View original document

The full text on this page is automatically extracted from the file linked above and may contain errors and inconsistencies.

THE WAR
ON

THE BANK OF THE UNITED STATES
OR,

A REVIEW OF THE MEASURES OF THE ADMINISTRA­
TION AGAINST THAT INSTITUTION AND THE
PROSPERITY OF THE COUNTRY.

Digitized by

Goosk

©

THE WAR
ON

THE BANK OF THE UNITED STATES;

OR,

A REVIEW OF THE MEASURES OF THE ADMINISTRA­
TION AGAINST THAT INSTITUTION AND THE ■
PROSPERITY OF THE COUNTRY.

"Darkness -was upon the face of the deep."
« And God said: let there he light."

<fj'-'

$'/i.<nm#\> u\

3:'IRfltttWMft

i^o-trc.

*

KEY & BIDDLE, S3 tylNOR STREET.

1834.

Digitized by

pbco-i*. WOO.9

ADVERTISEMENT.
THE following sheets carry with them whatever apology may be neces­
sary for their publication. When interests, so important to the country as
a sound and uniform currency and the legitimate construction of the Con­
stitution, are endangered, it is not less the duty, than the privilege, of the
citizen, to participate in their discussion. It seemed to the author, that a
concise account of the war on the Bank, with an inquiry into its causes
and effects, would, at this moment, be useful in determining the great
questions which Congress have remitted for decision to the people. In
preparing such a work, he has derived much assistance from the debates
in Congress; and has used, frequently with, yet often without, acknow­
ledgment, the opinions of the principal debaters, governed by no other
motive in his extracts, than to render his own views effective.
June 23, 1334.

Digitized by

TH?

WAR ON THE BANK.
THE foreigner, who, impelled by the desire to provide for
himself and his progeny a safe and happy home, should have vis­
ited this country in May 1833, would have found, everywhere,
abundantly, all the public and private sources of enjoyment
which the most favourable descriptions of our government, «*ir
people, and our pursuits^ might have taught him to expect. He
would have beheld " the people delighted or contented with the
apparent adjustment of some o( the most fearful controversies
that had ever divided them;" the debt, which, for many years,
pressed upon the national resources, extinguished; the necessa­
ries, and many of the luxuries of life, freed from impost, attain­
able almost at the cost of production; our money currency, the
great instrument ofsuccessful economy, in a uniform and sound
states the chief magistrate of the Union, lately elected by a
large majority, in condition to give to his administration the
greatest unanimity, zeal and success, and, almost to extinguish
party feuds; nature rewarding the husbandman with exuberant
crops, and trade replenishing the coffers of the merchant and the
nation; " the spindle and the shuttle, and every instrument of
mechanic industry, pursuing their busy labours with profit; and
internal improvements bringing down the remotest West to the
shores of the Atlantic, and combining and compacting the dis­
persed inhabitants of our widely extended territory, as the
inhabitants of a single state."
Satisfied with the scenes around him, and the pleasant antici­
pations they justified, our foreigner would have returned to the
eastern shores of the Atlantic to prepare for emigration. But
how changed the scene, when, in May 1834, he should revisit it!
The great works which were annihilating time and space are
suspended, or sluggishly prosecuted; the contractors for public
loans, and the subscribers to corporate stocks, being unable to
pay their instalments; the instruments of the mechanic are idle,
and their dispirited master, unemployed, either suffers want or

Digitized by

•

I J

4
anticipates its horrors, whilst consuming the stores of his suc­
cessful industry; trade, at home and abroad, is greatly dimin­
ished; exchange, foreign and domestic, is depressed, and bills
are negotiated with much difficulty; the price of public and
corporate stocks has fallen from ten to forty per cent; and the
principal articles of domestic production are sunk in still greater
proportion, whilst real estate can be sold only at a yet greater
sacrifice; money can no longer be procured on mortgage, even
at the highest legal rate of interest, and is attainable on good
paper, only, at great UBury; corporate companies, in some in­
stances, are unable to pay the interest on their borrowed money;
the State banks, generally, without power to discount new
paper, and the Bank of the United States contracting its accom­
modations, which heretofore, like fructifying streams, gave life
and vigor to enterprising labour; the currency of the country,
deranged and dislocated, is fast verging from a specie medium
to one of worthless paper—some of the State banks having al­
ready deohred their inability to redeem their notes with coin;
th# suffering and indignant people are, everywhere, in primary
meetings, declaring their grievances, reproaching their chief
magistrate and his counsellors with abuse of delegated, and
assumption of unlawful, power, and petitioning the unyielding
Congress for instant and effectual relief.
Our astonished, but intelligent emigrant, doubting the reports
of his too faithful senses and the testimony of his understand­
ing, asks, whether these appearances be real, or the misre­
presentations of factious partisans, got vip for effect? But,
entering the assemblies of die people, and observing the classes
of which they are composed, his doubts instantly vanish. He
sees, not some twenty or thirty party dependants, convened to
maintain, with their voices, whatever their leaders may assert,
to &ain their daily bread; but thousands and tens of thousands
of merchants and manufacturers, agriculturists and artisans, who
quit not their employments for ordinary causes, nor busy them­
selves in public concerns, unless their liberties or means of
prosperity be endangered. Assured that the appearances which
every where meet his eye are not delusive, he seeks the cause
of the extraordinary change; applying to those sages, whose
long experience in public and private affairs has well fitted them
to comprehend and unfold their most occult springs; and whose
condition and stake in the community blend their interest, in­
separably, with the public weal.
His request for information is thus answered:
" All the distress and embarrassment which astonishes you,
is ascribable to a sudden, extraordinary and increased demand
for commercial credit The causes which have led to this, and
which prevent its gratification, are somewhat complex, and re-

Digitized by

5
quire patient attention to be thoroughly understood. Our time
permits, only, that we indicate, so that you may pursue, them,
at leisure.
" 1. During a series of years of uninterrupted prosperity, the
two great classes of the commercial community, the lender and ~
the borrower, the capitalist and the enterprising and industrious
operator, who makes capital productive, acquired almost bound­
less confidence in each other; die banks extended their loans to
the utmost bound of safety; the merchant and the manufacturer
employed their proper and borrowed funds in enterprizes com­
mensurate in their extent with their pecuniary facilities, and
requiring the continued and uninterrupted use of the capital
invested. In this condition, any cause which required the lend­
er to withdraw the accustomed accommodation, and particu­
larly the recal of advances, would necessarily produce embar­
rassment and distress among men of business, even though therfe
should be little overtrading; and this distress would be greater
where its cause could not be foreseen and provided for.
" 2. Under the old system of collecting the duties, they iid
not become payable until about the time when the importer
was paid by the consumer. Under the system resulting from
the compromise of the tariff, the importers not only collect, as
before, but in fact advance to government one-half of the whole
amount of duties on importation, which is ultimately paid by
the consumer. An additional amount of capital, therefore,
equal to that of the duties, is now required, in order to carry
on the same quantity of business, in articles on which the duties
are payable in cash, or at much shorter periods than formerly.
" a. In New York, and, perhaps, in some other of the Atlan­
tic cities, large amounts of stocks, principally from the south­
west, had been purchased, mainly with a view to their sale in
the English markets. This had not, of late, answered the ex­
pectations of the contractors; and though they may have bor­
rowed abroad, to a considerable extent, on the credit of those
stocks, a large amount remained on hand, and absorbed a cor­
responding portion of capital or credit
" But the increase of credit, thus required, might, probably,
have been supplied by domestic capitalists, by loans from
abroad, and, particularly, by a liberal extension of the accom­
modations of the United States Bank, had not that institution
been restrained by prudential reasons from increasing the
amount of its discounts. To the causes which imposed on the
Bank this duty, are to be ascribed the disastrous effects now
visible on the prosperity of the country.
« 4. By the act of 10th April 1816, Sec. 15, incorporating the
Bank of the United States, it is provided, that, during the con­
tinuance of the act, and whenever required by the Secretary of

i
Digitized by

6
the Treasury, the Bank should give the necessary facilities for
transferring the public funds from place to place, and for dis­
tributing them in payment of the public creditors, without
charge, and should perform the duties of commissioners of
loans, &c.
"By Section 16, the deposits of the money of the United
States, in places where the.Bank and branches may be estab­
lished, are to be made in the Bank or branches, unless the Se­
cretary of the Treasury shall, at any time, otherwise order and
direct; in which case, he is required immediately to lay before
Congress, if in session, and if not, immediately after the com­
mencement qf the next session, the reasons of such order or
direction.
"-And by Section 20, in consideration of the exclusive privi­
leges and benefits conferred by the act, the Bank agreed to pay
to the United States one million and a half of dollars.
" Six years before the charter of the Bank would expire, the
administration of the government, unprovoked, declared war
against the institution, which it has since zealously and unremittedly persecuted. In the summer of 1833, threats were
uttered, by officers of the government, of withholding from it
the deposits of the public moneys, which compelled the Bank
to prepare for the attack, by limiting its business within nar­
rower bounds than would otherwise have been necessary. On
the 1st of October the threatened stroke was stricken. The
deposits were actually withheld, by order of the Secretary of
the Treasury. At this period, however, although the amount
of the loans of the Bank had been reduced, voluntarily, and by
the ordinary course of business, in this season of the year, about
four millions, the public had suffered no inconvenience; nor
would this small reduction have given cause of complaint. In
the Atlantic districts, especially in the city and state of New
York, portions of the Union most obnoxious to commercial dis­
tress, the State banks had not decreased their discounts; which
were, indeed, greater on the 1st of October 1833, than in Jan­
uary of that year. In the great West, the coming storm had
cast no shadow before it; and the echo of its thunders were un­
heard. But great change in the equilibrium of the atmosphere
is not the more certain precursor of the tempest, than is the de­
rangement of the currency the forerunner and the cause of
pecuniary distress.
"The hostility of the Government against the Bank, and,
more especially, its demonstration in the removal of the deposits,
created apprehensions of danger, immediately, to the Bank
itself, and remotely, to all the moneyed institutions and con­
cerns of the country. Retrenchment at all, and rigorous en­
forcement of its claims at some points, were presumed indis•
Digitized by

7
pensable to the safety of the Bank. The extent, being conjec­
tural, was exaggerated. There was communicated everywhere
that uncertainty of the future, which impels every man to seek
provision for the coming month, as well as for the passing day.
The capitalists, more fearful, perhaps, than men of less wealth,
withdrew their funds from circulation. Men saw that the rela­
tions between the government and the Bank were, thenceforth,
to continue hostile; that, between it and the substituted banks,
they were to be those of mistrust; and that, without a National
Bank, the stability and safety of the whole monetary system of
the country would be endangered.
" As a political measure,tineattack was alarming, being made
in defiance of a solemn vote of the late Congress, at their last
session; and, as if with the intention to forestall the opinion of
that which must meet within sixty days after the interference
was made; and as if to encroach upon its legitimate rights. It
was appalling to men of business, who rely for the success of
their operations on that stability of those of the Government,
which can only be guarantied by law, unexpectedly to discover,
that the commerce, the currency, and the moneyed institutions
of the country, its credit, and their own credit and fortunes,
were, thenceforth, to depend on* the private opinions, the pre­
sumed wisdom, and the arbitrary will of one man. Minor
causes increased the apprehensions, and restricted more and more
the use of private capital and private credit; and the alarm
became a panic, not dependent upon, or to be explained as a
matter of ordinary reason. The banks, indeed, (with some few
exceptions,) protected by the impossibility of exporting specie
without loss, have preserved their credit, and been enabled,
generally, to continue, in some measure, their usual accommo­
dations. Private credit has been most deeply affected; and the
leading feature of the present distress is the consequent inter­
ruption, and, in many cases, cessation, of business.
" T h e importers diminish, greatly, their orders and their
purchases of foreign exchange: which, for the first time for
many years, is at a discount The intermediate wholesale mer­
chants, fearful to contract new engagements, are anxious only
about the remittances necessary to discharge those already con­
tracted. Those engaged in the exportation of the produce of
the country, doubtful whether they can sell the foreign bills, on
which that exportation depends, give but limited orders for it.
The country merchants and the manufacturers are no longer
permitted to draw, as formerly, in advance, on the cities for the
products of the soil or of their industry. Men, with small capi­
tals, if at all extended, when disappointed in the remittances
they naturally expected, are crushed. New enterprizes and
engagements of every description are avoided; and in many in-

Digitized by

8
stances, workmen are discharged, or a reduction of wages
required The actual evils are aggravated by general appre*
hension; but the alarm can scarce be greater than the true state
of things justifies. In every aspect of the subject, the true and
efficient remedy consists in restoring confidence and credit,
which might be almost instantaneously effected by replacing the
Bank in die situation it had heretofore occupied, and assuring
its continuance; thus enabling it to resume its functions to their
usual extent
" In addition to these remarks, we give you the views of Mr.
Webster, a distinguished Senator, as exhibited in his speech on
this subject:—
4
The Treasury, in a very short time, has withdrawn from the Bank
8,000,000 dollars, within a fraction. This call, of course, the Bank has
been obliged to provide for, and could not provide for without more or less
inconvenience to the public. The mere withdrawing of so large a sum
from hands actually holding and using it, and the transferring of it, through
the bank collecting, and through another bank loaning it, if it can loan it,
into other hands, is itself an operation which, if conducted suddenly, must
produce considerable inconvenience. And this is all that the Secretary
seems to have anticipated. But this is not the one-hundredth part of the
whole evil. The great evil arises from the new attitude in which the
Government places itself toward the. Bank. Every thin? is now in a false
position. The Government, the Bank of the United States, the State
banks, are all out of place. They are deranged and separated, and jostling
against each other. Instead of amity, reliance, and mutual succour, rela­
tions of jealousy, of distrust, of hostility even, are springing up between
these parties. All act on the defensive; each looks out for itself; and the
public interest is crushed between the upper and the nether millstone.
All this should have been foreseen. It is idle to say that these evils
might have been prevented by the Bank, if it had exerted itself to prevent
them. That is a mere matter of opinion; it may be true, or it may not;
but it was the business of those who proposed the removal of the deposits,
to ask themselves how it was probable the Bank would act, when they
should attack it, assail its credit) and allege the violation by it of its charter;
and thus compel it to take an attitude, at least, of stern defence. The
community have certainly a right to hold those answerable, who have
unnecessarily got into this quarrel with the Bank, and thereby occasioned
the evil, let the conduct of the Bank, in the course of the controversy, be
what it may.
* In my opinion, sir, the great source of the evil is the shock which the
measure has given to confidence in the commercial world. The credit of
the whole system of the currency of the country seems shaken. The
State banks have lost credit, and lost confidence. They have suffered
vastly more than the Bank of the United States itself, at which the blow
was aimed.
' The derangement of internal exchanges is one of the most disastrous
consequences of the measure. By the origin of its charter, by its unques­
tioned solidity, by the fact that it was at home every where, and in perfect
credit every where, the Bank of the United States accomplished the inter­
nal exchanges of the country with vast facility, and at an unprecedented
cheap rate. The State banks can never perform this equally well; they
cannot act with the same concert, the same identity of purpose. Look at
the prices current, and see the change in the value of the notes of dis*
Digitized by

9
tant banks in the great cities. Look at the depression of the stocks of the
State banks, deposit banks and all. Look at what must happen the
moment the Bank of the United States, in its process of winding up, or
to meet any other crisis, shall cease to buy domestic bills, especially in
the Southern, Southwestern, and "Western markets. Can any man doubt
what will be the state of exchange when that takes place 1 Or can any
one doubt its necessary effect on the price of produce? The Bank has
purchased bills to the amount of sixty millions a year, as appears by docu­
ments heretofore laid before the Senate. A great portion of these, no doubt,
was purchased in the South and West, against shipments of the great
staples of those quarters of the country. Such is the course of trade. The
produce of the Southwest and the South is shipped to the North and the
East for sale; and those who ship it draw bills on those to whom it is
shipped; and these bills are bought and discounted, or cashed by the
Bank. When the Bank shall cease to buy, as it must cease, consequen­
ces cannot but be felt, much severer even than those now experienced.
This is inevitable. But, sir, I go no further into.particular statements.
My opinion, I repeat, is, that the present distress is immediately occa­
sioned, beyond all doubt, by the removal of the deposits; and that just
such consequences might have been, and ought to have been, foreseen
from that measure, as we do now perceive and feel around us.
* Sir, I do not believe, nevertheless, that these consequences were fore­
seen. With such foresight, the deposits, I think, would not have been
touched. The measure has operated more deeply and rnore widely than
was expected. We all may find proof of this, in the conversations of
every hour. No one, who seeks to acquaint himself with the opinions of
men, in and out of Congress, can doubt that, if the act were now to be
done, it would receive very little encouragement or support.'
" In the meanwhile, in this deepest depth of darkness, there
is no reason for despair. The usual channels of circulation are,
indeed, obstructed; but the products of the national industry,
though stagnant, are abundant The actual capital of the coun*
try still remains unimpaired, although the nominal value of
property be for a time lessened. There is no foreign pressure,
and the skill and activity of our intelligent merchants must,
after awhile, renew the broken chain of operations. The evil,
through a painful process, is gradually working its remedy:—
In proportion as no new engagements are contracted, the whole
mass is daily lessened, and we must, after a period of severe
and protracted suffering, unnecessarily inflicted, be placed in a
situation better adapted to a new order of things. These con­
solatory anticipations are confirmed by the fact, that the eyes
of the people are opening upon their true interests; and at
their command, the chains which bind many of their repre­
sentatives to the car of the administration^will be broken like
the cords upon the Nazarite."
Having thus explained to our inquiring emigrant, chiefly from
|he pen of one of the most distinguished statesmen and able finan­
ciers of the nation/ the causes generally assigned for the lament* Mr. Gallatin. Report of New York Union Committee.

Digitized by

10
able condition of the country, we shall leave' him, whilst awaiting
better times, to trace out and illustrate, more fully, the three first
of those causes; and assume to ourselves the task of considering
in all of its many phases, the extraordinary executive measure,
" the Removal of the Deposits," which has awakened the deep­
est feelinginthe country, not only for the preservation of its com­
mercial prosperity, but for the maintenance of those divisions of
political power, those checks and balances, which have been es­
tablished for the security of political liberty.
In considering this important subject, we design to treat it
with all the candour which a profound veneration for historical
truth should inspire. But we should be ashamed to pretend
that we have not formed a decided opinion upon it; because, we
hold such to be a profession of dishonourable and disgusting in­
difference to the sufferings and danger of the country.
The executive department of the general government has de­
clared an interminable war against the Bank of the United
States, which it does not more ardently pursue, than loudly and
energetically avow. The motives of this extraordinary enmity
against a fiscal agent, whose great utility and correct fulfilment
of its duties have been almost universally acknowledged, are
asserted to be of a disinterested and patriotic character. How
untruly asserted, will be most obvious in the progress of our in­
vestigation. In pursuing our purpose we propose,
I. To trace the hostility of the President against the Bank,
from itsfirstdemonstration to the removal of the deposits.
II. To examine the right of the President to direct and en­
force the removal.
III. To consider the reasons of the Secretary of the Treasury
assigned therefor, and to show the course of the two houses of
Congress thereon.
IV. To inquire into the right claimed for the President to re­
move at his pleasure from office, all persons whom he is em­
powered to nominate;—a claim which has become a most import­
ant feature of this remarkable case.
I. It is said, General Jackson was ever among those who
deny the constitutional right of Congress to charter a bank,
under any form; and, that, from this cause, his hostility to the
Bank of the United States originated. If this be true, it is
among the extraordinary features of his administration, that
such right has not been denied in any official document. Proper
occasions for expressing such an opinion presented themselves
in his several messages, and, especially, in his veto on the bank
bill of 1832. Yet none were used; and we may justly infer,
that no such sentiment existed, until a very late period; or that
it was suppressed for cause. Let us examine how the execu-

Digitized by

11
*

ft

tire sense has been developed; since it is important, not only
in determining the cause of executive operations against the
bank, but has become essential for their defence.
In his message to Congress of December 1829, the President
says:
"The charter of the Bank of the United States expires in 1836, and its
stockholders will, most probably, apply for a renewal of their privileges.
In o*der to avoid the evils resulting from precipitancy, in a measure involv­
ing such important principles, and such deep pecuniary interests, I feel, that
I cannot, in justice to the parties interested, too soon present it to the delib­
erate consideration of the legislature and the people. Both the consti­
tutionality and the expediency of the law, creating this Bank, are well
questioned, by a large portion of our fellow-citizens; and it must be ad­
mitted, by all, that it has failed in the great end of establishing a uniform
and sound currency."

In this, there is no committal upon the question of constitu­
tionality; and in a subsequent passage, it is submitted " whether
a National Bank, founded on the credit of the Government and
its resources, might not be devised?"
In the message of 1830, speaking of the Bank, he observes:
41
Nothing has occurred to lessen, in any degree, the danger which many
of our citizens apprehend from that institution, as at present organized. In
the spirit of improvement and compromise which distinguishes our coun­
try and its institutions, it becomes us to inquire, whether it be not possible,
to secure the advantages afforded by the present Bank, through the agency
of a Bank of the United States, so modified in its principles and structure*
as to obviate constitutional and other objections."

The subject is very briefly treated in,1831, after the follow­
ing manner:
. " Entertaining the opinions heretofore expressed in relation to the Bank
of the United States, as at present organized, I felt it my duty, in my
former messages, frankly to disclose them."

The veto message of July 1832, declares:
" A Bank of the United States is, in many respects, convenient for the
government and useful for the people. Entertaining this opinion, and
deeply impressed with the belief, that some of the powers and privileges
possessed by the existing Bank are unauthorized by the constitution, sub­
versive of the rights of the States, and dangerous to the liberties of the
people, I felt it my duty, at an early period of my administration, to
call the attention of Congress to the practicability of organizing an insti­
tution, combining all its advantages and obviating these objections. I sin­
cerely regret, that, in the act before me, I can perceive, none of those
modifications of the Bank charter, which are necessary, in my opinion, to
make it compatible with justice, with sound policy, or with the constitution of
the country?'
" That a Bank of the United States, competent to all
the duties which may be required by the government, might be so organ­
ized, as not to infringe on our own delegated powers or the reserved rights
of the States, I do not entertain a doubt. Had the Executive been called
upon to furnish the project of such an institution, the duty would have been
cheerfully performed"

Digitized by

12
i JEten so late as July 1833, it is apparent, from the commu­
nications of Mr. Duane, that the President's hostility to the
iBank was not founded on constitutional scruples; for, when the
(Secretary introduced, into the instructions of his agent, a decla­
ration that the President was opposed to any national bank,
jhe modified this, so as to announce opposition only to an insti­
tution, organized on the principles of the existing Bank.
| We have nothing, therefore, official, to warrant the conclu­
sion, that the President would not unite in chartering the Bank,
with suitable modifications; nothing to show that determina­
tion so frequently and fiercely uttered since the removal of
the deposits, " never to recharter the United States Bank,
or sign a charter for any other bank." Accordingly, in
the canvass which ensued the Veto, the partisans of the Presi­
dent used his reserve for the purpose for which it was designed;
and boldly asserted, wherever such assertion would be service­
able, that he was not opposed to the Bank with proper amend­
ments, and that his objections would be removed, and the Bank
sustained, in the event of his re-election.
Constitutional principles, then, have not caused the President
to resist the wishes of the people for the continuance of an in­
stitution, which, next to the enjoyment of civil and religious
liberty, has contributed most to their welfare. We have seen
him, upon questions of mere expediency, array himself against
the councils of the nation, and exercise the most exceptionable
power of the constitution, the veto, as if it were a hereditary
right, from a regal ancestor. " We have seen him, the chief
executive officer, whose voice in legislation should, on sound
political principles, be heard, only, in extreme cases, and when
the power delegated to the Executive by the constitution is asassailed—we have seen him pervert that power to defeat the
wishes of the people, distinctly expressed through their imme­
diate representatives. Is there an intelligible motive which
can be assigned for this extraordinary conduct? We think
there is, and shall endeavour to explain i t
The country passed through the first cycle of its existence
by a conservative impulse which has now ceased to operate.
The parties which grew out of the revolution, and the events
succeeding it, were formed upon certain political principles,
which, like religious dogmas, became subjects of supreme ven~
eration. The leaders were estimated only as they were faith­
ful and zealous apostles of these principles. For the high
offices of the nation, the revolution had supplied candidates,
who, already rich in fame, would not risk that wealth in experi­
ment. They had no inducement to assume forbidden powers
for the gratification of themselves or their partisans. The irten
and the parties of our early national history have passed from

Digitized by

13
the scene. Party principles growing from the revolution and
its consequences have been amalgamated by the success of our
political system; and have been succeeded by a new spring
of political action, more exclusively selfish. Jacksonism is
neither federalism nor democracy. It has, indeed, relation to
political principles of no kind; being a system of peculiar and
unmixed selfishness—the leaders of the party grasping, by any
means, every species of power, and their dependants yielding,
for reward, the most abject service.
There is in military fame an attraction which has ever proven '
irresistible with the mass of mankind, from fear, from grati­
tude, from sympathy with energetic power, or from a combina­
tion of all these causes. It is an indispensable, a necessary evil
of the social system, requiring perpetual vigilance to repress
it. It is the besetting danger of republics; the open or insidi­
ous, but ever active, enemy of political and civil liberty. The
military chieftain, when able and ambitious, is ever ready to use
its influence for forbidden ends; and if he want talent or dis-*
position for self-aggrandizement, he becomes the instrument of
others.
->
In General Jackson, there is no want of ambition, whatever
there may be of ability. That he is the tool of others, every
passing day brings new and indubitable evidence; and t h ^ t h e
nation is subjected to the action of two powerful causes of evil.
The nomination of General Jackson for the presidency may
have been prompted by grateful recollection of his services.
But his election is ascribable to other causes—to the combina­
tion of aspiring politicians, who made his elevation the means
of their own. Qualification for the office was wholly uncon­
sidered. The honours and emoluments of office, had from the
election of Mr. Jefferson flowed in a steady unperturbed stream,
in a channel which excluded a large portion of the enterprising
and ambitious spirits, even of the reigning party, and the whole
of the remnant and progeny of federalism, as effectually, as if
they were legitimately proscribed. To participate in office, it
was requisite to overthrow the reigning dynasty, to break the
line of succession. To this end, a combination was formed
between all the Outs and such of the Ins as feared to lose, or
hoped to gain, by the change. General Jackson became the
leader of the combined forces, whose banner, with the broad le­
gend of "BOOTY," wasflungto the breeze, and whose war cry,
the " Spoils of Victory," was shouted, not only in our cities,
but in the remotest and almost uninhabited forest glens. The
battle was won; and the principles on which it was fought were
proclaimed by the President, in his first annual message, an­
nouncing" rotation in office" as a cardinal rule of his administra-

Digitized by

Google

r

14
tion. This put, at once, every official incumbent and every
official aspirant, in manacles at his feet
Every political society is divisible into two great classes, the
speculative and the practical,—that which indicates the way,
and that which provides the means, of progression. The first,
like the superincumbent wave of the ocean, forming an incon­
siderable portion of the mass of moving waters, is ever visible,
Mid is swollen and stirred into foam and spray by every gale
that blows. The second, like the great depths of the sea, is
moved only by powerful causes, but when urged by the hurri­
cane or earthquake, is irresistible. Thefirstclass, in the calms of
state, usurps the functions of the whole body politic, and rules
the nation. It is the proper province of party, and is that for
which, on ordinary occasions, political gamesters play. The
second comes into voluntary action, only, when the deepest in­
terests of social life are at stake; and then, the first is made the
servant of its will. It is the first class in which Jacksonism is
triumphant The force of the second is about to be felt
The immense power lodged in the executive of the United
States was almost unknown. It had been used for the public
interest only; and its capacity for evil, for party rule, was not
dreaded. It remained for General Jackson to reveal its dangers,
and,4iappily, to awaken the intelligence of the country against
them. Hitherto, the fifty thousand executive appointees were
deemed by themselves and the public, to be the servants of the
people; but they are now claimed, and, in truth, are the servants
of the President; responsible to him, in thought and deed, and
removable, not for malversation in office, only, but, also, because
they may not fulfil the duties imposed by party discipline.
We have, thus, attained the worst stage of party feuds, in which
every thing is dependant on the will of party leaders. The
personal parties of Marius and Sylla, of Caesar and Pompey, are
rising among us. Office and political distinction are attainable,
only, by subservience, from which conscious integrity shrinks;
and the incumbent can preserve his place, only, whilst oblivious
*of the public weal. The worst evils which flowed from the
corruption of the ancient republics of Greece and Rome would
soon follow, were it not, that the mass of the people, which seeks
in government, only, the general happiness, is in action to se­
cure it
It is to maintain a party system such as we have described,
that the President, already endowed with the armed power of
the nation, has sought, and is seeking, the unrestrained control
of the public treasure. For this purpose, the prostitution of the
Bank of the United States to the unhallowed desires of party,
was solicited, and from this cause has its resistance been followed

Digitized by

15
by persecution. Hence, too, the project of a ^national bank,
founded on the credit of the government, and its revenues—of
that institution which the executive would have furnished, had
he been, primarily, called upon to legislate for the people.
Had the Bank of the United States been a subservient politi­
cal instrument, as the design was to make it, it might have been •
the cherished of the party. The attempt, thus, to degrade it was
duly and seasonably made, and we proceed to give its history.
Soon after the election of General Jackson "a meeting
was held in Washington of the principal chiefs of the party,
to consider the means of perpetuating their new authority; and
the possession of the Bank was among the most prominent ob­
jects of the assembly. The first open manifestation of their
purpose was in June 1829, when a concerted effort was made,
by the executive officers, to interfere in the election of the board
of directors at Portsmouth. Mr. Woodbury, the present Sec­
retary at War, most conspicuous in this attempt, did not hesitate
to avow, in a letter to the Secretary of the Treasury, which,
though marked " confidential" was published by the Committee
of Investigation^ in 1832, that he wished the interference of the
Government to remove the president of the Branch at Ports­
mouth, alleging that he (the president), "was a particular
friend of Mr. Webster and his political character, doubtless,
well known to the Secretary;" and requesting the last to com­
municate with some of the directors of the Mother Bank, in fa­
vour of such a change.
This letter was transmitted to the Bank by the Secretary, who
observed, that "from some expressions in the letter, it may be in­
ferred, that it is partly founded on a supposed application of the
influence of the Bank with a view to political effect;" in conse­
quence of which, he deemed it his duty to present it to the Bank,
" with the views of the administration in relation to it." At the
same time, Mr. Hill, then unconfirmed comptroller of the Trea-1
sury, and now a senator of the United States, sent a memorial;
from the members of his political party in the legislature of N e w l
Hampshire, requesting the removal of Mr. Mason; and by an­
other missive gave his opinion to the Bank, that no measure
short of Mr. Mason's removal " would reconcile the people of
New Hampshire to the Bank?7 and that "the friends of Gen­
eral Jackson, in New Hampshire, had but too much reason to
complain of the management at Portsmouth." Finally, the
Secretary at War ordered the transfer of the pension fund from
the Branch Bank at Portsmouth to another bank in Concord—
an act, so obviously in violation of the laws, that being resisted
by the Bank, it was retracted by the Secretary.
The Bank, upon'these extraordinary instances, deemed it ne­
cessary to extinguish, for ever, every hope of converting it into

Digitized by

16
a party engine. To this end, the President of the institution
addressed the following, among other remarks, to the Secretary
of the Treasury.
.
" Presuming that we have rightly apprehended* your views,
and fearful that the silence of the Bank might be hereafter
misconstrued into acquiescence with them, I deem it my duty to
state to you, in a manner perfectly respectful to your official and
personal character, yet so clear, as to leave no possibility of mis­
conception, that the Board of Directors of the Bank of the
United States, and the Board of Directors of the Branches of
the Bank of the United States, acknowledge not the slightest
responsibility of any description, whatsoever, to the Secretary
of the Treasury, touching the political conduct of their officers
—that being a subject on which they never consult, and never
desire to know the views of any administration." " Their res­
ponsibility is to Congress, and to Congress alone: no executive
officerj from the President of the United States downwards,
hop the slightest authority to interfere in it; and there can be
no more warrant for suggesting the views of the administration
to the Bank of the United States, than to the Supreme Court of
the United States." "For tBe Bank, which has specific duties
to perform, and which belongs to the country, and not to any
party, there is but one course of honour or of safety. When­
ever its duties come in conflict with the spirit of party, it should
not compromise with it, nor capitulate with it, but resist it;
resist it openly and fearlessly. In this, its interest concurs with
its duty, as, it will be found, at last, such is the good sense of
the country, that the best mode of satisfying all parties, is to
disregard them all." From this manly, independent and ra­
tional expostulation, two important deductions are to be drawn.
1st That whatever powers the Bank may possess, whether for
good or for evil, there is no disposition to pervert them to the
latter purpose: and, 2d. That, the Bank, however erroneously,
a contrary policy may have been ascribed to it, has no interest
whatever, in blending its concerns with those of political parti­
sans.
When we observe, that the conduct of the President of the
U. States towards the Bank has not been directed by an earnest
and irrepressible zeal for the integrity of the constitution—that
he has adopted, as governing principles of his administration,
the maxims—that " rotation in office gives healthful action to
the political system;" that "public offices are the 'spoils of
victory/ to be divided among the conquerors in party combat;"
and that, " it is sound political morality to reward friends by
appointment to, and punish enemies by removal from, office/9
we may readily believe, that the power and wealth of the Bank
would be sought, by one professing such principles, as parts of

Digitized by

17
the spoils of victory, in order to sustain the views and ascend­
ency of the party; and, that failing to bend the institution to
his views, the Executive would resolve to break it.
And yet the President has ventured to say, in his protest, to
the Senate, " If I had been ambitious, I should have sought alli­
ance with that powerful institution, which even now aspires to ,
divided empire." Seek an alliance to gratify his ambition!
Has he not done it? Has he not attempted, through one of the
humblest of his instruments, to compel the obedience of that
institution? Has not another of his agents (Mr. Kendall) since
boasted, that he would bring the institution as a reptile to the
feet of the Executive? If the alliance, he means, be that which
would render the Bank subservient to the Executive, a submis­
sive instrument in his hands, he did, in fact, seek that alliance,
which the Bank indignantly rejected. The President adds, too,
" If I had been venal, I should have sold myself to its designs."
A President of the United States make a merit of not having
sold himself for money! We will not, ourselves, do the Presi­
dent so much wrong, as to state, even hypothetically, the possi­
bility that he would have bartered his large honours for trash;
but, we are bound, in justice to the Bank, to say, that he never
had occasion to pray against the temptation.
But, again, we say, that the incorruptibility of the Bank is
the cause of the war against her. War to the knife. And one,
in which the assailing party is more reckless of consequences,
cannot be found in the political history of the world. The
cause assigned by the Bank being the true one, the motives of
the Executive find a parallel in the vengeance of every tyrant
for resistance to his will; in the desire of every demagogue to
asp and secure power. If the cause, now, assigned by the
xecutive be credited, the war was commenced and is waged
merely, for the sake of abstract opinion. For, when the country,
in 1829, was startled from its condition of peaceful and unsur­
passed prosperity, by the threatening voice of the President, the
Bank had committed none of the supposed sins which are now
assigned as causes for the most deadly blows against it.
V It had scrupulously fulfilled all the objects of its creation;
1 had raised the currency from a deranged and unsound state to
J one of uniformity and purity, unequalled by that of any counJ try of the same geographical extent; had performed all its
I duties to the government—transmitting the public moneys from
\one point of the Union to another, when desired, promptly and
Iwithout charge—serving its financial operations as no govern­
ment was ever before served—collecting and disbursing in the
(space of thirteen years more than three hundred and fifty mil­
lions of dollars, without the loss of a single cent—reducing
the exchange on the most distant commercial operations to a
*
B2

f

Digitized by

18
charge scarce more than nominal;—and, in a word, spreading
around it, all the blessings, which security and judicious assist­
ance could give, to the government and the people. All which
was acknowledged, and gratefully proclaimed, by every officer
connected with our fiscal concerns, and by the millions of citi­
zens rendered happy in a prosperous commerce; and all which
it was proposed by the Executive to jeopard, for the mainte­
nance of. an abstract opinion, which had been repudiated, for
years, by a large majority of the people. Can men who would,
thus, sacrifice the substantial realities of life to speculative no­
tions, be qualified to guide the destinies of a nation? Or can it
be believed that such notions are the true motives of any states­
man?
It is unquestionable1, that party leaders did attempt to use
the Bank for their purposes, and that the attempt was promptly
and effectually repelled; that, these leaders have the confidence
of the President; and that his feelings have been so artfully
wrought upon, that the destruction of the Bank has become his
ruling passion. This adversary position of the Bank and the
Executive, could the Bank be preserved in all its usefulness,
would be no cause of apprehension to the country. Mr. M'Duflfie
has, we think, placed this matter in its true light
" If I were to decide," said he, (in his nervous speech on the
removal of the deposits, Dec. 19, 1833) "upon principle, what
should be the course of a National Bank, in regard to the
politics of the country, I should say, that it is desirable, that
the present, and all future banks of a similar kind, should be,
•" habitually, opposed to the Executive Government. It would
be an admirable balance in our system, and would tend to
check the fearful tendency of Executive encroachment. We
have nothing to fear from that operation. The real danger lies
in an opposite direction. It is, that the President should con­
vert the Bank into a mere instrument of his will, and should
wield its power, which has been represented as so tremendous,
in addition to the still more tremendous power which he de­
rives from the patronage of such a Government, and that over­
whelming tide of popularity, which will generally follow the
man who distributes that patronage." We add, if the tenure
of office depend wholly upon submission to every measure of
the Executive, would not bank accommodations be subject
to the same condition ? And who doubts that such is the
tenure of office, " that no man can, now, breathe the air that
surrounds the palace, who does not think, precisely, as the
President thinks, and who will not consent to be docked or
stretched, until he fits the bed of Procrustes, and his political
opinions are brought to the true Executive dimensions? Upon
this principle, officers have been discarded and offices filled;

Digitized by

19
and this is the promised reform." " Who, now, doubts, that if
the local banks shall continue the depositaries of the public
revenue, it will not be a matter of political bargaining, between
them and the Executive, in order to insure the election of the
candidate of the party, and that the political and moneyed
power of the country will be concentrated in the same place
and in the same hands ?" « All these banks (the result is in­
evitable) will be actuated by the same political spirit, governed
by the same influence and wielded by one man. Not only the
twenty millions of public revenue, but a hundred millions of
bank capital will be thus wielded for political purposes, to the
corruption of public morals and the subversion of the public
liberty."
^ The war of the Executive against the Bank of the United
States began with the President's Message to Congress, in De­
cember 1829; some few days, or weeks, after the Bank had re­
pelled the attempt to make her a party agent. The agitation of
the country was then commenced by the distinct assertion, that
the constitutionality and expediency of the Bank were ques­
tioned by a large portion of our fellow-citizens, and, that all
men admitted that it had failed in the great end of establish­
ing a uniform and sound currency.
The spirit that was to guide the war was obvious from the co­
lour of these assertions. If a prejudice against the Bank, original­
ly, caused by the dread of constructive extension of constitutional
power, still lingered in some portions of the country, there was
not a spot, from the busy scenes of the seaboard, to the almost
uninhabited desert of the far West, in which its expediency was
not admitted; in which, it was not apparent, that a uniform and
sound currency had been established. One, only, attempt has
been made, that we have seen, to support this last misrepresen­
tation. Mr. Benton has declared in his place of the Senate, that
"from the year 1818 to 1827, the Bank had issued no currency,
at all, in the South and West; all its branches in those sections
of the Union were shut up for eight years, nearly, preceding
the Message. The branch drafts which have since been put
out, in imitation of branch notes, only, began to issue, and that,
in small quantities, ,by way of feeling the public pulse in 1827."
What, it will naturally be asked, upon this declaration, was the
circulation of the notes which these drafts supplied, and what
were these drafts, which were abundant in 1829, but the cur­
rency, the unifcjm currency, of the country? And sound cur­
rency, too, excejR, as Mr. Benton further urged, the drafts, like
the notes and other negotiable instruments, were liable to be
counterfeited. In truth, so absolutely were the uniformity and
soundness of the currency established in 1829, that no one of
sound discretion has ventured to question them.

Digitized by

20
The Committee of Ways and Means, of 1829, Mr. M'Duffie
chairman, to whom was referred so much of the President's Mes­
sage as related to the Bank, declared themselves " constrained
to express their respectful but decided dissent from his assertion
that the Bank had failed to establish a uniform and sound cur­
rency, and that in this respect it had been productive of results
more salutary than were anticipated by the most sanguine ad­
vocates of the policy of establishing it It has actually furnished a circulating medium more uniform than specie;
giving drafts, commanding specie at any point of the Union, at
a per centage greatly less than it would cost to transport specie,
and in many instances, at par." "When," add the Committee,
"it is, moreover, considered, that, the Bank performs with the
most scrupulous punctuality, the stipulation to transfer the funds
of the government to any point, where they may be wanted,
free of expense, it must be apparent, that the Committee are
correct, to the very letter, in stating that the Bank has fur- /
nished, both to the government and the people, a currency of
absolute uniform value, in all places, for all the purposes
of paying the public contributions, and disbursing the publie revenue. And when it is recollected, that the government
annually collects and disburses more than twenty-three mil­
lions of dollars, those who are at all familiar with the subject,
will, at once, perceive, that bills, which are of absolutely uni­
form value, for this vast operation, must be very nearly so, for
all the purposes of general commerce."
The stability and uniformity of the currency is so important
a result of the Bank, being the great object of the government
in chartering it, and so indispensable to the uniformity and equa­
lity of taxation, and the security and facility of business, that we
proceed to establish it by yet further testimony.
The Committee of the Senate, on Finance, to which was re­
ferred a resolution of the 30th December, 1829, directing the
Committee to inquire into the expediency of establishing an
uniform national currency, reported among other things,
" That the government had, for ten years preceding the first of January,
1830, received from 9000 agents, $230,068,855 17. This sum has been
collected in every section of this widely extended country. It has been
disbursed at other points, many thousand miles distant from the places
where it was collected; and yet, it has been so collected and distributed
without the loss, so far as the committee can learn, of a single dollar, and
without the expense of a single dollar to the government. That a currency
by which the government has been enabled to collect and transfer such an
amount of revenue to pay its army and navy, and allots expenses and the
national debt, is unsafe and unsound, cannot readily be believed; for there
can be no surer test of its sufficiency, than the simple fact, that every dol­
lar received in the form of a bank note, in the remotest parts of the interior,
is without charge converted into a silver dollar, at every one of the vast
number of places where the service of the government requires its dis-

Digitized by

bursement. The Secretary of the Treasury, in his report of the 6th De­
cember, 1828, declares, that, during the four years preceding, the receipts of
the government had amounted to more than ninety-seven millions or dol­
lars, and that all the payments had been punctually met, and that it is the
preservation of a gooa currency that can alone impart stability to property,
and prevent thosefluctuationsin its value, hurtful alike to individuals and
the nation. This advantage the Bank has secured to the community."
In the meantime let it be observed, that this declaration of the
Secretary was made one year before the declaration of the Pre­
sident, that the Bank had failed to establish a sound and uniform
currency.
After exhibiting and commenting upon the low rates to which
the Bank had reduced exchange, the committee proceed:
"This seems to present a state of currency approaching as near to per­
fection as could be desired; for here is a currency, issued at twenty-four
different parts of the Union, obtainable by any citizen who has money or
credit. When in his possession, it is equivalent to silver, in all his deal­
ings, with all the 9000 agents of the government, throughout the Union.
In all his dealings with the interior, it is better than silver; in all his
dealings in the commercial cities, equal to silver; and if, for any purpose,
he desires the silver with which he bought it, it is at his disposal, almost
universally, without any diminution, and never more than a diminution of
one quarter of one per cent. It is not easy to imagine, it is scarcely
necessary to desire, any currency better than this."
These reports, approved by the most august bodies of the
United States, to whom the subject peculiarly belonged, and
was confided, by the Constitution, were entitled to the respect
of the President, as the sincere sentiments of men distinguished
by their zeal in support of his election, but, more on account
of their truth. But, he has wholly disregarded them; opposing
his own judgment, unenlightened by experience or study, to
the voice of practical wisdom, speaking in the most concilia­
tory tones.
W e will add to this evidence, the testimony of Mr. Calhoun,
whose agency in the establishment of the Bank, and uninter­
rupted connection with the government of the country for many
years, render it highly important
" But, while I shall not condescend to notice the charges of the Secretary
against the Bank, beyond the extent which I have stated, a sense of duty
to the institution, and regard to the part which I took in its creation, com­
pels me to notice two allegations against it, which have fallen from another
quarter. It is said, that the Bank had no agency, or at least efficient agency,
in the restoration of specie payment in 1817, and that it had failed to fur­
nish the country with a uniform and sound currency, as had been promised
at its creation. Both of these allegations I pronounce to be without just
foundation. To enter into a minute examination of tbem, would carry me
too far from the subject, and I must content myself with saying, that having
been on the political stage, without interruption, from that day to this—
having been an attentive observer of the question of the currency through­
out the whole period—that the Bank has been an indispensable agent in

Digitized by

22
the restoration of specie payments; that, without it, the restoration could
not have been effected short of the utter prostration of all the moneyed insti­
tutions of the country, and an entire depreciation of Bank paper; and that,
it has not only restored specie payment, but has given a currency far more
uniform, between the extremes of the country, than was anticipated or
even dreamed of, at the time of its creation. I will say for myself, that I
did not believe, at that time, that the exchange between the Atlantic and
the West would be brought lower than two and a half per cent—the esti­
mated expense, then, including insurance and loss of time, of transporting
specie between the two points. How much it was below the anticipated
point, I need not state; the whole commercial world knows, that it was not
a fourth part, at the time of the removal of the deposits."
But, there is another branch of the message of 1829, relating
to this subject, which, taken in connection with subsequent
events, is of the highest importance. It is observable, already,
that the destruction of the Bank is not the sole passion of
the President's mind. Another, equally strong, is intimately
blended with it, and is the true cause of the first. It is the
establishment of a national bank, wholly dependant upon the
government. The project is, now, for the first time, presented,
wild and undigested, to be moulded upon " the credit of the
government and its revenues;" but it is never again lost sight
of. The Committee of Ways and Means instantly seized the
cub, and showed that, into whatever form it might be licked,
* it would be a monster too hideous for sight Apprehending at
once the design of the Executive, they observe, that,
" Deeply impressed with the conviction that the weak point of a free
overnment is the absorbing tendency of executive patronage, and sincerely
elieving that the proposed Bank would invest that branch of the govern­
ment with a weight of moneyed influence, more dangerous in its character,
and more powerful in its operation, than the entire mass of its present
atronage, the Committee have felt, that they were, imperiously, called upon,
y the highest considerations of public duty, to express the views they
have presented, with a frankness and freedom demanded by the occasion.

I

This first attack upon the Bank and the nation was repelled
at every point The Committee of Ways and Means distinctly
put, and ably maintained, the following propositions: 1. That
Congress had the constitutional power to incorporate a bank,
such as that, of the United States. 2. That it is expedient to
establish and maintain such an institution. And, 3. That it is
inexpedient to establish a National Bank, founded upon the
credit of the government and its revenues.
Thus rebuked and instructed, a decent respect for the legisla­
ture required, that the President should have left the subject
to them and the people, until he was called to act upon it, offi­
cially, by the presentation of a bill for his approval. If, then,
constitutional scruples prevailed to its rejection, however the
veto might be regretted, it could not be condemned. But this,
the only proper course, did not quadrate with the views of the

Digitized by

33
party. The nation, if suffered to discuss it, solely, as a ques­
tion of policy, would, it was to be feared, recognise and pursue
its true interests, and', in due season, recharter the Bank, and
thus mar, forever, the design upon the Treasury. An appeal,
therefore, was to be made from the councils of the nation to the
Jackson party, whose energy was to be roused by incessant
agitation. It was with this view, and certainly, with no hope
of legislative action, that the President, in December, 1830,
brought the Bank question again before the same Congress. With
an invitation to reconsider the subject, he submitted, in a more
specific form, the condemned project of a Treasury Bank; by
which, at once claiming, as now, the right of the Treasury to
dispose of the public deposits, an influence over the whole mo­
netary power of the Union might be acquired. The evils
of such an institution have been adverted to by Mr. Gallatin,
and abundantly displayed in the congressional speeches on the
removal of the deposits. As was to be expected, the Commit­
tee of Ways and Means, to whom that portion of the President's
message was referred, gave no further attention to the subject
On the convention of a new Congress in 1831, the President,
in the concise manner we have already noticed, repeated his
invitation; and, at the same session, the Bank applied for the re­
newal of its charter. This act of the Bank, to which it was
stimulated by the course of the Executive for three successive
years, has been denounced as premature, and as originating,
solely, in hostility to the President
" There are strong reasons," says that officer in his commu­
nication to his cabinet, 18th September, 1833, "for believing, that
the motive of the Bank, in asking for a recharter, at that session
of Congress, was to make it a leading question in the election
of a President of the United States, the ensuing November."
What was the motive of the President for calling the attention
of Congress so repeatedly to the charter? Was it the design
to make it a political question? If so, surely the Bank was at
liberty to seek the arena in which the question must be debated.
Were the President's views to obtain a decision of Congress
against the charter, six years before it would expire? If so,
surely, there was no impropriety in the Bank in submitting the
question to Congress,1 in a form that could not be evaded, only
four years before the expiration of the charter. The reasons
which could render it proper and expedient for the President,
on the part of ther nation, to obtain an early decision upon this
momentous subject, were equally operative upon the Bank,
when acting for itself and for the country.
Charges had been raised against the propriety of the con­
duct of the Bank, into which the moment, when it asked
a renewal of its charter, was the proper one for inquiry. A

Digitized by

24
Committee of Investigation, clothed with ample powers, was
appointed; which, after a very full examination, divided in opin­
ion; and three reports were made of their proceedings—one
by a majority, another by a minority, of the Committee, and a
third by an individual member, Mr. Adams. The effect of
these proceedings is sufficiently apparent, in the passage of a
bill, from the Senate, rechartering the Bank, by a vote of 107 to
85, in the House of Representatives. This bill, as we have seen,
was rejected by the President upon the ground of the unconsti­
tutionality and inexpediency of its provisions, but not on the
ground, that Congress could not, constitutionally, charter a Bank
of the United States.
Although thefloodgatesof party violence had been opened
upon the Bank, in its corporate capacity, and upon its president
and directors, individually, and all its acts had been grossly mis­
represented by the members of the party in Congress, by its thou­
sand presses, and by its orators in the primary meetings* of the
people, General Jackson, with self-respect, and respect for his
station, had, hitherto, refrained from committing himself upon
any definite charge of misconduct against the institution. But,
the contest, which he had provoked, had but given triumph to
the Bank. So far as the voice of the nation could be legiti­
mately known, it was in favour of the Bank. Some more
direct measure of hostility became necessary, and as vague
charges of unconstitutionality and mismanagement had not ren­
dered the people adverse to the institution, it was boldly and
rashly resolved, by the administration, to create doubts of its in­
solvency. In his message to Congress of the 3d of December,
1832, after the arrangement made by the Bank, in relation to
the payment of the three per cents, (which we shall have occa­
sion to consider hereafter) the President observes,
" Such measures as are within the reach of the Secretary of the Treasury
have been taken, to enable him to judge, whether the public deposits in
that institution may be regarded as entirely safe. But, as bis limited power
may prove inadequate to this object, I recommend the subject to the atten­
tion of Congress, under thefirmbelief, that it is worthy of their serious
investigation. An inquiry into the transactions of that institution, embrac­
ing the branches, as well as the principal Bank, seems called for, by the
credit which is given throughout the country to many serious charges,
impeaching its character, and which, if true, may justly excite the appre­
hension that it is no longer a safe depository of the money of the people."
And the Secretary of the Treasury, Mr.^'Lane, (it is necessary now, from the frequent changes in this office, to
give the name of the officer, to avoid confusion) by a para­
graph, in his annual report, which he can never cease to regret
whilst he continues to live, gave colour to this accusation of
insolvency.

Digitized by

25
"It is apparent/' he says, "however, that the apprehensions arising
oat of the arrangements," relative to the three per cents, " not less than
the great amount of the Bank's transactions, especially, in its western
branches, together with other matters connected with its dealings, which
have occupied the attention of one branch of the legislature since the
last annual report from this department, have tended to disturb the public
confidence in the management of the institution; and these, taken in con*
nection with the necessary arrangements in anticipation of finally closing
its business, have suggested an inquiry into the security of the Bank as
the depositary of the public funds."

Supposing that there were grounds for these doubts, pru­
dence, and an ordinary and honest regard for the rights and re­
putation of others, should have restrained their publication to
the world, until actual inquiry had confirmed them. Had a
responsible individual in private life thus attacked the com­
mercial existence of an established house, whose credit was un­
impeachable, the merchants upon change would have withered
the calumniator with their abiding scorn, whilst the courts of
justice would have taught him discretion, at the cost of half his
substance. And are the laws of morality less obligatory on the
functionaries of the nation? Granting it to have been possible,
that these doubts did exist in the minds of the President and
Secretary, it is certain, that they had instituted inquiry, and that
a few hours delay would have brought to them the result of the
investigation. What was the condition of the Bank at the mo­
ment these official communications were signed, according
to the report of the agent? "The liabilities of the Bank
amounted to $37,296,950 20, and the fund to meet them to
879,593,870 97, showing an excess of $42,296,920 77"!!I
Strong as the Bank is, its stock could not stand this shock
unimpaired. It fell six per cent in the market; the public
treasury and private fortunes suffering this diminution, by the
wanton enmity of the executive officers. What other bank
in the world could have withstood such an assault, with so little
injury? If in England or France, such a blow had been stricken
by the government, against the National Bank, it would have
gone down like the unarmed peasant before the glaive of the
mailed warrior. But, Congress upon this, as upon all previous
occasions, did not fail to do justice to the Bank; and we could
not frame a more severe reproof of the calumny against her,
than the vote of the House, 109 to 46, declaring "that the go­
vernment deposits may, in the opinion of the House, be safely
continued in the Bank of the United States."
Whatever may have been the professed object of the admin­
istration, when it suggested the insolvency of the Bank, it is
now certain, that it was to obtain immediate possession of the
deposits. Had the audacity of the Executive been, then, wound
up to the pitch it has since attained, it would not have required

Digitized by

26
the opinion of Congress to establish the contingency, on which,
alone, the Secretary of the Treasury would be justified id re­
moving the treasure of the nation from the custody of the
Bank. The vote, therefore, was an utter discomfiture, and we
may not be surprised, knowing the ardent temperament of the
individual, that the President should declare, " that unless the
Bank was broken down, it would break us down; that if the
last Congress had remained a week longer in session, two-thirds
would have been secured for the Bank by corrupt means, and
that the like result might be apprehended at the next Congress."
The country,however, thank heaven! is saved from the stigma
of shame, for her representatives, by the circumstances under
which this additional calumny was uttered.
It is not to be doubted, that the same policy which induced
the President to conceal his opinions on the constitutionality of
a National Bank, deterred him, for a season, from removing the
public treasure from the Bank of the United States into deposi­
tories under his own control. The assurance of his re-election
was the motive in both cases; and that no longer operating, he
resolved to remove the deposits under any colourable pretence,
which the imagination might suggest All parties had, until
this time, admitted, that the power of the Secretary over the
deposits could be exercised, only, in two cases; a danger of
loss, or a non-performance of the engagements of the Bank
with the government. A higher ground was now assumed,
which overlooked all considerations of contract, all legislative
provision for the security of the revenues, and gave to the Se­
cretary the absolute possession of the funds, whenever in his
opinion the "general interest and convenience of the people
required it." This resolution had been adopted at the mo­
ment that the determination of Congress against the measure
was known. With a hardihood, of which modern times has
no parallel, in any civilized government, the President op­
posed his will to that of the representatives of the people.
Truly has it been said, repeatedly, upon the floor of Congress,
that such a stretch of absolute power in England or France,
would have cost the monarch his head. Happily, in this coun­
try, the people have other, and more effectual, modes of redress­
ing their wrongs.
It is well known to the country, that from the time of Wash­
ington, the heads of the executive departments, that is, of the
departments of State, Treasury, War and Navy, with the At­
torney-General, and latterly, the Postmaster-General, form a
cabinet council, whose members the President consults, either
singly or together; having the benefit of their wisdom and in­
formation to guide his course. By the constitution, he may re­
quire their opinion in writing, and so uniform has been the

Digitized by

27
practice of advising with them, that, although the Presi­
dent is under no legal or constitutional obligation to consult
them, an opinion has become general, that they form, and they
are frequently called, his constitutional advisers; and the case
was always deemed an extraordinary one, in which the opin­
ion of a majority did not prevail. Their situations rendered
them responsible to their country; and their influence' was,
therefore, the safest which could be exercised over the chief
magistrate. General Jackson, it is said, with truth, which is
apparent from the evidence we are about to adduce, has sub­
jected himself to the influence of advisers of another and less re­
sponsible class; who, from their residence in the palace, have
been denominated the "Kitchen Cabinet." The term, though
not the most respectable that might be selected, is euphonious
and appropriate enough, and being universally recognized, we
must use it to ^distinguish this irresponsible cabal from the
"Cabinet" proper.
In this secret council have the most important measures of
the President originated. Its members, forpurposes, apparently,
purely of a party and selfish nature, have formed and steadily
pursued, a plan for obtaining possession of the political and fis­
cal power of the country; and, as we are told, by one who
was of the cabinet proper, go vern it through the instrumentality
of the President's passions and prejudices. The members of the
cabinet proper are occasionally and formally consulted; but they
are content, it seems, with the honours and emoluments of of­
fice, whilst, in the estimation of the country, its most important
duties are performed by "irresponsible persons, who possess the
confidence, if not the place, properly belonging to them." The
historian will not fail to contrast the humility of their minds
with their official elevation.
•
The existence of this hidden cabinet, the nature of its in­
fluence, and its direct agency in violating the laws, are estab­
lished by the piquant disclosures of Mr. Secretary Duane.
This gentleman, who had adhered to the Presidenf through good
report and evil report, and what is more to his faithfulness as
a partisan, through his own good opinion and evil opinion of the
chief magistrate, consented, reluctantly, at the earnest and
overpowering instances of the President, to fill the place of
Secretary of the Treasury, vacated by the translation of Mr.
M'Lane, his personal, and in this case, his efficient frtend, to
the department of State. The following is his account of his
induction to his official duties under the guidance of an influ­
ence, as he justly says, unknown to the Constitution.
"
My commission bore the date of May 29, 1833, and on
the 30th I reached W ashington. After waiting upon the President, on the
next day, 1 went to the treasury department, and took the oath of office on

Digitized by

28
the 1st of June. On the evening of that day, Mr. Reuben M. Whitney
called upon me at my lodgings, at the desire, as he said, of the President,
to make known to me what had been done, and what was contemplated, in
relation to the United States Bank. He stated, that the President had
concluded to take upon himself the responsibility of directing the secre­
tary of the treasury to remove the public deposits from that bank, and to
transfer them to state banks; that he had asked the members of the cabi­
net to give him their opinions on the subject; that the President had said,
" Mr. Taney and Mr. Barry had come out like men for the removal;" that
Mr. M'Lane had given a long opinion against it; that Mr. Cass was sup­
posed to be against it, but had given no written opinion; and that Mr.
Woodbury* had given an opinion which was " yes" and " no;" that the
President would make the act his own by addressing a paper or order to
the secretary of the treasury; that Mr. Amos Kendall, who was high in the
President's confidence, was now preparing that paper; that there had been
delay owing to the affair at Alexandria; but, no doubt, the President would
soon speak to me on the subject; that the paper referred to, would be put
forth as the Proclamation had been, and would be made a rallying point;
that he (Mr. Whitney) had, at the desire of the President, drawn up a me­
moir or exposition, showing that the measure might be safely adopted, and
that the state banks would be fully adequate to all the purposes of govern­
ment. He then read the exposition to me, and as I desired to understand
matters so important and so singularly presented, I asked him to leave the
paper with me, which he accordingly did. He also read to me divers let­
ters from individuals connected with state banks. The drifl of his further
observations was to satisfy me that the executive arm alone could be relied
on to prevent a renewal of the United States Bank charter.
" The communication thus made to me created surprise and mortifica­
tion. I was surprised at the position of affairs which it revealed, and
mortified at the low estimate which had been formed of the independence
of my character. I listened, however, respectfully, to one who gave such
evidence of the confidence reposed in him, and awaited the explanation
which he intimated the President would give.
" Soon after this interview I took occasion to express my mortification
at my position, to the member of the cabinet who had represented the
President in asking me to accept office.
" On the next evening (Sunday) Mr. Whitney again called on me, in
company with a stranger, whom he introduced as Mr. Amos Kendall, a
gentleman in the President's confidence, who would give me any further
explanations that I might desire, as to what was meditated in relation to
the United States Bank, and who then called on me because he was about
to proceed forthwith to Baltimore. 1 did not invite nor check communica­
tion. Very little was said, and perhaps because I could not wholly con­
ceal my mortification at an attempt, apparently made with the sanction of
the President, to reduce me to a mere cypher in the administration.
"The next morning, June 3d, I waited upon the President, and, as I had
been apprized by Mr. Whitney would be the case, he soon introduced the
subject of the Bank. 1 stated that Mr. Whitney had made known to me
what had been done, and what was intended, and had intimated that his
communication was made at the President's desire. The President re­
plied, in a tone of dissatisfaction, that it was true he had conferred with
Mr. Whitney-, and obtained in formation from him as to the Bank, but that he
did not make him his confidant, nor had he told him to call on me. I
enumerated the representations which Mr. Whitney had made, and their
* It is due to this gentleman to state, that I subsequently learned, he was opposed
to a removal prior to July, 1834, and was for only a gradual change afterwards.

Digitized by

29
correctness was admitted. I said, I feared that I should not be able to see
the subject in the light in which the President viewed it; to which he remarkedrthat he liked frankness, that my predecessor and himself had
sometimes differed in opinion, but it had made no difference in feeling, and
should not in my case; that the matter under consideration was of vast
consequence to the country; thai unless the bank was broken down, it would
break us down; that if the last Congress had remained a week longer in session, two-thirds would have been secured for the Bank by corrupt means; and
that the like result might be apprehended at the next Congress; that such a state
bank agency must be put in operation before the meeting of Congress, as
would show that the United States Bank was not necessary, and thus
some members would have no excuse for voting for it* My suggestions as
to an inquiry by Congress, as in December, 1832, or a recourse to the ju­
diciary, the President repelled, saying it would be idle to rely upon either;
referring, as to the judiciary, ta decisions already made, as indications of
what would be the effect of an appeal to them in future. After mention­
ing, that he would speak to me again, before he departed for the eastward,
he said he meant to take the opinions of the members of the cabinet with
him, but would send them to me from New York, together with his views,
and would expect me, on his return, to give him my sentiments frankiy
and fully.
" The President left Washington on the 6th of June. During his ab­
sence further circumstances came to my knowledge, which induced me to
believe, that the removal of the deposits was not advocated with any view
to public utility, but urged to accomplish selfish, if not factious purposes.
I sought no intercourse with those, who, I felt satisfied, had an undue in­
fluence over the President, at least in relation to the grave questions con­
nected with the removal of the deposits. Whenever any of them called on
me, there was no hesitation in urging me to accord in the proposed mea­
sure. It was contended that the removal of the deposits would be made
a rallying point at the opening of Congress, or a flag up for the new mem­
bers. Whenever 1 urged a recourse, in the first instance, to Congress, or
the judiciary, such a step was scouted, and delay represented as hazardous.
" I had heard rumours of the existence of an influence at Washington,
unknown to the constitution. The conviction, that such an influence ex­
isted, at least in relation to the matters then pressed upon me, was irresist­
ible. I knew that four of the six members of the cabinet, before I became
a member of it, had been opposed to any present action in relation to the
deposits; and I also knew that four of the six members of the existing
cabinet entertained the same views. I felt satisfied, not only that the Pre­
sident was not in the hands of his constitutional advisers, but that their
advice was successfully resisted by persons, whose views I considered at
variance with the public interest, ana the President's fame.
"Such were my impressions, when, on the 1st of July, I received a let­
ter from the President, dated " Boston, June 26th, 1833," together with
his views, and the opinions of four of the members of the cabinet, volumi­
nous papers, in the examination of which I was engaged when the Presi­
dent unexpectedly returned to Washington, on the 4th of July.
"In the views given by the President, he expressed his opinion, that the
secretary of the treasury would be wisely exercising the discretion conferred
upon him by law, by directing the deposits to be made in the state banks,
from and after the 15th of September, if arrangements to be made with them
should be then completed.
" In his letter, he stated that the only difficulty he for some time had, was
as to the time when the change should commence; that he thought the
time should be from the 1st to the 15th of September; that an agent should
be sent to consult with state banks upon the practicability of an arrange*
C 2

Digitized by

Google

30
y

ment such as the President then proceeded to detail; bat that he did not
contemplate a removal of funds deposited, unless when wanted for public
purposes. The letter closed with this emphatic assurance:—
" * In making to you, my dear sir, this frank and explicit avowal of my
opinions and feelings, it is not my intention to interfere with the indepen­
dent exercise of the discretion committed to you by law over the subject.
I have thought it however due to you, under the circumstances, to place
before you, with this restriction, my sentiments upon the subject; to the
end that you may, on my responsibility, allow them to enter into your de­
cision upon the subject, and into any future exposition of it, so far as you
may deem it proper.'
" Prior to the reception of these communications, I had felt embarrass­
ment, not only in relation to the general subject, but as to constitutional
and legal questions. I was in* doubt, as to the view which the President
would take of the 16th section of the law, chartering the United States
Bank, which gave the discretion, as to the deposits, to the secretary of the
freasury. When, however, I read the above passage in his letter, my anx­
iety was, in a great measure, if not wholly, removed. If it meant any
thing, I concluded that the President now confirmed, what the law had al­
ready declared, that the secretary of the treasury had the exclusive right to
exercise that discretion independently of the President; and that in thus
writing to me, he had pledged himself not to interfere beyond the express­
ion of nis own opinions, and the employment of argument to have an in­
fluence upon mine. Reflecting, however, upon the means that might be
used to induce the President to disregard this pledge, I considered it my
duty to comply strictly with his directions, to give him my sentiments
frankly and /u%."

We cannot be surprised that the sensibility of Mr. Duane
was excited " at the low estimate which had been formed of
the independance of his character" but we are not a little as­
tonished, that the complacency of the other dissentient members
of the cabinet proper, should have been undisturbed, whilst
measures most injurious to the country, which they had con­
demned, were thus prosecuted. In other countries where
implicit submission to the behests of the Executive power, to
which,time, long descent,and all the impressive circumstances of
feudality have given high, though not just, claims to respect,
such humble acquiescence would not have been seen, or would
have been doomed to ineffable contempt. The elder Pitt, whose
energetic mind was ruled by the patriot's heart, threw up the
seals when his honest counsel and warning voice were disre­
garded; and in the past year, we have seen, in France, distin­
guished ministers resign their offices, even when a legislative
body refused to give effect to their measures. Can there be
stronger evidence of the corruption of the party, than this sac­
rifice, which men of fair, and, in private life, of estimable char­
acter, make of their judgment and duty upon the altar of am­
bition or avarice? The secretary of the treasury, though
inexperienced in office, was not wanting either in the firmness
or intelligence which the occasion and his place required.
Believing, as he did, that the President really thought the pros-

Digitized by

Google

31
tration of the United States Bank would be another victory of
which he might be proud, and that he teas stimulated to
consider any means justifiable to attain that end, he re­
solved to interpose between him and those who were impelling
him in his rash career. He was, especially, anxious to disabuse
him as to the legislature and the judiciary. He resolutely re­
fused to direct the deposits to be made in the State banks, ur­
ging: 1, that the measure was extreme and arbitrary: 2, that
it was unauthorized by law: and, 3, that it was inexpedient
L It was extreme and arbitrary, because,
1. The charter is the law of the land; a contract, that cannot
be dissolved or altered, without mutual consent, or forfeited,
without inquiry. The public deposits are a benefit to the Bank,
for which it has paid a consideration, and their continuance is a
part of the contract.
2. The last Congress had acted upon the complaints of the
Bank; and the next Congress might follow the example of the
last The House of Representatives, by a vote of 109 to 46,
decided that the Bank was a safe place of deposit, and one of
the last acts of Congress authorized the Secretary of the Trea­
sury to lend a million of dollars to the Bank without security;
and nothing had occarred to warrant him to treat these evi­
dences of confidence with contempt, or to refuse to await the
interference of the next Congress. If a body with power to
send for persons and papers was unable to come to a decision
unfavourable to the Bank, or even to express a disbelief of
its safety, the Secretary could not, without such inquiry or
power to inquire,first,do what Congress would not do, and then,
refer to the reasons of the President as a justification. Any
proceeding, now, especially in the absence of adequate reasons,
would seem to arise from an apprehension that the representa­
tives of the people are incompetent or corruptible; and that
the people, themselves, are incapable of preserving the institu­
tions of their country, in the event of the general depravity of
their agents.
II. The measure was unauthorized. If the Secretary were
to cease to deposit the public money in the Bank of the United
States, it would be his duty to direct its deposit to the credit of
the treasurer in some safe place. Did it become the Secretary
to judge of the solidity of an institution by hearsay? If he
took that responsibility, had he a right to go farther? The plan
suggested by the President proposed a contract with divers
banks, according to which certain service was to be rendered
by one party, for the privilege of trading upon the money of
the other. Has the Secretary authority to create a sort of char­
ter? In any way, or for any time, to bind the United States?
Have the local banks any right to bind themselves? If they

Digitized by

32
have, what is the security, and who is to judge of it? Has t h e
Secretary any right to contract that certain banks may., con­
tract with other banks, unknown to him? Has he the right, or
is it discreet, to leave to any^agent the right to decide, in the
course of two months, upon the condition of all the banks
that may be necessary for the operations of government? If
there be no law granting powers needful, in doubtful cases, can
the Secretary discreetly take them on his own responsibility?
Beside the summary power to take away, has he the legis­
lative power to authorize a disposition of the public money?
Could a section of the charter, obviously meant for extreme
cases only, authorize the Secretary, in the absence of necessity,
to take the public money from a Bank over which there is a
controul, and distribute it among institutions over which no
controul exists? On the exercise of the power conferred by
Congress upon the Secretary, he is enjoined to give reasons im­
mediately to them; obviously showing that Congress consider­
ed themselves, alone, competent to judge of the necessity of a
removal, from one agent, and the propriety of the substitute.
The proposition of the President is avowed to be an experiment. Has the Secretary the right to make experiments upon
such important matters? If an experiment must be made, is it
not courteous to Congress, of whom the President considers
the Secretary, in this case, the agent, to await their instruc­
tion? Have not the constitutional holders of the public purse
the only means which can be safely used for making such trials?
III. The measure is inexpedient. If Congress should in­
terrupt the experiment, and it should fail, as the Secretary
thinks it would, is he then to make another? Time will be ne­
cessary to test the project; and the President desires, that the
trial may be made, so as to meet the dissolution of the United
States Bank. This rests on the presumption, that Congress wilt
not interfere; whereas the Secretary believes, that the opera­
tions will have scarcely been commenced, ere the apparatus
will be demolished. With such a probability, will solvent
banks engage in the project? Will they guarantee the acts of
banks in the remote parts of the Union? Would it be prudent
to ally the country with banks willing to make such a common
cause? Will not the avarice, the ignorance, or the imprudence
of, particularly, remote, local banks, tempt them so to extend
their loans, and use the public money, as to disable them from
returning it, when required, or compfel them to ruin their
debtors by recalling it?
Suppose, that in the proposed measure, the faith of the country
would not be violated; that contempt to the last and the next
Congress would not be evinced; that power to contract with
State banks exists; and that it would not be unwise to make the

Digitized by

33
contract; still the question presents itself, What would be the
effect upon society? Would the operations of the Government,
or of the commercial world, be facilitated? Would confidence
between man and man be promoted? Would the facility to
stand a shock, in the event of a war in Europe, for instance, be
given to the local banks? Mr. Duane adds:
"These questions were placed hy the predecessor of the Secretary in a
point of view which he thinks cannot be overlooked by a chief magistrate
anxious to protect the mass of the community from embarrassment. From
want of experience, or information, the Secretary may not anticipate evil
so extensive as that apprehended by his predecessor; but his fears render
him unwilling to put the match to a train, the end of which.he has not the
sagacity to discern.
"Even if he doubted whether the United States Bank could meet
every demand of Government, as made upon it, he would hesitate whether
it would not be his duty to forbear, rather than increase the evil, by abridg­
ing the power of the Bank to surmount its difficulties. So that, in the
absence of all doubt of the kind, he would be at a loss for an excuse, were
he to produce, by an act on his part, the very mischief that is apprehended.
Credit, like female fame, is of such a peculiar nature, that its blossoms
may be blighted even by the breath of inquiry. Much more trivial changes
than that proposed by the President, nave produced great commercial
convulsions."
"The struggle to be made is not to see which can do the other the
most harm, the Government or the Bank. The Government has but one
duty to execute—to inform the people and their representatives of the appre­
hended danger. It is not called upon to maim the Bank, lest the Bank
should master the country. In any attempt to maim, the agents of the
Bank would be those most likely to escape; the wound would be felt in
the cottage of the farmer, rather than in the palace of the banker."
"
If the suggestion of the President be sound, that the
United States Bank dare not operate oppressively, because the State banks,
having Government deposits, might run upon the branches, then, there is a
check, at all times, in the hands of the Government; and the Bank, during
its legal existence, will be careful not to do or omit what might warrant a
total removal of the deposits."
"
The United States Bank is represented by some of the
local banks as an engine so powerful, as to be an object of universal alarm;
and, at the next moment, so utterly feeble, that by the simple operation of
a treasury order, the entire branches may be broken up, one after the other,
and the paperflungupon them in masses, which they will not be prepared
to redeem! Which of these is the true picture? If a treasury order have
such talismanic influence, can there be a better pledge for the safety of the
public deposites? But, if it has no such power, is it discreet to commence
the war? In all such calculations, as those referred to, theflingingback
masses of bank paper, and breaking up the branches are items, that seems
to have caused no compassion for the ultimate sufferers. It appears to
have been forgotten, that a large portion of the good and pure people of
the land would be ruined."

It will be seen, by those who have read the letters of the exSecretary, that we have selected from, and condensed his
remarks, but have not given all that he said to the President
to divert him from the immoral and impolitic war in which he
had so franticly engaged. The whole of the Secretary's reasons,

Digitized by

34
on this head, do honour alike to his principles and his sagacity*
We see that the President has not pursued his course, u n ­
warned of its consequences; and that the barbarous system of the
war, including the run upon the branches, subsequently at­
tempted at Charleston, was deliberately meditated.
The reasons of the Secretary for refusing to withhold the de­
posits from the Bank, were communicated to the President of
the United States on the 12th July. He displayed, in several
interviews, strong marks of dissatisfaction with his " refractory
subordinate;" but, at length, asserted, that he wanted inquiry
only; and to the observation of the Secretaryy that his letter of
June 26th indicated the purpose of an actual removal by the
15th September, he replied, certainly not with the honesty and
frankness which have so falsely been attributed to him, "that
the banks might not agree to the only plan he thought safe, that
of mutual guarantee; that information ought to be obtained,
even for the use of Congress; that he conceived the Secretary
ought to co-operate in collecting it; that he was desirous that
Mr. Kendall should make inquiries; and that they might re­
main uncommitted until after a consideration of the questions
that were connected with a change of the depository."
Under these views, the Secretary consented to prepare in­
structions for the agent; stating, the approaching dissolution of
the United States Bank; his power, prior to that period, if there
were adequate cause, to withhold the deposits from it, and the
desire of the President to ascertain, whether a substitute might
not be procured in the state banks; directing the agent to
select a designated number of such banks in certain districts,
which should be empowered to appoint all the banks, at other
points, in which the public money should be deposited, subject
to the approbation of the Secretary; who reserved the right to
discontinue the deposits in any bank when he should think
roper. The terms proposed for an arrangement with the
anks were, that they should make monthly or more frequent
returns of their condition; report, weekly, the public deposits,
and submit their books and transactions to examination by the
Secretary or his agent when required: that the contract of the
Government should be only with the primary banks, they
being responsible for the safety of the deposits wherever made,
and for making payments, without charge to the Government,
at all places directed by the Secretary, rendering every service
lawfully required from the United States Bank, and paying the
expense of any agent the secretary should appoint to examine
into their affairs. The agent was also instructed;—to inquire,
whether the charters of such banks as were disposed to this
arrangement would warrant it; whether, if it should be made,
prior to the 4th of March, 1836, the Bank of the United States
might have power and disposition to embarrass or interrupt it;

E

Digitized by

35
and in such case, what would be the probable effects upon the
banks and the community: and to obtain, from the selected
banks, information to enable the Government to judge of their
condition, at the time of arrangement, and that full publicity
should be given to the proceedings of the agent with them.
In concluding these instructions the Secretary observed:
" It becomes my duty to myself, in order to guard against expectations,
on the part of the banks, that may not be realized, or misapprehension
elsewhere, distinctly to say, that, my performance of the present act of
duty as an executive agent, is not to be understood as an indication of any
intention on my part, under existing circumstances, to exercise the power
vested in me by law. Whether such an emergency may not arise, as may
warrant the exercise of that power, it is unnecessary now to anticipate, it
is sufficient to observe that, in my opinion, none such exists at present.**
With a design to immediate operations, these instructions are
not consistent with the views previously communicated by the
Secretary to the President; but the former justified them, as use­
ful, to obtain information which would undeceive the President,
demonstrate the impracticability of his plan of financial agency r
and be serviceable in any e v e n t T h e qualification appended
t o them was, indeed, a protection from injury; for, it was little
probable, that any respectable bank would enter into an arrange­
ment, under a declaration that there existed no intention of
carrying it into effect.
T h e effect of this qualification was at once perceived, and
objected to, by the President, who, quitting the ground of " i n quiry only" on which he had amused the Secretary, now de­
clared, (letter of July 22d, 1833):
"The great object to be obtained by the inquiry, is to ascertain whether
the state banks will agree to become the agents of the Government, on the
terms proposed, for the safe keeping and transmission of the public moneys*
If they will, the ground taken by the President, should circumstances
remain as they now are, is, that it will be then expedient and just to
resort to them as a substitute for the Bank of the United States as a fiscal
agent." " Previously to inquiry, however, (the President continued), you
declare that nothing has yet occurred to render necessary the movement
anticipated by it; and thus leave me to infer, that should the inquiry estab­
lish the competency of the state banks to perform the agency proposed to
them, you will not feel yourself at liberty to carry into effect the decision,
transferring the public deposits to them, which the President, on his
advisement with his cabinet, may make. Please inform me whether I
am correct in supposing that this is your determination. If I am, it will
then be my duty, in frankness and candour, to suggest the course which will be
necessary on my part."

This intelligible threat of dismissal from office, the Secretary
considered as a palpable violation of the President's assurance,
" that it was not his intention to interfere with the independent
exercise of the discretion committed to the Secretary of the
Treasury, by law, over the subject;" and he was inclined, pe>

Digitized by

36
remptorily, to adhere to the last paragraph of his instructions*
But, as he says, the President still admitted in his letter, that,
"all matters connected with the substitution of another fiscal
agent," were to be "fully considered; and knowing that the
instructions contemplated the President's bank plan alone, and
the collection of information as to the effect of the removal of
the deposits upon the banks and society; and as he could not,
with propriety, declare, that he would not, at a future period, act,
because it might become his duty, he consented to give up the
offensive paragraph; and after reiterating his opinions, promised,
that when the moment for decision, after inquiry and discussion,
should arrive, he would concur with the President, or retire.
The promise of the Secretary, it appears, was considered by
the President as removing every obstacle to his course. The
instructions were, unhesitatingly, altered in many essential par­
ticulars; the direction to collect information was stricken out,
and the agent empowered to propose or accept new plans.
Thus modified, the instructions were signed by the Secretary;
flattering himself, "that the President would be undeceived,
and that the time of the meeting of Congress would be so closely
approximated, ere a suitable inquiry could be made, as to ren­
der any action by the President altogether indelicate and improper." He signed them, he assures us, not with a view to
retain a post, which had no longer any attraction for him, not
to thwart the President in his legitimate course, not to mar a
salutary, measure, but to prevent the execution of the scheme
which, he believed, would be detrimental to the country and to
the President himself. The propriety of the sequence, however,
will be apparent, probably, to those, only, who may believe
that he who fires the train is no agent in projecting the missile
of destruction. But even Mr. Duane, with the opportunities
which he now had of knowing the President, could not con­
ceive, that he would so far disregard the dictates of delicacy
and propriety as to withhold the deposits against the express­
ed sense of the legislature; notwithstanding, such an intention
was distinctly avowed at his first official interview on the 3d
June, with the President, and also in his letter of 22d July.
Yet Mr. Duane seems, at this time, or soon after, to have
attained a clear conception of the true nature of the service
required of him, as he assures us that it" was not to substitute
one fiscal agent for another, but to pervert a power reserved
by law, for the public protection, into a weapon to punish the
legitimate fiscal agent, at such a time, and in such a manner, as
to evade legislative and judicial action."
The result of these measures is given by the Secretary:
" The instructions, thus offered, were on the 23d of July sent to the agent,
who soon after proceeded on his mission. He returned early in Septem-

Digitized by

37
ber, and on the 9th of that month his report was submitted to the Presi­
dent. The plan of bank agency, deemed by the President the only safe
one, had been almost unanimously rejected by the state banks. The
materials from which the condition of the state banks was to be ascer­
tained, were very imperfectly furnished. No inquiry, beyond that which
resulted in the agent's report and correspondence, was, to my knowledge,
made. Nor was there any discussion, in my presence, or otherwise, to my
knowledge, as to the agent's report and correspondence, or any plan of
state bank agency. If any member of the administration understood what
was to be the system of future fiscal operations, I was not that person,
although I, attentively, read all that was submitted. Yet it was into this
chaos 1 was required precipitately to plunge the fiscal operations of the
country, at a moment when they were conducted by the legitimate agent
with the utmost simplicity, safety and despatch."

When it was known, early in September, that the Secretary
persisted in his refusal to remove the deposits, some members
of the cabinet appeared to desire a middle course. He was
asked whether he would fix a day on which he would remove
the deposits, after the meeting of Congress, in case that body
should not act upon the subject. This is not the least extraor­
dinary feature in this most extraordinary history. It supposed
a resolution, in the Executive, to control the public funds, not
only without the authority of Congress, but even against the
repeated and continued expression of the public will; and sup­
posed, also, a claim to power, quite as broad as the Executive
has since set up in his presumptuous protest to the Senate. The
Secretary refused to fix a day, but consented to remove the
deposits in case Congress desired it; and again stated his readi­
ness to retire, as soon as the President should express his pre­
ference for that course.
In the meantime, while a grand attack upon the Bank was
in preparation, pursuant to a predetermined plan, reasons for
justifying the assault were, covertly, sought through the instru*
mentality of the directors of the institution, appointed by the
President; who were instructed by that officer, privately, to
make inquisition into the proceedings of the Bank, and whose
report, replete with ejror and perversion, we shall have occa­
sion hereafter to notice.
A cabinet council, destined to be famous in history, was
holden on the 18th September, when the President read to the
assembled members an exposition of his views, which he de­
livered to the Secretary of the Treasury for consideration.
Four of the members, it is understood, dissented. Of the doc­
trines and allegations contained in this document, it is unneces­
sary now to speak at large, since they have been wholly adopted
by the successor of Mr. Duane, and reported by him to Con­
gress as his reasons for the removal of the deposits. Some of
the closing paragraphs, however, of the address must find a
place here. They contain the President's exposition of his

Digitized by

38
right to control the Secretary of the Treasury, and his peremp­
tory appointment of a day for the removal of the deposits.
" Viewing it (the change) as a question of transcendent importance*
both in the principles and consequences it involves, the President could
not, in justice to the responsibility he owes to the country, refrain from
pressing upon the Secretary of the Treasury his view of the considera­
tions which impel to immediate action. Upon him has been devolved by
the Constitution and the suffrages of the American people, the duty of
superintending the operations of the Executive departments of the Govern­
ment, and seeing that the laws are faithfully executed. In the performance
of this high trust, it is his undoubted Tight to express to those whom the
laws and his choice have made his associates in the administration of the
Government, his opinion of their duties under circumstances as they arise.
It is this right which he now exercises. Far be it from him to expect or
require, that any member of the cabinet should, at his request, order or dicta*
tion, do any act which he believes unlawful, or in his conscience condemns.
From them, and from his fellow-citizens, iu general, he desires, only, that
aid and support which their reason approves and their conscience sanc­
tions.
" The President again repeats, that he begs his cabinet to consider the proposed measure as his own, in the support of which he shall require no one of
them to make a sacrifice of opinion or principle. Its responsibility has been
assumed, after the most mature deliberation and reflection, as necessary to
preserve the morals of the people, the freedom of the press, and the purity
of the elective franchise, without which, all will unite in saying, that the
blood and treasure expended by our forefathers, in the establishment of
our happy system of government, will have been vain and fruitless. Un­
der these convictions, he feels that a measure so important to the Ameri­
can people cannot be commenced too soon; and he therefore names the
first day of October next, as a period proper for the change of the deposits,
or sooner, provided the necessary arrangements with the state banks can
be made."

It is really difficult to understand what the President appre­
hended, when he so repeatedly asserted that he did not mean to
coerce the action of any one of his cabinet. These assevera­
tions refer, solely, to the Secretary of the Treasury. The Presi­
dent recognizes the power of that officer as unqualified, as
absolute, over the deposits; he claims only to be viceroy over
him. We can comprehend, that an absolute prince does not
coerce obedience to his command when he does not make the
prison, the cord, or the axe, the alternative. But, surely, he is
not tolerant, when he expends the whole of his power to pro­
duce conformity. Nor can the President be supposed to re­
spect the opinions of a cabinet minister, when expulsion, the
greatest punishment he can inflict, is the consequence of dis­
agreement with him.
The decision of the Secretary was, hastily and indecorously,
pressed upon the 19th, and though he craved delay until the
21st, that he might prepare a defensive paper, the determination
to remove the deposits was officially published on the 20th;
thus offering to him a gross indignity as an officer and a man.

Digitized by

39
On the 21st, he addressed a " brief emphatic letter" to the Presi­
dent, refusing to carry his directions into effect, or voluntarily
to leave the post which the law had placed under his charge;
conceiving that the latter resolution was warranted by the af­
front which had been put upon him. He was formally and
rudely dismissed on the 23d of September, by a note from the
President, saying, " I feel constrained to notify you that your
further services as Secretary of the Treasury are no longer re­
quired." Mr. Taney, who had sustained the views of the Presi­
dent, as his successor, carried them into effect. Mr. Duane has
earned, with his contemporaries and posterity, the reputation of a
man of talent, firm in the performance of his duty, incorruptible
by ambition, and what is more rare, unseduced by the wiles and
claims of party,—an enviable niche in the historic temple.
Thus, was perpetrated in the most vindictive spirit, the most
naked and reckless act of power which our annals have recorded.
The sense of Congress scorned,—its members shamefully defamed,
—the solemn contract with the bank annulled,—the public treasury
torn from the legal depositary,—the national currency unsettled,
and bankruptcy and ruin widely spread over the land.
II. The lawfulness of the power claimed by the President over
the deposites has become a question of grave consideration in
Congress; and its exercise has called forth, from the Senate, a
rebuke, which is second only to a conviction on impeachment.
This power is claimed by the President on the following grounds.
1. That the Executive power is vested in him by the Constitu­
tion. 2. That it is his sworn duty to take care that the laws be
faithfully executed. 3. That it is his right and duty to nominate,
and by and with the advice and consent of the Senate, appoint,
all officers of the United States, whose appointments are not, in
the Constitution, otherwise provided for. From these premises,
he infers, "that the whole Executive power being vested in
him, who is responsible for its exercise, it is a necessary con­
sequence, that he should have a right to employ agents of his
own choice, to aid him in the performance of his functions, and
to discharge them, when he is no longer willing to be respon­
sible for their acts. In strict accordance with this principle,
the power of removal, which, like that of appointment, is an
original Executive power, is left unchecked by the Constitution,
in relation to all Executive officers, for whose conduct the Pre­
sident is responsible, wThile it is taken from him in relation to
judicial officers, for whose acts he is not responsible." The
power of removal he maintains, by the contemporaneous con­
struction of the Constitution, and the uniform practice under it.
The President further contends, " that the Treasury Depart­
ment is on the 6ame footing as the other departments; the Se­
cretary, being constitutionally appointable and removable by him,

Digitized by

40
is an Executive officer, the mere instrument o( the Chief Magis­
trate in the execution of the laws, subject, like all other heads of
departments, to his supervision and control: That the preten­
sion, that the Secretary is an officer of Congress, is not war­
ranted by anything in the Constitution; no joint power of ap­
pointment is given to the two houses of Congress; nor is there
any accountability to them, as one body; but, as soon as any
office is created by law, of whatever name or character, the
appointment of the officer devolves by the Constitution upon the
President, with the advice and consent of the Senate, except in
cases, of which this is none: That this pretension is discounte­
nanced by an incident which occurred at the time of the organi­
zation of the Treasury Department, distinctly evincing the una­
nimous concurrence of the first Congress, in the principle, that
the Treasury Department is wholly Executive in its character
and responsibility; a motion to strike out the provision of the
bill making it the duty of the Secretary 'to digest and report
plans for the improvement and management of the revenue, and
for the support of public credit/ on the ground that it would
give the Executive Department too much influence in Congress,
was opposed, not because the Secretary was the officer of Con­
gress, which, if admitted, would have been conclusive, but for
reasons which conceded his Executive character throughout
" That the custody of the public property, under such regula­
tions as may be prescribed by legislative authority, has always
been considered an appropriate function of the Executive De­
partment, in this, and all other governments. In accordance
with this principle, every species of property belonging to the
United States, (with some exceptions unimportant to this issue,)
is in charge of officers appointed by the President, whether it be
lands, buildings, merchandise, provisions, clothing, arms or mu­
nitions of war/1
" That public money is but a species of public property. It cannot be
brought into the Treasury, except by law; but when obtained, its custody
a)way8 has been, and must be, unless the Constitution be changed, intrust­
ed to the Executive Department. iVb officer can be created by Congress to
take charge of it, whose appointment would not, by the Constitution, devolve on
the President, and who would not be responsible to him for the faithful performance of his duties. The Legislative power may undoubtedly bind him and
the President by law, prescribing where particular portions of the public
money may be kept, and for what reason it may be removed; as it may
direct the supplies for the army or navy to be kept in particular stores; and
it will be the duty of the President to see that the law be faithfully exe­
cuted—yet will the custody remain in the Executive Department. Were Con­
gress to assume the power to appoint officers, independently of the Presi­
dent, to take charge of the public property in the arsenals, & c , it would be
a palpable usurpation of Executive power, subversive of the form as well
as of the fundamental principles of the government. And no difference ex­
ists, between public property in the form of munitions of war, or pecuniary [
treasure. Congress eannot, therefore, take from the Executive Department tie

Digitized by

41
custody of the public property or money, without an assumption of Executive
power, and subversion of the first principles of the Constitution,
" That Congress has never imperatively directed the public moneys to be
kept in any particular place. A Treasurer created, subordinate to the Sec­
retary and through him to the President, is required to give bond, safely to
keep, and faithfully to disburse, the public moneys without direction as to
the manner or place in which they should be kept. By the original and
continued practice of the Government, the Secretary, under the supervision
of the President, designated the places of custody, and specially directed
all transfers of the public funds; and although portions were first placed
in the State banks, and then in the former bank of the United States, and
on its dissolution, again transferred to the State banks, no legislation was
deemed necessary by Congress, and all the operations were originated and
perfected by Executive authority.
That, " The Act of 1816, directing the public deposites to be made in the
Bank of the United States, unless the Secretary of the Treasury should
otherwise order, was but the continuation of the pre-existing powers of the
Secretary to direct where the deposites should be made, with the superadded
obligation of giving reasons to Congress for making them elsewhere. The
provision did not, in any way, alter the relation between the Secretary and
the President, as the responsible head of the Executive Department, or re­
lease the latter from his constitutional obligation, *to take care that the laws
be faithfully executed.' It was the duty of the Secretary to direct the de­
posites to be made elsewhere than in that Bank, whenever sufficient reasons
existed for making the exchange. If he neglected or refused to act, he would
neglect or refuse to execute the law, which the duty of the President re­
quired him to see faithfully executed; and the obligation in such case is the
stronger, as the neglect is in his presence, and the remedy at hand. A con­
temporaneous construction of the Act of 1816, shows that it was not de­
signed to change the relations between the President and Secretary. The
Secretary applied for and obtained the President's sanction and authority to
the original transfer of the deposites to the present Bank of the United
States. With the like sanction and authority, the transfers from the
Branches of the United States Bank, to State banks at Chilicothe, Cincin­
nati, and Louisville, were made in 1819. And these acts were known to, and
approved by all the departments of government, and by Congress and the
people; and they show, that, upon all important questions appertaining to
his department, whether relating to the public deposites or other matters, it
was the constant practice of the Secretary of the Treasury to obtain for his
acts, the approval and sanction of the Presidents."
" Thus, was it settled by the Constitution, the laws, and the whole prac­
tice of the Government, that the entire Executive power is vested in the
President of the United States; that as incident to that power, the right of
appointing and removing those officers who are to aid him in the execution
of the laws, with such restrictions only as the constitution prescribes, is
vested in the President: that the Secretary of the Treasury is one of those
officers: that the custody of the public property and money is an Executive
function, whidh, in relation to the money, has always been exercised through
the Secretary of the Treasury and his subordinates; that in the performance
of these duties, he is subject to the supervision and control of the President,
and in all important measures having relation to them, consults the Chief
Magistrate, and obtains his approval and sanction; that the law establishin? the Bank did not, as it could not, change the relation between the Pre­
sident and the Secretary—did not release the former from his obligation to
see the law faithfully executed, nor the latter from the President's super­
vision and control;' that afterwards, and before, the Secretary did in fact
consult, and obtain the sanction of, the President, to transfers and removals
P2

Digitized by

42
of the public depotites; and that all departments of the Goyernment, and
the nation itself, approved or acquiesced in these acts and principles, as in
strict conformity with our constitution and laws."
" Circumstances, in the opinion of the President, rendered it ths duty of
the Secretary to place the public moneys in other depositaries than the
Bank. The Secretary did not concur in that opinion, and declined to give
the necessary direction; and the President deemed it his imperative duty,
by the exertion of every power confided to him by the constitution and
laws to check the career of the Bank, even in the alternative of dismiss*
iog the head of one of the departments."
These reasons of the President, which we believe contain all
the positions strictly relative to the subject, are abstracted from
the protest against the resolutions of the Senate, delivered to that
body on the 17th April, 1834. The broad ground of exclusive
right in the Executive department to the custody of the public
money, had not, before that time, been made; and however much
Congress and the people had been prepared for Executive assump­
tions of power, this, from the universal astonishment and indig­
nation which it instantly provoked, had been wholly unex­
pected.
Such, indeed, was the force of that indignation, that even the
usually unyielding temper of the President was compelled to bow
before it. An attempt was, therefore, made within four days af­
ter the communication of the Protest, to qualify it by a supple­
ment, alleging, that several passages of the former might be mis­
understood; and that it was not the intention of the President to
deny the power and right of the legislative department, to pro­
vide by law for the custody, safe keeping, and disposition of the
public money and property of the United States.

"1 admit," he continued, " without reserve, as I have before done, (see last
paragraph page 40) the constitutional power of the legislature to provide
by law, the place or places in which the public money or other property is
to be deposited, and to make such regulations concerning its custody, re­
moval, or disposition, as they may think proper to exact. Nor do I claim,
for the Executive, any right to the possession or disposition of the public
property or treasure, or any authority to interfere with the same, except when
such possession or disposition or authority is given by law; nor do I claim
right, in any manner, to supervise or interfere, with the person entrusted w
such property or treasure, unless he be an officer whose appointment, und
constitution and laws, is devolved upon the President alone, or in conjunc­
tion with the Senate, and for whose conduct he is constitutionally respon­
sible."
It is obvious that the extent of the claim of the President over
the public property and money, as an Executive Junction, is
not at all narrowed by this explanation. For all officers of the
United States must be appointed by the President in conjunction
with the Senate, by the President alone, or by the courts of k w ,
or the heads of departments; in the last case, the subordinates are

Digitized by

43
appointed by the superior officers, and by and through them are
.subject to the President; and he does claim, even in the supple­
ment, by unequivocal implication, the right to "supervise or in­
terfere with the person entrusted with the public property or
treasure, if he be an officer whose appointment is devolved upon
h i m alone, or in conjunction with the Senate."
Far less pretensions, than are set forth, in the cabinet com­
munication, of the 18th September, 1833, had called for the
special consideration of the Senate. On the 26th December,
1833, Mr. Clay offered, with another, the following, resolution:
Resolved, That, hy dismissing the late Secretary of the Treasury, be­
cause he would not, contrary to his sense of his own duty, remove
the money of the United States in deposite with the Bank of the United
States and its branches, in conformity with the President's opinion;
and by appointing his successor to effect such removal, which has
been done, the President has assumed the exercise of a power over the
Treasury of the United States, not granted to him.by the Constitution and
laws, and dangerous to the liberties of the people.
This resolution, after a protracted debate, was, on the 28th
March, modified by the mover, and passed by the votes of twentysix senators out of forty-six, who were present and voted, in the
following words :
" Resolved, That, the President in the late Executive proceedings, in re­
lation to the public revenue, has assumed upon himself authority and power
not conferred by the constitution and laws, but in derogation of both."
Thus, the right claimed by Ihe Executive over the public funds
is not only denied, but its exercise has been severely rebuked.
The most distinguished statesmen, the Adams, the Websters, the
Clays, the Binneys, the M'Duffies, the Southards, the Calhouns,
the Claytons, and many others of scarce less notoriety and esti­
mation have raised their voices, with all the force of reason and
eloquence, against a measure in which they perceive the inception
of the ruin of political and civil liberty—a measure which tends
inevitably to unite in one hand, the purse and the sword, and, by
this amalgamation of all power, to make the nation subject to one
man. Since the foundation of the government, since the birth
of the nation in 1776, no subject of deeper interest has agitated
her councils; none has developed more intellectual power 5 none
excited a richer flow of eloquence.
The importance of this question is thus emphatically and spi­
ritedly urged by Mr. Clay, on opening its discussion in the Se­
nate, on the 26th December last:
" I agree, sir,and I am very happy whenever I can agree, with the Pre­
sident, as to the immense importance of these questions. He says, in the
paper which I hold in my hand, that he looks upon the pending question as
involving higher considerations than the ' mere transfer of a sum of money
from one bank to another. Its decision may affect the character of our Go-

Digitized by

44
vernment for ages to come.9 And, with him, I view it as * of transcendent
importance, both in the principles and the consequences it involves.' It is
a question of all time, for posterity as well as for us—of constitutional go­
vernment or monarchy—of liberty or slavery. As I regard it, I hold the
Bank as nothing, as perfectly insignificant, faithful as it has been in the per­
formance of all its duties. I hold a sound currency as nothing, essential as
it is to the prosperity of every branch of business, and to all conditions of
society, and efficient as the agency of the Bank has been in providing the
country with a currency as sound as ever existed, and unsurpassed by any
in Christendom. I consider even the public faith, sacred and inviolable as
it ever should be, as comparatively nothing. All these questions are merged
in the greater and mightier question of the constitutional distribution of the
powers of the Government, as affected by the recent Executive innovation.
The real inquiry is, shall all the barriers which have been erected by the
caution and wisdom of our ancestors, for the preservation of civil liberty,
be prostrated and trodden under foot, and the sword and the purse be at once
united in the hands of one man 1 Shall the power of Congress over the
Treasury of the United States, hitherto never contested, be wrested from its
possession, and be henceforward wielded by the Chief Magistrate ? En­
tertaining these views of the magnitude of the question before us, I shall
not, at least to-day, examine the reasons which the President has assigned
for his act. If he has no power to perform it, no reasons, however cogent,
can justify the deed. None can sanctify an illegal or unconstitutional act."
And thus Mr. M'Duffie, with that richness of illustration and
forceful vehemence which characterise him, exhibits the nature
of the Executive assumptions :
" Sir, I have read history with some attention, and for the last two or
three years my mind has been irresistibly carried, by the downward ten­
dency and ominous signs of the times, to those portions of the history of na­
tions which trace their progress in the rapid descent from the enjoyment of
free institutions to the endurance of despotic forms of government. And
after surveying the whole field which history presents, covered with monu­
mental beacons, inscribed with lessons of wisdom—if nations would ever
learn wisdom from experience, I venture to make the assertion, that there
is no instance in the history of any civilized government of modern times
in which the progress of usurpation has been more rapid, bold, ingenious
and successful, than it has been in these United States for the last fifteen
months. Sir, the last of the Tarquins was hurled from the throne of his
ancestors; thefirstof the Caesars was slain in the Roman Senate; Charles
the First of England, and Louis the Sixteenth of France, were severally
condemned and executed; all under the charge, with different specifications,
of having subverted the fundamental laws, and conspired to usurp the
supreme power of the State. And although the sentence by which these
enemies of human liberty were doomed to expiate their delinquencies—
some of them in their own blood—has been solemnly ratified by the im­
partial judgment of posterity, yet, sir, strange as it may sound to loyal
ears, it is my deliberate conviction that the proofs by which the charge of
usurpation was established in these memorable instances were not more
full and conclusive than the proofs which can be now produced to establish
the same charge against a republican President, who came into power under
the most solemn pledges to restrain the usurping tendencies of this Gov­
ernment, to reclaim the lost rights of the sovereign States of this Union,
and to bring baek the institutions of his country to the primitive standard
of republican economy, simplicity, and purity. God forbid, sir, that I
should insinuate, or be the means of inducing any one to suppose, that the

Digitized by

45
President of the United States should encounter the fate of those whose
pernicious example he has but too closely followed!"
With these views of the nature of the struggle in which the
country is involved, we shall consider more fully the President's
pretensions to the custody of the funds and consequent power to
remove the Secretary of the Treasury.
"What power," says Mr. Clay, "has the President over the public
Treasury? Is it in the Bank chartert That gives him but two clearly de­
fined powers: one to appoint, with the concurrence of the Senate, and to
remove the Government directors; and the other, to order a scire facias
when the Charter shall be violated by the Bank. There is no other power
conferred on him by it.
** In the law the Secretary of the Treasury alone is designated. The
President is not, by the remotest allusion, referred to. And, to put the
matter beyond all controversy, whenever the Secretary gives an order or
direction for the removal, he is to report his reasons—to whom 1 To the
President ? No! directly to Congress. Nor is the Bank itself required to
report its periodical condition to the President, but to the Secretary of the
Treasury or to Congress, through the organ of a committee. The whole
scheme of the Charter seems to have been cautiously framed with the deli­
berate purpose of excluding all intervention of the President, except in the
two cases which have been specified. And this power, given exclusively
to the Secretary, and these relations maintained between him and Congress,
are in strict conformity with the act of September, 1789, creating and esta­
blishing the Treasury Department. Congress reserved to itself the control
over that department. It refused to make it an Executive department. Its
whole structure manifests cautious jealousy and experienced wisdom. The
constitution had ordained that no money should be drawn from the Treasury
but in consequence of appropriations made by law. It remained for Congress
to provide how it should be drawn. And that duty is performed by the act
constituting the Treasury Department. According to that act, the Secretary
of the Treasury is to prepare and sign, the Comptroller to countersign, the
Register to record, and, finally, the Treasurer to pay, a warrant, issued, and
only issued, in virtue of a prior act of appropriation. Each is referred to
the law as the guide of his duty. Each acts on his own separate responsi­
bility. Each is a check upon every other. And all are placed under the
control of Congress. The Secretary is to report to Congress, and to each
branch of Congress. The great principle of division of duty, and of con­
trol and responsibility—that principle which lies at the bottom of all free
government—that principle, without which there can be no free govern­
ment, is upheld throughout. So, in the Bank Charter, Congress did not
choose to refer the reasons of the Secretary to the President; but, when­
ever he changed the deposites, the Secretary was commanded to report his
reasons directly to Congress, that they might weigh, judge, and pronounce
upon their validity."
Mr. Binney, in his admirably argumentative review of the rea­
sons of Secretary Taney, thus meets the claim of the Executive,
not only as it regards the power of the President over the funds,
but, also, that of the Secretary himself.
" The act of the 2d September, 1789, for the establishment of the Trea­
sury Department, pursues a strikingly different course from acts establish­
ing other departments. It drops from the title the denomination of Executive
given to the other departments—not by accident, but by design, as the word

Digitized by

46.
' Executive' was contained in the title of the bill when reported by c o m ­
mittee, (see Journal 1st &2d Cong. vol. 1, p. 57,) and, what is more mate­
rial, it enacts that it shall be the duty of the Secretary ' to digest and pre­
pare plans for the management and improvement of the revenue, and for the
support of the public credit; to prepare and report estimates of the public
revenue and the public expenditures; to superintend the collection of the
public revenue; to decide on the forms of keeping and stating accounts and
making returns; and to grant, under the limitations herein established, or
to be hereafter provided, all warrants for moneys to be issued from the
Treasury, in pursuance of appropriations by law; to execute such services
relative to the sale of the lands belonging to the United States as may be
by law required of him; to make report and give information to either
branch of the Legislature, in person or in writing, as he may be required,
respecting all matters referred to him by the Senate or House of Represen­
tatives, or which shall appertain to his office; and generally to perform all
such services relative to the finances as he shall be directed to perform,' The
name of the President is not mentioned in the act, except in the 7th section,
which charges the assistant with the duties of the office, in case the Secre­
tary is removed by the President; and the bond of the Treasurer, prescribed
by the 4th section, is not to be approved by the President, but by the Secre­
tary of the Treasury and Comptroller.
" It is not meant to say, sir, that the Secretary of the Treasury performs,
or is bound to perform, no duties of an Executive department, or that, in the
performance of any such duties, he is not subject to direction by the Pre­
sident ; but it is meant to say that the Treasury Department is not, in its
control of the Treasury, an Executive department, in the constitutional
sense; and that the direction which is to govern the Secretary, is left, by
the terms of the act, to be settled according to the character of the function
to be exercised. The Secretary is not the head of an Executive depart­
ment, in the performance of acts which concern the custody and security of
the public moneys in the Treasury. His department is not, in this respect,
a Presidential department. To have placed the custody of the public Trea­
sury within the Executive department, would have been a constitutional
incongruity, a solecism, to say nothing of the enormous mischiefs to result
from placing the power of the sword and the purse in the same hand. It
would have marred the harmony and simplicity of the whole scheme of the
constitution, by leaving to Congress the duty of paying the debts and pro­
viding for the common defence and welfare, while the money collected for
these objects was not under their control, but in the hands of a different de­
partment. It would make, and the adoption of the doctrine does make, the
power of appropriation entirely futile, because the public money is, by
force of it, as little under the control of Congress before appropriation as it
is afterwards; and it gives the control of the public treasure, so far as the
position and distribution of it can give such a control, to a department that
can wield the whole force of the revenue, against the legislative department
and the people.
" The principle which, it seems to me, sir, roust govern this question, and
that which I take the liberty of stating to the House, as the only satisfac­
tory one that has occurred to me, is this—that the right of direction, where
it exists at all, results from official connexion, subordination, and responsi­
bility, and not from tenure of office. If the duty belongs to the Executive
department, the right of direction is in the head of that department, who is
responsible for the performance of all its duties. If it belongs to the Judi­
cial department, the right is in the heads of that department—the courts.
If it belongs to the Legislative department, the right of direction is in Con­
gress. The direction in these several cases, by force of this principle, is in
perfect harmony with the system. It proceeds from official responsibility

Digitized by

47
in the principal, and official dnty in the subordinate officer to follow what
the principal directs. The officer is bound to obey the principal, because
the principal is responsible for him in the very matter directed, and his
direction is a justification to the officer who obeys him. Any other prin­
ciple must produce perpetual conflict and confusion. The attempt to make
a test of the removing power, fails as soon as you apply it. The mar­
shals are, as to matters of judicial cognizance, directed by the courts, to
whom they are responsible, and for the proper direction of whom the courts
are responsible; yet the courts do not appoint, and cannot remove, the
marshals.
** Sir, the question cannot well arise as to acts plainly prescribed. No
one can assert an authority in the President to direct an act to be done,
which the laws, or the courts in conformity with the laws, direct not to be
done; nor the contrary. It arises only in regard to discretionary acts. But
the same principle regulates duties of every description, and especially
duties which are committed by the law to the discretion of an officer. For
abuse of that discretion, if answerable to anything but the law, he is an­
swerable to the head of that department to which the particular duty apper­
tains, and by that department he may be directed. The marshal is, in judi­
cial matters, answerable to the court; in legislative matters, to Congress;
and in executive matters, to the President. The Secretary of the Treasury,
as it regards the Treasury, is answerable to Congress. To give the Presi­
dent the right of directing or controlling his discretion in such matters, is
to make the Secretary responsible to the President, who is not responsible
for him. This, sir, is the position upon which the doctrine I maintain may
be safely placed. The President is not responsible for the duties which do
not appertain to his department. His direction is no justification to the
officer to whom the law assigns the duty to be performed, or to whom it has
given the discretion to perform the act or not; he is, therefore, not bound
to obey him, nor excusable for obeying him. Any other principle will give
to the President the right of directing and controlling the discretion of every
officer in the land except the Judges.
44
The answers given to these suggestions, sir, are not satisfactory. It is
said, the President has the undoubted right to remove, and may, in this way,
obtain the direction. Certainly the President may thus obtain the direction
of men who prefer their office" to their duty; but if be removes, \o obtain a
power of direction where he has not the right, he violates his own duty.
The power of removal ought not to be so exercised.
" It is further said, that all powers are legislative, judicial, or executive.
The Secretary's power is neither legislative nor judicial, and therefore it
must be executive, and belong to the Executive department. This is a con­
fusion of language. The departments of our Government are legislative,
judicial, and executive; and what does not belong to the first two, belongs
to the third. But there are executive acts, that is to say, acts to be exe­
cuted in the Judicial and Legislative departments, as well as in the Ex­
ecutive department. An act to be executed in the Judicial department does
not belong to the Executive department. The question of the right of direc­
tion regards not merely the act to be done, but the relation in which it is to
be done.
" It is again said, that the constitutional power of the President to de­
mand the opinion, in writing, of the officers of the Executive departments,
touching the duties of their respective offices, shows the dependency of
these officers upon the President, and his responsibility for them. This
may or may not be so; but it leaves the question, what is an Executive
department, in this sense, precisely where it found it.
44
Again: it is said that the President is bound to take care that the laws
are faithfully executed. This proves too much for the argument, as, if it

Digitized by

48
proves anything, it proves that the President may direct the judges as well
as other officers, during pleasure. The supervisory power cannot interfere
with the exercise of discretion in the Secretary, when the law gives it to
him, because the faithful execution of the law consists in the exercise of
his discretion; and whoever disturbs that exercise, violates the law instead
of executing it. It is a power that does not enlarge the President's authority,
but rather declares the result of other powers before given to him in the constitution, It is corrective, to put aside, where his power is adequate, both dishonesty and incompetency / but it is not directory nor transcendental, to bring all
the officers and operations of the nation under his sway.
" Finally, it is said, that the power of removal is fairly applied to discharge
an officer who does not do his duty; and how can this be, if the President
cannot decide what is his duty, and, consequently, direct its performance!
Sir, the President is responsible for the use and abuse of his power. If he
exercises it fairly, to remove an officer who does not do his duty, it is well.
But if the discharge is colourably for this, but really to enforce a direction
which he had no right to give, he gains the power he ought not to have, by
the abuse of the power he has."

Upon a review of the acts of Congress, organizing the E x ­
ecutive departments, no unprejudiced mind, we think, can fail to
arrive at the conclusion, that it was designed to organize the
Treasury Department upon principles of responsibility, different
from those adopted in forming the other departments. It is
obvious that an additional and special responsibility is created
from the officers of the Treasury department to Congress. Bat
the general supervisory power of the President, growing out of
the power, rightfully, or otherwise, to appoint and to remove
the officer for nonfeasance or malfeasance, has not been taken
away. It seems to us, that the being whose life and death are at
the will of another, is not more dependant than the officer, who
may be made and destroyed by a word from the mouth of a su­
perior, is dependant upon and responsible to that superior. The
remedy for the evil is in rendering the officer accountable to the
people. But in the view given by Mr. Binney, the responsi­
bility to Congress and the President are not incompatible—the
power of the one being corrective ; that of the other being directory and transcendental We will not say, however, that the
case is free from all difficulty. If we giant to the President a
directorial power in relation to it, the case becomes one, not of
usurpation, but of abuse, of powter. The justification of the course
of the President, then, depends upon the right of the Secretary
and the expediency of removing the deposites. If these be not
established, the attempt of the President to coerce the Secretary
to their removal was an abuse of his power, perverting it to a
purpose for which it was never designed. Upon this hypothesis,
the views of Mr. Calhoun, similar to those of Mr. Polk of the
House of Representatives, may be correct. They are entitled
to the most respectful attention, as coming from a mind emi­
nently endowed, governed by unquestionable sincerity and purity
of purpose, and long devoted to the science of government.

Digitized by

49
" I have no doubt that the President removed the former Secretary, and
placed the present in his place, expressly with a view to the removal of the
deposites. I am equally clear, under all the circumstances of the case, that
the President's conduct is wholly indefensible; and, among other objec­
tions, I fear he had in view, in the removal, an object eminently dangerous
and unconstitutional—to give an advantage to his veto, never intended by
the Constitution—a power intended as a shield, to protect the Executive
against the encroachment of the Legislative department—to maintain the
present state of things against dangerous or hasty innovation, but which, I
fear, is, in this case, intended as a sword, to defend the usurpation of the
Executive. I say I fear, for although the circumstance of this case leads to
a just apprehension that such is the intention, I will not permit myself to
assert that such is the fact—that so lawless and unconstitutional an object
is contemplated by the President, till his act shall compel me to believe to
the contrary. But while I thus severely condemn the conduct of tho Presi­
dent in removing the former Secretary and appointing the present, I must
say, that in my opinion, it is a case of the abuse and not of the usurpation of
power. I cannot doubt that the President has, under the Constitution, the
right of removal from office: nor can I doubt that the power of removal,
wherever it exists, does, from necessity, involve the power of general su­
pervision ; nor can I doubt that it might be constitutionally exercised in
reference to the deposites. Reverse the present case—suppose the laie
Secretary, instead of being against, had been in favour of the removal, and
that the President, instead of for, had been against it, deeming the removal
not only inexpedient, but, under xdrcumstances, illegal; would any man
doubt, that under such circumstances, he had a right to remove his Secre­
tary, if it were the only means of preventing the removal of the deposites ?
Nay, would it not be his indispensable duty to have removed him ? and,
had he not, would not he have been universally and justly held respon­
sible?"
Such being the views taken in Congress upon the pretensions
of the President to control his appointees, and the disposition of
the public treasure even before the boundless claim of the protest
and its supplement, it will be readily supposed, that the latter
was not spared, in the remarks of Senators upon those unpre­
cedented and presumptuous messages. The resolutions in which
the Senatorial debates upon them resulted, were another castigation of arrogaut pretensions, which constitutional heroes, men
impenetrable to everything which should regulate and control
their will, alone, would invoke.
By a vote of 27 to 16, a majority, more than double that on
the former reproof, the Senate resolved:
"That the protest communicated to the Senate, on the 17th, (April,) by
the President of the United States, asserts powers belonging to the President
which are inconsistent with the just authority of the two houses of Congress,
and inconsistent with the Constitution of the United States/9
It is not, perhaps, immediately necessary to this branch of our
subject, to advert to the remaining resolutions adopted on this
occasion by the Senate; yet, as we may not, hereafter, find it
convenient to notice them, we may observe now, that, the right
claimed and exercised by the President to make a formal protest
£

Digitized by

«

50
against votes and proceedings of the Senate, declaring them to be
illegal and unconstitutional, and requesting the Senate to enter
such proceedings on its journals was repudiated; and his right to
send a protest to the Senate against any of its proceedings, de­
nied; and the protest declared a breach of the privileges of the
Senate, and refused a place on their journals.
The communication made by the President on the 18th of
September, 1833, was not designed solely for his Cabinet. In
truth, the Cabinet, the measure of removal having been previously
resolved on, had little to do with it. The members were not
convoked for consultation. The last paragraph of the communi­
cation, fixing a day for the removal, shows, that it was a foregone
conclusion in the mind of the President. He desired no discus­
sion. For him all reasons were useless before the
" Sic volo, sic jubeo, stet pro ratione voluntas."
The question concerned the peculiar official duties of no more
than one member, the Secretary of the Treasury; who, it was
now found, had been mistakenly selected for pliancy of will, and
whose zealous party devotion had been, falsely, conceived to im­
ply an abjectness of spirit, that would suffer, unresistingly, unrepiningly, any degradation. Had the object of the communication
been, the conviction of the Cabinet, or the Secretary alone, it
would have slept, after the performance of its office of explaining
to them or him, the views of the President. But, it was designed
for an ulterior, if not altogether a different, purpose. It was the
manifesto of the President against the Bank, in which all the rea­
sons that he and his coadjutors could gather, sound or unsound,
true or false, against the institution, were congregated. It was
the defence of the war, furnished for the use ottheparty, before
the astounded and affrighted country; and was, for that purpose,
published in all the party journals, and most industriously circu­
lated among the people.
This paper was before the directors of the Bank, on the 24th of
September, and a counter manifesto was prepared, in which, the
Board have ably refuted the charges made against them. The
allegations of the President against the Bank, and all his avowed
causes of the war have been reported by Mr. Taney, as his reasons
for the removal of the deposites;—the defence of the bank has
been adopted and enlarged by the whig speakers in Congress. We
proceed, therefore, to the consideration of the reasons and their
refutation, omitting, for want of space, so much of the President's
message of December, 1833, as relates to the Bank, for which this
would be the appropriate place.
III. The report of the Secretary of the Treasury is divisible into

Digitized by

51
t w o parts: The first, comprising the principles upon which he
bases his authority, and the second, The facts by which he en­
deavours to justify its exercise.
The principles or primary propositions are:
1. That, by his removal of the deposites, whether with or
without cause, the Bank of the United States was divested of all
right thereto, and the nation discharged from the contract, with­
out any violation of faith. Thus, he says,
44
The act incorporating the Bank is to be regarded as a contract between
the United States of the one part, and the stockholders of the other; and
by the plain terms of the contract, the stockholders have agreed, that the
power reserved to the Secretary over the deposites, shall not be restricted
to any particular contingencies, but be absolute and unconditional, as far as.
their interests are involved in the removal. The order, therefore, of the Secre­
tary, directing the public money to be deposited elsewhere, can in no event
be regarded as a violation of the contract with the stockholders, nor impair
any right secured to them by charter. The Treasury department being en­
trusted with the administration of the finances of the country, it was always
the duty of the Secretary, in the absence of any legislative provision on the
subject, to take care that the public money was deposited in safe keeping,
in the hands of faithful agents and in convenient places, to be applied, ac­
cording to the wants of the government. The law incorporating the Bank
has reserved to him, in its full extent, the power he before possessed. It
does not confer upon him a new power, but reserves to him his former au­
thority, without any new limitation. The obligation to assign the reasons
for his direction to deposite the money of the United States elsewhere, can­
not be considered as a restriction of the power, because the right of the
Secretary to designate the place of deposite was always necessary, subject to
the control of Congress. And as the Secretary of the Treasury presides
over one of the executive departments of the government, and his power
over this subject forms a part of the executive duties of his office, the man­
ner in which it is exercised, must be subject to the supervision of the officer
to whom the Constitution has confided the whole of the executive power,
and has required to take care that the laws be faithfully executed."
2. By the second position, the Secretary assumes, that whilst
his power over the subject is absolute, that of Congress is divest­
ed;—the Legislature have alienated it to him; thus,
"The faith of the United States is pledged, (by the 16th section of the
Bank Act,) that the public money shall be deposited in this bank, ' unless
the Secretary of the Treasury shall otherwise order and direct.' And as
this agreement has been entered into by Congress, in behalf of the United
States, the place of the deposite could not be changed by a legislative act,
without disregarding a pledge which the Legislature has given ; and the
money of the United States, must, therefore, continue to be deposited in the
Bank until the last hour of its existence, unless it shall be otherwise order­
ed by the authority mentioned in the charter. The power over the place of
deposite for the public money would seem, properly, to belong to the Legislative
department of the government, and it is difficult to imagine, why the authority
to withdraw it from this bank, was confided exclusively to the Executive. But
the terms of the charter appear to be too plain, to admit of question. And
although Congress should be satisfied that the public money was not safe
in the care of the Bank, or should be convinced that the interests of the peo­
ple of the United States imperiously demanded the removal, yet the passage

Digitized by

52
of a law directing it to be done, would be a breach of the agreements, into
which they have entered."
3. The third position is, that, the rightful exercise of this
power of the Secretary is not, even in point of responsibility to
Congress, dependent upon the safety of the deposites, or on the
fidelity of the Bank, in its conduct to the government; but that
it is his right and duty to remove them, if the removal tend, in
any degree, to the interest and convenience of the public.
4. And the fourth and last proposition is, that as the propriety
of removing the deposites was evident, it was consequently his
duty to select the places of future deposite.
The manner in which this duty has been filled, is thus describ­
ed; the advantages predicted from it, will be considered here­
after:

" It became necessary that arrangements should be made with the new
depositaries of the public money, which would not only render it safe, but
would at the same time secure to the government, and to the community at
large, the conveniences and facilities, that were intended to be obtained by
incorporating the Bank of the United States. In order to secure the safety
of the public money, each of them is required, and has agreed, to give
security, whenever the amount of the deposites shall exceed the half of the
amount of the capital, actually paid in, and this department has reserved to
itself the right to demand security whenever it may think it advisable, al­
though the amount on deposite may not be equal to the sum above stated.
The banks selected have also, severally, engaged to transmit money to any
point, at which it may be required, by the directions of this department, for
the public service, and to perform all the services to the government, which
were heretofore rendered by the Bank of the United States, and by agree­
ment, among themselves, to honour each other's notes and drafts, they are
providing a general currency, at least as sound as that of the Bank of the
United States, and will afford facilities to commerce, and in the business of
domestic exchange, quite equal to any which the community heretofore enjoyed
The facts urged by the Secretary in justification of his exercise
of power, the influence of which, is subsidiary to, and dependent
upon, the foregoing principles, and which he emphatically styles
his reasons, are,
1. That the Charter of the Bank will expire by the existing
law in 1836, and will not be renewed.
2. The unwarrantable reduction by the Bank of its discounts,
and consequent depression of commerce.
3. Mismanagement of the Bank and improper application of
its funds.
4. That the Bank, though a fiscal agent of the government, has
sacrificed to its own interest that of its principal.
5. That the Bank has used its means to obtain political power
and thereby to assure the renewal of its charter.
Having, thus, given a synopsis of the principles and reasons
assigned by the Secretary of the Treasury for the removal of the
deposites, we shall proceed to consider them more fully, in

Digitized by

53
tracing their stormy progress through the two Houses of Con­
gress, giving the reader the benefit of the light which has been
s h e d upon them in their discussion. But that we may, uninter­
ruptedly, avail ourselves of the debates, we will first narrate the
disposition of these " Reasons" in either Chamber, together with
s o m e other matters relating to our subject.
On the 3d December, 1833,the "reasons" were communicated
to the House of Representatives, and on the succeeding day, to
the Senate. An effort was made by the friends of the adminis­
tration in both chambers, to divert attention from the Secretary's
defence, to an examination of the conduct of the Bank, on the
Secretary's charges ; and thus, to put the Bank, and not the Se­
cretary, on trial. This ruse was easily defeated in the Senate,
but cost some trouble in the House, where it was met by those
expedients which the minority can always successfully employ
against a proscripti ve majority. In the House, the report was
first
referred to the Committee of the Whole on the State of the
Union ; bul, with the view, as afterwards became undeniable, of
avoiding judgment, upon the "reasons," and to substitute an in­
quiry into the conduct of the Bank, for new " reasons" justifica­
tory of the Secretary's acts, that reference was recalled on the 17th,
and a motion made to refer the Report to the Committee of Ways
and Means; to which Mr.M'Duffie proposed to add, "with instruc­
tion to report a joint resolution, providing that the public revenue,
hereafter collected, shall be deposited in the Bank of the United
States, in compliance with the public faith pledged by the char­
ter of the said Bank." This addition, subjected the reasons to
immediate and full discussion, as if referred to the Committee of
the Whole, and gave the early opportunity of enlightening the
country, which those who would preserve its good faith desired.
A wish, almost universal, was awakened in the members, to
debate the subject; and, consequently, it occupied the attention
of the house almost exclusively for two months. In the interim,
Mr. Jones, of Georgia, proposed as a substitute for Mr. M'DuffiVs
instruction,"To inquire into the expediency of depositing the re­
venue, hereafter collected, in all the State Banks in the different
States, where the same is collected, in proportion to their respec­
tive capitals paid in ; and to prescribe the terms on which the
same shall be deposited ; and to report by bill or otherwise." On
February 18, the debate was closed, by the call of the previous
question, which cut ofi the amendment of Messrs. M'Duffie and
Jones; and the Secretary's reasons were referred, by a vote of
130 to 98, to the Committee of Ways and Means.
On the 4th March the majority of the Committee made report,
to which four resolutions were appended. 1. That the Bank of
the United States ought not to be rechartered $ 2. That the pub­
lic deposites ought not to be restored to it; 3. That the state.
E2

Digitized by

/

54
banks ought to be continued as the places of deposite of the p u b ­
lic money, and that it is expedient for Congress to make further
provision by law, prescribing the mode of selection, the securities
to be taken, and the manner and terms on which they are to b e '
employed ; and 4th,
44
That for the purpose of ascertaining as far as practicable, the cause of
the commercial embarrassment and distress complained of by numerous ci­
tizens of the United States, in sundry memorials which have been presented
to Congress, at the present session, and of inquiring whether the charter of
the Bank of the United States has been violated, and also what corruptions
and abuses have existed in its management: whether it has used its corpo­
rate power or money to control the press, to interfere in politics, or influence
elections; and whether it has had any agency, through its management or
money, in producing the existing pressure; a Select Committee be appointed
to inspect the books, and examine into the proceedings of the said Bank,
who shall report whether the provisions of the charter have been violated or
not; and also what abuses, corruptions, or malpractices have existed in
the management of the said Bank ; and that the said Committee be autho­
rized to send for persons and papers, and to summon and examine witnesses
on oath, and tocexamine into the offices of said Bank and Branches; and
they are further authorized to visit the principal Bank or any of its branches,
for the purpose of inspecting the books, correspondence, accounts, and other
papers connected with its management or business, and that the said Com­
mittee be required to report the result of such investigation, together with
the evidence they may take, at as early a day as possible."
On the same day the minority of the Committee also made re­
port, concluding with the following declaration :
44
The minority are of the opinion, that none of the reasons assigned by
the Secretary, in his communication to Congress, are sufficient to justify
the removal of the deposites. They are also of the opinion that it is due to
the Bank to return them, without regard to the sentiment of the House,
upon the subject of rechafter. They are further of the opinion, that the si­
tuation of the country requires immediate action by Congress, to restore
public confidence and to prevent a derangement of the currency : And they
express to the house their settled conviction, that these objects will not be
attained, if the public deposites are left in the State banks. They think,
besides, that the universal voice of the country, requires that somethingshall be immediately done for public relief, and that the resolutions pro­
posed by the committee, will only aggravate the existing evils, instead of
providing a remedy."*
The resolutions reported by the Committee were debated, al­
most daily; such members as had been precluded from the dis­
cussion on the reference, by the previous question, availing them­
selves of the opportunity now afforded, to review tbe whole
ground. This lengthened debate, which had been commenced
by Mr. M'Duffie on the 19th December, was finally closed o n
the 4th of April, after another address of the same gentleman, b y
• In this great controversy, names become important, as authority for facts,
at least, if not for inductions. The Committee of Ways and Means consist o f
Messrs. Polk, Wilde, Cambreleng, Gorham, M*Kim, Binney, Loyall, M'Kinley
and Hubbard. The minority was composed of Messrs. Wilde of Georgia, Gor­
ham of Massachusetts, and Binney of Pennsylvania,

Digitized by

55
the invocation of the previous question, which was sustained by'
a vote of 114 against 105. Complaints have been uttered against
this forcible sealing of the lips of the minority. But the time
which had been given to the subject, and the ample manner in
which it had been treated, take from the justice of these re­
proaches, and leave perhaps little cause to regret the sudden ter­
mination of the discussion, except so far as it prevented the ex­
position before the House of the views of Mr. John Quincy
Adams.
The opinions of this gentleman, from his virtues, his services,
his experience, and his intellectual qualifications, are entitled to
profound respect from a grateful people. Indignities offered to
him, are offered to the nation, and stain indelibly the party and
the agent by whom they are perpetrated. From his representa­
tions, the truth of which none question, the decorum due to him
has not been observed.
On presenting to the House the resolutions of the legislature
of Massachusetts, in relation to the state of the currency and the
removal of the depo&ites, Mr. Adams, to save time and to admit
the reception of other memorials, confined himself to a few gene­
ral and indispensable remarks, expressly stating, that he hoped
at a suitable time, to be indulged with the opportunity of offering
his views upon one of the resolutions, in which the legislature
had declared, its opinion that the reasons of the Secretary for the
transfer of the public funds, were insufficient to justify the mea­
sure. It was not until after three unsuccessful attempts, on three
different days, and after an expostulation with the Speaker, as ear­
nest as it was necessary, that Mr. Adams was enabled to obtain a
hearing for the legislature of Massachusetts; and he was then in­
debted for it " to the courtesy of a member from South Carolina,
who, on the FOURTH DAY of a discussion allowed by the SPEAKER
under his administration of the rules of the House and of the /ea
parliamentarian by the judicious admixture of which two au­
thorities, all the proceedings of the House solve themselves into
the will of the Speaker, was entitled to thefloor,upon certain re­
solutions of the legislature of Virginia."
On the day of the previous question, at the instant when Mr.
M'Duffie resumed his seat, Mr. Adams addressed the Speaker,
with the intention of delivering his opinion on the subject before
the House, which was, precisely, that of the legislature of Mas­
sachusetts, upon which he had given notice of his desire to be
heard. The Speaker's eye and ear were in another direction,
and he gave the floor to a member from Virginia, who by agree­
ment concerted out of the House, was to move the previous
question. Fortunately for the country, Mr. Adams, thus denied
a hearing before the representatives of that nation over which he
had presided with distinguished honour, in discharge of his duty

Digitized by

56
to the legislature of Massachusetts and to his constituents, resorted
to the press, to make public the remarks which it was his inten­
tion to address to the national council.* Supposing the exclusion
to have been undesigned, it is to be lamented, that it has the co­
lour of premeditation; if it were intended, it will be a blot in our
history.
On putting the question, it Was divided, so as to take the vote,
separately, on each resolution. The House determined, 1. That
the Bank ought not to be rechartered, by a vote of 135 to 82;
2. That the public deposites ought not to be restored to the Bank,
by a vote of 119 to 104; 3. That the State banks ought to be
continued as the places of deposite, &c, by a vote of 117 to 105;
and, 4. That a committee of investigation should be appointed, by
a vote of 174 to 41. The following gentlemen were named
on this Committee: Mr. Thomas of Maryland; Everett of Mas­
sachusetts; Muhlenburg of Pennsylvania; Mason of Virginia;
Ellswprth of Connecticut; Mann of .New York; and Lytle of
Ohio. The party thus audaciously avoided, and have pertina­
ciously and successfully continued to avoid, taking the sense of
the House of Representatives upon the sufficiency of the Secre­
tary's reasons.
This disposition of the reasons of the Secretary and report of
the Committee did not terminate the debate upon the subject
It was continued until the 16th May, without bounds to its excursiveness, upon a resolution of Mr. Mardis of Alabama, propos­
ing that " the Committee of Ways and Means be instructed to in­
quire into the expediency of reporting a bill requiring the Sec­
retary of the Treasury to deposit the public moneys of the United
States in the State Banks; and also as to the expediency of de­
fining by law, all contracts, hereafter to be made with the Sec­
retary, for the safe keeping, management, and disbursement of the
same," and upon amendments suggested to this resolution.
The amendments and resolutions were then withdrawn by the
movers, a bill upon the same subject having been reported to the
House, and referred to the Committee of the whole.
In Senate on the 26th December, Mr. Clay, on the considera­
tion of the report of the Secretary of the Treasury on the removal
of the deposites, offered and sustained, beside the resolution we
have already noticed censuring the conduct of the President,
another, declaring, " that the reasons assigned by the Secretary of
the Treasury for the removal of the money of the United States de­
posited in the Bank of the United States, and its branches, com­
municated to Congress on the 3d day of December, 1833, are un­
satisfactory and insufficient." The debate on these resolutions
continued almost without intermission, until the 4th of February,
• Introduction to Mr. Adams's printed speech.

Digitized by

57
when that relating immediately to the Secretary, was referred to
the Committee on Finance, Mr. Webster, chairman, who made
report thereon, on the succeeding day, in which, a review of the
reasons of the Secretary closed with a recommendation to the
Senate to adopt the resolution which had been referred to them.
The discussion was thence protracted, until 28th March, when
the resolution was adopted by a vote of 28 to 18.
On the 28th May, Mr. Clay offered two joint resolutions in
Senate; the first declaring the reasons of the Secretary for the
removal of the Deposites insufficient and unsatisfactory ; and the
second directing that the public moneys accruing on and after the
1st July, 1834, be deposited with the Bank of the United States,
pursuant to the charter. The faithful party sentinel, Mr. Benton,
whose great powers serve but to repel all accord of others in his
measures, sought, vainly, to avert this direct blow. The first re­
solution was passed on the 3d June by a vote of 30 to 16,
and the second, on the succeeding day, by a vote of 28 to 16.
Being sent to the House of Representatives, they were, on
June 13, on the motion of Mr. Polk, laid on the table, there to
sleep in oblivion. Thus, again, to use a term of Mr. Lytle, the
majority has skulked the question, of the sufficiency of Mr.
Taney's reasons; and though effectually sustaining his measures,
they dared not meet the responsibility of a vote justificatory of
them.
Pending this long debate, in which many of the Representa­
tives, pledged to the party, denied the distress of their constitu­
ents, the people were not idle in taking constitutional measures
for their own relief. They met in primary assemblies, by hun­
dreds, by thousands, and by tens of thousands, and in energetic
petitions and remonstrances, claimed from Congress the restora­
tion of the deposits to the United States Bank, and the re-charter
of the institution. The legislatures of many States, also added
their representations to like effect. Every mail, from the north,
the east, and the west, came laden with these expressions of pub­
lic opinion. Nor were the leaders of Jacksonism indolent in the
support of their idol,—but the intoxication from the Circean cup
of which their partisans had drunk was passing away; and sober
reason and sad reality, were chasing the phantastic visions of
" glory;" and the rolling drum no longer drew to the waving
banner, blinded and devoted agents.* Those who came to the
call, had, an eager and inquiring temper, and their numbers, as
reckoned upon the petitions to Congress, were but as one to eight
of their adversaries. Whole states, as Connecticut, and Rhode
Island which had been subjected to party thraldom, threw off the
yoke, and everywhere the demonstrations of a renovated and
indignant spirit became apparent.
• From Pennsylvania the petitioners to the Senate for restoring the depo­
sites, amount to 36,700; those against the restoration to 571!

Digitized by

58
Committee* from the people, instructed in their grievances,
came personally, to the seat of government, to present their views
to Congress and the president. By the latter, they were, for a
shprt season, received with tolerable courtesy: but, the undis­
ciplined, arrogant, and irrepressible temper of the military chief­
tain, could not long brook the complaints and remonstrances of
those who were suffering beneath his policy. His impatience
and anger were displayed in rude manners and captious ques­
tions; in violent and abusive denunciations of the Bank, and
reiterated assertions of its insolvency. Commanding the peti­
tioners to seek relief at the hands of the president of the institu­
tion, he mocked their distresses, declaring, that the failures which
afflicted the country, were only amongst the stock-jobbers, brokers
and gamblers, whom he wished to God were all swept from the
land—that he had never doubted that brokers, stock-speculators,
and all who were doing business on a borrowed capital would
suffer severely, under the effects of his measures, and that, all
such people ought to break;—concluding with vociferations
"that he would never restore the deposites, would never re-char­
ter the United States Bank, or sign a charter for any other Bank,
so long as his name was Andrew Jackson."
These undignified scenes were made known to the people;
and their effect was to arouse them, still more, from their delu­
sion, and to make them blush for the deportment of the first offi­
cial of the country. This was soon perceived by the party, and
it was resolved, rather than longer to expose their chief to inter­
views and occasions, for which he had shown himself so unequal,
to resort to a measure, alike unwise and desperate—to close the
doors of the first magistrate of the nation, against the delegates
of the people, charged to communicate their griefs, to remonstrate
against their causes, and to enlighten and reclaim their author.
For the first time, in a free country, a chief magistrate refused to
listen, in person, to the voice of his constituents.
Early in the session, the President nominated to the Senate,
the directors whose subserviency had furnished him with mis­
representations as a basis for criminal accusations against^ the
bank. The Senate, in concurrence with the public sense on the
conduct of these gentlemen, rejected them on the 27th February,
1834. The subject, in the njean time, with which these nomi­
nations were connected, having undergone a full and elaborate
investigation, the decision could not fail to satisfy the President,
that the Senate entertained decisive objections to the confirma­
tion of these persons, and the journals showed him, that, each
had been rejected by a majority of the whole Senate. Notwith­
standing these facts, he with selfish tenacity of purpose, and utter
disregard for the sentiments of the Senate, renominated the same
persons on the 11th March. A long remonstrance against the
act of the Senate, accompanied this renomination, with an intima-

Digitized by

59
tion, that if the nominees were not approved, no others would be
named, and that the bank would, therefore, be without gov­
ernment directors.
In his message, the President disclaimed, indeed, in terms, all
right to inquire into the reasons of the Senate for rejecting any
nomination: yet he, distinctly, inferred, from facts and circum­
stances, what those reasons must have been, and controverted, at
large their validity. If, as the President, justly admitted, he
could not inquire into the reasons of the Senate for refusing its
assent to his nominations, it is obvious that such reasons could
not be, with propriety, assumed, and made subjects of comment.
This inquisition and rebuke was, therefore, a new instance of
overweening presumption, which, in a dignified manner, was re­
proved by the Committee, to whom the message was referred,
and their recommendation that, the Senate do not advise and con­
sent to the appointment of the persons thus renominated, was
adopted, by a large majority.
Subsequently, the President nominated other gentlemen as
directors of the Bank, who, with the exception of one, distin­
guished for partisan activity and devotion to the party chief,
were duly approved.
The Committee appointed to investigate the affairs of the Bank,
under the resolution proposed by the Committee of Ways and
Means, assembled in Philadelphia on the 23d April. A Com­
mittee was appointed of seven members of the Board of Direc­
tors, of which Mr. John Sergeant was chairman, to receive the
Committee of the House of Representatives, aud to offer for their
inspection, such books of the Bank as might be necessary to ex- v
hibit the proceedings of the corporation according to the requirements of the charter—and due arrangements were made for
the accommodation of the investigators at the Bank.
The nomination of this Committee, the chosen and legal agents
of the Bank, was viewed with apprehension and dislike by the
investigators, "which soon grew into a conviction, that it had
been appointed to supervise their acts, and to limit and restrain
their proceedings, not according to the directions contained in
the resolution of the House, but according to the will and judg­
ment of the Board of Directors." That will and judgment was
determined, however, by the proper rules, the requirements of
the charter. With singular inconsistency, too, the investigators
complain, that, the exhibition of the books and papers had not
been committed to the more appropriate agents, the president
and cashier, whose duty required them to be always present at ^
the Bank, when in the same breath, they also complain, that the
president of the Bank as an ex officio member of the exhibiting
Committee, pre-occupied with them, the room assigned to the
investigators. In a word, these latter gentlemen appear to have

Digitized by

60
been confounded by the appearance of resolution, on the part of
the Bank, whilst it yielded all that could be required from it,
under the charter, to resist firmly, every effort of illegal search
^ made with the view solely to criminate the directors.
In two investigations, previously made into the affairs of the
Bank, it had submitted, without reserve, to every possible mode
of inquiry ; for every possible purpose. Congress had not as­
sumed a hostile position against it, and the directors felt full con­
fidence in the disposition of the national legislature to do them
justice, against any efforts, illegally, to impeach their characters,
or arraign their conduct. At the last investigation, they were
applicants for a re-charter, and they could not object to any
latitude of inquiry demanded by a House of Congress favour­
ably disposed to their wishes, provided the result of the exami­
nation should be satisfactory. Instead, therefore, of placing them­
selves upon their rights, they opened all their books and papers
to unconditional inspection and unreserved examination. The
inquiry was pushed into every matter of alleged abuse, and
wherever it was supposed, the Bank was vulnerable. Nothing
was spared; nothing held back. Books and papers were sub­
mitted, and personal examinations on oath were endured, although,
avowedly for the purpose of discovering matters of inculpation
against the directors. The materials thus collected, were spread
before Congress, and the people, even by the exertions and the
expense of the Bank; and a majority of both Houses of Con­
gress united in the passage of a bill for re-chartering the institu­
tion.
But, a very different state of things had succeeded this trium­
phant vindication of the integrity of the Bank. The hostility of
the administration against it had become desperate and reckless,
—its insolvency was falsely proclaimed—the most beneficial con­
dition of its contract with the nation was violated by withholding
the deposites—a majority of the House of Representatives elected
before the passage of the late Bank bill, were pledged to the en­
mity of the administration, and had declared their opinion, that the
Bank ought not to be re-chartered, nor the deposites restored.
To sanction this opinion, known, unquestionably, to be opposed
to that of the nation, charges of the most unwarrantable designs,
and the most corrupt practices were alleged against the directors,
to sustain which, per fas aut nefas, there was but too much rea­
son to believe the present Committee of investigation had been
raised.
Whilst the bank was, in every object of legal inquiry, bound
by its charter, and willing to co-operate, it was its right and its
duty to resist every mode of inquisition for the crimination of
the directors, more especially, as every essential matter of incul­
pation, now brought forward, had already been examined into,

Digitized by

4

61
and passed upon, by Congress. From the measures of the ad­
ministration and the majority of the House of Representatives,
the objects of the committee of investigation could not easily be
mistaken. But those objects are exhibited, in letters of light,
by the minority of that committee, men distinguished alike for
sound morals and cultivated minds. u They think, that no
candid person, contemplating all the circumstances of the case,
from the first demonstration of a policy on the part of the
Executive, hostile to the bank, down to the recent measures, in
support of that policy in the House of Representatives, will deny,
that its object was the overthrow of the institution, and the im­
peachment of its directors, before the bar of public opinion, if
not before that of the judicial tribunals of the land, of gross
malpractices, corruptions and frauds; and that the inquiry to be
conducted by the committee, was proposed to be one of the
measures to promote that end. So far from this being denied,
they understand it to be, not only admitted, but claimed as a
merit, on the part of the friends of the present administration of
the National Government."
In what spirit could such a design be met#by honest and honour­
able men, conscious of their probity and of their ability to protect
this valuable possession against invasion ? For, it is against such,
this disreputable inquisition is directed. The bank is a mere legal
abstraction, incapable of virtue or crime. Its directors are the ^
responsible agents—charged with a most cruel and perfidious de­
sign to bring universal distress upon the country for paltry and
selfish ends—and for promoting these, with corrupting the con­
ductors of the press, corrupting the people in the exercise of the
elective franchise, and corrupting the members of Congress.
Are they to submit to the charge without a murmur—to admit
the existence of a prima facie case against them? Does the
strong and indignant feeling that their characters are outraged,
while their rights are invaded, call upon them, voluntarily to
take the culprit's place and endure the ignominy of an unwar­
ranted and vexatious inquisition? Or is it not rather the natural
dictate of proud and conscious innocence to place themselves
upon their rights, beneath the aegis of the law?
To ascertain those rights we must inquire what powers belong
to the committee of investigation, under the charter to the bank.
By the twenty-third section of the act incorporating the bank,
it is made lawful for a committee of either house of Congress, to
inspect the books and to examine into the proceedings of the
corporation, and to report whether the provisions of the charter
have been violated, with a view to the trial of the violation, by
a proper judicial tribunal. A committee of investigation, under
this section, is authorized to visit the bank, inspect the books,
examine into its proceedings, with the view to report, whether

Digitized by

G2
the charter has been violated. This power to inspect books and
papers, is given, altogether, by the charter and would not other­
wise have been possessed by the House, and is to be exercised,
solely, for purposes recognized by the charter.
Congress, as the grand inquest of the nation, have the power,
independent, and above the charter of the bank, to inquire, by
committee or otherwise, into any alleged abuse or corruption
whatever; and for such purpose, to send for and examine per­
sons, books and papers. But, the inquiry, under this power,
must be conducted according to the general principles of law.
A committee authorized.under the provisions to inspect books,
&c. for a purpose recognized by the charter, cannot use them for
a purpose not so recognized.
If two committees be appointed by the House, one for charter
objects, and the other for general inquiry, they cannot amalga­
mate or interchange their functions. So, if one committee be
appointed for a two-fold purpose, it cannot use the means ex­
clusively appropriated to one, in order to accomplish the other.
The committee of investigation having the powers of a spe­
cial and general committee, it is important to know what are
the powers of a general committee of inquiry. It is more easy,
however, to say, what those powers are not, than what they are.
And the very statement of the powers which the committee have
not, will be in itself sufficient to establish their exception.
Be it premised, that this general power extends to all persons,
individual and corporate, and is no more applicable to the Bank
of the United States than to any other bank. It is not an absolute in­
quisitorial power—it does, not authorize a committee to prosecute
a secret inquiry of indefinite character, after any, and every
abuse, probable or possible—it does not extend to the right of
inspecting the books granted for one purpose, alone, so as to
authorize the inspection for purposes totally different—it gives
no power to issue warrants of general search and compel the ap­
pearance of citizens and the production of papers, not in the
proof or disproof of charges against third persons, by evidence,
of which they are legal depositaries, but in order to enable the
committee to discover, by such papers, whether those who bring
them, are not themselves guilty of misdemeanors—to institute
a general search and compel the citizens on oath to purge them­
selves, if innocent, and criminate themselves, if guilty, and to
bring with them, their papers to be ransacked in a roving hunt
for unspecified crimes. Against such enormities, the Constitu­
tion provides ample protection.
The majority of the committee assumed, that the twenty-third
section of the charter gave them authority to examine into all
books and proceedings of the bank without exception, and for
any purpose; admitting, however, that there was a restriction on

Digitized by

63
the committee, which had reference, not to the extent of the ex­
amination, but to the character of the report That is, that the
examination might be for any purpose, although the committee
were restricted to report " whether the provisions of the charter
were violated or not" If this be true, it is also extraordinary
that so boundless a power should be given for so limited a
purpose.
With this notice of the rights of the committee we are pre­
pared to judge of their proceedings and those of the bank.
The first object of the committee of investigation seems to
have been, to obtain absolute and exclusive possession of all the
books of the bank, or at least of such as they might deem neces­
sary. To this end, they called for a list of the books, with an ex­
planation of the purposes for which each was designed, and the
names of the clerks to whose custody they were respectively
committed. This was a preliminary step to a precept to be ad­
dressed to the clerks, to take possession of the books. But the
object was defeated ; the exhibiting committee furnishing the
list, and declaring the books to be in the general custody of the
board.
<
To this end also, the committee of investigation sought to
obtain exclusive possession of a room in the banking house,
offered by the directors for their accommodation during the in­
spection of the books; notwithstanding the exhibiting committee
had expressed their intention to withdraw whenever the com­
mittee of the House desired to deliberate. But the visiting com­
mittee, declaring their proceedings confidential, until otherwise
ordered, resolved that they would " conduct the investigation
without the presence of any persons not required or invited to
attend."
This claim of secret session was objectionable; 1st, As unpar­
liamentary, no committee of inquiry being empowered to sit in
secret, unless constituted a secret committee by express order of
the house. 2d, As withdrawing the books of the bank from the
custody of the directors, a power not given by charter, that re­
served or granted, being only to inspect the books, whilst this
was a right wholly to obstruct, and bring to a stop the ordinary
proceedings of the bank ; in fact to suspend the charter. A right
to inspect the books no more involves a right to take possession
of them, than a right to count the money in the vaults involves
the right to take possession of it It is vain to urge, that the
possession of the books would not be abused; since, the very
purpose for which they were requested was the greatest possible
abuse—being that of a general search, to ascertain in general
form, not only, whether the charter had been violated, but
whether there were corruptions and abuses in its management;—

Digitized by

64
to do that, as a general committee of inquiry, which could only be
done, if at all, under the special authority of the charter.
Exclusive possession of the books of the bank being thus de­
nied in the banking house, the committee took a step still more
objectionable; returning to their hotel, they sent a written re­
quest to have such books, 6ut of the bank, at their private lodg­
ings. This was of course declined, for the same reason as the •
grant of exclusive possession of the room, as well as for other
causes, among which, was exposure to injury in the streets and in
a public hotel. So important was it deemed, that the books
should not be taken from the bank, that a special provision was
requisite in the charter, to authorize the court, on the trial of a
scire facias against the bank, to require the production of the
books in court.
The propriety of the refusal of the bank, to suffer their
books to leave the banking house, soon became obvious to
the committee of investigation, and they determined again to
repair to the banking house to inspect them. A notice of
their intention to visit the bank, on the 5th May, at one
o'clock was communicated to the chairman of the exhibiting
committee at his dwelling-house, when the committee was not in
session, and a short time before the hour appointed. He imme­
diately informed the chairman of the investigating committee
that it would be impracticable to re-assemble the committee of
directors in season to submit the books for inspection on that
day, but that they would be re-assembled without unnecessary
delay. Notwithstanding, the committee were thus apprized,
that their visit would be without result, they persisted to make
it, with, apparently, no other motive than to form an issue between
them and the bank. Proceeding to the bank, they demanded, for­
mally, certain books of the President and Cashier, who declined
compliance, on the ground, that they were not in their custody,
but in the custody of the committee, to whom they had been
committed by the board. This was but another effort to obtain
exclusive possession and control of the books.
Satisfied, at length, that the books of the institution would not
be abandoned to them; and probably, convinced of the propriety
of the course pursued by the Directors, the committee of investi­
gation acquiesced in it, and without waiving their right to require
the books at their lodging, they again repaired to the banking
house, to the room set apart for their accommodation, where, on
the 7th of May, they resolved to examine into the truth of the
statement made by the Government directors to the President
and Congress; and called for the inspection of the minute books
of the board, the expense books and vouchers of expenses incur­
red.
It became, now, necessary for the Bank to take the ground

Digitized by

65
which it had, doubtless, resolved to assume, immediately after
the adoption of the resolutions reported by the committee of ways
and means. Adverting to the wide inquiry proposed by the
committee of investigation, embracing, among other things, an
extensive examination of the acts, transactions, accounts and let­
ters of individuals, and thus instituting a kind of general search,
which was the more objectionable, if it had any purpose at all,
because it must be to criminate those individuals, as well as the
Bank, the committee of directors declared it their duty, by all
lawful means, to protect the rights and sacred confidence entrusted
to their keeping; to yield nothing by consent, which could
not be legally demanded from them; and, that, the inquiry which
could only be rightfully extended to alleged violations of the
charter should be conducted on some certain principles. They,
therefore, proposed, that the committee of investigation, when
calling for books and papers, for inspection, should state, specifi­
cally, in writing, the purpose; if to establish a violation of
the charter, then to state, specifically, in writing, what are the
charged violations, to which the evidence is supposed applicable;
and that the committee of investigation should furnish a specifica­
tion of all charges intended to be inquired into, and proceed with
them in order as stated. These propositions were rejected by the
committee.
The call, now made, for certain books of the Bank, was to
enable the committee to examine into the truth of the statement
supplied by the Government directors; embracing matters, that
neither are, nor are alleged to be, violations of the charter; and,
consequently, upon the principles already stated, the directors
not being required to submit their books for inspection, they
were refused ; and the refusal was fully sanctioned by the board.
Other requisitions were made by the committee of investigation
covering a wide range of inquiry of the most miscellaneous cha­
racter ; such as documents, which, in whole, or in part, had been
already communicated to Congress; papers relating to matters
which could not be stated without great labour of compilation and
resort to sources of knowledge, not necessarily, nor officially, in
the possession of the Bank—matters, with respect to which no
desire of concealment, could, on any hypothesis be imputed to
the Bank,—and others, involving the highest confidence of indi­
viduals, not to be divulged, except under legal compulsion, with­
out the grossest breach of faith. These reasons, in connection with
the object for which the requisitions were made, constrained the
board to refuse compliance with most of them.
Two of these requisitions merit particular notice, as showing
in the most conclusive manner, the spirit of the inquiry. The
first required copies of all correspondence between the president
of the Bank or any of its officers and members of Congress and of
P2

Digitized by

Google

66
m

unanswered Utters received from any one of them, since the first
day of July, 1832, touching the renewal of the charter of the
Bank, the removal or restoration of the public deposites, or touch­
ing the business transactions of such members with the Bank.
The second demanded, a detailed statement of all loans made, since
the first of January, 1829, to individuals, who were then, or have
been since, and noware, members of Congress, stating the amount
of each loan; when made; the security; and time when given;
the security now holden and amount still due, from each borrow­
er, or person for his benefit, at the Bank, or either of the branches;
and stating, also, the particulars of any such loans which have
been protested, or which are now under protest, and the names
of the parties to any such debts; also the names, if any, of any
such persons, whose notes have been renewed after the same be­
came due, and not protested, or renewed, with the names of indi­
viduals, parties to said renewals, whose notes were under protest
at the time such renewals were made: and also whether such
loans were made by the directors or otherwise, and by what au­
thority.
There can be no difficulty in comprehending the scope of these
requisitions. They express, distinctly, a charge of bribery and
corruption, in which the directors of the Bank and members of
Congress were parties, and from their minuteness seem to regard
special individuals. Is it to be tolerated, even in the fiercest
political warfare, that such crimes shall be insinuated against the
most respectable and conspicuous men in the country ; and that,.
at the sacrifice of every principle of delicacy and honour, a gene­
ral and indefinite inquisition shall be made into the transactions
of the representatives of the people,, in hope, that chance may
supply some facts to sustain the monstrous charge of corruptibility
which the President has dared to make against them ? The
monstrosity of this proceeding is the more apparent, when it is
known, that not more than four members of Congress had dealings
of any character with the Bank, and that those were altogether
free from suspicion. " If individuals are, on clear grounds, sus­
pected of being thus corrupted; if the Bank, on reasonable grounds
be suspected of this highest breach of privilege, let such indivi­
duals be named; the charge stated in form; the culprit brought
to the bar of the house; and the guilty punished. But, let not
the whole body of both nouses be involved in one indiscriminate
and odious, because vague and anonymous, delation." If the
house, ruled by party, were not wantkig in a proper sense of its
own dignity, the committee would be in danger of incurring the
extremity of its indignation for this gross breach of privilege.
The call for the correspondence of all members of Congress
with the Bank, is wholly unwarranted by law. It has long been
settled, " that to ransack private studies, in order to search for

Digitized by

67

*'

evidence, and even without a previous charge on oath, is con­
trary to natural justice as well as to the liberty of the subject
To search a man's private papers, ad libitum, and even without
accusation, is an infringement of the natural rights of mankind."
It was not the least detestable of the cruel violations of justice
and law which brought Sidney to the block, that he perished in
consequence of a manuscript political treatise, brought to light by
a general search among the papers of his cabinet How much
more, then, would the liberties of the citizen be outraged by a
general warrant to compel the production of all the letters which
may have been written by a class of individuals for two years, in
order to a search of the same, with the view to the institution of a
criminal prosecution against the writers or receivers?
Upon the same ground, may be placed the call upon the Bank
for the amount of fees paid to counsel, and of the accommodations
given at the Bank to editors and publishers of newspapers and
periodical works. Of payments for services to the Bank, or loans
to customers, the directors and the stockholders are the proper
judges. These are matters with which Congress have nothing to
do, and about which the committee had no right to inquire. As
well might the accounts of all employees of the Bank, and of all
its customers, who are not converts of Jacksonism, be subjected
to investigation, on the ground that they were bribed by payment
of their services and by loans, to vote against the administration.
The remark is not out of place here, that counsellors and editors
open to bribery, are quite as likely to be bought, by wages and
accommodations from other banks, as from the Bank of the
United States; and political patronage, as at present exercised,
and as developed by the late investigation of the Post-Office
transactions, is a source of corruption, to say the least, quite as
powerful as the favour of a monied institution.
For refusing compliance with requisitions such as these, the
directors of the Bank have been charged with contemning the
authority of the House of Representatives. But, as authoritative
form was not given to the requisitions, they, in respectfully de­
clining compliance, cannot be legally charged with contempt
The committee of investigation were resolved, however, to take
measures, If possible, to place the directors of the Bank in that
predicament, that they might more effectually lay the basis of
further persecutions; or failing, to subject them to the process of
contempt, to make a case which might serve to abuse the public
mind.
Resort was therefore had to the subpoenas furnished under
the seal of the House of Representatives. They, thereby, on the
9th May, directed the marshall of the Eastern District of Penn­
sylvania to summon the president and thirteen directors of the
Bank, to attend at their committee-room, on the next day at

Digitized by

68
12 o'clock, at noon, to testify of the matters of which the com*
m it tee was authorized to inquire, and to bring with them certain
books, therein named, for inspection. The parties appeared in
pursuance of the writ, and delivered in writing, their answer to
the requisition ; stating, that, they did not produce the books of
the Bank, because, they were not in the custody of either of
the witnesses, but in that of the board of directors, and that, being
corporators and directors they were parties to the proceedings,
not bound to testify, and therefore, they, respectfully, declined
so to do.
The right of the committee to issue the subpoena, as well as the
mode of service, might well be questioned. Objection, however,
was, momentarily and with protest, waived, on the appearance of
the parties. But the requisitions were wholly inadmissible. To
compel the production of the books, all the directors, or at least,
the committee, in whose charge they had been temporarily placed,
should have been specially summoned. And though, if the right
thus to obtain the books were valid, any book might be required;
yet the call for the credit books of the Bank, showing the accounts
of every individual with the institution, displayed an utter
disregard for the rights and feelings of third persons. The call
upon the directors to testify, required them to criminate or purge
themselves on oath; for the avowed object of the subpoena was
to inquire " whether a criminal prosecution shall be instituted."
Such a requisition is, unquestionably, unlawful. And we have
already seen, that, for such a purpose the books could not be
legally demanded. But, whilst the directors protested against the
right of the committee to examine them, they declared, they had
no knowledge, which, if a necessary regard to their duty and the
rights of others permitted, they would not willingly expose with­
out reserve.
The process resorted to on this occasion, " unlike any known to the hu­
mane jurisdiction of the present day, is in their most odious features identi­
cal with the general warrants of the dark ages of English liberty, and the
writs of assistance which first kindled the spirit of resistance in the Ame­
rican colonies. It is a process to compel the good people of the United
States to produce their books and papers, and submit them to a general search
in proof of crimes not charged, but suspected; to be enforced by attachment,
imprisonment, and infinite distress—a search of books, a search of papers,
a search of accounts, a search of letters, and an examination on oath of the
persons implicated, touching the matters whereof they are suspected—a
process differing in nothing from that issued under the First Charles and
Second James, for which, among other things, Scraggs was impeached;
and which the House of Commons in 1763, after full argument, solemnly,
resolved to be illegal."

Thus baffled in a most iniquitous purpose, the Committee of
Investigation returned to Washington and made report of their
proceedings, terminating with resolutions: 1. That, by the Bank
Charter, the right was reserved to either House of Congress, by

Digitized by

69
committee, to inspect the books and examine the proceedings of
the Bank, as well as to ascertain, if, at any time, it had violated
its charter; 2. That, the resolutions of the House of 4th April,
1834, for the appointment of a committee, was in accordance with
the charter, and the power of the House; 3. That, the President
and Directors of the Bank refusing to submit the books, &c, have
contemned the authority of the House; 4. That, either House of
Congress has the right to compel the production of such books,
&c. ; and also to compel the President and Directors of the Bank
to testify to such interrogatories as are necessary to a full and per­
fect understanding qf the proceedings of the Bank, at any period,
within the term of its existence; 5. And that, the Speaker of the
House issue his warrant for the President and thirteen Directors,
(designated by name,) and bring them to the bar of the House, to
answer for their contempt of its lawful authority.
The minority of the committee, Messrs. Edward Everett, and
William W. Ellsworth, who had throughout the whole inquiry
dissented from their colleagues, on the principles and modes by
which it was pursued, also made a report, in which, they ably
sustained the Directors of the Bank in their proceedings, and from
which, we have abstracted much of what is here given. Their re­
port concluded with the following declaration.
«* Firmly believing that they are innocent of the crimes and corruptions
with which they have been charged, and that if guilty, they ought not to be
compelled to criminate themselves, we are clearly of the opinion, that the
Directors of the Bank have been guilty of no contempt of the authority of
the House, in having respectfully declined to submit their books for inspec­
tion, except as required by charter."

Being now prepared to discuss, uninterruptedly, the reasons
of the Secretary, we shall take them up, seriatim, in the order
he has placed them, commencing with what we have termed the
principles on which he founds his power.
First, then, he claims that, by the contract between the Bank
and the United States, absolute and unconditional power is
given to the Secretary over the public deposites, so far as the
interests of the Stockholders is involved in them. The error of
this position lies in the misconstruction of this contract; and as
this is the source whence the administration must derive the de­
fence of its acts, it demands full consideration.
All agree, that the charter is a contract which cannot be vio­
lated by either party, and more especially by the stronger, with­
out a breach of good faith. It will serve us much, in ascertaining
the nature of the contract, to inquire, what were the objects sought
by the creation of the Bank. These were, first, the acquisition of
afiscalagent, an auxiliary to the treasury,,necessary and proper
for the purposes of the government,—in the language of the char­
ter, " to give the necessary facilities for transferring the public

Digitized by

70
funds from place to place, without charge; for distributing the
same in payment of the public creditors;" and for performing
" the several and respective duties of the Commissioners of Loans
for the several states." And secondly, the regulation of the
currency, the fulfilment of one of the most important duties of
sovereignty, involving the aggregate and individual interests of
the people. Both these objects have been effectually attained.
To the first, all parties bear testimony. We have already given
ample evidence of the attainment of the second; but this may be
rendered more apparent, by contrasting the condition of the Cur­
rency at the period between the dissolution of the first Bank of
the United States, and the incorporation of the second, with its
condition at, and for a long time preceding, the withholding of the
deposites. The effect of the state of the currency in 1814, is thus
stated by Mr. Dallas, 17th October, 1814, in his letter to Mr.
Eppes, chairman of the Committee of Ways and Means, of
the House of Representatives:
"The condition of the circulating medium of the country, presents an­
other copious source of mischief and embarrassment; the recent exportstions of specie have considerably diminished the fund of gold and silver
coin; and another considerable portion of that fund has been drawn by the
timid and the wary, from the use of the community, into the private coffers
of individuals. On the other hand, the multiplication of banks in the several states, has so increased the quantity of paper currency, that it would be
difficult to calculate its amount, and still more difficult to ascertain its value,
with reference to the capital on which it is issued. But the benefit of this
paper currency, is, in a great measure lost, as the suspension of payments
in specie, at most of the banks, has suddenly broken the chain of accommo­
dation that previously extended the credit and the circulation of the notes,
which were emitted in one State, into every State of the Union. It may*
in general, be affirmed, therefore, that there exists at this time, no adequate
circulating medium common to the citizens of the United States. The
monied transactions of private life, are at a stand, and the fiscal operations
of the government, labour with extreme inconvenience."

In the report of this eminent statesman of the 3d of December,
1816, he observes—and his observations were prophecy—
" The treasury has been compelled to accept the payment of duties and
taxes, in the local currency of the respective places of payment.
"The comparative value of the local currencies appeared, in some degree,
to render this course of payment unequal; but the alternative was either to
adopt it, or to abandon the hope of collecting the revenue in any convertible
medium, for satisfying the public engagements. The rule was, therefore,
declared, that the Treasury would receive and pay, in the notes of banks cir­
culating at par, at the respective places of receiving and paying. For a
time, the test of the fact, that the notes did circulate at par, was the agree­
ment of the banks employed as the depositories of the revenue, to credit
them as cash in the Treasurer's accounts. But when the principal banks
withdrew that accommodation, and refused to credit as cash any bank notes b
those which they had themselves respectively issued, the fact of the circulation
at par was necessarily left to its own notoriety, and to the official responsi­
bility of the collectors. Few notes, except the notes of the local banks,

Digitized by

71
continued to circulate at par; and such as d£d socirculate were received by ->
the banks upon special deposite, for safe keeping; and constituted a discre­
dited fund, upon which the Treasurer could only' occasionally draw.
" The treasury has been involved in the difficult and delicate task of de­
signating the medium, in which the warrants draw* by the heads of Depart­
ments should be respectively paid.
"The revenue is collected throughout the Union, but the amount of the
collection is very different in different places; and it has happened, not unfrequently, that the demand for payment was the greatest where the means
of payment were the least.
" The Treasury has been compelled to increase the numbeT, and extend the
range of banks employed as the depositories of the public revenue, with con­
sequences unavoidably inconvenient and injurious.
♦* As soon as the differences of the current value of bank notes were intro­
duced, and particularly when one bank refused to credit, as cash, a deposite
of the notes of another, the Treasury was driven to a choice of expedients y
that is, either to take the hazard of the accumulation of masses of revenue
in the hands of the individual collectors and receivers, or to recognise, as
places of deposite, the banks (being, however, banks of unquestioned so­
lidity,) established in the districts which were most affected by the course
of exchanges. Many powerful reasons led to an adoption of the latter mea­
sure ; instructions were issued to the collectors and receivers to act accord­
ingly; and the number of banks thus necessarily employed by the Trea­
sury, from Maine to Louisiana, may be stated at ninety-four.
" To the inconveniences incident to this multiplication of the places of
deposite, was added the complexity inevitably arising from the various
kinds of paper in circulation as money, upon some of which minute calcu­
lations were required. Generally speaking, the Treasury has with each
bank four accounts:
" An account of cash, meaning (in the absence of coin) the local cur­
rency.
" An account of special deposites of bank notes, being notes issued by
banks, other than the depository.
" An account of special deposites of Treasury notes, bearing interest.
"An account of deposites of small Treasury notes, not bearing interest.
" Owing to this untoward condition of the machinery for the collection,
custody, and distribution of the revenue; to the great extension of the busi­
ness of receipts and expenditures, and to several accidental causes; the
punctual statement and settlement of the Treasurer's accounts have not been
found practicable."
The loss sustained by the United States from this deranged
state of the currency, from broken banks alone, between 1814
and 1819, is nearly a million and a half of dollars. "The receipts
into the treasury during the five years were $ 198,000,000. Of
this amount $68,000,000 were received from loans and treasury
notes, and $93,000,000 from customs; upon none of which was
there any loss. The whole amount of loss accrued on the collec­
tion of $36,000,000 received from the public lands, internal reve­
nue, direct taxes, and incidental receipts, and was more than one
thirty-sixth part accruing from these sources in five years."*
" This, however, forms but a small portion of the loss to the
government. If all that was lost by the extravagant price paid
* Mr. Wilde's speech on the removal of the deposites, 18th March, 1834.

Digitized by

*n
for loans, by the sale of treasury notes, at a discount, and by the
premium paid on exchanges, or the interest allowed for the ad­
vances of current money, were taken into the account, the sum
would be swelled to many millions."*
For further effects produced by the enormous and depreciated
issues of the State banks, immediately after the dissolution of the
first Bank of the United States, we refer to Mr. Gallatin's article
on banks and currency (see 16th No. of the American Quarterly
Review). These effects, and especially their great cause, the sus­
pension of specie payments, he states, " would not have happened,
at the time when they took place, had the former Bank of the
United States been still in existence. The exaggerated increase
of State banks, would not have occurred. That Bank would, as
- before, have restrained them within proper bounds, and checked
their issues ; and through the means of its officers, would have
been in possession of the earliest symptoms of the approaching
danger. It would have put the treasury department upon its guard;
both acting in concert, would, certainly, have been able, at least,
to retard the event; and, as the treaty of peace was ratified within
less than six months after the suspension took place, that catastro­
phe would have been altogether avoided."
For the loss to individuals, during the first period we have
named, we again refer to the luminous and erudite statements of
Mr. Wilde.
" Still, the loss to the Government sinks into utter insignificance com­
pared with that to individuals. During the years '15 and '16, the exchange
between our different cities varied from 5 to 25 per cent., the ordinary pre­
mium for specie being from 10 to 20 per cent. The amount of our domestic
exchanges may even then be estimated at not less than $200,000,000 per
annum; they are now much more. If we estimate the difference of ex­
change, paid on these $200,000,000, at only 5 per cent, on an average, the
industrious classes were taxed, annually, ten millions, for the benefit of banks
and brokers, on their domestic exchanges!"
And now for the contrast, as exhibited in the same address,
and in our preceding remarks at pages 20, 21.
." The excellence of the Bank of the United States, as latterly conducted,
consists in the facility and stability it has given to domestic exchanges.
The transfer of funds from place to place, for the purposes of the public
expenditure, are as nothing compared with those demanded by the exigen­
cies of commerce. The burden of transmitting the public money under a
system of unequal exchanges would seem to be much less than the advan­
tage, in the shape of premiums, to be derived from such exchanges on the
remittances of commerce. But the people would have a just right to com­
plain, if the institution sacrificed their interests to its own, by levying a tax
on their exchanges beyond the fair equivalent for interest, trouble, postage,
and insurance. Under a judicious course of policy, therefore, domestic
exchange has latterly been equalized. The remittances of commerce are
made subservient to the transmission of the public funds, the depositee of
* Mr. Wilde's speech on the removal of the depositee 18th March, 1834.

Digitized by

n
the public funds have, in their turn, furnished the means of extending
greater facilities to commerce; while the public, in the sum originally paid,
and in the duties, subsequently performed by the Bank, received ample
compensation for the privileges bestowed on it."
With this view of the objects of the Charter, we proceed to
consider the Charter itself, or the special contract by which these
were to be attained. We have stated the duties of the agent, and
the services which it contracted to perform, to which, however,
WQ must add, the payment to the United States of one and a half
millions of dollars, in regard to which, we believe, there is no
difference of opinion. It remains to determine what were the
covenanted considerations for such services. These we take to
be, 1. The exclusive privilege of banking under the authority of
Congress, with certain exceptions mentioned in the Charter.
2. The acceptance of its notes in payment of duties. 3. The
reception of the deposites during the term of the Charter. The
latter consideration is the only disputed one. If it be a con­
sideration for the services of the Bank, it cannot be supposed
that its enjoyment was to be wholly at the discretion of any one.
The enjoyment, however, had its condition of which we shall
fully speak. Are the deposites a consideration for services ? Are
they part of those privileges and*benefits for which the Bank
covenanted to pay, and did pay, one million and a half of
dollars ?
Let us suppose the deposites to average, as is commonly esti­
mated, continually, the sum of eight millions per annum. The use
of this sum, as banking capital, at five per cent, only, is worth
to the Bank 400,000 dollars per annum, which for twenty
years, the term of the Charter, produces eight millions of dol­
lars, at simple interest The sum remaining constantly in the
Bank may be less or more; but whatever it be, it is sufficiently
large to show, that it must have been a consideration with the
Bank, in forming the contract; and if nothing more, was deemed
a compensation for the bonus.
It is, however, denied by the Secretary and the party, " that
the custody of the deposites is a consideration of the services of
the Bank." We have already noticed the Secretary's views upon
this subject, which are thus supported by the Corepheus of the
party, Mr. Polk, in the House of Representatives. " It was no
part of the Government's contract with the Bank, that the de­
posites should remain in its custody during the whole period of
its existence; on thej contrary, it was expressly stipulated that
they might be withdrawn by the Secretary, at will. Nor was
any reason stated as the ground of removal. It was not neces­
sary to render the removal lawful, that the deposites should be
unsafe in the hands of the Bank; other reasons might operate to
produce the Secretary's determination." This effort to maintain
one asseveration by another is most successfully prostrated by

Digitized by

74
the reasoning of the minority of the Committee of Ways and
Means.
" The power of removing the public deposites is granted or reserved by
the 16th section of the Bank Charter, to be exercised by the Secretary of
the Treasury, for reasons to be communicated to Congress. This power is
not absolute or unconditional, in regard either to the Bank or to the country.
Absolute and unconditional power does not reside in any department of
Government. Congress hold their own power under the condition of con­
forming to the principles of justice, as well as to the restraints or limita­
tions contained or prescribed in the Constitution. They cannot grant an
absolute and unconditional power to any officer of Government for any pur­
pose of Government. The broadest discretion they can give, must be sub­
ject to the implied condition of being exercised in conformity with the Con­
stitution, the laws, the rights of individuals, and the principles of natural
justice. Above all, they cannot, in the absence of express declaration, be
presumed to have given an unconditional power to an officer of Government
to affect rights and privileges conferred or sanctioned by law.
" Various suggestions are made to sustain the position that the exercise
of the Secretary's power, whether for good reasons, or for no reasons at all,
determines the right of the Bank to the deposites, and leaves the nation free
from all reproach of violated faith.
" It is said that he is authorized to act, before he gives his reasons
to Congress; and his act, therefore, has validity, whatever may be his rea­
sons. The efficacy of his act to remove the deposites is not the question.
Whether his reasons be good or bad, his order is, in the first instance, to
be respected; but if he is bound to have good reasons, and his reasons
have not been good, the subsequent communication of them will show that
his act was unjust at the time; and if Congress do not rescind it, they will
sanction the injustice. There are innumerable instances in which an order,
right or wrong, must be respected when it is given; yet when it is subse­
quently shown to have been wrong, the injustice is declared, and the ag­
gressor punished.
" It is further said, that the Bank has paid nothing for the use of the de­
posites, and therefore has no right to them that may not be revoked at plea­
sure, and that the bonus and other expenditures in the public behalf have
been paid by the Bank for the privilege of exclusive banking, and for the
benefit of having their notes received in all payments to the United States.
If the deposites be a benefit, (and of this there can be no doubt,) the 20th
section of the Charter shows that the bonus was given for that benefit as
much as for any other. The language of the section is general. The pay­
ment is " in consideration of the exclusive privileges and benefits conferred
by the act," and this is one of them. Whether the receipt of the notes in <
public payments is really a benefit to the Bank, has been much doubted.
That it is a benefit at all comparable to that of having the deposites, cannot
be maintained. The obligation of the United States to receive these notes
was absolute and unlimited in the Charter of the first Bank, which did not
pay any bonus at all; and in the present Charter, for which a large bonus
was paid, the engagement to receive them is subject to the pleasure of Con­
gress. The great difference in benefit of the respective Charters of the two
banks is, that in the first there was no stipulation for the public deposites,
and the Bank paid nothing for its Charter; whereas, in the present Charter,
the case is otherwise in both particulars.
" Another suggestion to show that the power of the Secretary over the
deposites is absolute and unconditional, is, that the power of Congress to
repeal the guaranty of the notes is so. The difference between the cases
is, that the Secretary must have reasons for his direction, as the 16th sec*

Digitized by

75
tion expressly declares, whereas the 14th section, in regard to the notes,
makes no such qualification of the powers of Congress.
" It is again said that the power given to the Secretary by the 16th sec­
tion is his old, or former power, which was absolute and unconditional as it
regarded every depositary with whom the public money was placed, and
therefore, the present,power must be the same. If the power given by the
16th section is the old power, the House is possessed of the Secretary's
opinion as to the extent of it. The language of the Secretary's letter is as
follows: * The Treasury Department being intrusted with the administra­
tion of thefinancesof the country, it was always the duty of the Secretary,
in the abseuce of any legislative provision on the subject, to take care that
the public money was deposited in safe keeping, in the hands of faithful
agents, and in convenient places, ready to be applied according to the wants
of the Government. The law incorporating the Bank has reserved to him,
in the fullest extent, the power he before possessed. It does not confer
upon him any new power, but reserves to him his former authority without
any new limitation.' It is unnecessary to dispute the position that the
power in the 16th section is the*old power in this sense; for the power in
the 16th section is not only admitted, but asserted to go to the very extent
which the Secretary claims for the old power, and no further; namely, to
the extent that the safety of the deposites, and their distribution in conve­
nient places, require. Such a power is obviously neither absolute nor un­
conditional. But independent of this definition of his own power by the
Secretary, it seems to have been overlooked by the committee, that the pre­
sent power is to be applied to divest a right; whereas the former power was
exercised over the possession of depositories who had no right whatever.
The control of the Treasury Department over the public moneys, until the
charter of the present Bank, was universally a question between the Trea*
sury and Congress; it is now a question between the Bank and Congress."

In this conclusion of the minority, we submit, that no lawyer,
no honest and enlightened man, untrammelled and unbiassed byparty, can fail to concur. Their views are similar to those enter­
tained by the Committee on Finance of the Senate, who say:
" The opinion of the Secretary is, that his power over the deposites, so
far as respects the rights of the Bank, is not limited to any particular con­
tingencies, but is absolute and unconditional. If it be absolute and uncon­
ditional, so far as respects the rights of the Bank, it must be absolute and
unconditional in all other respects ; because it is obvious, if there be any
limitation, that limitation is imposed as much for the benefit of the Bank as
for the security of the country. The Bank has contracted for the keeping
of the public moneys, and paid for it, as for a privilege or benefit. It has
agreed, at the same time, that the Secretary shall possess the power of re­
moval; but, then, it is also agreed, that whenever this power is exercised,
the reasons therefor shall be reported to Congress; Congress being thus
constituted the final judge as well of the rights of the Bank, in this par­
ticular, as of the good of the country. So that, if the Secretary's power be
io truth absolute and unconditional, it restrains Congress from judging
whether the public good is injured by the removal, just as much as it re­
strains it from judging whether the rights of the Bank are injured by the
removal; because the limitation, if any, is equally for the security of the
bank and of the public.
" If the Bank be interested in retaining the deposites, then it is interested
in the troth or falsity, in the sufficiency or insufficiency, of the reasons
given for their removal. Especially is it so interested, since these reasons

Digitized by

76
are to be rendered to a tribunal which is to judge over the Secretary, and
may form a different opinion on the validity of these reasons, and may re­
verse his decision. It clearly has an interest in retaining the deposites,
and, therefore, i9 as clearly concerned in the reasons which the Secretary
may give for their removal. And as he is bound to give reasons, this very
circumstance shows that his authority is not absolute and unconditional.
Because, how can an appeal be given from the decision of an absolute
power; and how can such a power be called on to give reasons for any in­
stance of its exercise t If it be absolute, its only reason is a reference to its
own will.
"The committee think, therefore, that no absolute and unconditional
power was conferred on the Secretary; that no authority was given him
by which he could deprive the Bank of the custody of the public moneys,
without reason; and that therefore his opinion is not to be admitted that, in
no event, can any order for removing the deposites impair the right secured
to the Bank by the Charter. If removed without good cause, the committee
think the removal does impair the rights of the Bank."
An attempt is made by the Secretary and the party to support
his interference by precedent; and reference is had to the acts
and assumptions of Mr. Crawford, particularly, to his letter of
the 13th February, 1817, to the President of the Mechanics
Bank of New York; in which, certainly, a power as extensive
as unwarranted, was claimed by that gentleman, over the public
funds. "The Secretary of the Treasury," he says, " will al­
ways be disposed to support the credit of the State Banks, and
will invariably, direct transfers from the deposites of the public
money ? in aid of their legitimate exertions to maintain their
credit. But as the proposition of the Bank of the United States,
excludes the idea of pressure on its part, no measures of that
nature appear to be necessary.' 1
N o power is given by law,
thus, to use the public treasure ; and Mr. Crawford mistook his
rights and duties when he claimed authority to dispose of it in
supporting the credit of State banks. But a broad distinction seems
to run between all the acts of the past and present administrations.
Wherever extraordinary powers were assumed, by the first, they
were used, temporarily, in aid of the law and public weal ; but
by the last, to the permanent increase of the Executive power,
and to the public detriment. And we might observe, if the pre­
cedent were admissable, that Mr. Crawford's is distinguished
from the present case, by the essential feature that his transfers
were made with the consent of the Bank.
But Mr. Crawford was armed with extraordinary powers to
compel the resumption of specie payments, by resolution of 30th
April, 1816, requiring him to adopt such measures as he might
deem necessary to cause the duties and moneys payable to the
United States, to be paid in legal currency, and prohibiting
after a given day, the receipts in any other medium.
"It appears by Mr. Crawford's letter of 10th December, 1817, to the
Speaker of the House of Representatives, assigning his reasons for not
transferring the deposites from some of the State and District banks to the

Digitized by

77
Bank of the United States, that he entertained doubts whether the provi­
sions of the 16th section of the bank charter did impose the obligation of
transferring to the Bank of the United States the deposites previously made
in the local banks. He did, nevertheless, communicate his reasons for or­
dering and directing otherwise than that the deposites should be made in the
Bank of the United States, whether they had been previously deposited in
/ h e local banks or not. A single moment of reflection will show that the
transfer of deposites from local banks, not paying specie, to the Bank of
the United States, which could pay in nothing but specie, must have been
made under this resolution of Congress of 30th of April, 1816, and upon
principles altogether inapplicable to the present case. The object of the
Secretary of the Treasury was, by one and the same operation, to compel
the local banks to resume specie payments, and to withdraw from them the
ublic deposites, to place them in the Bank of the United States. That
tank could receive them only as equivalent to specie, for so only was it
bound by its charter to pay them out. It was impossible, then, effectively
to withdraw them, but by a simultaneous resumption of specie payments
by the banks from which they were to be withdrawn.
To obtain their assent to this twofold measure, then, Mr. Crawford felt
himself justified in giving them assurances of all the aid from Government
necessary for its accomplishment; and particularly that in effecting the
transfer of the deposites from their vaults to those of the Bank of the United
States, there should be no advantage taken of them by any unnecessary
ressure which should render the operation injurious to them. There can
e no doubt that he was fully justified in giving them these assurances.
To the liberality with which the bank of the United States co-operated to
the accomplishment of these purposes, the letter of Mr. Crawford, of 10th
December, 1817, bears signal testimony.
It is equally certain that indulgences were afterwards extended to several
of the local banks, beyond what was warranted by law. They furnished
the grounds of investigations and inquiries by both Houses of Congress,
and, at one time, of direct charges made by Ninian Edwards against Mr.
Crawford. The letters of that officer of the 25th of February, 1823,
(p. 66,) to the Senate, of the 24th of February, 1823, (p. 72,) to the chair­
man of a committee of the House of Representatives, and of the 8th May,
1824, (p. 76,) to the chairman of a committee of the House, appointed to
investigate the charges of Ninian Edwards, exhibit statements of several
instances in which he had caused deposites to be transferred to the local
banks for the purpose of sustaining them. In justification of the practice,
he alleges frequent instances in which it had been resorted to, during the
interval between thefirstand second Banks of the United States; and he
cites, as analogous cases, several instances of delays to the payment of
custom-house bonds, during the existence of the first Bank of the United
States. But so far as such proceedings ever had taken place as expedients
to rescue banks from danger, the committee of the House of Representa­
tives, upon the charges of Ninian EdwaTds, expressly declare that this is no
legal employment ofpublic funds ; it is nothing but a gratuitous loan." *

S

E

But, the selection of precedents by the Committee of Ways
and Means of the House, is not more extraordinary than those
adduced by Mr. Forsyth, of the Senate. *« The Jirst is a resolu­
tion offered in the House of Representatives, in 1817, never acted
upon, and carrying with it no other authority, than the unsup­
ported opinion of the mover, who was the honourable gentle­
man himself. He proposed that the Secretary of the Treasury,
be directed, to withdraw the deposits ; directed, not by the
* Printed speech of Mr. J. Q. Adams.
6 2

Digitized by

w
President, but by Congress. The second was a resolution ofiered
in the House, by Mr. Spencer of New York, never acted apoo,
by which the Secretary was ordered to withdraw the deposites.
The third waS an extract from Mr. MT)uffie's report, in 1830,
averring that the Secretary, with the sanction qf
Congresses
the power of removing the deposites, for various reasons. And.
thus, propositions to give a peremptory order by a superior, were
cited to maintain the claim of the subordinate Secretary, to un­
limited and exclusive power. Mr. Forsyth explained, that he
had not adduced these precedents to show, that the Congress had
no power, but that the Secretary had. He thought that Con­
gress also possessed the power of removal, and so far differed
from the Secretary; and thus took from the latter, the only
pretence that had the colour of justification, namely; that his ac­
tion was a condition precedent to the action of Congress. Ano­
ther gentleman, but of the lower House, Mr. Wise, of Virginia,
who has the happy faculty of combining qualities, which most
persons believe have little affinity for each other, and who, upon
his own report is " most distinctly" a friend of the administra­
tion, and undisguisedly and decidedly a friend to the constitu­
tional power of Congress, to incorporate a bank, and who has
treated this subject with much naivete and peculiarity, has pro­
tested against the doctrine that Congress has divested or can
divest itself of its power, in favour of the Secretary, and has
declared, after mature reflection, that the Secretary is bound to lay
before Congress, financial reasons alone, for the removal of the
deposites, and that none of his reasons are good financial reasons.
This brings us to the consideration of the second general pro­
position of the Secretary.
II. That Congress had wholly stript itself of all power over
the deposites, having conveyed it to him. The replies of the
Committees of the several Chambers are equally conclusive upon
this as upon the former proposition.
Thus the minority of the Committee of Ways and Means of
the House, say :
" It isfinallysaid, that the power of the Secretary is absolute and uncon­
ditional, because Congress have given to him their whole power, reserving
none whatever to themselves to touch the deposites until he shall have re­
stored their power to them. This argument begs the question in dispute.
The Secretary supposes himself to be an independent judge in this matter,
whereas the minority suppose, that he is merely the agent of Congress.
His power in the premises is a part of their power entrusted to him as their
representative. Though he may use it for sufficient reasons, Congress may
use it also for the same reasons. The restraint upon the exercise of his
power is imposed by the right of the Bank, and this is all the restraint that
is imposed upon the right of Congress. If the Bank has no right, as the
committee appear to assert, upon what ground can the right of Congress be
denied ? If the power reserved to the Secretary, by the 16th section, ia
neither more nor less than the old power, how is it possible to deny the

Digitized by

Google

right to Congress td control the depositee, under the charter, if Congress
bad any right to control them before the charter % It is worthy of deep re­
flection* that the argument put forward by the committee, to sustain the
Secretary's reasoning, has oarried them to the extent of asserting that Con­
gress abandoned (he public treasure to the Secretary and the Bank beyond
the possibility of iccall.
"The minority state their opinion to the House, that the power of the
Secretary over the depositee in the Bank depends for its just exercise upon
the existence of adequate causes; that the Bank had a direct and immedi­
ate interest in them, and is entitled to an impartial decision upon them;
that an unjust decision upon them will be a violation of the charter, and a
stain upon the public faith; and that the Secretary's position, that his power
is absolute and unconditional in regard to the Bank, is an unwarrantable as­
sumption of power, instead of a just interpretation of that which has been
griven."

And the minority thus meet the allegation of the Secretary,
that the manner in which his duties are exercised, must be sub­
ject to the supervision of the President.
" In the execution of this power, the Secretary was the agent of Conress, and not of the President. He derived the power from Congress;
e is to report his reasons for using it to Congress. The act of the Secre­
tary in removing the deposites is neither actually, nor by construction, the
act of the President, nor are the reasons of the President a satisfaction,
either in effect or form, of the requisition of the Secretary to report his
reasons. The exercise of this power affects the public treasure, which
Congress directed to be placed in the Bank of the United States. The
treasure is the treasure of the people, the custody and control of which be­
longs to the Legislature and to the agents of the Legislature. The custo­
dy of the Legislature is exclusive of the Executive Department. The
custody of the Bank, as the agent of the Legislature, is equally exclusive.
The power of the Secretary is, in like manner, exclusive. The Chief
Executive Magistrate has no constitutional authority to raise revenue, or to
take it into his official possession when raised, or to direct who shall pos­
sess it, or to interfere with a direction or authority in this behalf, proceed­
ing from Congress, any more than he possesses authority to direct by whom
the public money shall be used and consumed. The Secretary cannot be
relieved from the duty of accounting to Conmress by any order of the
President; nor can the reasons of the PresidentT>e imposed upon him as a
guide, nor be offered to Congress as an excuse* The discretion which is
given by the charter, is given to the Secretary alone. The order of remo­
val must come directly from the Secretary; and if it came from the Presi­
dent alone, it would be null and void.
The power of the President to remove the Secretary of the Treasury is
no reason for holding that the Secretary is under the direction of the Presi­
dent in the exercise of the discretion conferred by the charter. The Presi­
dent may remove the Secretary whether he performs or does not perform
his duty. The legal power to do it is as perfect in the one case as the
other. The mere existence of the power does not consequently imply the
right of direction or control. The constitutional duty ot the President, to
see that the laws are faithfully executed, requires him to see that an officer
to whom the law confides a discretion is permitted fairly to exercise it. A
law which confers a discretion upon one officer, is violated, instead of be­
ing faithfully executed, by compelling him to submit to the discretion of
another officer. If the President has in this matter, directly or indirectly,
controlled the discretion of the Secretary, the law has not been faithfully

Digitized by

80
executed, and his act has been a violation both of the law and of the con­
stitution."
III. The third position of the Secretary is, that his power over
the deposites, does not depend upon their safety, nor upon the
fidelity of the Bank; but may be exercised, if their removal tend,
in any degree to the interest and convenience of the public.
But for a true view of this pretension we refer again to the
report of the minority of the committee of Ways and Means.
" The only adequate cause for removing the public deposites, must
be a cause affecting the safety of the public moneys in the Bank, or their
distribution for the public service. Such a cause alone directly concerns
the subject upon which the power is to be exercised. It is the only cause
of which the functions of his office and his relations to the Bank authorize
and enable the Secretary to judge, and which is of such a nature as to re­
quire immediate action without a previous reference to Congress. It is the
only cause which would justly deprive the Bank of the use of the public
moneys after having paid for it. It is the only cause which Congress could
safely submit to the discretion of the Treasury, without abandoning to that
officer the whole scheme of public policy in regard to a National Bank.
1. A cause that does not directly concern the subject upon which the
power is to be exercised, must regard the public moneys as an instrument,
and not as an object of the power. To comprehend such a cause, the charter
must be construed to give the Secretary an unlimited choice of the objects
to be attained by the custody of public moneys; for as none are pointed out
by the charter but those of mere custody and'transfer, the instant that these
cease to be the only objects of the power, we are without any limitation.
Whether the purpose of the Secretary be local or general, whether it be to
make money dear or cheap, to regulate or disturb exchanges, to promote or
retard public works, to increase or diminish the amount of bank discounts,
to excite or counteract political movements, each and all of these objects
must be within the discretion of the Secretary, if any of them are.
2. That the Secretary should be entrusted with a power necessary to pro­
tect the Treasury itself, or to meet the demands upon it, is reasonable. If
the public moneys are exposed to danger, he must first perceive its approach,
and would be best able to measure its extent. He also, from his official
position, must know the direction which public engagements require to be
given to the means of satisfying them. The power, which either danger or
the public credit makes necessary, is one that does not admit of delay,
whether Congress be in session or not. The action required, to be effectual,
must be in some cases instantaneous. The grant or reservation of such a
power to the Secretary of the Treasury was necessary and proper. But if
the public moneys were to be made an instrument for effecting an ulterior
object, no reason can be imagined why the power of using them should be
given to the Secretary rather than to the President, or why it should be
given to either instead of being left to the action of Congress. That nothing
but the safety and distribution of the national treasure were the lawful ob­
jects of the Secretary's poweT, is conclusively shown by the circumstance
that the "Act to establish the Treasury Department," the very moment
that the Secretary gave the order not to make the deposites in the Bank of
the United States, placed them in the hands of the Treasurer, who could
lawfully make no disposition of them, but to keep them securely, to be dis­
bursed according to law. A removal of the deposites for any purpose, e x ­
cept to place them in this custody, would be not only a violation of the
rights of the Bank, but of the functions of the Treasurer as created bylaw."

Digitized by

81
IV. The claim of the Secretary, of right, to select the future
depositaries of the public treasure, when withheld from the
Bank of the United States, falls with his pretension to withhold
them. If he could not take them away, he could not place
them elsewhere. But no portion of this great case calls for
more consideration, than the employment of the substitutes for
the Bank of the United States. It may be regarded as to the
right and the result.
The right of choosing depositaries of the public funds, when
such funds are not legally gaged, is claimed, with much speciousness, as pertaining, ex officio, to the Secretary of the Trea­
sury. This right is derived, by implication, from the Acts of
1789 and 1792, authorizing the Secretary to superintend the col­
lection of the revenue, and to direct the superintendence of the
collection of duties on imports and tonnage, as he shall judge
best. If there he danger in attaining power by implication and
construction, (and who shall deny it) can our apprehensions be
more properly aroused than by this far fetched deduction which
puts at the disposition of the Secretary, and now distinctly
avowed, at the will of the President, all the moneyed power of
the nation ? And yet, for many years this enormous power was
silently acquiesced in, as was the irresponsible disposition of the
funds of the post office. By the Treasury practice, the monies
of the government were lodged wherever the Secretary direct­
ed. But circumstances, heretofore, so ruled his discretion, that
no danger flowed, or was apprehended, from it.
The first Bank of the United States was incorporated, 25th of
February, 1791, and furnished a safe place of deposite, almost ^
as soon as the government had a dollar to guard : and though
not required by law, that Bank became, and continued, the
depositary, with inconsiderable exceptions, until its extinction
in 1611. Upon that event the funds remained in the hands of
the Secretary, and were deposited by him where he deemed
most convenient. The single mindedness of Mr. Madison,
which admitted no idea of personal or party influence to mingle
with his patriotism—the integrity and intelligence of Messrs.
Gallatin, Dallas, and Crawford, which left no doubt of the purpose for which they employed their powers—the war of 1812,
which gave superabundant employment to all the departments
of the government, prevented an inquiry into the legality of
these powers, which, though assumed, had not been abused.
When that period, rendered so disastrous to the finances of the
country, and entailing upon its resources the fiscal burdens,
which are but just removed, in consequence of the want of a na­
tional Bank, was terminated, a proper and safe depositary was
provided by law for the funds of the government, in the Bank of
the United States, in nine-tenths of the places where they

Digitized by

82
accumulated. For their disposition in tht remaining tenth,
there was little regard; and, they may have been supposed, ia
the custody of the proper officer, the Treasurer.
The proper duty of the Secretary is to superintend the col­
lection of the revenue. The duty of the Treasurer is "to
receive and keep the moneys of the United States, and to dis­
burse the same on warrants drawn by the Secretary of the Trea­
sury, countersigned by the proper officers, and recorded accord­
ing to law. He is required to give bond, in the sum of one
hundred and fifty thouaand dollars, conditioned for the faithful
performance of the duties of his office, and for the fidelity of
the persons to be by him employed. It is the Treasurer,
therefore, who is to choose the place of deposite ; and he is the
best officer, in theory, as well as the only officer, by the law,
to perform the act; because the dQctrines of general convenience
and interest are not so like to reach him. His object will be
security, and his bond is the motive for obtaining it. If there
be a treasury practice, which has displaced the Treasurer, the
practice should be made to conform to the law, or the law to
the practice. As the case now stands, the money of the United
States is not deposited where it is, by direction, and under the
sanction of the law. It is placed in the deposite Banks by an
officer who has not the authority so to place it; and in case of
controversy, it may possibly be found, not only that the bond
of the Treasurer is of no avail, but that, remedies for the loss
or detention of the deposites, are not to be obtained in the name
of the United States, or in the courts of the United States; but
in private names, and in State courts, with all the contingen­
cies incident to litigation in this form. Whatever may be the
practice, it is not becoming, that the treasury of the United
States should be in any predicament, but that, precisely, in
which the law has given its direction to place it."*
But where did the Secretary get authority to contract with
the State Banks? It would seem as if every step of this officer
was to be over some broken pillar of the law. He was autho­
rized by no law to make such contracts: nay, he was expressly
forbidden by the Act of 1st May, 1820, for the regulation of
the departments, which provides, Sec. 6, that no contract shall
thereafter be made by the Secretary of State, or of the Treasury, or of the Department of War, or of the Navy, except
under a law, authorizing the^same, or under an appropriation
adequate to its fulfilment; and excepting, also, contracts for
the subsistence and clothing of the army or navy, and contracts
by the Quarter Master's Department, which may be made by
the Secretaries of those Departments.
We now proceed to consider the result of the selection of
•

*

* Speech of Mr. Binney.

Digitized by

83
the State Banks, as the depositaries of the public treasure. In
other words, to consider the probable operation of the system
proposed by the administration. This may be done with the
greater propriety, that the system is, now, fully developed*
Mr. Taney and the Committee of Ways and Means concur,
in declaring, that by the adoption of the State Banks, as the
fiscal agents of the General Government, a sounder state of the
currency, than that lately existing, might soon be obtained.
This leads, immediately, to the inquiry into the actual condi­
tion of the State Banks. The information attainable on this
subject, is neither so full, nor correct, as is to be desired; yet,
it is sufficient to enable us to form a tolerable correct judgment.
From the returns, collected by Mr. Wilde, of the House of
Representatives, it appears that there are, in round numbers,
four hundred and fifty Banks in the States, districts, and terri­
tories; with an aggregate capital of one hundred and forty-six \
millions of dollars ; circulation of near seventy millions ; but
which by others is given at an hundred millions; deposites, fifty
millions; specie and specie funds, fifteen millions. Specie
funds do not mean gold and silver; but deposites or balances
in distant binks, on which checks may be drawn, which are
as available as specie. The actual amount of the precious
metals in possession of these banks is supposed not to exceed
ten millions. The total amount of discounted paper is about
two hundred and thirty-three millions. The interest on their
discounts is more than the specie in their vaults.
Thus, it is apparent that the circulation of the State Banks is
at least seven times greater than their specie, and that, conse­
quently, they would be wholly unable to withstand any run,
which might drain them; and would be compelled to contract
their issues, diminish greatly the circulation, and throw into
utter confusion the business operations of the whole country, de­
preciating the value of property in proportion to the reduction
of the circulation. The Bank of the United States has less than
two dollars in outstanding notes, for one dollar of specie at com- *
mand. And what confidence is due even to the statements
made by State Banks may be gathered, from the late failure of
some, and the notorious shifts of others to make up accounts for
settling or reporting days. "There are, no doubt, many sound
and solvent State Banks, with honest, honourable, and conscien­
tious directors. But any bank, to which the aid of public
deposites is necessary for its safety, cannot be fit for a public
depository. Upon the real condition of all the State Banks
in the State of New York, the recent act of the Legislature,
taxing the people with the loan of six millions of dollars, to
save them from breaking, is a commentary of very unequivocal
significancy."*
* Speech of Mr^dams,

Digitized by

84
There is a constant tendency in the State Banks to over issue?*
This is repressive, only, by a power perpetually and uniformly
active, which, like gravity in the solar system, shall keep each
lantt in its orbit. This power is the Bank of the United States.
'he Secretary of the Treasury, in his letter to the Committee
of Ways and Means, seems reluctantly to admit this, but most
perversely infers, despite of the maxim, that the effect ceases
with the cause, that the Bank being discontinued, the re­
straint it produces, will remain. Thus he says: "If there be any
force in this argument, the paper currency furnished by the
State Banks, as well as that issued by the Bank of the United
States, ought now to be in a sound state. The Bank of the
United States has been in existence seventeen years, and must
have already exerted all the influence in relation to the curren­
cy which can ever be expected from such an institution. And if
it exercises a wholesome and salutary control over the conduct
of the State Banks, and restrains them within proper bounds,
it has had full time and opportunity to exert that power; and
the notes of the State Banks, as well as those of the Bank of the
United States, ought now to be found in a safe condition. For,
it must be admitted, that we have gained but little.in chartering
the United States Bank, if only the comparative small portion
of the paper currency furnished by itself is sound, while the
great mass of the circulating medium is inherently vicious and
liable to be disordered at any moment It is believed, that more
than three-fourths of the present paper currency is furnished by
the State Banks; and if so large a portion of our circulating me­
dium is unsafe and unworthy of credit, then the Bank of the
United States is incapable of exercising the salutary control
claimed for it, or it has failed to perform its duty to the public
In either event it is time to look for some other remedy."*
The style and logic of this article are equally admirable. It
is supposed, justly supposed, that the presence of the Bank of
the United States, like the sun in the system, vivifies, regu­
lates, and preserves the subordinate Banks,—and the Secretary
infers, that because it so does, the State Banks will continue,
truly and faithfully, to perform their revolution in their proper
orbits, when the Bank shall be no more. He urges, that if the
Bank produces soundness in the State Banks, the object of its
being has been attained, and therefore it may be dismissed as
useless,—and that, if it have not rendered the circulating me­
dium safe, it has failed in the purpose of its creation. He who
would say, that the power of gravity, having, for thousands of
years, preserved the order of the universe, has effected the de­
sign for which it was created, and that such order will continue,
though such power be withdrawn, would argue just as soundly.

?

* Letter bf Mr. Taney tQ Committee of Ways and Means, 1834.

Digitized by

85
Shortly after the hatching of this dilemma, the Secretary,
with the inconsistency so conspicuous in the report of his " Rea­
sons, " recognises the necessity of preserving the Bank, or of
creating a substitute, if the present currency be in a sound
and healthy state* But to avoid the utter discomfiture and
disgrace which are otherwise inevitable from this admission, he
denies the soundness of the currency; and by reason of the dis­
proportion of specie to (he paper circulation, the large quantity
of bank notes whose value is less than five dollars, and the impotency of the government of the United States to restrain these
issues, he infers, " that the condition of the currency is ob­
viously such, that the nation should not be content with it, nor
desire to continue it, in its present state." Not content with,
not desirous to continue in its present state, a currency which
is pronounced by every statesman who is not a disciple of Jacksonism, in this, and in every other country, to be better than a
metallic one! A currency which, in the very same paragraph,
the Secretary says, every one firmly believes will be paid in
coin! This is an issue upon which the Secretary, the adminis­
tration, and the party, have put themselves against the evidence
of truth and the interests of the nation. What man in the country
complained of the condition of the currency, one year since ?
Who thought of its condition, save those few thinking men who
produced it,—those who had leisure and taste to seek and admire
its causes,—anp1 those, who desired to destroy it,because it was a
jrood,not the work of their hands, and because it was an obstacle in
their path to evil? The currency is the blood of the social and com­
mercial system. Like that of the natural body it runs its course,
whilst in health, giving life and joy, but producing scarce a
consciousness of its own existence. It is when deranged, dis­
eased, that its stoppings, its throbs and throes, and revulsions,
make us feel and know its presence. In its healthy state, the
wise and discreet physician does not interfere with it. The
ignorant quack, unable to discriminate between the symptoms
of health and disease, alone has audacity to prescribe his nos­
trums, regardless whether they give life or death, if his interest
be served.
If the currency were not perfect, if the abundance of paper
of small denominations limited the use of silver; if the mis­
taken legislation of the country expelled gold from circulation,
these were evils which the people, ever awake to their inter­
ests, and ever competent to learn and promote them, would
have, in due season, fully remedied. Already, without the prompt­
ings of the general government, had the States commenced
the suppression of small notes; and so fast as the sense of the
true interests of the people prevailed over the interests of the
banks, this suppression would, and will, be extended. Be-

Digitized by

86
yond this, no effort, of the general government can avaiL For
though it may enforce the State banks, in its service, say one
hundredy to disuse notes under a designated amount, it will
have no influence over the remaining three hundred, and
fifty banks, whose pernicious issues, unchecked by a regulating
power, would be enlarged with decrease of competition. Al­
ready, had the nation called for the interference of the legisla­
ture; and, had General Jackson and his Secretary of the Trea­
sury been with the Pre-adamites, had the war against the Bank
never commenced, the measures in progress to retain gold in
the country would have been instituted.
But, says Mr. Taney, the currency is deranged; it is un­
sound, because liable to constant fluctuation; and the remedy
lies in the increase of the metallic bases, and, the reduction of
paper circulation. It is admitted, not that the currency is un­
sound, but that it may be improved, by those means, which the
sagacity of the nation had already discovered, and its wisdom
had engaged to supply. But to this purpose, the preservation of
the Bank of the United States is indispensable: because with it
will depart that soundness of the currency which we were
about to improve. The substance will be annihilated, with all
its modes of being. The measures, therefore, of the adminis­
tration will be destructive of all the ends which they profess
to attain, however effectual they may prove in the accomplish­
ment of those which are unavowed.
But the Secretary declares, that he does " not perceive, that
a Batik of the United States, upon any plan, is likely to
diminish the evil." And yet it is universally admitted, that
the Bank of the United States did circumscribe the issue, did,
in a word produce one of the very results desired. The
manner in which the Bank checks the issues of the State
Banks is equally simple and obvious. It consists in receiving
the notes of all which are solvent, and requiring payment from
time to time, without suffering the balance, due by any, to be­
come too large. This restricting agency being removed, what
is the substitute. Simply that, " After the 3d March, 1&36,
no Bank be used as the depository of the public money which
shall issue or pay out, notes below five dollars: and the notes
of no bank to be received in payment of debts due to the
United States Bank, which Bank shall issue and pay out notes
of a less denomination, than that above mentioned, after that
time; nor shall any bank be a depositary which does not pay
specie on demand for its notes."
Now, the inefficiency of this very plan is demonstrated by
the Secretary himself, in a few preceding paragraphs. "Gold
and silver," he «ays, truly, "will never circulate, where banks
issue notes, which come in competition with them. For it will

Digitized by

87
invariably happen, that when the circulating medium is com­
posed of different kinds of money, and one of them is less
valuable than the other, but not sufficiently depreciated to be
discredited, the inferior will, after a time, become the general
currency, and the more valuable will wholly disappear." The
mere exclusion, therefore, of the notes of the State banks,
which issue bills of small denominations, will be entirely in>
adequate. The only effect of that regulation will be, to render
them a depreciated currency; which, as the Secretary admits,
always, usurps the circulation. Every one will receive it for
sales, because they add a little to the price. Every one will take
it for doubtful debts, rather than go unpaid, and every one will
pass it off again for fear of loss. *
But suppose the mean offered, to effect a desirable purpose,
be useful and be made effective by the co-operation of the
States, a measure extremely problematical, what is to prevent
it from being quite efficient when applied through the United
States Bank? As that Bank acts uniformly and simultaneously,
throughout the Union,, can there be a doubt, that the effect
would be more prompt and universal? But give it all the re­
sults predicted, what is to compensate for the unrestrained is­
sues of all other notes, which all admit may, and which we
gay, must, ensue the dissolution of the United States Bank?
If the past had not ceased to be the monitor of the future,
if experience were not wholly rejected as a guide, we would
appeal to history to support us in the declaration, that there is
no compensation. But, if it be the interest of our rulers to
close their eyes to this light, it is not that of the people.
During the existence of the first Bank of the United States,
we had a sound currency, uniform taxation, and stable ex­
changes. In January, 1811, there were in the United States,
including the national Bank, eighty-five banks, whose capital
amounted to fifty-two millions, five hundred and ten thousand
dollars; notes in circulation to twenty-eight millions; species
to fifteen millions. In 1S11, we destroyed the Bank, and de­
prived the country of a capital of seven millions, which, out
of ten, belonged to foreigners. In 1816, in five years we had
two hundred and forty-two State banks, with a capital of ninetyone millions; notes in circulation, sixty-six and a half millions;
and specie, nineteen millions. Our currency became deranged,
specie payments suspended, depreciation immense, and ex­
change fluctuating from six to twenty-five per cent. We re­
created the Bank in 1816, and, on the first of January, 1820,
there were three hundred and two Banks, including that of the
United States, with a capital of more than one hundred and
thirty-three millions; a circulation of notes of less than fortyfour millions; and specie exceeding nineteen millions. Thus
♦Speech of Mr. Wilde.

Digitized by

88
the amount of notes in circulation was one million less than
immediately before the suspension of specie payments; and
twenty-three millions less, than in 1S16. Has not the Bank
of the United States, then, at all periods of its existence, cir­
cumscribed and preserved, within due bounds, the issues of the
State banks, and have not the State banks at all times, when
unrestrained, made their issues excessive?*
The public feels that there is no security against this evil.
It has learned it from experience; and this very feeling, this
distrust of their paper, is the very evil, the very serious
evil, which the State banks have to encounter. They know
that confidence in them is far greater where there exists a
power elsewhere to prevent excess and depreciation. Such a
power, therefore, is friendly to their best interests. It gives
confidence and credit to them, one and all. Hence, a vast
majority of the State banks, nearly all, perhaps, except those,
which expect to be objects of particular favour, desire the con­
tinuance of a national bank, as an institution highly useful to
themselves, t
Is not the threatened, the onward course of things now tend­
ing directly to the state of 1816 ? Has not every effort bee?:
made, through the public officers, the press, and every other
mode of influence, to cause the multiplication of State banks ?
Has it not, every where, been urged upon the people to establish
State banks, independent banks, to supply the place of the Na­
tional Bank? Behold the result. Of late there have been
otiblished, banks, with the following amounts of capital, in the
Slates of,
Maine
$ 100,000
Vermont
600,000
Rhode Island,
1,000,000
Connecticut, 600,000
N e w Jersey,
100,000
N e w York, - 4,000,000
Pennsylvania,
4,400,000
Maryland,
500,000
North Carolina, 2,800,000
South Carolina,
500,000
Mississippi,
700,000
Louisiana,
- 12,000,000
Tennessee,
5,000,000
Kentucky,
- 5,000,000
Ohio,
4,000,000
Indiana,
- 1,600,000
g 42,900,000
* (iailatuVs Essay on Bankinj and Currency.
f Webster's Remarks in Senate, 1&34.

Digitized by

89
* But we are not to stop, here, with four hundred andfiftyBanks
in actual operation, with a circulation of one hundred millions of
notes, with a great many more about to go into operation; but
multitudes of propositions are before the State legislatures for new
charters; and the system will continue to spread and increase.
Each of these banks will strive to extend its circulation, and
will endeavour to avoid specie payments; the more rotten and
worthless they are, the more strenuous will be their efforts for
these purposes.
But whence does the executive derive the right, so boldly as­
sumed) of providing the country with a currency, whether pa­
per or metallic ? This assumption is in every point of view
illegal—so palpably illegal, that the majority of the Committee
of Ways and Means of the House of Representatives have not
ventured, notwithstanding their efforts to cover the Secretary of
the Treasury, in every other point, to support him in this.
They disclaim for him the right, which not only he, but the
President of the United States, had distinctly and repeatedly
asserted.
The minority of the Committee of Ways and Mean* have
thus conclusively disposed of this branch of the subject*
u
The value of the measure, as an operation of finance, to expel one currency
«nd to introduce a better, has been already tested, in the short time that hat
elapsed since the order of removal The discounts of the Bank hare been par­
tially reduced, yet the circulation of the Bank, instead of being diminished, has,
increased. The local bank paper* except for local purposes, has generally depre­
ciated, and the paper of the Bank of the United States h* at par m all places exoept where it is above par. But without adverting farther to fhe- incompetency
of the means proposed to attain the end, it is an imputation upon the Congress
of 1816 to say they intended to authorize the Secretary of the Treasury to use
amy means whatever for the attainment of such an end, Hoe avowed purpose of
the Secretary is to change the currency of the coon try, and to change H daring
the very time in which Congress have made a different provision in regard to it
The purpose is to be effected by compelling the Bank of the United States to
cease lending, and by enabling the deposit banks to lend; by compelling the one
to cease circulating bank notes, and enabling the others to circulate them more
extensively. In fine, by compelling them all to give him* indirectly the managetnent of banks, without any law to warrant it, and to surrender it themselves, con­
trary to the laws by which they are exclusively entitled to H. A power to do this
no Congress could lawfully give to a Secretary of the Treasury, and no Congress
therefore should be presumed to have given it* It is a delegation of the highest
powers of legislation, under the form of ministerial agency. If there b any legis­
lative power which demands more circumspection in its use than any other, it is
that of regulating the currency. The currency is the measure of value of every
man's property* of his contracts, of indemnity for the breach of them, and of the
revenue of the country ; and without a due adjustment of it, it is a hopeless effort
to distribute in equal proportion among the citizens either the burdens or advan­
tages of civil eociety. A deranged currency deranges every institution of the
country that has any relation to property. It makes laws, promises, the verdicts
of juries and the judgments of courts, speak unintentionally the language of
falsehood or deceit It gives a p remramto fraud, and strips honest labour of its
scanty earnings, by paying te> it half of its just recompense in the false and connterfeit name of the whole. Yet this power the Secretary of the Treasury claims
to exercise, by delegation from the representatives of the people, and he has proH

Digitized by

Google

90
eeeded to the exercise of it, with consequences which are now spreading in a ware
of destruction over the whole country. The Secretary claims the power to re*
move the public deposites from the Bank, if in any degree it tends to promote the
convenience of the people; that is to say, if h so tends in his opinion; and him
opinion, with this mighty lever of the public revenue, it, consequently, to away
the universal interests of this immense people. And what are the direct e n dences that Congress meant to give the Secretary of the Treasury any such
power ? He is not by law entrusted with the custody of a single dollar of the
public treasure. His hands do not legally receive it, and cannot legally hold it.
His duty is to prepare plans for the management and improvement of the revenue,
to prepare estimates of the revenue and expenditures, te superintend the collection
of the revenue, to decide on the forms of keeping and stating accounts, and to
grant warrants in pursuance of appropriations by law. The notes of the Bank
of the United States, against which this battery is directed, he is bound by law to
protect, by requiring all public collectors to receive them in all payments to the
United States. 1 be stock of the nation in the Bank of the United States he can­
not sell, nor separate their interest, to the extent of seven millions, from that of
the other stockholders of the Bank. The payment of the interest and principal
of the public debt must be made bT and through the Bank, as commissioners of
loans. The military pensions must be paid through the same channel. And thus,
while several permanent laws of Congress, without any limitation in point of time,
sustain the circulation of the Bank, the relations between the Bank and the Trea­
sury, and the control thus obtained over the currency of the country, the Secre­
tary of the Treasury, under a provisional clause in the Bank charter, to order
that the deposites of the public moneys shall not be made there, claims the
authority to break up the present system, and to substitute another, for regulating
the currency and property of twenty-four States, and thirteen millions of people.
The minority do not believe that a like attempt has ever before been made, with <
or without authority, and all present indications are inconceivably deceptive, if
the result shall not afford a memorable warning against the like attempt again.
The Secretary's plan is now called an experiment. The name is adopted, be­
cause it would seem only to defer, and not absolutely to destroy, the hope of ohimate safety. It is adopted, because it would seem to make those who prosecute
it responsible for less, because they promise less. But the change of name
changes neither the thing nor the responsibility for it. If it be an experiment*
what law, what principle of our civil associations, authorizes the Treasury De­
partment to try such an experiment? What security does Government afford te
the property of the citizens, if the Treasury may try experiments with it? If it
be an experiment, what authorized its trial in a day of unusual prosperity, and
when the only rational prayer to the civil ruler was, *let us alone ?'* What jus.
titles its continuance, when the first test that has been cast into the crucible with
the precious materials of human happiness, has nearly decomposed them all, and
threatens to convert them into poisons that will corrode and canker the country
to its very heart ? It is no longer an experiment It has been tried, exposed, and
ought to be rejected. It is no longer an experiment, unless k would deserve the
name of an experiment to try whether life can be supported without vital uir, or
the labourer and his children without daily bread.
"If it should finally happen, in the progress of the experiment, that a currency
is created such as the Secretary anticipates, what is that currency to be to the
country, and what is the country to be by means of k? This question may be
answered by our own history, as it might be answered without the aid of history.
It is not to be a national currency, nor a eurreney partly local, and partly na­
tional, maintained every where in the condition of equality, by a universally per­
vading influence, but it is to be a variety of local currencies, subject to local influ­
ence only. The State Banks, and the State Banks only, are to furnish i t They
are to furnish it under the patronage of the Treasury, and with a full knowledge
of the maxims which have been quoted by the conunktee,' that the borrower is
the servant of the lender? and that 4 he who controls a bank, controls the debtors
of a bank? maxims which will be found to lose none of their force when State
banks shall feel the effect of their position as borrowers of the Treasury, and

Digitized by

91
debtors shall feel it also at borrowers of State banks that we under the control
* of the Treasury.
44
It will be a currency wholly removed from that restraint which a national
institution is alone capable of imposing in all parts of the Union, that is to say r
free from all banking restraint whatever; for, practically, there can be no restraint
where there is no general and pervading power to enforce i t In some, perhaps
in several, of the untrammelled and independent State banks, banking will be
conducted upon judicious principles, so far as it regards their own operations; and
their own local currency may continue for a time locally sound. But where shall
be the controlling cause that shall secure this result, where the principles of bank­
ing are unsound, and where the desire of larye profits shall tempt State banks to
extend their issues beyond that measure which experience has ascertained to be
the only safe and accurate measure? Where is to be found the universal pre­
sence of a test that will instantly detect excess, and lead to its detection? That
test is to be found in a national paper, based upon the precious metals, sustained
by the law of the whole land, received in payment of all public dues, circulating
every where, and furnishing a standard of comparison every where. Where,
again, is to be round the necessity, as well as the power, of applying the correc­
tive ? This corrective is to be found in an institution which issues that national
paper, and which, in self-defence, and in defence of the nation also, must repress
the circulation of every bank that does not provide it with the means of disburs­
ing the public treasure in all parts of the United States. The paper that is really
sound, will be as good as its own, and will be received as such, and may circulate
as such. But if the paper of any one of the State banks is not as good as its
own, such an institution cannot receive it, because it cannot account for it every
where to Government, in an equal amount of its own paper or of specie. If it
cannot be received by the national institution, it must return to those who issue
it, and the corrective is at once applied.
** The system of local banks, of which those to be employed by the Treasury
are to form a part, is, therefore, defective in this, that their circulation will be
local. They will be constantly endeavouring, at least in a great many cases, to
send out their paper to excess, and there cannot be the regular application of the
corrective, that will as constantly prevent i t It may be repressed in some in­
stances, in an irregular way, by sound State banks; it may also be partially re­
pressed by demands from other States; but the effort to do it regularly, will be
without inducement, and will not be sustained by the requisite ability. Excess
will creep upon the country until it is universally diffused; and when an acciden­
tal state of the balances shall turn the excess suddenly back upon the banks which
have issued it, dishonor will come, and with it universal alarm and bankruptcy.
This is the history of the past, and a lesson for the future. A confederation of
State Banks, sanctioned by the laws of the States, is a scheme ^hich the minority
do not think it necessary to combat, until some one shall propose it, and present
its outlines. An attempt to regulate the currency by the operations ef State
Banks, through private compacts, with each other, or with the Treasury Depart­
ment, will probably fail, however often repeated, as it has failed already. A part­
nership of different corporations, for profit and loss, or for mutual guaranty, with
independent boards of direction, is as strange a contrivance for the security of
stockholders, as it is for the control and regulation of the currency. When the
question of providing a regulation for the currency shall be deliberately consider­
ed, the minority have no doubt that the project of employing State banks for
national purposes will be universally rejected as impracticable.*'

With regard to the employment of the State banks, as the
agents of the general government, there are other views of
grave character which richly merit consideration, and which
we present in the words of Mr. Corwin of Ohio.
" But suppose your league of Treasury banks should succeed in establishing
their credit so as to give general currency to their paper; will not those banks*
in that way, by loans and exchanges, gain the same power and control over the

Digitized by

M
business and trade of the country, which, you say, it now possessed by (he United
States Bank—that dangerous power,forthe possession of which, you say, it must
be abolished 7 And what is gained by exchanging the one for the other ? What
will your condition be when your league banks shall be able to crush, if they
choose, the trade of the country ? Can you strike them out of existence ? No !-~
over them and their charters you have no control. The State Legislatures gave
them life, and will, at their pleasure, prolong their existence. Suppose their char*
ters expire; they are your Treasury agents; they will then be indispensable U>
your system of finance. Will they consent to expire ? Will not the stockholders
in them be just as anxious for a renewal of their charters, as the owners of stock
in the United States Bank now are for a renewal of theirs ? Yes, Sir, they will,
and they will be just as little scrupulous about the means employed to obtain their
end. This image with a hundred heads, Which you are now erecting, will be just
as difficult to destroy, as the monster you profess so much to fear. The impure
priesthood of Mammon will clamour just as loudly for their hundred-headed idol
god, as do those now whom you profess to regard with so much horror. You will
find, when the discovery will be too late, that possessing stock in a State bank
does not of itself make a Cato, nor owning the same property in the United States
Bank convert a good citizen into a Catiline.
M
There is another view of the dangerous connexion between the Executive
Government here and the banks of the States, which I cannot pass without no­
tice. If your scheme ever does succeed, if it works well in your fiscal affairs al
all, it will of course be desirable to continue it in steady operation for a long time
to come. But there will be obstacles to this. The charters of some of your banks'
will terminate. The Secretary of the Treasury will, of course, desire to have
these charters renewed by the Legislatures of the States in which they are
situated. To effect this, toe influence of the bank will be first exerted on the
Treasury Department here, by offering to do your business on very advantageous
terms; the Secretary of the Treasury, with the aid of the power, popularity, and
influence of the President for the time being, will bear down upon your State
Legislatures: one vote, or two, or three, may, perhaps,, decide the fate of your
bank. Will not those votes be secured ? Yes, the whole patronage of the Federal
Government in this scheme, from time to time, win* be tempted into the legislative
halls of the States. We have heard mu h of consolidation; much of the danger
of merging the independence of the States in the overwhelming power of the
Federal Government If the wit of man were tasked to invent a cunning, insls
dious plan, by which this ruin might be wrought, he could not devise ene more
likely to effect his diabolical purpose than that proposed in this Treasury inven­
tion. Give the Executive the power to confer favours on so many different companies of men, who also stand closely connected with the State Governments,
and you have so n&ny centripetal forces, drawing, by the resistless influence o f
pecuniary interest, the independence of the States into the vortex of Federalcontrol. These twenty-four states, that now shine, with such mild and pure lustre,
will be drawn from their spheres, and their lights quenched forever in the superior
blaze of one great central sun."

And, now, let us also see, how this State-bank currency is toaffect the dealers of the Middle, South, and South-western States.
On this head, we will be instructed by Mr. Poindexter.
u
The merchants of the Middle States, the Southern, South-western, and Wes­
tern States, supply themselves with foreign merchandise, for the annual supply or
their customers, at this great emporium of commerce. How, Sir, do they make'
their remittances in payment of these goods ? At present, through the medium of
a National Bank, they may, without difficulty, deposit their local State paper, the
' credit of which is good where it is issued, in a Branch Bank of the United States,
and obtain a check on any part of the United States, however remote, at a very
small discount, not exceeding one per cent. They do not run the risk of a protest
as in the case of bills of exchange drawn by individuals, or a company of mer­
chants ; they run no risk in transmitting such a check by mail, because, if lost,

Digitized by

m
it may be renewed, and the holder cannot demand payment without the endorse*
ment of the person in whose favour it was drawn. Thus the intercourse between
the Western country and New York, or the other commercial cities on the sea­
board, can be carried on without risk, and fbr a very small premium, by means of
a National Bank and a general currency. But let us look at the other aide of the
picture. Suppose this great point, which is made a deiideratum in the policy of
this administration, of prostrating the Bank of the United States, should prevail,
we shall then be thrown back upon the local State currency, and the ordinary
means of remittances, through the medium of bills of exchange. 8uppose, under
this state of things, a merchant in Natchez, or Mobile, or New Orleans, should
become debtor for goods, wares, and merchandise, to an importing merchant in
the city of New York, payable in six and twelve months. He sells his goods to
his customers, and receives in payment the sound currency of the State in which
they are sold, (and he can obtain payment in no other currency.)
" Well, Sir, be takes with him these bank notes, issued by banks which have
more specie in their vaults than notes in circulation; equal, in the amount of their
solid capital, to any institution of the kind in the < <rkl, and offers them, in pay­
ment of his debt, to the New York merchant. And what, Sir, will he be told ?
Why, Sir, the cautious merchant would say to him—' lio into Wall street, and
whatever your paper is worth at the brokers, I will take it at the same rate of
discount, but give me the note of a pet bank in this city, and I will take it at par.*
The Wall street broker would exhibit to the applicant a regular graduated lbt of
the value of bank paper from Fassamaquoddy to the Belize; this scale, Sir, will
be regulated to suit the taste of the Wall street brokers, who, without the inter­
vention of a national currency, will take the command and control of the fiscal
concerns of this country. New York bank paper would far transcend in value
the bank paper of any other State in the Union; it would find pasture in all that
vast region of country where the retail merchant is a debtor for foreign goods
purchased in the New York market; it would be sought fbr there, and even
bought at a premium by all who desired to make remittances to the city of New
York. What, Sir, has been the progress of this system since the removal of the
public deposits ? We find that already the bank paper of the whole Western and
Southern country is below par in the Northern cities, at from five to ten per cent.
This inequality will increase rather than diminish, as the system advances to
maturity. Besides this unfavourable oporation on the whole interior of the Union,
itfr manifest that the exchange capital of the country must be deposited in New
iftrk, and other great commercial cities, where the rate of discount on the domes­
tic exchangee of the country will be fixed so as to produce the best practicable
profit to those who deal in them. Now, by the agency ot a general cuirency, the
people who reside beyond the mountains, in the great valley of the Mississippi,
may transfer their funds without risk, and at a small expense, *to any portion of
the United States; but if they are driven, by the destruction of this currency, to
the necessity of making their remittances in local bank paper or bills of exchange,
they must inevitably sustain an annual loss of from six to ten per cent, on the
whole amount of these remittances."
s

But, from elements such as these, we are to have not only a
sounder currency than that furnished by the Bank of the United
States, but, God save the mark! a hard money currency! When
the peal of indignation swelled from every portion of the coun­
try against the injustice committed on the United States Bank,
and the reasons concocted by the President and his Secretary
were scouted as impudent and illusory, the ground of defence
was changed; and though prior to the first of October, no inti­
mation was given of an intention to endeavour the introduction
of a metallic currency, we are now told, that the government is
making an experiment whether they cannot substitute for one

Digitized by

94
of the best currencies in the world, a currency of coin, sn in
France. And in this experiment, the ease, the happiness, the
bread of millions are to be jeoparded.
This object, however, is no sooner declared, than with the
inconsistency inseparable from error and wrong, its impractica­
bility is demonstrated by the Secretary himself. *' No com­
mercial or manufacturing community,*' he observes, "could
conduct its business to any advantage without a liberal system
of credit, and a facility of obtaining money on loan, when the
exigencies of their business require it. This cannot be obtain-1
ed without the aid of a paper circulation founded on credit.
It is therefore not the interest of the country to put down the
paper currency altogether!!
" The great object should be to give it a foundation on which
it will safely stand. {On what rests the present currency which
is every where, at will, without cost, convertible into specie?)
a circulating medium composed of paper and gold and silver in
just proportions (What other is the present?) would not beliable
to be constantly disordered by the accidental embarrasmenta
or imprudencies of trade—nor by a combination of the monied
interest for political purposes." (These assertions are disproved
by our present condition; by the combination of the New
York Safety Fund banks, and by the combination of banks
in the service of the government.)
" The state of the currency, then," he continues, (€ which is
proposed in the foregoing observations, would provide silver
and gold for ordinary domestic purposes and the smaller pay­
ments—and the banks of the different States would easily be
able to furnish exchanges between distant places according to
the wants of commerce. (Furnish exchanges! Certainly, Q*
in 1816, at from 6 to25 percent.) There cannot, therefore, be
any necessity Tor a paper circulation of general credit through­
out the country. Funds are more conveniently and safely trans­
ferred, from place to place, by drafts and bills of exchange,
than by bank notes. (In what way does the Bank of the
United Stages perform exchanges to the amount of two hundred and fifty-five millions annually?) * * * * * "The
chief object of the plan, I propose, is to increase the proportion
of the metallic currency without diminishing inconveniently
the general mass of the circulating medium, and any provi­
sion tending to enlarge the proportion of paper beyond what
the public convenience requires should be studiously avoided.
Now, again, we say, what was the currency lately prevail­
ing? Was it not based on a metallic basis, which was on the
increase, and to be enlarged by the very means now proposed*
The fruition of which, no measures of the administration wilt

Digitized by

j

Google ^

95
hasten. And was not the enlargement of paper beyond the
requisition of public convenience sedulously avoided?
But is it in contempt of our intellects, or from the inep­
titude of his own, that we are told by the Secretary, that
a paper circulation founded on credit, is indispensable to a
commercial and manufacturing community; and that there can­
not be any necessity (profit for that is commercial necessity,)
for a paper circulation of general credit throughout the coun­
try? Upon this point we oppose President Madison to Secre­
tary Taney, a giant to a pigmy. " But for the interests of the
community at large," says the President, in his Message of
December, 1816, "as well as the purposes of the Treasury, it
is essential that the nation should possess a currency of equal
value, credit and use, wherever it may circulate." A thou­
sand illustrations of the falsity and absurdity of the position of
the Secretary could be given. It is enough to say, that, with
a bill) of general credit throughout the country, (a draft of the
United States Bank, for instance,) we can procure specie wher­
ever it exists, at half per cent, cost, and that for a bill of local
credit, (of a bank in Missouri or Albany,) we must pay a
premium (if the Bank of the United States be no more,) of from
twelve to fifteen per cent. And this great per centage is the
difference on the profit of the merchant or consumer, and an
onerous tax on the industry of the country.
Thus, then, though it be impossible to employ the State
banks with safety or profit to the country, and though a me­
tallic currency is neither practicable nor desirable, the one is to
be obstinately persevered in, though it ruin the nation, because
it will increase the power of the government; and the other,
that the eyes of the people, dazzled and blinded, may not see
their approaching destruction.
Again: this paper circulation must form the far larger por­
tion of our currency; and, therefore, instead of a sound and
uniform currency, so much admired in a commercial commu­
nity, the Secretary is avowedly labouring to give us a hundred
currencies, to introduce expense, delay, irresistable confusion
and irregularity in all commercial transactions. During the
suspension of specie payments, the currency of the several
States varied, " not only from time to time, but at the same
time, from State to State, and in the same State, from place to
place. In New England, where these payments were not dis­
continued, the currency was equal in value to specie, it was, at
the same, time at a discount of seven per cent in New York
and Charleston, of fifteen in Philadelphia, of twenty and
twenty-five in Baltimore and Washington, with every possible
variation in other places and States."*
There is another result of this operation which we have al* Gallatin on Banking, &c.

Digitized by

06
ready touched, bat which merits further notice. It is the de­
pendence and subservience of the State Bank?, selected by the
Secretary, upon the government —upon the party. To effect
this, we have just reason to believe, is the true motive of the
disastrous measures against the Bank; and the contracts made
by the Secretary with them, put them, wholly, at his mercy; mak­
ing them the vassals of the administration; enabling it, through
them, to operate upon the stockholders and their debtors.
Upon this head, we select the following just and apposite
remarks, from the able exposition of Mr. Southard, in Senate,
on the 8th January, 1894.
** The extent of power and influence which this act draws to the Secretary, ud
through him to the Executive, upon his avowed principles, is enormous, dangerooi
to the interests of the people and the liberties of the country. It places all the
selected banks, and, through them, many other State institutions, at the mercy of
the Secretary of the Treasury. He may, at will, require security for the public
money, or he may require none. He may require the payment of heavy expenses
and compensation for his agencies, and fasten them on whom he chooses. He
may decide, at pleasure, which of them must transfer money from one extreme
of the Union to another, and when and where they shall transfer it—acts which
they may, and probably will, be incompetent to perform; and he may discharge
them, without warning, from the service of the Government. All this he may do
for causes entirely unconnected with the business of the Treasury, and in no way
concerning the public interest There is no responsibility upon him—they have
no means of resistance. And his power of favoritism, in the deposite of moneyi
distribution of duties, and compensation, is as unlimited as his power of injury
and injustice; and he has every possible temptation to its exercise for the worst
of purposes. Subservience to his will will become the ready and sure road to
benefits. Sir, the very act is calculated to create an army of servile sycophants
and supporters. Whether it will produce that result is yet to be shown. Tbj
promptness with which the representatives of some of the banks have volunteered
their defence of him, and the manner in which his favour was received by at
least one, gives no very auspicious augury as to the result, but too clearly indi­
cates the effect upon their dispositions. The Secretary was rery promptly*
informed of "the high sense entertained by the Directors of one of the banks, of
the honour conferred upon it by so distinguished a mark of his confidence"—*
quick stooping to degradation.
u
This state of things is prescribed, not by the Legislature, but by a Secretary,
and is not dependent upon and regulated by law, but by his discretion* And the
man who presumes thus to act, tells Congress that his acts are under the controoi
of the President He says, in effect, ** I have no official will—the President may
order me as he pleases—the whole is at the command of the President" *j
there has been a larger or more dangerous stretch of Executive power ana
influence, I have not discovered it If Senators are prepared to meet the conse­
quences of such an assumption, they have but to approve the reasons of the Sec­
retary. The day is not long passed by, when it would have met the deep-toned
execrations of the present supporters of Executive infallibility.
41
The law which created the Bank, which directed where and how the pubJi*
treasure was tf> be kept, and what was to be done, did not so regulate this subject
The intercourse between the Government and the Bank, in relation to the public
money, was fixed and authorized by law. The acts directed to be done,**
omitted, were, under it, matters of leeal right, not of Executive faaour* *"d
law was paramount aud triumphant. There was no temptation to favouritism *
corruption. But, under the recent innovation, while such unlimited powers arc
exercised by the Secretary and the Executive, there must be favouritism a0"
corruption. I have no faith to bestow on the purity of individual virtue, acting
without law, in the midst of such temptations. Much less can I approve of coft*

Digitized by

97
<£uct in a Secretary so violative of all law, and leading so directly to encroach­
ments which are dangerous to the liberties which we enjoy/7

On the other hand, so odious was this slavery, that manybanks refused to assume the yoke; and others, finding it intol­
erable, have indignantly cast it from their necks.
The use which the Secretary and the administration, might,
and would make, of the public money, to enslave these banks
is aptly illustrated by the " transfer drafts," issued for no
fiscal purpose—for no government use, but, solely, to protect
the pet or trap banks, against a suppositious hostility of the
Bank of the United States. This protection is the price paid
by the lord to the villein for his most abject service, binding
him to all labours, and at all times.
A favourable opportunity here presents itself, to notice the
manner in which the war has been conducted against the Bank
of the United States.
44
The act of removal has not only been an act of declared hostility, but it has
been preceded and followed by all the customary practices of embittered war.
T h e Bank has never been directly apprised of any thing that the Treasury pur­
posed to carry into effect against her. If made aware of it, it has been through
rumours in the streets, or hints iu the newspapers, and never from the Treasury
Department, until the moment that the blow was given. The determination to
remove the deposites has not, to this day, been made known to the Bank by
any official communication from the Treasury; no evidence certainly of such a
communication has been sent to this House. An order of the 26th September,
1833, by the Secretary to the President of the Bank, to deliver to the collector at
Philadelphia all bonds to the United States, payable on or after the 1st of Octo­
ber, was the only annunciation to the Bank in Philadelphia; and this, by the collectors's letter of the 28th, would seem to have been communicated to the Bank
on the 30th of September. Yet, it is now known, that the removal of the deposites
was a foregone conclusion a considerable time before that.
44
The times and amounts in which the deposites were to be drawn by the Trea­
sury, were, not only not made known, but, concealed from the Bank. The Trea­
surer had been for years in the practice of sending daily lists to the Bank of
every draft drawn upon it, stating both the date and the amounts, without the
names of the holders; and he also sent weekly lists of the drafts, with the par­
ticulars in every point These were the suggestions of amity to assist the Bank,
by the fullest information of the Treasury purposes. But, as soon as the policy
of the Treasury Department was altered, and a hostile attitude assumed, the
practice of daily and weekly lists was continued; but they did not speak the
whole truth- Drafts to an immense amount were withheld from the lists, to be
used according to contingencies, and at points where the Bank might or might
not be prepared to meet them; and the daily and weekly lists consequently be­
came instruments of deception to the Bank. The Bank was left to ascertain
and prepare for the Treasury demand, with deceptive information as to its extent1**

An attempt has been made to consider these drafts, for two mil­
lions three hundred thousand dollars, as mere transfers, as direc­
tions, from the Treasury Department to the Bank, to send a
particular sum of public money from one place to another, for
the public, not private use, as drafts designed to change the position, not the custody of the public money. But the Secre­
tary, in his report to the Senate of the SOth November, has him* Speech of Mr. Binney.

Digitized by

98
self, put the true impress upon the transaction; declaring that,
" he has transferred money, in some instances, from the Bank
of the United States, to the selected banks, in order to enable
them to defend the community against the unwarrantable at­
tempts (attempts never made, every Bank bearing testimony
to the unexpected forbearance of the Bank J of the Bank of
the United States, to produce a state of general embarrassment
and distress."
Defender of the community! Protector of the people! When
and how were attributes like these given to the Secretary of the
Treasury? By what law? If the administration can, under
pretence of protecting the people, assume, unrebuked, unmnished, to loan to individuals or corporate institutions mil*
ions of their money, it will not be long before we shall have
given, the protection of the people, as vouchers for the illegal
expenditure of millions. Well may it be said " that the ine­
vitable tendency of power is its own enlargement." These
drafts, informally and illegally framed and sanctioned, for money
lawfully deposited in the treasury, were given, secretly given,
to cashiers, to be used at their discretion, upon contingencies affecting their institutions, of which they, alone, were judges,
and which had no relation to the public service. What securi­
ty existed against their abuse? What pledge against their ille­
gal conversion to the use of the cashiers themselves? Had such
conversion been made, no claim would have existed against the
Banks under their respective contracts, or against the sureties
on the cashiers' bonds. The banks would not have been liable
for money which they had not received, and the condition of
the cashiers' bonds embrace no such trust. Can it be for an in­
stant doubted, that soulless institutions, whose constituency re­
lieves them in a great measure from moral obligation, whose
spring of action is pecuniary interest, receiving favours like
these, the gratuitous loan of millions to defend their credit, will
not be the ready, the remorseless instruments of the power that
fosters them? Can it be, that such institutions will not combine
to make themselves, their stockholders, and their debtors, the
partizans, the creatures of the administration, adding hundreds
of thousands to the army of fifty thousand mercenaries which
the newly established tenure of office has supplied to the Exe­
cutive? It matters not to our view of the case, that a portion,
only, of these drafts were used, and the remainder returned to
the treasury.
So conscious, indeed, has the party become, that this influence
over the State banks will not be tolerated by the country, that
the Committee of Ways and Means, now,propose, in legitimating
the use of these Banks, to provide against this abuse; prohibit­
ing the Secretary of the Treasury, " during the session of Con-

f

Digitized by

99
gress, to dismiss from the service of the Treasury any Bank of
deposit, without having first obtained the sanction and approba­
tion of Congress; and if during the recess of Congress any
Bank shall fail or refuse to comply with the terms and conditions
upon which it has been employed, or if the Secretary shall
deem it necessary, during the recess of Congress, in order to
protect the public interest, to discontinue any Bank as a public
depository, he is to be authorized to issue such order, tempora­
rily, but required, at the commencement of the next session to
report to Congress, the reason and evidence upon which he has
ordered such discontinuance, reserving to Congress the right to
approve or reverse such order." This does but embody the spi­
rit of the provision, in the charter of the Bank of the United
States, giving power to the Secretary to remove the deposites
from that institution; and, surely, if that provision have been
mocked and disregarded, although its sense was as visible as if
written with a " pencil of phosphorus," we cannot have any
guarantee from words, mere words, that the prescribed duty
will be fulfilled. W hen the spirit of the law is contemned, its
words are but a caput mortuum.
But reasons and evidence!
Why, after it has been "announced from a source high in the
confidence of the administration, that the removal of the depo­
sites was a measure so manifestly wrong, and had been produc­
tive of consequences so injurious, that the error would have
been redressed by a vote of two-thirds of each House, if it had
not been discussed as a party question," what faith is to be
given to reasons and evidence? Any collocation of ideas, perti­
nent or impertinent, in juxta position or in chance medley,
will stand for reasons; and any statement of facts, true or simu­
lated, will serve for evidence.
The law requires the deposites of the public moneys to be
made in the Bank of the United States and its branches, unless
the Secretary of the Treasury shall otherwise direct. When
once made, there his authority, as conferred by the charter,
ceases. He has no authority over them, whatever; except
according to the provisions of the constitution and the general
laws. The provision of the constitution attaches to them, which
forbids any money to be drawn from the Treasury, unless in
consequence of appropriations made by law. All the laws
which forbid the transfer of moneys appropriated for one object,
to be applied to another, likewise attach to it; and the Secretary
of the Treasury has no lawful authority to draw money from its
place of deposite, except for the purpose of making the payment
to which it is appropriated.
The Secretary alleges that the charter confers upon him no
new power. No new power? It was the power to dispense
with law. How could he possess it before the law was enacted?
* Speeph of Mr, Cbtftpft AJte»,

Digitized by

100
It was a power to cancel a contract between the nation and the
Bank. How could he possess it before the contract was made?
And as he could not exercise it before the statute was enacted,
so neither could he exercise it after the enactment of the statute,
had it not been conferred by the statut^ itself; and he was bound
to exercise it according to the provisions, and under the limita­
tions prescribed by the statute. The limitation of his power was
to give order that the deposites should cease to be made in the
Bank and its branches; and for this he was required to give, as
speedily as possibly, his reasons to Congress. His power was
prospective over moneys to be deposited. When once depo­
sited, he could draw them from their places of deposit only in
consequence of appropriations made by law.
It is said that the power of removing the public moneys from
one place of deposite to another, has always been exercised by
the Secretary of the Treasury. This is a power, which no one
doubts, of making remittances; incidental to the obligation of
paying out the public moneys according to their respective
appropriations; without which the public creditors could not be
paid, and for which no law requires that the Secretary should
assign to Congress any reason whatever. But such we have
seen is not the nature of the present removal. That is a colour­
able transaction, for the purpose of loaning appropriated public
moneys to brittle favourite banks, without charge of interest,
while those very same banks were loaning Ho another depart­
ment of the Government, money at an interest of five or six per
cent*
The employment of the State banks as the substitute of the
Bank of the United States, being, as we think, the end and aim
of the Executive movement in the Treasury Department, we
have given it a considerable portion of our attention. We now
proceed to consider the Secretary's facts warranting the exercise
of the power which he has, with as little of justice as of law,
deduced for himself.
I. The charter of the Bank, the Secretary asserts, will ex­
pire on the 3d of March, 1836, and will not be renewed. Here
are two very distinct propositions. The first is true, sub modof
only. Though the charter expires, for certain purposes, on
that day, it survives for other purposes, and for the very pur"
poses which the Secretary supposes it does not live to execute.
For "notwithstanding the expiration of the term for which the
said corporation is created, it shall be lawful to use the corpo­
rate name and style and capacity for the purpose of suits fir
the final settlement and liquidation of the affairs 6*"^
counts of the corporation, and for the sale and disposition °
their estate, real, personal, and mixed; but not for any ol»e*j
purpose, or in any other manner whatsoever, nor for a pen°
* Mr. Adams' Speech.

Digitized by

101
exceeding two years after the expiration of the said term of
incorporation." [Act 1816, See. 21.] Consequently, there it
no one operation which he wishes to compel the Bank, now, to
perform, that it cannot most appropriately perform, in the ad­
ditional two years. It may reduce its discounts in any ratio, ch>
cum8tances may require, may bring in its notes, so fast as the
holders consent, and may do all that it now does, but expand
itself, after haying closed or liquidated a transaction. It cannot
make a new loan, but may continue, or settle and liquidate ex­
isting contracts, at pleasure.
But suppose the fact, to be unqualifiedly, as the Secretary
states it, is it a reason to the government to remove the de­
posites? The views of expediency which the Secretary deems
affirmatively conclusive, are: 1. That as several millions will
probably remain in the Bank at the expiration of the charter, it
would be attended with serious inconvenience if they were sud­
denly withdrawn, when its immense circulation is returning
upon it, and its private deposites are being removed into other
institutions. 2. That under such circumstances the ability of
the Bank to make prompt payment to the government would
be doubtful, even if their ultimate safety could be relied upon.
3. The sudden withdrawal or depreciation of its circulation, it
being the principal medium of commerce with the people, before
another sound and convenient currency could be substituted,
would produce extensive evils in all classes of society. The
superior credit of the notes of the Bank of the United States,
being founded, solely, in their reception in all payments to the
United States, will not outlive that quality which expires on
the 3d of March, 1836; the outstanding notes of the Bank,
losing this peculiar value, will be depreciated as the notes of
the local banks, producing great distress when it would be too
late to provide against the evil, by the substitution of a safe and
sound currency. These considerations, says the Secretary,
make the removal a question of time only. And to his choice
of time he was induced by his faith in the second position above
stated; namely, that the charter would not be renewed.
But the foregoing views, one and all, are unfounded. 1. The
cessation of the right of the Bank to retain the deposites being
known, the withdrawal would be fully provided for, even
though they should have been at the greatest height of prior
accumulation. But with the inconsistency, which seems an
essential constituent of the man, the Secretary has elsewhere
shown, that there is a violent probability that in March, 1836,
the public would have no balance in Bank. In his Annual
Report of December, 1834, he comes to the conclusion, that if
the appropriations should be kept up to the amount authorized for the present year, the charge upon the Treasury in
i

Digitized by

102
1835 would be more than it could probably meet. But that
the debt having then been entirely paid, if a guarded rule of
appropriation be at once commenced, there will be no difficulty in bringing down the expenditure without injury to
the public service." Again he says, "unless the revenue
to arise (under the new Tariff Act) should hereafter be more
productive than is anticipated, it will be necessary in two
years from this time to impose dvties on articles that are now
free, in order to meet the current expenses of the government."
The existence, then, of the several millions in the Treasury in
March, 1836, is dependent upon the future action of Congress,
and could not constitute a motive for the removal of the Deposites in October, 1833.
2. The ability of the Bank to meet its engagements of every
character, was, at the instant when the Secretary expressed his
doubts, unquestionable—nay, unquestioned by himself. Such
ability was admitted by all. Its accumulation of specie exceeded
ten, millions; and though the natural result of its business, was
deemed by the* administration and the party as the cause of deep
reproach. The official reports of the Secretary prove, that the
Bank is entirely able to pay deposites—debts—every thing—and
have a large surplus. Sound reasoning and experience alike
expose the groundlessness of the Secretary's apprehension. A
bank with such resources as this is admitted to have, increases in
strength from the moment she attains the term of her charter;
beaause her capital is then returned to her. Other banks may
then assist, by their expansion, the liquidation of her debts, safely,
to a considerable extent, as she has not, or having, cannot
Exercise the power to distress them, without encountering
effectual resistance in public opinion. "To ask of the State
banks, what it must distress them to give, and what is unneces­
sary to the United States Bank for operations then discontinuedT
would be as idle in her as the apprehension of it is in others. It
cannot occur. There must be a reasonable arrangement between
the United States Bank and all the State banks who assist in ab­
sorbing her loans, to prevent or mitigate the distress which the
withdrawal of a large capital would otherwise occasion. This,
therefore, is the moment when the Bank of the United States
will have the greatest power for her own protection, without
having it for the annoyance of the State banks; and unless there
is a general crash, which will make deposites unsafe every
where, they will be as safe in the Bank of the United States as
they can be any where."*
3. That the sudden withdrawal of the whole circulation of the
Bank, nay, any considerable withdrawal of that circulation, tanst
be productive of great evils, is as indubitable, as that the pre
sence of that circulation is a blessing. That withdrawal, if ^
' *Mr. Binney's Speech.

Digitized by

103
take place, will be the faulty the crime of the administration.
Still, there is no necessity to make it more sudden, or op­
pressive, than is inevitable. Some of the remarks we have
made under the last head are applicable to this. In the execu­
tion of their duty to the stockholders, the directors, will close
their concerns as rapidly as their interest will permit. But
that interest will prevent them from recalling their loans and
issues with haste, which must extinguish the debts with the
solvency of the debtors. Unhappily, however much reason
we have to dread, on the score of the soundness and safety of
the currency, and the preservation of public prosperity, there
is little fear of there being State banks in abundance to absorb
the loans discontinued by the Bank of the United States.
The experience derived from the closing the first Bank of the
United States, assures us of this, whilst it shows the practica­
bility of safely winding up the concerns of the present.
The suggestion of the depreciation of the notes of the Bank,
is wholly without support. If the notes are to depreciate, be­
cause they will be paid on presentation, because the quantity
in circulation will be daily diminished, because the residue
outstanding will be of increased value; and, because, unless
Congress shall pass a law to the contrary, the public guarrantee
will continue, then, but not otherwise, the Secretary's fears
may prove true. The Secretary has erred, even as to the
matter of the guarantee; declaring that, the obligation of the
United States to receive the notes in payment, will expire on
the third March, 1836, when the 16th section of the charter
provides, that the notes of the " said corporation," shall be so
receivable, unless otherwise directed by act of Congress.
They will be notes of the said corporation, as much after the
Charter expires as before.*
Of the nature of the currency which was intended to be
provided, we have already sufficiently spoken. The sound
and safe currency is impossible; but the rotten and destructive
currency, predicted by wisdom and experience, is with, and
around us. And to avoid the pains of a tranquil, and natural
death, at the appointed time, which will come when it must
come, we have submitted ourselves to the torture, and are
surely, and slowly dying; whilst cries and groans, are destined
to render the air vocal, for at least two years to come.
Among other assumptions of the Secretary, is the spirit of
prophecy. We have seen, that the spirit of truth has not at­
tended him in other matters, and we may confidently hope
that it is not with him in this. The prediction is, that the
Bank will not be re-chartered; and for this, too, we have rea­
sons more abundant than blackberries, and more worthless. We
are told, that the charter will not be renewed:
* Speech of Mr. Binney.

Digitized by

104
1. Because it has no claim to renewal, founded on the jus­
tice of Congress; the charter bein£ an exclusive privilege, at the
expense of the rest of the commuuity, enjoyed for twenty years.
2. Because the charter is unconstitutional.
3. Because public opinion has decided against i t
1. Is the charter an exclusive privilege, at the expense of
the rest of the community? We make a division of the ques­
tion. To the first member, we answer, aye; to the second, no.
The privileges of the charter, are however, no farther exclu­
sive than are the privileges of every corporation, every social
circle, every church or eleemosynary association, every posses­
sion of property. All who are qualified may become partici­
pators in the privileges of these States. At the commence­
ment of the charter, not only was the stock open to all, but
some thousand shares long solicited purchasers in vain. Since
that period, the stock, has been continually changing hands.
Yet the present stockholders have no peculiar claim for re­
newal of their charter, farther than, that they can, with experi­
ence and established relations, and a nation's confidence, best
promote the public weal. The present stockholders would
be no greater gainers than would be the stockholders of
a new bank; most of them have paid much more for
th^ir stock than par, much more than it would now
bring, and many, as much as the stock would at any time
attain. The Bank did not go into operation until the com­
mencement of the year 1817, and such were the losses during
the first six years of its existence that its dividends were short
of three and a half per cent per annum. The average dividend
during thirteen and an half years was but four eighty-eighth
hundreths per cent, per annum; and an annual dividend of about
nine per cent, during the residue of the term of the charter
(from 1832) is necessary to give the stockholders an average
return of six per cent on their capital.*
The exclusive privileges possessed by the Bank are indis­
pensable to its useful existence, and form an objection, not ao
much against the renewal of its charter, as to the existence of
any bank. But this is a matter not within the proper pro­
vince of the Secretary. It is purely a question of legislative
jurisdiction.
It is most certain, that these privileges have not been holden
at the expense of the community. Up to this period the divi­
dends of the Bank have not averaged six per cent per annum.
Whilst it has saved to the government, from forty to sixty mil­
lions by its operations, and to the people a sum almost incal­
culable in the equalization of exchange.
2. The question of the constitutionality of the charter ought
to be at rest Time, the acquiescence of the nation, reason,
* Gallatin on Banking, &&

Digitized by

105
judicial authority, all have confirmed it; and were it not neces­
sary to the completion of our purpose of giving a view of the
"Bank Question" in all its phases, and had it not been, even
within the last two months, strenuously denied in Congress by
members known to represent the sentiments of the President
and the administration, we would forbear to comment upon it.
With Mr. Dallas we say, " In the administration of human
affairs, there must be a period when discussion shall cease and
decision shall become absolute. A diversity of opinion may
honourably survive the contest; but upon the genuine principles
of a representative government, the opinion of the majority
alone can be carried into action. The judge who dissents from
the majority of the bench, changes not his opinion, but performs
his duty, when he confirms the judgment of the court, although
it is contrary to his own convictions. An oath to support the
constitution and the laws, is not therefore an oath to support
them under all circumstances according to the opinion of the
individual who takes it, but it is emphatically an oath to sup­
port them according to the interpretation of the legitimate au­
thorities. For the erroneous decisions of a court of law, there
is the redress of a censorial, as well as of an appellate, jurisdic­
tion. Over an act, founded upon an exposition of the Constitu­
tion, made by the legislative department of the government,
but alleged to be incorrect, we have seen the judicial department
exercise a remedial power. And, even if all the departments,
legislative, executive, and judicial, should concur in the exer­
cise of a power which is either thought to transcend the consti­
tutional trust, or to operate injuriously upon the community,
the case is still within the reach of a competent control, through
the medium of an amendment to the Constitution, upon the
proposition, not only of Congress, but of the several States.
When, therefore, we have marked the existence of a National
Bank, for a period of, [near forty years,] with all the sanctions
of the legislative, executive, and judicial authorities; when we
have seen the dissolution of one institution, (the re-establishment of another 9 and a loud and continued call for its preservation;) when, under these circumstances, neither Congress
nor the several States have resorted to the power of amend­
ment; can it be deemed a violation of the right of private opi­
nion, to consider the constitutionality of a National Bank as a
question forever settled and at rest ?"
This view has been enlarged and sustained, by the venerable
and venerated James Madison, in his letter of the 25th June,
1831, to Mr. Charles J. Ingersol, from which we make the
following extracts:—
M

The charge of inconeiatency between mj objection to the constitutionality of

Digitized by

106
such a Bank in 1791, and my assent in 1817, turns on the question, how far legis­
lative precedents, expounding the Constitution, ought to guide succeeding legis­
latures, and to overrule individual opinions.
"Some obscurity has been thrown over the question, by confounding it with
the request due from one legislature, to laws passed by preceding legislator*.
But the two cases are essentially different A constitution, being derived from
a superior authority, is to be expounded and obeyed, not controlled or varied, by
the subordinate authority of a legislature. A law, on the other band, resting en
no higher authority than that possessed by every successive legislature! its expe­
diency as well as its meaning is within the scope of the latter.
"The case in question has its true analogy in the obligation arising from judi­
cial expositions of the law on succeeding judges; the constitution being a law to
the legislator, as the law is a rule of decision to the judge.
** And why are judicial precedents, whenformedon due discussion and consi­
deration, and deliberately sanctioned by reviews and repetitions, regarded at of
binding influence, or rather of authoritative force, in settling the meaning of a
law ? It must be answered, 1st, because it is a reasonable and established adorn,
that the good of society requires that the rules of conduct of its members should
be certain and known, which would not be the case if any judge, disregarding
the decision of his predecessors, should vary the rule of law according to bis in­
dividual interpretation of it Misera est aervitus ubi jus est aul vagum out sacsgnUum. 2d. Because an exposition of the law, publicly made, and repeatedly
confirmed by the constituted authority, carries with it, by fair inference, the
sanction of those who, having made the law through their legislative organ, ap­
pear, under such circumstances, to have determined its meaning through thetr
judiciary organ.
u
Can it be of less consequence that the meaning of a constitution ijbwM be
fixed and known, than that the meaning of a law should be so ? Can, indeed, a
law be fixed in its meaning and operation, unless the Constitution be so? On the
contrary, if a particular Legislature, differing in the construction of the Consti­
tution, from a series of preceding constructions, proceed to act on that difference,
they not only introduce uncertainty and instability in the constitution, but in the
laws themselves; inasmuch as all laws preceding the new construction, and in­
consistent with it, are not only annulled for the future, but virtually pronounced
nullities from the beginning.
" But it is said that the legislator having sworn to support the constitution, most
support it in his own construction of it, however different from that put on it by
his predecessors, or whatever be the consequences of the construction. And w
not the judge under the same oath to support the law ? Yet, has it ever been sup­
posed that he was required, or at liberty, to disregard all precedents, however so­
lemnly repeated and regularly observed; and, by giving effect to his own abstract
and individual opinions, to disturb the established course of practice in the busi­
ness of the community ? Has the wisest and most conscientious judge ever scru­
pled to acquiesce in decisions in which he has been overruled by the matureo
opinions of the majority of his colleagues; and subsequently to conform bimselt
thereto, as to authoritative expositions of the law? And is it not reasonable to
suppose that the same view of the official oath should be taken by a ^esr*~a^f'
acting under the constitution, which is his guide, as is taken by a judge, acting
under the law, which is his ?
" There is in fact, and in common understanding, a necessity of regarding *
course of practice, as above characterized, in the light of a legal rule of inter,
preting a law; and there is a like necessity of considering it a constitutional role
of interpreting a constitution.
,
t
44
That there may be extraordinary and peculiar circumstances controlling'WJ
rule in both cases, may be admitted; but, with such exceptions, the rule win
force itself on the practical judgment of the most ardent theorist He will find"
impossible to adhere to, and act officially upon, his solitary opinions, as to»W
meaning of the law or constitution, in opposition to a construction reduced w
practice, during a reasonable period of time; more especially where no prosf*0
existed of a change of construction by the public or its agents. And if a f*J°n.'
able period of time, marked with the usual sanctions, would not bar the moivw

Digitized by

ion
dual prerogative, there could be no limitation to its exercise, although the danger
of error must increase with the increasing oblivion of explanatory circumstances,
and with the continual changes in the import of words and phrases.
" Let it then be left to the decision of every intelligent and candid judge, which,
on the whole, is most to be relied on, for the true and safe construction of a con­
stitution : that which has the uniform sanction of successive legislative bodies,
through a period of years, and under the varied ascendency of parties; or that
which depends upon the opinions of every new Legislature, heated as it may be
by the spirit of party, eager in the pursuit of some favourite object, or led astray
by the eloquence and address of popular statesmen, themselves, perhaps, under
the influence of the same misleading causes."

Of the derivation of the constitutional power of Congress, an
able and satisfactory statement is given by Mr. Gallatin, in his
Essay upon Banks and Currency, of which the following is a
synopsis.
It was the object of the Constitution to consolidate the United
States into one nation, so far as regarded their foreign relations,
and some few subjects essential to the prosperity of the people.
Of these were the regulations of commerce among the seve­
ral States, and the control over the monetary system of the
country.
Power over the last mentioned object is of primary import­
ance. It was on a deliberate view of the subject, that it was
confirmed and enlarged by the Constitution, and the indi­
vidual States excluded from participation in it with the General
Government. To assure this power, the Constitution provided
that, " The Congress shall have power to coin money, regulate
the value thereof, and of foreign coin; to provide for the pun­
ishment of counterfeiting the securities and current coin of the
United States; to make all laws which shall be necessary and
proper for carrying into execution the foregoing powers;" and
that " n o State shall coin money, emit bills of credit, or make
any thing but gold and silver a tender in payment of debts."
This power over the monetary system is essential to the execu­
tion of other powers given in the first paragraph of the 8th sec­
tion of the first article of the Constitution, " to lay and collect
taxes, duties, imposts, and excises, to pay the debts and provide
for the common defence and general welfare of the United
States;" with the restrictive provision, that "all duties, im­
posts and excises, shall be uniform throughout the United States."
By the admission of all parties, the just construction of the
words " to provide for the common defence and general wel­
fare," gives power to Congress to lay duties and taxes for the
general welfare of the United States without other limitation
than, 1st. That duties, imports and excises should be uniform
throughout the United States; 2nd. That no direct tax should
be laid unless in proportion to the census; and 3d. That no
duty should be laid on exports.
It has been lately contended by distinguished citizens, that
the words " general welfare," refer only to powers expressly

Digitized by

108
vested in Congress by the Constitution; or in other words, that I
the power to lay duties and taxes can be exercised only for the
purpose of carrying into effect some of those specific powers.
Admitting this for the sake of argument, the objection does not
apply to cases where the object, in reference to which the duty I
or tax is laid, is clearly within the powers of the General Gov­
ernment.
Congress has therefore the power to lay stamp duties on notes
- of every description, whether of individuals or banks, to such
amount and in such manner as may be necessary to effect its
object; whether that be to provide generally for the public I
welfare, or to execute the provisions of the Constitution, giving I
to Congress exclusively the control over the monetary system, I
and more particularly those which imply the necessity of a I
uniform currency. In the exercise of this power, it may lay I
a duty on small notes, which would prevent their circula- I
tion, would convert all banks into banks of discount and
deposit only, annihilate the paper currency, and render a bank j
of the United States unnecessary in reference to that object.
But if this last measure prove pernicious or impracticable, Conress must resort to other means. The Bank of the United
tates was established for this express purpose.
The power to establish the Bank is not derived from the
clause of the Constitution referring to the "general welfare;"
but from that which gives Congress "power to make all laws
which shall be necessary and proper for carrying Into execu- |
tion the powers given by the Constitution, and thereby vested
in the Government of the United States, or in any department
or office thereof.—[J2rt. 1. see 8 cl 10.] It becomes, there­
fore, the first object to determine the meaning of the words
"necessary and proper" in that clause.
The word " necessary'' must not be taken in its strict sense,
as if it stood alone. It is connected with, and qualified by the
word "proper." This last word implies, that what is called
necessary, may be proper or improper. Hence the words \
" laws necessary and proper," are not intended in the most
limited sense, implying absolute impossibility of effecting the
object without the law; but mean such laws as are fairly intend- $
ed, and highly useful and important for that purpose.
That such is the fair and uniform construction of the Consti- 3
tution, without which it could not have been carried into effect*
is apparent from many laws; particularly from that most ge^" i
ral and important law, enacted from the first organization of the Bl
government, from a- provision which has been retained in1* Jm
through all its modifications—the law to lay and collect duties ,F(
on imports. This requires a variety of oaths; among others ^
that of the importers or consignees, relating to the quantity and ^

f

Digitized by

109
value as stated in their invoices. Yet such oaths are not absolutely necessary, because the duties, as in France, might be ef­
ficiently collected without them, by means of the appraisement
of the merchandize.
There are several means of carrying into effect any of the
powers expressly defined in the Constitution. No one of these
can be strictly necessary, whilst any one of the remainder may
be used. But if we object to each, as not so necessary, no mean
can be used. Thus the restriction on the issues of State Banks
may be effected by a stamp duty, or by a Bank of the United
States. But, if these be the sole means, and we refuse both,
because neither is indispensable, the object will be unattainable.
But, to render such means necessary and proper, they should
not only be highly useful and essential, for effecting a power
vested in Congress, but should tend clearly and bona fide to
their avowed object—not be colourably auxiliary to one power,
when designed to effect another. This was the ground of oppo­
sition to the first Bank. Experience had not then taught the
efficiency of the agency of a Bank to regulate the currency,
nor its utility in aiding the operations of the government. In­
deed, there were but three banks in the country, and little
could be known of their nature and effects. The friends of the
United States Bank, therefore, did not put the necessity of its
creation upon the regulation of the currency, but claimed it as
an incident to the powers of regulating commerce, of collecting
the revenue, of the safe keeping of public moneys, and gene­
rally, of carrying on the operations of the Treasury. Its oppo­
nents did not believe these to be the real purposes, but supposed
that it was designed for the consolidation of a monied aristocracy,
and to further the views at that time ascribed to a certain party
and its assumed leader. These erroneous opinions have passed
away, but they have left impressions which may still affect pub­
lic opinion in relation to the constitutionality of the Bank.
It is now universally admitted that the use of banks is indis­
pensable to the government. But against all experience, it
is insisted, that the operations of the Treasury and the regula­
tion of the currency may be effected with equal facility and
safety through the State Banks alone, as through a Bank of the
United States; and on that ground the constitutionality of the
latter is denied. To admit, however, that State Banks are DJ*cessary to the operations of the government* is an abandonment
of the question. To make and to* use, or to make and to hire,
must require the same power in this case, and be either both
constitutional, or both equally unconstitutional; except that,
every consideration of propriety and expediency and conve­
nience, requires that Congress should make a Bank, which will
suit its own purposes, answer its awn ends, and be subject ta

Digitized by L j O O Q l e

'

•

110

its own control, rather than use other Banks, which were not
created for any such purpose, are not suited to it, and over
which Congress can exercise no supervision. The power in
either case to use a bank, can be derived only from the fact,
that it is necessary and proper for carrying into effect the powers
granted by the Constitution. The General Goverment is not
made by the Constitution to depend, for the execution of its
powers, on the uncertain aid of institutions created by other
authorities and independent of its control. It is expressly au­
thorized to carry those powers into effect by its own means, b y
passing the laws necessary and proper for that purpose, and in
this instance by its own Bank.
But it is not on the useful agency of the Bank in treasury
operations that its tsonstitutionality is now mainly placed. The
States, though forbidden by the Constitution to issue bills of
credit, have, to all intents and purposes, so done, through the
agency of the banks, and the notes of these banks produce the
very effect the Constitution intended to prevent by the prohibi­
tion. The injustice to individuals, the embarrassments of go­
vernment, the depreciation of the currency, its want of uni­
formity, the moral necessity imposed on the community, either
to receive the unsound currency, or to suspend business transac­
tions, all the evils consequent on the suspension of specie pay­
ments have been as great, if not greater, than those which
might have flowed from a paper currency, issued directly by
State authority.
We have already adverted to several provisions of the Consti­
tution which give Congress the right and impose the duty to
provide a remedy; but there is another, deserving special con­
sideration. Notwithstanding the suspension of specie payments
in Great Britain, the Bank of England, by its notes, though
fluctuating and depreciated, furnished a currency which was
uniform throughout the kingdom. But such we have seen was
not the case with the currency supplied here by the State banks.
It was not only depreciated, but multiform. It is specially pro­
vided by the Constitution of the United States, 1. That all du­
ties, imposts and excises shall «be uniform throughout the United
States; and, 2. That Representatives and direct taxes shall be
apportioned among the several States, according to their respec­
tive population. Both these just provisions are violated when
currencies, of different values in the several States, prevail,
Upon this ground, alone, Congress would be obliged to provide
means for giving effect to these constitutional provisions. The
uniformity of taxes of every nature is an essential and funda­
mental principle of the Constitution and our political association.
That uniformity depends on the uniformity of the currency.
Therefore, laws to effect this are " necessary and proper," in
the strictest sense of the words. But there are two means only

Digitized by

Ill
to attain the object, ri metallic or a uniform paper currency.
The one may be possible, but it is difficult of attainment, and if
attainable, inexpedient; because it involves the destruction of
all the State banks and the established commercial system.
The other is prepared to our hands, and we know, from long and
various experience, will insure a sound and uniform currency;
checking and regulating the greater part which it does not
itself supply.
3. We are now to examine the third reason of the Secretary,
for believing that the charter of the Bank will not be renewed;
which is, that public opinion had pronounced against the Bank
in the result of the Presidential election. In his cabinet com*
munication of 18th September, 1833, the President avers, that
his election was put upon the question of the recharter. "Can
it now be said," he exclaims, "that the question of a recharter
of the Bank was not decided at the election which ensued? Had
the veto been equivocal, or had it not^ covered the whole
ground—if it had merely taken exceptions to the details of the
bill, or to the time of its passage—if it had not met the whole
ground of constitutionality and expediency, then there might
have been some plausibility for the allegation that the question
was not decided by the people. It was to compel the Presi­
dent to take his stand, that the question was brought forward
at that particular time. He met the challenge, willingly, took
the position into which his adversaries sought to force him, and
frankly declared his unalterable opposition to the Bank, as
being both unconstitutional and inexpedient."
"On that ground the case was argued to the people. And
now that the people have sustained the President, notwithstand­
ing the influence and power which was brought to bear upon
him, it is too late, he confidently thinks, to say that the ques­
tion has not been decided. Whatever may be the opinion of
others, the President considers his re-election as a decision of
the people against the Bank."
In the concluding paragraph of his veto message, he said:
" I have now done my duty to my country. If sustained by
my fellow citizens, I shall be grateful and happy; if not, I shall
find in the motives which impel me, ample grounds for content­
ment and peace. He was sustained by a just people, and he
desires to evince his gratitude by carrying into effect their deci­
sion, so far as it depends upon him."
The Secretary echoes these declarations thus: "The question
of the renewal of the charter was introduced into the election
by the corporation itself. Its voluntary application to Congress
for the renewal of its charter four years before it expired, and
n the eve of the election of President, was understood on
aides, as bringing forward the question for incidental dec**

r

Digitized by

112
sion, at the then approaching election. It was, accordingly, ar­
gued, on both sides, before the tribunal of the people, and their
verdict pronounced against the Bank, by the election of the can­
didate who was known to have been always inflexibly opposed
to it."
We have made these extracts for the double purpose of con*
troverting and disproving the allegations, and of rebuking the
political heresy which they contain. We have, elsewhere,
shown, that the President, prior to his cabinet communication,
had, at no time, met the whole ground of constitutionality and
expediency—that the veto was not equivocal, inasmuch as it
declared, that the Bank of the United States was convenient for
the government, and useful for the people ; that the President
was impressed with the belief, not that a Bank of the United
States was unconstitutional and inexpedient, but that SOME of
the powers and privileges of the EXISTING Bank are unautho­
rized by the Constitution, subversive of the rights of the States,
and dangerous to the liberties of the people, "and that, had
the Executive been called upon to furnish the project of such
an institution, the duty would have been cheerfully performed." Without comment upon the arrogance of the inti­
mation, that the Executive would furnish the Legislature a plan
for the regulation of the finances of the country—a matter ex­
clusively pertaining to the latter, and the ignorance which the
suggestion displays of the relative rights and obligations of the
executive and legislative branches of the government, we ask
whether this naked prevarication is not at once a mockery of
the people, and a disgrace to the country?
"But what part of the charter, or of any law of Congress, authorises the
Secretary to communicate such a reason to the House ? Where is the warrant
for the Secretary's instructing Congress as to the decision of the people upon a
matter of future legislation ? By what channel does the Secretary maintain an
intercourse with the people that is not open to their representatives ? How does
the Secretary know any thing as to the wishes of the people, which the represen­
tatives of the people do not better know themselves ? The communication of such
a reason to the representatives of freemen, who are themselves freemen, is without a precedent in the history of this or any other representative Government.
The alleged fact is, moreover, an assumption, and a mere assumption, without
proof, and without the means of proof. It is a political inference which the
people of this country will never sustain, until they are prepared to sav that the
election of a President is not the result af a preference founded upon his general
qualifications, opinions, and actions, but is an adoption and ratification of his sin­
gle will to any extent that he has at any time declared it, and even when he may
Have declared it in contrary directions at different times.

The constitutionality and expediency of a Bank of the
United States, was not put before the tribunal of the people,
nor did they understand that they were required to judge such
a question. We appeal to their representatives in either House
of Congress.

Digitized b y C j O O Q l C

IIS
t

Mr. Clay, of the Senate, replies :
" In the canvass which ensued, it was boldly asserted, by the partisans of the
President, that he was not opposed to a Bank of the United States, nor to the ex­
isting Bank with proper amendments. They maintained, at least wherever those
friendly to a National Bank were in the majority, that his re-election would be
followed by a recharter of the Bank with proper amendments. They dwelt, it
i s true, with great earnestness upon his objections to the Bank, as at present
modified, and especially to the pernicious influence of foreigners holding stock
i n it; but they, nevertheless, contended, that these objections would be cured, if
he was re-elected, and the Bank sustained. I appeal to the whole Senate, to my
colleague, to the people of Kentucky, and especially, to the citizens of the city of
Louisville, for the correctness of this statement*'—[Speech 26 $ 30th Dee* lo$3.]

Mr. Southard responds:
** Due regard was observed not to close up the question. For we are assured,
that after the Veto, 4a general discussion will take place, eliciting new, and set­
tling important principles: and a new Congress, elected in the midst of such
discussions, and furnishing an equal representation of the people, according to
the last census, will bear to the Capitol, the verdict of public opinion, and, I doubt
not, bring this question to a satisfactory result,'' What Congress was to bear this
verdict to the Capitol ? The present—that now in actual session, in that very
Capitol—members elected amidst those discussions, of which, I am one! We
were to bear the verdict! Had the Secretary heard it when he acted ? Did the
Executive wait to hear it ? How did they know what we should say ? How
know, that a majority would not be of the opinion, that the Bank ought to be
rechartered? Or that, even two-thirds might not be found to oppose on this
point, the Executive will, should that will resist their views in managing their
constitutional guardianship over the Treasury ? Could they not wait sixty days
for that verdict, for which they had promised to wait ? Was the country on the
brink of ruin, sliding down the precipice into the gulph of irretrievable bank­
ruptcy, that its drowning honour and perishing fortunes must be thus rudely
rescued ? That message was a solemn promise, by the Executive, to let this
question be settled by Congress and to submit to it What else can the words
mean, but that, the people would consider the subject, and their representatives
decide it ? Did the President intend to trifle with the people ? To profess re­
gard for their opinions, as expressed through Congress, and yet to scorn those
opinions by his actions? Was he giving out Delphic responses? Did he
palter with us in a double sense ? No, sir, he meant, then, what he said, how­
ever ill the promise has been kept, under the influence of those who have sur­
rounded him. The people so understood—they so believed. It was to be tested,
whether, without new arguments or new facts, legislative assemblies, chambers
of commerce, and the great majority of the people of these States, had changed
their opinions upon the new lights, which subservience to party, and devotion to
men have afforded ? Nay, it was even reasonable to suppose, that the President
himself might yield his official opinions to the deliberate, well-considered opi­
nions of a majority of the people, and to permit their judgments to govern in
this land of majorities, and under institutions which have so long sanctioned th#
existence of such a fiscal agent It had been so before. Mr. Madison had
yielded his doubts, upon principles, and for reasons which do equal honour to his
head and heart, and which are well developed in his letter of 25th June, 1831."

And Mr. Wilkins—to be sure, the mutable nature of this gen­
tleman's opinions may detract somewhat from the force of his
testimony—but as, like the helianthus, his changeful course
always looks towards the sun above the horizon, and as he is
the zealous worshipper of the luminary, we may use his eviK 2

Digitized by

114
dence with confidence, and with a compliment to the sincerity
which most notably puts the President in the wrong, and re­
proves the Secretary most ungently for overlooking the Act of
Congress, and directing his eye to political signs.
u
A bill," he says, " had been introduced into Congress for the renewal of the
Bank charter, and had been lost The same Chief Magistrate, by whose veto
that measure had been defeated, was subsequently re-elected by the people. And
I will take occasion to observe, that I do not put the common construction upon
that political event; and in the inference I draw from it, / differ in some degree
from the President and Secretary of the Treasury. I do not think that result
turned upon the question of the recharter of the Bank; nor was it a popular decision of that inquiry. I believe the people in that Presidential election looked
beyond the Bank; and (without meaning any indelicacy towards his distinguish­
ed competitor,) were governed by higher and mere interesting considerations in
the re-election of General Jackson. Thousands of voters threw their weight on
the side of the successful candidate^ who would votefor a National Bank to-morrow?

Has the gentleman who uses this unkind frankness no fear
of the pains and penalties provided for " refractory subordinates," whether of the official or party hierarchy ?
Let us now seek the opinions of the immediate delegates of
the people, in the House of Representatives.
x Mr. Moore, of Va., says:
" I cannot perceive the least propriety in the Secretary introducing topics of
this kind into his report: nor do I know by whom he was constituted the judge
of the motives which governed the people in making choice of a chief magistrate;
but I am certain, he could not have come to a more erroneous conclusion, than
he has done. Every gentleman here knows, that General Jackson would have
been elected whether he was for or against the Bank. The only hope entertain­
ed by his opponents of preventing his re-election, was dependent upon his vetoing
the Bank charter. All admitted if he approved the charter, he would be elected
by a great majority. He would have been elected if he had chartered forty
banks, by even a larger vote than he received. The chartering the Bank was
not the only question upon which the Presidential election turned: on the con­
trary, it is probable that more than one half of those who voted for the present
Chief Magistrate were, at that time, in favour of rechartering the Bank."

And Mr. Wise, also of Virginia, who reports himself, as we
have already noticed, " most distinctly" a friend of the admin­
istration, and an "honest man," thus expresses his sentiments
to the same purpose:
" Sir, I am, undisguisedly and decidedly, a friend to the constitutional power
of Congress to incorporate a Bank of the United States on proper principles; and
f l am more than ever convinced, that such an institution, properly organized, is
absolutely necessary to conduct, not only the commercial operations of the peo­
ple, but thefinancialoperations of the government And there is no subject on
which I differ more widely with the President and with the Secretary, than on
this important subject. I, for one, once did think that the President would sanc­
tion such a charter as can be made congenial to, and consistent with the Constitu­
tion. On all proper occasions when using my feeble efforts to elect him, I confi­
dently declared this belief to many of the people whom I represent"

Mr. Chilton Allen, whom we had before occasion to quote,
with much satisfaction, testifies, thus, to the same effect:

Digitized by

115
* Bat, Sir, we are told that this nation has decided against the existence of a
National Bank, and the second election of General Jackson to the Presidency is
referred to, to prove that fact I deny that the election of General Jackson either
roves, or conduces to prove, that the people of the United States are opposed to a
rational Bank. General Jackson certainly went before the people, at the last
election, as a Bank man. It is true, in his veto message he made knowoi his ob­
jections to certain parts of the existing Bank charter; but it is equally true that,
i n the same message, he spoke of a United States Bank as a useful institution,
and said that a charter for one could be made compatible with the Constitution;
and that, if he had been called on, he would have furnished such a charter. It la
equally true that Mr. M'Lane, while acting as his Secretary of the Treasury,
under his supervision^ in his annual report to the first session of the last Congress,
did maintain, most ably and clearly, that the National Bank was an Institution
necessary both to the administration of the affairs of the Treasury and the pre­
servation of the currency. Then, Sir, I undertake to say that the Jackson party,
in every county and district in the United States, presented General Jackson to
the people, upon the authority of his veto message and Mr. M'Lane's report, as
friendly to a United States Bank, properly modified. I appeal to every member
now in this House for the truth of this statement The people were every where
told that General Jackson vetoed the Bank bill because it was brought before him
too soon, for electioneering purposes, and because he disapproved certain modifi­
cations of the charter; but that he would, after his election, give his approbation
to a National Bank properly guarded. A gentleman from Virginia, (Mr. Wise,)
said, the other day, that this was the view presented to the people of his district
before the Presidential election. I know it was the view taken in Kentucky.
And I say, upon the authority of the public press, and the veto message, and Mr.
M'Lane's report, that this was the manner in which General Jackson was pre­
sented to the people of the United States at the last Presidential election. If I
am mistaken in regard to any part of the country, I hope the gentleman who
knows the fact will correct me. General Jackson has been deceived in his infor­
mation on this subject; and if he will inquire of the members of the present
Congress, he will be informed that he was elected as a Bank man. But, Sir, if it '
had been known that General Jackson was opposed to a National Bank in any
form, his election would not prove that the people were opposed to a Bank; for the
fact is, that his popularity was so overshadowing, that he could have been elected
on any side of any question.
" In coming to a conclusion in regard to the matured sense of the American
people, on the subject of a National Bank, I will rely not upon the election of any
particular man, (when it is a fact of such general notoriety that the election did
not turn upon the Bank question,) but will appeal to the history of forty years,
during which a National Bank has existed in this country, and, during which
protracted period, met with the public support, attested by all the modes of ratifi­
cation that can flow from the general acquiescence—from legislative sanction,
judicial confirmation, and executive approval."

5

Abundant evidence has been, and much more might be, ad­
duced, to show that the question of the Bank was not on trial
before the people at the late Presidential election. But if we
admit the issue to have been formed, the verdict must be gather­
ed, not from the result of the Presidential election alone, but
from the return of the representatives of the people, mediate
and immediate. The majority of the Senate in favour of the
Bank has been increased, and the results in the lower house,
not against the measure, are thus exhibited by Mr. J. Q. Adams,
with his accustomed ability:
" When the President of the United States said*, that if the last Congress had
continued in session one week longer, the Bank would, by corrupt means, have

Digitized by

116
procured a recharter by majorities of two-thirds, in both Houses of CottpeM, to ]
what portion of the members of both Houses did this honourable testimonial of 1
his confidence specially apply ? At the preceding session of the same Congress, a
|
hill to recharter the Bank had passed the Senate by a vote of 28to20. Ithad
passed in the House by a vote of 107 to 85, and this was immediately after an 1
investigation of the affairs of the Bank by a committee of the House, who went I
to Philadelphia for that express purpose, and every member of that committee a I
also a member of this House. Of the 107 members of the House who voted for I
that recharter, 50 are members of this House; of the 85 members who voted I
against it, 41 are members of the present House; and there is in this proportion, I
on both sides, a coincidence so remarkable, that I cannot help invitingtoit the I
attention of the House. It has been assumed by the President of the United J
States, and repeated by the Secretary of the Treasury, and by the report of the I
Committee of Ways and Means, that the reelection of the President, after his I
veto upon this very bill to recharter the Bank, is of itself equivalent to a verdict of I
the people against the Bank. Mr. Speaker, I shall not inquire what sort of an I
estimate this position supposes the people to have formed of all the other measures I
of a four years1 administration. It seems to me an admission, that in all the rest I
of his measures, the people saw and felt nothing, which could have secured to 1
him his re-election, but that this crushing of the monster was not only meritorious I
in itself, but sufficient to outweigh a mass of demerit, in the whole system of the I
administration besides, which would have forfeited the claim to that approbation I
of the people of which the result of the election was the test Sir, if the President
of the United States is willing that his reputation as a statesman at the head of 1
this Union, should go down upon the records of this age, to the admiration of after
times, on the single and solitary foundation of his having destroyed the Bank of
the United States, I can have no possible objection to his being gratified. He wUl
suffer no injustice by having that measure applied to his foot as the standard, and
then inferring from that the whole man, " Ex pede Herodem," all the rest will be
perfectly congenial with it; and such I have no doubt will be the judgment of
posterity. But, Sir, if his re-election can, with any pretence of reason, be consi.
dered as an evidence of the sentence of condemnation by the people, again** the
Bank, then I say that the re-election of the members of the House, who voted for
and against that bill to recharter the Bank, is evidence far more conclusive and
unequivocal of the sentiments of the people with regard to the Bank and the re­
charter, than the Presidential election was or could be. Now, Sir, every member
of this House who voted for or against that bill to recharter the Bank, has passed
through that ordeal of re-election since he gave that vote; and it so happens that
the proportion of re-elected members of those who voted for and against the re­
charter, is precisely the same. One member of the House who voted for the re­
charter, Philip Doddridge, of Virginia, we soon after followed, in melancholy
procession, to the grave; and sure I am, that there is not a Virginian heart who
hears me, but will respond to me when I say that hia vote was nofeebletestimo­
nial of the purity of purpose with which every vote was given on that occasion,
which now stands recorded in association with his. Had he lived and consented
to serve, there can be no doubt that he would still have been one of us. There
would then have been 51 re-elected members of 107 members who votedforthe
recharter; there are 41 of 85 who voted against it; and as 41 is to 85, so is 51 to
107. Sir, the doctrine of chances, and all the other elements which are mingled
up in the process of electioneering throughout this whole Union, has not pro­
duced a variation from the proportion, to the amount of a single man; and what
is the inference that I draw from this curious and extraordinary arithmetical de­
monstration ? Why, Sir, that all the members on both sides of the question, those
who voted for and those who voted against the recharter, faithfully represented
the sentiments of their respective constituents; and this result, so uniform, of the
elections to this House throughout the whole Union, is of itself an honourable
vindication of the integrity of its members, from the baseness imputed to them
by the Chief Executive Magistrate.
"This vindication, it must also be observed, is more necessary to that portion of
the members of the House who voted against the recharter, and wore the deTotedfriendsof the President and of his administration, than to the rest It was

Digitized by

117

•

ftom the eiguty-five members who voted again* the rf charter that the recruits
of corruption must have been levied, to constitute, with the one hundred and
■even who had already voted for the recharter, that majority of two-thirds which
could have effected the recharter in defiance of the veto. Of the eighty-five names
which stand thus recorded, twenty-one must have changed their votes from tho
negative to the affirmative before the recharter could have been accomplished by
a majority of two-thirds; and this is what the President of the United States considered not only as practicable, but as certain to have been effected, by corrupt
means, if the last session of Congress had continued one week longer. Mr. Speaker, I do not believe there was one member of the last Congress wno voted against
the rechartcring of the Bank, who could have been induced to change his vote by
corrupt means, had the President and Directors of the Bank been base enough to
attempt the use of them. I believe this imputation to have been as unjust as it
was dishonourable to both the parties implicated in it. That it was cruelly un­
generous towards the friends of the administration in this House, is my deliberate
opinion; and, as I am well assured, there was not one of them justly obnoxious to
the suspicion, so there is no one of them who can be considered exempted from
i t Ano* now, when we reflect that this defamatory and disgraceful suspicion,
harboured or professed against his own friends, supporters, and adherents, was
the real and efficient cause, (to call it a reason would be to shame the term,) but
that it was the real motive for the removal of the deposites during the recess of
Congress, and only two months before its meeting, what can we do but hide our
heads fbr shame? Sir, one of the duties of the President of the United States—a
duty as sacred as that to which he is bound by his official oath, is that of main­
taining unsullied the honour of his country. But how could the President of the
United States assert in the presence of any foreigner a claim to honourable prin.
ciple or moral virtue, as attributes belonging to his countrymen, when he is the
first to cast the indelible stigma upon them. * Vale, venalis civitas, mox peritura,
si emptorem inveniasj was the prophetic curse of Jugurtha upon Rome, in the
days of her deep corruption. If the imputations of the President of the United
States, upon his own partizans and supporters, were true, our country would have
already found a purchaser.'*

But an executive appeal to the people, and the induction of
power and authority for action upon their determination, real
or suppositious, is a political heresy of the most alarming nature.
If it be a principle of our political system, that an appeal lies
from the Congress to the people, determinable at the instance,
and upon the judgment, of the President, there is an authority
unknown to, and above, the Constitution, and we are not only
in the midst of revolution, but a revolution has been completed;
our representative system is destroyed; the only elements of
the body politic are broad democracy and a single headed Execu­
tive, and we have sunk into the preparatory stage of absolute
despotism.
This very important portion of the Presidential assumptions,
we think, has not been sufficiently regarded in the late debates
of Congress. Mr. Clay and Southard have noticed it, but it
has been best probed by Mr. Calhoun, whose great sensitive­
ness to constitutional violation, could not escape a shock.
" I would inquire," he says, " by what authority the Secretary of the Treasury
constitutes himselfthe organ ofthe People of the fjnited States. He has the repu­
tation of being an able lawyer; and can he be ignorant, that so long as the Con­
stitution of the United States exists, the only organ of the people of these States,
at far as the action of the General Government is concerned, are the several

Digitized by

118
departments legislative, executive and judicial i which, acting within the respec­
tive limits assigned by the Constitution, have a right to pronounce, authoritatively,
the voice of the people. A claim on the part of the executive to interpret, as the
Secretary has done, the voice of the people, through any other channel, is to shake
the foundation of our system. Has the Secretary forgotten, that, the last step to
absolute power is this very assumption which he has claimed for that department
I am thus brought to allude to the extraordinary manifesto read by the President
to the Cabinet, and which is so intimately connected with the point immediately
under consideration. That document, though apparently addressed to the Cabi­
net, was clearly and manifestly intended as an appeal to the people of the United
States, and opens a new and direct organ of communication, between the Presi­
dent and them, unknown to the laws. There are but two channels known to
either, through which the President can communicate with the people—-by mes­
sages to the two Houses of Congress, as expressly provided for by the Constitu­
tion, or by proclamation, setting forth the interpretations he places upon a law it
has become his official duty to execute. Going beyond this is one amongst the
alarming signs of the times, which portend the overthrow of the Constitution,
and the approach of despotic power."

It is not, however, in the President's Address to the People
that we see danger. It would be no great stretch of construc­
tion, to consider the communication wtych Mr. Calhoun calls a
Manifesto, a Proclamation. It is the claiming and construing
the response—the drawing from it authority for executive and
legislative action, that violates the Constitution. Yet the mode
of communication to the people, adopted by the President, is
essentially vicious, as well as extraordinary, and can originate
only in the desire to obtain influence in matters which are
against or beyond the law.
The appeals of the President to the people are not only un­
constitutional, but are otherwise of the most dangerous charac­
ter—demagogical, anarchical, and inflammatory—they tend to
excite the poor against the rich, and to produce the worst of
civil wars. For what honest purpose can the executive de­
claim, in a message to Congress, such passages as the following;
containing principles sound enough in the abstract, but rendered
most mischievous by false application?
w
It is to be regretted that the rich and powerful too often bend the acts of
government to their selfish purposes. Distinctions in society will always exist
under every just government Equality of talents, of education, or of wealth, can­
not be produced by human institutions. In the full enjoyment of the gifts of
heaven, and the fruits of superior industry, economy, and virtue, every man is
equally entitled to protection by law. But when the laws undertake to add ts
these natural and just advantages, artificial distinctions, to grant titles, gratuities
and exclusive piiiileges, to make the rich, richer, and the potent more powerful,
the humble members of society, the farmers, mechanics, ana labourers, who have
neither the time nor the means of securing like favours to themselves, have a right
to complain of the injustice of the government."

Again;
** Experience should teach us wisdom. Most of the difficulties our government
now encounters, and most of the dangers which impend over our sum unien, have
iprung frsm an abandonment of the legitimate objects of government, bfournm*

Digitized by

tmal legislation* and the adoption of ouch principles ao are embodied in ihio Act,
(Bill for renewal of Bank Charier.) Many of our rich men have not been content
with eqwilprotecHon and equal benefits; but have besought us tomaike them richer
by act of Congress. By attempting to gratify their desires, tee have% in the results
of our legislation, arrayed section against section, interest against interest, and
man against man, in a fearful commotion, which threatens to shake the founda­
tions of oar Union. It is time to pause in our career, to review our principles,
and, if possible, to revive that devoted patriotism and spirit of compromise which
distinguished the sages of our revolution, and the fathers of our Union. If we
cannot, at once, in justice to interest vested under improvident legislation, make
our government what it ought to be, we can at least take a stand against all new
grants of monopolies and exclusive privileges, against any prostitution of our go­
vernment, to the advancement of the few, at the expense of the many, and in fa­
vour of compromise and gradual reform in our code of laws and system of political
economy.**

What are these and the like extracts, which might be made
from the executive documents, but attempts to inflame the peo­
ple against the "improvidence" and "prostitution" of their
representatives, and to incite them to seek protection and relief
from the executive ? What, but an effort to bring into dreadful
activity the worst passions of our nature—to produce amongst,
what the President has been pleased, in the most factious spirit,
to call the "humble members qf society, the farmers, mechanics and labourers," unhappy discontents—and to array the poor
against the rich? All must condemn the design, but none can
fear its full success. Fortunately, for the peace of the States,
these " humble members of SOCIETY" comprise the great mass
of the virtue, wealth and talent of the country, and are most
obnoxious to the unfounded reproaches of the President. The
appeals of the Executive are framed in the cant and slang
adapted to the Fauxbourgs of Paris, and the purlieus of St. Giles;
and were our people less enlightened, less happy and independent,
they might have responded to the call of the Executive, " to
take a stand against all new grants of monopolies and
exclusive privileges—against any prostitution of our government
to the advancement of the few at the expense of the many," in
armed multitudes; and we might have seen the President "reforming our code of laws arid system ofpolitical economy,"
by the forcible expulsion of Congress from the Capitol.
But even in our enlightened country, such appeals are not
altogether without effect; though they assume, fortunately,a form
less odious and noxious than in other states.' We recognise
their operation in the election of the majority of the House of
Representatives, under pledges to support the Jackson adminis­
tration—We recognise it, too, in that most shameful acquies­
cence by the majority, in the charge made by the President of
corruption and corruptibility against them and their predeces­
sors. But as the consummation of the President's design,depends
upon the surrender of the peculiar and appropriate powers of
Congress, the love of power, not less conspicuous in popular

Digitized by

120
bodies than in individuals, combined with a spirit of patriotism,
may prevent its completion.
In speaking of the late executive documents, Mr. Wilde holds
this appropriate language:
"The style and spirit of all these documents, from the veto message to the
report of the committee, are in my judgment highly exceptionable. They have
a general similitude. There is, throughout, too little calm reason; too little of
sober and enlightened experience; and too much appeal to the more ignoble pas­
sions. Instead of clear-sighted, deep-searching and far-reaching sagacity, we
have the incarnate spirit which practices on popular delusions, and has been the
ruin of all republics. The Demus of the old Greek comedy, the Agrarians of
Rome, the disciples of Spence in England, and the Jacobins in France, held simi­
lar language. It is the first time, however, I believe, that we have seen the chief
executive magistrate ofafreeand intelligent people made "to talk and act Jack
Cade."

Mr. Webster, too, has adverted to this topic with equal elo­
quence, force and truth.
" Sir, there is one other subject on which I wish to raise my voice. There is a
topic, which I perceive is become the general war cry of party, on which I take the
liberty to warn the country against delusion. Sir, the cry is to be raised, that this is a
question between the poor and the rich. I know, Sir, it has been proclaimed that
one thing was certain—that there was always a hatredfromthe poor to the rich;
and that this hatred would support the late measures, and the putting down of the
Bank. Sir, I will not be silent at the threatening of such a detestable fraud on
public opinion. If but one man, or ten men in the nation, will hear my voice, I
would still warn them against this attempted imposition.
" Mr. President, this is an eventful moment. On the great questions which
occupy us, we all look for some decisive movement of public opinion. As I wish
that movement to be free, intelligent, and unbiassed—the true manifestation of
the public will—I desire to prepare the country for another assault, which I per­
ceive is about to be made on popular prejudice—another attempt to obscure all
distinct views of the public good—to overwhelm all patriotism, and all enlightened
self-interest, by loud cries against false danger, and by exciting the passions of
one class against another. I am not mistaken in the omen—I see the magazine
whence the weapons of this warfare are to be drawn. I already hear the din of
the hammering of arms, preparatory to the combat. They may be such arms,
perhaps, as reason, and justice, and honest patriotism cannot resist. Every effort
at resistance, it is possible, may be feeble and powerless; but, for one, I shall
make an effort—an effort to be begun now, and to be carried on and continued,
with untiring zeal, till the end of the contest comes.
? Sir, I see in those vehicles which carry to the people sentiments from high
places, plain declarations that the present controversy is but a strife between one
nart of the community and another. I hear it boasted as the unfailing security,
the solid ground never to be shaken, on which recent measures rest, that the poor
naturally hate the rich. I know, that under the shade of the roofs of the Capitol,
within the last twenty-four hours—among men sent here to devise means for the
public safety and the public good—it has been vaunted forth, as matter of boast
and triumph, that one cause existed, powerful enough to support every thin?,
and to defend every thing, and that was—the natural hatred of the poor to me
rich.
," Sir, I pronounce the author of such sentiments to be guilty of attempting a de­
testable fraud on the community; a double fraud; a fraud which is to cheat
men out of their property, and'out of the earnings of their labour, by first cheatingthem out of their understandings.
" ' The natural hatred of the poor to the rich." Sir, it shall not be till the last
moment of my existence*—it shall be only when I am drawn to the verge «*f

Digitized by

121
oblivion—when I shall cease to have respect or affection for any thin? on
earth—that I will believe the people of the United States capable of be­
ing effectually deluded, cajoled, and driven about in herds, by such abom­
inable frauds as this. If they shall sink to that point—if they so far cease
to be men—thinking men, intelligent men—as to yield to such pretences.
and such clamor, they will be slaves already; slaves to their own pas­
sions—slaves to the frand and knavery of pretended friends. They will
deserve to be blotted out of all the records of freedom; they ought not to
dishonour the cause of self-government, by attempting any longer to exer­
cise it; they ought to keep their unworthy hands entirely off from the
cause of republican liberty, if they are capable of being the victims of ar­
tifices so shallow—of tricks so stale, so threadbare, so often practised, so
much worn out, on serfs and slaves.
" ' The natural hatred of the poor against the rich/' * The danger of a
monied aristocracy!' ( A power as great and dangerous as that resisted
by44the Revolution!' ' A call to a new Declaration of Independence!9
Sir, I admonish the people against the objects of outcries like these.
I admonish every industrious laborer in the country to be on his guard
against such delusion. I tell him the attempt is to play off his passions
against his interests, and to prevail on him, in the name of liberty, to des­
troy all the fruits of liberty; in the name of patriotism, to injure and
afflict his country; and, in the name of his own independence, to destroy
that very independence, and make him a beggar and a slave. Has he a
dollar? He is advised to do that which will destroy half its value. Has
he hands to labour? Let him rather fold them and set still than be push­
ed on, by fraud and artifice, to support measures which will render his
labour useless and hopeless."
Let us examine, for a single instant, into the nature of
banking institutions, which faction now so much decries, but
w h i c h are dangerous, only, in their excess, and which, with the
power of steam locomotives, have carried us forward in an un­
paralleled progress of prosperity ? Are they " grants of mo­
nopolies" and exclusive privileges as they have been character­
ized? The answer is most satisfactorily furnished by Mr.
Gushing of Newburyport, in an able speech before the House of
Representatives of Massachusetts.
" Sir, in the face of this partizan denunciation of the property of the
country, I undertake to say, that, if any fact in political science be sus­
ceptible of demonstration, the inseparable connection of capital and of
labour is that fact. Take the example of our banks, which are pure
monied institutions. Who are chiefly interested in their welfare? Is it
the rich ? Is it, as we have heard so emphatically and confidently asserted
here to-day, the rich capitalists ? Do they employ the banks as engines
for ' grinding the poor,' as it has been affirmed this morning ? By no
means.—Never was there a wilder delusion. Desirous* some time ago,
of understanding the precise
fact, 1 had recourse, in thefirstplace, to the
books of the Merchants1 Bank of Newburyport, to which I had right of
access in capacity of director. Personally knawing every stockholder,
his condition and his pursuits, I went careifully over the dividend-book of
that bank, and 1 found that, of its six thousand shares, 3923 belonged to
-women and to public institutions, 1035 to working mechanics, and only
1042 to any description of capitalists. Struck with this result, I made a
similar examination of the stock-book of fhe Mechanics' Bank in the same
t o w n ; and of the two thousand shares into which its capital is di-

Digitized by

122
Tided, 946 belong to women and public institutions, 593 to working me­
chanics, and only 461 to capitalists. Not content with this, I pursued my
inquiries in different banks of the city of Boston, and I found the general
fact substantially the same, with this qualification; namely, that although
in banks newly got up, a larger proportion of the stock occasionally be­
longed to capitalists, yet in a few years it all took the ordinary course of
gettiug into the hands of women, public institutions and thrifty mechanics.
I speak advisedly in this matter, on the strength of carefully prepared ab­
stracts, of which I give a single example taken at mere hazard. Thus,
the stock-book of the bank I have in mind exhibits this result: of ten
thousand shares, 2834 are held by women, trustees and guardians; 2247
by public institutions; and only 1551 by capitalists; and the remaining
3360 by men of the industrious classes.
"The reason of this fact is plain enough to those who will use their
eyes. Capitalists do not choose to pay to the State an excise upon their
circulating cash capital; to pay the rent of a banking house; to pay the
salaries of presidents and cashiers, for doing what they can do as well in
their own persons; to be restricted to six per cent interest for their
money; and to have their affairs scrutinized every day of the year by the
public authorities of the State. No, they prefer to keep their money under
their own controul, and to use it in buying blue books or cashing notes at
an extra interest of one per cent per month. It is the mechanic, the soli­
tary female, the minor child, the public institution of charity, which need,
and find safe, investments for their money in banks; and their stock is not
the property of great city merchants rolling in wealth; but is diffused in
small sums all over the Commonwealth."

We might prosecute this matter much farther, and show that
the business of the banks, like their stocks, belongs to the in­
dustry and enterprize of the country, not to capitalists; that la­
bour and capital are inseparable in their utility; the latter,
without the former, being as useless in the hands of the owner,
as the precious metals in their primitive beds.
II. The second reason, in fact, alleged by the Secretary for
removing the deposits, is the unwarrantable reduction by the
Bank of its discounts, and consequent oppression of commerce.
The specification is, that between 1st December 1832 and 2d
August 1833, the Bank increased its discounts more than two
and a-half millions of dollars; and, so far from preparing to
wind up its affairs, although the election of the President had
sealed its death-warrant, thus strove to compel the country to
submit to the renewal of the charter, under the penalty of a
currency suddenly deranged: that on the appointment of an
agent to seek depositaries, and when the demands upon the
traders by government were unusually large, by reason of the
conjunction of the payments of the bond and cash duties, the
Bank changed its course; and between the 2d of August and the
2d of October, curtailed its discounts four millions, whilst the
public deposites were increased two and a half millions; that
this reduction compelled the State banks also to curtail, and
produced complaints of pressure from every quarter; so that, if
the public moneys had continued to be deposited in the Bank

Digitized by

Google

123
of the United States for two months longer, and the same sys­
tem had been followed, a wide spread scene of bankruptcy and
ruin must have ensued; that these causes left no alternative to
the Secretary of the Treasury, but to remove the deposites,
when, under other circumstances, he would have been disposed
to direct the removal to take effect, at a distant day, so as to
give Congress an opportunity of prescribing, in the mean time,
the places of deposite, and of regulating the securities proper to
be taken.
Now, will it be credited, that these allegations, said to be
productive of such important results, are wholly untrue; that,
consequently, the removal of the deposites was wholly unwar­
ranted by them,—and that, supposing them true, the reason
ascribed for hastening the removal is absolutely false. We use
strong expressions; but none other befits the occasion.
1. The Bank of the United States did not, between the 2d
of August and the 2d of October, voluntarily, curtail its dis­
counts a single dollar.
2. Within that period, the State banks did not curtail their
discounts.
3. The removal of the deposites, on the 1st of October, or
sooner if practicable, was definitely fixed, on the 18th of Sep­
tember, and could not depend upon events subsequent to that
day, which could not he known; and the design to prevent
the action of Congress upon the question of removal, was, pre­
viously, distinctly avowed and invariably adhered to.
1. Our first asseveration is incontrovertibly proven, by the fol­
lowing exposition of the Bank operations, extracted from the
• Bank Report of 8th April, 1834.
To provide against the effects of the President's hostility
against the Bank, demonstrated during the summer of 1833>
the Bank resolved on the 13th August: 1. That, until further
order, the amount of " bills discounted" should not be increased
at the Bank and the several offices; 2. That bills of exchange,
purchased, except at the five western offices, should not have
more than ninety days to run; 3. That, the five western offices
be instructed to purchase no bills of exchange except those
payable in the Atlantic cities, nor having more than ninety days
to run, or those which may be received in payment of existing
debts to the Bank and the offices, and, then, not having more
than four months to run.
This was the only measure deemed necessary by the Board,
which was reluctant to diminish its business, or to distress the
country. And the measure was merely followed out, by re­
solutions of the 1st of October:—^1. To extend the third resolu­
tion of 13th August, from the five western to other distant
offices. 2. That, all the other offices should likewise purchase

Digitized by

124
bills, only, on the Atlantic cities, New Orleans and Mobile; not
having more than ninety days to run. 3. To increase the rates
of buying bills of exchange. 4. To restrict the receipts of
the State bank notes to those in the same places with the offices.
5. To collect the debts due by distant State banks.
So that, up to the 1st of October, 1833, no order had been
given to curtail the loans. But all who are familiar with our
commerce, know, that during the summer, in the interval be­
tween the old and the new crop, commercial operations, and the
loans founded on them, subside. This, the Bank shows by a
tabular view for the ten successive years.
The Secretary ought to have seen, from the statements fur­
nished to him, that there were no " curtail ments," and that the
"oppressive system," which he stigmatized, was a voluntary
reduction by the maturity of bills of exchange, drawn at New
Orleans for
#2,037,099 53
Of bills drawn at other places,
1,018,215 90
And the voluntary diminution of local loans by
one house,
1,010,830 72
4,066,146 15
On the 1st of October, the deposites were withdrawn. On
the 8th the Bank directed, " that the committee on the of­
fices be authorized to direct such gradual reduction in the amount
and the time of the loans, at the respective offices, as may, in
their judgment, be made, without inconvenience to the custo­
mers of the Bank, or the community/' This authority has
been executed in such a way as to accomplish its object with
the least pressure upon the community; and the Bank sum up
their operations, in the following manner:—
1st. That the Bank never directed any curtailment of its
loans until the actual removal of the deposites.
2d. That the only actual reduction of loans took place from
the 1st of October to the 1st of December, when the
loans were diminished,
#5,641,098 26
While at the same time, the public and private deposits
were reduced, .
- 5,887,864 63
3d. That from the 1st of December, 1833, to the 1st of
April, 1834, the loans have not been reduced, but, on the
contrary, have actually been increasing, and were greater
on the 1st of April, 1834, than on the 1st of October,
1833, by
353,713 95
While, during that same period, the public deposits had
decreased no less than
2,239,393 89
4th. That the total reduction of loans from the 1st of Oc­
tober to the 1st of April, was
5,057,537 22
yihile the public deposits had been re­
duced
#6,935,568 84
Private deposits,
842,834 57
Making an aggregate of
_
—
.
7,778,403 41

Digitized by

125
being a reduction of loans less, by nearly three mil­
lions, than the reduction of deposites.
5th. That, so far from cramping the trade of the country, it
has actually purchased, rrom the 1st of October to the
Istof April, of domestic and foreign bills of exchange, - 34,671,334 00
6th. That the State banks were permitted to be indebted
to the Bank an arerage amount of
- . - 3,464,956 00
2. Our second averment is fully established by the state of
the New York banks as represented in the report of the Union
Committee prepared by Mr. Gallatin, showing that their dis­
counts were greater on the 1st of October, 1833, than in Janu­
ary of the same year; and, the
Third, is proven, by the Cabinet Communication of the 18th
of September, fixing the removal of the deposites for the 1st of
October; and by the President's declaration to Mr. Duane,
" that a State bank agency must be put into operation before
the meeting of Congress."
There is yet another remarkable feature in this reason of the
Secretary, another striking evidence of his want of reasons, and
his consequent inconsistency; it is, that the very effect he in­
tended to produce by the removal, and which, if the Bank had
reduced its discounts would have been caused by the known
intention of removal, is preferred, as the ground of complaint
against the Bank, and as the justification of the removal. He
complains of the Bank, because her ascribed action would have
carried his design into effect; and he removes the deposites,
because the Bank took measures to prevent the removal from dis­
tressing her.
Upon these facts and these reasons alone, the Secretary as­
serts, that he was obliged to remove the deposites without re­
ference to the misconduct of the Bank. But, that there were
other reasons for removal, growing out of the manner in which
the affairs of the Bank have been managed, and its moneys ap­
plied, which would have made it his duty to withdraw the de­
posits at any period of the charter. He avers,
1. That, the Bank, as a public agent, and in consideration of
the privileges and benefits bestowed by the act of incorporation,
was bound to sacrifice its peculiar interests to the public wel*
fare: That, for the protection of the public interests in the
Bank, and to apprise the proper authorities of any misconduct
on the part of the institution, five directors are appointed by the
United States, from whom the Bank, in order to avoid accounta­
bility, designedly, concealed its affairs;—to this end violating the
charter, by committing many of its most important transactions to
a committee, denominated the " Exchange Committee/' instead
of conductirfg them by a Board of at least seven directors, at
which the government directors might be present; and J>y the
exclusion of the public directors from su§h committee, and from
L2

Digitized by

126
a voice in its appointment; such appointment being made,
solely, by the President of the Bank.
But there is no violation, whatever, of the charter in autho­
rizing the President to appoint the Committee of Exchange,or
in empowering the Committee to transact the business of ex­
change or of discount The fourth fundamental law of the cor­
poration enacts, that " not less than seven directors shall con­
stitute a Board for the transaction of business." By transaction
of business, the Secretary must understand, exclusively, the execution of business. But such is not the restricted meaning of
the word here. 1. Because the requisition of seven directors to
do the various business of the Bank, would render the execution
of business impossible; not even a deposite could be received or
paid without their presence. 2. The charter, by the use of a
different term, in different places, shows that such is not the
meaning of the word. 3. The word, in its proper sense, in­
cludes direction and execution. 4. The authority of the Board
is legislative; and, though they can also execute any business
the law prescribed, by themselves, or under the charter, must
determine what part they will perform in person, and what re­
mit to others. The quorum is appointed for the exercise of
authority as a Board, for legislation and for the execution of the
commands of the Board. 5. The body is, by the very name of
its office, directive and not executive. This is clearly implied
from the provision which gives to a substituted director the
power to transact all the necessary business belonging to the of­
fice of President during the President's sickness, or necessary
absence. The charter does not declare the business of the Pre­
sident; that is prescribed by the Board of Directors or the byelaws and regulations of the Bank. If by the Board, they must
have power to direct, and he, by virtue thereof, power to execute.
The power to make bye-laws and regulations for the Bank,
not contrary to the constitution thereof, and the laws of the
United States, is given by the charter; and it has been settled,
for a century, that when a charter commits such power to the
whole body of the corporation, they may delegate it to a select
portion, which will then represent the whole body in their acts
of legislation. Otherwise, when the power is given to a select
body; for they cannot delegate their power to any other body.
Now, the whole body of the corporation, the stockholders of the
Bank, at a general meeting on the 6th of January, 1817, did del­
egate their powers of making bye-laws and regulations to the
Board of Directors, and the laws and regulations made by them,
are valid, either by virtue of their own charter authority as di­
rectors, or that delegated by the entire corporation.*
Upon this principle, the board may authorize the President
* "Mr. Binney's Speech.

Digitized by

127
to appoint committees, a necessary power to every legislative
body, or may authorise a committee to take order upon the pur­
chase and sale of exchange, or for any other act of banking,
where not prohibited by charter. The power exercised by the
Committee of Exchange is not only usual in banking, but indis­
pensable to the due management of the parent Bank. The
question of expediency is, however, for the Board, when its le­
gal quorum is present, to decide, and their decision has not been
questioned by the stockholders as to the right. Though the dis­
count of promissory notes is directed by the Board ofDirectors
in person, there is no legal difference between discounts and ex­
changes; the Board may regulate the whole as it deems best
for the Bank.
m
But the charge of concealment, as connected with the alleged
violation of the charter, involves great considerations. It would
seem to imply, general concealment, from omission to appoint
any of the government directors upon the Committee of Ex­
change; and particular concealment, from authority given to the
committee on the offices to modify the resolutions of the board
for reducing the business of the Bank; also, from refusing to the
government directors, a copy of the resolution indicating the
course of the Bank, and which they thought should be trans­
mitted to the Secretary of the Treasury.
The rights specially claimed by the government directors, are
wholly unfounded. Their right to be members of any com­
mittee has no more legal support than the right of a member of
the House of Representatives to be upon a committee appointed
by that house. It depends, in one case, on the pleasure of the
house, or which is the same thing, its organ, the Speaker; and
in the other, upon the pleasure of the board, or their agent, the
President. The right to require a committee to report to the
Board, is the right of the Board; and not of an individual mem­
ber. The right to take a copy of the minutes, depends on the
will of the Board, the charter containing no direction upon the
subject Such being the questions of right, we may advert to
those of expediency and propriety.
Heretofore, the government directors mingled in all the trans­
actions of the Bank, served on all the important committees, in­
cluding that of exchange, as their peculiar qualifications may
have warranted—their selection being always a question of
qualification. But, in the time of the late government direc­
tors, a change had come over the country and the Bank, from
which they could not escape. It was for a long time vehe­
mently suspected, and is now, certainjy, established by their
own confession/ that the government directors deemed them• See their letter to the President, 22d April, 1833, annexed to the letter of the
Secretary of the Treasury.

Digitized by

128
selves bound, or entitled, to use their posts for the purpose of
making representations to the President of the United States,
tending to excite odium against their co-directors, by impeach­
ing their motives and acts, and thus to impair the credit of the
Bank; that they deemed themselves at liberty, in the perfor­
mance of this duty, as in the exercise of this right, to pursue ob­
jects which they did not care to avow, and which they were
not permitted to avow; andfinally,that in some way, by some
unexplained theory of their appointment, they had come to the
opinion, that they possessed political powers in the institution,
which they were authorised to use for political purposes;—that
they were devised as instruments for the attainment of pub­
lic objects, and that their appointment was given to the Presi­
dent with the consent of the Senate, in order to clothe them
with all the character of official representatives, and to exact
from them a discharge of all the duties, public, political, and
patriotic, incident to a trust so conferred. All this being known,
or vehemently suspected, may have produced doubts of the
propriety of placing these directors in posts of trust and confi. dence, where other gentlemen, having feelings and reputations
of their own, might be unwilling to sit with them. Such doubts
would seem to be fully justified by the sense of the Senate of
the United States, which has refused to advise, or consent to
their re-appointment
The object which these instruments of the President were
required to pursue, but forbidden to avow, is now known to have
been the inculpation of the Board, and, particularly, of the gen­
tleman at its head; and by means of the odium thus excited,to
justify, to public prejudice, an act of deadly hatred to the Bank,
of which they were directors—the removal of the deposited.
With the confession of concealment by the government direc­
tors, to which they were coerced by the Executive, the Secre­
tary of the Treasury arraigns the Board for concealing its opera­
tions from them. He charges the Board with concealment, in
violation of their charter, and in contempt of the Government,
when the head and front of their offence is this, only—that
they would not consent to be the dupes of concealment that
was practised by others.*
But the government directors have wholly misconceived their
powers and duties. They were not devised as instruments of
the President, whatever they may have made of themselves.
There is no difference between the rights and duties of any of the
directors. Those appointed by the President, owe a duty to
the nation; so do the others, and they have performed it Those
elected by the stpckholders owe a duty to the Bank, and so did
• Mr. Binney'a speech.

Digitized by

Google

129
the others; but they neither performed nor acknowledged i t
They were not placed there to make inquiries for the Presi­
dent, who had no authority to direct inquiries to be made by
them. This is a question of charter power, of power over a
corporation, all of whose privileges are rights of property. The
charter gives to the President no such right. It expressly
gives to the Secretary of the Treasury a right of limited inquiry,
by investigating such general accounts, in the books of the
Bank, as relate to the statements which the Bank is bound to
furnish to the Treasury Department, but no further. Congress
have power to inspect the books of the Bank and the proceed­
ings of the corporation generally. These powers have been
expressly given, and have been so given, because they would
not have been derived by implications from the charter. But,
here is a power to be implied, greater than all, and worse than
all—a power to be exercised secretly, and without avowal;
ex parte, without notice, without opportunity of reply or expla­
nation being given to those whom it affects, and by persons who
are holding, to all appearances, the relations of amity, with their
co-directors sitting on the same seats, and professing the same
general objects.*
If other justification were necessary to the Board for its
conduct, than the simple statement of the facts, it is found, in
the approbation of all, whom party has not blinded or made
mute. Yet, a hue and cry has been raised against the directors
of the Bank, because the Bank would not tell the Government
directors, that they might tell the Secretary, precisely how
they meant to wind up, if they did mean it; and here is a new
theory of banking, to place beside the new theory of political
power—that, all which the Bank intends to do for its own de­
fence, is to be told to an enemy—that, if he thinks fit, he may
defeat the measure—that it is not sufficient for him to know the
precise condition of the Bank, in point of fact, as it actually is,
and as he must perceive it to be, by the weekly statements; but,
that he must also know what it is going to be, by the operation
of measures of defence, that if it is in his power, and he also
thinks fit, he may frustrate the purpose. The private directors
of this Bank have upon them the responsibility of taking care
of all the stockholders—the nation, for its seven millions, in­
cluded: and the unwarrantable censure of the President and
Secretary, of the mode in which they have fulfilled their duties,
has not been sustained by either house of Congress.
2. The conduct of the Bank, in relation to the three per cent
stocks, is alleged as an abuse of the power of the private direc­
tors, and as evidence of their disposition to conceal their trans* Mr. Binney's Speech.

Digitized by

130
actions. This affair is but adverted to, not enlarged upon, by
the Secretary. But, a most perverted and rancorous statement
of it is given in the President's cabinet manifesto.
" In March, 1832," says this document, " the Bank was so sensible of
its inability to pay over the public deposits, when they would be required
by the Government, that it commenced a secret negotiation with the
agents for about 02,700,000 of the three per cent stocks, held in Holland,
to induce them not to claim payment for one or more years after notice
should be given by the Treasury Department, that the Bank might use,
during that time, the public money set apart for the payment of these
stocks.
" After this negotiation had commenced, the Secretary of the Treasury
informed the Bank, that it was his intention to pay off one-half of the
three per cents on the first of the succeeding July, which amounted to
about $6,500,000. The President of the Bank came immediately to
Washington, and upon representing that the Bank was desirous of accom­
modating the importing merchants at New York, (which it railed to do,)
and undertaking to pay the interest itself, procured the consent of the
Secretary, after consultation with the President, to postpone the payment
until the succeeding first of October. Conscious that at the ena of that
quarter, the Bank would not be able to pay over the deposits, and that
further indulgence was not to be expectea of the Government, an agent
was despatched to England, secretly to negotiate with the holders of the
public debt in Europe, and induce them by the offer of an equal or higher
interest than that paid by the Government, to hold back their claims for
one year, during which the Bank expected thus to retain the use of
||5,000,000 of public money, which the Government should set apart for
the payment of that debt. The agent made an arrangement, on terms, in
part, which were in direct violation of the charter of the Bank, and when
some incidents connected with this secret negotiation accidentally came
to the knowledge of the public and the Government, then, and not before,
so much of it as was palpably in violation of the charter was disavowed.
A modification of the rest was attempted with the view of getting the
certificates without payment of the money, and thus absolving the Govern­
ment from its liability to the holders. In this scheme the Bank was par­
tial! v successful, but to this day the certificates of a portion of these
stocks have not been paid, and the Bank retains the use of the money."

Two cases of procrastination of payment are here distinctly
alleged against the Bank. The facts are, with regard to the
First, that in March, 1832, the Secretary of the Treasury in­
formed the President of the Bank of the intention of the
government to pay, on the succeeding 1st of July, to each stock­
holder, one half of his three per cent stock, remarking " if any
objection occurs to you either as to the amount or mode of pay­
ment, I will thank you to suggest it." The Presidentreplied,
that so far as the Bank was concerned, no objection occurred to
him; it being sufficient that the government had the necessary
funds in the Bank. He suggested, however, that in the exist­
ing state of the commercial community, with a very large
amount of revenue (nine millions) to be paid before the 1st of
July, the debtors of the government would require all the for­
bearance and aid that could be given them; that the proposed

Digitized by

131
payment of several millions to European stockholders, tending
to diminish the usual facilities, might endanger the punctual pay­
ment of the revenue; and that, therefore, it might be advisable
to, postpone such payment until the next quarter.
This suggestion was supported by letters from Mr. M'Duffie,
chairman of the Committee of Ways and Means, and Mr. Cambreling, chairman of the Committee of Commerce. The gov­
ernment wished the postponement; and the only difficulty, arising
from a wish to save the quarter's interest, the President of the
Bank removed, by an agreement to pay the interest, as the money
would remain with the Bank,—a provident and laudable bar­
gain, certainly, for the institution, since it paid three, and would
receive six per cent on the amount The committee of inves­
tigation, before whom the whole subject was, in 1832, by their
majority, reported, " that they were fully of the opinion that the
Bank neither sought for, nor requested a postponement of the
payment by the government;" being, however, hostile to the
Bank, it added, yet if such postponement had not been made,
the Bank would not, on the 1st of July, have possessed the
ability to meet the demand, without causing a scene of great dis­
tress in the commercial community." The ability of the Bank
is no longer to be doubted, and its efforts to save the commercial
community from great distress, merits, and will receive, the
grateful acknowledgments of the country. And yet this trans­
action is represented by a President of the United States as a
cause for discrediting the fiscal agent of the nation, at home and
abroad.
2. With regard to the second postponement, it appears, that
in the year 1832 the country was heatily indebted to Europe
for large importations of 1831; it was desirable that time should
be given to pay the debt, from the annual earnings, and that no
addition should be made to the foreign demand. But there were
more than twenty-five millions of the public debt payable in that
year, of which more thanfifteenwere to be paid in nine months,
and between eight and nine of it to foreigners. The Bank,
from its exhibits, was prepared for the first payment on the
1st of October, 1832.
" In this state, the Bank, had it considered only its own interest, would
have been perfectly passive, since it was perfectly at ease. But it bad
other and higher interests to consult. From the communication with the
Treasury in July, it was probable that the funds of the Government might
he insufficient to pay the debt advertised to be paid—and that even if these
funds were adequate, the operation would exhaust all the means of the
Government, and require that the community should repay the whole
amount of the public funds distributed among them. It was further
manifest, that the ability of the Government to meet its engagements,
depended entirely on the punctual payment of the revenue in the commer­
cial cities, from July to January, which was estimated at about twelve
millions of dollars.

Digitized by

132
" That resource was threatened with the greatest dinger by the appear­
ance of the cholera, which had already began its ravages in New York
and Philadelphia, with every indication of pervading the whole country,
Had it continued, as it began, and all the appearances in July warranted
the belief of its continuance, there can be no doubt it would have pros­
trated all commercial credit, and seriously endangered the public revenue,
as in New York and Philadelphia alone, the demand on account of the
foreign three per cents was about five millions."

The bank, therefore, made an arrangement with the foreign
owners of this stock to the amount of about four millions, to
leave their money in the country for another year, assuming to
pay the interest instead of the government
" All these things were fully explained by the Committee of Ways and
Means, to whom tnat part of the President's message was referred, and
that Committee accordingly reported as follows:—
" * The arrangement made by the Bank for a temporary postponement,
with the consent ef the holders, of the payment of five millions of the three
per cent debt, being now substantially closed by the surrender to the
Government of the certificates of stock, except for a small amount, and
the whole debt itself, as far as respects the Government, at an earlier
period than it is probable it would otherwise have been, this question
seems no longer to present any important or practical object of inquiry, or
to call for, or admit, any action of Congress upon it.'
" This ought to be satisfactory, yet is the subject now revived with the
addition of two distinct errors in point of fact. The first is that the Bank
4
was conscious that at the end ot the quarter it would not be able to pay
over the deposits'—whereas the state of the Bank, as above explained,
proved its entire ability to make this payment, and that its interposition
was exclusively dictated by the desire to avert an additional trouble at a
season of pestilence. The second is, that the part of the arrangement
made with the agent of the\Bank was not disavowed until * some incidents
connected with this secret negotiation accidentally came to the knowledge
of the public and the Government.9 The fact is, that as soon as that part
of the arrangement, which seemed to conflict with the charter, was *
received, the determination was made to decline executing it before any
publication of any sort was seen or known in regard to it."
Of the propriety of the conduct of the B a n k in relation to this
transaction, e v e r y experienced and enlightened statesman in the
country w a s satisfied. Its true character, so grossly misrepre­
sented, is thus summed up b y M r . J. Q. A d a m s :
44
What was the case of the three per cents? The Bank was reqaired to
pay off, say twelve millions of the public debt, which bore an interest of
three per cent a year, to pay it off at two given days, in the y^ar 1832; the
Bank paid it off accordingly. Part of this debt, however, was due in finrope, say five millions.' The Bank negotiated an arrangement, by which
the European holders of the debt consented to wait a year longer before
they should receive payment of their portion, they taking the Bank for their
debtor instead of the nation, and receiving three per cent for the year's in­
terest. This was equivalent for the time to so much addition to the capi­
tal of the Bank. It enabled the Bank to accommodate borrowers here to
double the amount, for the year, and to receive therefor an interest of six

Digitized by

133
percent. The profit to the Bank was the difference between three per
cent* which she pai<l*on saidfivemillions, and six per cent interest, which
she received on double the amount which it enabled her during the same
time to loan. But suppose it enabled the Bank to loan only to the same
amount. She paid one hundred and fifty thousand dollars for the use of
the money, and received three hundred thousand dollars by the employment
of it. Her profit upon the transaction was one hundred andfiftythousand
dollars, o*ne-fifth of which, say thirty thousand dollars, she paid in divi­
dends, to the people of the United States*"
3. But the Secretary alleges, that it is not merely by the con­
cealment of its transactions that the Bank has proven itself re*
gardless of the duties of its agency. Its own interests are found
to be its ruling principle, and the just claims of the public have
been treated with little regard, when they have come into col­
lision with the interests of the corporation. As in the case of the
three per cents, so in that of the French Bill, in which a de­
mand is made upon the public for the sum of 0158,342 77, da­
mages for non-payment. W e have shown, conclusively, in the
case of the three per cents, that, though the Bank wisely pro­
moted its own interests, it also essentially served the public. In
this case the interests of the Bank and the nation were concur­
r e n t In the case of the French Bill, those interests are, in some
respects, adverse, as in the case of debtor and creditor. The
claim is a legal one, and as the nation is abundantly solvent, and
has been rigorous in exacting her dues from others, she comes
with an ill grace to ask mercy and generosity. But this is
another appeal from the laws of the country to the passions of
the people.
The following is the President's statement of the case.
" The Bank became the purchaser of a Bill drawn by our Government
on that of France for about 900,000 dollars, being the first instalment of
the French indemnity. The purchase money was left in the use of the
Bank, being simply added to the Treasury deposits. The Bank sold the
Bill in England, and the holder sent it to France for collection; and
arrangements not having been made by the French Government for its
payment, it was taken up by the agents of the Bank in Paris, with the
funds of the Bank in their hands. Under these circumstances it has,
through its organs, openly assailed the credit of the Government, and
has actually made and persists in a demand of fifteen per cent, or
$\58,842 77 as damages, when no damage, or none beyond some trifling
expense, has in fact been sustained, and when the Bank had in its own
possession on deposit, several millions of the public money which it was
then using for its own profit. Is afiscalagent to the Government, which
thus seeks to enrich itself at the expense of the public, worthy of further
trust?"
T o this, the Bank replies, publishing unquestioned and incon­
trovertible evidence of the truth of its statements:
1. That in this transaction, it was not the fiscal agent of the
Government,—-that it offered to become such, to collect the
bill without charge, and to place the amount to the credit of the

M

Digitized by

134
Government on the 2d of March, 1834, at the current rate of
exchange of the best bills, on that day, in Philadelphia—that
this offer was refused; and the Government, after considering
the offers from other quarters, decided to sell the bill to the
Bank—the Bank paying for it, nearly one and a half per cent
more than for a large amount of other bills, then purchased.
2. That the purchase money was not left in the use of the
Bank, being simply added to the treasury deposits. But had
such been the fact, no change would have been made in the na­
ture of the question. The payment was complete—the funds
were to the credit of the Government, subject to its order, and
as effectually out of the control of the Bank as if they had
been withdrawn in specie. Not only was this the case; but the
intention of withdrawal was immediately announced. Credit
was given to the Treasurer on the 11th of February, 1833; and
on the 6th of March, the Secretary offered to lend the money.
Yet this was not all. The identical proceeds of the bill were
actually used by the Government in payment of its ordinary
expenses, by the 20th of May.
3. The Bank had paid the amount of the bill in the United
States in the most inconvenient form. When it was protested
in Paris, the agent of the Bank paid it on account of the Bank;
so that the Bank actually paid for the bill twice;—having, of
course, credit for the proceeds of the sale of the bill in London;
but its actual disbursements on account of the bill were up­
wards of §11,800,000,—and when, on the 22d of March, the
protested bill came back, the whole amount to the credit of the
Treasury, throughout the whole United States, with the excep­
tion of the Danish indemnity money, was not two thousand
dollars more than the Bank had advanced on account of the
bill. Had it been otherwise, the use of the deposits by the
Bank would be no ground for the release of damages; since a
full and covenant consideration was paid for that, by the stipu­
lated services of the Bank.
4. Upon return of the bill, the Bank, as indorser, called on
the Government for the principal and damages. This was not
only in course of business, but was a duty to the Government;
because, if it had the right to draw the bill, it had the right to
claim, from France, damages for the breach of contract, suffer­
ed by payment of the legal claim of the Bank. This it might
the more readily do, as being one-fifth partner of the Bank, its
own share would be 231,000. In the course of events the
ovemment will, probably, be the gainer by the demand of the
lank. But its legal liability does not depend on this; and it i s
denied, with a very ill grace, by a party which inexorably,
under all circumstances of solvency and insolvency, exacted
damages on protested bills purchased from American citizens.

f

Digitized by

135
The case of Girard is 'cited by the Bank as one of the most
striking. The lapse of years reverses the state of the parties;
Mr. Girard's heirs and his associates, apply to the Secretary—
not for twenty per cent damages which he paid, but for fifteen
per cent; and the answer vouchsafed by the treasury depart­
ment, is, that the claim has no foundation in law or equity—to
which the President' adds, that it is an attempt to "impair the
credit of the Government, and tarnish the honour of the coun­
try. Such a course tends to the utter confusion of all ideas of
justice.
But, supposing the. claim were questionable, would it justify
this denunciation of the Bank? It is a question between Amer­
ican citizens and their Government, depending on the law of
the land, and determinable by its judicial tribunals. Yet,
while the Bank calmly awaits the decision, the President of
the United States prejudges the question,—denounces the Bank
for having presumed to make the claim,—and gives that to the
country, as a reason for the removal of a Secretary of the
Treasury, in order to subject the whole public revenue to his
own disposal.
III. The last reason, in fact, assigned by the Secretary is, that
the Bank has used its means, with a view to obtain political
power, and thereby secure the renewal of its charter. This is a
grievous charge, and, if true, grievously should the Bank an­
swer it. The specifications under the charge are—
1. That, with a view to influence the measures of the
Government, by causing its weight to be felt in the elec­
tion of public officers, the Bank increased its discounts, from
842,402,304 24 to $63,026,424 93; nearly fifty per cent in one
year; and on the 1st of May 1832, to $70,428,070 72, being
an augmentation of $28,025,766 48 in sixteen months. This ex­
traordinary increase of its loans, was made when the charter had
hut Jour years to run, with little chance of renewal; when she
was aware of the necessity of closing up her vast concerns, and
upon the eve of a severely contested election, in which she
took an open and direct interest, demonstrates, that she was
using her means for the purpose of obtaining a hold upon the
people, in order to operate upon their fears, and to induce them,
by apprehensions of ruin, to vote against the candidate whom
it desired to defeat
Here is a singular compound of allegations of fact, and supposi­
tions. The former are untrue and the latter wholly gratuitous.
The time at which the alleged increase of loans was made was
not within four but six years of the termination of the charter;
—a time at which no reasons of prudence required a limita­
tion or reduction of the business of the Bank, other than the
ordinary principle of safety. That such principle was duly

Digitized by

136
regarded » evident from the present perfect condition of the
institution. The chances of renewal were greatly in her favour*
as demonstrated by the fact, that an act for that purpose passed
both houses of Cohgress-^the Bank could not, a priori, assame*
or believe, that a President of the United States, avowing no
constitutional scruples, would oppose himself with his oboes*
ious Veto, to the declared sense of the country upej| a question
of expediency. The hold which the Bank was to get upon the
people implies, that the loans, if made, were made to insolvent
debtors, with the knowledge of their insolvency. For, if made
to solvent debtors in the ordinary way of business, they eoald
have no effect upon the opinions or votes of the borrowers.
There are things asserted in morals as in physics which are in*
credible, because they are in opposition to known laws of ac­
tion. It is contrary to these, that, an institution, whose end and
aim is pecuniary profit, guided by intelligent men> should put
at hazard 28 millions of its funds, to affect an object that was
already attained. For, there is not a man in the country who
does not know, that had the President been neutral upon the
subject, the Bank would have been rechartered without ob­
jection. Supposing, what it is impossible with propriety to
suppose, that the object could have been attained and would
have been worth the price,—had the Bank offered her millions
to bribe the President, she would indeed have been chargeable,
with an attempt" to influence the measures of the Governme^V,
unduly.
But the Bank has reduced her loans from their maximum of
870,000,000, to 854,000,000. Had the increase been made with
design to influence the votes of the borrowers, the reduction
would have been avoided; for, all who have been compelled to
pay, would become her enemies. And we well know, that the
passion of revenge is, not only a more powerful, but a more
durable motive than gratitude, especially, for a pecuniary ac­
commodation which has beeq fully paid for at legal price.
But the allegations of fact are untrue. The loans at the
periods mentioned by the Secretary stood thus:
Loans to Individuals
Loan to Government
Domestic Bills

January, 1831.
May, 1833.
$33,575,403 43 #47,375,078 20
8,674,681 06
10,456,653 90 23,052,972 52
852,706,738 39 {870,428,050 72
52,706,738 39
#17,721,312 33

Baring, Brs. & Co.

Gr. 2,387,331 19 Dr. 1,878,122,29

Digitized by

137
From this it is manifest that between, those two periods the Bank had
received from Government the reimbursement of
$8,674,681 06
It had drawn for its foreign funds
#2,387,331 19
And drawn on its foreign corres­
pondents for an additional sum of
1,878,122 29
Making a total of
4,265,453 48
Thus furnishing additional means of discounting to the
amount of
Yet its actual loans—its actual discounts were increased
only

#12,940,134 54
5,124,893 71

The Domestic Bills of Exchange purchased for the transferring of the
funds of the Government or of individuals, make a separate and independ­
ent business, dependent on the demand for the interior commerce of the
country. But taking the increase of those bills into consideration, it will
be seen that the increase of loans is
#5,124,893 71
And the increase of Bills of Exchange
12,596,318 62
Making a total increase of

#17,721,212 33

instead of 28 millions. That is to say, in the year 1831, there being a
most active foreign and interior trade, requiring unusual facilities for its
operations, the Bank having received from the Government the reimburse­
ment of its loan to Government, amounting to more than eight millions;
and having called in its funds in Europe, and employed its credit there to
the amount of four millions, possessing thus additional means of loaniug,
to the amount of nearly thirteen millions, actually increased its loans to
the amount of seventeen millions, making in fact a mere increase of its in­
vestments not equal to five millions, of which increase the new Branch
Bank of Natchez, established within that period, alone contributed nearly
three millions.

2. The second specification of the design of the Bank to ob­
tain political influence is, that, the whole capital of the Bank
is, in effect, placed at the disposition of the President of the
Bank, for political purposes. The evidence alleged by the Sec­
retary, as substantiating this enormity, is the disclosures of the
Government Directors, who have deemed themselves, ex officio, viceroys} but have been characterized, repeatedly, in Con­
gress as official spies, over the rest of the Board.
The basis of this accusation is found in the following pro­
ceedings and resolutions of the Board:
On the 30th November, 1830, the President submitted to the
Board a copy of Mr. Gallatin's article on Banks and Currency,
published in the American Quarterly Review, and suggested the
ropriety of making the views of the author more extensively
nown than could be done by means of the subscription list
of the Review. Whereupon it was resolved, " that the Presi­
dent be authorized to take such measures in regard to the cir­
culation of the contents of the said article, either in whole or in
part, as he may deem most for the interests of the Bank." On
the 11th of March, 1831, on further suggestions and reports of
the President, it was also resolved, " that the President, be au-

E

M2

Digitized by

138
thorized, to cause to be prepared and circulated, such documents and papers as may communicate to the people information in regard to the nature and operations oj the
Bank.9'
An attempt was made by the Government Directors to ob­
tain, what the Board deemed, unusual and unnecessary state­
ments of expenditures under these resolutions, and also their
repeal. Their resolution, offered to this effect, implying cen­
sure on the President, the Board resolved, " that they have full
confidence in the wisdom and integrity of the President, and
in the propriety of the resolutions of the 30th of November,
1830, and the 11th of March, 1831, and entertain a full convic­
tion of the necessity. of a renewed attention to the object of
these resolutions, and that the President be authorized and re­
quested to continue his exertions for the promotion of the said
qbjects."
The expenditures purporting to be made under the authority
of these resolutions during the years 1831 and 1832, the Presi­
dent of the United States avers, were about 880,000; the objects
to which they were applied, were Congressional reports, Mr.
Gallatin's and other pamphlets relating to the Bank, and news­
papers containing proceedings of Congress and discussions of
this interesting topic.
Now, the Sank shows by details of their expense account,
that the expenditure for these purposes, during four years, in­
stead of 880,000 was but 858,000, which it was obliged, to
incur, to defend itself against injurious misrepresentations.
With this expenditure, the stockholders, the nation included,
are, so far as their sense can be ascertained, entirely content
The directors eligible by the private stockholders have been
re-elected—the public directors eligible by the nation, who
misrepresented and denounced the expenditure, have been re­
jected, expressly upon the ground of misconduct, in this very
case. What more conclusive can be said, as to the propriety of
the conduct of the Board in their defence of the Bank! But
one word as to the right of the directors to resort to the press
for that defence. On this head Mr. Binney shall speak:
" Sir, I deny the charge. I say the design was not entertained, and
that not a particle of evidence has been produced to infer the contrary.
The Board have printed and published, and have assisted in printing and
publishing, *for the purpose of communicating to the people information
in regard to the nature and operations of the Bank, and to remove un­
founded prejudices, or repel injurious calumnies on the institution intrasted
to their care.' This is the declared purpose of all they have done, and
they stand upon the sacred principle of self-defence in asserting their right
to do it. That there was nothing in the veto message to justify the cffcur
lation of the review which the gentlemen from Tennessee has noticed, W
more than I admit; and when the gentleman shall assert, upon bis own
authority, that the Board have given currency to a scurrilous pamphlet

Digitized by

13&
against any one, he will find me ready either to deny the fact, er to admit its
impropriety. The Constitution secures to every person, natural and politi­
cal, the right of printing and publishing, being responsible for the abuse of
it* It prohibits Congress from passing any Taw abridging the freedom of
the press. If the charter had inserted a provision to restrain the Board of
Directors from printing or publishing, it would have been null and void.
An interpretation of the charter to restrain it is equally so. They have
the universal right, subject to the constitutional corrective through tfce
judicial tribunals of the country; but to condemn, and then to try them-*
to punish, and then to hear—belongs not to the tribunals of this earth, nor
*to the Constitution of this country.*'

But, how vast the difference of the costs imposed on the na­
tion by the respective parties!
We give a view of tnis from M R Adams's Speech.
♦* The Bank, in the course of four years, have spent sixty thousand dol?
lars in printing and paper, they say in self-defence; the President of the
United States says, in electioneering against him, and for a recharter to
themselves. This money was the property of the stockholders, and onefifth part of it, twelve thousand dollars, belonged to the people of the
United States. The people of the United States own seventy thousand
shares of the stock of this Bank. When the President of the United States
declared war against the institution, every one of those shares was worth
oue hundred and thirty dollars.. What are they worth nowt At the ufrmost, one hundred and five dollars a share. Compare the prices current
of the two periods, and you will find that every share of the Bank stock
owned by the people of the United States, has lost twenty-five dollars of
its value to them by this electioneering of the President of the United
States, against the Bank, and for himself. Twenty-five dollars a share,
upon seventy thousand snares, is one million seven hundred and fifty
thousand dollars; and this is the sum which the President of the United
States has levied upon the people, by his electioneering against the Bank
and for himself.
" Thus, then, stand the comparative accounts. The Bank has cost the
people of the United States, in electioneering against the President, and
for itself, twelve thousand dollars. The President has cost the people, in
electioneering against the Bank, and for himself, one million seven hun­
dred and fifty thousand dollars. And in this same contest of electioneer­
ing, while the Bank has expended forty-eight thousand dollars of the
money of the other stockholders, the President of the United States has
taxed them to the amount of seven millions of dollars. Eight millions
seven hundred and fifty thousand dollars is the sum levied by the Presi­
dent of the United States upon the stockholders of the Bank, for his elec­
tioneering; and the Secretary of the Treasury tells us that sixty thousand
dollars expended in the same contest by the Bank is sufficiently startling."

3. There is yet a third specification under the charge against
the Bank—of attempting to gain political influence. It is made
by the President, in his cabinet manifesto; but, the Secretary
of the Treasury has had the grace not to dwell upon it, in his
report to Congress. It is " that the Bank controls, and in some
cases, substantially owns, and by its money supports, some of
the leading presses in the country," by unwarrantable loans.
But as this charge has not been persisted in, and the report of the
Committee of Investigation in 1832 covers the whole ground

Digitized by

140
whieh Congress did hot believe an improper one, we will not
enlarge upon it
But, in closing this part of the subject, we may remark, that
these charges of dishonesty and corruption are equally ungener­
ous and unjust Ungenerous, because they are made under the
protection of official station against private citizens, for such
are the representatives of the private stockholders of the Bank,
in a manner which deprives them of the means of defending
themselves, and vindicating their characters. They are unjust,
because made, not in candid, open and explicit forms, which
ought to mark all official denunciations, against individuals, but
in a manner consciously evasive, and distrustful of itself, and
because they are untrue. These charges, too, deeply as they
affect the character of private individuals, are not made directly
against them by name. No! it is the Bank, that is the mon­
ster; the moneyed aristocracy; the mammoth corporation;
that is the sink of corruption; the purse-proud tyrant; corrupt
itself, and practising corruption upon the people.*
" Now, strip Andrew Jackson and Roger B. Taney of the little brief
authority which invests them with the privilege of slandering their fellowcitizens with impunity, and neither of them would DARE to charge any one
of those men whom I have named, (the Bank Directors)^ either before their
faces, or any where in the presence of credible, impartial witnesses, with
dishonesty or corruption, either in general terms or by any one specification.
Neither of them would dare go to the city of Philadelphia, and there, in any
possible manner, avow a charge against any one of those men, which could
make up an issue for a test of character by a verdict of their peers. It
may, indeed, be a question whether even a President of the United States,
or a Secretary of the Treasury, does possess the right of pouring forth
slanders upon private individuals, wholly without responsibility to the laws,
protective of character. It cannot be doubted, that, under colour of the
aischarge of official duty, it is in the power of those high dignitaries to blast
the reputation of individuals by groundless imputations, for which the
injured party would in vain seek reparation or indemnity from the laws of
his country. But, even this odious privilege has its limits. Neither a
Secretary of the Treasury, nor a President of the United States, is wholly
above the law. No one will deny that both those officers are, as indi­
viduals, liable to action or indictment for slanders, like others, and there
seems to be a full consciousness of ,this, in the undeviating uniformity
with which they point their official defamation at the Bank, instead of
directing their charges, as fair and honourable adversaries ought to do,
at the president and stock directors of the Bank, the real objeets of their
accusations."*

In determining on the propriety of the conduct of the Secretary,
we may consider the acts of the Bank, either as consistent with,
or in violation of, the charter. In the first case, they are mere
acts of administration or management of the Bank, which the
United States, as a stockholder, have agreed to commit to the
discretion of the Board of Directors. Neither the Government
Directors nor the President of the United States have a vote on
the proceedings of the Board. If their resolutions be lawful,
* Speech of Mr. J. Q. Adams.

Digitized by

141
they bind all the stockholder*, public and private; and if inex­
pedient, their correction is to be sought in the annual elections.
Upon questions of administration, within tjie legal competency
of the Board, there is no more justification of an attempt to tear
the Bank to pieces, by a part of the Directors, or by the Trea­
sury Department, in support of them, because the voice of the
minority is not respected, than there would be for an attempt, by
a State or States, for the like reason, to sever the Union. All
the parties to the contract have agreed, that questions of admin­
istration within the lawful competence of the legislature, whe­
ther of the Bank or of the Union, shall be decided, by a majority;
and if they require correction, that they shall be corrected by a
majority, and in no other way. If the measures of the Bank
were lawful, the dissatisfaction of the Secretary with them is
no cause for removing the deposits. The management of the
Bank has not been committed to him. He has no right to in­
spect its management, or even its condition, except in a limited
way, for the purpose of ascertaining the security of the deposits.
To have given him the power of removal in any case in which
he should deem the management wrong, would have been to
give him, effectually, the management of the Bank in every
particular.
If, on the other hand, the acts questioned, are violations of the
charter, the objection to the Secretary's acts are not less strong.
He is not the officer to whom the charter has confided the au­
thority to direct a prosecution for a violation of the charter. It
has expressly confided that authority to others—the Bank is
entitled to be heard, before any judgment of violation is pro­
nounced—and that judgment is to be rendered by the judicial
department only.*
Before we proceed to the consideration of the last subject
which we proposed to treat, namely, «the right claimed by the
President to remove, at his pleasure, from office, all persons
whom he is empowered to nominate," it is proper we should
notice an episode to the removal of the deposits, in the illegal
and defeated effort of the administration to transfer the pension
fund from the Bank of the United States to the pet banks.
By the system of pension agency, as established by law, the
Bank of the United States and its branches pay the pensions
in States where they are respectively established: and the Bank
designate, for this purpose, some State bank where there is no
branch bank; and where there is no State bank, the Secretary
at War is authorized to appoint a pension agent.
The administration made several efforts to obtain possession
of these funds, at certain places, prior to January, 1834, by
transferring them to the State banks, at Portsmouth and Albany;
but, the remonstrances of the Bank of the United States exhi• Mr. Binney's Speech.

Digitized by

142
bited the illegality of the measure in so strong a light that, Mr.
Eaton, Secretary at War, revoked, himself, one of his orders,
and his successor recalled the other. These were very morti­
fying circumstances, producing a festering wound in the mind
of the President; the pain of which could be assuaged, only, by
vengeance. For this, an opportunity was supposed to be dis­
covered in the phraseology of the pension acts of 15 th May, 1828,
and 7th June, 1832, which, by forced construction, it was thought,
might be separated from the general pension system; although
they had been recognized as parts of that system, by every execu­
tive department, and, what is more to the purpose, by several sub­
sequent acts of Congress, in which they were, by name, recog­
nized as pension acts. This, however, proved no barrier to
executive invasion; and in January, 1834, the Secretary at War
announced the appointment, on the same day, of fifteen new pen­
sion agents (pet banks), to perform the duties heretofore fulfilled
by theBank of the United States, under the act of 1832; and, at
the same time, that Bank was forbidden to pay any pensions ac­
cruing under that act, and directed to transfer the funds, books
and papers, relating thereto, to the newly nominated agents.
With this requisition of transfer the Bank of the United
States refused to comply, on the ground, that it was not war-,
ranted by law, and that the Bank was alike bound by its duty
to Congress and regard for its own safety so to do.
On the 4th of February, the President of the United States
communicated this refusal to Congress, denouncing the Bank in
unmeasured terms, for attempting to impede and defeat the
measures of the administration, usurping the functions of the
judicial power, and prescribing to the executive department the
manner in which it shall execute the trust confided to it by law.
This grave but unfounded accusation, having been duly
examined by the Senate, like every other accusation against
the Bank from the same source, has *been dissipated into thin
air. On the 26th of May, the Senate resolved, 1. That the
Department of War is not warranted in appointing pension
agents in any State or Territory where the Bank of the United
States or one of its branches has been established, except when
specially authorized by act of Congress. 2. That no power is
conferred by any law upon the department, or Secretary at
War, to remove the agency for the payment of pensions, under
the act of 7th June, 1832; and the funds, books and papers,
connected with that agency from the Bank of the United States,
and to appoint other agents to supersede the Bank in the pay­
ment of such pensions. 3. That the act of Congress for the
relief of certain officers and soldiers of the Revolution, passed on
the 15th May, 1828, and the act supplementary to that act,
passed on the 7th of June, 1832, are properly acts providing for
military pensions.

Digitized by

143
The proceedings of the executive officers, in this case, and the
opinions professed in relation to it by the President and the
Attorney General, merit examination in another view than as
they regard the Bank. The unconstitutional assumption of power
is here theoretically and practically displayed, as in most other
measures of General Jackson's administration,, and demand
thorough and wide exposure. But our space and subject do not
now permit the fulfilment of this duty.
IV. The Constitution of the United Stales, consisting of funda­
mental rules only, contains little else than general principles,
subject to various and conflicting interpretations. Scarce a year
has elapsed since its adoption, in which some construction or
new application of a principle has not arisen to agitate the country.
And such will be the case, so long as due regard for political
liberty excites a wholesome jealousy of constructive power, and
prompts us to confine within safe limits its necessary but danger­
ous exercise. As this power must always be exercised in sub­
servience to existing circumstances and prevalent opinions, and
as the one may be deceptive and the other unfounded, errors
will arise for which experience must furnish appropriate reme­
dies. When the sense of the constitution is perfectly clear, and
its operation proves mischievous, the remedy lies in amendment
of the letter of the instrument. But, when an evil practice re­
sults from the construction of the letter, it is the voice of experi­
ence teaching us to seek another interpretation, more consistent
with the public happiness, which is the governing purpose of the
grant made by the people—it is the extraordinary and peculiar
circumstance, which Mr. Madison admits may arise, to change
the construction, however long received.
These remarks are peculiarly applicable to the portions of the
constitution, whence has been derived the power of the Execu­
tive to remove from office; which seems to depend altogether
upon construction. The power and mode of appointment are
clearly and literally expressed, whilst the tenure of office as to
time and condition is wholly undefined, except in case of the
judges; and there is no provision for removal of an incumbent,
save by impeachment.
This omission compels resort to construction, for a power to re­
move from office, otherwise than by impeachment, which seems,
in some cases, as indispensable as the power to appoint. In the ab­
sence of every expression which might give this power, adherence
to the letter of the constitution would make the tenure of every of­
ficer that of good behaviour; since he could be removed, only, upon
thejudgmentof the Senate,on impeachment. And this opinion was
sustained, as constitutional law, by some distinguished members of
the first Congress. But the inconvenience of this construction,
as it regards many offices, is such, that the opinion has not found
many advocates. Three other opinions have been earnestly main*

Digitized by

144
tained. I. That the power to remove belongs exclusively to the
President II. That it rests with the President and Senate,
which together form the appointing power. III. That it is
a power necessary and proper to carry into effect other power*,
and being not otherwise delegated, is granted to the Legislature.
We will consider these in their order.
The question first came up for consideration in the first Con*
gress, when about to establish the executive departments. We
much doubt whether any construction could have been given, to
any portion of the constitution, pregnant with more danger to
political liberty and moral purity, than that which was tbea
adopted.
I. The power to remove from office was claimed for the
President, alone, as incident to the power to appoint. It wis
admitted, on all hands, to be a dangerous one, and liable to great
perversion. But it was contended, that it would not be abused,
as it was not likely that the first magistrate would ever be an
ambitious or designing character, and that he would be ever
awed by the dread of impeachment It was said to be a portion
of the executive power, all of which was vested in the President;
except so far as the Senate participated in the power to appoint:
That the President, being responsible for all the officers of the
executive department, those officers must be responsible to him,
and consequently removable at his pleasure. That being required
by the constitution to take care that the laws be faithfully ex­
ecuted, it was necessary, for this purpose, that all executive offi­
cers should depend upon him.
To this, it was replied, that it was an assumption wholly
gratuitous, to say, that the power of removal was incident to the
power of appointment; the one not being necessarily dependent
upon the other, but readily separable, as was apparent, by the
constitution itself, under which the President and Judges were
appointahle by one power and removable by another; by the
* applicability of impeachment for removal in all cases; and by
the assignment of the power of removal to other than the per­
sons who appoint, in various manners, under the State legislatures:
—That it could not be considered settled, that the power to
remove was an executive power; since, even the power of ap­
pointment was exercised by the State legislatures; and Congress
in certain cases, under the constitution might vest the power in
the judiciary:—That, supposing the power to remove were inci­
dent to the appointing power, it would not belong to the Presi­
dent, as the appointing power was not in him, but in him and the
Senate conjointly: That the evidence of history forbade the pre­
sumption, that the chief magistrate would be always free /rom
ambition and design; and that if he were otherwise, the dread<of
impeachment would not deter him from using his power to cor­
rupt officers dependent on his will:—That although the constitu-

Digitized by

145
lion declared, that the executive power should be vested in the
President, that was not an indefinite grant of all executive
• power; the executive power could be only such as was given by
the constitution; no department under the general government
having other powers than were expressly granted, or were indis­
pensable to carry those expressly granted into effect: that clause,
therefore, of the constitution proved too much, and consequently
proved nothing; because it implied, that powers which are ex*
pressly given by the constitution would have been in the Presi­
dent without the express grant: That any other construction
would give to the President all the powers of an absolute mon­
arch, embracing every power which could by any means be brought
within the definition of executive power; including that of
regulating at his discretion alt the duties of his subordinate agents,
with the manner in which they should exercise them:—That the
responsibility imputed to the President was wholly ideal, since
the responsibility even for the appointment did not rest altogether
upon him, being divided with the Senate.—If he were responsi­
ble for the conduct of the officer, it would be because he might
remove him; but if he had not the power of removal, the respon.sibility did not exist.—It was sufficient that the officer was re­
sponsible to the law; to give to the President the power of re­
moval, would impose a responsibility that might be irksome.
II. It was contended, that, if the power to remove were incident
to that of appointment, it vested in the President and Senate, as
the President alone could only nominate; to appoint, required
the advice and consent of the Senate. This view was sustained
by the Federalist in the following manner.
u
It has been mentioned as one of the advantages to be expected from the
co-operation of the Senate, in the basiness of appointments, that it would
contribute to the stability of the administration. The consent of this body
would be necessary to displace as well as to appoint, A change of the Chief
Magistrate therefore would not occasion so violent or general revolu­
tion in the affairs of government as might be expected if he were the sole
disposer of offices, where a man in any station has given satisfactory
evidenoe of hisfitnessfor it, a new President would be restrained from at­
tempting a change, in favour of a person more agreeable to him, by the ap­
prehension that the discountenance of the Senate might prostrate the attempt,
and bring some degree of discredit upon himself. Those who can best esti­
mate the value of a steady administration, will be most disposed to prize
a provision, which connects the official existence of public men with the
approbation or disapprobation of that body, which from the greater perma­
nency of its own composition, will, in all probability, be less subject to in­
consistency, than any other member of the government."
It was also contended, that, not only was there no expression
in the constitution giving the President the power of removal
from office, but that the contrary is strongly implied; for it is
said, that, Congress may establish offices by law, and vest the ap­
pointment, and consequently the removal in the President alone,

Digitized by

146
in the courts of law, or heads of departments; showing that Con­
gress was not at liberty to make any alteration, by law, in the
mode of appointing superior officers; and, consequently, they
are not at liberty to alter the manner of removal: That the Senate
was a permanent body, so constructed as to give durability to
public measures; that permanency was designed and desired in
the magistracy, and, therefore, the Senate was combined in the
appointment to office, and should be, in the removal. For if the
President alone have the power of removal, he may, at any
time destroy whatever had been done. Such a principle would
be destructive of the intention of the constitution, expressed
by giving a participation in the power of appointment to the
Senate ; and would also subvert the clause, which gives to
that body the sole power of trying impeachments j because,
the President may remove the officer, in order to screen him
from the effects of their judgment and impeachment.
To these views, it was objected, that the constitution no more
gave the power of removal to the President and Senate, than to
the President alone ; that, if the appointing power were in them,
still it must be determined, that the removing power was inci­
dent to the appointing power : That, to require the concurrence
of the President and Senate, in the removal of an officer, was
highly objectionable, on the score of expediency—for that, in all
cases of removal, the president must accuse to the Senate; the
accused would scarce fail to find friends in so numerous a
body, and every question of removal might become a trial of
the accuser, as well as of the accused ; that, the dignity and use­
fulness of the President must necessarily be, in either case,
diminished ; and that such joint power could be only conve­
niently exercised, by the constant session of the Senate, as many
cases might arise, that would require action before the Senate
could be assembled.
III. A third party contended, that the case was provided for in
the constitution; the 18th clause, Sec. 8. Art. 1., giving Congress
power to make all laws which shall be necessary and proper for
carrying into execution the powers granted by the constitution,
and thereby vested in the government of the United States, or
any department or office thereof: That the necessity of the power
of removal, otherwise than by impeachment, was universally ad­
mitted: That, the power of creating offices is given to the Legis­
lature, which under this grant may determine their organization,
affix the tenure, and declare the control. It may provide that,
the office be held for any term of years, and that the incum­
bent be removable by the President, the President and Senate,
the legislature, or otherwise: That Congress might adapt this
power to all cases; giving it to the President absolutely, where
absolute and instantaneous control was necessary over the agent;
k.

Digitized by

147
as in the case of a diplomatic minister; limiting it to suspension, *
only, where time and circumstances would admit of due inquiry,
into the propriety of removals or vesting it, in proper cases, abso­
lutely, or qualifiedly, in heads of departments orother officers:—
That under this construction, it would not be necessary to concede
the dangerous ground, that, the President possessed all executive
powery and that being responsible for the conduct of all execu­
tive officers, he held the threads of their destiny in his hands, to
clip at pleasure : That, if the power of removal be granted by
the constitution, as seemed to be admitted on all hands, and
was not given to the President, or to the President and the Senate,
it must vest in the legislature, consisting of the House of Repre­
sentatives, the Senate and the President; it being the very es­
sence of legislative power to create officers, to prescribe their
duties, to fix their tenure, and to determine what kind and degree
of malversation shall be sufficient ground for dismissal from
office.
This construction, which seems to us the only sound one, was,
we think, feebly opposed. It was alleged, that this was a case
omitted in, or provided for, by the constitution ; and that, in
either view, the legislature had nothing whatever to do with it.
If it were omitted, Congress by attempting to supply the power
would amend the constitution; which it had no right to do in this
mode. But this argument, would deprive Congress of all the
powers necessary and proper to carry the constitution into effect.
If it were provided for, Congress ought not to legislate upon that,
which was already settled by the constitution. But, if the power
were given by the constitution, the difficulty lay in determining
to what department it was given.
At the time this question came up for decision, no experience
could have been had, upon it, in the General, or State, Govern­
ments. In the constitution of one of the latter, at least, and per­
haps in others, expressions similar to those of the constitution
of the United States occur.
By the constitution of Pennsylvania, "The Supreme Execu­
tive power of the Commonwealth shall be vested in the Gover­
nor;" " who shall appoint all officers whose offices are esta­
blished by the constitution or shall be established by law, and
whose appointments are not by the constitution otherwise pro­
vided for.91 Now, these provisions present a stronger case in
favour of the executive, than those of the constitution of the
United States; inasmuch, as under the latter instrument, the
legislature is expressly empowered to "vest the appointment of
such inferior officers as they think proper, in the President, alone,
in the courts of law, or in the heads of departments."
Under the constitution of Pennsylvania, by construction alone,
the Governor is holden to possess the right of removal from office;
and in practice, the commissions of all officers holden at his will,

Digitized by

148
m

are deemed to expire with his term of office; or at least, to require
the authority of the new Governor, which is usually given b y
proclamation, to continue them in force; and a new commission
is, we believe, issued for every such officer, by every new Go­
vernor, if not by every Governor upon re-election. The conse­
quence of this is, a perpetual contest of parties for the possession
of the instrument of appointment; the Governor being, com­
monly, we might say almost without exception, the mere tool of
the party, that selects him; without discretion and without dig­
nity; swayed with regard to the appointments of each county,
not by the fitness of the candidates, but the recommendation of
his partisans; and the officers selected, perfectly conusant of the
quality which determined their appointments, are the humblest
slaves of the Governor, so long as he is the candidate of the
dominant party. At every change of the executive, especially if
such change be the consequence of a change of party power, the
scramble for offices, the paltry intrigues, of which the appointor
and the appointed are parties, are most shameful and disgusting.
Yet, whenever the Legislature deems proper, it takes away
from the executive the power of removal, or qualifies it with
conditions.
Many instances of the exercise of this power might be given;
but we shall confine ourselves to a few only. The heads of de­
partments in the Commonwealth may be considered, the Secre­
tary of State, the Treasurer, the Auditor General, the Secretary
of the Land Office, and the Surveyor General. The first is appointable by the Governor, but the term of his office is fixed for
the term of the Governor's continuance in office, if he shall so
long behave well. Consequently, he is immoveable, by the
Governor. The Treasurer is elected, annually, by the Legisla­
ture, and is removable, only, by that body. The Auditor General,
the Secretary of the Land Office, and the Surveyor General, are all
appointed by the Governor, and, until the year 1811 the first, and
until the year 1809, the two last were removeable by the mere will
of the executive. But by acts passed in these years the term of
office of each of these officers was fixed at three years, and they
were made removable by the Governor, only on the address of
both houses of the Legislature, A distinction is made, i n relation
to the Auditor General, by which it would seem, that, if an incum­
bent do not serve the full term of three years, his successor is appointable, only for the balance of the term. Thus, in the great
offices of State, the Legislature has modified the tenure of office to
which the Governor by the constitution appoints, and has taken to
itself the power of removal. In minor offices, they have also taken
from the Governor, or have qualified, the power of removal. And
thus, they have conclusively shown, that neither by the power to
appoint, nor by the duty to take care that the laws be faithfully

Digitized by

149
executed, which is also imposed upon him, is the power to remove
from office, under a grant similar to that given by the constitution
of the United States, exclusively and inseparably vested in the
executive. This is not a conclusive argument, we admit, against
the construction given to the Constitution of the United States;
but it is high presumptive evidence that a different construction
may be safely adopted.
Still, the debate on this subject ended in Congress, in the
House of Representatives, and in the Senate, in the latter body,
by the casting vote of the Vice President, the elder Adams, by
the recognition of the power of the President to remove from
office, all persons holding appointments from him. This conclu­
sion, which fortunately is not binding upon the present or a fu­
ture Congress, was attained under deceptive circumstances and
erroneous opinions. All parties were conscious of the importance
of the subject before them. Those who denied the power, seem
also to have had a prophetic view of the future; whilst those who
supported it, professed to believe, that the halcyon present would
never change, and that all future presidents would be Washingtons.
The former averred, that they were about to declare a power
in the President, which might be, thereafter, greatly abused:
That the country was not always to expect a chief magistrate, in
whom it could place such entire confidence as in Washington,
and that it ought, therefore, to look forward to a period, when
this power might be in the hands .of an ambitious man, who
might apply it to dangerous purposes;—who might from caprice
remove the most worthy man from office; whose will would be
the only tenure, by which office would be held, and when, con­
sequently, every officer would become the dependent, the abject
slave of the President, and When men of reputation and honour
would shun office as they would the degradation of slavery. But
the case, they said, might also be looked at in another aspect.
The removal might be made by a President, improperly, though
without malicious motives. He might have about him, men, who
were envious of the honours and emoluments of persons in office;
men, who might, even use him as an instrument to effect sinister
purposes, and who might insinuate suspicions into his honest
breast, and thus produce the removal of incumbents who stood in
their way.
They predicted, that the President would, by these means, ob­
tain the control and disposition of the Treasury: That the con, stitution gave him the command of the military, and that with
the head of the Treasury Department at his mercy, he would soon
be master of the liberties of the country : That, if he desired to
establish an arbitrary authority, and found the Secretary of the
Treasury not inclined to second his endeavours, he had nothing
N2

Digitized by

150
more to do, than remove him, and appoint another with princi­
ples more congenial to his own. The bill recognizing the au­
thority, was declared to contain the seeds of royal prerogative;
and it was argued, that if the TJhief-Magistrate might take a man
away from the head of a department, without assigning any rea*
son, be might as well be invested with power, on certain occa­
sions, to take away his existence.
The partisans of executive power dented these dangers. So
differently did they consider the nature of office from that as­
signed to it at the present day, that they deemed it even impos­
sible to conceive of the removal of incumbents, for other causes
than the want of capacity or of integrity. It is amusing and yet
painful to contrast the opinions of the influential men of that day
with those of the Jackson men of this; and perhaps nothing can
show more, how widely we are departing from the original sense
of the constitution. So far from considering the offices of the
nation " spoils of victory," to animate every needy and un­
thrifty partisan to combat, they ran almost to the contrary ex­
treme, and were disposed to view offices as the property of the
incumbents, whilst they were fulfilled with ability and faithful­
ness. So far from conceiving that men were removable for a
difference of opinion, on political subjects, from the appointing
officer, they recognized no other causes of removal, than treason,
bribery, or other high crimes and misdemeanors. So far from
apprehending, that a President could ever exist, who would de­
light in causing a " rotation in office," they dreaded, that from
bis reluctance to perform an ungrateful duty, more injury would
arise from not removing improper officers, than from displacing
good ones: and so far from supposing, that the first magistrate of
the nation, the chosen of twelve millions of freemen, would carry
to the Executive chair a disposition to reward his friends, that
is, his partisans, and punish his enemies, that is, his opponents
at the polls, by the distribution of office, that they held him alike
impeachable, for continuing an unworthy man in office, and the
removal of an unworthy man from office.
The contrast of the opinions of the present administration, with
those of our fathers, will be obvious, by adverting to the doctrines
proclaimed by President Jackson, in his first Message, Decem­
ber, 1829, and by comparing the number of removals from office,
made in the times of the preceding presidents and in his:
I'The duties of all public offices," he says, "are, or at least, admit of
being made, so plain and simple, that men of intelligence may readily qua­
lify themselves for their performance. I cannot but believe, that more is
lost by the long continuance of men in office, than is generally to bo gained
by their experience. I submit, therefore, to your consideration, whether
the efficiency of the government would not be promoted, and official indus­
try and integrity better secured, by a general extension of the law, which
limits appointments to four years."

Digitized by

151
M
In a country where offices a?e created, solely, for the benefit of the peo­
ple, no one man has any more intrinsic right to official station than another.
Offices were not established to give support to particular men at public ex­
pense. No individual wrong is, there tore, done by removal; Since neither
appointment to, nor continuance in office' is matter of riffht: The incumbent
became an officer with the view to public benefits, and when these require
his removal, they are not to be sacrificed to private interests. It is the peo­
ple, and they alone, who have a right to complain, when a bad officer is sub­
stituted for a good one. He that is removed, has the same means of ob­
taining a living, that are enjoyed by the millions who never held office. The
proposed limitation would destroy the idea of property now so generally
connected with official station; and although individual distress may be
sometimes produced, it would, by promoting that * rotation' which consti­
tutes a leading principle, and in the republican creed, gives healthful action
to the system.

This most artful compound of inconsistency, truth and false­
hood, is the most appropriate proclamation of the chief of a party,
that came into office by a triumph won under the banner of
" Booty," and whose sole principle of union was the spoils of
victory—of a chief who hoped to retain power, by perpetuating
popular delusion. The duties of all public offices are proclaimed
easy to all: experience, faithfulness, and skill, are decried as va­
lueless! Offices are not established to give support to particular
men at the public expense;—but all the people are invited, once
in four years, at every presidential term, to throw themselves into
the arena and contend for their fruits! A rotation in office is
announced solely to awaken cupidity that could not be, and was
never designed to be, gratified. But it served the purpose of put­
ting incumbents on* the alert, and to awaken some hundreds of
thousands ojf hungry expectants, who might look for reward at
the end of four years' servitude. The service has been rendered,
the time has elapsed, but the fruits have not been, nor are they
like to be gathered. Meritorious incumbents who have faithfully
preserved their allegiance, preserve, also, their places.
But on this subject, let General Jackson be his own judge.
Upon this subject he once entertained sound opinions, or his hy­
pocrisy has never been surpassed. In his celebrated letter to Mr.
Monroe, which did more than his military triumphs to make him
President, he says, " The removal of no public officer should be
effected to create a vacancy or to gratify the ambition of a favourite
partisan/' When this shall come to pass," the patriot will have
ample cause to tremble for the honour of his country and the
perpetuity of her public republican institutions." 0 prophetic
spirit! Has it not come to pass, and does not the heart of every pa­
triot tremble for the honour of his country and the perpetuity of
her institutions ? Who can observe this contrast between the decla­
rations and the practice of the man, and not feel the divine wis­
dom of the prayer, "Lead us not into temptation."
T h e true doctrines in relation to public office, are simple, and

Digitized by

152
alike beneficial to the people and the incumbents. Offices of
State are created for the service of the people, as the State itself
is constituted for their benefit. The emoluments of the officer
is an accident, not an object, of the creation. Rotation in office is
not a leading principle of republican creed, and does not give
healthful action to the system. Such doctrines have a demoral­
izing effect, tending to discourage industry, and to create nume­
rous, anxious, idle, venal expectants of office. Their absurdity
becomes apparent, by following them out to their proper results.
Even if we limit the proposition, by saying, that all men, duly
qualified, are entitled to participate in official emoluments, it will
be obvious, that an attempt to reduce it to practice, must produce
a change every hour, in every office in the country. The proper
principle is, that public officers are the agents of the people, ap­
pointed directly or indirectly, as the people have determined,
and should be changed, only, as the public interests require. Like
other agents, they should receive a moderate and just compensa­
tion for their services, with the assurance of its continuance,
whilst those services are faithfully rendered. Towards its ser­
vants, the State should pursue the course of every prudent indi­
vidual, in his own affairs, and never discharge a competent,
experienced, and faithful agent, to receive others in quick succes­
sion, who engage with a view to wages, and perhaps illegal vails,
and whose capacity is to be acquired at public expense, and
whose morals will be those of the gamester, because their exist­
ence depends upon chance, or what is the same thing, upon the
caprice of another.
Let us now observe, how far the practice of the founders of
the republic and their immediate disciples, and that of the new
dynasty, accords with their respective principles. For forty
years which had preceded the inauguration of President Jackson,
the removals of civil officers, as far as can be ascertained from the
public records, amounted to seventy-three only—less than an
average of two per annum. During the twelve years of the
administration of Washington and of the first Adams, there were
twenty-two removals—all, no doubt, with exclusive reference to
the faithful execution of the laws.
Mr. Jefferson came into office by virtue of what has frequently
been termed a "civil revolution;" during which, party feelings,
greatly excited, might have stimulated and extenuated vindictive
measures against sturdy adversaries. He found almost allthe public
offices in possession of his political opponents—a fact which shows,
that although " rotation in office," be not threatened by the Presi­
dent, its dread suffices, whilst the officer, is dependent upon him, to
produce strong cohesion. Some of these opponents, especially
marshalls and attorneys, had rendered themselves odious to the
people by uncalled for zeal in enforcing the obnoxious sedition law.

Digitized by

153
Others had been commissioned in the last moments of his prede­
cessor, thus depriving him of the appointment And yet, under
all these exciting circumstances, the whole number of removals by
Mr. Jefferson, in eight years, was thirty-six only; less than five
per annum.
Mr. Madison, who proclaimed and always held the doctrine,
that the President was liable to impeachment for the retention of
an evil, or the dismissal of a good, officer, in eight years, re­
moved five civil officers,—Mr. Monroe nine,—and Mr. Adams,
the reviled John Quincy Adams, in four years made two remo­
vals. Had the last gentleman been less regardful of the purity of
our institutions, and the independence of our citizens, he would
have rendered the triumph of his rival, at least, more difficult.
But, he was a martyr to the independence of public officers, and
the freedom of opinion. His great offence to the disciples of
Jacksonism was his resistance to the " rotation in office," which
made all public places the " spoils of victory.9*
When General Jackson entered upon office, there had been no
enforcement of odious laws; and instead of appointments on the
eve of his accession, derogatory to his rights, the executive action
had been, for months preceding, suspended? and on the day of
his inauguration there were more offices vacant, the filling of
which had been postponed for the purpose of conferring the
patronage on him, than the whole number of removals by Mr.
Jefferson in his eight years.
Within one year, next ^following General Jackson's inaugura­
tion, there were, ajt least, one hundred and ninety-six, if not more
than two hundred, expulsions; double, nearly three times as
many, as during the whole forty years of all his predecessors!
And thi§, toor when the vastly greater proportion of the offices
were in the hands of his friends. To these removals are to be
added 490 removals of post-masters, hundreds of inspectors,
clerks, deputy-collectors, deputy-marshalls, secretaries, and other
subordinates, swelling the amount from 1500 to 2000, in a single
year! Nor has the proscription yet been stayed.*
By this nefarious policy, the administration has acquired an
army amounting to near fifty thousand well paid mercenaries;
who, spread over the whole surface of the country, mingle with
and endeavour, in many instances but too successfully to sway, the
people in their primary assemblies. , This was a political offence
which Jefferson could not pardon, and which Jackson most hy­
pocritically denounced. The first addressed the various officers
of his administration thus:
" The President of the United States has seen with dissatisfaction, officers
of the General Government taking, on various occasions, active parts in the
* Speech of Mr. Sprague, in Senate.

Digitized by

154
election of public functionaries whether of the General w State Governments.
freedom of elections being essential to the matnal independence of govern­
ment and the different branches of the same government, so vitally cherish­
ed by most of our constitutions, it is deemed improper for officers depending
on the executive of the Union, to attempt to control or influence the free
exercise of the elective right; and further, it is expected, that he, (the
officer,) will not attempt to influence the votes of others, nor take any part
in the business of electioneering; this being deemed inconsistent urith the
constitution and his duties to it."

The inaugural address of General Jackson, of the 4th of March
1829, contains a principle of the same kind, but tainted with the
poison which pervades all his measures, an excitement to a strug;le for participation in office, which he well knew must render
utile all charges to refrain from illegitimate influence over the
elective franchise.
" The recent demonstration of public sentiment," he says, " inscribes on
the list of executive duties in characters too legible to be overlooked, the
task of REFORM; which will require, particularly, the correction of those abuses,
that have brought the patronage of the Federal Government into conflict with t
freedom of elections, and the counteraction of those causes which have disturb
the rightful course of appointment', and have placed, or continued power in un
faithful or incompetent hands."

f

So much for the theory; for the adverse practice under it, we
refer to the elections in N e w York, in Philadelphia, in every
place where the officers of the government are located, and, more
especially, we refer to the broad comment which has lately been
given to the text, in the State of Ohio. On'the 8th of January,
1834, a convention, under the denomination of "the friends of
the present administration," assembled at Columbus to appoint
delegates to represent the party, in a proposed national convention to be holden in May, 1835, to nominate a successor to
General Jackson. This Ohio convention of " the friends of the
present administration," was composed of one hundred and
seventy persons; of whom seventy-seven were office holders.
A gentleman holding the office of District Judge, under the ap­
pointment of the President, not then confirmed by the Senate,
in his character of a " central committee man," called a meeting
(by advertisement in a public newspaper) of the friends of the
administration, in a particular county, for the purpose of naming
delegates to the convention at Columbus. All these things were
matters of public notoriety. The convention, among other things
constituted a " central committee, with electioneering jurisdiction,
co-extensive with the territorial limits of the State." Of this
committee composed of seven persons, Jive, are officers holding
appointments under the executive: viz. one district attorney;
two receivers of public moneys; one surveyor of the Virginia
military lands; and one post-master.
But it has been discovered that an army of 50,000 mercenaries
already in place, and a half million of hungry expectants, are

Digitized by

15$
•
insufficient, entirely to subjugate twelve millions of freemen, and
the iannisary bands are to be enlarged by all the force which
can be obtained from the directors and stockholders'of the Go­
vernment pet banks, and tbtir debtors, in every State ; all of
whom are, through their interests, to be enrolled in' the execu­
tive battalia.
That measures such as these, if successful, must put the liber­
ties of the country at the mercy of the Executive, cannot admit
of a doubt. A subservient Congress may be attained by them ;
and though the forms of our government may. be preserved, a
tyranny as effectual as if sustained by armed cohorts, will be es­
tablished. But will such measures be successful? We answer
confidently, No; if they be timely resisted. The interests of the
people furnish the true, the only true rules of right in politics;
and whilst the people are free they will always, sooner or later,
be pursued. Man in the mass, as in the individual, is liable to
error. Under deceptive lights the mass may mistake its welfare;
but, experience is ever at hand with her correctives, and happy
are the wanderers when her lessons are not too dearly gained.
The hand of that experience is upon us, heavily upon us. The
means of happiness which years of labour had procured, are
hourly stealing away; but with them, the clouds which had ob­
scured the public sense, ate, also, departing; and the people,
rising in their might, will shake from them; as dew-drops from
the lion's mane, the vampire which is fatally draining the current
of their prosperity. To remove the darkness which rests upon
the people, it is necessary, only, THAT THERE BE LIGHT.

Digitized by