H. OF R.]

Deposite Banks.

[JUNE 20, 1834.

He heard gentle

men near him observe that the enemy could have steamboats too; but that was not to be expected. The House had been gravely told that no money had been expended on Boston harbor. Did gentlemen forget that an appropriation of $75,000 had been expended upon this very George's island?

parte who had so thoroughly fortified his own great har- this matter were perfectly correct. bors of Brest and Cherbourg. He did not seem to place entire reliance either on stumps or on men's bosoms, but had erected vast bastions of stone instead, by which he was able to withstand ships of the line of 74, 90, and 100 guns. Mr. R. was not satisfied with what had been said respecting the Secretary of War. It had been alleged that that officer was opposed to an appropriation for this Mr. REED here interposed. The appropriation the fort during the present year. Mr R. saw no evidence gentleman referred to was not for fortifications; it was of this. The Secretary had given the House a bill con- merely for a sea-wall, to prevent the shores of the island taining this item. That was the best expression of his from being washed away. It only secured a solid founopinion on the matter. But how had it happened that he dation for the fort. He would remind the learned genhad written a letter to somebody, saying that this work tleman, who seemed so well acquainted with the means might be deferred? Manifestly, because somebody had first of harbor defence, that a sea-wall was not a fort. written to him, suggesting a supposed necessity of redu- Mr. JONES. Very true; but $75,000 is money; and Icing the estimates. Mr. R. had called at the Depart- money appropriated for Boston harbor. Gentlemen told ment with the design of getting a sight of the letter the House that these fortifications were indispensable for written to the Secretary, as well as that written by him, the security of our commerce. He insisted that we had but had not been able to obtain it. The letter, no doubt, quite enough of them. It was false policy to build more. was in substance this: "Mr. Secretary, your estimates Where was to be the end of it if we had a coast of upfor this year are too large. The House cannot pass wards of two thousand miles in length? Could we put a them; they must be reduced; and now please to say fort wherever a vessel might run in and land troops? He where the reduction can best be made." The Secretary, prayed gentlemen to consider the number of troops it thus pressed, had replied, that if any works must be dis- would require to man all these works. Our army was pensed with, it might be best to begin with those on now but 6,000 men, or less than that. Should this policy which the least amount had been expended. Why did continue and prevail, we must have a standing army of not the chairman show the letter which some member ten times that number. The gentleman said that, had it had addressed to the Secretary? Let that letter be pro- not been for some defect in Fort Washington, on the Poduced, and the whole mystery would be explained in a tomac, this city would not have been taken. Now, Mr. moment. Mr. R. trusted the appropriation would pass J. was mistaken if the British ships had not entered this without further opposition. A more important fort for city through Bladensburg. [Loud laughter.] He meant the defence of the commerce, the navigation, and the to say troops, not ships. The gentleman had said that naval resources of the country, did not remain to be erect- one fortress defended Virginia. But would a fort upon ed. It had long since been proposed in the general plan the Rip Raps, or would Fortress Monroe, prevent the Britof fortification; and now, after so long a delay, when the ish squadrons from ascending the Chesapeake and laying appropriation had been duly inserted in the bill, he hoped waste the country? There was no fort in Boston harbor the guardian of the bill would not succeed in turning it last war, yet he did not know that the British had done much at laying waste the country round that city. They did not, for some reason or other, seem to wish to hurt it. Why build a fort to defend what was never attacked? Mr. J. was against the whole system. It must lead to an annual appropriation for the garrisoning of these works, which would soon far surpass the cost of the forts themselves. [Here the debate was arrested by an adjournment; the motion pending being that of Mr. PEYTON, 10 strike out the enacting words of the bill.]

out.

Mr. PEYTON now moved to strike out the enacting clause of the bill.

Mr. JONES, of Georgia, supported the motion. He wanted (to use the gentleman's phrase) the House to "take a sweep of 60," and strike out not one of these appropriations, but the whole of them. They were but entering wedges to new and vast expenditures.

The gentleman from Massachusetts seemed to believe that the harbor and city of Boston were at present in a state of great dinger. But the gentleman from South Carolina had said that, for one million of dollars, granted to his! own State, he would undertake to guaranty the safety of that city and harbor for ever. Mr. J. said he was of the same opinion, and would have no objection to become joint security with his friend.

FRIDAY, JUNE 20.

DEPOSITE BANKS.

Mr. POLK, from the Committee of Ways and Means, reported a resolution proposing to make the bill "regulating the deposites of the money of the United States in certain local banks" the special order for 12 o'clock this day.

After a desultory conversation on the point of order involved,

The House had been told of the liability of the harbor to the attack of an enemy; but did history teach the same lesson? Did experience prove that that city had been so greatly endangered? Had it sustained any injury during Mr. E. EVERETT inquired whether, as this day was the last war from an enemy's fleet? Not that he had set apart by the rule for the consideration of private bills, ever heard of. And had there been a fort on George's it was competent for a majority to adopt the resolution? island to protect it? There had not. And why was there any more need of such a fort now, in a season of profound peace? The work itself would cost a vast sum; and then an enormous amount more would be requisite to arm it with cannon, and garrison it with soldiers. The invention of steamboats, gentlemen should recollect, had made a vast change in the security of harbors and the facility of defending them. No squadron could lie in safety at the mouth of any harbor where armed steamboats could move against it. He did not mean to say that steamboats could prevent their lying there; but, should the squadron be becalmed, steamboats might not only annoy, but attack and capture it. He gave the opinions of naval men, not his own conjectures, and he believed their opinions in

The SPEAKER decided that the resolution could only be received by suspending the rule for that purpose. Mr. POLK accordingly moved a suspension of the rule; which motion was decided in the affirmative: Yeas 114, nays 54.

So the House having suspended the rule, and the question being on the adoption of the resolution,

Mr. JONES, of Georgia, moved to strike out "this day," and insert "Monday next;" which motion was rejected.

Mr. WATMOUGH moved to insert "Tuesday;" which having been also rejected,

JUNE 20, 1834.]

Harbor Bill-Deposite Bank Bill.

[H. OF R.

might reduce the sum to that, or such other sum as it would deem expedient.

Mr. CHILTON said that, as he believed, if this subject was to be taken up, so ought the joint resolutions from the Senate, declaring the reasons of the Secretary of the Mr. MERCER said he could not consent to any reducTreasury for the removal of the deposites, insufficient; tion; he would rather increase the amount to what was and the one for the restoration thereof to the Bank of the originally proposed, viz: 30,000 dollars, and which he United States; and he moved an amendment to the reso-thought was necessary. lution to that effect.

Mr. WATMOUGH expressed his hope that, if the vote was reconsidered, it should be with the understanding that the subject would be immediately proceeded with; otherwise, he would warn gentlemen, under the circumstances that the House were in, from having so recently fixed the other bill to be taken up at 12 o'clock, they would gain but little by the motion to reconsider.

Mr. FELDER called on those who had assisted in rejecting the amendment to continue their exertions, and, by refusing to reconsider the vote, thus take the first steps that were necessary to crush, what he believed the country deemed to be a bad system, internal improvement, when in the hands of the General Government.

Mr. EVANS rose for the purpose of correcting the member from New York, [Mr. BEARDSLEY,] in the statements he had made. The House, he believed, knew fully that part of the appropriation was intended to defray the arrearages of 1833; and also knew that it had been usual to make such appropriations for ten years past.

Mr. BRIGGS now moved the previous question; which was seconded: Ayes 93, noes 40. The previous question was then put; but before the vote was taken,

Mr. JONES suggested that the hour of one o'clock had arrived, and insisted on proceeding to the special order of the day, viz: Mr. POLK's bill to continue the deposites in

the State banks.

After a desultory discussion on questions of order, the order of the day was postponed to 3 o'clock.

Mr. BEARDSLEY rose to state that he believed there had been some misconception as to the appropriations made by the bill in question, as he believed it contained The previous question was then put and carried. no appropriations but those that were ordinarily made for The main question, on reconsidering the rejection of the purpose of completeing works already commenced. the amendment of Mr. MERCER, appropriating $29,000 to There was a proposition to engraft on the bill an appro- the continuance of surveys, was put, and decided by yeas priation of $29,000 for surveys, but which was rejected, and nays, as follows: Yeas 101, nays 75. he believed, more from the want of a proper understanding or explanation as to its objects, than any thing else, and which induced the House possibly so to reject it, without referring to what had been its former practice in making similar appropriations.

So the House agreed to reconsider that question.

DEPOSITE BANK BILL.

The House then proceeded to the special order of the day, and took up the bill regulating the deposites of the money of the United States in certain local banks.

The bill having been read, Mr. POLK addressed the House as follows:

He understood that, out of the sum proposed to be given for defraying the expenses of these surveys, 10 or 20,000 dollars had been already expended. These explanations, he believed, were not made, or, if made, were Mr. Speaker: The advanced stage of the session, and not generally known to or understood by the House as the evident propriety of proceeding, with all convenient they should have been, or there might have been a differ-despatch, to dispose of the mass of other public business ent result.

Mr. LEWIS, to save the time of the House, and believing this subject had been sufficiently discussed, moved to lay the motion to reconsider on the table.

upon your table, will alike conspire to induce me to condense very much what I had proposed to say upon the subject of the currency, and the legal provisions deemed proper to be made for the future management and safekeeping of the public money. The bill upon your table

Mr. E. WHITTLESEY called for the yeas and nays, which were taken, and the motion of Mr. LEWIS was re-has been prepared and brought forward by the Committee jected: Yeas 74, nays 104.

So the House refused to lay the motion to reconsider on the table.

The question being on the motion to reconsider, after some remarks from Mr. MERCER and Mr. POLK,

of Ways and Means, in accordance with the principles understood to be settled by the resolution of the House, which affirmed that the State banks ought to be continued as the place of deposite of the public money, and that it is expedient for Congress to make further provision by Mr. SUTHERLAND moved to postpone the special law, prescribing the mode of selection, the securities to order of the day until one o'clock; which motion prevail-be taken, and the manner and terms on which they are to ed: Ayes 96, nays 56.

The motion of Mr. LANE to reconsider was decided in the affirmative: Yeas 123, nays 72.

So the House having agreed to reconsider the bill, Mr. BEARDSLEY moved a reconsideration of the vote by which the amendment proposed yesterday by Mr. MERCER was rejected, viz: “ And for defraying the expenses of surveys, pursuant to the act of 30th April, 1824, including arrearages for 1833, 29,000 dollars.

be employed.'

The bill is designed, so far as legislative provisions are deemed proper, to carry that resolution into effect.

In the report of the Committee of Ways and Means, submitted to the House upon a former day of the session, and which concluded with this, among other resolutions, which were afterwards concurred in by the vote of the House, the committee state that," According to the law, as it now stands, the duty of selecting the banks, and of Mr. B. informed the House that 25,000 dollars had been prescribing the securities to be taken, is devolved upon appropriated for these surveys for some years, and he the Secretary of the Treasury, under the supervision of understood there was an expense of at least 16 or 17,000 the President. This power has been heretofore exercised dollars incurred for surveys ordered to be made last year, by the head of the Treasury Department, and in a manwhich would reduce very considerably the appropriation ner advantageous to the public; and it is not doubted, if in the amendment. The House, if it thought proper, the law should continue unchanged, that it may and will

H. of R.]

Deposite Bank Bill.

[JUNE 20, 1834.

continue to be so exercised by the head of that Depart to "keep in order the currency of the country every ment; yet it is the opinion of the committee that discre- where."

tionary power should never be given, in any case, to any The minority of the Committee of Ways and Means, in officer of the Government, where it can be regulated and their counter report upon the subject of the deposites, defined by law. They think that it would be more con- maintain that, "if the present bank is not to be rechar sistent with the principles of our Government for Con- tered, something to regulate the currency must be progress to regulate, by law, the mode of selecting the fiscal vided in its place. The plan of the Secretary gives over agents, the securities proper to be taken, the duties they the regulation to State banks, which will themselves be shall be required to perform, and the terms on which they promoters of the disorder. The country requires someshall be emoloyed." thing which will regulate the State banks." That "State banks and their operations are to be controlled, and not the controlling power, in the execution of such a design."

The opinion, here expressed, of the actual powers of the Executive, under the existing law, was founded not only upon a careful examination of the law itself, but upon the construction given to it, the uniform acquiescence in that construction, and the practice under it, from the earliest periods of the Government, and running through every administration, down to the present time. But we are here met at the threshold, and told, if this be so, why legislate upon the subject? "If it is all very well as it is, why should there be any legislation about it?" In the course of a former debate upon this subject, the same gentleman [Mr. WILDE] thus expressed himself:

it

Now, sir, I affirm that there is no power given to Congress, by the constitution, to create such a regulator. I am not about to go at large into the question of the power of Congress, under the constitution, to create a bank. The power, I will, however, say, is maintained by its advocates, upon the exclusive ground that a bank is necessary as a Government agent in the execution of some express power. The power has never been placed, even by the boldest of its advocates, upon the ground that such an in"But it has been said, and will be said, the money of stitution was necessary to regulate and control the paper the nation is in the selected banks-it will do no good to currency of the States. This startling doctrine is now, remove it-will you not provide for its safe keeping there? is believed, for the first time assumed in an official paper I answer, frankly, No! I will not consecrate usurpation emanating from and having the sanction of a minority of by law. They have seized upon the Treasury. Unless a committee of this House. What are the powers of we, its constitutional guardians, can restore it to its safe Congress in regard to the currency? Congress may and proper depository, let them keep it till they can be "coin money and regulate the value thereof," but this impeached. If tyranny will not rouse the people, ruin they do by fixing by law the value of gold and silver will." coin; and this power is executed by the mint, and not by It is here distinctly avowed, in anticipation that such a the bank. The argument is, that a national bank is nemeasure as this would probably be brought forward, that cessary as a regulator of the paper currency of the States. it was to be opposed. Indeed, there is reason to doubt If this be so, then Congress have conferred upon a corwhether there be any measure connected with the reve- poration of its own creation, a power which they do not nue, short of the recharter of the Bank of the United themselves possess. Congress possess no power, either States, or tending ultimately to produce its recharter, express or implied, to create an agent to regulate the which can receive the support of a part of this House. paper currency of the States. It is a power and a check I have simply to say to gentlemen who hold these opin- thrown over the States, wholly unknown to the constituions, that they occupy a position which, in my judgment, tion. To create an arbitrary regulator of paper currency, cannot be maintained. It seldom happens that laws are so without a competitor, which may contract or expand its perfect that they cannot be amended. The public mo- issues at pleasure, is to put in its power the regulation of ney is now in the local banks. This House has decided the money price of the whole property of the country. that it shall not be removed from them; and, although the By contracting its issues it makes money scarce, and, in Secretary of the Treasury, under the existing law, pos- proportion to its scarcity, the more valuable, and thus resesses the power to continue their employment, yet the duces the money price of property. By expanding its committee have given it as their opinion, that discretion- business it makes money abundant, and raises the price ary power should not be given to any officer of the Gov- of property. A regulator, without any power reserved ernment when it can be regulated and defined by law. any where to check or control it, might subject the propThe Secretary of the Treasury, under the law as it is, erty of every individual to sudden, great, and ruinous possesses a large discretion. The bill proposes to limit depreciation. Is it safe to commit the value of the whole that discretion; and I submit to those gentlemen who property of the country to the fluctuations in price which express apprehensions that the executive control over such a regulator, in the form of an irresponsible corporathe deposite banks may be used as a dangerous branch of tion, may and certainly would produce? We have it from the executive patronage, and may be subject to be high authority, the President of the Bank of the United abused, whether they can object to the limitations and re- States himself, that the State banks exist by the forbearstrictions which this bill proposes to impose on the Exec-ance of the Bank of the United States, and that "there utive? If the provisions of the bill are not proper, I sug-are very few State banks which might not have been gest to them to come forward and propose others that are destroyed by the exertion of the power of the Bank of better, and, so far as I am concerned, they shall be at the United States." Ought such a power of destruction once accepted. The mere allegation that the power as to be granted to any corporation? Was such a power sumed in the removal of the deposites was not warranted deemed to be necessary by the framers of the constituby law, can be no sufficient reason why we should not tion? legislate on the subject at all, but is rather a reason why we should by law define and make certain that which now gives rise to a difference of opinion.

I propose very briefly to look into the origin and history of this bank question under the Federal Government. The first national bank established was the Bank of But it is objected that the State banks are wholly in- North America. That bank was incorporated by the old competent to perform the duties of fiscal agents of the Congress, in December, 1781. Doubts existing as to the Government, and that, therefore, it is unnecessary to power of the old Congress to create such a corporation, legislate in regard to them. It has been maintained that resolutions were adopted requesting the several States to a national bank is necessary as a regulator of the paper pass laws of incorporation. Accordingly, Pennsylvania currency of the State banks, as a test "in defence of passed an act incorporating the same Bank of North the nation," against local bank paper, and as essential America in 1782; three years afterwards (in 1785) she

JUNE 20, 1834.]

Deposite Bank Bill.

[H. of R.

repealed her act of incorporation, and in the repealing ter into arrangements for lending their agency; and the act is found this remarkable preamble, assigning the rea- more favorably, as there will be a competition among son of the repeal: "Whereas the bank established in the them for it; whereas the bill delivers us up bound to the city of Philadelphia hath been found to be injurious to national bank, who are free to refuse all arrangements, the welfare of this State, and in its tendency appears to but on their own terms, and the public not free, on be incompatible with the public safety, therefore," &c. such refusal, to employ any other bank. That of PhilaThe act was repealed, because, in the opinion of the Le-delphia, I believe, now does this business by their post gislature of the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania, the bank notes, which, by an arrangement with the Treasury, are was incompatible with the public safety. It is true that, paid by any State collector to whom they are presented. two years afterwards, (in 1787,) another political party This expedient alone suffices to prevent the existence of came into power in that State, and passed a law repealing that necessity which may justify this assumption of a nonthe repealing act of 1785, and thus revived the Bank of enumerated power as a means for carrying into effect an North America. But in the preamble to that act, also, it enumerated one. The thing may be done, and has been is declared that in the charter of incorporation such limi- done, and well done, without this assumption: therefore, tations and restrictions should be imposed on the bank, it does not stand in that degree of necessity which can that it should not become "an object of jealousy or ap- honestly justify it." prehension to the good people of this State." This was In the memorial of that bank for a renewal of its charimmediately preceding the meeting of the convention ter, presented to Congress December 18, 1810, the same which framed the present constitution, and the state of objections were urged against the employment of State public opinion in relation to the Bank of North America, banks that are now heard from those who advocate the in Pennsylvania, and doubtless in other States also, must recharter of the present bank. In that memorial the have been perfectly familiar to the members of that body. old Bank of the United States holds the following lanIn confirmation of this, Mr. Jefferson, in his correspond- guage to Congress, viz: ence, details the following important facts, viz: "As to the State banks, your memorialists are fully "March 11, 1798, Baldwin mentions at table the follow-sensible of the benefits resulting from their establishment, ing fact: when the bank bill was under discussion in the and of their sufficiency for the purposes of their instituHouse of Representatives, Judge Wilson came in, and tion, the local accommodation of the places in which they was standing by Baldwin, who reminded him of the fol- exist. But their capitals are by no means adequate to lowing fact, which passed in the grand convention. the demands of the General Government, in a time of Among the enumerated powers given to Congress, was emergency; a time when the ordinary claims of their own one to erect corporations. It was, on debate, struck out. State Governments, and of their own particular customSeveral particular powers were then proposed. Among ers, would be increased, and entitled to preference. others, Robert Morris proposed to give Congress a power Neither could the transmission of the public moneys, from to establish a national bank. Governeur Morris opposed one quarter of the Union to another, be effected with it; observing that it was extremely doubtful whether the sufficient ease and despatch, or to the requisite extent, constitution they were framing could ever be passed at by banks of limited capital, having no connexion with all by the people of America; that to give it its best nor direction over each other."

chance, however, they should make it as palatable as pos- "Nor would it be prudent in the Government to trust sible, and put nothing into it not very essential, that the deposite of its funds, to the extent to which they might raise up enemies; that his colleague (Robert Mor- sometimes exist, in a variety of institutions, united by no ris) well knew that a bank was in their State (Pennsyl- common bond, and in no degree responsible for each vania) the very watchword of a party; that a bank had other; over whose conduct the General Government could been the great bone of contention between the two par- have no control; into whose management and condition it ties of the State, from the establishment of their consti- could not legally inquire; and which those institutions, tution, having been erected, put down, and erected even if disposed, could not legally communicate. Indeagain, as either party predominated; that, therefore, to pendent of the hazard to which the public moneys might insert this power would instantly enlist against the whole be subjected by mismanagement, a power would be instrument the whole of the anti-bank party of Pennsyl-placed in hands which, from want of responsibility and vania. Whereupon, it was rejected, as was every other want of control, might be used to injurious purposes." special power, except that of giving copyrights to au- "Nor is it easy to calculate the effects which the destructhors, and patents to inventors; the general power of tion of the bank would produce in the loss it would occa incorporating being whittled down to this shred. Wil- sion to the public revenue, to charitable institutions, son agreed to the fact."

These facts show the jealousy with which, at a very early period, moneyed corporations were viewed. The secret journal of the convention, published for the first time a few years ago, shows that all attempts to confer upon the new Government an express power to create such a corporation as the present Bank of the United States, received no favor in that body. Such a corporation was not, therefore, at that time, regarded either as an indispensable fiscal agent, or as a regulator of the currency.

widows, children, and others interested in the stock; from the pressure to which the other banks must be inevitably subjected; from the want of confidence it would create in the stability of our institutions; and from the general derangement of credit."

But this argument of the bank did not convince the Congress of 1810, and the recharter was refused.

In a report made to Congress by Mr. Gallatin, then Secretary of the Treasury, on the 10th of January, 1811, upon the subject of the recharter of the old bank, it is expressly conceded that a national bank is not indispenWhen the old Bank of the United States was incorpo- sable, either as a Government agent or as a regulator of rated, in February, 1791, it was not upon the ground that currency. In that report it is furthermore expressly adit was required as a regulator of the currency, and that mitted that "State banks may be used" as Government the State banks were incompetent to discharge the duty agents, "without any insuperable difficulty." of fiscal agents. Upon the point of the competency of port states: "That the public moneys are safer by being State banks to do the business of the Government, Mr. weekly deposited in banks, instead of accumulating in Jefferson, in his cabinet opinion, upon the occasion of the hands of collectors, is self-evident. And their transgranting the charter to the old Bank of the United States, mission, whenever this may be wanted, for the purpose in 1791, thus expresses himself, viz: of making payments in other places than those of collec

The re

"Besides, the existing banks will, without a doubt, en-Ition, cannot, with any convenience, be effected on a

H. OF R.]

Deposite Bank Bill.

[JUNE 20, 1834.

If the

large scale, in an extensive country, except through the compel the Bank of the United States to do so. medium of banks, or of persons acting as bankers. The Bank of the United States had failed or refused, either to question, therefore, is, whether a bank incorporated by establish branches, or to employ the State banks selected the United States, or a number of banks incorporated by and "first approved by the Secretary of the Treasury," the several States, be most convenient for those purposes. would the Secretary have been compelled to keep the State banks may be used, and must, in case of a non-re- whole public treasure at Philadelphia and Washington? newal of the charter, be used by the Treasury. Prepara- Would not the public convenience have required the setory arrangements have already been made to that effect, lection, by the head of the Treasury Department, of State and it is believed that the ordinary business will be trans- banks, as the depositories and agents of the Treasury? acted, through their medium, with less convenience, and, This had always been done, before that period, by the in some respects, with perhaps less safety than at present, head of that Department. State banks were at that time, but without any insuperable difficulty." "If, indeed, and had been from the earliest periods of the Governthe Bank of the United States could be removed without ment, employed as such depositories and agents. Was it affecting either its numerous debtors, the other moneyed intended to limit the power of the Treasury to continue institutions, or the circulation of the country, the ordinary their employment, or to change the practice? Indeed, fiscal operations of Government would not be materially by the 16th section of the Bank charter, the money of the deranged, and might be carried on by means of another United States is to be deposited only "in places in which general bank, or of State banks. But the transition will the said bank and branches thereof may be established." be attended with much individual, and probably with no In places where there was no bank or branches, the State inconsiderable public injury. It is impossible that an in- banks were necessarily to be employed, and they have stitution which circulates thirteen millions of dollars, and been ever since, as well as before the date of that charto whom the merchants owe fourteen, should terminate ter, so employed. Since the date of that charter, numerits operations, particularly in the present unfavorable ous State banks have been constantly employed as depos. state of the American commerce, and after the great losses itories in places where no branch of the United States lately experienced abroad, without giving a serious Bank was established; and, in some instances, in places in shock to commercial, banking, and national credit." which such branches existed; and this without objection

State banks, then, were not regarded by Mr. Gallatin from the bank, or any other quarter, until recently. as incapable of doing the public business; and I undertake These provisions of the bank charter, to which I have to affirm, and to prove, that they were not so regarded called the attention of the House, distinctly recognising, even by the Congress of 1816, by which the charter to as they do, the employment of State banks, prove, 1st. the present bank was granted. It is clear, from that That the Bank of the United States is not the Treasury! charter itself, that State banks were looked to as deposi- 2d. That it is not the only legal or proper depository of tories of the public money, and were considered compe- the public money; and, 3d. That, in the opinion of the tent to perform the duties of fiscal agents of Government. Congress of 1816, State banks were to continue to be By the 14th general regulation of the 11th section of that employed; that they contemplated their employment by charter, it will be found that Congress reserved to itself the Treasury; and that even the authors of the bank charno power to require the establishment of any branch of ter themselves regarded them as competent fiscal agents, that bank in any of the States. They might by law re- able to perform, as they had in fact before that time perquire the establishment of a branch within the District of formed, all the duties and services required by the GovColumbia. If the bank had failed or refused to establish ernment. any other branch in any other place, can it be maintained The argument, then, so much relied upon to prove the that the Government would have been compelled to make incompetency of the State banks, and the necessity for a the whole deposite of its revenue, collected as it is at so national institution, as a Government agent and regulator many points distant from each other, either in the princi- of currency, seems to be not only without just foundation, pal bank at Philadelphia, or its branch in Washington? but to be wholly disproved, both by the authorities cited Had no other branch been established, would these have and the practice of the Government from the date of its been the only proper depositories? The same article of organization. I hesitate not to affirm that the State banks, the bank charter, it is true, provides that Congress may if banks are to be employed in aid of the Treasury in the by law require the establishment of a branch "in any collection and disbursement of the public revenue, are as State in which two thousand shares shall have been sub-competent as any national institution can be. The supscribed or may be held, whenever, upon application of posed necessity for a national institution to perform the the Legislature of such State," they may be requested to double function of public agent and regulator of the curdo so. Before Congress can pass a law requiring the es- rency, being unsustained upon any principles of sound tablishment of a branch in any State, two contingencies reasoning or constitutional construction, can constitute must happen: first, two thousand shares of the stock of no solid objection to the proposed employment of other the bank must be held by citizens of such State; and, se- banks, or to regulations by law, "prescribing the mode condly, application must be made to Congress by the Le-of selection, the securities to be taken, and the manner gislature of such State, requesting Congress to pass a law and terms on which they are to be employed."

for that purpose. If both of these contingencies shall not Before I notice the particular provisions of this bill, I happen, Congress cannot require the establishment of beg leave, very briefly, to call the attention of the House such branch. But to show the more clearly that the em- to the state of things as they existed about the period ployment of State banks was contemplated and looked to when the old Bank of the United States went out of exby the framers of that charter, the same article further istence, and the state of things as they now exist. I beg provides that "it shall be lawful for the directors of the to compare the state of public feeling and opinion about said corporation, from time to time, to employ any other the period of 1810, pending the application to Congress bank or banks, to be first approved by the Secretary of of the old bank for a renewal of its charter, and the state the Treasury, at any place or places that they may deem of public feeling and opinion as now exhibited to us. safe and proper, to manage and transact the business pro- The analogies, in more respects than one, will be found posed as aforesaid, other than the purposes of discount, to be strong and striking. Then, as now, loud complaints to be managed and transacted by such officers, under such agreements, and subject to such regulations, as they shall deem just and proper." But though lawful thus to employ State banks, yet no power is reserved whereby to

were heard of the impending ruin, desolation, and public as well as private distress, which awaited the refusal of Congress to grant a renewal of the charter. If, sir, the memorials from chambers of commerce, ensurance