NOTES.

1. Great Expense of Banks.-The excessive multiplication of banks by the States is a grievous burden upon the people, on the score of expense alone-even were they ably managed. There are in Tennessee about twenty banks-principals and branches-with from five to ten salaried officers each; besides from seven to fifteen directors. Allowing to each bank six executive officers, we have one hundred and twenty persons employed, at an average salary, say of $1000, or a total of $120,000 per annum, to superintend a bad currency. Then twenty banking houses at a rent charge of $1000, or $20,000 a year for the whole. Then insurances, contingencies, losses by bad debts and rogueries of all sorts, may reach to any indefinitely large sum. But set these down at only $60,000 a year. We then have a total annual tax or charge of $200,000 imposed on the good people of Tennessee, in order to be furnished with a very poor substitute for United States Bank paper.

There are some 900 or 1000 similar banks in the United States, which, at the same rates as the above, cost the nation nine or ten millions annually. In like manner, there are not fewer probably than five or six thousand salaried officers, and from ten to twenty thousand directors. Reasonable scope here for peculation, political patronage, favouritism, intrigue and genteel idleness!

2. From a mere reading of the constitution, one might infer that the federal government alone had the right to charter banks. That the States retained no right whatever to meddle with the currency, or to emit paper money or "bills of credit," in any form, or under any guise. This would be a legitimate inference or construction, were it not that several State banks existed at the time when the Convention framed the constitution, viz. :—

(1.) The Bank of North America, (then a Pennsylvania bank,) instituted in 1781.

(2.) Massachusetts Bank, at Boston, 1784.

(3.) Bank of New York, at New York, 1784.

3. The States could not reserve to themselves the sole right of creating a national banking corporation, or a bank which could furnish a uniform currency throughout the Union, because they never possessed either the right or the power. They could not do it, if they would.

4. A National Currency.-"The indispensable elements of a na

tional currency must combine: 1. Uniformity; 2. Safety; 3. Convenience; 4. Convertibility; 5. And entire public confidence. Invariability of value is the great desideratum of currency. So great is the advantage of a paper currency over a metallic, that its tendency is rather to increase than diminish in value, when the basis is perfectly secure; and no greater security can possibly be given, than the plighted faith of the government, to whose hands are confided the fortunes, lives and honour of the people. This is the highest of all possible human security." (Madisonian, 1841. The official organ of Tyler's administration.)

5. Are banks monopolies? If so, who created them? Who is responsible for their doings? Who culpable, etc.?

6. Are bank charters contracts? If so, ought they not to be fulfilled in good faith; even when they prove bad bargains to the people who made them?

AMERICAN DEMOCRACY.

PART FOURTH.

TARIFF, Taxation, Bounties, Free Trade, Revenue, Protection.

The technical term tariff, as used in our country, means a list or table of duties or customs to be paid on goods imported-according to some fixed scale or uniform system. Without attempting any formal, elaborate or scientific discussion of this complex, exciting, vexatious and much controverted subject; I merely submit my general views, in few words, under the following heads. I remark:

1. That, as a mode of taxation, it is preferable to all others. It is a tax on consumption-chiefly on luxuries -and is always voluntary. It is infinitely better, or less injurious, than a tax on land, or upon production, or than any species of direct tax whatever. Here, again, Mr. Jefferson was orthodox. Among the first acts of his administration, was the repeal of the internal or direct taxes of every kind. (Tucker, vol. ii. p. 113.) This is high authority and safe precedent for both whigs and democrats.

2. It is perfectly equal—in all sections of the republic, and upon all classes of the people. It operates on individuals everywhere-as much so in Massachusetts as in

South Carolina. The individual consumer of the foreign goods always pays; and in exact proportion to the amount consumed. It favours none-oppresses none. It is not, and cannot be, sectional or local or partial in its application. It is the fairest and most equitable plan of supplying the necessities of an economical government which human wisdom can devise.

3. The interests of all classes and professions-the farmer, planter, mechanic, merchant, manufacturer—are identical and inseparable. You cannot depress one class of producers, without injury to all the rest. There is no ground, therefore, for jealousy or hostility on the part of any one class or vocation towards another.

4. A distinction ought to be made between a tariff for revenue, and a tariff for the protection and encouragement of home industry. A tariff strictly for revenue, is not intended to prevent or to check importation. Otherwise it would defeat its avowed design. With this single object in view, a judicious tariff would never be higher than the actual condition of commerce could bear without diminishing the dutiable commodities in number or quantity. It should be as light as the exigencies of government would permit. And should be laid on luxuries rather than upon necessaries-upon wine rather than on coffee. It is a tax: and all taxes are onerous, and generally odious. It is difficult to persuade the people that a tax is a good thing-a desirable measure-a real favour to themselves. They are naturally and justly suspicious whenever they are told about the blessings of taxation. They do not readily perceive how the taking of their

money is to enrich or benefit them. They have a shrewd notion that more is meant than meets the ear. That it is all a cunning Yankee scheme to get money out of their pockets under false pretences; and for very selfish purposes. That a tariff, in short, is neither more nor less than a robbery of the many for the benefit of the few— or of the South to enrich the North.

The people would

Two distinct obThe one, revenue:

It were, perhaps, a wiser policy at once to discriminate between the articles which we must import from abroad, and those which we intend to produce or manufacture at home. Upon the first, levy a sufficient impost or tax to meet the wants of government; and prohibit the importation of the latter altogether: either by a forfeiture of the cargo, or by other penalties; or by so heavy a duty as must soon put an end to the traffic. then understand the whole subject. jects would be placed before them. the other, the exclusion of all foreign goods, which could compete or interfere with domestic industry. The first is a tax-nothing more. It will be regarded and paid as a tax without complaint, if reasonable and moderate. In the other case, it will be seen that the government is aiming directly to foster and sustain certain kinds, or rather all practicable kinds, of home production; and that a tariff for this end, was never designed as a tax, but as a preventive-as an obstacle in the way of the foreigner-as a guarantee of a clear field and ample market for the American labourer. Who would object to this? The universal cry is, or has been, the want of something to do—that is worth doing. Every sensible