town of Madison, and enclosed to him, with a letter from
the same gentlemen; that he had not been requested
by any person who attended the meeting to present these
proceedings to the House, nor did he know that it was
the wish of the meeting that he should do so; that he had
not been informed as to the extent of the meeting, nor
the number who were in attendance; but he was acquainted
with the gentlemen who acted as officers to said meeting,
as also those who composed the committee, whose duty
it was made to draught the proceedings; and he knew them
all to be highly respectable individuals. Their names
were with the proceedings, and none others. Mr. C. felt
it to be his duty, under all the circumstances, to ask leave
of the House to present these proceedings.
Leave being granted by the House, they were, upon
the motion of Mr. C., read, and ordered to be printed; and
the same direction was given them that was given to pro-
ceedings of the like character from other States.

NEW BEDFORD MEMORIAL.

Mr. REED said he had been requested to present the memorial of the citizens of the collection district of New Bedford, in the State of Massachusetts. This memorial (said Mr. R.) is signed by one thousand nine hundred and twenty-two citizens, living in New Bedford, Fair Haven, Wareham, Rochester, and Dartmouth. It had been signed by almost all the citizens of those towns who were at home, and who had an opportunity; perhaps twenty have declined. But it cannot be pretended that there is any dispute or division of opinion upon the subject. They will send no counter-memorial here, for party and politi. cal dissensions are suppressed and forgotten in the general and deep distress which pervades that part of the country. All unite in the desire to present to the Government of their country their true situation, and, if pos. sible, to persuade the Government to change its present ruinous policy, and thereby relieve all from present and future embarrassment and distress. In presenting this memorial, I hesitate not to declare (said Mr. R.) that the signers are as intelligent, honorable, industrious, enterprising, and useful citizens as can be found in any other part of the country, and have a just claim to the regard and consideration of this House. [Here the SPEAKER interposed, and said the gentleman from Massachusetts must confine himself strictly to the rule, and briefly state the substance of the memorial.] Mr. R. proceeded: I am fully aware that the privilege of presenting memorials this day is, in some measure, a favor, and I shall not abuse that privilege. ... I do not purpose to pursue the course which has prevailed of late in this House; but the memorial which I hold in my hand is an unusual and extraordinary one for the part of the country from whence it comes. No memorial containing that number of names, or anything like it, was ever presented to Congress from that place at any former period. It shows a state of feeling, suffering, and excitement very unusual, and I am sure this House cannot be unwilling to know the fact and its cause. I beg (said Mr. R.) to call the particular attention of this House to some important facts and arguments in this memorial. They state that the collection district of New Bedford is the fourth district in the United States as to its navigation and tonnage. This fact deserves some conideration: it shows that it is a place of activity, enterprise, business, and consequence. Their shipping amounts, i think, to more than seventy thousand tons. They are Principally engaged in the whale fishery, and have now in that employment one hundred and twenty ships, and twenty-three vessels of less dimensions. These ships amount to more than one-third, and almost one-half of the whale fishery of the United States. This fishery is carried *Principally in the Pacific Ocean, and three years may be fairly estimated as the period of a voyage; the prepaWol. X.--182

ration and sale of the oil require another year. Thus
four years must elapse, after the ship is fitted out and
prepared and sent to sea, before the profit or income of
the voyage can be realized.
The memorialists observe “that, from the precarious
and tardy manner in which the products of their industry
are realized, they quickly feel any sudden and unexpected
derangement of the currency, and that all who are en-
gaged in the same pursuit must be similarly situated; that
ten thousand seamen employed in this fishery, besides vast
numbers of mechanics, laborers, and traders connected
with it, are dependent upon the slow moving operation of
their particular trade.”
This memorial, in fact, presents to this House the valu-
able and important national interest of the whale fishery.
In this fishery, owners, masters, and seamen, are all part-
ners; and by their admirable arrangement, skill, industry,
and daring intrepidity, they have surpassed all other na-
tions, and have been eminently successful. They have
been successful under the general protection of our Gov-
ernment, but have received no extraordinary aid. Not so
with European nations; they have given great encourage-
ment by direct bounties and duties. Now the prospect is,
that not only the owner of these ships, but the ten thou-
sand seamen, partners in the business, after the expiration
of the three years' voyage, when they return, must go to
their families pennyless; I fear they may not have a dollar
to receive. This memorial presents to the consideration
of this House the vast national importance of the whale
fishery. It affords light and comfort—it affords encour-
agement and profit to those who furnish the timber for the
ships, from one end of the United States to the other—to
numerous mechanics and ship-builders—to the farmer and
planter, who furnish provisions and supplies. The capi-
tal employed is great, and in every view the national inter-
est is great. But the main and principal national benefit
is preparation for national defence. By means of this
fishery, we have an army of seamen trained and rendered
most skilful and daring for our defence. They cost no-
thing in time of peace. In case of war, they are ready and
able to defend their country; and no signal victory, on the
ocean or lakes, has or ever will be gained without their
efficient aid.
These memorialists state that they have met with severe
disasters in the prosecution of their legitimate business.
They candidly admit that a part of their sufferings is owing
to over-trading and speculation; and, standing here as
their representative, I do not desire to pass over that ad-
mission unnoticed. I wish to put this House in possession,
not only of the truth, but the whole truth, touching this
subject. But they insist that the distressing calamity they
now suffer is mainly owing to the pressure and panic con-
sequent upon the removal of the public deposites. They
aver that no caution, no activity, no foresight, could have
averted the blow. It came upon them like a tornado, and
they had no warning to reef or furl their sails, and many
must be more or less torn and shattered, and not a few
utterly shipwrecked.
The memorialists believe their distress has arisen from
the withdrawal of the deposites, and other measures of
the Executive in relation to the Bank of the United
States. By withdrawing the deposites, the Bank of the
United States was compelled to curtail its discounts and
reduce its paper in circulation. But here it is worthy of
particular notice, that State banks have been compelled
to reduce their discounts and money in circulation, by
still more severe restrictions; for the plain reason, that
they had less specie in their vaults, in proportion to their
paper in circulation, than the Bank of the United States.
It is well known that there is no branch of the United
States Bank in New Bedford.
New Bedford has four banks, whose capital, united,

H. of R.] The Public Deposites. [MAnch 6, 1834. on october last, they had in circulation, - $260,000 ly owing to a general panic and want of confidence. They have now only - - - 147,000 Surely, then, they can have no motive or desire to exag

gerate their distress; for by so doing they must be likely Which shows a reduction of - - $113,000 to excite further alarm, and thereby increase the very

|

body to which it was submitted, did they believe the de-
posites should be removed? Did they think a suit should
be instituted to revoke the remnant of the charter? So
far from it, to my mortification, Congress, by a large ma-
jority, rechartered the bank; and, strange to tell, there
were those at that day, the warmest friends of the bank,
and who voted for a renewal of its charter, who are now
convinced, upon weaker testimony, of precisely the same
character, that its deposites ought to be removed!
The verdict of that Congress settled the fate of the
report, and, though the facts remain, they are robbed of
their force; for, at the last session, they had no influence
upon the question then presented, as to the safety of the
deposites. In the authority of two concurring decisions,
whatever may be my opinion as to their correctness,
the public voice, as expressed by their representatives,
seems to have acquiesced, and to have pronounced that
the labors of the investigating committee had brought to
light no good reason for a change of the institution.
So far then, sir, from obtaining two verdicts against the
bank, the bank obtained two verdicts against me—that is,
if Congress, the immediate representatives of the people,
is considered any part of this Government; but perhaps
the gentleman may give in to the new doctrine, that the
President is the Government, and, as such, had a right to
alter the verdicts in the manner before related. If so,
they are his verdicts, not mine.
I yet remain unconvinced of the justness of that deci-
sion, so far as respects the constitutionality of the measure,
though I candidly own my mind has undergone a very
considerable change as to its expediency; and this has
been mainly effected by the dear-bought experience
which has succeeded a rash and inconsiderate act, the
consequences whereof are now sweeping over the country
like a desolating simoom.
I consider the removal of the deposites more unconsti-
tutional than the charter of the bank, because there is
less doubt about it, and infinitely more mischief. The
bank divides, perhaps, more than equally, the talents of
the country; has had two great administrations in its fa-
vor, backed by a decision of the Supreme Court; and
what is stronger than all, has the promise of the “great-
est and best” to be renewed, though rejected upon con-
stitutional grounds, provided the country will let him
dictate the terms. Not so with the removal of the de-
posites. One wide, deep, and settled tone of complaint
attests the public disapprobation. The murmurs of the
people rise and swell the tide of discontent which beats
upon this House, if not in the fury of a storm, in the
steady progress of a torrent. The act was and is con-
demned by the friends and foes of its author. His best
advisers pronounced it wrong. The former and present
Secretaries of State, of War, and, at one time, of the
Navy, if reports be true, deprecated the measure; and,
sir, his best friend and most decided enemy of the bank,
the firm and honest Duane, said it was “unwise, unjust,
unnecessary, arbitrary, and vindictive.” Never did five
words comprehend more truth, in relation to the effect of
a measure. It was unwise, as relates to the interest of
the country; it was unjust, as relates to the bank; it was
unnecessary, as relates to the moneyed operations of the
Government; it was arbitrary, with respect to the exer-
cise of official power; and it was vindictive to those who
manage the concerns of the institution.
It was, moreover, unnecessary, in reference to the pre-
vention of a future renewal of the charter. The Presi-
dent will remain in office, if he lives, till the 4th of March,
1837; and if he dies, his place will be filled with a milder,
because a more cunning, hostility to the bank. He had
vetoed the late charter, and, as he boasts, it was confirm-
ed by the people. It could not possibly pass him and his
successor, in the residue of its existence. Why, then,
strike at a prostrated enemy, which, if not dead, was in

the last agonies that inevitably tended to that fate? Why
run the risk of exciting public sympathy, by the exercise
of cruel and unusual persecution towards an enemy that
all must confess has done some good? There was every
thing to lose, and nothing to gain. The bank was gone,
and that was all its opposers wanted. Did it not occur
to the President, and does it not occur to every one, what
a dangerous experiment results from this measure? If it
does not succeed as contemplated; if somewhere in the
chain of reasoning an error has been committed; if in the
long and complicated consequences expected to follow
an action which pervades the most ramified interests of
society, a false conclusion has been drawn, conducting the
whole process to an entirely different result—a result fa.
tally injurious to the fortunate destinies of the country-
who does not see that all will be laid to the necessity of a
bank, and, as on a former occasion, public opinion, di-
rected by the best of all science, suffering experience,
will again demand and have a bank?
Actions are not without their motives; we must look
for the motive of every measure. Seeing, then, the
course of the administration was wholly unnecessary as
related to the future renewal of the charter, and that, in-
deed, it might produce an opposite effect, a question
naturally presents itself, what could be the object? The
subject had been laid before Congress, and refused; it
had been laid before the cabinet, and rejected; the best
and wisest counsels of the country had advised againstit;
the good sense of the whole community revolted at the
idea; why, then, should a favorite and highly honorable
officer be expelled from his post to achieve this singular
project? It is something else than the mere prevention
of a charter.
Mr. Speaker: History is full of the melancholy truth,
that rulers, and sometimes good ones, are controlled by
an artful, sinister influence, of which they themselves are
unconscious; and, thus operated upon, deeds have been
done at which their own good judgment has been made to
shudder; and after suffering all the consequences of deceit.
ful counsels, their characters have been delivered over to
the faithful page of history, there to receive their merited
obloquy. . What a reflection to one whose high character
and lofty fame now hang upon the issue of a most doubt-
ful experiment! The stake is great, and the game, as it
draws to a close, is fearfully critical. If rumor speaks
the truth, just such an influence has produced the present
agony of the country. There are around the administra.
tion two malign influences, operating for the accomplish-
ment of a joint, but, ultimately, a single purpose—avarice
and ambition. The first seeks its gratification in the
attainment of stocks, lands, and low office; the latter, in
the o: office of the Government; but this last is the
special instrument by which the former is to be continued:
and, hence, to this end every power is concentrated.
Enough is seen to show that the bank stands in the way of
a scheme to organize a moneyed regency throughout the
country, the most irresistible agent, successfully tried
elsewhere to effect the purpose referred to; and, conse-
quently, it must be immediately destroyed; it will not do
to wait for its natural death--the golden harvest will have
passed; and though the Government may lose seven mil-
lions of stock—though it may lose a part, or perhaps the
whole, of its revenue—though it may lose all its facilities
for carrying on the fiscal operations of the Treasury—
though the whole country may bleed at every pore—yet
these are nothing, compared with the selfish objects of
heartless politicians. This, then, in my humble opinion,
accounts for a measure which Mr. Duane declared, and
truly too, was totally “unnecessary.”
I come now, Mr. Speaker, to consider the subject with
reference to the power which has been exercised in the
removal of the deposites, and to show that, if I am op-

posed to the recharter of the bank upon constitutional

Manch 6, 1834.]

principles, I ought to be much more so, if consistent, to
the power exercised by the Executive. And I will can-
didly own that, if I were driven to the necessity of choos-
ing between them, (which I trust will not be the case,) I
would prefer the former to the latter. Before I proceed,
permit me to ask, what is the bank? Is it any part of the
Government? If it is, what? If it is not, what relation
does it bear to the Government? These are important
questions, in the view I shall take of the subject.
The principle upon which the bank is chartered, as
contended for by General Washington, Mr. Madison, the
Federal Court, and the two Congresses that have sanc-
tioned their opinions, is to be found in this strong and
expressive language: “That Congress has a distinct and
substantive power to create corporations, without refer-
ence to the objects intrusted to its jurisdiction, is a propo-
sition which never has been maintained; but that any one
of the powers expressly conferred upon Congress is sub-
ject to the limitation that it shall not be carried into effect
by the agency of a corporation, is a proposition which is
equally unmaintainable;” for that it has a right to all the
means “necessary and proper” to execute its powers.
Then, we clearly infer that the bank is a part of the Gov-
ernment, to carry into effect some of its “expressly con-
ferred powers.” What are those powers? Its friends
have always relied upon these:
1st. To assist the Government in “collecting taxes,
duties, imposts, and excises, and paying them away; and
to pay the debts of the United States.”
2d. To borrow money on the credit of the United
States.
3d. To regulate commerce; and,
4th. To coin money, regulate the value thereof, and of
foreign coin, and thereby regulate the currency of the
country.
These are all the express powers, upon a careful ex-
amination of the constitution, the bank is intended to sub-
serve; there is not another that has the slightest relation
to it. Let it be constantly recollected that these are le-
gislative, not executive powers, and found in the very arti-
cle which defines the powers of Congress. The Govern-
ment has, besides this, another distinct interest in the
bank; but this is evidently a private interest, and clearly
distinguishable from that just mentioned, which is a pub-
lic one. It holds stock in common with the other stock-
holders, and every one must perceive, if its public interest
was withdrawn, if the bank was not its agent to carry in-
to effect certain powers of the constitution, it would have
no more coutrol over the bank than any other stockhold-
er. . This private interest is managed by its directors as
the interest of the stockholders is managed by their direc-
tors—all constituting one representative body for the
whole, with no superior powers or privileges resting in
any to the exclusion of the others. This private interest
must be kept entirely separate from the other; they have
nothing to do with each other. The public interest is
not atall intrusted to the directors appointed by the Gov-
ernment individually, or as a class, but only so far as they
are connected with the other directors in the general
management of the institution. This interest is confided
to the Secretary of the Treasury, to carry into effect the
powers of the constitution. Any other view involves the
contradiction that two different agencies are created to
regulate the same interest, a disagreement between
which would entirely defeat the object of the Govern-
ment, which the bank has undertaken to discharge.
powers are to aid, as before stated, in collecting
and disbursing the revenue, to borrow money, to regu-
late commerce, and to establish a uniform currency.
This is the entire scope of his duties, because to go be-
yond these is to go beyond even the powers of the Gov-
ernment, and the very object they had in chartering the
bank. They admit and declare that for exclusively pri-

vate purposes they have no power to grant charters of
incorporation, but they can do so when it is to carry into
effect well-known powers of the constitution. They have
named these powers, and within them they and their
agents must revolve. We have now got the question
into a very intelligible and well-defined boundary.
It could not be expected that the bank would execute
these powers for nothing. If they were highly import-
ant to the Government, they were worth something; con-
sequently the Government said to the bank, You shall
have the use of all our deposites, and we will receive
your bills in payment of all our revenue; thus investing
you with the Government’s whole funds and credit. But
this is more than equivalent for the services to be per-
formed o you; you must pay a bonus of one million and
a half of dollars for your charter and your exclusive
privilege. Moreover, it is improper to risk the public
treasures with a private corporation, without having some
control over it. Its safety demands that we should have
a weekly and monthly inspection of your affairs by the
Secretary of the Treasury, and also by a committee of
Congress whensoever that body may think proper; and
besides its safety, the proper execution of the powers of
the constitution which you have undertaken requires
that the same officer may withhold the deposites, “in
which case,” however, to prevent injustice, “he shall
immediately lay before Congress, if in session, and, if not,
immediately after the commencement of the next session,
the reasons of such order or direction.” Now here is a
plain, simple, fair contract, the condition of one part
being the condition of every other part, and it has been
violated by a misconception of the Secretary in two im-
portant particulars. First, he considers himself a party
to the contract, when nothing can be more erroneous.
He speaks of the Government's vesting in him certain
powers, which divested it of any further control over
them. A little attention to this idea will completely
manifest its perfect absurdity. Who are the contracting
parties to this deed? Certainly there are but two—the
stockholders and the Government. Who are to be ben-
efited by it? Certainly no one but the stockholders and
the Government. Between whom has the consideration
passed? Certainly between them. Who are able to
contract? None but them. What is the subject-matter
of the contract? The execution of certain powers of the
constitution by the bank, for certain privileges granted
to that institution. Now, will any one contend that the
Secretary was able to contract, did contract, passed, or
received any consideration? Had he any powers to be
executed by the bank? The thing is preposterous. It
may as well be contended that the other persons and
agencies mentioned in the charter were all parties to the
contract, such as the cashiers and officers of the bank,
commissioner of loans, the President of the United
States, and the Federal Court; for they are all mentioned
as having something to do in the execution of the con-
tract. Why should the Secretary alone believe he is a
party and beneficiary of the contract? Can any one be-
lieve that Congress was so stupid as to make a contract
by which a third person, not interested, should immedi-
ately come into the control of the people’s funds for
twenty years? Who does not perceive that the Secretary
could have withheld the deposites, upon any reasons he
might chose to give, on the second day after the charter
went into operation, and, throughout the remainder of its
existence, divided them among every merchant, nay,
every man in America? for if he can do it with State
banks, by contract, he can with any body else; they
being nothing but persons in law. His other mistake is
as to the character of the reasons he is bound to give for
withholding the deposites. His interpretation of the law
renders the exercise of the power perfectly unlimited; and,

therefore, is a capricious one. Does any one believe this?