University of South Carolina Libraries
DEVOTED TO SOUTHRNRIGHITSDEMOCRACY , 8, LITERATURESINEADTERS JAS. S. G.RICHARDSON, Editor. WM,. I. FRANCIS, Proprietor. Oi TERMS---T u vo .. . v. SU M'-ER VILLE, S. C AU 21, 18-0. -_. VOL. IV. SUJM rEVILLE, S. GO' AUGUST 21, 18.5.N~ Two Dollars in advance, Two Dollars and Fifty-cents at the exiration of six tuonths, or Three Dollars at the end of the year. No paper discontinued until all arreara ges are paid, unless at the option of the Proprietor. UTAdvertisements inserted at 73 ces. per square, (14 lines or less,) for the first and half that sumu for each subsequent insertion. J'SThe number of insertions to be mark ed on all Advertisements or they will be published until ordered to be discontinued, and charged accordingly. UTOne Dollar per square for a single * insertion. Quarterly and Mot thly Adver tisements will be charged the same as a single nsertion, and semi-monthly the same as new ones. All Obituary Notices exceeding six lines, and Communications recommending Candidates for public offices or trust-or puffing E~xhibitions, will be charged as Advertisements. ,17All letters by mail must be paid to insure punctual attendance. 07Rev.FREDErcK RusH, is a travelling Agent for this paper, and is authorized to raceive subscriptions and receipt for toe same. DEFENCE OF TILE BANK OF TILE STATE, 01: SOUTH CAROLINA; BY TIHE IION. F. H. ELMORE. LETIEit 'Iii. Defcng of the Bank continued. I. it to be preserved or destroyed? O/hjec. ,jeclions of its enemics considered. 1.s Objection, That Directors and o/fi -ers have absorbed 81,091,116 of its funds, examined and refuted. 2d. That "thirty of liacir friends have 870,000, more," exposed. tI have now cleared the way and ex. ii ut~ibersytbhoac ci . r V4h ill" enable you, fellow citizens, to follow me through and understand the second branch of my de fence of the Bank, on which I now en ter. W hat is the issue before you? It is: Shall the Bank be destroyed or pre served? This issue was presented by Mr. Memminger in .1-148. It was again inade by Gov. Seabrook's message, and embodied in the bill of the Select Com. rnittee of the last session by Mr. Mem. minger and Mr. Alazyck. ''hie de. struction of the Bank, te point at which Mr. Memminger had been driving in all those measures of 1838, 1841, and 1841, which I have heretofore explained, was there embodied and perfected. Shall the Bank be destroyed? Mr. Alem minger answers-it shall. But it de. ponds not on him, but on you to decide this question. In coning to your decision, you of course wish to understand whether the ]ank is worth preserving; whether it has been managed with fidelity; wheth er it is sound; whether it has been use. ful; whether it has been profitable; and whether, if preserved, it will continue to promote the public welfare. On all these, and perhaps other points, objec tions have been started and pressed with extraordinary zeal by its adversaries, and I hope to be able to embrace the whole of them in this vindIication. A t the head of all these points of in, qui ry is the one on which all others S hang; the fidelity of its adniinistration. If yotu cannot rely on the integrity of your managers, the confidence neces. sary to the useful and profituble aidiiin. ist ration of the Bank cannot be given; andl, since 1846 it hats been attempted to undermine and (lest roy that. Of thet modes of attaining this, that which Ihas been used wvith most indtustry atnd to somie extenit with some success, is the charge upon the Oflicers and Directors of having absorbed, ''for their owna use,"' a very la rgo amoi(unit of the funds of the Ihaik to the exclusion of thne rest of the S.ate. In nothing hans exaggeration and miustatemient bein umore employed, and it has been the more successful in ob taining credit, because it was assertedl that all the proofs paraded, erroneous nd deceptive as they were in reality, were d-awn from the "Private Recport" f the Bank. In a former number of this exposition No. 5,) 1 gave in part the history of this P'rivate Rieport. I stated lint the act of 19~31 required a report of thne accounts of the o00icers to be laidI before lie Leg. islaotiure each session; bust in 1839 thIiis dluty was exteinded by the following re. sdlut ion: ''lesolved, Tihuat hereafie r it shial I be the dutty of thle P'resident oft lhe Iblnki I, to s(et forth in an ann iual Pri vate lIeport to the Senate and [louse of Rlep. res'nt at ives, thle i ndetbt mes andl respon si hi lit iiesof thle several I )i rectors withI lie si ianhok, for t he past yeiar, brought do wni to thie first dauy of each sessioni of the [woiislature."' .f in of v'oi, to wvhom 1 ad( lress this defenice. tire uniuto teainted with hlaniks, and know very little of the business they transact, or the principles on which Banking is done; and you may ask: What is the objection to making public, or even to printing, the private accounts of the Directors of the Bank and of those whose bonds, notes, &c., they have endorsed? Bear with me a mo ment, and I will try and explain. Bunking is a pursuit or business: just as much so as planting, or mercantile pursuits, or manufacturing, or as is the practice of ly, or medicine. If it is carried on by the State, it must be con. ducted, as it is, by private Corporations, or Banks; for they have, by long expe. rience, ascertained the safest and most profitable mode of management. They have, for hundreds of years known that they must keep the accounts of those who have business with them entirely private and concealed from the public; because, if they show their accounts, those who deal with them will quit them, and go and do business with those who do not expose their transactions. There are twetlve Banks in South Carolina, and nearly one thousand more in the United States. Not one of all these Banks read out their Directors' accounts, and publish the indebtedness or responsibilities of their managers or customers. I never knew but one oc. casion when it was ever proposed in Charleston; and that was in 1839, at a meeting of the Rail Road Bank. The Directors themselves asked, then, that their accounts might be read out; only the amount. And the stockholders re fused to allow it to be done; hlectuse it would injure the lank. It it were iro. posed to do it in the Planters' and : le chanics' Rank, does any man dream that Mr. Memminger would support it? No!-not he. But, he first opposed it in 1839 and 1842, and afterwards caused it to be done, in the case of your Bank, in 1840 1848 and 18.19. Now, if it is good for your Bank, would it not be good for the private Banks? If it is injurious to them, is it not so to yours? The State was .o fully sensible of this, that in the 10th clause of the char. tor, (Comp. p. 7,) it is declnred that no '-hmoGP have "a :right to inspect the accounts of any individuals, or any body politic or corporate, with the Bank." In the 7th clause of the Act of 1813, the same protection is again declared, (Compilation, 11;) also, in _)d clause Act of 1817, Compilation, 15.) Act of 1843, (Compilation, 60.) Arnd it was upon the faith of this protection of their private accounts, and of the Resolution of 1839, which I copied at the head of this article, that all these accounts were made with the Bank which were set forth in the Private Report, for the in. formation of the Legislature, and which I r. Menmminger contrived to have made public by reading in the Illouse,-senud. ing the names and private debts of hun dreds of the debtors of the Biank into public exposure and gossip. Why do they not send the names of. their debtors, in the same way, to the public, in the Planter's and Mlechanics' Bank? 1e. cause none but its friends cam vo te there, and they are too wise to do it so great anl injury. The reqtirements of the Resoltution of 1839 was afterwards enlarged so as to embrace the Branches, and to make the Report show the accoutats on the 1st of' each amontha. I must here ask par.~ ticualar atteatioa to the phraseology of this Rtesolutiona, as the force andl efaect ofv.what will follow dlependls on keepinig the e-xact words andta thei r tru-e mienatning al1ways ini the atin ad. The Re~sol utijon of 19301 retquires an "Ananuail Repjort'' --of' whait! Of lhe "'inade~btidness anad responsibilities of thie several IDirectors w itha lie said hlank ." Antd to w.ihorn as this "Private Report"' to bc made? '"To the Senate and I louse of Iteprec. senaitat ives." Did the Legislaturc aaean a public report, whleai t hey reqiredl a "p rivante areport?"' Consult every Ditctinary of note, and thecre is not otne buttt suistaint s the conist ruct ion that thle words "p ~riv'ate report to the Setnate andI I louse oh itep resentatives"' was a restrictive trmat desigonating it for t he-ir owna private in. fo ramation-and niot fur tihe puic t. There was aiot only realsons of po~licy for making th ais ''privote."' bitt lie char. ter pirotected private accounts farm be ing exposeda. If' the-re had( beent notht inag restaictivye ini the wordl parivate-, whtv wais it iserted ? It wats, itt fact, whie~n introdu tced by Ni r. T1rev ill e, inii I -:it, ian. rodluced as a siustitutte for, a nd in an - tithtesis, to ai proposition), for a general public report. llut is it nt'~ede to prove what is pailpabale? The resoluatin as anronsenase, if' it does not aike thle reptort "pri vatte to thI e Senate atnd I 1ouseiS of R~epresenitativyes,'' anid ntot publ ic to thle worldl. liiit whlait doaes the Resoluit iona callI for? A reptort of twit thtings; atal Itre, agi, I beg sptecial aitteant iota to t hese two thitgs, its anot one atal the saame thintg, bitt as beintg as di re rent in fact, ruth andl manain ag, its they are in words. Thaey iire 1st: "'The iaidebtedness of the Directorts."' ed. "The responsibili ies of te D)irectors'' D~o thtr~s two. "iidmbhtmedes nt "responsibilities," mean one and the same thing? If a Director borrows money of the Bank, and gives his note or bond he is indebted; and if he owes more than one of such notes and bonds, the aggregate is his indebtedness. But if he endorses the note of another or gives a guaranty or letter of credit, or is a seciirity, those constitute "respon. sibilities, not "indebtedness." The resolution was drawn by an able Lawyer; and every Lawyer recognises the clear distinction, (one of reality and not of mere sound) between the two classes of liabilities, which Mr. Treville defined, one as "indebtedness," and the other as "responsibilities." Every man of business sees and at once acknowl edges the justice and propriety of this classification, and every man of com-. mon sense, and a fair disposition, refus. es to confound them, but at once assigns to each class its true and separate mean ing. The "indebtedness" of the Dircec. tor being what lie owes on his own tic. count-his "responsibilities" are what other persons owe, but which he has be. come liable for. It is not just or C air to confound the two chr.sses and to say that "responsi. hility" and "indebtedness" are synonv mous. It is not true in any sense; and imost especia ly does it convey a very false impression in commercial transac tions, where, in addition to the responsi. bility of Ins principal, the endorser is ofter fully protected by collateral se curities--produce, deposites, mortgages of property, &c. It is not fair or just to sayof any man, whether he is a Di. rector or not, that lie is "indebted to the full extent of all lie owes, and all lie may be made responsible for as endor ser, security or guarantor for others; it gives a false idea of' his debts, and if lie is a man in large business, atfects iiiju riously his credit, standing and influ ence; and. if he is a Director in your lank, it is the more unjust and unfair, not only for all I have said above as aiFecting him personally, and in his pri. vate business, but it is unjust to himt as a public servant, because it weakens his standing and shakes your confidence in his uprightness, integrity and oflicial idelity;gdycwr conhidenoa.in 'imb. ing shraken, his standing and usefulness with the publies is impaired. Since P4.10, nothing has been more urged by its enemies, than a charge that the Oflicers and Directors of the Bank, have got out of it, "for their own "se," a large proportion of its funds. hee most exaggerated statements have been cuirrent, swelling it tip from sun to sumi, until dlr. enmininger. who be. 'an it in I141, has ended, by putting down in a table, a carefully summed up statenwtit, which, he says, was taken hium the "lust "private" report, that their "total indebtedness" reached the enormous stun of $1,1191,1 16; "leaving for the rest of the State $31,344 of the whole actual capital of the Batik." Ilore are his own words: "'I'lh following abstract of the report, made: at the last session of the Legisla ture, will exhibit this fact: Total iudebtedness of the Officers and Directors of the Bank of the State. CiARf.:STON. 'Olicers, $206,062 I)irectors, $110,5;H 86706,600 Cor.citnu. OlIlicers, $90,'226 D i rectors, 222,330 Oitc'ers, $ 12,?.a On the above, I have sceeral pintts to1 call yIonur a tteiition to. 'The stm oif $1,001 , t16, is dhistinicily stated as lie * indeIibtedlru-ss of the~ Olliceris antd Dji re. trs."' It is done deliberately. It pro f-ses to dlrawi its ev idenrce from n ihe "P ri vato leport,"' and it comes frorn one0 of lie Illepresettative-s of Chl~Ies ton, and one whlo had the means of lit. ing best inifiormed. It spceak s as thle voice of that great anid ittlligi . city' --it conies fromt the Chanirmtan of the Ciiomitteie o f WVays and Nileans--a miiani versed ini1 lice; atid f'roim an old l aw. yer, w ho wetllI knw iiwSWhat "'iindebtei. ness'' mieans, and whalit idea lie use' of tat wvord, coupled with his impijosingz a rray, of figuiire's, imust con vev . Th'le business of his life has heir, to weigh wiords--to sift their tmineiiig ito thir sh ghtest sha tdes oif di 1feIrence, and! to shape his ownvi exprrssions so tis to moake thiem tell the moest against his opipo ietits. Nowr, if it hadl been otnly this on1ce that this charge had bee-n tie b him iii, I couli hvie considered it as an iniad. ve rteiice; a strange one, it is tue; andi 1 could have passed it as such, anid felt less comp~lled to exainoi and refute it; bitt, unhappily, it is far from beitng ihie oily intnc.in fact, in all his pubilishi. ed peechevs, and in his publIicat ions i this whole controversy, Mir. Mlemmiiiinger has inot M;y con founded the "'itidebted. ness'" wvith the '"responsibilities'' of the Directors, making till "'indebitedness;"' but lie hasu advorted to and commented on the Directors and on their accounts, in many ways calculated 'to excite pre judices and to produce impressions the most unfavorable agaffit-them. I will show this now. In higepoech in De cember, 1848, in the ftowspaper report, he says: "In additi t6 this, the Di. rectors have the powet to divide this money amongst them 'yes, and they not only have this r, but they ex ercise it.' And in th samphlet edition of the same speech, says, at p. 16: "The Directors exhib1 :a solid mass of liability, amounting; }to upwards of $700,000; and if to tIhis be, added the liabilities of the Officers of the Bank, it results that those cotiductirni the aiTuirs of the Bank, have taken t0 their own use, three.f-ourths of the whole actual capital of the Bank. It akes appar. ent that the true name o'tltie subject is not the People's Batik. It sthe Direc tors' Bank.' Again ,at page 19: "Set. ting down the amount l anedthe Direc. tors and Officers of the flaik at $850, 000.' li his speech in 184, in ad. vocating the reduction Xf the Board to four salaried Directors, and speaking of the Directors' acdounts, he says: "Why, twelve men had out 8850,000 of the mo'ey, and thirty of their friends had out 8S00,000 mote, (I will notice this fully presently,) 'iin all a million and a half-three hutdred and fifty diousand dollars more'thtan the capital of the Bank." (Carolinian, Telegraph, and Mercury reports.) "True our doors ore besieged now by men begging to be allowed to serve, but their pur pose was the discounts. By paying a salary we can get men we con rely upon." But not only in these speeches has he thus sneered and insintated against the Directors, and in speaking offieir ac. counts, confounded the two items of "indebtedness and responsibility" and so used them as to make the impr sion that the Directors and ,1ifoers "laave got for their own uqea all these large sums of money; but, ll ita s.i lto. pub lished articles he adhe b to the sait systetm. I have shown4r i in. dib table he made out wit (tls dnbti,; her, slating their "in "'I'hte Directors -and Ofliceis have umong them more than 81,000,000.' In his No. 5, in summing up--"second objection: That this was a Bank for the accommodation of the Planters, and to destroy it would be injurious to the agricultural community." lie an. swe r.: "T'this objection was answered by showing that the Officers and Direc tors of the 3anh its::lf had among them $1,001,116, which left of the actual capital of the Bank, only $-21.344 for al tin rest of the State." And in the No. 5 of what he calls his defence, he repeats the same in substance. I have been thus full and particular, in bringitg again to view andu in evi. dinee, these repetitions of' what Mr. Memminger has said and written, that it may appear clearly what they are, and that I have not mistated Iia posi. lions; nll that in w hat I shall now say, in explanation of this Private lReport on the Dairectors' accounts, and in exposi lion of what it really locs contain in re. gird to then, and of the Cvidenc und facts in it, which are so ditlerent from the version he has given of them, that yOu tmay all see I ltavye no talt ive Ileft but to subm~tit to the te'rribhle errors lhe h as led votu into, or to c'orreet them fully; ainl it haappen~s providenutially for th~e hdank , that ntow fur the first time, it has been put itn my powe r to speaik ott on this poinit, by the Senate's hiavitng pritnted thIiis very P'ri vate Rieport: A copy of it prited~' itn full, now lies be faeme, anid I otnly reg'ret, as t hatau gutst body d id ordert it to be pa i nted, that they had nio t sent a copy to every citi. zeti of thle S'taite. As it i, tie COPY now befo're mue is freec to thteinspect ion of any, one' whlo wishe~s to test m~y s tt' mettts, atnd ttay he seenl at thaeltaak. lIefbrtoe this {mb111icatiotn, I f'elti myst'elf fettered atnd restr'ainaed from miakinig lhese exsp1anat ions. Inti my antswe'rs to a C2ommiattee oft the' L egidatutre in 18:37. Coinlp. p. :320, I t~ointe'd out tihe false in f'i-rences II whi the mtodite tadoptecd by thle Legishiature woulId leadl to itt resgardl to these5 taccosunts; andti Iexpinted also, how the chtartetr forbid! my givintg thoase: ex pl anationsi of these aceouants, wiVlcha tustice to the l )irctors, calledl fort; aind, w ithouit wvhichl, the( P'rivate lI'port onm their accoutats wvas, neiceswiliy, very iimpelit~ . in f~ac't, that byv stating sitm. the ainounit of' "*responisibilityv.' wvithocut __v g, ait t ie soaeU tilte, tlit t)in Ies5 of the p"'rsomns for whom thary w'cre' thuns re spons5 ile. thie amtaounlts (of dlebt ill eac(h ca1st, withi thn' securities thv fiel for tht('tn, andl thiose afllorded' ini lhe niatie Uundl resource'sofi the~ r'eaI de bto rs, whose papter they had put their niiames oil, that this report wavrs calcutl atedi to mnisle1ald thle Legishuttire, and1( (1( great wrong to the: Ditrectrs. I now proceed to take Iup the "'Private Iteport' itself, and to show from it what is really set forth; wihat is the actual amrount of the inde'btedtness of' the O0Th cers tandt [)irectoirs; and wvhat the aumout thev are r'esnottibhin fr. thia nature of those liabilities, and the number and character of the persons for whom they are thus liable, amounting to three hun. dred and eighty.three persons, who are scattered over the whole State. I halve already shown that Mr. Aem. minger has published a table, made, as he says, from this "Private' Report, showing the total "indebtedness" of the Officers and Directors to be 01.091,110 This sum does not correspond exactly with the aggregate of indebtedness and responsibilities set forth in the report, which is 81,070,444 07. But this is a very immatterial error, scarcely worthy of note, when compared with that glar ing and most unjust one which classes a liability as a debt, and converts the debts of three hundred and eighty.three other persons. amounting to 8557,777,8 01 into that much of "indebtedness of the Directors," simply because they have endorsed the paper of these per. Sons. It will be remembered that this re. port embraces the accounts of the three Boards, and three sets of Officers at Charleston, Columbia and Camden eighteen Officers and upwards of thirty Directors. It shows their aggregate indebtedness to be 8512,660 06 Their aggregate responsibilities to be 557,778 01 Making indebtedness and liabilities both amount to 81,070,444 67 It thus appears that the real indeht edness of the Officers and Directors, is a little under one half of what Mr. Memminger has set it down; and that their liabilities as securities and endor. sers is a trifle over one half' of that sum. It should be remarked also, even in regard to this indebtedness, that it in. eltides the whole of the debt owed by the Nesbitt Manufacturing Company, as a Company,- and of several of its in. dividual members, as individuals, inclu ding thirteen persons in all, amounting to 147,557 02. These debts, on a oonsiderable part of. hioh we were not liable, Lot: Hlam pton and myself ssim' dffsWl h r 8 rP i -$210,058 50. Besides this, I have giv en a lien on portions of my own property to the Bank, which was valued at more than 880,000. It is a debt that has fal. len upon us by the misfortunes and fail tires of the original parties-not a cent of the money ever went to my use or Col. IHampton's, but we have to pay it. Mr. Memminger charges in this esti. mate the whole of this $147,557 02 to me, as an officer; well be it so. If is to so stated, then the "indebtedness' of the eighteen officers and more than thir. ty Directors will stand at the sum sta. ted, viz: 6512.666 66 But if it he considered that this debt is provided for in the securities held for it and belongs not to that category, then it should be deducted front the above 147,557 02 And it would leave the indebtedness of the Ofli .ers and Directors 365,059 64 And the amount of $147,557 02 would stand against me as a "responsibility' rather than as a debt. Every man will decide for himself whether or not this deduction is reason. able. ..ut,.whethr the decision be one way or the' othler, the dif~ercee be ween the "indebtedness, charged by Mr. .\emmiinger to bo $1,091,116 60 And this actodl inidebtedness, at its la rgest sum, of 512,000 00 Is the wide difference of 8578,440 34 TIhe "responsibilities" of the Officers and Directors of the three Boards I have shownt to be $557,778 01; and it now be comes proper that I should show the nature anud character of these liabilities whose debts they really are, and for whom they have been incurred. Thtese responsibuili. tics exist in the shape of security ships on the bond~us of other persons, secured in most cases, by mourtgages of property, and for larger vailue than the detbt; of endorsements oin notes, for which, in nmany instances, there are stocks pledged, or other collater al securitier. in the hands of thme Otlicer or Director whto endorsed. The Investiga. ling Coinmittee that examuined these de mnandls prononnmueed thenm all good and safe. Alr. M31ienumnger classes all thuese liables as debts of thle ()flicers and Directors. Tihis inot just nor correct. Theyw~, in cacth and every case, aire (wing by the panrties who gave the botnds or notes, and whose names are siignecd to tem; an~d so fatr fromi bemit conutinecd to. nud for the use of, the few otli curs ;anmd D irectors to whom heo charges them, these $.557,7783 01 of liabilities have beenu got by not less than three hundrod and eighty-three persons, who reside all over the State, anid embrace every class oft our cit izent and every pursuit of labor amnd mudustry. The private report itself from which Mr. Mfeninitger compiled his tables, states at fullI lenagth, the names of no less thanm one hutndred anid twenty (120) of' the persons a nil firms of men in business, on whmose' notes anid forwhom the greater p art of this sunm hiaid been drawn, for which the Directors were responsible; and that list omitted the naumes of upwards of ninety others on small business notes. At Columbia, the personus who got the $115,984 41, charged to res Tnonsibilities of Directors; were one linndred and~ thirtv-one (131.) and at Camdcn. for the 855,751 of like responsibilities, there were thirty-five persons, making, in all, no less than three hundred and eighty-three (383) persons, whose aggregate indebtedness is 6557,778 01, and for which the Officers and Directors are responsible as securities or endorsers, but Which Mr. Memminger charges on them as their own debts. The above statement certainly. shows, that instead of the Officers and Directors having "got fortheir own use" 8.1,091,110 of the funds of the lapk, that $557,778 10 which Mr. Memminger includes in these figures; were got by nearly four hundred other people, living in every district in the State, and embracing every variety of busi. ness and pursuit. We have endeavored to classify these people; and as nearly as we can ascertain, upwards of two hundred ate planters and farmers-about seventy are merchants; about the same number, seventy, are mechanics; the rest are tim ber and lumber trader., clergymen, law yers, physicians, &c. It thus appears that the Bank which Mr. Memminger denies is the People's Bank, but sneering calls "a Director's Bank," has thus accommodated nearly four hun dred citizens, residing in every district and all parts ofthe State, and embracing plan. ters, farmers, mechanics, merchants, cler gymen, lawyers, physicians, &c. to the amount of 8557,778 01 out of that very 81,091,116, which he charges the Officers and Directors with having "borrowed for their own use," and to the exclusion of these very persons. Could any thing be more unfair? More unjust to the Direc tors? More uncaridid? If Mr. Memminger did not know this, lie could have known it by examining the Re port carefully; or at least, he could have seen much there to contradict what he has put forth on it, and the rest he could have got upon inquiry. But, at any rate, he should not have pretended to give informa tion on so imnortant and delicate a point, without first knowing that what he said was strictly correct. The Bank and its manag ers are made victims to errors, which he has spread more widely than any other person, and which his station has imparted the highest authority for. I am aware the it may be attempted to reply, that in .many instances, these Notes or Bonds were ofibred by the Directors, and that they drew the money. This is true, in part, and yet, while trUein letter, -It docs not va . tho fste or st of what et ~ a~d wleh 1O that the~uin. -'q~ Noeeor be thie party cases, even where the money wont to the Director's purse, it only went to replace what he had advanced to his customer be fore: to the Planter to pay for his bagging, his bacon, his sugar, coffee and blankets to the Merchant, the Mechanic, and profes sional man for supplies, sent by the Direc tor as his factor and agent, and man or bu siness. In short, I state only a well known truth, when I say that our Factor Directors loan out to their customers more of the mo ney which they borrow as drawers, and owe as their own debts in Bank, than ther re ceive of that for which they endorse, and which stands charged against them as "re sponsibilities." I would here close this number, if it were not that there is one other charge made by Mr. Memminger, n connection with these accounts of the Directors, which may be more properly disposed of here than elsewhere. In his last speech at Columbia, Dec.. 1849, speaking in favor of reducing the Board of Directors in Charleston to four members, "Mr. Memminger exclaims: "Why twelve men had out 8850,000 of the money, and thirty of their friends had out 8700,)00 more-in all, a million and a half -three hundred and fifty thousand dollars more than the capital of the Bank!"-Col umbia Telegraph, and Carolinian. In another paper, the expression is slight ly varied, viz: "Byv the red book the hon orable gentleman h'eld in his hand, (the Re port of the Investigating Committee in red cover,) he perceived the Directors had bor rowedl themiselves, 8150,000, (a misprint for $850.000,) and had lent amongst Ihirty of their friends 8700,000-in the agcrregate a million and a half, and just $350,000O miore than the original capital of the Bank itself." See Charleston Mekrcury, Dec.1it0, 18-19.) It will be seen,. that to make up this frightful absortion of $1,55O0X0, that lhe chlarges first $'850,000i on the Directors, and thien adds 8700,(KX) 'lent to thirty of their friends," and~ that for proof of this last, oir that "S700,0() more was lent to thirty of their friends," lie refers to the Report of the Investigating Coimmittee. On the fourteenth page of that report I find what that Comminitten do say, and it is: "T1hat nearly $700,(XK) of the funds of the Bank, are in the hands of about thirty individuals, borrowed from the Itanik in Charleston alone," &c. TIhere is not one word atbout these thirty individuals being thme "f riends" of the Bloardl, nor does the passage warrant the assertion that this $700l,000 is in addi tion to what the Directors owe themselves. In fa~-t, thme whole passage and its ligures and statemeints is a tissue of errors piled on errors, for which the 'nve'stigatiing Coom mittee are in no whit responsible. Their report gives no ground to support these charges. Although four oif its live moan bers, when that investigation took plaee, entered the Banik its opponents, the great majority of them were too intelligent to fall into so ptalpabhle an error and too honorable to misstate those facts. Thley knew well that tho Directors and O')licers had not bor rowed any such exaggeratedl sum as $850, (XX0, a's Ihave already shown; and that of this $70)0,0)00, which Mr. Memminger adds on to the $850,000) to miake his enormous abstraction of $l1,50,00 of the funds of the lanik, $409,018 was atlready ine luded in the indebtedniess anid liabilities of the lDi. rectors and Officers. Em~braced in thme 8850,000 it is thus converted into a double charge; first, as part of the $850,000, and then as part of thme $700,000t. There can be no mistakc in thi.. for when I ead, at Columbia, the ERport fcbon mostigatng Committee, .Iaddressedago t tori Ma %vck, the Chairn an, who we id re- * fuested his listof the thirty" t%. T'hy were furnished me, and I tmadeih t !tate. ment one of the sbbjects' n whit Iad- a tIressed a memorial totioth Hoo the rourth page of which I noti 4 Istate ment. That list shows mnadiy things to vat}.Mr. aemminger's remark nOSt0essenti l. It shows not only that 490,01of. th 700, D0O was in.the accountso(theOffiers antd Directors, as I have stated alave, ;nd in eluded all my indebtedness an, lj ities an the Nesbitt Iron Wprtisat fies of my own, and my liabilities foral) ltfirs on whose paper my name Is, but that tthese thirty names, some were ist 'ome were widowed women with.their fanmlies, some were perfectly neutral in this cdtest, and that no inconsiderable partwerse aleci ded and influential opponents, actively co aperating with Mr. Memrningeragainst the Bank. In fact, he might,. v;ith eqi, if not greater justice, have assigned a lace in the picture to his own as to "their frieds." How the Union may beDshed. From an eloquent and.patrioticiad4ress :f Gen Caleb Cushing, delivered at New buryport Union, we take the following ex ract, which is as applicable to some other :ommunities with which we are.aquaint d as to the people of Massachusetts: severed in, you, the State of Massachuseits, Ilow, then, is the Union, so dear to-eve y patriotic heart, and of such inestimable ralue to all of us, to be preserved -lreply .o this question, by stating how I think It nay be destroyed; or at least how you tho >eople of Massachusetts, if you. labor dili fently and zealously in that view, may do nuch to promote and finally consupgm-te he dissolution of the Union. Desiring and intending to dissolve the Union, you will in the first place, as' you inve already done, knowingly and of rmal ce aforethought, infringe as at State upon xprees provisions of the 'constitutiop, for lie avowed purpose of injury to theiti ens of other States.. You will, in. the second placeca you: ave already done, maintain such uncon titutional legislation on the.gr: fl tr mQnscience not permitting you to, eid to he injunction ofthe const . e nonsatrating to the' tatb, ontt no COt safauyavil {{, t , nvn capricious conscience, or pretence of onscience, from keeping your implied en fagcments, or even your solemn, express )ath of fealty to the Union. By these acts and doctrines, steadly per. nay hope to succeed in dissolving the Un. on, so far as that consists of a written con titutional compact. Of the individual citizens of Massacho etts, each and all may do much to the ame end, by exerting themselves to kill he spirit of the constitution. In this aim, you will let pas unimprov d no occasion for violent, habitual, system tic misrepresentations and denunciation if the.character and principles of your fel ow citizens of other States. In order to lo this more thoroughly, you will establish sewspapers, form societies, and hold anni ersary and other public meetings, for the ole object of exaggerating their faults end naligning their motives and actions. If ccustomed to writing or public speaking, *ou will publish books or pamphlets, or erambulate the country delivering lec ures in the same sense. And if you hold my station confering on your authority as me of the religious, moral or political uiles of society, you will not tail to make ;our office the special means, as much as >ossible, of disseminating such obloquy and letraction. Thus you will eventually mcceed in completely alineating from you lhe regard of the citizens of other States, mid preparing them to accept the disunion 'ou tender to them, and to change readily trm the condition of your countrymen to hat of your foreign enemies. B~ut the people of the several States must :o-operate ini the performance of political Lets, without which ino comsmon govern nent can exist among them''and the Union mxpires of itself. You are to elect a Con tress to enact and a President to execute hie laws of the Union. If you 'sincerely lesire disunions, as wvould appear from the icts and language of msany, you will, ac :ordsigly, make the election oif President inmerely sectional questioni and you will ae rareful to vote for no person as member >f Congress, unless he will previously pledge himisseli to hold such opinions and ropose or support such measures as shall renider it impossible for him to co-operate wvith the members of Congress from other States in the enactment of any laws for the public good. If any one of your repre senstatives ini Conigress dedicates himsself to the task of embit tering sectional prejudice, inflamiing resentments and resistinsg all measures of conciliation, peace and con. stitutional harmony, himn you will glorify ansd mnaintain; for he is doing your- work ini furthecring the dissolution of the Union. Dut if one of your representatives presume to speak to yoau of your duty as good citi zeins, to appeal to your constitutional en g~agenments, to pleaid for justice, moderation, wisdom, cnmmron senuse, him crucify; for he stands in the way of yourenavrtoda solvo thme Union) edaertod. If by nll these mseans and appulianmces you In not accompish your object, you nieed lhe but one step msore, and the result is ire. You violate the constitutsion. . You elI the other parties to it thatsyou, do, not ~onsider yourself bound by any engage -nents you have insde with them, however, .leliberately in time, however soleranly in o'rm. By persevering calumny of your fol ow-citizens, you have at-length got them o hate you, sufficiently. Yout WiM snihar so pubbao functionary of yours tick ~r ate with them irn the common cotsenl of the nation. What remains to be'donelw But na hiingssmalto asr .he ots