The Sumter banner. (Sumterville, S.C.) 1846-1855, August 21, 1850, Image 1
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