Cheraw gazette. [volume] (Cheraw, S.C.) 1835-1838, May 24, 1836, Image 1
I - : ? . .. - . & - , '
(II Kit AW GAZETTE.
m. maclean editor & profrietor. CIIERAW, S. C., TUESDAY, MAY 24, 1836. m. t jib.* ^
> I I
Published eveiyTuesday.
IEBWS.
If paid wilhia throe months, - . . 3. OC
It paid withinthree montns after tne close
ot the year, - ------- 3. 5(
If not paid within that time, . . . . 4. 0(
A company of six persons taking the paper ;
the same rust Office, shall be entitled to it at ?1
paid in advance, and a company of ten persoi
at #20 ; provided the names be f orwarded togeti
er, accompanied by the money.
So paper to be discontinue but at the optio
of the Editor till arrearages are paid.
Advertisements inserted for 75 cents per squai
the first time, and 37 J for each subsequent inse
tion.
Persona sending in advertisements are requcs
ed to specify the number of times they are to I
inserted; otherwise they will be continued ti
N ordered out, and charged accordingly.
Jj'The Postage must be paid on all commi
nications sent by mail.
Extracts from Mr. Garland's Speech in reply t
Mr. Bell.
The honorable gentleman from Tennes
' a *> ?t\ _ ^ ^
see, oai) in assigning mv re?u?uu
which have induced him to abandon uth
party" now sustaining the Administration
charges, 1st. That the Administration cam
into power upon the profession of one set o
principles, and practices upon anotl>er. 2d
That the Administration has been grossh
derelict in its duty in recommending prope
measures and providing for the defence o
the country. 3d. That its practices an
prodigal and corrupt in the employment am
disbursement of the public funds used in dis
pensatingtlie patronage of the Government
And 4th. That it has attempted to deludi
the People, and produce public excitemen
upon subjects which th\?y recommend, am
never intended to carry out into practice
Before, however, I proceed to answer thesi
charges, I propose to ascertain the true poin
of responsibility* if they be found true. Th<
honorable gentleman from Tennessee sayhe
attaches but a slight degree of responsi
bility to the President, for t!?e practices am
neglect which he charges upon the Admin
istration; but holds his lieutenants, as hi
calls them, responsible, and thinks the Vici
President himself should be held somewha
responsible; that he ought, to some extent
to examine into the practices of the Govern
ment, and correct abuses. I do not, Mr
Chairman, concur with the honorable gen
tleman in his views upon this subject. 1
hold the President himself responsible foi
all and every abuse of Executive neglect o
" rni /i ?
duty or abuse ot power, i ne lonsuuuioi
charges him with the whole Executive duty
he appoints to office and removes at his will
it* abuses exist, the Constitution has placet
in his hands the corrective power; and if hi
fails, whenever he has knowledge of abuse
to apply the corrective, I hold him resoon
sible to the country. I will not separate be
tween the President and Executive officers
because all his duties consist in controlling
tiieir action and correcting their mulpracti
cos. It is here abuses.may sometimes exis
for a tune without his detectiou; but whci
he docs detect them; it is his duty to correct
and, if he fails, he is deeply responsible
Mut upon what priuciple the Vice Presiden
is to be held responsible, I confess I canno
discern. He is charged by the Constitutioi
simply with the duty ol* presiding over th<
deliberations of the Senate; ho can neithci
appoint nor remove an Executive officer, no
can he constitutionally do a single Execu
tive act, unless he is charged with the dutie
of the office of President, by the death, re
moval, or resignation, or disability of tin
President. Sir, the Vice President is upor
4io principle responsible for any abuses o
the Government, however glaring or cor
rupt, for the simple reason Jhat he has n<
constitutional power to correct thcpi. It i
'obvious, however, that lie is to be held res
ponsibleby his opponents, with a view t*
affect him in the comingPresidentiul election
I come now, Mr. Chairman, to conside
the charges of the honorable gentlemai
from Termessce.against the Administration
in doing so, 1 shall attempt to defend th
Administration by fact and reason. I shal
not employ opprobrious party epithets, o
impeach the motives of any man upon thi
floor. Conscious of the integrity of my o wi
opinions, I shall extend to others with whor
I differ as much credit for integrity of opic
ion as 1 claim for myself. Knowing, as
do, the liability of the human mind, and it
pronencss to err, and being unwilling to clair
to myself infallibility, if facts and reason
cannot be foond to sustain my opinions,
am sure denunciation will not. The firs
charge that I propose to consider is, th th
Administration came into power protessin
one set of principles, and that it practice
upon another. The first specification mad
by the gentleman from Tennessee, which
shall discuss, is the subject of "Internal I it
provemeni." He charges that the presei
^ Administration came into power professin
opposition to this system, and in practice ha
expended more money than in the same p<
* riod of any pre-existing Administratioi
* First, then, sir, as to the profession, and the
the practice. And here 1 might rest tl
defence of the Administration against tl
charge, by simply quoting from the soeec
of the gentleman from Kentucky (Mr. Aliei
the charge that the President came into pov
er favoring Vie system of Internal Improve
ments, while his practice has overthrown i
This gentleman read an extract from a lett<
' from the President to the Governor of Ind
ana, in which the President refers to his vofc
as a member of the Senate upon this subjec
and asserts his opinions to be unaltere
This letter, the gentleman from Kentucl
fhs West into the snniwri
OUJ O, IVIUUVV ???v f "??
the President. He says: 'This letter, throug
out the West, was considered as removii
every doubt, and the vote of that count
was given upon the faith of the positi
pledge it containedThe gentleman ss
castically says that this pledge was i
deemed by the veto of the Maysville j
and that the veto of the bill for the be
eiit of the Louisville canal, in the latter
t
which the President expressed this sound
and orthodox opinion : "Positive expert.
1 C7ice, and a more thorough consideration of
I the subject, have convinced me [the President]
) of the impropriety as well as inexpediency of
at such investments After the gentleman
5. had spoken of the shock and disappointment
18 which the Maysville and Louisville canal
l' | had produced in the West, and their tenden(I1
! cv to weaken the ties which bind together
; representative and constituent, and denying
"e ! the right of a representative to change his
r- j pledged opinion, he says; "But it teas vc.
t 1 cessaty to break the shock which this disap.
l0 \pointment caused in the West."
U | This purpose was accomplished, says the
! gentleman, in the message of 1829. Sir,
j this is certainly a most singular state of
I -i 'ni. _ 'c j. ,i .]
J mini's. x nu iuicu vi sjjuck uiiu uiaup0
! pointment created by the Maysville veto
message of May, 1830, in the West, is broken
by the annual message of December,
s 1829. Most singular?the force of a shock
e which took place in May, 1830, is broken by
i, a message delivered about six months before I
c I leave the gentleman to make the best of
,f this argument he can; for it is, I admit,
. greatly beyond my comprehension. In addition
to this testimony; I will offer that of
r; Mr. (Any, who pronounced, I think in 1834,
f i the death of his favorite system of internal
2 i improvement under the blow given it by the
1 J Maysville veto. Every member know9 the
. 1 particular solicitude with which that gentle. ,
. , man watched over his favorite system, and
2 ; that, from his public or private relations with
t! the President, be would not be disposed to
J i do him more than justice; yet, as late as
. t 1834, he pronounced the system crushed
5! beneath the power of the veto. Now, sir,
t J this gentleman, or the gentleman from Tennf
ci. no Ia fhn I
2 j IKJSSUVf XUIdlOA^U* l/Ul) OH 9 ??o IV vt.w
3 j protested principles of the President upon
. j this subject when he came into office; indc1
| pendent of this testimony, I think I shall be
.; able satisfactorily to prove that tho I resident,
s I in the administration of the Government, has
5 been consistent with himself, in profession 1
t and practice, in relation to this subject. The
,: Mavsville veto was the first occasion upon i
. I which the President made a particular avow.
! al ofhis opinions upon this all important i
. question of constitutional power, in'which
[ j he denies the right of this Government to
r! construct works of internal improvement
f i within the boundaries of a State, or to ap1
; propriatc money in aid of such w orks, by
; j subscriptions for stock or otherwise. lie I
; | avows also the opiniou that this Government
j has the powe:? j appropriate money for re2
moving obstacles from, and imrpoving the
, navigable rivers within, the limits of a State,
.; or where it is the boundary between States,
. : and for constructing works of improvement
, in the Territories; in all of which he distinr
| guishes between works of u national aud
. j those of a mere local cirnrUcter. The Pre
t sideut, however, in the veto message, ex- j
a: presses himself doubtfully of what is the !
; . true boundary line, within which the Govern-:
. j meat may appropriate money, and rccom11
meuds such an amendment oftlie Constitut!
tion as will place the exercises of this imi;
portant power upon its true ground, defining
: j the line over which" the Government shall
r 1 not go, and putting to rest forever this vexed
r j question. The V resident repeated in each
. ( of his succeeding messages the difficulty
s i under which ho labored, and the recommen.
j dation of a constitutional amendment, to res
! licve the Executive from the difliculty. This
i ; recommendation of his, merely to define by
f j constitutional declaration mis power, uus
. | not been responded to by the'represcutatives
51 of the People, and the responsibility for its
5 failure rests upon then).
It cannot be forgotten that the Maysviiie
[> veto was hailed with enthusiastic delight by
. the opponents of this power, as cutting off
r the whole system of local improvements
a within the limits of the States, and though
i; not achieving the whole, yet achieving much
a | very much, for the principle of strict conU
; st ruction. All the public journals so regardr
j ed it, and this was the view which was tas
i ken by the whoie nation. This, sir, is the
n | principle which the Administration profess,
n ! ed; and I contend that in all the appropriai
j lions for works of internal improvement,
11 none have been constructed of h local char,
s acter, incompatible with the principles avow,
n ed in the Maysviiie veto and subsequent
s messages. If there is one, sir, it lias4 escaI
ped my memory, and I should like to know
>t the truth.
e [Mr. Wise rose and said, that understandg
ing his honorable colleague (Mr. Garland)
s | to inquire or to ask lor a specification of any
e act of approbation bv the Executive of the
I principle of internal improvement since his
i. veto of the Maysviiie road bill, he would,
it with his colleague's permission, specify a
rr single instance during the fast Congress.
O C" " o * v? rt
d Mr. Garland gave way, and Mr. Wise
2- proceeded to state that daring last Congress
i. there was a bill of appropriation lor the cooid
struction of certain harbors on the lakes, in
le I the States of New York and Ohio. That
ie | when that bill came np for consideration, his
:h colleague (Mr. Mercer) moved to amend it,
i) by adding an item of thirty thousand dollars
v- or thereabout, for surveys for ivories of intere
nal improvement. This sum lias been for
it. several years annually appropriated for in- j
?r ternal improvement, and had ever been conli.
sidered thefoundation of the whole system.
2s It was the nucleus the nest egg of works of
5t, internal improvement; for without previous
d. surveys no works whatever could be coney
structed. It involved the whole 'principle
of of the system without limitation, without the
b- refined distinction ever involved in the word
ig "national." So viewed, when this amendry
ment was offered to this harbor bill, a few
te strict constructionists from theSouth of whom
it- I was ore, determined to make one more
*e- efTort to resist the principle of internal iinill,
j provemenf, and to strike a blow at the very1
ii-! foundation of the system. Accordingly,
C* w her. the bill came u*, wv rrf gen:! .men and
| * 1 O
i i???BBsaa
myselfappealed to the gentlemen of "(he
parly," particularly from New Yirk, to aid
us in resisting this amendment of my col.
bague> (Mr. xMercer.) My honorable colleague
(Mr. Archer,) when the amendment
was offered, called for the yeas and nays,
and, to our gratification, it was rejected by
the rotes of .^the party" from New York,
united with the strict constructionists of the
South. We congratulated ourselves upon
the triumph; and 1 remember well that I was
cordially congratulated by several gentle,
meu from New York upon the evidence
which they had given us that they were with
the South on the question of internal improvements.
I relied upon their evidences
and their smiles, but was doomed to disappointment,
and, in turn, to defeat. My colInnrrnn
/Mr IVIfiiv>o?>\ on/] tVi/i V<it!r.nnl l?n
1VW0UV i'AVlV/UI J UUU I llv AlUUUliUl AW. publicans,
as they are called, generally, seeing
the manner in which their favorite appropriation
for surveys had been defeated, turned
around and united with the strict constructionists
in voting against the harbors of
New York and Ohio. Thus we, in fact,
defeated the whole bill; but the rejection lasted
only twenty four hours, for the moment
uthc party" of New York saw their harbors
fail, they forgot they were against the principles
of internal improvement, which they admitted,
and all admit, is involved in the appropriation
for surveys, came in the next
day, moved a reconsideration ef the vote rejecting
the amendment of my colleague?it
was moved by Mr. Beardsley, ofNew York.
The amendment, then, was passed by their
votes. The vote rejecting the harbors was
then reconsidered; the bill, containing surveys
and harbors was passed, and the Preaidsnt.
nf thp Tnitnd Stntpp siirnpfl. and <tiinr.
tioiied the att with all its features of Internal
improvement in every form.]
Mr. Garland resumed. I do not doubt
at all the truth of the statement of my lionorable
friend from Virginia. I know lie
would make no intentional misstatement;
nor is it material to my argument to vindicate
or defend the course ofmcmbers on this
floor, who may act inconsistently with themselves:
that is their own business; with which
I have no concern, and with which I shall
not meddle; butl do not think the 830,000,
referred to by my colleague, at all conflicts
with the truth of the assertion; for there is
nothing in it, nor has there been any prac
1 .M 1 M.. j| *
tice unucr ir, incompatible wnn me principles
of the Maysvilfe veto. The first appropriation
for f>lans and surveys was made on
the 30th of April, 1824, and is in these
words: "Be it enacted tyc. That the President
of the United States is hereby authorised
to cause the necessary surveys, plans,
and estimates to be made of the routes of
Such roads and canals as he may deem of
national importance in a commercial or a
military point of view, or necessary for the
franspoi tation of the public mail; designating
in the case of each canal, wli^t points may
be made capable of sloop navigation," <fcc.;
in which the surveys to be made are to be
lor works of "national importanceand in
its execution restricted to such works as are
of national importance in a commercial or
r>/ivnf nf firth nr nrmenni inr fht>
mil4K4#y VJ VfrVlV) W #?wwvwrvwjf ^ v# ?iw
transportation of thepiiblic mail. The first
appropriation for this object during this Administration
is in these words: For'defraying
the expenses incidental to making examinations
and surveys for nationalitorks under the
act of 30th April, 1824, &c. thirty thousand
dollars'?Act of May 3d, 1830; in which
the appropriation directly refers to the surveys,
&c. centemplated by the act of 1824,
and only incorporates the principles of that
act. Every appropriation since is in the
same language, aud is made to procure the
surveys, plans, &c. contemplated by the act
of 1824; and is expressly restriotcd to the
objects named in that act. Whatever, then,
is wrong in the annual appropriation referred
to by my friend from Virginia, is to be traced
to the act of 1824, for which the republican
Administration of Mr. Monroe is rosponsible.
In that act, the distinction is
taken between local and national works, and
is the distinction taken in the Mayavflle veto
and running throughout the messages of
President Jackson. I admit, sir, for I never
will disguise truth for any consideration, that
' on Ann .l.ii
wis annual appropriation 01 ov,vuv uoaurs
contains within it aprincrple of internal improvement,
not an unrestricted and unlimited
principle, such as was claimed bv the preceding
Administration* but a restricted principle.
restricted to national works, the very
principle of the veto. Yet, sir, I am free to
confess that this principle is broader than
my own notion of constitutional power, and
incompatible with the strict doctrine of the
Virginia school upon this subject. I disagree
with the President as to the power
which he asserts over rivers within a State,
or where the jurisdiction of two States extends
over it. I am not attempting to prove
that the doctrines of the President are entirely
in accordance with the Virginia doctrines
upon this subject; I know they are
not, and he never pretended that they were.
I am only contending that he is consistent
with himself in principle and practice inrc'
- ' T -x '1 AUI <* WMAAIiaa kn
luiioii lo tins suujeci ; uuu tu mis uv
has done much, very much, to restore the
practice of the (Government to the true constitutioual
standard for which he has my
sincere thanks.
Much has been said, Mr. Chairman, by
all the gentlemen who have preceded me in
this debute, about the immense surplus in
the Treasury, and its rapid increase. I
here summit statements showing the actual
I amonnt of the surplus at the close of the
j last year; and what will be its probable
amount at tiie close of the current year,
depends upon the appropriations of the
present session.
1. The actual surplus in the Treasury on
the 1st of January, 1636. after deducting
> unavailable funds, and all outstanding ap!
propriaiions, was about 18,000,000 dollars.
; The b 61'ar.ee cn hand was about 05,731
1521 dollars," and the outstanding appropria-'
tious near eight millions.. This surplus
was larger than had been previously
estimated, on account of the great importations
in the last quarter of the year, made
before the apprehended difficulties with
Fia:ice should probably end in commercial
restrictions and war; and on account of
the unexpected continuance of extravagant j
speculations in public lands through the
months of November and December.
2. The amount of the surplus at the close
ot 1936, will of course, depend on the
receipts tluring the year,, and the expenditures,
which have not yet been ascertained,
for a single month with entire accuracy.
But, if the estimates made in the last an.
nual report of the receipts should be ex
ceeded by three or four millions of dollars,
as seems probable froft the large imports
to supply the destruction of goods by firg
in New York, and fr*f& a continuance in
January and February of large purchases
of public lands, then the*jrhole receipts in
the year may be expected "*to ~ equal about
25,000,000 dollars. ..Yhe receipts lrom
lands are so uncertain, they may exceeded
or fall short of the allowance included in
the above computation".
I do not see any indications that the
United States Bank intends to pay into the
Treasury mudv if Wit, of our capital stock
during 1836, so as to swell the surplus from
that source.
From this 25,000,000 dollars is to be
deducted the expenditure during 1836 of
new appropriations, whiph , have been estimated
in tho annual rcpdft about 23,900,000
i _n . 4HRvPW.
uumirs. ; ? .
If the expenditures in *ife3(5 of new appropriations
should equal that sum, the
balance of receipts in the year would exceed
tho expenditure abot&2)600,000 dollars.
But if to those expa^flfeftes, as estimated
seveu months ago, are added the pew
items for the Florida war, and olhpr incidents,
equalling five millions,, the balance
of expenditures over receipts would be
3,000,000 dollars, and thus what might be
deemed a surplus in the Treasury, January,
1837, would bo only about 15,000,000
dollars, instead of what it was January 1,
1836, of about 18,000,000 dollars.
Should Congress, however, appropriate
still more to the fortifications ancLNavy, to
build custom houses, <Sjc. dec., than was
contemplated in the estimates submitted
last December, (and it is expected they may
to the amount of at least six or seven millions.)
all tluiLexcess will pro tanlo reduce
the surplus below fitleen millions, and make
it not over seven or eight millions. So if
the receipts from duties are actually postpoued
much to subsequent years by the
New York fire bill, or are diminished by
any large remission of duties, the surplus
will be further reduced. On the contrary
the receipts from lands dec., may be larger
and then it will be increased.
From this statement, there was actually
in the Treasury, at the close of the year,
about 810,000,000, after deducting actual
expenditures and unexpended appropriations,
which must be expended. And this, sir, is
the immense surplus over which the Executive
wields an uncontrolled authority,
and with \<-hich the nation is to be corrupted
! Sir, it is true it is rapidly increasing
and will continue to do so, unless we pass
the necessary appropriation bills. Sir,
this surplus, with the decreasing duties under
the act of.1802, will not remain long,
although it amounts in calculation almost to
850,000,000, but will be only in calculation,
not in cash. I am Mr. Chairman,
much amused at the change in the state of
things. Two years ago we heard nothing
but woful prophecies of a bankrupt Treasury
and a ruined People. A% resort to
direct taxation, arising from the folly and
usurpations of this Administration, was
predicted .ritli great confidence. This
very year was the period of fulfilment?
1 ? 1?1 kz-ih/vl#! ii?n o%.A oln??mn/1
\\ IlL'Il IO i auu wv oi<j iiui imui iiiuu
on account of a bankrupt Treasury and a
ruined country, but, sir, because of an
overflowing Treasury and a. prosperous
People. Wcarc actually alarmed because
we have so much money we do not know
what to do w th it. What a singular fulfilment
of prophecy this! There is, Mr.
Chairman, a ready way to relieve all our
difficulties upon this subject?relieve the
taxes of the People by reducing the tariff*,
and the surplus will soon be reduced. I
hold myself indcr no obligation to abide
any compromise of conflicting interests,
which shall unnecessarily bunden the great
body of the Pcopkv
. I come mw, Mr. Chairman, to consider
the subject $f the deposite banks. It is
said by the gentleman. from Tennessee
| (Mr. Belli that the deposite of the public
i money in tie State banks, extending as
j they do over the whole nation, secures to
; the Exec at ve an extensive and dangerous
\ influence *ver the moneyed concerns of
! the country to an extent dangcrous.to public
i virtue and iberty; that the deposite banks
will be enirely subservient to its views.
Sir, the pii>lic money must either be con.
centrated it one point, in the Treasury
Department, which would be unsafe and
dangerous or in the hands of individuals
which w odd also be unsafe, or in banks;
and the qiestion is, which would be the
most judcious deposite? Mr. Gallatin,
for whose opinions 1 entertain very high
respect, ha report to Congress in* 1811,
when thecharter of the old United States
Bank w? under consideration, used this
language " The banking system is now
firmly esablished, and in its ramifications
' extends t> every part of the United States.
Under tut system, the assistance of banks
appearsto me necessary for the punctual
collectifi of the revenue, and for the safe
kcepiniand transmission ofpublic moneys.
That te punctuality of payments is prinripaltyd'-jo
to banks, is a fact generally fic. j
I
i
knowledged," dec. This argument is used
merely to prove the necessity of using
banks, because the system is firmlv incorporated
into our system. He then goes
on to argue the advantages of a national,
over State banks; but says: "If, indeed
the Bank of the United States could be
removed without affecting either its nume.
rous debtors, the other moneyed institutions,
or the circulation of the country, the or- 1
dinary fiscal operations of the Government
would not bo materially deranged and
might be carried on by means of another
general bank, or of State banks." This
concedes the whole ground 1 desire; and
that State batiks can be effectively and
i* i.. i i * i i M ' . i 1
saieiy empjoycu, is aireauy provea oy aciuai
experiment. Tlie concession comes, too, 1
from a mau favoring a national bank.
The reasons, under existing cirCum- '
stances, of selecting State banks, by the
Executive, are manifest; it was an act of 1
necessity. There is no la\v directing 1
wht re the public money should be deposited,. ;
in case of the expiration of the U. S.
Bank charter, or in case the Secretary, J
under the discretion with which he was 1
vested, should deem it expedient to remove ;
them: the State banks were the only safe 'l
places which could be selected. At the
opening of the session of Congress succeeding
the removal of the public deposites,
the President in his message notified Con- j
gress to make suitable -regulations. He \
said," the attention of Congress is earnestly J
invited to the regulation of the deposites in !
the State banks, by law. Although the 1
power now exercised by the Executive 1
Department in this behalf is only such as I
ti'oo nm
u IVO UllUVillUJ' bill Vf Vl^
Administration, from the origin of tiie i
Government up to the establishment of 1
the present bank, yet it is one which is 1
susceptible of regulation by law, and tliere- '
fore ought to be so regulated. The power J
of Congress to direct in what places the '
Treasurer shall keep the moneys in the 1
Treasury, and to impose restrictions upon *
the Executive authority, in relation to their 1
custody and removal, is unlimitedand 1
Pnmrrace fV/\m tKnt fimrt tr\ (Kis li.ic filling i
VUHq1 Wv> iiv?4 kliu% UII1W VV IIMW tVMiwi
to do so. The reason is obvious. The '
bill regulating this mutter was embarrassed I
in its progress with clogs and restrictions, J
which might induce tho State banks to '
refuse to receive the deposiles, and thus to (
bring about the necessity of renewing the '
charter of the United States Bank, or <
chartering a new national bank. Sir, we <
should cease to assail the Executive about '
its influence and control over the State 1
banks, and of the public money. The <
Executive lias earnestly invited and urged 1
you to regulate the deposites, and restrict !
its control over the public money. 1
Gentlemen complain of the influence 1
which the Executive will exert over the '
community?an influence, they say, don. I
gerous to liberty?through medium ul* thedeposite
banks. I submit it to the
country to decide whether there be less
danger from a connexion with a national
bank of $35,000,000, having its branches j
in tiie capital of every State, controlled by
a single board of directors, or the saxae ]
number of State banks, having each its in- 1
dependent board of directors, controlled i
by the vigilance of 24 State Governments, '
each interested for its own security in i
restraining any. undue influence over State :
institutions by the National Government,
even with $50,000,000, of capital. I am,
myself, AIr. Chairman, no friend of banking j
institutions: the whole system is corrupt in
its tendency, and is as successfully building <
up aristocracy in this country as the laws !
of primogeniture and succession sustain it
in Great Britain. <
i But, sir, gentlemen not only profess to be j
alarmed at the influence .possessed by the j
Government over these institutions, and
the dangerous tendency of that influence, i
but they strike up another panic, and assert 1
that the deposite banks are not safe; that 1
the public money will all, or nearly all, be I
lost. I here exhibit a table showing the j
true condition of the deposite banks up to '
the 1st February, by which it will be seen <
that all the demands against thein amount |
to $06,814,736 36, and their means to <
meet them $129,074,570 15; leaving a sum
over and above all demands of $41,229,833
79. '
It appears that the immediate liabilities
of all the deposite banks are as fol. i
lows: * i
Owing to other banks, $14,679,161 45 i
Pfmilntinn fr? he redfiemod 26.243.688 36 '
Private depositcs, 15,043,03d 61 i
Public depositcs 30,768,879 91 <
Aggregate $86,844,763 36
Their immediate means to meet their i
immediate liabilities were:
Due from other banks $15,712,977 35 j
Specie on hand 10,198,659 24 i
Notes of specie-paying
banks 9,573,089 53 <
, i
Aggregate $33,484,726 12 ]
So that their? nmediate means were as 1 ]
to about 21-2 of their immediate liabilities. <
This is a proportion larger than most of <
the other banks in the Uuited States; larger 1
than the United States Bank itself used <
generally to have when a public depository, ;
and larger than the Bank of England
usually has. (See supplemental report,
1834, table AA, Doc. No. 27, Ho. of i
Eeps.) '. -j
But beside these immediate mean* the
deposite banks had also other means to i
secure the Government and other depositors t
and the holders of their notes, of about 50 i
per cent, more than the amount of all their 1
immediate liabilities. <
Thus, beside the above immediate means, '
tlrev have bills of exchange, in many
cases as available as specie, amounting i
to $27,149,935 39
They have due t?them on. J
note? and obligations ., ?*
discounted the sum. of
And add to this their immediate
means of 35,484,72$ 12
j?1?- i
And thev have* in aft the . '/ ,
sum of 0428,O7^MF7O 15
to pay and secure their haaiedinte , . %
66,644,763 dollars 36 cents. " ' ..^J|
In addition to this, the Twgdfijr hoUs v
collateral security of most of these tanks, ** ?
to sccut^wbatis due to the Unijta$ States
as suggested in annual report, page 81. z&tijk
The reports up the 1st of Masph. varyZ^SS
this view but little. It is num&flfcijheie*
tare, Mr. Chairman, that so much alarm-for
the safety of the public money k totallyunfounded.
It is easy to discover that all
iKpco t<w)M nrul ?Inwno c kftirt tl\A. ^MAarin
banks, this irresistible influence of the Ex.
tjcutive over the.fubficwirid, through their ~
igency, me intea&ed to efiect som# ofl* r
tkvorittj- object *mj$ ?paM at another
national bank. I do not allude to any gentleman
on this floors Bui; sir,, does it not
recur to gentlemen, if these deposit# banks a j
are all broke, that they cap exercise' no deleterious
influence upon the country, and
tliat tliese fears arc entirely visionary X
The next subject of complaint on the
part of the honorable gentleman from Tennessee
(Mr. Bnx) to which I shall advert
is the subject of Executive patronage, the
increase and dangerous tendency of which
seem to excite so much apprehension for i
the virtue and safety of the natioo, on the
part of that gentleman. In discussing this
[jucstif n, Air. ChairmanrI shall not stop to
inquire what friend of the Administration
ma v or mav not beinvolvodin inconsistency;
jt ~ 4 r ? - |
that is immaterial to me. i shall present * my
own views upon this as upon an other
questions which shalTcome under consideration,
withoutregardtothe consequences to
others. The question is, what^are the
principles of this Administration upon tiffs
subject? not what is, or what has been, the
opinion of this or that indhridaal friend;
md whether, upon this subject, the proSbs*
ron and practice of the Administration , :
tiave been consistent. The honorable 3
gentleman says the bill,now before the -j
tlouse, sent hither by the Senate, is 'in*
tended to restrict and cut off improper Executive
patronage. This bill provides that
the limitation of four years .to the duration
of the term of the public office rs, to whoso 4
offices itnow applies, shall be repealed, \
md that, in case of removal from offiae <
before the nomination of a successor is ;j
icted upon, the President shall assign to the
Senate his reasons for the removal* Now,
sir, I deny that this bill is in accordance with
the professed opinions of the Administration.
The views of the President upon
this subject were announced in his first annual
message to Congrcifc, in wbUi Ui ?j **
?i*TWo nru porhnpg fcvr TOfU w ho O?
for an}* great length of time enjoy office
and power, without being more or less unJ 'nd.,A?AA
IA
uur uiu uiiiucuw vi tccuugs uuimvtwwiu w
a faithful discharge of their public duties. ^
Their integrity may be proof Ugaktst improper
considerations immediately address. ed
to themselves, but they are sot to acquire
a habit of looking with md il&reace trnon
the public interests, and of
duct from which an unpractised ttmKpJtouJd
revolt. Office is considered as a iepeeies "
of property, and Governmen^JMfcCMk#' a
means of promoting individual interests, ?
than as an inst%nent created solely % . . i
the service of the People. Cprruptioa ifi
some, and in others a perversion of correct
feelings and principles, divert Government
from its legitimate ends, and make it an
engine for the support of ihe few at the expense
of the many, The duties of all
public officers are, or at least admit pf %
being made so plain and simple that men of
intelligence may readily qualify themselves
for their performance j and 1 cannot Jtoit ' j
believe that more is lost by the long continuance
of men in office than is generally to
be gained by their experience. / xabmit,
therefore, to your consideration whether the j
\jficiency of the Government wtuld not be f
promoted, and afdalinduxtry and integrity ;
belter secured, by a general externum of (he ^
law which limits appointments to four yean.
" In a country where offices ire created . ?
snlpJv flirthfthcnelll nf fhp P<?nnlft,?n ?hn i
man has any more intrinsic right to official
station than another. Office? mre Dot |
established to give support llo lyriyikr
men, at the public expense. Nowldiridual
wrong is therefore done by removal, since
neither appointment to, nor condmoce in,
office is matter of right. The incumbent
became an officer with a view to public
benefits; und when these require "Ins removal,
they are not to be sacrificed to
private interests. It is the People and they
alone, who have a right to comp&o when i
a bad officer is substituted for a gpod sue. j
He who is removed has the same means of ]
obtaining a living, that areeojoyed by the
millions who never held office. The j*roposed
limitation would destroy the idea of
property, now so generally connected with
official station; and although individual
distress may be sometimes produced, it .
would, by promoting that rotation which
constitutes a leading principle in the re.
publican creed, give healthful actkfei to the
system.*'
If any man can discern in these viewr^of"
the President the slightest accordance with
the principles of tiie bill from the Senate,
he has more acuteness than 1 have. The
Senate's bill proposes to repeal the Kmita.
lion of four years entirely, while the Pre.
sident recommends on enlargement of the
limitation of four years to nearly all tiie
offices under the Government; certainly a
very materio! difference. The Senate's
bill requires the President to assign bis reasons
for removal; the President nowhere
intimates the propriety of such a requisition?
r
X ' ' f
. , /
" * i
* - S _