Newspaper Page Text
lions, and require contributions, such as the | e
unshackled tree born spirits of the western It
w.»rld was bv no means prepared to submit to. j j
Born to believe, and reared under circunrstan- H
< es to increase the impression, 'hat they were I t
individually, as well as in their collective ca- <
o icitv as communities, entitled to all the ad- <
v images both natural and political, resulting <
from their peculiar providential situations, the i
people of the colonies could not by persuasionsji
cr threats, he induced to recognize the divine > \
4 ? of Kings,Princes and Potentates, to dir- .
late to them, but fearlessly asserted, and bold- i
iv maintamed their right to adopt such form of I
government, as to them should apoear most
congenial with the circumstances by which
i'icy were surrounded, and under which it was
both their province and duty to make such
choice. From these considerations, showing
dearly and distinctly the character of ihe ma
terials, which compose their political fabric, I
proceed to lay down the following, as the fun
damental principles of our present form of go
vernment, and shall sustain each, under its
proper head.
First, That the States are as they were ori
ginally intended to be. sovereign and independ
ant of each other, and that the Federal Govern
ment is their agent.
Second, That they are the proper judges of
their own rights, as well their infraction, as the
inode and measure of redress.
I agree fully in opinion with Governor
Troup, that sovereignty is indivisible; and that
it can exist in but one power at the same time.
It musi iherefoie either be in the government,
or in the people. If it be m the government,
then the people must be subject to the sovereign
will, and so far from being freemen, are bond
men, f*>r they arc the subjects of the sovereign.
If it be in the people, then the government
must be subject to the sovereign will of the peo
ple, or the attribute of sovereignty is entirely
lost. Tne sovereign being the superior, the
subject the inferior, it must follow as an irre
sistible conclusion that the people who are
sovereign, must be superior to the government
who are subject to their control. Now, when
we approach the Constitution to enquire into
(he powers of the federal government, and the
rights of the States, we must do so under the
acknowledged fact, that the “States are sove
reign,” and that the federal government is not;
because the powers vested in the State Gov
ernments are derivable immediately from the
people, and those of the Federal Government
from the States; otherwise a total change in the
character, genius and objects of the people.who
made the declaration of independance, and
adopted the articles of confederation must
have taken place, at the tune of the adoption
of the Federal Constitution; thus presenting
th” strange anomdy of a people, maintaining
a sanguinary war of seven years duration for
principle*. and a successful practical operation
of a government of their own choice for twelve
prod c ited upon those principles, yielding the
whole, without a murmur or an effort made for
their preservation. Is it possible that any ra
tional mmd can arrive at such a preposterous
conclusion? But let us examine whether the
Federal Constitution imparts sovereignly to
that government, or whom it is reserved, by it
to the States. Upon a close inspection of the
constitution we find every power which is in
tended to be granted by it Io ihe Federal Go
vernment, plainly and distinc ly enumerated,
and the 17:h clause of the Bth section of the
fust article, can alone in (he slightest degree
be construed as imparting powers of a general
character. Let us see haw far that docs so.
“ i'he Congress shall have power to make aH
laws which shall be necessary and proper for
carrying into execution the foregoing powers,
and all oilier powers vested by this Constitu
tion in the government of the United Slates,
or tn any department or office thereof.”
What is meant hy the “ foregoing powers;”
nothing more not less than the powers which
are plainly enumerated from the first to the
six-eeiub clauses, inclusive, of this same Sth
section, of which this is the seventeenth-
Wnat is meant by “all other powers ?” No
armvi r more satisfactory can be given, than
the language iu the clause affords. “ All oth
er powers vested by this Constitution in the
G v-r unent of the United States, or in anv
offi■ i or department 'hereof.” Not all
<4n r p >wcrs ac.-oidmg to the constructions or
ii>»p/.>cuhaus of the gov< rnmeut of the United
State - is hereby meant; but only such powers
as uro ” vested bv this constitution’’ in that go
ver ment, is tiio plain import of tho clause.
Is tins clihish men found to bo general in its
character ’ Or does it on tho other hand con- i
li'ic the powers of Congress, and ot tho gov
ernment ge lerally and the officers thereof,
tn the plain simple enumerated grants, con
tained in th<* Constitu ion. and m end- d as the
rub of action «»f each ArancA, department or
officer of tho government? In vain have I look- i
od for any grant of power in the Constitution, ;
vesting Sovereignty in the United States, jhe !
term “ sovereignty.” cannot tie found from the !
first to the list svlable in it- The power can
only he contended for, therefore, by construc
tion or implication, which it the foregoing po
sitions are correct, tnu-t he a high handed and
dangerous assumption r»f authority, nn the p.iH
of the government, unknown to the constitu
lion, and violative of the reserved rights of the
S'.ites, and of the penpie. But to make the
s " |c<-i, ts possible, still more clear, the 10th
• mendmen’ to the constitution declare-'. that
■“uh powers not delegated to the United!
States b* the constitution, nor prohibited by 11 j
to the states, are reserved to the States re- I
spectivelv, or to the people.’’ .Now no person
udi d-t.y'hat sovereignty h t power and an
essetitu! one too, tn the formation of any kind !
ol government. if therefore it cannot be l
found by a positive grant in ihc Cons itution. I
to he vested in the Gem ral Government, and '
its mdiv«du«lity of character, prombits Mi oih-,
er Haims to ih»- participation in o by tha* gov- ‘
•rnment, as has already been eh wn it f.<M (> . - 1
•s a proposition too plain to he d -p red, »hai I
jt must bs among the powers reee’vvd t' '*'e ♦:
states; or rather an original, essential funda
mental power,of right, belonging to tile people,
from whom all other powers or delegated au
thority flows, whether vested in the govern
ment of the States of whten they are citizens,
or of the United States in their confederated
character. Sovereignty is a paramount power
superior to all other powers whatever, and sig
nifies the head or source of all other powers;
lit must therefore be rationally looked fur as
I residing in whatever source the power which
■ is about to be exercised, (be it what it may) or
iginally emenated. If this position is denied,
j you then take from the Sovereign of the Uni
verse, one of his essential attributes, which
belnngeth to him as the Creator of all things.
And the analogy holds good in the present in
stance; for as every power, whether of a posi
tive,or of an implied or constructive character,
if you please, that the Genera! Government
possesses, has eminated from the States, and
the people of the States, it follows as clearly
as any demonstration can be laid down, that
the States through the people, must be in pos
session of the original fundamental principle,
which alone could justify the exercise of such
high authority, as that God himself, .being the
Creator of all things, is entitled to sovereignty
as a divine attribute.
Let us see how far the States are indepen
dent of each other. It must bo borne in mind,
that at the time of the change of policy of the
Crown and Parliament, with respect to the
Colonies, that the charter which had been pre
viously granted to each, was unconnected
with, and entirely independent of the others;
and that the league which through necessity,
■was formed between them lor their common
defence against the usurpations of the mother
country, recognised them as they had origin
ally existed, entirely independent of each oth- •;
er, but for the purpose of ’hat league. What
gave rise to the necessity of forming this
league ? A similarity of wrongs, eminating
from the same power, which had assumed an
unauthorised, and unnatural control over the
affairs of the whole, thereby violating in the
same acts, the right of each Colony in its in
dividual capacity,. Nor does the fact, that
the Colonies did unite for the purpose of com- i
mon defence, prove that they altered in the
slightest degree, their individuality of charac
ter, further than the objects contemplated by
the league; for it cannot be denied; that under
their charters from the crown, they had the
right to enter into this league, or not, as each
of them though t proper; or can it bo contend
ed, that a majority of the whole having revol
ted, the balance were compelled to follow their
example, and violate their primitive allegiance
to the Crown. It is evident therefore, that
the action of the Colonies in the formation of
the league for their common defence, was vo
luntary, and the result of their individual
choice; consequently binding on each, no far
ther than the objects plainly, and unequivocal
ly contemplated by, and set forth in the in
strument, which was the evidence of the league
between them. If we take the Declarationrof
Independence as the instrument which shall de
termine the character of the Colonies at that
period, the plain import of that instrument
will fully bear me out in this view of the sub
ject; for if the object of the Colonies was the
preservation of their “ undeniable rights,”
among which “ are life, liberty, and the pur
suit of happiness,” they never could have con
templated the absurdity of vesting others with
authority, which the instrument itself was in
tended, and docs so positively deny to the
mother country, with whom they were then
contending, and for this very power. And it
would be a gross perversion of plain substan
tial facts, to say that the rupture between the
Colonies and the mother country, was predi
cated upon the asserted rig-Afof the former tn
judge o]f their own rights, and a positivedenial
to them to do so by the la’tor. If we go far
ther and resort to the articles of confederation
as a test of the design of the original league
between the Colonies, we find the same princi
ples recognised therein; for that instrument
docs most plainly and distinctly, m the most
cautious ind guarded manner, set forth the
powers tho States intended should ho exercis
ed by the government then contemplated to
be formed, and most positively declared their
own sovereignty, in the following words :
“ Each State retains its sovereignty, freedom
and independence, and every power, jurisdic
tion and right, which is not by this confedera
tion expressly delegated to the United States,
lin Congress assembled.” Here then we find
that both the Declaration of Independance,
and the aruc|es< f confederation, go to show
, that it wa* the intention of the Colonies, and
,th<* or.gmal thirteen States to preserve their
I individual vharicter as “independent sove
reignties,” and 'hat they intended to part with
no power who ever, beyond such positive
I grants as are plainly dcduceable Irorn tho writ
j tei agreement whi h may a’, the diffirent peri
ods of their existence as “ independant sove
reignties,” he the bond between them. It
i i must be recollected tha- the states were con- I
- federated, and operating under i political Fc-
- > deraZ Government, predicated upon the above
I principles, at'the tune the Convention was cal- j
t led to form the present Constitution. How
was that convention formed ? By the will’of the !
' government, then known as the federel gov-'
1 ernment, or by the authority nf tho thirteen
States that composed the confederacy ? The ■
answer is plain—that the Convention was the
joint agent of the individual States, whoie de
legates composed it; and this answer is veri
ffied by the last clause of the Constition itself, !
j which is in the following words: “ Done in
I Convention hv the unanimous consent of the
> Stalespresent, &c.” And the fact that there ;
■ was only twelve of the states present instead 1
I «f thirteen, shows more conclusively, that >i i I
• was the voluntary action ot a part of the slates j t
,tn their individual sovereign and not t
.»• result of the cons olidated whole. The j f
provision m the Consli'uiion also, that the ra- * r
ifi Kion of the ven n>n of nine States, ■ i
should be eufficteE’ for :ts establishment “ be- ’ <■
tween the states so ratifying the same,” shews j;
that each was left to its own ch<u< e with re-i
gard to that important matter, ontrammele 1,1
and uninfluenced by the will or action cf the;
balance; and that it was a reasonable calcula- I
tion, that even some of the states that were |
present in jho Convention by the r delegates
might not chose to be bound by the proceed
ings of those agents, but think proper to adopt
some other course. Could they have been I
prevented in such a choice? Surely not. And 1
had one or more ol them been displeased with ;
the. provisions of the Constitution (as was the ‘
fact with North Carolina) the dissentients could j
have set up forthemselves, conjointly, or indi- j
viduafly, as to each of them appeared right and '
proper. Here then is the period, and m.der
the circumstances herein detailed, that it is ab
surdly contended, that tne States merged iheir
individual characters tn a general consolida
tion of the whole, by becoming parties to the
constitution. No proposition can be better
established, than, that the constitution after
being ratified by the States, became the crea
ture of the states so ratifying it. If so, would
it not be a strange perversion of things, tor the
Creator to voluntarily submit itself m the en
tire will and ahsol ite control of thecreature?
Or would it not be more consistent with the
nature of the circumstances connected with
the origin, and proceedings of the Colonies
and the states, up to this period, to suppose
that it was the design of the Convention that
formed the Constitution, and of the states that
ratified it, that the same fundamental princi
ples set forth in the declaration of indepen
dence, and which constitutes the basis of the
articles of confederation, should be the main
pillars of the government they were about to
adopt. I cannot believe that any other than
jan affirmative answer can be given to these
questions. It is therefore a clear deduction
from all the facts and circumstances connect
ed with the Union of the Stites, that they are
now, as they originally were, sepe.rate and dis
tinct sovereignties, entirely independent of
each other in all respects except for the pur
poses of the league they have formed; and that
the Constitution is the bond of that league, and
can have no binding infl euce on the parties
to it, further than its plain, unequivocal provis
ions require.
The Federal Government is the Agent of the
States. Wc must bear in mind this fact, that
the government of a state, is the primary gov
ernment to which the people look for immedi
ate protection in their persons and property
Each citizen having a direct exercise of sove
reign power in its Creator, imparts to it a con
current exercise of the .same power, so far as
the rights of 'he whole community are con
cerned, reserving to himself all the natural and
inherent rights over which the government can
have no control. Thus far and in his sense,
the government of a s.aie is sovereign; be
cause it is the instrument by which die essen
tial power constituting sovereigntv. is carried
.into effect, to wit : the will ofthe people. Ve
ry diffrent from this, is the huracter of the
Federal Government- That is, not like u
stale government, reated by the people, but
derives ns existence, a id all its authority Io
act, from tho government of the stales, in their
political character', consequently could not de
rive from the states, a power which was not
inherent tn them, and <d course such an one
as they could not impart—the sovereignty
possessed bv i stale bung n delegated power
and al all tunes, to the coiv oul of ih. people.
Each stale, however, yoss ssinga concurrent
exercise of >uvere guv wit a ibe peord . so far
asthege> ratin e « . .ft i -cr.iz-ti* are con
cerned, Were c iiii ui to confederate, and to
form a league, for bei'er accomplishment
of certain objects .Inch n<.je« t- must not,
and cannot exee luneed < nnrurrent ex
ercise of soverei. 1 i , a.«r v.-sied ui >hc gov
ernments of the -by th people. There
fore this co ifedemtt • i or league, forms an
agency for specific p i - »sea. d. nv ng its whole
authority from the sta e , vlnch have crea-ed it
under their delegated au'.’i r;iv .< >m the ->■<»-
pie, to do tor them cojou-'ty, certain things,
which they could not do so .c|| for themselves
in their mdividn il capacity
________ [Concluded next taeet.J
From the Huntsville .'v. wcrat.
, LETTER IV.
■ j To the People of the L niti .. tates.
■ On the viol >lton by a majority ot it. Senate of
the. constitutional rights »cuet the i 're.ri-
I I dent, as well as us the plaints' . inciples of
common just ce and propriety.
Countrymen :
Ihe President of he Uni cc br:in»
elected by you through el ctor- . !ir-<-t
I representative, and ivspunsib! He
is also liable to impea> hmem i . rimes
and misdemeanors.”
I Tile members of the II ■ senia-
i lives are also your direct r< and
j responsible to you atone.
J Vou taken particular < > ~>m: out
in what mode your represcuta i, n G.e Ex
ecutive Chair shall be subjected tr,<- addi
tional responsibility of impeachment, ’ . e-clar
; mg that no other public functionary th at your
immediate representatives, shall bavt i light to
I bring nn accusal-on against him. In vour con
stitution yon sav, that the House - fl. iip-.cn
tatives "shall have the SOLE power of im
peachment.” 1-is is certainly hs explicit in
relation to the point m controversy as if i had
read, "the Senate shaft .Vol have the p acer of
i impeachment.”
Now, what co'.ld have been your nlje<-tin
providing that the House of Represeri aiives
shall, and that the Senate shall not have the
power of impeachment ? Was it not to reserve
to yourselves throng ( vour immediate represen
tatives. ffte power zo pass in the first instance
upon the conduct of y OU r President > Was it
not to throw be: ween him, and unjust accusers
from any other quarter the shield of your direct
representatives I Was it rmi <o prevent his
Oemg officially charged even wi h viola mg the
‘•onetituuon and laws, unless you, or a major i-
fy °f y tj ur representatives, first think him guilty? 11
Has no’ the President a right in the benefit j
of this shield ? Are not the members of the
House of Representatives, representing a ma-j
hority of the People, his SOLE constitutional
i accusers ? • |
An affirmative is the only answer which can j
be given. But in the proceedings of the Sen- i
ate, he is deprived of this constitutional pro- I
j tection. It is not the Representatives of a i
' majority of the. people who impeach him : hut ,
; it is the Representatives of a majority oj the
; Slates. It is not men who are directly res- j
j possible to the People—his constituents as ’
; well as iheir own—that venture to accuse him.
! —bin men who are responsible only to the !
States. By the constitution, he can be accus- i
ed only by a majority of the People; in this
case, ihe principle is assumed, that be may be
accused by a majority of the Slates. To be
deprived of his right to have his conduct pas
sed upon in the first instance by a majority of
the People, is a sufficient outrage upon hiscon
stitutional rights; but he has not had the pro
tection which even a majority of the States
would have given him. Uessrs Sprague,
Southard, Frelinghuysen, and Ewing, were
directly instructed by their States to vote in
support of the acts tney have condemned; and
their votes, independent of those of Messrs.
Bell, Robbins, Knight, Black, Poindexter, &c.
who equally misrepresented their respective
States, would have thrown the majority against
the resolution. Not only, therefore, was the
President deprived of his constitutional shield
against unjust official accusations, but even of
that furnished him by the very States whose
Representatives in the Senate have assumed
the power to denounce him! The Senators
usurp a power which belongs to the popular
branch of the Legislature; and in the exercise
of that usurped power, openly set at naught the
will of the States they pretend to represent!
Here is a double usurpation ?
But ’.he most shocking part of this usurpa
tion is, ihat the judges turn accusers and pros
ecutors; disregard all the forms of judicial pro
ceedings. try ivilhout evidence, and condemn
ivilhout a hearing.
The Convention which formed our Consti
tution, first resolved that the power ol trying
impeachments should be vested in the Supreme
Court.
In the first draft of a Constitution reported
in pursuance of their resolves, the jurisdiction
of the Supreme Court was declared to extend
“/o the trial of impeachments of officers of the
United Stales;” and in the same paper it was
provided, that the President, “sZta/Z Ae removed
from his office on impeachment by the House of
Representatives and conviction in the Supreme
Court of treason, bribery, or curruplioH.” if
the Constitution had been adopted in this shape
what would v>m have thought of the judges of
the Supreme Court, if without any accusalion
from the House of Representatives, they had
spent the whole of their late term in discussing
among themselves a resolution that the Presi
dent had committed violations of the Constitu
tion and laws, for which he ought to be im
peached, and finally adopted and entered it in
perpetual memorial upon their records ? Would
not all America have risen up as one man and
declared them usurpers? Would they not have
been told, that the People have reserved to
themselves, through their immediate represen
tatives, tho sole right of bringing accusations
for impeachable offences, against theii* Presi
dent, and that it is enough forjudges to try lhe
case when it comes constitutionally before
them ?
A majority ofthe Senators have placed them
selves in just such an attitude. In the final
draft ofthe constitution, the power to try im
peachments was transferred from 'he Supreme
Court to them. They are made judges, in all
such cases, as entirely as tho members of the
Supreme Court would tiavo been ts tho original
plan h id been adopted.
fl the President has “assumed powers not
conferred upon him by the constitution and
laws, but in derogation of both, as declared in
the resolution ofthe Senate, it will not be de
ni' d that he has committed an impeachable
offence. Mr. Hopkinson, on the impeach
ment of Judge Chase, said; “?\ misdemeanor,
or a crime, for in their just and proper signifi
cation thev are synonymous, is an act commit
ted, or omitted, in the violation of a public law,
either forbiding or commanding it ” If there
; was any reason to believe tha- the President
j hud committed such an act, the penally for
which is removal from office, and a disquali
, fi< ation to hold anv office of honor, trust, or
j profit, under the United States, his conslitu
; tional judges were certainly not the first who
j ought to have become his accusers. No prin
| ciple is more sacred in a free Government, and
■ among honest men in all Governments, than
j that the citizen or subject who may be charged
with crime, shall bo tried bv an impartial tri
butial. In our system of jurisprudence, so
caret.div is this right of lhe accused secured,
'hat no man who has made up or expressed an
opinion upon the case, is permitted to act as a
juror. Proof of anv bias or previous expres
sion of opinion, i« good ground for setting aside
a verdict ofgmhy.
>'y Countrymen—See how this sacred
principle is outraged in the case of yo ir Pres
ident! The Senators are the jurors to riy him.
It was notenoughthat Mr. Calhoun, one of Ins
jurors, was his deadly enemy, and has been
long laboring to destroy him. It was not
enough that .Mi. Preston another of his jurors,
had denounced mm, as “a toothless tiger,” and
a tvraiit of the blackes' dve, when nullification I
was brandishing its itnpo'ent sword io South '
Carolina It was not enough that Mr. Clay, I
another <*f Ins jurors, was so eager, to destroy
him lhai he would desolate his country with i
“war, pestilence, and famine, or any other I
scourge,” for that p rpnse II was not enough !
that Mr. Southard, another, of his jurors, en- I
tertained the most dead'v malignity towards!,
tom. which overle p- all the bounds of truth I
and justice to tarnish his fame. But these, i
and thetr kindred ?pir:ts, must get uo a dtscus-
sioniii their jury box, without waiting for an ac
cusation, or hearing a worn of testimony, and
pronounce him guilty before trial ! Is thisjus
tice or law, in this free country’? Would not
jurymen who should so conduct themselves, bo
followed by public execrations, long and loud,
if even they escaped ihe vengeance of just lawe.
It is vain for Senators to say they did not
condemn the President in the character of
Judges. “ Can the Ethiopian change his skin
or the leopard his spots?” If a man were to
take part in a bar-room meeting, condemning
a fell ‘W-citizen who was about to be put upon
trial in court, and being afterwards called in ass
a juror to trv him. were to say “/ shall be a
most impartial Jur>r— l only abused and con
demned Ihe accused io another capacity,”
would he not be justly driven out of court as a
malignant wretch seeking not for justice; but,
for vengeance? Just such triers of the Presi
dent would a majority nf the Senate nowbe.
Nothing is wanting to make plain the atrocity
of their conduci, but to imagine that the faith
ful old soldier, hero, and statesman, is arraign
ed before them for trial on an impeachment by
the House of Representatives, and that Mes
srs. Calhoun, Clay, Preston, Southard, Poin
dexter, and their compeers, are standing with
their hands upon the book, taking a solemn
oath before Almighty God, impartially to try
him! Shade of Washington ! would not a pang
reach thee in Heaven at having consented to
body a Court for the trial of impeach
ments! I
There is another point upon which the con
stitutional rights of the accused have been
grossly outraged. It is provided in the con
stitution, that no public officer shall be found
guilty of an impeachable offence without the
concurrence of two thirds of the Senators pre
sent. Yet your President has been found guil
ty by a vote of less than two-thirds. There
were forty-six present : it would have required
thirty-one to convict by the constitution; yet is
he found guilty upon tne vote ot twenty six.
If an impeachment had been presented by iha
House of Representatives, and after full trial,
the vote had been twenty-six to twenty, the Pre
sident would have been acquitted’, but accused
and prosecuted by his judges, without notice
to defend, he is condemned by a vote which lhe
constitution declares to be an acquittal, and
stands forever denounced upon the records of
the Senate.
Could there be usurpation more palpable, or
tyranny more hateful?
So it said that tho removal from office and
the disqualification which follow conviction
upon a constitutional impeachment, do not
flow from this proceeding? If his good name
be taken from him, what does Andrew Jack
son care for office ? His hones! fame is all he
lives for. I was one of those who vi-ited and
congratulated him when he entered upon his
second term of service; and on alluding to that
as the first day of that term, he exclaimed, with
the utmost fervor, “Would to God it were ths
last.” Instead of tho restless ambition which
urges on his accusers, he looks to the 4th of
March, 1837, as the day of his deliverance
from an arduous service in'’which he has no
motive to stimulate him hut love of country
and of fame. If malignant Senators defeat his
exertions for his country and tarnish the fame
he cherishes, they will have inflicted all the
pains and penalties of a conviction upon irn
• peachment which he regards. Sooner than
lose all ho thus cherishes, ho would cheerfully
I hare his ho mm to the assassin, or lay his head
upon the block. If his countryman and the
world can be made to believe what tho Senate
have declared, his punishment will indeed be
j felt bv him as worse than removal, disqualifi
cation, and death itself.
Will a free People tolerate this usurpation of
their own power, and that of their Representa
tives bv Senators who even deny their obliga
tion to represent the will of their respective
States? Will they permit their President to
be condemned, without trial, bv the irrespon
sible instruments of a moneyed corporation 1
Impossible.
I shall endeavor in my next, to give a true
history of the 'Treasury of the U. States, with
the view of showing that the Bank Senators
are striving to usurp Executive power, for the
benefit of the corporation thev represent.
JEFFERSON.
The following are the resolutions offered by the
Committee appointed by the House of Repre*
sentatives to investigate the affairs of the
Bank of the United States.
1. Resolved, That by the charterer the Bank
of the United States, tho right was expressly
reserved to cither Hqusq of Congress, by the
appointment of a committee, to inspect tho
books, and lo examine into tho proceedings,
of the said Bank, as well as to ascertain if at
any time it had violated its charter.
2. Resolved. That tho resolution of the*
House of Represeniativ es, passed on the 4th
of April, 1834, for the appointment of a com—
i mittee, with full powers to make the investi
gations embraced in said resolution, was in ac
cordance with lhe provisions of tho charter of
said Bank and the power of this House.
3. Resolved, That the President and Board
of Directors of the Bank of the United States,
by refusing to submit for inspection, the hooks
and papers of the Bank, as called for by tho
committee of the House of Representatives,
have contemned the legitimate authority of the
House, asserting for themselv *s powers and
privileges not cuniemphted by the framers of
'heir charter, nor in fairness deducible from
any of the terms or provisions of that inslru
! merit.
4. Resolved, That either House of Congress
has ihe right to compel the production of any
■such books or papers as have been called f or
by their committee, and also to compel sa?d
President aad D.rectors to testify to such in
terrogatories as were necessary to a full and
perfect understanding of the proceeding of tho
Bank at any period within tho term of its ex
istence.
5. Resolved, That tho Speaker of this House