Newspaper Page Text
BY JAMES W. JONES.
The Southern Whig,
PUBLISHED EVERY SATURDAY MORNING.
TERMS.
Three dollars per annum, payable within six
months alter the receipt of the fust number, or
four dollars if not paid within the year. Sub
scribers living out of the State, will be expect
ed in all cases, to pay in advance.
No subscription received for less than one year,
unless the money is paid in ad vance; and no
paper will be discontinued until all arrear
ages are paid, except at the option of the pub
lisher. Persons requesting a discontinuance,
of their Papers, are requested to bear in mind,
a settement of their accounts.
Advertisements will be inserted at the usual
rates; when the number of insertions is not
specified, they will be continued until ordered
out.
All Letters to the Editor or Proprietor, on
matters connected with the establishment,
must be post paid inorderto secure attention
95- Notice of the sale of Land and Negroes, by
Administrators, Executors, or Guardians,
must be published sixty days previous to the
day of sale.
The sale of personal Property, in like manner,
must be published forty days previous to
the day of sale.
Notice to debtors and creditors of an estate must,
be published forty days.
Notice that Application will be made to the Court
of Ordinary for Leave to sell Land or Ne
groes, must be published four months.
Notice that Application will be made for Letters
of administration, must be published thirty
days and Letters of Dismission, six months.
For Advertising—Letters of Citation. S 2 75
Notice to Debtors and Creditors, (40 days) 325
Four Months Notices, 4 00
Sales of Personal Property by Executors,
Administrators, or Guardians, 3 25
Sales of Land or Negroes by do . 4 75
Application for Letters of Dismission, 4 50
Other Advertisements will be charged 75 cents
for every thirteen lines of smell type, (or space
equivalent,) first insertion, and 50 cents for each
weekly continuance. If published every other
week, 62 1-2 cuts for each continuance. If
published once a month, it will be charged each
time as a new advertisement. For a single
insertion, $1 00 per square.
MAIL
THE Subscriber respectfully announces to
the public, that he has in full operation a
LINE OF FOUR HORSE COACHES, from
Athens, via Watkinsville, Madison, to Eatonton,
and back, 3 times a week, leaving and returning
as follows :
Leaving Athens on Sundays, Tuesdays, ami
Thursdays, at 6 o’clock, A. Al., and arriving at
Eatonton, at 6 o’clock P. M., on the same
days.
Leaving Eatonton on Mondays Wednesdays,
and Fiidays, at 6 o’clock, A. M., and arriving
in Athens, at 6 o’cloch P. M., same days.
H. N. WILLSON, Contractor.
March 17—4G—tf.
0O“ The Southern Recorder will please pub
lish the above until forbid.
LIVBBY STABLE.
7THIE Undersigned has just opened a LIVE
RY STABLE in the Town of Athens,
immediately in the rear of Mr. 11. A. Fraser’s
Store, where he will keep 011 hand
y ! JEIOCIxES OF
JEffiiSl’ DESCRIPTION',
ALSO
-a
And well broke
HARNESS HORSES
To Hire.
Persons wishing to travel, can be accommo
dated with Carriages and Horses at all times
His Vehicles have not yet arrived, but are ex
pected by the first of the Spring. He will also
take on Livery the horses of any one wishing to
place their horses under his charge.
P. M. WELLS.
Jan. 27 39 ts.
months after date, application will be
made to the Inferior Court of Clark county,
when sitting for ordinary purposes, for leave
to sell the real Estate of John A. Strickland,
deceased.
MILLINGTON SCOGGINS, Adm’r.
Feb. 10,—41—4m
GEORGIA, HALLCOUNTY.
’WMT'HEREAS, Ambrose Kennedy, Adminis
• ■ trator of the Estate ofEdward Harrison,
deceased, applies to me for Letters of dismission.
This is therefore to cite and admonish all. and
singular the kindred and creditors of said de
ceased, to be and appear at my office within the
time prescribed by law, to shew cause (if any
they have) why said letters should not be grant
ed.
Given under my hand, this 20th day of Octo
ber, 1837. J
E. M. JOHNSON, c . c. o.
Oct. 21,—25—6m
ptOUR months after date, application will bo
J- made, to the Interior Court of Gwinnett
county, for leave to sell all the realestate of John
Turner, late of said county deceased.
MITCHELL BENNETT, ? . .
S. F. ALEXANDER, ( A ' l,ur e>
March 21,—47-Im
Southern Whig.
SPEECH OF MR. CALHOUN,
In Reply to Air. Clay, on Air. Wright’s Bill.
I rise to fulfil a promise I made some time
since to notice at my leisure the reply ©f the
Senator from Kentucky farthest from me (Mr.
Clay) to my remarks, when I first addressed
the Senate on the subject now under discussion.
On comparing with care the reply with the
remarks, I arfi at a loss to determine whether
it is the most remarkable for its omissions or
misstatements. Instead of leaving not a hair
in the head of my arguments, as the Senator
threatened, (to use his not very dignified ex
pression,) he has not, even attempted to an
swer a large, and not the least weighty por
tion ; and of that which he has, there is not
one fairly stated, or fairly answered. I speak
literally, and without exaggeration ; nor would
it be difficult to establish to the letter what I
assert, if 1 could reconcile it to myself to con
same the time of the Seriate in establishing a
long series of negative propositions, in wnich
they could take but little interest, however im
portant they may be regarded by the Senator
and myselfs To avoid so idle a consumption
of the time, I propose to present a few instan
ces of his misstatements, from which the rest
may be inferred ; and, that I may not be sus
pected of having selected them, I shall take
them in the order in which they stand in his
reply.
The Senate will recollect that when the
Senator from Virginia farthest from me (Mr.
Rives,) introduced his substitute, he accompa
nied it with the remark, that it was his first
choice, and the second choice of those who
are allied with him on this occasion. In no
ticing this remark, I stated, that if I might
judge from appearances, which could scarcely
deceive one, the Senator might have said, not
only the second, but, under enisling circum
stances, it was their first choice, and that,
despairing of a bank for the present, they
would support his substitute. Assuming this
inference to be correct, I stated that the ques
tion was narrowed down, in fact, to the bill and
substitute, ol which one or the other must be
selected. The Senator from Kentucky, in his
reply, omitted all these qualifications, and re
presented me as making the absolute assertion
that, in the nature of the case, there was no
other alternative but the bill or the substitute,
and then gravely pointed out two others ; to
do nothing, or adopt a national bank, as if I
could possibly be ignorant of what was so ob
vious. Alter he hid thus replied, not to what
I really said, but his own misstatement of it, as
if to make compensation, he proceeded in the
same breath t© confirm the truth of what I did
say by giving his support to the substitute,
which he culled a halt- way house, where he I
could spend some pleasant hours. Nothing is I
more easy than to win such victories. j
Having inferred, as has turned out to be the
fact, that there was no other alternative at I
present but the bill and substitute, 1 next show- ■
ed the embarrassment to which the gentlemen
opposite tome would be involved from having,
four years ago, on the question of the remov
al of the depesites, denounced a league of!
State banks, similar to that proposed to be re- j
vived by the substitute. Aller enlarging on ,
this point. I remarked that, if I might be per- j
mitted to state my opinion, the gentlemen had ;
taken a course unfortunate for themselves and I
the country ; unfortunate for them, for let I
what would come they would be responsible. '
II the bill was lost, theirs would be the res-j
possibility ; if the substitute was carried, on |
them the responsibility would fall; and, if no- I
thing was done, they would be held responsi- I
ble; and unfortunate for the country, because |
it had prevented the decision of the question at ;
the extra session, winch could not have failed
to put an early termination to the present com
mercial and pecuniary embarrassment. This
the Senator, in his reply, met by stating that I
had called 011 him and his friends to follow my
lead; am! thus regarding it, he made it the
pretext.of some ill-natured personal remarks,
which I slu il notice hereafter. I never
dreamed of making such a call ; and what I
said cannot ba tortured, by the force of con
structiou, to bear a meaning having the least
semblance to it.
After making these preliminary remarks, I
took up the substitute, and showed that it pro
posed to make a bargain with the banks. 1
then stated the particulars and the conditions
of the proposed bargain ; that its object was to
enable the batiks to pay their debts, and for
that purpose it proposed to confer important
privileges ; to give them the use of the public
funds Pom the time of deposit© to disburse,
ment, and to have theirnotes received as cash
in the dues of the Government 1 then asked
it we had a right to make such a bargain ?
The Senator, leaving out ail these particulars,
represented me assaying that the Government
had no right to make a bargain with the banks;
and then undertakes to involve me in an in
consistency, in supporting the bill, because it
proposes to bargain with the banks for the use
of their vaults, as a place of safe-keeping for
the public money; as if there was a possible
analogy between the two cases. Nothing is
more easy than to refute the most demonstra
tive argument in this- way. Drop an essential
part of the premises, and the most irresistible
conclusion, of course, fails.
In the same summary and easy mode of re
plying to my arguments, the Senator perverted
my denial that the Government had a right to
I receive bank notes as cash, into the assertion
that it had no right to receive any thing but
cash ; and then accuses me with inconsistency,
because I voted, nt the extra session, for the
bill authorizing the receipt of Treasury notes
in the dues of the Government; as if any- one
ever doubted that it could receive its own pa
| per, or securities, in playmerit of us debts.—
Such arc the misstatements of the Senator ta
ken in their regular order, as they stand in his
reply, and they present a fair specimen of what
he chooses to consider an answer to my argu
ment. There is not one less unfairly staled,
or unfairly met, than the instances I have
cited.
The Senator presented two difficulties in re
ply to what I said against receiving bank notes
by the Government, which demand a passing
notice before I dissiniss this part of the sub.
ject. He objected, first, that it was contrary
to the provision ot the bill itself, which author
izes the receipt of the notes of specie-paying
banks for a limited time. To answer this ob
j lection, it will be necessary Io advert to the ob-
Ijectof the provision. By the provisions of
| the joint resolution of 1816, the notes ofspecie-
I paying banks are made receivable in the dues
lof the Government; and, of course, on the
| resumption of specie payments, bank notes
I would again be received by the Government
I as heretofore, without limi'.aii ’ii as to time,
LE.
•’WHERE POWERS ARE ASSUMED WHICH HAVE NOT BEEN DELEGATED, A NULLIFICATION OF HIE ACT IS THE RIGHTFUL REMEDY.
unless some provision be adopted to prevent it.
In a word, the Government, though separated
in fact at present from the banks, is not legal -
ly separated; and the object of the provision
is to effect the separation as well in law as it
is in fact. This it proposes to do by a gradu.
al repeal of the joint resolution of 1816, in or
der to prevent, as far as possible, any injurious
effects to the community or the banks. The
Senator, in making his objection, overlooks
the broad distinction between the doing and
undoing of an unconstitutional act. There are
some.unconstitutional acts that are difficult,ifnot
imposssble, to bemidone; such, for instance,
as the admission of Louisiana into the Union,
admitting it to be unconstitutional, which I do
not. There are others which cannot be un
done suddenly, without wide-spread distress
and ruin ; such as the protective tariff, which,
accordingly, the compromise act allowed up
wards of eight years lor the gradual repeal.
Such also is the case under consideration,
which, under the provisions of the bill, would
be effected in seven years. In all such cases
I bold it to be not only clearly constitutional
for Congress to make a gradual repeal, but its
duty to du so ; otherwise it would be often im
possible to get clear of an unconstitutional act
short ofa revolution. His next objection was,
that the reasons which would make the re
ceipt of bank notes unconstitutional, would also
make the China trade so, which he represent,
cd as absorbing a large portion of the specie
of the country. There is no analogy whate
ver between the two cases. The very object
of specie is to carry on trade, and it would be
idle to attempt to regulate the distribution and
fluctuation which result from its operation.
Experience proves that all attempts of the kind
must either prove abortive or mischievous.
In fact, it may be laid down as a law, that the
more universal the demand for specie, and the
less that demand is interrupted, the more stea
dy and uniform its value, and the more perfect
ly, of course, it fulfils the great purpose of cir
culation, for which it was intended. There
are, however, not a few who, taking a differ
ent view, have thought it to be the duty of the
Government So prohibit the exportation ofspe
cie to China, on the very ground which the
Senator assumes, and I am no’, certain but that
he himself has beet in favor of the measure.
But the Senator did not restrict himself to a
reply to my argumonts. He introduced per
sonal remarks, which neither self-respect, nor
a regard to the cause I support, will permit
me to pass without notice, as adverse as I am
to all personal controversies. Not only my
education and disposition, but. above all, my
conception of the duties belonging to the sta
tion I occupy, indisposes me to such contro
versies. We are sent here, not to wrangle,
or indulge in personal abuse but to deliberate
and decide on the common interest of the States
of this Union, as far as they have been sub
jected by the Constitution to our jurisdiction.
Thus thinking and feeling, and having perfect
confidence in the cause 1 support, I addressed
myself, when I was last up, directly and ex
clusively to the understanding, carefully avoid
ing every remark which had the least person
al or party bearing. In proof of this, I ap.
peal to you, Senators, my witnesses and judges
on this occasion. But it seems that no call
lion on my part could prevent what I was so
anxious to avoid. The Senator, having no
pretext to give a personal direction to the dis
cussion, m; de a premeditated and gratuitous
attack on me. 1 say having no pretext, for
there is not a shadow of foundation for the as
sertion that 1 called on him and his party to
follow my lead, at which he seemed to take
offence, as I have already shown. I made
no such call, or any thing that could be con
stiued into it. It would have been imperti
nent, in the relation between myself and his
party, tt any stage of this question ; and ab
surd at that late period, when every Senator
had made up his mind. As there was, then,
neither provocation nor pretext, what could be
the motive of the Senator in making the attack?
It could not be to indulge in the pleasure of
personal abuse, the ]o west and basest of all our
passions, and which is so far beneath the dig
nity of the Senator’s character and station.
Norcouldit be with the view to intimidation.
The Senator knows me too long and too well
to make such an attempt. lam sent here by
constituents as respectable as those he repre
sents, in order to watch over their peculiar in
terests, and take care of the general concern ;
and if I were capable of being deterred by any
one, or any consequence, in discharging my
duty, from denouncing what 1 regarded as
dangerous or corrupt, or giving a decided and
zealous support to what I thought right and
expedient, I would, in shame and confusion,
i return my commission to the patriotic and gal
■ lant State 1 represent, to be placed in more re-
I solute and trustworthy hands.
If, then, neither the one nor the other of
these be the motive, what, I again repeat, can
il be? In casting my eyes ove* the whole
surface I can see but one, which is, that the
Senator, despairing ofthe sufficiency of his
reply to overthrow my arguments, had resort
ed to personalities, in the hope, with their aid,
to effect what he could not accomplish by main
strength. He well knows that the force of an
argument on moral or political subjects de
pends greatly on the character of him who ad
vanced i’, and that to cast suspicion on his
sincerity or motive, or to shake confidence in
his understanding, is often the most effectual
mode to destroy its force. Thus viewed, his
personalities may be fairly regarded as con
stituting a part of his reply to my argument;
and we. accordingly, find the Senator throw
ing them in front, like a skilful general, in or
der to weaken my arguments before he brought
on his main attack. In repelling, then, his
personal attacks, I also defend the cause which
I advocate- It is against that his blows are
aimed, and he strikes at it through me, because
he believes his blows will be the more effec
tual.
Having given this direction to his reply, he
has imposed on me a double duty to repel his
attacks : duty to myself and the cause 1 sup
port. 1 shall not decline its performance;
anil when it, is discharged, I trust I shall have
placed my character as far beyond the darts
which he lias hurled at it, as my nrgunuuits
have proved to be above his abilities to replv
to thorn. Iu doing this, 1 shall be compelled
to speak of mvsell. No one can be more sen
sible than 1 am how odious it is to speak of
one self. I shall endeavor to coniine myself
within the limits ofthe strictest propriety;
but if any thing should escape mo that may
wound the most delicate car, the odium ought
in justice to fall not on me, but the Senator
who, bv his unprovoked and wanton attack,
has imposed on me the painful necessity of
spea king of myself.
The leading charge ofthe Se'iator--tmit on
which all the others depend, and which, being
« -athrown, th< y fall tu the grmmd—is that J
ATHEYS, 4rE©RGIA,J£ATIJBI>AY\ APRIL 7, 1838.
have gone over; have left his side, and joined
the other. By this vague and indefinite ex
pression, I presume he meant to imply that I
had either changed my opinion, or abandoned
my principle, or;deserted my party. If he
' did not mean one, or al!; if I have changed
1 neither opinions, principles, nor party, then
the charge meant nothing deserving notice.
But if he intended to imply, what I have pre
sumed he did, I take issue on the fact—l meet
and repel the charge. It happened fortunate
ly for me, fortunately for the cause of truth
and justice, that it was not the first time that
I had offered my sentiments on the question
now under consideration. There is scarcely
a single point in the present issue on which I
did not explicitly express my opinion, four
years ago, in my place here, when the remov
al of the deposites and the questions connected
with it were under discussion—so explicitly as
to repel effectually the charge of any change
on my part, and to make it impossible for me
to pursue any other course than I have with
out involving mysely in gross inconsistency.
I intend not to leave so important a point to
rest on my bare assertion. What I assert
stands on record, which I now hold in my
possession, and intend, at the proper time, to
introduce and read. But, before I do that, it
will be proper I should state the questions
now at issue, and my course in relation to
them, so that, having a clear and distinct
perception of them, you may, Senators, readily
and satisfactorily compare and determine
whether my course on the present occasion
coincides with the opinion I then expressed.
There are three questions, as is agreed by
al’., involved in the present issue: Shall we
separate the Government from the banks, or
shall we levive the league of State banks, or
create a national bank? My opinion and
course in reference to each are well known.
I prefer the separation to either of the others;
and, as between the other two, I regard a ny
tional bank as a more efficient and a less cor
rupting fiscal agent than a league of State
banks. It is also well known that I have ex
pressed myself on the present occasion hostile
to the banking system, as it exists, and against
the constitutional power of making a bank,
unless on the assumption that we have Ihe right
to receive and treat bank notes as cash in our
fiscal operations, which I, for the first time,
have denied on the present occasion. Now,
I entertained and expressed all these opinions,
on a different occasion, four years ago, except
the right ofreceiving bank notes, in regard to
which I then reserved my opinion; and if all
this should be fully and clearly established by
the record, from speeches delivered and pub
lished at the time, the charge of the Senator
must, in the opinion of all, however prejudiced,
sink to the ground. lam now prepared to
introduce, and have the record read. I deliv
ered two speeches in the session 0f1833-’34,
one on the removal of the deposites, and the
other on the question of the renewal of the
charter of the late bank. I ask the Secretary
to turn to the volume lying before him, and !
read the three paragraphs marked in my speech
on the deposites. I will thank him to raise
his voice, and read slowly, so that he may be
distinctly heard, and I must ask you. Sena
tors to give your attentive hearing, for on the
coincidence between my opinions then and my
sourse now my vindication against this un
proved and groundless charge rests.
“If (said Mr. C.) this was a question of
bank or no bank ; if it involved the existence !
of the banking svstem, it would indeed be a I
great question—one of the first magnitude;
& with my present impression, long entertain. ;
ed, and daily increasing, I would hesitate, long ;
hesitate, before I would be found under the ban
nerofthe system. I have great doubts (if
doubts they may be called) as to the soundness
and tendency of the whole system, in all its
modifications. 1 have great fears that it will
be found hostile to liberty and the advance of
civilization ; fatally hostile to liberty in our ■
country, where the system exists in its v.0r.4 !
and most dangerous form. Os all institutions {
affecting the great question of the distribution I
of wealth ; a question least explored, and the
most important of all in the whole range of
political economy ; the banking institution has.
if not the greatest among the greatest, and, I
fear, most pernicious, influence on the mode
of distribution. Were the question really be
fore us, 1 would not shun the responsibility,
great as it might be, of freely and fully oiler,
ing my sentiments on these deeply important
points ; but, as it is, I must content myself
with the few remarks which 1 have thrown
out.
“What, then, is the real question which now
agitates the country ? I answer, it is a strug
gle between the executive and legislative de
pertinents of the Government; a struggle, not
in relation to the existence of the bank, but
which Congress or the President, should have
I tile power to create a bank, and the consequent
control over the currency of the country. 'Phis
s the real question. Let us not deceive our.
selves. This league, this association of banks,
created by the Executive, bound together bv its
influence, united m common at tides of asso
ciation, vivified and sustained by receiving the
deposites of the public money, and having their
notes converted, by being received every where
by the Trcasuiy, into the common currency of
the country, is, to all intents and purposes, a
Bank of the United States, the Executive
Bank of the United States, as distinguished
1 from that of Congress.
“However it might fail to perform satisfac
torily the useful functions of the Batik of the
United States as incorporated by law, it would
outstrip it, far outstrip it, <ll all its damrci’ous
qualities, in extending the power, the infill,
ence, mid the corruption of the Government.
It was impossible to conceive any iusilution
more admirably calculated to advance the ob
jects. Not only the selected banks, but the
whole banking institutions of the country, and
with the entire money power, fertile purpose
of speculation, peculation, and corruption,
would be placed under the control ot the Ex
ecutive. A system of menaces and promises
! will be established .• of menace to the banks in
[ possession of the deposites, but which might
not be entirely subservient to Executive views
and of promise of future favors to those who
may not as yet enjoy its favors. Between the
two, the banks would be left wuhout influence
honor, or honest) ; and a system ofspeeulation
and stock-jobbing would commence, unequal-
I led 111 the annals of our country.”
“S.. long as the question is one between a
ißmffiof the United States, incorporated In
( o;.gross, and that system of hooks which has
• been created by the nel of i| b E'.e-’u’:v .it is
; a:; insult to the umE’i’stiUidiug to disco" .;. ■
I' :• pernicious tendency a ' uncoustituti ffi.
mv ot the Bank oi th- United States.
I bring up th It qn -.Uiu f.urly :1 . 1( | legit 1:1 ,
I vou mustiauiier Ji.
j voice the Guven ment and th c baukiiig sys cm.'
You must refuse all connexion with batiks.
You must neither receive nor pay away bank
notes ; you must go back to the old system of
the strong box, and of gold and silver. If you
have a right to receive bank notes at all—to
treat them as money by receiving them in
your dues, or paying them away to creditors,
you have a right to create a bank. Whatever
the Government receives and treats as money,
is money ; and, if it be money, then they have
the right, under the Constitution, to regulate
it. Nay, they are bound by a high obligation
to adopt the most efficient means, according to
the nature of that which they have recog.
nised as money, to give to it the utmost stabili
ty and uniformity of value. And if it be in the
shape ofbank notes, the most efficient means
of giving those qualities is a Bank ot the United
States, incorporated by Congress. Unless you
give the highest practical uniformity to the
value of bank notes—so long as you receive
them in your dues, and treat as money, you
violate that provision of the Constitution which
provides that taxation shall be uniform through
out the United States. There is no other al
ternative. I repeat, you must divorce the Go
vernment entirely from the banking system,
or, if not, you are bound to incorporate a bank
as the only safe and efficient means of giving
stability and uniformity to the currency. And
sheuld the deposites not be restored, and the
present illegal and unconstitutional connexion
between the Executive and the league of banks
continue,! shall feel it my duty, if no one else
moves, to introduce a measure to prohibit Gov.
ernment from receivingor touching bank notes
in any shape whatever, as the only means left
of giving safety and stability to the currency,
and saving the country from corruption and
ruin.”
Such were my sentiments, delivered four
years since, on the question of the removal of
the deposites, and now standing on record ;
and I now call your attention. Senators, while
they are fresh in your minds, and before oth
er extracts are read, to the opinions I then en
tertained and expressed, in order that you may
compare them with those that I have express
ed, and the course I have pursued on the pre
sent occasion. In the first place, I then ex
pressed myself explicitly and decidedly against
the banking system, and intimated, m language
too strong to be mistaken, that, if the question
was then bank or no bank, as it now is, as far
as Government is concerned, I would not be
found on the side of the bank. Now, I ask, I
appeal to the candor of all, even the most pre.
judiced, is there any thing in all this contra
dictory to my present opinions or course ?
On the contrary, having entertained and ex
pressed these opinions, could I, at this time,
when the issue I then supposed is actually pre
sented, have gone against the separation with
out gros-i inconsistency ? Again, I then de
clared myself to be utterly opposed to a combi
nation or league of State banks, as being the
most inefficient and corrupting fiscal agent the
Government could select, and more objection
able than a Bank of the United States- la
gain appeal, is there a sentiment or a word in
all this contradictory to whnt I nave said or
done on the present occasion? So far other
wise, is there not a perfect harmony and coin
cidence throughout, which, considering the
distance of lime and the differet.ee of the occa
sion, is truly remarkable, and this entending
to all the great and governing questions now at
issue ?
But the removal of the deposites was not
the only question discussed at that remarkable
and important session. The charter of the
United States Bank was then about to expire.
The Senator from Massachusetts nearest to me,
(Mr. Webster,) then at the head of the Com
mittee on Finance, suggested, in his place, that
he intended to introduce a bill to renew the
charter. I clearly perceived that the move
ment, if made, would fail; and that there was
no prospect of doing any thing to arrest the
danger I saw approaching, unless the subject
was taken up on the broad question of the cur
rency ? and that if any connexion of the Gov.
ernment with the banks could be justified at
all, it must be in that relation. lam not a
mong those who believe that the currency was
in a sound condition when the deposites were
removedin 1834. 1 then believed, and expe
lienee has proved I was correct, that it was
deeply and dangerously diseased ; and that
the most efficient measures were necessary to
prevent the catastrophe which has since fallen
on the circulation of the country. There was
then not more than one dollar in specie, on an
average, in the banks, including the United
States Bank and all, for six of bank notes in
circulation, and not more than one in eleven
compared to liabilities of the banks, and this
while the United States Bank was in full and
active operation, which proves conclusively
that its charter ought not to be renewed, if re
newed at all, without great modifications. I
saw also that the expansion of the circulation,
great as it then was. must still farther increase;
that the disease lay deep in the system ; that
the terms on which the charter of the Bank of
England was renewed would give a western
direction to specie, which, insteml of correc
ting the disorder, by substituting specie for
bank notes in our circulation, would become
the basis of new banking operations that would
greatly increase the swelling tide. Such were
my conceptions then, and I honestly mid earn
estly endeavored to carry them into effect, in
order to prevent the approaching catastrophe.
The political and personal relations between
mvseif and the Senator from Massachusetts
(Mr. Webster) were then not the kindest.
We stood in opposition at the preceding ses
sion on the great question growing out of the
conflict between the State I represented and
the General Government, which could not pass
away without leaving unfriendly feelings on
both sides ; but where duty is involved, I am
not in the habit ol permuting my personal rela
tions to interfere. In my solicitude to avoid
coming dangers. I sought an interview, thro’
a common friend, in order to compare opinions
as to the proper course to be pursued. We
met, and conversed freely and fully, but parted
without agreeing. I expressed to him my
deep regret at our disagreement, and informed
him that, although I could not agree with him,
I would throw no embarrassment in his way.
but should feel it to be tnv duly, when he made
his motion to introduce a bill to renew the
charter of the ba k. to express my opinion at
large on the state ofthe currency and the pro
per course to be pursued, which I according
ly did. On that memorable occasion I stood
almost alone. One party supported the league
i of Stut< banks, ami th” other the U ited States
j Bank, the charter of which th* Senator from
I Massachusetts (Mr. Webster) proposed to re
new for six ’.ears. Nothi g was t ft me but
to place myself distinctly before the con-try
o.a the ground I occupied, which I did fully
o. 'ti explicitly it) the speech I delivered on the
occasion. In justice to myself, I ought to
have every word of it read on the present oc
casion. It would of itself be u full vindica
tion of my course. I stated and enlarged on
all the points to which I have already refer,
red ; objected to the recharter as proposed by
the mover, and foretold that what has since
happened would follow, unless something effec
tual was done to prevent it. As a remedy, I
proposed to use the Bank ot the United States
as a temporary expedient, fortified with strong
guards, in order to resist and turn back the
swelling tide of circulation. With this view,
I proposed to prohibit die issue of any note
under ten dollars, tt filst, and after a certain
interval, under twenty ; and to refuse to re
ceive the notes of any bank that issued notes
under five dollars, or that received the notesot
any bank that issued less, in order to make a
total separation between the banks that should
refuse to discontinue the issue of small notes,
and the others, in the hope that the influence
ofthe latter, with the voice of the community,
would ultimately compel a discontinuance. I
proposed, that the charter, with these and oth
er provisions that might be di vised by a com
mittee appointed fofcthe purpose, should be re.
newed for twelve ywirs, twd years longer than
the Bank of England had been, in order to avail
ourselves ofthe experience and wisdom of that
great aod enlightened nation, All this I propo
sed, expressly on the ground of undoing the
system, gradually and slowly, till a total dis
connexion should be effected, if experience
should show that it could he earned to that ex
tent. My object was double ; to get clear of
the system, and to avoid the catastrophe which
has since befallen us, and which I then saw was
approaching.
To prove all this, I again refer to the record.
If it shall appear from it that my object was
to disconnect the Government gradually and
cautiously from the banking system, and with
that view, and that only, I proposed to use the
United States Bank for a short time, and that
I explicitly expressed the same opinions then
as I now have on almost every point connec
ted with the system, 1 shall not only have vin
dicated my character from the charge ot the
Senator from Kentucky, but shall do more,,
much more, show that I did all an individual,
standing alone as I did, could do to avert the
present calamities, and, of course, 1 am free
from all responsibility for what has since hap
pened. I have shortened the extracts, ns tar
as was possible to do mvseif justice, and have
left out much that ought, of right, to bo read in
my defence, rather than to weary the Senate. (
I know how difficult it is to command atten.
tion to reading of documents ; but I trust that
this, where justice to a member of the body,
whose character has been assailed without the
least provocation, will form an exception.
The extracts are numbered, and I will thank
the Secretary to pause at the end of each, un
less otherwise desired.
The Secretary here read the following ex- ■
tract:
“ After a full survey ofthe whole subject. I ■}
see none, I can conjecture no means of extri- i
eating the country from its present danger, and j
to arrest its farther increase, but a bank, the’
agency of which, in some form or under some ’
authority, is indispensable. The country has |
been brought into the present diseased state of ;
the currency by banks, and must be extricated
by their agency. We must, in a word, use a
bank to uubank the banks, to the extent that
maybe necessary to restore a safe and stable
currency—just as we apply saow to a frozen !
limb in order to restore vitality and circuki- j
tion, or hold up a burn to the flame to extract j
the inflammation. All must see that it is irn- ;
possible to suppress the banking system nt j
once. It must continue for a time. Its great- |
est enemies, and the advocates cf an exclusive !
specie circulation, must make it a part of their ;
system to tolerate the banks for a longer or a '
shorter period. To suppress them at once /
would, it it were possible, work a greater revo-!
lution—a greater change in the relative condi- i
tion of the various classes of the community, J
than would the conquest of the coutry by a sa- ;
vage enemy. What, then, must be done ? I I
answer, a new and safe system must gradual- I
ly grow up under, and replace, the old ; imi- 1
tating, in this respect, the beautiful process I
which we sometimes see, of a wounded or dis- ;
eased part in a living organic body, gradually ’
superseded by the healing process of Na
lure.”
After having so expressed myself, which
clearly showc that my object was to use the
bank for a time in such a manner as to break
the connexion with the system, without a
shock to the country or currency, I then pro- I
ceed and examine the question, whether this .
could be best accomplished by the renewal of
the charterofthe United States bank, or thro’
a league of State banks. After concluding ’
what I had to say on the subject, in my deep ]
solicitude I addressed tho three parties in the
Senate separately, urging such motives as I
thought best calculated to act on them, and
pressing them to join me in the measure sug
gested, in order to avert approaching danger, 1
I began with my friends ot the State Rights
party and with the Administration. I have
taken copious extracts from the address to the
first, which will clearly prove how exactly my
opinion then and now coincide on all questions
connected with the banks. I now ask the
Secretary to read the extract numbered two.
“ Having now stated the measures necessa.
ry to apply the remedy, I am thus brought to
the question—can the measure succeed ?
which brings up the inquiry of how far it may
be expected to receive the support of the seve
ral parties which compose the Senate, and on
which I shall next proceed to make a few re
marks.
•‘ First, then, can the State rights party give
it their support ? that party of which I am
proud of being a member, and for which I en.
tertain so strong an attachment —the stronger
because we are few among many. In propo- 1
sing this question, I am not ignorant ot t.ieir I
longstanding constitutional objection to the
bank, on the ground that this was intended to
bt, as it is usually expressed, a hard-money
Government—a Go'venmieut whose circula
ting medium was intended to consist of the pre
cious metals, and for which object the power
of coining money and regulating the value
thereof was expressly conferred by the Con
stitution. I know how long and how sincere
ly this opinion has been entertained, and under
how many difficulties it has been maintained.
It is not my intention to attempt to change an
opinion so firmly fixed, but 1 may be permit
ted to make a* few observations, in order to
present what appears to me to be the true ques
tion in reference to this constitutional point—
in order that we may fully comprehend the
circumstances under which we are p.aced in
reference to it. With th s view, 1 do not
deem it necessary to i quire whether, in con
felting the pow er to coin money and to regu
late the value thereof, the Constitution ioten-
Vol. V—Ao. 4».
I ded to limit the power strictly to Coining mo
ney nnd regulating its value, or whether it in.
tended to confer a more general power over
the currency ; nor do I intend to inquire
whether the word coin is limited simply to tho
metals, or may be extended to other eubatan
ces, if, through a gradual change, they may
become the medium of the general circulation
ofthe world.”
* The very receipt of bank notes on the part
of the Government, in its dues, would, it is con
ceded, make them money, as far as the Gov
ernment may be concerned, and, by a neces
sary consequence, would make them, to a
great extent, the currency ofthe country. I
say nothing ofthe positive provisions in the
Constitution which declare that ‘ all duties,
imposts, aud excises, shall be uniform through
out the United Stales,' which cannot be, un
less that iu which they tire paid should also
have, us nearly as practicable, a uniform value
throughout the country. To effect this, where
bank notes are received, the banking power is
necessary and proper within the meaning of
the Constitution ; and consequently, if the
Government has the right to receive bank notes
in its dues, the power becomes constitutional.
Here lies, said Mr. C. the real coe*»tuti«ud
question : has the Government a right
ceive bank notes or not ? Ihe question is not
upon the mere power ot incorporating a bank,
as it has been commonly argued ; though,
even in that view,there would be as great a
constitutional objection to any act on the part
of the Executive, or any other branch of the
Government, which should unite any associa.
tion of State batiks into one system, as the
means of giving Hie uniformity and stability to
the currency which tha Constitution intends
to confer. The very act of so associating or
incorporating them into one, by whatever name
called, or by whatever department performed,
would be iu fact an act of incorporation.
“ But, said Mr. C., my object, as E have
stated, is not to discuss the
tions, nor to determine whether the bank be
constitutional or not. It is, I repeat, to show
where the diffieitltylies—a difficulty which I
have felt ft cm the time I first came into the
, public service, I found then, as now,-the cur
rency of the country consisting almost entirely
ofbank notes- I found the Government (inti
mately connected with the system, receiving
bank notes in its dues, and paying them awny
under its appropriations ns cash. The tact
was beyond my control ; long be
fore my time, and u illiout my agency ; and I
j was compelled to act on the fact ns it existed,
| without deciding on the many questions which
! I have suggested, as connected with this sub
ject, and on many of which I have never yet
formed a definite opinion. No one can pay
less regard to precedent than I do, acting here
in my representative and deliberative charac
ter, on legal or coustituiionfii questions ; but
I have felt from the beninning the full force of
the distinction so sensibly taken by the Sena
tor from Virginia. [Mr. Leigh,] between do
ing and undoing an act, A w hich he so strong,
iv illustrated in the case oi‘the purchase of
Louisiana. The constitutionality of that act
was doubted by many al the time, and among
others by its author himself; yet he would bo
considered tt nuedni-ui who, coming into politi
cal life, at this late period, would now serious
ly take up the question ofthe constitutionality
ofthe purchase, find, coining to the coticiusion
that it was uneoiistitutional, should propose to
rescind the act, and eject from the Uffitm
two flourishing States, ami a growing Territo
ry.”
I next ask the attention of tho .Senators,
especially from the Northern States, while the
Secretary reads the short address to the Oppo.
sition, that they may see howjiisliuctly I fore
saw what was coming, and bow anxious’l was
to avert the calamity that has fallen on the
section where I anticipated it would. I ask
the Secretary to read the extract numbered
three :
“ I next address my self to the members of
the Opposition, who principally represent the
commercial and manufacturing portions of the
country, w here the banking system has been
the farthest extended, and wlune a larger por
tion of the properly exists in the shape of cre
dit that in any other section ; and to whom a
sound and stable currency is most necessary,
and tho opposite most dangerous. You havo
no constitutional objection ; to you it is a mere
question of expediency ; viewed in this light,
can you vote for the proposed measnre?—a
measure designed to arrest tile approach of
events which I have demonstrated must, ifnot
arrested, create convulsions and revolutions ;
and to correct <1 disease w hivh must, if not
corrected, subject the currency to . continued
agitations and fluctuations ; and in order to
give that permanence, stability, and uiiiforini
ty which is essential to your safety and
prosperity. To effect this may require some
! diminution on the profits of banking ; some
! temporary sacrifice of interest ; but if such
j should be the fact, it will be compensated in
; more than a hundred.fold proportion, by in
! creased security nud durable prosperity. If
| the system must a •.rance in the present course
without a check, and if explosion must follow,
j remember that where you stand will be the
’ cratei : shou’d the system quake, under your
feet thechastn will opeti that will engulf your
1 institutions and your prosperity.”
; I regret lo trespass on tho patience of the
; Senate, but I wish, in justice to myself, to ask
: their attention to one more, which, though not
immediately relating to the question under
consideration, is not irrelevant to my vindica.
tion. I not only expressed my opinions free
ly in relation to the currency and the bank, in
the speech from which such copious extracts
have been rend, but had the precaution to de.
fine my political position distinctly in refer
ence to the political parties of the day, and tho
course I would pursue in relation to each. I
then, as now, belonged to the party to which it
! is mv glory ever to have been attached exclu
sively ; and avowed, explicitly, (hat I belon
ged to neither ofthe two parties. Opposition
or Administration, then contending for superi
ority, which of itself ought to go fur to rep*!
the charge ot the -senator from Kentucky, that
I have gone over from one partv to the other.
The Secretary wi’l read the lasi otract:
"I am the partisan, as I have said, of no
class, nor, let me add. ot any political party. I
am neither ol the Opposition norofthe Admin
istration. It I act with the former in any in
stance, it is because I approve of their course
0:1 the particular occasion ; and I shall always
be happy to net with them when I do approve.
It I oppose the Administration ; ifldesireto
see power change hands, it is because 1 disap
prove < f the general course of those in author,
ily ; because they have departed from the
principles on which they came into office ;
because, instead oi using the immense power
and patronage put in their bauds to secure the
liberty ot the country and advance the nublic