Newspaper Page Text
BY GRIEVE & OR ME, State Printers.]
MILLEDGEVILLE, GEORGIA, TUESDAY, AUGUST 4, 1840.
[NO. 29—VOL. XXI.
-rj* -fhe Recorder is published weekly, on Hancock
street, nearly opposite the Masoai Hall, at Three Doi.-
i. Uts per annum, payable in advance, or Four Doi.i.aRS
it' not paid before the end of the year. No paper sent out
of the State, to any new subscriber, without being lirst paid
(or in advance. ,
A DVERTlSEttENTS conspicuously inserted at the usual
rates, lTiose sent without a specification of the number o
insertions, v:!l be published until ordered out, and charged
accordingly. „
5a*es of land and negroes, by Administrators, Executors,
or iusrdians, are required by law to be held on the first
Tuesday i.-i tne month, between the hours of ten in the fore
noon and .nree in the afternoon, at the Court-house of the
roaiuv in f'ljich the property is situate. Notices of these
sales muot Le given in a public gazette SIXTY days previous
to the day of sale.
Notices for the sale of personal property must be given
in ike manner. FORTY days previous to the day of sale.—
A isa, notice to the debtors and creditors of an estate must be
pablisnei for FORTY days.
Notice that application will be made to the Court of Ordina
ry for leave to sell land, must be published for four months
All business in the line of printing, will meet with
prompt ittei.tion at the Recorder Office.
Letters (on business) must be post-paid.
Our readers, in requesting the direction of their pa
per changed from one PostOffice to another, are desired, in
everv instance, in making such requests,to inform ns as well
oftiie name of the PostOffice from which they desire it
changed, as hat to which they may thereafter wish it sent.
» U ACT to alter ilie 3d ,7tli nud 12th sections of the first
article, and the 1st, 2d and 3d sections of the 3d article,
and the 15th section of the 4th article of the Constitution of
Whereas a part of the 3d section of the 1st article of the
Constitution is in the following words, viz: The Senate
shall be elected annually; and a part of the 7th section of
the 1st article, is in the following words: The Representa
tives shall be chosen annually; and a part of the 12th sec
tion of the 1st article is in the following words: The meeting
of the General Assembly shall be annually ; And whereas a
part of the 3d section of the 3d article is in the following
words : There shall he a State’s Attorney and Solicitor ap
pointed by the Legislature and commissioned by the Gov
ernor, who shall hold their office for the term of three years ;
and a part of the 15th section of the 4th article is in the fol
lowing words: The same shall be published at least six
months previous to the next ensuing annual election, for
members of the General Assembly: And whereas the before
recited clauses require amendments—
Section 1. Be il enacted by the Senate and House of Repre-
s, vtatives of the State of Georgia in General Assembly met and
it is hereby enacted by the authority of the same. That so soon as
tliis r«t shall have passed, agreeably to the requisitions of
die Constitution, the following shall be adopted in lieu of
the forenoing clauses: In the 3d section of the 1st article,
the followin'.', to wit: The Senate shallbe elected bi-annually.
after the passage of this act; the first election to take place
on the first Monday in the year one thousand eight hundred
and forty-three. In lieu of the 7tli section of the 1st article,
the following: The Representatives shall be elected bi-an-
ltually, after the passage of this act, the first election to take
place on the first Monday in October, in the year one thou
sand eignt hundred and forty three; and in lieu of the clause
in the 12th section of the 1st artioe, the following : The meet-
in*' of the General Assembly shall be bi-annually, after the
p.assag - of this act, on the first Monday in November. And
in lieu of the clause in the 3d section of the 3d article, the
following, to wit: There shall be a State’s Attorney and So
licitor elected by tlie Legislature, who shall hold their office
for the term of four years; and in lieu of the clause in the
15th section of the 4th article,, the following : The same shall
be published at least six months previous to the next ensuing
bi-annual election for members of the General Assembly ;
the provisions of this act not to go into eliect until the year
one thousand eight hundred and forty-three.
SEC. 2. And he it further enacted bg the authority aforesaid,
That whenever it shall so happen, that the term of office of any
of the Judges, State’s Attorney or Solicitors, shall expire at
any time during the recess of the General Assembly, then
and in that case it shall be the duty of his Excellency the
Governor to fill such vacancy, by appointment, until the
next General Assembly thereafter to be held, when such
vacan-y shall be filled by election by the Legisla ire, until
the next election of Judges, State’s Attorney or Solicitors
shall take place
JOSEPH DAY,
Speaker of the House of Representatives.
ROBERT M. ECHOLS,
President of the Senate.
Assented to, December 23.1, 1839.
CHARLES J. MCDONALD, Governor.
March 31, 1840. ' 11
CKNTIEAI. BANK AtlENCT.
mpR undersigned offer their services as agents in the
X renewal of Notes at the Central Bank. They will at
tend to all Notes entrusted to their care, for the customary
fee of one dollar; also, to the taking out and forwarding
Grants at one dollar each.
They will also attend to the offering of Notes for discount,
at the distribution of the Central Bank, advertised to com
mence on the Kith July, and all orders in regard to the dis
position of the money will be promptly attended to
[0= Letters enclosing notes or monev must be post paid.
THOMAS RAGLAND,
THO. H. HALL.
Milledgeville, June lfi, 1840. 22 tf
The Columbus Enquirer and Sentinel and Herald,
will insert three times.
CENTRAL BANK OF OEBKtJIA.
Mili.edgevii.LE, 11th June, 1840.
"B") ESOLVED, That a distribution of seven hundred and
g V fifty thousand dollars be made among the several coun
ties of this State, to be loaned on accommodation notes, which
may be offered for discount or. the days and in the order
stated in the foilwing table, viz :
Thursday. lG/7t July.
Amount. | County.
County.
Appling,
Baker,
Baldwin,
Bibb,
Bryan,
Bulloch,
Burke,
Butts,
Cobb,
Columbia,
Coweta,
Crawford,
Decatur,
DeKalb,
Dade,
Forsyth,
F ranklin,
Gilmer,
Glynn,
Greene,
Harris,
Heard,
Henry,
Houston,
Irwin,
Lee,
Liberty,
Lincoln,
Lowndes,
Lumpkin,
Macon,
Madison,
Murray,
Muscogee,
Newton,
Oglethorpe,
Paulding,
Richmond,
Soriven,
Stewart,
Sumter,
Talbot,
Taliaferro,
Upson,
Walker,
Walton,
Ware,
Warren,
Camden,
Campbell,
Carroll,
Cass,
Chatham*
Cherokee,
Chattooga,
Clarke,
Thursday. 30Ih July.
$2,372
3.013
7,183
10,136
2,904
3,836
12,521
6.106
7.540 | Dooly,
11,069 | Early,
11,534
8,712
5.546
13,196
1,119
Effingham,
Elbert,
Emanuel,
F ayette,
Floyd,
Thursday* 20th Angus/.
6.359
11.650
1,990
3,899
11,349
Gwinnett.
Habersham,
Hall,
Hancock,
Thursday, 3d September.
14,863 Jackson,
5,602 Jasper,
14,762 Jefferson,
13,177 Jones.
2,182 Laurens.
Thursday, 17th September.
3,510 I Marion,
6,812 McIntosh,
6,178 | Meriwether,
5,849 j Monroe,
7,592 I Montgomery,
5,417 1 Morgan,
5,613 |
Thursday, 1st'October.
4,051
17,641
13,795
11,691
2,981
Pike,
Pulaski,
Putnam,
Rabun,
Randolph,
Thursday, lath October■
13,875 I Tattnall,
5,132 I Telfair,
11,463 I Thomas,
4.882 j Troup,
15,844 j Twiggs,
5,006 I Union,
Thursday, 29th October.
Washington,
Wayne,
Wilkes,
Wilkinson,
14,9
5.484
11 984
2,598
11,140
Amount.
5,6u0
5,912
5.104
8,251
21,354
5,598
4,224
11,403
4.991
4,953
2.775
12,479
3.621
7,513
4,224
13,495
9,972
9,881
10.099
13.962
12.040
6,087
10,473
6.035
5,179
5,266
16,122
15,594
2,521
9,877
10,191
5,399
11,507
2,494
7,137
2,949
3,147
6.591
16,624
8,827
2,935
10,806
1.704
11.235
7,653
GENERAL REGULATIONS.
The law requires that the money app; ..(iriated to each
county shall be loaned only to the citizens of such counties
respectively, anil that the endorsers, as well as the makers
of notes, shall be residents of the county. The Board will
therefore require in each case a certificate of residence, both
of the makers and endorsers; which may be signed by any
civil officer of the county. But if the money appropriated
to the counties respectively, shall not be applied tor and
loaned within thirtv days from the offering days above speci
fied, then the above requirement of the law in relation to the
residence of endorses ceases; and alter that time a certificate
ot residence of the maker only, will be required.
All notes must be made payable at the Central Banx of
Georgia, three hundred and sixty days alter date, and must
have two or more good endorsers.
Every note presented for discount must be accompanied with a
written affidavit of the maker, in which he shall state that the note
offered is for the only use and benefit of him, the maker and not
for the use, benefit, or interest, of any other person, or persons
whatsoever ; winch affidavit shall be certified by a magistrate or
Ollier ofiicer legally authorised to administer said oath.
Certificates ot the taxable property of the makers and en
dorsers of the notes offered, will be regarded as the best ev
idence of their solvency.
No note will be discounted having on it the name of any
person indebted to the State, either as principal or security,
which debt is due and unseu ed ; or who is the maker of or
endoiser on, any note or bill heretofore discounted bv tlie
Central Bank, and which is past due and unaueuded to"
No note will be teceived lor discount after the hour of nine
o’clock, A. M. of the days above specified.
The proceeds of the discounted notes will be paid to the
check ol ibe last eudorser only.
By order of the Board of Directors.
A. M. NISBET, Cash’r.
June 16. 82 tf
POLITICAL.
StT.ECH OF MR. HABERSHAM,
On tlie Treasury Note Bill-
House of Representatives, Ma -cb 24, 1840.
The bill authorizing the issue of five mil
lions of dollars in Treasury notes beine under
consideration in Committee of the Whole, Mr.
H ab 1 rsham, of Georgia, offered the following
amendment to the second Section.
“ W hirh notes so to be issued shall be negotiable only
* v special endii seir.ent by and to each person through
whose hands they may pass, subject to the same rules and
restrictions ns inlitnd bills of exchange payable to order,
out without the liability of the endorser.”
Which having been read, Mr. Habersham
addressed the committee in support of the
amendment as follows :
Mr. Chairman : 1 have been induced to of
fer this amendment to the bill, because the
honorable Chairman of the Committee of
Ways and Means has stated that the Treas
ury notes which by this bill the Government
is authorized to issue, are not intended to cir
culate as uitruey. I am further induced to of
fer this amendment, in consequence of some
remarks which my eloquent friend and col
league (Mr. Nisbet) has this evening made,
in the course of which he has said that accord
ing to what he supposed was the fairest con
struction of the act of 1837, of which this bill
is but. a continuation, these notes were made
negotiable only by assignment thereon from
the payee and from all subsequent holders ;—
and that thereby their circulation as money
would be restrained ; although he admitted
that the act of 1837 would bear a different
construction. My colleague admitted at the
same time, and this seems to. have heen gene
rally conceded bythose who have engaged in
this debate, that Congress has no constitution
al power to “ emit bills of credit.” Such is
my respect for the judgment and purity of pur
pose of my colleague, that it is with great re
luctance 1 ever differ with him ; and I am
happy to find now that the only difference be
tween us, is that I believe thfit Treasury uotes
issued in the form prescribed: by the act of
1S37, are bills of credit, and will circulate
as money, notwithstanding they are payable
to order, and must be endorsed by the payee ;
while he is of opinion that they are not bills
of credit, and will not circulate as money, be
cause, by his construction of the act, these
notes are made negotiable only, by assignment
thereon by the payee and by all subsequent
holders, and thereby their circulation as mo
ney would be restrained, though he admits
that this provision of the act, would bear a dif
ferent construction. The difference between
us, then, is simply a diffeience in the construc
tion of a single provision of the act, admitted
by him to be of doubtful construction. Now,
if the doubt which he admits to exist can be
removed, and all the declared objects of the
bill be at ilie same lime attained, so that while
these notes may be used as promissory notes
by ihe Government, iti satisfaction of demands
against it, or a - pledges on which to raise loans
without assuming the character of paper mo
ney, or of being circulated as such, it is cer
tainly most desirable that such alteration and
provision shall be made as will remove all
doubts of the constitutionality of the measure.!
It is will] this view that I have offered the a- !
mendment, which, if adopted, will, in my |
opinion, remove the doubt, and obviate the
objection. It proposes that the notes to be
issued shall only pass by special endorsement,
which, while it will preclude the idea of their
circulating as money, and give them the char
acter of mere promissory notes or inland bills
will enable the Government to use them to dis
cern ge its immediate obligations, or as pledges
on which to borrow money. Now, if the ob
ject really is to use these notes merely as
means to raise money, and not to put them in
circulation as paper money, I think the chair
man of the committee cannot, or rather ought
not, to hesitate to remove all constitutional
doubt, by accepting the amendment. In that
event, and if the amendment be made, I can,
and will, with great pleasure, vote for the bill;
because I believe that the Government really
needs the amount asked for, and I am dispos
ed to grant it, if 1 can do so in a shape which
I balieve to be constitutional. I am unwilling
to resort to a loan on the issue of stock certi
ficates, because that will nol only requite the
establishment of transfer offices, but will ope
rate to fasten again upon the country a nation
al debt of permanent character, redeemable
at long periods—an evil which 1 am most
anxious to avoid. Independently, however,
of these reasons for a preference of Treasu
ry notes in the form I propose over an issue
of stock certificates, there is another reason
which, in the present state of the currency and
of exchanges, deserves a grave consideration.
It is, that Treasury notes transferable by
special endorsement will afford both a conve
nient and safe medium of exchange, and will
in that mode, greatly add to the circulation of
the country, as bills of exchange, without as
suming the distinctive character of paper mo
ney; while stock, from the difficulties and de
lays in the forms and modes of transfer, will
contribute, but in a very limited degree, to so
desirable an object, and would be liable to tlie
same fluctuations in value. The Treasury
notes, in such ease, would in fact be only a
new form of stock on which to obtain a loan
more convenient to the stockholder, because
transferrable with more facility, and yet with
a negotiation sufficiently restrained to prevent
them from circulating as paper money or bills
of credit, in the sense attached to those words
as used in the Constitution. If, then, those
who represent the Government are really sin
cere in this matter, and do not intend these
notes to circulate as paper money, why not a-
dopt the amendment I have proposed] If
they do not intend them to enter into the cir
culation as money, why not impede the circu
lation to the extent proposed by me ? If they
do not intend to emit them as bills of credit,
and to use and circulate them as paper money
why not say so at once, openly and above
board, and ihat this violation ot the Constitu
tion is jwMified by tlie necessity of the case ;
that money cannot be raised constitutionally
by borrowing it on the credit of the Govern
ment, and that, therefore, they must make mo
ney to meet the exigency, though without the
constitutional power to do so 1
Now, why not come out boldly and say so,
and prove to us that the money cannot be got
in the constitutional mode, by borrowing, in
lime to meet the exigencies of the case { I
say why not do tins ? The answer is obvious:
because they know that in the mode I propose
the motiey cannot be borrowed immediately ;
or even if it could not, the Treasury notes,
in the form I propose, would atiswet foi the
immediate exigency. The truth is, they are
unwilling to call things by tbeirright names;
unwilling to call it a loan, because the idea
of a loan, a debt would not be palatable to the
People. But call it by what name they will,
give it what shape they may, it is still a loan ;
It is still a national debt of five millions, and
the promises of the Government are out to
pay that amount at some fulnre day. The ne
cessity does not exist. If it did, this would
be a law, necessary and proper to carry into
effect a granted power, and its constitutional
ity would be put on that ground. The neces
sity does not exist, so far as even to justify
the exercise of a dobtful power. The mo
ney can be borrowed, and borrowed at once.
When that necessity does exist; when, as in
case of war, and after the power to borrow’ is
exhausted, because there are none able or
willing to lend ; when it becomes necessary
for the safety of the country to exercise a
doubtful power, or even to violate the Consti
tution, by issuing Treasury notes, payable to
bearer, to circulate as money, I will then be
walling, and not till then, to esait bills of credit
or continental money, or any thing else, which
will serve the purposes of Government, and
will justify my vote on the necessity of the
case, and on the principle of self defence,
which, with nations, as with individuals, over
leaps all laws and all constitutions. But 1 do
not believe that such extreme necessity does
now exist, and therefore, in the pi’esent shape
of the bill, and without the amendment 1 pro
pose, I cannot vote for it.
I have said that the difference between my
colleague, (Mr. Nisbet,) the chairman of the
Committee of Ways and Means, (Mr. Jones,)
and myself, is this : They say that the notes
proposed by this bill are nol “ bills of credit,”
as that terra, is used iri the Constitution. I
say that they are. We all agree that Congress
has no power to emit bills, of credit. It has al
ready been made to appear by my honorable
friend and colleague, (Mr. King,) in his able
argument on this question, by the testimony
of Mr. Madison, that the Convention, by a vote
of nine States to two, refused to grant this
power; and the eloquent gentleman from
Pennsylvania, (Mr. Biddle,) has rested his
argument on even a broader basis, for he
shows that the words which were stricken out
by the Convention u’ere, “ That Congress
shall have^power to emit bills on the credit of
the United States.” He is, no doubt, correct;
but I deem it to be unnecessary for the pur
poses of the argument to use other words than
those which have been used by my colleagues.
I am content to take the words to be as they
are in that section of the Constitution which
prohibits the States to emit bills of credit.—
I am content to lay aside altogether the au
thority of the Madison Papers, to lay aside
altogether the fact that this power was refused
to the Federal Government by the Convention.
I am willing to rest the question on the Consti
tution as we have received it ; to rest it sing
ly on the inquiry, In what part of the Consti
tution do you find the power granted “ to
emit bills of credit ?” Nowhere. In this, all
I believe, agree. The naked question then
presents itself, Is the issue of Treasury notes,
in the form and manner designated by the act
ofl837, “ to emit bills of credit?” Jfso, this
act is unconstitutional; If not, then it is con
stitutional.
What was meant by the words “ to emit
bills of credit,” as used in the Constitution ?
In reply to this inquiry, I cannot better begin
my answer than by adopting the language of
Mr. Justice Johnson, in the case commonly
known as the Missouri case, decided by the
Supreme Court of the United States, in the
year 1S30., and reported in Fourth Peters.
“ Il is only tiy resorting to tlie nomenclature of the day
of the Constitution, that we c.rui hope to get at the idea
which the framers of the Constitution attached to tlie
words “ emit hills of credit.” The whole history and
legislation of the time, prove that by “ bills of crti.’t,”
the framers of die Constitution meant paper rnonev, with
reference to that species of paper money which had been
used in the States from the commencement of the century,
down to tiie time when il ceased to pass, before reduced
to its innate worthlessness.”
To what source of more purity or accuracy
can we resort for the asceitainment of this his
tory than to the decision of the Supreme Court
in the same case, pronounced by Chief Justice
Marshall ?
“ We learn (he says) from Hutchinson’s History of Mas
sachusetts that bills of credit were issued for the first time
in that colony, in 1690. An army returning unexpectedly
from an expedition against Canada, found the Government
totullv unprepared to meet their claims. Bids of Credit
were resorted to for relief from this embarrassment. They
do not appear to have been made a tender, but they were
not, on that account, less bills ot credit.” “ Paper money
was also issued in oilier colonies, both iu the North and
South; and, whether made a tender or not, was produc
tive of evils in proportion to the quantity emitted. In the
war » hich commenced in America in 1755, V’irgJnia issued
paper money at several successive sessions, under the ap
pellation of 1'reasury notes. Ibis was ninde a tender.—
Emissions were afterwards made in 1769, 1771, and
1773. These were not made a tender, but they circulated
together—were equally bills of credit—arid were produc
tive of the same effects. In 1775, a considerable emission
was made for the purposes of w ar. The bills were declar
ed to he current, but were not made a tender. In 1776,
an additional emission was made, and the bills were declar
ed to be a lender. The bills of 1775 and 1776 circulated
together—were equally bills of ciedit—and were produc
tive of the same consquences. Congress issued lulls of
credit to a large amount, and did not, perhaps could not,
make them a legal tender. This power resided in the
Stales. In May, 1777, Virginia passed an act making the
bills oferedit issued by Congress a legal tender so far as to
extinguish interest. In 17S1, Virginia made all tlie bills
of credit which had been issued by Congress, and ali which
had been issued by herself, a legal tender in payment of
debts. Yet they were, in every sense of the word, bills of
credit previous to that lime, and were productive of all
the consequences of paper money.”
Such is the concise history of bills of credit
in this country prior to the adoption of the
Constitution. These bills of credit, when is
sued by Congress, are better known by the
name of Continental money.
Let us hear again what the Chief Justice
says in the same case on the same subject;
During tho war of out Revolution we were driven to the
expedient of emitting bills of credit, and necessity compell
ed us to use them to a co: siderable extent. The term has
acquired an appropriate meaning; and bills of credit
signify a paper medium intended to circulate between indi
viduals, and bet ween Government and individuals, for the or
dinary purposes of society Such a medium has always been
liable to considerable fluctuations. Its value is i ontinuallv
changing, and these changes, often grpatand sudden, expose
individuals to immense losst s are the sources of runious spec
ulations, and destroy all confidence between man and man.—
To cut up the mischief by the roots—a mischief which teas
felt through the United Stales, and which deeply affected
the interest ond prosperity of all, the people declared in
the Constitution that no State should emit bills of cred
it. If the prohibition means anything—if the words are
not empty sounds—it must comprehend the emissions of
any paper medium by a State Government for the pur
pose of common circulation."
The People had experienced, sadly experi
enced, the monstrous evils of such emissions.
Thousands of individuals had been ruined, and
all had suffered, more or less, by the rapid de
preciation and ultimate worthlessness of such
a medium. The paper, whether issued by
Congress or by the States, bad alike become
utterly valuless. It was to prevent these evils
in future that, by the Constitution, the States
f were prohibited from emitting bills of credit,
i It was unnecessary to extend the prohibition
1 to Congress, for Congress could not possess
i the power unless by express grant. Now if
the Convention refused to Congress, the pow
er to “ emit bills of credit,” or bills on the cred
it of the United States, I u’ould say, in the lan
guage of the Chief Justice, “ if it means any
thing, it must comprehend the denial of the
power to Congress to emit any paper medium
j like that of the Continental money, for the
purpose of common circulation.”
Again, in the same case, Judge Marshall
asks:
‘‘ What is the character of the certificates issued by the
authority of the act of Missouri under consideration ?—
What office are they to perform ? Certificates, signed by
the auditor and treasurer of the State, are to be issued by
those officers in amounts not exceeding ten dollars, nor
less than fifty cents. The paper purports on its face to he
receivable tit the Treasury, or ut any loan office in the
Stale of Missouri, in discharge of taxes or d* bts due to
tlie State. Tt also pledges the faith and funds of the
State for their redemption.
Again he says :
‘‘Had they been termed ‘bills of credit,’ Instead-of cer
tificates, nothing would have bpen wanting to bring them
within the terms of the constitution. And can this make
any real difference l Is the proposition to be maintained,
that the constitution meant to prohibit names and not
r hings ? That a very important act, big with great and
runious mischief, which is expressly forbidden by words
most appropriate for its description, may be per
formed by ihe substitution of a nam ;1 That the constitu
tion, in one of its most important provisions, may he openly
evaded by giving a new name to art old thing P W’e can
not think so. We think the certificates issued under the
authority of this act are as entirely hills of credit as if they
had been so denominated in the act itself.”
Such are the views of the Supreme Court
as delivered and sanction, by Chief Justice Mar
shall. Before I proceed to comment upon
them, and to apply them to the bill before
the committee for the emission of Treasury
notes, I will trouble the committee with a. ref
erence to the opinion of the Supreme Court in
the case commonly known as the Kentucky,
case, decided as late as the year 1837, and to
be found in 11th Peters. In that case, the
opinion of the Court was delivered by Mi.
Justice McLean, and I now quote from that
opinion.
“ It would be difficult to classify the bills of credit which
were issued in the earlv history of this country. In some
case they were payable with interest, in others without
interest. Funds arising ft out certain sources of taxation
were pledged for their redemptien in some instances, in
others they were issued without such pledge. They were
sometimes made a legal tender, at others not. In some
instances a refusal to receive them operated as a discharge
of the debt, in others a postporimpm of it. They were
sometimes payable on demand, at other times ot some fu
ture period. At all times they were receivable in pay
ment of taxes, and of debts due to the J’ublic, except, per
haps, in some instances, where they had Lecoqie so depre-
| dated as to be of little or no value.”
After commenting on the definition of the
j Supreme Court in the Missouri case, to which
I have already referred, the Court says :
“ The definition which does include all classes of hills
of credit, emitted by the Colonies or States, is a paper is-,
sued bv the sovereign power, containing a ple lgs of'its
faith, and, designed to circulate as money. To consti
tute a bin of * r dit within the Constitution, it must be is
sued bn n State, on the faith of ilie State, and be design
ed to riivulate as money. It must be a paper which circu
lates on the credit of the Stale, and is so received and used
in the ordinary buisnes? of life.”
The direct question before the Supreme
Court in this case was whether the notes of the
Bank of Kentucky were bills of credit with
in the meaning of the words “ bills of credit”
in the Constitution :
“ The notes contained no pledge of the faith of the State
in any form. They purport to have heen issued on the
credit of tli e funds of the hank, and must have been so re
ceived by the community. These fund- were in part only
derived from the Stale. In making loans the bark was re
quired t" take good securities ; and these constituted a
fond, to which the holders of the notes could look for pay
ment. and which could he made legally responsible. In
this respect ihe notes were essentially different from any
class of bills of credit which arc bdiaved to have been \
issued*• But.” again s.iys the Court, “there is another
quality' which distinguishes these notes from hills of credit
Every holder of them could not only look to the funds of
the Bank for payment, but he had in his power the means
of enforcing it. The bank could be sued."
On these two grounds, then, there was
an actual existing fund pledged for the redemp-
| tion of these notes and that this fund could be
i made liable, by suit, for their redemp-
I tion, the Supreme Court decided that these
! notes were constitutionally issued, and were
not within the constitutional meaning of the
words “ bills of credit.”
Mr. Justice Thompson, in concurring with
the opinion of the Court, says
“ The two great infirmities which attended the bills of
credit which circulated as money, and came within the
mischief intended to he guarded against by ihe constitu
tional prohibition, were, the want of some real arid sub
stantial fund being provided for their payment and re
demption, and no mode provided for enforcing payment
of the same.”
This distinction is a satisfactory answer to
the objection which has been raised, that, if a,
State, by the prohibition or want of power to
“emit bills of credit,” cannot issue Treasury
notes in the form proposed by the bill before
the committee, it follows as a necessary con
sequence that bank notes of a bank incorporat
ed by a State or by the United States were
unconstitutional, because that which a State or
the Uhiited States could not do directly, could
not be done by a bank incorporated by a State
or by the United States. On these two solid
grounds of distinction rests the constitutionali
ty of all the bank notes of the country, wheth
er issued by a bank owned by the State, or by
individuals.
From the examination which I have just
made of the two cases 1 have referred to, the
committee may now arrive at the precise defi
nition of the words ‘‘bills of credit,” the power
to issue which was refused to Congress and
prohibited to the States. The bill or. note must
le issued by a State, or by her agents in the
name or on the faith of the State, and be design
ed to circulate as money-. There must be no
real or substantial fund pledgedfor its redemp
tion, and which may be made liable by suit for
its payment, and no party against whom a suit
may be brought on the note.
Now, let us proceed to examine whether
the Treasury notes proposed to be issued by
this bill will be subject to all these infirmities.
If so, they are clearly unconstitutional, at least
according to two successive opinions of the
Supreme Court—a court whose decisions are
entitled to the highest respect, and which alone
is empowered,in the last resoit, to decide upon
the constitutionality or miconslitutionality of
an act of Congress.
The Treasury notes which are by this bill
directed to be issued, are described in the act
of October 12, 1837, of which this bill is only
a continuation. They are to be of denomina
tions not less than fifty dollars. They are re
deemable after the expiration of one yearfrom
their dates. They are to bear an interest, to
be expressed on the face of the notes, for one
year from the date, and no longer. The rate
of interest is to be fixed by the Secretary of
the Treasury and the President, but shall not
exceed six per centum per annum, They are
to be re-imbursed at the Treasury of the U.
States, and for this re-imbursement, at the
time or times specified, the faith of the United
• tates is pledged. The notes are to be signed,
on behalf of the United States, by the T rea-
surer, aiul countersigned by the Register. The
Secretary of the Treasury is authorized, with
the approbation of the President, to issue such
amount of the notes as he may deem expedi
ent, in payment of debts due the U. States, to
such public creditors, or to such other per
sons as may choose to receive them in pay
ment at par; and like authority is given to
borrow, from time to time, not under par, such
sums as the President may think expedient,
on the credit of such notes. The notes “shall
be transferable by delivery and assignment
endorsed thereon, by the person to whose or
der the same shall, on the face thereof, have
been made payable.” They shall be receiva
ble in payment of all duties and taxes laid by
the authority of tlie United States, of all pub
lic lands sold by the United States, of all debts
due to the United States. And lastly, that so
much of any unappropriated money as may be
necessary for the purpose is, by the 8th sec
tion, appropriated for paying the principal
and interest on the said notes. These are all
the provisions of the law which are applicable
to the subject in question. Now, what is the
result of these several provisions ? Why, this
i$ it. That the denominations of the notes are
not to be less than $50; that they are payable
at an uncertain day after the expiration of one
year from date; that they bear an interest at
the discretion of tlie President, notexceedi
six per cent, but which may be fixed a3 low
as one mill, as was done in the late issue, being
equivalent to no interest at all ; that the notes
shall be signed by the Treasurer, and coun
tersigned by the Register, on behalf of tlie
United States; that they shall be transferable
by delivery, after being endorsed by the
payee, without further endorsement; that
they shall be receivable in payment of all
dues, taxes, and debts due to the U, States;
and the only pledge for their redemption is
any money in. the Treasury of the United
States not otherwise appropriated at the time
they fall due, and the faith of the United
States. Further, the notes are to be issued in
payment of debts due by the United States
to such of the public creditors, or other persons,
as may choose to receive them ; or tin their
credit money may be borrowed. Now, such
being the exact character of these proposed
Treasury notes, and such the uses to which
they are to be applied, and such the pledges
for theii redemption, I would ask the com
mittee to which of the infirmities of “ bills of
credit,” as stated in the decisions of the Su
preme Court, arc they not subject ?
These notes, like the bills of credit, are is
sued by thp United States. They are sigued
in behalf of the United States by agents. They
are payable at an uncertain future day. They
are issued on the faith of the United States.
There is no real substantial fund pledged for
their redemption. No one against whom a
suit cau be brought to enforce payment. No
one will contend that money which may be in
the Treasury a year hence, not otherwise ap
propriated, is either a real or substantial fund,
or any fund at all. That there is no spare
money now in the Treasury is evident from
the fact, that this loan is needed. The Trea
sury notes issued last year under this very
act, and with the same pledge, are still in
part, say two millions, as yet unredeemed,
and there is no unappropriated balance in the
Treasury to redeem them. Tlie same may, and
no doubt will be the case when these notes fall
due ; and can that be termed a real or substantial
fund which has no present existence, and the
future existence of which is dependent upon
improbable contingencies ? Assuredly no one
will contend that there is a real or sub
stantial fund pledged for the redemption of
these notes. Lastly, there is no party against
whom a suit can he brought. The United
States cannot be sued. Those who have signed
the notes are on the very face of the notes
mere agents, authorized to act, and kupwn to
all to be acting only as agents, and of course
cannot be liable to a suit on the notes. These
notes, then, are subject, to all the infirmities
which are ascribed by the Supreme Court to
“ bills of credit,” except one. They must be
designed to circulate as money. Does this
form, an exception ? Are they not designed
to circulate as money, and will they not so cir
culate ? True, the act does not expressly de
clare that such is the design ; but it is not ne
cessary that the design should be expressed.
But may not the intention exist,and be inferred
from all the circumstances of the case, with
out an express declaration of the design ? In
almost every case where the intent is material,
is not that intent or design ascertained from
the circumstances of the case ? In cases of
homicide, larceny, contract, in the construc
tion of statutes, is not the intent inferred from
the circumstances of the case? Have not all
the Treasury notes which have been hereto
fore issued at various times, under circum
stances precisely similar, and, in form, the
same as these, and for like sums, and nego
tiable in like manner, circulated as money ?
Did not those which issued during the last
war circulate as money ? Have not those
which have been issued iu the last two years
nnder this very act circulated as money ? If
an act has been known in our past experience
always to produce certain results, will not the
intent to produce the same results be inferred
from the voluntary commission of the act?
Would not the voluntary commission of the
act be conclusive of the intent ? Have not
Treasury notes always circulated as money,
and: will they not do so again ? Is it not then
the design of their emission, that they shall
circulate as money ? Who can doubt it ? But
what is meant by “ circulate as money ?” Bank
notes,which pass by delivery from hand to hand,
and are paid or received in payment of debts,
circulate as money, and answer all the common
purposes of gold and silver coin in the circu
lation. Because the denominations of such
notes are as great as $50 and $100, does that
change their character, or prevent them circu
lating as money ? Assuredly not. Because
bank notes are not a legal tender, does that
prevent them from circulating as money ? As
suredly nol. Because, in some cases, they
have been made payable to order, at a future
uncertain day, and were required to be en
dorsed by the payee in blank before they
were put into circulation, did they not circu
late as money ? Did not what were called the
post notes of the late Bank of the United
States—the $5, $10, and 20 dollar notes—
which were made payable to the cashiers of
the branches or order, and weie endorsed by
them, circulate as money. 83 freely as the
notes of the same denominations payable to
bearer ? Now, if all. this is true of bank notes.
is there any obstacle interposed or existing to
prevent these Treasury notes from circulating
as moaey ? They are issued and received by
the Government in payment; their denomina*-
tions are the same as bank notes which circu
late—say $50 or $100. After the payee, who
will probably be some clerk of the Treasury’,
or, to use the words of the act, “ after the
person to whose order, on the face thereof,
they are payable,’’ has by delivery and assign
ment endorsed them, they will pass by delivery
only, without further endorsement, in the same
manner at if originally payable to bearer.
Wherein, then, do they differ from the post
notes of the late Bank of the U. States, before
referred to, and which circulated as money as
freely as other bank notes ? The conclusion,
therefore, is inevitable, that they will circulate
as money. If such is not the design, why refuse
to throw obstacles in the way of their circula
tion ? \\ hy not adopt the amendment I have
proposed, to make them transferable only by
the special endorsement of each person into
whose hands they may come ? This would at
once present a serious obstacle to their free
circulation, but none to the negotiating or
transferring them as pledges on which to
borrow money. The very refusal to adopt
this amendment will be strong evidence of a
design to circulate them as money. Does any
one doubt that they will circulate
If I am right, then, in the several positions 1
have endeavored to establish, these Treasury
notes will possess all the infirmities of “bills
of ci edit;” will, in fact, be “ bills of credit;”
and of course, as such, unconstitutional.
Mr. Chairman, there are two conclusions to
he draw from these decisions of the Supreme
Court. Fiist that these proposed Treasury
notes are unconstitutional; secondly, that bank
bank paper is constituonal. It has struck me,
sir, with great surprise, th paper .
tion so unconstitutional as tba. ... t reasury
notes should not only be co ntenanced,but even
urged upon the country jv an administration
which professes to be a vious to give to the
nation a constitutional c renry. That an ad
ministration which condemns bank paper a*
unconstitutional cutrency, should insist upon
substituting for it a paper issue so unconstitu
tional. That an administration which con
demns bank paper because of its .liability -to
fluctuation and depreciation, should sound un
ceasing praises in favor of a Government pa
per, at least equally liable to fluctuation and
depreciation. Sir, all past experience has
pioved that Treasury notes or Government
paper money will depreciate whenever the
amount issued exceeds the amount of receipts
into the Treasury. During the Revolution
the bills of credit ceased at last, to be of any
value whatever, and ruined thousands. Du
ring the late war, even these Treasury notes
which bore an interest of five or six per cent,
and were issued from necessity,, depreciated
from ten to fifteen percent, yea, more, below
the par value, and if the war had continued a
few years longer, would have fallen to fifty
per cent below par. Even after the war, they
did not reach par value until they were made
receivable iu payment of subscriptions to the
Bank of the United States. Quf ancestors,
who had experienced all the evils of such cur
rency, wisely endeavored, iu framing the Con
stitution, to guard their descendants from like
suffering; and now, this Administration, pro
fessing to be the warm advocate of a hard
money constitutional currency, and profess
ing, too, to guard the Constitution from viola
tion, by strict construction both in theory and
practice, is now about to inundate the country
with a paper currency, unconstitutional and
liable to all the evils of bank paper, without
any of its virtues. Sir, these are strange in
consistencies, which it will be difficult either
to reconcile or to justify before the People.
If the amendment is not adopted, I cannot
vote for the bill.
The following honorable testimony to the
character of Gen. Harrison, from the veteran
Gen. Miller, who knows him well* is in reply
to a letter from Mr. Webster :
Salem, June 30, 1840.
My Dear Sir.—I have the honor to have
received your letter of yesterday, requesting
me to state what I think of the recent attacks
upon the military character of Gen. Harrison,
j I answer 1 can truly say, that I have noticed
; with deep regret attacks, not only on his well-
earned military fame, but also on his private
and moral character. My first acquaintance
with Gen. Harrison w r as in the year 181 J. I
was on duty in the 4th Regiment of Infantry,
then commanded by Col. John P. Boyd—after
wards Gen. Boyd—under orders to proceed
to Vincennes, and there report to. Governor
Harrison. We did so. We remained at
Vincennes some days, and united ourselves
with the volunteers assembled there,.devoting
our limited time to purposes of organization
and drill. We then took up the line of march
for the Indian country, and proceeded by slow
and cautious marches, until w’e had reached
about seventy miles up the Wabash towards
Tippecanoe ; where we halted, and threw up
astockaded work which we call Fort Harrison.
Here I remained until the army returned from
Tippecanoe after the battle.
Although I was not in the battle, still I took
great interest in it; had much conversation
with all the officers on their return; and made
every enquiry I could think of respecting their
movements and encampments, the attack and
defence, and the operations of the battle through
out—and I made up my mind unhesitatingly'
that the campaign had been conducted with
great bravery,skillandjudgment,and that noth
ing was left undone that could be done consis
tently with the Geuerals express orders from
the War Department, which I saw and read.
Nor have I ever known or heard of any act
of his, which has, in the least degree, altered
the opinion I then formed of him. I will add,
that if l ever had any military skill, I am more
indebted for it to Gen. Harrison, than to any
other man. Soon after the battle I wrote a
letter to Gen. Benjamin Pierce, late Governor
of New-Hampshire—my military father as I
called him—giving a somewhat detailed ac
count of the campaign of Tippecanoe. That
letter was preserved by Gen. P. and mightnow
probably be found among his papers. If-it is
in existence it w’ill show what were my opin
ions at that time, as would also several other
letters then written by me to various friends.
In those day I never heard that Gen.Harrison
was a coward, or wore petticoats.
To conclude, I freely express my opinion,
after following him through ttfl fits civil and
military career, after living with him in his
family more than six months, that Gen. Wil
liam Henry Harrison is a fret stain or
blemish as it falls to the lot of man to be.
I am dear Sir, your old friend,
JAMES MILLER.
IWDakiW. WrasTin.