Imatges de pàgina
PDF
EPUB

for its dishonour;-and the act of duty on the part of the Bank may enable the national treasury to receive as a stockholder in the Bank, the sum of $31,000 as its portion of these damages. But its legal liability does not depend on this; and it is denied, with a very ill grace by a party, which, under all circumstances of solvency or insolvency has exacted damages on. protested bills of exchange purchased from American citizens.

But suppose the claim to be questionable, does it justify the fierce denunciation of the Bank by the Executive? It is a question between American citizens and their Government, depending on the law of the land and determinable by its judicial tribunals. The Bank has ever demonstrated a disposition to resort to these tribunals; but as it cannot sue the Government, it has no other course than to excite the Government to bring suit against it. To this end, it has retained dividends on the United States stock, to the amount of the damages; and, by suit, the administration might, by this time, have settled the question. But throughout this war, it has sedulously avoided submitting any question, involved in it, to the arbitrement of law; and now proposes to employ its plenary power, to inflict additional injury on the Bank, by forbidding the reception of its paper at the Treasury, notwithstanding the nation has covenanted by law to receive it; and thus to annul a charter, not as the English monarchs have done, by a quo warranto, and a corrupt judiciary, which, thank heaven, is unknown to our country, but by a tyrannical stretch of legislative power. This purpose, we also thank heaven, the Executive cannot effect. If it have influence sufficient, in the House of Representatives, to obtain its sanction to such a bill, there is power in the Senate to save the country from such indelible disgrace.

433. V. The last reason assigned by the Secretary, for removal of the deposits is, that the Bank had sought political power. This is a grievous charge, and grievously, if true, should it be answered. The specifications are:

1. That, with a view to influence the measures of the Government, by causing its weight to be felt in the election of public officers, the Bank increased its discounts, from $42,402,304 24 to $63,026,424 93; nearly fifty per cent. in one year; and on the 1st of May, 1832, to $70,428,070 72, being an augmentation of $28,025,766 48 in sixteen months. This extraordinary increase of its loans, was made when the charter had but four years to run, with little chance of renewal; when she was aware of the necessity of closing up her vast

concerns, and upon the eve of a severely contested election, in which she took an open and direct interest, demonstrates, that she was using her means for the purpose of obtaining a hold upon the people, in order to operate upon their fears, and to induce them, by apprehensions of ruin, to vote against the candidate whom it desired to defeat.

Here is a singular compound of allegations of fact, and suppositions. The former are untrue, and the latter wholly gratuitous. The time at which the alleged increase of loans was made, was not within four, but six years of the termination of the charter;-a time at which no reasons of prudence required a limitation or reduction of the business of the Bank, other than the ordinary principle of safety. That such principle was duly regarded, is evident from the present perfect condition of the institution. The chances of renewal were greatly in her favour, as demonstrated by the fact, that an act for that purpose passed both Houses of Congress-the Bank could not, a priori, assume, or believe, that a President of the United States, avowing no constitutional scruples, would oppose himself, with his obnoxious Veto, to the declared sense of the country, upon a question of expediency. The hold which the Bank was to get upon the people implies, that the loans, if made, were made to insolvent debtors, with the knowledge of their insolvency. For, if made to solvent debtors in the ordinary way of business, they could have no effect upon the opinions or votes of the borrowers. There are things asserted in morals, as in physics, which are incredible, because they are in opposition to known laws of action. It is contrary to these, that, an institution, whose end and aim is pecuniary profit, guided by intelligent men, should put at hazard twenty-eight millions of its funds, to affect an object that was already attained. For, there is not a man in the country who does not know, that had the President been neutral upon the subjcct, the Bank would have been rechartered without objection.

The truth is, that in the year 1831, there being a most active foreign and interior trade, requiring unusual facilities for its operations, the Bank having received the reimbursement of its loan to Government, amounting to more than eight millions; and having called in its funds in Europe, and employed its credit there to the amount of four millions, possessing thus additional means of loaning, to the amount of nearly thirteen millions, actually increased its loans to the amount of seventeen millions; making in fact a mere

increase of its investments not equal to five millions; of which increase the new Branch Bank of Natchez, established within that period, alone contributed nearly three millions.

2. It is also charged, that, to obtain political influence, the Bank placed its whole capital at the disposition of its President. This extravagant charge has no other foundation, than that, this officer was authorized to cause to be prepared and circulated, "such documents and papers as might communicate to the people information in regard to the nature and operations of the Bank."

The amount expended by virtue of this authority, was exaggerated by the Executive to $80,000; the objects to which they were applied, were congressional reports, pamphlets, relating to the Bank, and newspapers containing proceedings of Congress, and discussions of this interesting topic.

Now, the expenditure for these purposes, during four years, instead of $80,000, was but $58,000, which the Bank was obliged to incur, to defend itself against injurious misrepresentations. With this expenditure, the stockholders, the nation included, are, so far as their sense can be ascertained, entirely content. The Directors, eligible by the private stockholders, have been re-elected the public Directors, eligible by the nation, who misrepresented and denounced the expenditure, have been rejected, expressly upon the ground of misrepresentation, in this very case. What more conclusive can be said, as to the propriety of the conduct of the Board, in their defence of the Bank!

But how vast is the difference in the injury done to the nation, by the respective parties in this unnatural and causéless war made upon the Bank, by the administration. As stockholders in the Bank, the citizens of the United States have lost twelve thousand dollars, which the Bank has been compelled to expend in self-defence. The people hold 70,000 shares of the stock, which, when the President of the United States declared war against that institution, were worth each 130 dollars. The result of that war was, to reduce the value of each share $25; making a loss upon the interest of the people, of one million seven hundred and fifty thousand dollars, which the President of the United States has caused by his electioneering, against the Bank, and for himself; and the loss which he has occasioned upon the aggregate amount of the Bank stock, was eight millions seven hundred and fifty thousand dollars!!

3. There is a third specification under the charge against

the Bank-of attempting to gain political influence. It is made by the President, in his cabinet manifesto; but, the Secretary of the Treasury has had the grace rot to dwell upon it, in his report to Congress. It is, "that the Bank controls, and, in some cases, substantially owns, and by its money supports, some of the leading presses, in the country," by unwarrantable loans. But as this charge has not been persisted in, and the reports of the Committee of Investigation, in 1832, and the Senate Committee of 1834, cover the whole ground which Congress did not believe an improper one, we will not enlarge upon it, further than to say, it stands a monument of the baseless slanders which have been fabricated by party malevolence against this institution.

In determining on the propriety of the conduct of the Secretary, we may consider the acts of the Bank, either as consistent with, or in violation of, the charter. In the first case, they are mere acts of administration or management of the Bank, which the United States, as a stockholder, has agreed to commit to the discrection of the Board of Directors. Neither the Government Directors nor the President of the United Statess have a veto on the proceedings of the Board. If their resolutions be lawful, they bind all the stockholders, public and private; and if inexpedient, their correction is to be sought in the annual elections. Upon questions of administration, within the legal competency of the Board, there is no more justification of an attempt to tear the Bank to pieces, hy a part of the Directors, or by the Treasury Department, in support of them, because the voice of the minority is not respected, than there would be for an attempt, by a State cr States, for the like reason, to sever the Union. All the parties to the contract have agreed, that questions of administration within the lawful competence of the Legislature, whether - of the Bank or of the Union, shall be decided by a majority;and if they require correction, that they shall be corrected by a majority, and in no other way. If the measures of the Bank were lawful, the dissatisfaction of the Secretary with them was no cause for removing the deposits. The management of the Bank has not been committed to him. He has no right to inspect its management, or even its condition, except in a limited way, for the purpose of ascertaining the security of the deposits. To have given him the power of removal in any case in which he should deem the management wrong, would have been to give him, effectually, the management of the Bank in every particular.

If, on the other hand, the acts questioned, are violations of the charter, the objection to the Secretary's acts are not less strong. He is not the officer to whom the charter has confided the authority to direct a prosecution for its violation. It has expressly confided that authority to others-the Bank is entitled to be heard, before any judgment of violation is pronounced-and that judgment is to be rendered by the judicial department only.

434. In addition to the outrage upon justice, the law, and the Bank, which we have now recorded, we must notice another act of like character in taking from the Bank the pension funds and agency."

By the system of pension agency, as established by law, the Bank of the United States and its branches are required to pay the pensions in States where they are respectively established: and the Bank designates, for this purpose, some State Bank where there is no Branch Bank; and where there is no State Bank, the Secretary, at War is authorized to appoint a pension agent.

[ocr errors]

The Administration made several efforts to obtain possession of these funds, at certain places, prior to January, 1834, by transferring them to the State Banks, at Portsmouth and Albany but, the remonstrances of the Bank of the United States exhibited the illegality of the measure in so strong a light, that, Mr. Eaton, Secretary at War, revoked, himself, one of his orders, and his successor recalled the other. These were very mortifying circumstances, producing a festering wound in the mind of the President; the pain of which could be assauged, only, by vengeance. For this, a mean was supposed to be discovered in the phraseology of the pension acts of 15th May, 1828, and 7th June, 1832, which, by forced construction, it was thought, might be separated from the general pension system; although they had been recognized as parts of that system, by every executive department, and, what is more to the purpose, by several subsequent acts of Congress, in which they were, by name, styled pension acts. This, however, proved no barrier to executive invasion; and in January, 1834, the Secretary at War announced the appointment, on the same day, of fifteen new pension agents (pet banks,) to perform the duties, theretofore, fulfilled by the Bank of the United States, under the act of 1832; and, at the same time, that Bank was forbidden to pay any pensions accruing under that act, and directed to trans

« AnteriorContinua »