Page images
PDF
EPUB

23d CoNG. 1st SESS.]

Mr. Duane's Address to the People of the United States.

Permit me respectfully to say, that I am not aware that my willingness or unwillingness to afford you an oppor. tunity to select a successor could have had any influence or bearing upon any question before the cabinet; but I am willing to meet that consideration, as well as those stated to you this day in our interview.

In short, sir, as I stated to you in that interview, my course is justificatory towards you: I desire no unkind feeling, I have no unkind purpose: however ardent or unusual my language may be, it is at least sincere.

Allow me, then, very respectfully to state, as declared at our interview, that, under the most serious convictions of my duty, I refuse to aid, assist, or in any way participate, in the proposed change of the public depository; that I refuse to relinquish a post conferred upon me by the law; and that, without in the most remote degree meaning any sort of disrespect to you, I protest against any interference, on your part, with powers and duties which, I believe, were designedly withheld from the President, and committed to the Secretary of the Treasury, the fiscal agent of the law.

With fervent wishes that your measures may conduce to the advantage of your country, and to the honor of yourself,

I am, with the utmost consideration,
Your obedient servant,
W. J. DUANE.

No. 5.

The Secretary of the Treasury to the President of the United States.

TREASURY DEPARTMENT, September 21, 1833. SIR: Allow me, with great respect, to present to you another view, in addition to those stated in my letter of this date.

If I understand your wish, as it is to be collected from your note of this date, which I have just now again perused, it is to hold me, on principles of delicacy, at least, to my assurance of July 22d, that unless I agreed with your decision, after inquiry and discussion, I would promptly afford you an opportunity to obtain a successor according in your views.

I pray you dispassionately to consider whether you did not absolve me, even upon principles of delicacy, from all obligation upon this view of the matter.

1. On Wednesday, September 18, I signified in cabinet my desire to take and examine your exposition: you gave it to me, saying, in reply to my inquiry as to your direction, that I was to consider myself directed to act on your responsibility.

2. On Thursday morning, September 19, you applied to me to know if I had come to a decision, and I returned by your messenger, who brought your note, this reply: "To the President of the United States:

"SIR: Upon a matter that deeply concerns not only myself, but all who are dear to me, I have deemed it right, as I have not a friend here to advise with, to ask the counsel of my father at this crisis. I wrote to him last night, and am sure that nothing but sickness will prevent his presence to-morrow night; on the next day, I trust that I shall be able to make a communication to

you.

"With the utinost respect, "Your obedient servant,

[blocks in formation]

Lest words should be forgotten, I wrote and delivered to Major Donelson this reply: "A. J. Donelson, Esq.:

"DEAR SIR: The world is so censorious, that I am obliged, upon reflection, to express to you my hope that you will not regard me as approving of any publication; it would seem to be but delicate to defer such an act until I shall either concur or decline; however, all that I desire to have understood is, that I do not approve of the course you mentioned. Were I the President, I would consult, at least reasonably, the feelings of a man who has alrea dy anxiety enough. As to the newspapers, they will know what has been done, without an official communication. "Very respectfully, yours,

"September 19, 1833."

"W. J. DUANE.

4. In the Globe of Friday, September 20, you caused it to be announced to the world that the die was cast; thus altogether disregarding the rights of the Secretary of the Treasury, and my own feelings and fame; and refusing besides to wait even until the next day to receive my decision.

Allow me, therefore, very respectfully, but confidently, to say, that I was thus discharged from any sort of obli gation or respect for or on account of the past.

You gave me no opportunity to let you know whether I would or would not afford you an opportunity to choose a successor; in short, the Secretary of the Treasury was, as far as an Executive act would do it, nullified; and I hold it, therefore, that after such a course, I may stand before my country acquitted of any disregard even of delicacy.

Trusting, sir, that you will be so good as to permit this to enter into your consideration, with my former note of this date, and that we may close, without discredit to either, the pending matter,

I am, with the utmost consideration, our obedient serv't, W. J. DUANE.

No. 6.

The Secretary of the Treasury to the President of the United States.

TREASURY DEPARTMENT, September 21, 1833. SIR: As you had not, in any written communications, given a direction as to the deposites, but on the contrary, had left the action to the Secretary of the Treasury as a matter of option, I deemed it my duty, when I had the honor to receive from you your exposition of the 18th in stant, to ask you whether I was to consider myself di rected to remove the deposites, and you replied that was directed on your responsibility.

I was preparing to lay before you an exposition of our relative position and views, from the first moment of my authoritatively announced in the Globe, a proceeding entry into your administration, when your decision was unsanctioned by me, that rendered all further discussion needless, and any attempt of the kind derogatory to myself.

present circumstances, which I delivered to you yester A communication, justificatory of my course under day, having been returned, or account of alleged objec tionable matter therein, the presence of which, if disre spectful, I regret, it now becomes my duty, in reply to your letter returning that communication, respectfully to announce my unwillingness to carry your direction as to the deposites into effect; and, in making known that decision, without meaning any sort of disrespect, to pr tect myself, by protesting against all that has been done, or is doing, to divest the Secretary of the Treasury of the power to exercise, independently, of the President, the discretion committed to him by law over the deposites.

Executive Proceedings of the Senate.

I have already, sir, on more than one occasion, and recently, without contradiction, before the Cabinet, stated that I did not know, until after my induction into office, that you had determined that the deposites should be removed without any further action of Congress; if I had known that such was your decision, and that I should be required to act, I would not have accepted office. But, as soon as I understood, when in office, what your intention was, I sought for all information calculated to enable me to act uprightly in the embarrassing position in which I was unexpectedly placed.

[23d CoNG, 1st Sess.

I sincerely hope and beg, sir, that you will consider that I owe it to myself, my family, and my friends, not to leave my course, at this most trying moment of my life, open to doubt or conjecture; that my conduct has already sharpened the dagger of malice, as may be seen in some of the public prints; that you, who have been assailed in so many tender parts, and in whose defence I have devoted many a painful day, ought to make allowance for me in my present position; that were I to resign, I could meet no calumniator without breach of duty; that I ask such or. der or direction from you, in relation to my office, as may protect me and my children from reproach, and save you and myself from all present or future pain; that I desire to separate in peace and kindness; that I will strive to forget all unpleasantness, or cause of it; and that I devoutly wish that your measures may end in happiness to your country, and honor to yourself. With the utmost consideration, Your obedient servant,

W. J. DUANE.

You were so good as to transmit to me, to that end, from Boston, not only the opinions of the members of the cabinet, but your own views in detail, upon the deposite question; but, instead of intimating to me that my dis inclination to carry those views into effect would be fullowed by a call for my retirement, you emphatically as sured me, in your letter of the 26th June, that you "did not intend to interfere with the independent exercise of the discretion committed to me by law over the subject. Fully confiding in the encouragement thus held out, I entered into an exposition of my objections to the pro posed measure. Discussion ended in an understanding The President of the United States to the Secretary of that we should remain uncommitted until after an inquiry which your agent was to make should be completed, and until the discussion of the cabinet. But pending the preparation for this inquiry, I received your letter of July 22d, conveying what I understood to be an intimation that I must retire, unless I would then say that I would remove the deposites, after the inquiry and discussion, in case you should then decide to have them removed.

I would have at once considered this letter as an order to retire, and would have obeyed it, if I had not thought it my duty to hold the post intrusted to me as long as I could do so with benefit to the country, and without discredit to myself; instead, therefore, of retiring voluntarily or otherwise, I subjected my feelings to restraint, and stated, as you quote in your letter of this day, that, if I could not, after inquiry and discussion, as the responsible agent of the law, carry into effect the decision that might be made, I would afford you an opportunity to select a successor, &c.

No. 7.

the Treasury.

September 23, 1833. Sin: Since I returned your first letter of September 21st, and since the receipt of your second letter of the same day, which I sent back to you at your own reques', I have received your third and fourth letters of the same date. The two last, as well as the first, contain statements that are inaccurate; and, as I have already indicated in my last note to you that a correspondence of this description is inadmissible, your two last letters are herewith returned.

But, from all your recent communications, as well as your recent conduct, your feelings and sentiments appear to be of such a character that, after your letter of July last, in which you say, should your views not accord with mine "I will from respect to you and for myself, afford you an opportunity to select a successor whose views may accord with your own on the important matter in contem. plation," and your determination now to disregard the pledge you then gave, I feel my self constrained to notify you that your further services as Secretary of the Treas I am, respectfully, your obedient servant,

Under these circumstances, the inquiry was entered upon: it ended in showing, as I had predicted, that the plan submitted to me on the 26th June was impractica-ury are no longer required. ble, and in a report without any defined substitute, according to my comprehension of it.

After a consideration of the subject in the cabinet, you gave directions, as stated at the commencement of this letter, and I wrote to you that I would make a communication to you on Saturday, 21st instant, and I accordingly did so, as hereinbefore stated.

Unto the present time, therefore, I have been struggling, under painful circumstances, not to retain a post that I never sought, and the loss of which I shall not regret on my own account, but to maintain it for the country, under a serious sense of duty to it, and to avert a measure that I honestly feared might affect yourself.

Without entertaining or desiring to manifest towards you, sir, the slightest disrespect, but solemnly impressed with a consideration of my responsibility to the country, and my duty to myself, I now definitely declare that I will not, in any way, aid or assist to cause the public money to be deposited in any other institution, bank, or place, than that provided by the 16th section of the act chartering the United States Bank, until Congress shall direct or authorize such change to be made, unless good cause shall arise, such as in my judgment does not now exist. I am further constrained, owing to occurrences and circumstances that in part have come to my knowledge, or have taken place of late, to leave it to you, sir, to determine whether I am or am not any longer to remain a member of your administration.

ANDREW JACKSON.

EXECUTIVE PROCEEDINGS OF THE SENATE On the nomination and renomination of certain Directors of the Bank of the United States.

TUESDAY, December 17, 1833.

dent of the United States, by Mr. Donelson, his Secre. The following message was received from the Presi tary:

To the Senate:

WASHINGTON, December 17, 1833,

I nominate James A. Bayard, of Delaware, to be a director in the Bank of the United States, on the part of the Government, for the year 1834, in the place of Saul Alley.

And I nominate Peter Wager, Henry D. Gilpin, and John T. Sullivan, of Philadelphia, and Hugh McElderry, of Baltimore, to the same offices for the year 1834.

ANDREW JACKSON.

The message was read.
Ordered, That it be referred to the Committee on Fi

nance.

THURSDAY, January 19, 1834.

Mr. Webster, from the Committee on Finance, to whom was referred the message nominating James A. Bayard,

[blocks in formation]

and others, as directors of the Bank of the United States, reported.

TUESDAY, January 21, 1834.

The Senate proceeded to consider the message of the 17th December, nominating James A. Bayard, and others,

as directors of the Bank of the United States.

On the question, "Will the Senate advise and consent to the appointment of James A. Bayard?" It was determined in the affirmative. The remaining nominations being under consideration, On motion by Mr. Clay, the Senate adjourned.

WEDNESDAY, January 22, 1834.

The Senate resumed the consideration of the message nominating James A. Bayard, and others, as directors of the Bank of the United States; and, after debate, The Senate adjourned.

MONDAY, February 10, 1834.

The Senate resumed the consideration of the message nominating James A. Bayard, and others, as directors of the Bank of the United States.

Mr. Kane submitted the following motion: Resolved, That the nominations of H. D. Gilpin, John T. Sullivan, Peter Wager, and Hugh McElderry, be re. committed to the Committee on Finance, with instructions to inquire into their several qualifications and fitness for the stations to which they have been nominated; also into the truth of all charges preferred by them against the board of directors of the Bank of the United States, and into the conduct of each of the said nominees during the time he may have acted as director of the said bank; and that the said nominees have notice of the times and places of meetings of said committee, and have leave to attend the same.

On motion by Mr. Forsyth,

The yeas and nays being desired by one-fifth of the Senators presen',

Those who voted in the affirmative, are,

Messrs. Benton, Brown, Forsyth, Grundy, Hendricks, Hill, Kane, King of Alabama, Linn, McKean, Moore, Morris, Rives, Robinson, Shepley, Tallmadge, Tipton, White, Wilkins, Wright.

Those who voted in the negative, are,

Messrs. Bell, Bibb, Black, Calhoun, Chambers, Clay, Clayton, Ewing, Frelinghuysen, Kent, King of Georgia, Knight, Mangum, Naudain, Poindexter, Porter, Prentiss, Preston, Robbins, Silsbee, Smith, Southard, Sprague, Swift, Tomlinson, Tyler, Waggaman, Webster.

So the resolution was disagreed to.

The question recurring on advising and consenting to the nominations,

After debate, the Senate adjourned.

MONDAY, February 21, 1834.

The Senate resumed the consideration of the message nominating James A. Bayard, and others, as directors of the Bank of the United States.

On motion by Mr. Mangum, Ordered, That it lie on the table.

THURSDAY, February 27, 1834.

On motion by Mr. Webster,

The Senate resumed the consideration of the message nominating James A. Bayard, and others.

Mr. Morris submitted the following resolution: Resolved, That the nominations of H. D. Gilpin, Peter Wager, John T. Sullivan, and Hugh McElderry, be again referred to the Committee on Finance, with instructions to inquire whether any objections whatever exist either against their characters or qualifications to act as directors of the Bank of the United States.

On the question to agree thereto,

It was determined in the negative, yeas 18, nays 27. On motion by Mr. Morris,

The yeas and nays being desired by one-fifth of the Senators present,

Those who voted in the affirmative, are,

Messrs. Benton, Brown, Forsyth, Grundy, Hill, Kane, King of Alabama, Linn, McKean, Moore, Morris, Robinson, Shepley, Tallmadge, Tipton, White, Wilkins, and Wright. Those who voted in the negative, are,

Messrs. Bell, Bibb, Black, Calhoun, Chambers, Clay, Clayton, Ewing, Frelinghuysen, Hendricks, Kent, Knight, Mangum, Naudain, Poindexter, Porter, Prentiss, Preston, Robbins, Silsbee, Smith, Sprague, Swift, Tomlinson, Tyler, Waggaman, Webster.

So the resolution was rejected.

On the question, "Will the Senate advise and consent to the appointment of Peter Wager?"

It was determined in the negative, yeas 20, nays 25.
On motion by Mr. Forsyth,

The yeas and nays being desired by one-fifth of the

Senators present,

Those who voted in the affirmative, are,

Messrs. Benton, Black, Brown, Forsyth, Grundy, HenMoore, Morris, Robinson, Shepley, Tallmadge, Tipton, dricks, Hill, Kane, King of Alabama, Linn, McKean, White, Wilkins, Wright.

Those who voted in the negative, are,

Messrs. Bell, Bibb, Calhoun, Chambers, Clay, Clayton, Ewing, Frelinghuysen, Kent, Knight, Mangum, Naudain, Poindexter, Porter, Prentiss, Preston, Robbins, Silsbée, Smith, Sprague, Swift, Tomlinson, Tyler, Waggaman,

Webster.

to the appointment of Henry D. Gilpin?" On the question, "Will the Senate advise and consent

It was determined in the negative, yeas 20, nays 24. The yeas and nays being desired by one-fifth of the Senators present,

Those who voted in the affirmative, are,

Messrs. Benton, Black, Brown, Forsyth, Grundy, Hendricks, Hill, Kane, King of Alabama, Linn, McKean, Moore, Morris, Robinson, Shepley, Tallmadge, Tipton, White, Wilkins, Wright.

Those who voted in the negative, are,

Messrs. Bell, Bibb, Calhoun, Chambers, Clay, Ewing, dexter, Porter, Prentiss, Preston, Robbins, Silsbee, Frelinghuysen, Kent, Knight, Mangum, Naudain, PoinSmith, Sprague, Swift, Tomlinson, Tyler, Waggaman, Webster.

On the question, "Will the Senate advise and consent to the appointment of John T. Sullivan?"

It was determined in the negative, yeas 18, nays 27. The yeas and nays being desired by one-fifth of the Senators present,

Those who voted in the affirmative, are,

Messrs. Benton, Brown, Forsyth, Grundy, Hendricks, Hill, Kane, King of Alabama, Linn, McKean, Morris, Robinson, Shepley, Tallmadge, Tipton, White, Wilkins, Wright.

Those who voted in the negative, are,

Messrs. Bell, Bibb, Black, Calhoun, Chambers, Clay, Clayton, Ewing, Frelinghuysen, Kent, Knight, Mangum, Moore, Naudain, Poindexter, Porter, Prentiss, Preston, Robbins, Silsbee, Smith, Sprague, Swift, Tomlinson, Tyler, Waggaman, Webster.

On the question, "Will the Sena'e advise and consent to the appointment of Hugh McElderry ""

It was determined in the negative, yeas 20, nays 25. The yeas and nays being desired by one-fifth of the Senators present,

Those who voted in the affirmative, are,

Messrs. Benton, Black, Brown, Forsyth, Grundy, Hendricks, Hill, Kane, King of Alabama, Linn, McKean, Moore, Morris, Robinson, Shepley, Tallmadge, Tipton, White, Wilkins, Wright.

Executive Proceedings of the Senate.

[blocks in formation]

tary:

To the Senate:

WASHINGTON, March 11, 1834.

I nominate Henry D. Gilpin, Peter Wager, and John T. Sullivan, of Philadelphia, and Hugh McElderry, of Baltimore, to be directors in the Bank of the United States for the year 1834.

I disclaim all pretension of right on the part of the President officially to inquire into, or call in question, the reasons of the Senate for rejecting any nomination whatsoever. As the President is not responsible to them for the reasons which induce him to make a nomination, so they are not responsible to him for the reasons which induce them to reject it. In these respects, each is independent of the other, and both responsible to their respective constituents. Nevertheless, the attitude in which certain vital interests of the country are placed by the rejection of the gentlemen now renominated require of me, frankly, to communicate my views of the consequences which must necessarily follow this act of the Senate, if it be not reconsidered.

[23d CONG. 1st SESS.

bank in the manner stated in the two reports, and have not denied that the charges there made against the corporation are substantially true.

It must be taken, therefore, as admitted that the statements of the public directors, in the reports abovementioned, are correct: and they disclose the most alarming abuses on the part of the corporation, and the most strenuous exertions on their part to put an end to them. They prove that enormous sums were secretly lavished in a manner, and for purposes that cannot be justified; and that the whole of the immense capital of the bank has been virtually placed at the disposal of a single individual, to be used, if he thinks proper, to corrupt the press, and to control the proceedings of the Government by exercising an undue influence over elections.

The reports were made in obedience to my official directions; and I here with transmit copies of my letter call. ing for information of the proceedings of the bank. Were they bound to disregard the call? Was it their duty to remain silent while abuses of the most injurious and dangerous character were daily practised? Were they bound to conceal from the constituted authorities a course of measures destructive to the best interests of the country, and intended, gradually and secretly, to subvert the foundations of our Government, and to transfer its powers from the hands of the people to a great moneyed corporation? Was it their duty to sit in silence at the board, and witness all these abuses without an attempt to correct them; or, in case of failure there, not to appeal to higher authority? The eighth fundamental rule authorizes any one of the directors, whether elected or ap pointed, who may have been absent when an excess of debt was created, or who may have dissented from the act, to exonerate himself from personal responsibility by giving notice of the fact to the President of the United States; thus recognising the propriety of communicating The characters and standing of these gentlemen are to that officer the proceedings of the board in such cases. well known to the community, and eminently qualified But, independently of any argument to be derived from them for the offices to which I propose to appoint them. the principle recognised in the rule referred to, I cannot Their confirmation by the Senate at its last session to the doubt for a moment that it is the right and the duty of same offices is proof that such was the opinion of them every director at the board to attempt to correct all illeentertained by the Senate at that time; and unless some-gal proceedings, and in case of failure, to disclose them;, thing has occurred since to change it, this act may now be referred to as evidence that their talents and pursuits justified their selection.

The refusal, however, to confirm their nominations to the same offices, shows that there is something in the conduct of these gentlemen during the last year which, in the opinion of the Senate, disqualifies them; and as no charge has been made against them as men or citizens, nothing which impeaches the fair private character they possessed when the Senate gave them their sanction at its last session, and as it moreover appears from the journal of the Senate recently transmitted for my inspection, that it was deemed unnecessary to inquire into their qualifications or character, it is to be inferred that the change in the opinion of the Senate has arisen from the official conduct of these gentlemen. The only circumstances in their official conduct which have been deemed of sufficient importance to attract public attention are the two reports made by them to the Executive department of the Government, the one bearing date the 22d day of April, and the other the 19th day of August last; both of which reports were communicated to the Senate by the Secretary of the Treasury with his reasons for removing the deposites.

The truth of the facts stated in these reports, is not, 1 presume, questioned by any one. The high character and standing of the citizens by whom they were made prevent any doubt upon the subject. Indeed the state ments have not been denied by the president of the bank, and the other directors. On the contrary, they have insisted that they were authorized to use the money of the

and that every one of them, whether elected by the stockholders or appointed by the Government, who had knowledge of the facts, and concealed them, would be justly amenable to the severest censure.

But, in the case of the public directors, it was their peculiar and official duty to make the disclosures; and the call upon them for information could not have been disregarded without a flagrant breach of their trust. The directors appointed by the United States cannot be regarded in the light of the ordinary directors of a bank appointed by the stockholders, and charged with the care of their pecuniary interests in the corporation. They have higher and more important duties. They are pub lic officers. They are placed at the board not merely to represent the stock held by the United States, but to observe the conduct of the corporation, and to watch over the public interests. It was foreseen that this great moneyed monopoly might be so managed as to endanger the interests of the country; and it was therefore deemed necessary, as a measure of precaution, to place at the board watchful sentinels, who should observe its conduct, and stand ready to report to the proper officers of the Government every act of the board which might affect injuriously the interests of the people.

The whole frame of the charter, as well as the manner of their appointment, proves this to be their true character. The United States are not represented at the board by these directors merely on account of the stock held by the Government. The right of the United States to appoint directors, and the number appointed, do not depend upon the amount of the stock; for, if every share should

[blocks in formation]

be sold, and the United States cease to be a stockholder altogether, yet, under the charter, the right to appoint five directors would still remain. In such a case, what would be the character of the directors? They would represent no stock, and be chosen by no stockholder. Yet they would have a right to sit at the board, to vote on all questions submitted to it, and to be made acquainted with all the proceedings of the corporation. They would not, in such a case, be ordinary directors chosen by the stockholders in proportion to their stock. But they would be public officers appointed to guard the public interest; and their duties must conform to their office. They are not the duties of an ordinary director chosen by a stockholder, but they are the peculiar duties of a public officer who is bound on all occasions to protect, to the utmost of his lawful means, the public interests; and where his own authority is not sufficient to prevent injury, to inform those to whom the law has confided the necessary power. Such then is the character, and such are the duties of the directors appointed by the United States, whether the public be stockholders or not. They are officers of the United States, and not the mere representatives of a stockholder.

ions, without the means of enforcement. Yet they must be wholly inoperative and useless unless there be some means by which the official conduct of the public direct. ors, and the abuses of power on the part of the corporation, may be brought to the knowledge of the Executive department of the Government.

Will it be said that the power is given to the Secretary of the Treasury to examine himself, or by his authorized agent, into the conduct and condition of the bank? The answer is obvious. It could not have been expected or intended that he would make an examination unless information was first given to him which excited his suspicions; and, if he did make such a general examination without previous information of misconduct, it is most probable that, in the complex concerns and accounts of a bank, it would result in nothing, whatever abuses might have been practised.

It is indeed the duty of every director to give information of such misconduct on the part of the board. But the power to issue a scire facias and to remove the depos ites, presupposes that the directors elected by the stockholders might abuse their power; and it cannot be presumed that Congress intended to rely on these same The mode of their appointment, and their tenure of directors to give information of their own misconduct. office, confirm this position. They are appointed like The Government is not accustomed to rely on the offendother officers of the Government, and by the same au ing party to disclose his offence. It was intended that the thority. They do not hold their offices irrevocably a power to issue a scire facias and remove the deposites year after their appointment: on the contrary, by the ex- should be real and effective. The necessary means of inpress terms of the law, they are liable to be removed formation were, therefore, provided in the charter, and from office at any time by the President, when, in his five officers of the Government, appointed in the usual judgment, the public interest shall require it. In every manner, responsible to the public and not the stockholdaspect, therefore, in which the subject can be considered, ers, were placed as sentinels at the board, and are bound it is evident that the five directors appointed by the by the nature and character of their office to resist, and, United States are to be regarded as public officers, who if unsuccessful, to report to the proper authority, every are placed there in order to observe the conduct of the infraction of the charter and every abuse of power, in corporation, and to prevent abuses which might other-order that due measures should be taken to punish or wise be committed. correct it; and, in like manner, it is their duty to give, when called upon, any explanation of their own official conduct touching the management of the institution. It was, perhaps, scarcely necessary to present to the Senate these views of the powers of the Executive, and of the duties of the five directors appointed by the Uni ted States. But the bank is believed to be now striving to obtain for itself the Government of the country, and is seeking, by new and strained constructions, to wrest from the hands of the constituted authorities the salutary control reserved by the charter. And as misrepresentation is one of its most usual weapons of attack, I have deemed it my duty to put before the Senate, in a manner not to be misunderstood, the principles on which I have acted.

Such being the character of the directors appointed on behalf of the United States, it is obviously their duty to resist, and, in case of failure, to report to the President, or to the Secretary of the Treasury, any proceedings of the board by which the public interest may be injuriously affected. The President may order a scire facias against the bank for a violation of its charter, and the Secretary of the Treasury is empowered to direct the money of the United States to be deposited elsewhere, when, in his judgment, the public interest requires it to be done. The directors of this bank, like all others, are accustomed to sit with closed doors, and do not report their proceedings to any department of the Government. The mon hly return which the charter requires to be made to the Treasury Department, gives nothing more than a general statement of its pecuniary condition, and, of that, but an imperfect one. For, although it shows the amount loaned at the bank and its different branches, it does not show the condition of its debtors, nor the circumstances under which the loans were made. It does not show whether they were, in truth, accommodations granted in the regular and ordinary course of business upon fair banking principles, or from other motives. Under the name of loans, advances may be made to persons notoriously insolvent for the most corrupt and improper purposes, and a course of proceeding may be adopted in violation of its charter, while, upon the face of its monthly statement, every thing would appear to be fair and

correct.

How, then, is the Executive branch of the Government to become acquainted with the official conduct of the public directors, or the abuses practised by the corporation for its private ends, and in violation of its duty to the public? The power of displacing the public directors, and that of issuing a scire facias, and of removing the deposites, were not intended to be idle and nugatory provis

Entertaining, as I do, a solemn conviction of the truth of these principles, I must adhere to them, and act upon them, with constancy and firmness.

Aware, as I now am, of the dangerous machinations of the bank, it is more than ever my duty to be vigilant in guarding the rights of the people from the impending danger. And I should feel that I ought to forfeit the confidence with which my countrymen have honored me, if I did not require regular and full reports of every thing in the proceedings of the bank calculated to affect inju riously the public interests, from the public directors; and if the directors should fail to give the information called for, it would be my imperious duty to exercise the pow er conferred on me by the law of removing them from office, and of appointing others who would discharge their duties with more fidelity to the public. I can never suffer any one to hold office under me who would connive at corruption, or who should fail to give the alarm when he saw the enemies of liberty endeavoring to sap the foundations of our free institutions, and to subject the free people of the United States to the dominion of a great moneyed corporation.

« PreviousContinue »