Page images
PDF
EPUB

In technical language,

opinion formed after full argument. it must not have been sub silentio. Now the acts of 1804 and 1807, relied upon as pledges for the re-chartering of this company, passed not only without any discussions whatever of the constitutional power of Congress to establish a bank, but, I venture to say, without a single member having had his attention drawn to this question. I had the honor of a seat in the Senate when the latter law passed, probably voted for it, and I declare, with the utmost sincerity, that I never once thought of that point, and I appeal confidently to every honorable member who was then present, to say if that was not his situation.

This doctrine of precedents, applied to the Legislature, appears to me to be fraught with the most mischievous consequences. The great advantage of our system of government over all others, is, that we have a written Constitution defining its limits, and prescribing its authorities; and that, however, for a time, faction may convulse the nation, and passion and party prejudices sway its functionaries, the season of reflection will recur, when, calmly retracing their deeds, all aberrations from fundamental principle will be corrected. But once substitute practice for principle; the exposition of the Constitution for the text of the Constitution, and in vain shall we look for the instrument in the instrument itself! It will be as diffused and intangible as the pretended Constitution of England; and must be sought for in the statute book, in the fugitive journals of Congress, and in the reports of the Secretary of the Treasury! What would be our condition, if we were to take the interpretations given to that sacred book, which is, or ought to be, the criterion of our faith, for the book itself? We should find the Holy Bible buried beneath the interpretations, glosses and comments of councils, synods and learned divines, which have produced swarms of intolerant and furious sects, partaking less of the mildness and meekness of their origin, than of a vindictive spirit of hostility toward each other! They ought to afford us a solemn warning to make that Constitution, which we have sworn to support, our invariable

I conceive, then, sir, that we were not empowered by the Constitution, nor bound by any practice under it, to renew the charter of this bank, and I might here rest the argument. But as there are strong objections to the renewal on the score of expediency, and as the distresses which will attend the dissolution of the bank have been greatly exaggerated, I will ask for your indulgence for a few moments longer. That some temporary inconvenience will arise, I shall not deny; but most groundlessly have the recent failures in New York been attributed to the discontinuance of this bank. As well might you ascribe to that cause the failures of Amsterdam and Hamburg, of London and Liverpool. The embarrassments of commerce, the sequestrations in France, the Danish captures; in fine, the belligerent edicts are the obvious sources of these failures. Their immediate cause is the return of bills upon London, drawn upon the faith of unproductive or unprofitable shipments. Yes, sir, the protests of the notaries of London, not those of New York, have occasioned these bankruptcies.

The power of a nation is said to consist in the sword and the purse. Perhaps, at last, all power is resolvable into that of the purse, for with it you may command almost every thing else. The specie circulation of the United States is estimated, by some calculators, at ten millions of dollars, and if it be no more, one moiety is in the vaults of this bank. May not the time arrive, when the concentration of such a vast portion of the circulating medium of the country in the hands of any corporation, will be dangerous to our liberties? By whom is this immense power wielded? By a body, that, in derogation of the great principle of all our institutions, responsibility to the people, is amenable only to a few stockholders, and they chiefly foreigners. Suppose an attempt to subvert this Government, would not the traitor first aim, by force or corruption, to acquire the treasure of this company? Look at it in another aspect. Seven tenths of its capital are in the hands of foreigners, and these foreigners chiefly English subjects. We are possibly on the eve of a rupture with that nation. Should such an event occur, do you apprehend that the English Premier would experience any difficulty in

obtaining the entire control of this institution? Republics, above all other Governments, ought most seriously to guard against foreign influence. All history proves, that the internal dissensions excited by foreign intrigue have produced the downfall of almost every free government that has hitherto existed; and yet, gentlemen contend that we are benefited by the possession of this foreign capital! If we could have its use, without its attending abuse, I should be gratified also. But it is in vain to expect the one without the other. Wealth is power, and, under whatsoever form it exists, its proprietor, whether he lives on this or the other side of the Atlantic, will have a proportionate influence. It is argued, that our possession of this English capital gives us a great influence over the British Government. If this reasoning be sound, we had better revoke the interdiction as to aliens holding land, and invite foreigners to engross the whole property, real and personal, of the country. We had better, at once, exchange the condition of independent proprietors for that of stewards. We should then be able to govern foreign nations, according to the reasoning of the gentlemen on the other side. But let us put aside this theory and appeal to the decisions of experience. Go to the other side of the Atlantic and see what has been achieved for us there, by Englishmen holding seven tenths of the capital of this bank. Has it released from galling and ignominious bondage one solitary American seaman, bleeding under British oppression? Did it prevent the unmanly attack upon the Chesapeake ? promulgation, or has it abrogated the orders in council,those orders which have given birth to a new era in commerce? In spite of all its boasted effect, are not the two nations brought to the very brink of war? Are we quite sure, that, on this side of the water, it has had no effect favorable to British interests. It has often been stated, and although I do not know that it is susceptible of strict proof, I believe it to be a fact, that this bank exercised its influence in support of Jay's treaty; and may it not have contributed to blunt the public sentiment, or paralyze the efforts of this nation against British aggression?

Did it arrest the

The Duke of Northumberland is said to be the most considerable stockholder in the Bank of the United States. A late Lord Chancellor of England, beside other noblemen, was a large stockholder. Suppose the Prince of Essling, the Duke of Cadore, and other French dignitaries, owned seven eighths of the capital of this bank, should we witness the same exertions (I allude not to any made in the Senate) to re-charter it? So far from it, would not the danger of French influence be resounded throughout the nation?

I shall, therefore, give my most hearty assent to the motion for striking out the first section of the bill.

ON THE

UNITED STATES BANK QUESTION.

ADDRESS TO HIS CONSTITUENTS AT LEXINGTON, JUNE 3, 1816.

MR. CLAY delivered a speech in the Senate of the United States, in 1811, in which he opposed the re-charter of the first Bank of the United States. In the year 1816, he advocated a bill introduced by Mr. Calhoun of South-Carolina, for incorporating a similar institution. This bill passed both Houses of Congress, and was signed by President Madison.* The following address, in which Mr. CLAY explains to electors of the Congressional district of Kentucky, which he represented, the reasons for his change of opinion on the subject of a National bank, will satisfy all candid persons, of his sincerity and patriotism, on both occasions.

"ON one subject, that of the Bank of the United States, to which at the late session of Congress he gave his humble support, Mr. CLAY felt particularly anxious to explain the grounds on which he had acted. This explanation, if not due to his own character, the State, and the district to which he belonged, had a right to demand. It would have been unnecessary, if his observations, addressed to the House of Representatives, pending the measure, had been published; but they were not published, and why they were not published he was unadvised.

"When he was a member of the Senate of the United States, he was induced to oppose the renewal of the charter to the old Bank of the United States by three general considerations. The first was, that he was instructed to oppose it by the Legislature of the State. What were the reasons that operated with the

This speech was never published.

( 153 )

« PreviousContinue »