Virginia Argus. [volume] (Richmond, Va.) 1796-1816, 1811-06-27
CONGRESS.
United States Bank.
Mr.. BRENT's SPEECH
S f NATE.
CONTINUED

1t is said that the corporation, which it is
proposed tn re-charter, independent Of the
lection Of the revenue bns alse
advantages given to it that it is a moncp-
oly-and what right, tits asked, has Con
Sress to grant monopoly? / will ask, in
return, when an officer is appointed to col
lect the customs, has he not salary and c.
molumentse Is not every Office in law called
a franchise ora particular privilege? If the
oiEcerwho has these emoluJnents, privileges
or franchises, (call them what you WHY re-
ceives these in consideration for his services.
have you not the power to hold out induce
ments to associated bodies of men to form
an institution from which the public may de-
rive benefit, not with a view exclusively to
their monopoly and benefit, but on account of
the advantages to be derived from it by the
public. lift is urgedthat instead Of thisincor-
porated company, you might appoint officers
in the different ports of the states in which
the greatest duties are collected, and issue
notes, or bills of credit which are made cur
rent, without creating a bank authorised to
make discounts, ! admit we might but if
we believe it not SO convenient and safe q
way Of collecting any revenue rs through
the agencyof bank, we have the right to
associate men in a banking company for
this purpose, and give them particular pri-
vileges, upon the same principles that we give
privileges or franchises to every officer we
appoint; and although we thus confer
in both instances privileges, it is done
for the public good, because the object to be
effected can be accomplished by no other
means SO etfectual. If you want an associa-
ton OF men i'll particular manner to make
them subservient to some political use, you
have authority to give to these associating
men whatever privilege may be sufficient to
induce them to associate for this purpose
You donot give them this privilege for their
own individual advantage, but as the lure,
the bonus for association, by which associa-
ton the public object is effected. ] would
ask whether Congress could not tomorrow
pass law authorship the President to open
a negotiation with Hope and Co. saying, we
have full confidence in you, and you shall
be the United States bankers> This NAV
be said to be n nopoly; but if Congress
were convinced that this was the safest
means of collecting the revenue, ask where
is the clause of the constitution which, in sub
stance or words, prohibits Congress from "a
DOPING such measured If there be no
clause toprohibit this, there is no prohibition
to the passage of law for Incorporating in
dividuals in an association from which the
greatest possible facility in the collection
Of tho revenue is expected. In word, sir,
it appears TO me that the only rule in an in
stance of this kind is to take care that the
means used have a necessary reference to
the object of the power. When legislating
OH the enumerated powers of Congress, the
only limitation is an enquiry whether the
means we are about to use necessarily re-
late to the effectuation Of the object in view.
For instance, ] should consider it a violation
Of the constitution, if Congress, under the
power to make rules for the government
OF the land and naval forces" should pass a
lawregulating military testamentary devises;
because the incident is too remote, it is too
great a stretch of power, the constitutional
ity or unconstitutionality being regulated by
the relations Of the means to the object to
be effected. If this reasoning be lust, then,
this question is not soluble by the mere de-
termination of the question whether or not
this is the best system by which our reven-
ue can be collected /; we must, TO ensure its
rejection on constitutional grounds, prove
that the power Of establishing a bank is so
remote from the object Of collecting the re-
venue, as to have no connection with it. Adj
NIT that better system of collecting the ne
venue can be devised, than by the establish
ment Of a bank; it does not follow that the
bank is unconstitutional. The only question
is whether it is so remote, rs that BY no sat
istactory process OF reasoning you can prove
its analogy to the collection Of the revenue
II it be shewn that better system could be
adopted, it only proves that thisis inexpedi-
ent; not that it is unconstitutional and, sir,
it has been a matter Of astonishment to me,
that Notwithstanding it was so universally
believed some time since that the agency Of
the bank was excessively conducive to the
prompt and regular collection OF the reven-
ue, it is now discovered that its agency is
unnecessary. The gentlemen who are now
Of this opinion thought otherwise formerly,
and the Secretary Of the treasury, whoi is best
enabled to decide the question, is Of a differ
ent opinion from them.
In answer to those, sir, who say that state
banks afford the facility necessary to the col
lection Of the revenue, would ask, is the
general government % be dependent on the
state banks for tic collection Of the revenue
Or do gentlemen believe they would be as
secure and responsible as the bank Of Tie Z.
States9 AS to the remark that in those
states where there arc no banks tho revenue
is collected with as much facility as where
there are banks there is nevertheless bank
currency in circulation. Where the states
have no banks OF their own, the notes Of the
bank Of the United Stases arc in circulation,
and the customs paid in those notes. ma
tional bank, am under a strong conviction,
is, if not indispensable, highly conducive to