Richmond enquirer. [volume] (Richmond, Va.) 1815-1867, 1823-12-11
ter ofthe 18th Nov. 1914 quotes the folowln-
paragraph from the n Intelliprpcer.

paragraph from the n Intelligrnc+r:
Alter VERY able dabate, yesterday, the hons.
rcptescptatves decided, by an immense majority a.
favor oil Mr.. Caihovn-s amendn,en, The eh.it 80
this vote is, surprising tho bill To he further amend,
las pfobabe) IN conformity To the views espresso
by Mr. Calhoun to give the hank bill the foilowisr
features the capital he Giiy millions snbscr,,,-
tons 10 tie opened a,onhy ia certain III.
whole amount of subscription lie paid in The Inn
OF s"oscrong-'n The following proportions of specie
and paper-six millions IN specie, aud forty -luu,
m'ons I" Treasury notes, hereafter TO lie issued il,
surt PROPORTIONS monthly the bank will absorb
the United States 10 hold stock IN tie bunk no CON
tr" W ais direction, nor ANY legal iigki To demand
loans itom tse bauk."
Mark, the old Bank had but 10 millions
capital: Mr.. Caihoun's magnificent sche,n.
would have embraced so!
Thomson ~ mistaken in the assertion that
Mr.. Crawford's speech has never been quoted
in this paper. II has been twice quoted. and
We again state our regret that such sentiments
sh~uld ever have been entertained Inv Mr.
Crawford. He may have modified his senli-
ments we understand that he has probably
done SO 10 y certain extent. But il is sill true.
that MIR. Calhoun as well as Mr.. Crawl ford
doubteu the power of the States to establish
banks; Tor ne "arSued. taking into view the
prohibition against the states issuing hills
vi credit, that there was "a strong presumption
this poicer 10 IS intended to be elciusipeiu giren
10 Congress"
Thomson substantially admits that SIR CAL
nouns views of Internal Improvements are
Fepugnant to the Interpretation, which the
constitution has received fro n the Republicans
ofVirginia. In truth, his famous, magnificent
bill was rejected by Dir. Madison, among the
last acts of his administration. Its whole ten
ar shows the ultra doctrines of its author:
Common Defence" general welfare" stand
IN bold relief AS grounds for lis adoptinn.-
Thomson hints he goes as far as Mr.. Monroe
ii. goes furher-for Mr.. NJ. expressly dis
claims the Internal commerce among the Sc
ferai states" as foundation for The power.
But L. repeats the old objection against Mr..
CrawiOrd--that he shrunk from "A compliancc
with the call Of he Ii. of R.-tbat MIR Cal
huun replied toihe order AT the earlies, prac-
hcabie moment )" while Mr.. Crawford ST.
knly declined obedience from the fear of
Inlulng his popularity" Why. this is anus
lng enough! could not Mr.. Craw ford have
taken the very same course which Mr.. Calhoun
did Could he not give a scheme of I'm
provement, without committing himself on the
constitutional rSht-nay, have expressly dis
claimed such commitment This was precise.
~ the course which Mr. Calhoun purs upd =
Tor, he says in his Report Of January 7ih, 1919,
" la the view which has hceu taken, | iiAyr
though iaiproper, nnder the resolution oTthe House
10 dsscnss fhe constitutional question. how far the
systcm Of internal improve mrns which has been n,e
secuted may he carried inio effeot He principle of
our government aud therefore the loioie of The a, s-
meats whir" are used, aud the measures propnseJ
may be considered depending ,he decision of Laf
question"
MIR. Crawford might have taken this course
az well as Mr.. Calhoun.
In truth, the attempt TO prove that Mr.
Calhoun il at anipodes with the general CON
stItutnnal principles adopted by most ofthe cit
liens "r Virginia, and advocated by Mr.. Mad
ison's Report. is almost supererosatory-
" Whoever runs, may read"