Constitutional Whig. [volume] (Richmond, Va.) 1824-1832, 1824-07-20

eiS ueC'aralon, tnat any otflcer OF the Govern
ment but especially the head of the Treasury
can employ the national funds in disregard o
law" ana yet not mismaaIge them. Surel,
tnere IS something less secured in the public
treasure of the United States than in that o
England.
Having proved, clearly, by the declarations o
the Secretary, and the expressions of the com
rnlttcc, that the former relinquishetl, ssby ar
rangcnent," on the 30th juno, 1918, the right
OF the United States to the fiscal nstrusnentality
OF the Bank of the United States, in the collec.
ton and disbursement of the national funds, and
employed, by conditions offered to them, on the
Isl July following, the instrumcntality of Ger.
tam State Banks, for the same purposes and hav.
| ing shown that, when, shortly after the latter
date, an extended agreement was entered info
on conditions more favorable to these banks, al
lowing them, as an equivalent, or rather as nav.
Tor Similar instrumentality, $4,000, annually,
by way of interest on permanent depsses; and
having also shown that the Secretary has made
various loans of the p,i6iic money, shall pro-
cced to subject connected with my second
charge.
This inputes to the Secretary of the Treasu-
~, without any investigation of his motives, nc
stect Of duty. LIN relation TO it, the committee
admit that the act of Congress incprporafino tI,,
Bank or the United States, makes il the duty of
the Secretary of the Treasury to employ the of
noes OF that institution as places of deiositc for
the public funds In preference to all other banks
unless, tor special reasons, he scoull think fit
to use other banks for the purposes and i'm tina I
case, the special reasons are to be conmunica-
ted to Congress by the Secretary, at its then, or
Its next session. This communication the COM
mttee pronounce, and the Secretary contesscshc
faileI to make. L may safely rest the truth of
my second charge on this admission, since a fat
lure iii an officer of the United States, from any
cause, to comply with the directions of a law
prescribing his dutics Isl to all intents aud pur-
poses, neglect Of duty. The Secretary, howe
yer, accounts for it, and the committee Justify il
upon the ground of inadoesfence.
The admission of inadvertence, In this case,
IS concession of a neglect of duty SO complex,
tliat it may fairly be denoninatcd a oiolatioa of
duty; for, as the object of the law, in re-
curing the prompt communication of these
special reasons, was not only to know that
they existed, but also TO know that they were
sufficient, failure to make the communication
if justified by rnadvertence, is justified only as
to the ertstcnce ofthc special reasons and leaves
the Secretary more directly obnoxious to the
charge of having proceeded in the business up
on reasons that were Insufficient, charge which.
II substantiated by inquiry, could not from its
nature, be justified by inaaccrieace, but would
infallibly discredit either the Judgment or the
integrity OF the presiding officer of the Treasu.
rs.
| Alter fecapiiuiating my statements in regard
| to the intercourse between the Secretary and
the Bank of Missouri, the committee remark,
upon that which (they say declares that this
6aah ,cas unworthy ofcredh at the time the pub
lie money acas suffered to accumulate an 1T, TO a
large and Improper amount they admit that at
one time, this accumulation amounted TO seven
hundred and twenty-six thousand dollars, and
then affirm that the propriety of permitting
this state of things is question of pru-
dence, depending on the solidity, of the
institution. | endeavor to show, in my add
address TO the House, that, in reference to this
enormous accumulation, the limited capital, and
excessive issues of the Bank of Missouri, left
nothing like a substantial or reasonable security
to the United States. But the committee, not
denying the business Of this inference, seem to
avoid it, by affirming that my estimate of the
capital of this bank is incorrect inasmuch as it
does not comprehend the amount of permanent
depostc as part of lis capital and as raising the
latter to such portion to the amount of its is
sues of paper, as would give it, in relation to
the whole sum of public moneys confded to it,
the character ofsolidity. Thereasoning involv-
ed this affirmation cannot be maintained. 1.-THE
bank had lost its solvcncy from the excess Of
its issues above the amount ofits capital a COM
| mon creditor would hardly be persuaded, in or
| der to secure debt Of $50, 700, due to him
from the bank, to lend it SI50, 900 more, to add
to lis capital, and restore its proper proportion
to the issues of the institution. This step might
be beneficial to the other creditors, and friend
| ly IN regard to the Stockholders and officers but
except in this benevolent light, would certainly
be considered folly on the part of the creditor.
| The proportion, then, between the capital and
the circulation of this bank, upon the fitness of
| which the committee declared the prudence of
accommodating S725, 900 of public money in it,
depended, is not as 100000 is to 49, 900, but
as S2l0,000 IS 10 100000: and the amour.
! hazardei in dcposic, by the Secretary of the
| Treasury, stands related TO the capital of the
bank to which it was confided, not in the proper
ton of go, 900 to 500, 900, but in that OF 7o6-
| 600 to 10000; and this 5000, endangered
| by its disadvantages and inadequate proportion
| to an admitted excessive amount of issues Be-
| sides, this nominal capital Of $4,000 was sub
Jcctcd - the pressure Of other cxhausting ope-
rations. The discounts 10 the stockholders and
directors were made ON pledge of their stock
so that, 10 this extent, that species of financial
capacity, which $i00 of capital may represent,
aud authorize & SO, in issues, was destroyed.
AS this proposition OF the committee cannot
be sustained, the force of my statement, which
IT was intended to obviatc, still bears upon the
conduct OF the Secretary, and demonstrates
That, IN his intercourse with the Bank of Mis-
sour, be not only was guilty Of negiecti1g his
dnty, but of msmanaging the public funds.
In my address to the House, it was alleged
thatthc Secretary had neglected TO exact month
" returns, and quarterly lists ofits Debtors from
this bank, and thus disregarded the means in his
power OF understanding the condition of the
bank, and OF providing against any loss which
might occur TO tie United States from the en-
| barrassmedt or insolvency of this institution