Alabama state intelligencer., 1831-01-08

iae House 9f fRerestatipes q the tnted States, rssa
 NO. III.
 Perhaps this doctrine of conract may be des nied. Let us therefore, exhibit our authori-, ty for this position; an authority which the advocates of the Bank and those who go for sweeping away all the rights of the States will never presume to dispute. It is none other than that mammoth power, the Federal Judiciary, that stands prepared to clnch whatever the Federal Legislature dare to drive. What says the Supreme Court in the case we have just cited 'sAn aggregate cor4 portioni collection of individuals unitedin one connected body, under special name, and possessing certain immunities, privileges and capacities, in it's collective character, which do net belong to the natural persons composing it, ltis, in short, an arfifciaiher-~ son, existing in contemplation of law, and en- dowed with certain powers and franchises which, though they must be exercised thro' the medium ofits natural members, are vet considered as subsisting in the corporation itself, as distinctly as lift were a real herson, We have now got the legal certainty. which
 must be kept ill mind, that a corporation is nothing more nor less than hcraon. an indf. piduai in law, and of course, whatever DOW CT can be vested in them by the government, can be vested in private person. Let us see how they are divided. The same authority proceeds, "another division of corporations is into hu6Hc and hriuate. Public corporations are generally esteemed such as exist for pub- lie political purposes only. such as towns, ci- ties parishes and counties; and in many re- spects, they are SC, although they involve some private intcrests but strictly speaking, public corporations are such only as are found- cd by the government for public purposes. where the 7choie interests belong also, to the government. If, therefore, the foundation be private, though under the charter of the government, the corporation is private, how ever extensive the uses to which it is devoted, either by the bounty of the founder, or nature and objects of the institution. For instance, bank created by the government for its o.un USe, whose stock is erclusiucly ozvned by the government, is, in the strctest sense, a public corporation. So is hospital created and en- dowcd by the government for general chari-. l ty. But bank, whose Stock IS ozvned bv friUGte ferSonS, is q hripatc corhoratfon, although 1t IS created by the government and HS 06JecfS and OferationS fartake ofa hu6Lc nature. The same doctrine may be affirmed ot insurance, Canal, bridge, and turnpike companies. In all these cases, the uses may, in acertain sense, be called public, but the corporations are private, as much so indeed,- as ii the frdnchises were vested in single herSon." We have again gone one step fur ther in the process, (and we wish to keep what we fairly get,) and settle the point, that d bank corporation whose "stock isnot owned exclusively by the government" but whose "stock is owned by private persons" is hripate corhoration, and consequently, that the Bank the U. States is private corpo- ration. Now let us see what is the character of private corporation, and what the go- vernment may, or may not do with it. And first, what they may not do, says the same authority, "when a private corporation is thus created by the charter of the crown, Gan ominous name for Congress,) it is subject to mother control on the part of the Grown, than what is expressly or implicitly reserved by the charter itself. Unless power be reserv-; cd for this purpose, the crown cannot, in vir- tue of it's prerogatve, without the consent of the corporation, alter or amend the charter, or divcst the corporation of any of its franchi- ses, or add to them, OF add to or diminish the number of the Trustees, or remove any of the members or change or control the admi- nistration of the charity, or compel the cor poraton to receive a new charter. This is the uniform language of the authorities, and forms one of the most stubborn and zveH set- tled doctrines of the common law" Again; our authority declares, in answer to an argu- ment which was argued in the case decided, ''when the corporation is said, at the bar, to be public, it is not merely meant, that the whole community may be proper objects of the grant, but that the government have the sole right, as trustees of the public interests, to regulate control, and direct the corpora ton, and it's funds and its franchises, at it's own good will and pleasure. Now, such an authority does not e,rist in the government, except where the corporation is, in the strict- est sense, public; that is, where its whole interests and franchises are the erclusipe hroherty and domain of the government it. sell" Again, in respect to corporate fran chises, they are properly speaking, legal es- tates veSted in the corporation itself, as soon as it is in eSSe They are not mere naked powers, granted to the corporations; but pow CTS couhleG with an interest The property of corporation vests upon the possession of it's franchises" And, lastly, 'it is perfectly clear, that any act of q Legislature which takes away any powers or franchises vested by its charter in hrivate eorhoration. or it's corporate officers, or which restraints or con- trols the legitimate exercise of them, or transfers them to other persons, without it's assent, is violation of the obligations of that charter"
 Now, as to what the government may do with private corporation, our authority con- tinues, "the grant of corporation, ( quoting the English law,) is comhact between the Grown and a number of persons, the latter of whom undertake, in consideration of the pri- vileges bestowed, to exert themselves for the good government of the franchise. If they fail to perform their part of it, there is an end of the comhact. The charter of corpora tion, says MT Justice Blackstone, may be forfeited through negligence, or abuse of its franchises, in which cases, the law judges the body polite has broken the condition up-