Phenix gazette. [volume] (Alexandria [D.C.]) 1825-1833, 1832-07-13

RETURNING The BANK BILL TO THE SENATE
WITH HIS oBJEcrIoNs.-T Concluded.
Should the stock of the bank principally pass
into the hands Of the subjects of a foreign eoun'
try, and we should unfortunately become invoiv-
ed ia war with that country, what wouid.oe our
condition? OF the course which would be Pur'
sued by bank almost wholly owned BY the sub
jrcts of foreign power, and managed oy tnose
whose Interests, If not affections, would run In
the same direction, there can be no doubt All
its operatinns within would be in aid OF the hostile
fleets and armies without: controlling our cur
rency, receiving our public moneys, and holding
thousands of our citizens in dependence, would
be more formidable and dangerous than the IA
val and mi itary power Of the enemy.
If we must have d bank with private stockhod-
ers, every consideration of sound policy, and eve
~ impulse of American feeling, a,lmonistes that
it should be purely .7mericDs. Its stockholders
should be composed exclusively OF our own c'tl-
zens, who at least ought to be friendly to our 60
verumen,, and willing to support It IN times OF
difficulty and danger. So abundant Is domestic
capital. that competition IN subscribing Tor the
stock of local banks has recently led almost to
riots, To bank exclusively of American stock
holders. possessing the powers and privileges
granted BY this act, subscription Tor two hundred
millions Of dollars could be readily obtained. -
lastead of sending abroad the stock OF the
bank, in which the government must dep0site
il, funds, and on which it must rely to sus-
tain its credit in times Of emergency, 1t would
rather seem to be expedent to prohibit its sale to
aliens, under penalty of absolute forfeiture.
IL is maintained by the advocates OF the bank,
that its constitutonality in all its features, ought
to be considered as settled by precedent, and by
the decision Of the Supreme Court. To this con-
cluson cannot assent. Mere precedent is a
dangerous source Of authority, and should not De
regarded as deciding questions OF constitutional
power, except where the acquiescence OF the peo-
pie aud the States can be considered as weli-set-
tied. So far from this being the case on thus SUB
iect, an argument against the bank might be based
on precedent. One Congress, in 1871, decided
in favor Of a bank; another, in 1911, decided
against IT, One Congres, in 1878. decided
against q bank; another. IN 1916, decided IN ITS
favor Prior TO the present Congress, therefore,
the prece,ents drawn from that scurcewere equal.
II we resort to the States the expressions OF le-
pislative judicial, and executive opinions against
the bank have been, probably, to those in It's ia
yor. as four 10 one. There Is nothing IN prece-
dent, therefore, which. il its authority were al
mit,ed, ought to weigh in favor Ut the act before
me.
II the opinion of the Supreme Court covered
the whole ground Of this act, It ought not to con-
troll the CO ordinate authorities OF this govern.
meut The Congress. the Executive, and the
Court. must each for itself be guided by lis own
opinion of the Constitutions Each public officer
who takes an oath to support the Constitution,
swears that he will support it as he understands
it, and not as it Is understood bv others. Ii is as
much the duty of the House of Representatives,
of the Senate. and of the President, to decide up
IN the cunstirutOnality Of any bill or resolution
which may be presented to them tor passage or
approval, as 1t Il Of the Supreme Judges. when il
may be brought before them Tor judicial decision.
The opinion of the Judges has no more authority
over Congress than the opinion OF Congress has
over the Judges; and on that point. the President
i in,Icpendent of both The authority Of the
Sunreme Court must not, therefore, be permitted
TO control the Congress or the Executive, when
acting in their legislative capacities, but to have
only such influence as the force OF their reason
ing may deserve.
Bnt in the case relied upon. the Supreme Court
have not decided that all the features of this cor
marathon are compatible with the constitution. II
Is true. that the court have said, that the law in
cooperating the bank, is constitutional exercise
of nov er by Congress. But taking into view the
whole opinion Of the court, and the reasoning by
which they have come to that conclusion, under
stand them To have decided that, inasmuch as 8
bank is an appropriate means for carving int
effect the enumerated powers Of the General Go
yernmeat. therefore. the law Incorporating 1t i!
in accordance with that provision of the consti
tuition which declares that Congress shall have
nower to make all laws which shall be neces
sarv and proper for CARRYING those powers int,
execution Having satisfied themselves, that tine
word necessary" IN the constitution. means
"needfni,' requisite" ''essentidL." "eond,t
eire 10" and that a .'bank" is a convenient,
u,efui, aud essential instrument in the prOsecu-
tion of the Governments "6scal operations,
they conclude that, To - use one must be within
the discretion Of Congress" and, that, ''the &C
IN Incorporate the Bank of the United States, il
a law made in pursuance of the constitution. -
:. But" say they. "mhere The tac is notprohi
B;tsd. and is really calcuidfedfo Effect any 9th
objects entrusted to The Gorernmeat, to uadertak
here 10 inquire into The degree IF IT'S necessity
,ro,,Ei be to pass me lire mhich eircamscr,bes tn
;udieiai deoartneni, and to tread on legisiatir
ground"
The principle. here affirmed. is. that the g de
gree of its necessary" inSolving all the details
a banking institution. Is question exclnslve'
for legislative consideration. A bank Is const'