Herald of the times. [volume] (Newport, R.I.) 1830-1846, 1832-10-18
WHOLE NO. l33.

ions. Both are equally destitute of bind.
ing force. Such an universal power al
is now claimed for hlm, power Of judg.
! ing over the laws aud over the decisions
OF the tribunal, is nothing else than pura
dcspotism. If conc eded to him, it makes
him at once what Louis the FourteenlA
proclaimed himself 10 be when he said 4
AN THE STATE
| The Supreme Court has unanimously
declared and adludged that the existing
bank IS created by IA constitutional law OF
congress As has been heretofore OBJ
served, this bank, 50 far as the present
question Is concerned, is like that which
was established in 1871 by Washington,
and sanctioned by the great men of that
day. In every form therefore, in which
the question can be raised, il has been
raised, and has been settled. Every pro-
cess, and every mode Of trial known to tho
constitution and laws, has been exhausted;
and always and without exception, the va
lldity has been in favor Of the law. But
all this practice, all this precedent, all
this public appreciation, all this solemn
adjudication directly on the point, is to be
direa arded and rejected, and the con-
stitutonal power fiatly denied. And, sir,
if we are startled at this conclusion, our
surprise will not be lessened when we ex-
anime the argument by which it is main-
tanned.
Il BY tae constitution, Congress is au-
thorlZcd to pass all laws necessary and
proper" for carrying its own legislative
powers into effect. Congress has deem-
ed bank to be "necessary and proper"
for these purposes, and it has therefore
established bank. But although tho
law has been passed, and the bank estab-
lished and the constitutional validity Of
It's charter solemnly adjudged, yet, the
President pronounces il unconstitutional
because some of the powers bestowed on
the bank, are, IN has opinion not necessa-
Try or proper. 1t would appear that tho
: powers which, in 1871 and lal6, in the
\ time Of Washington, and in the time Of
! Madison were deemed necessary and
proper" are no longer to be SO regarded,
and therefore The Bank is unconstitutional.
i 1t has really come to this, That The consti-
tuiionohty ofa Bank IS 10 depend upon the
( opinion mhich one particular man may form,
! oI The utility or necessity o. some Of The clau-
Ses Of itS charter. If that individual
chooses to think that a particular power
contained IN the charter ~ not accessory
10 The proper constitution d The Bank, that
the act is unconstitutional
!, Hitherto it has always been supposed
), that the question was Of different ma
ture. 1t has been thought that the policg
!; of granting "A particular charter may be
materially dependent on the structure,
and organization, and powers Of the pro-
: posed institution. But lis general consti-
2 tutionality has never before been under-
= stood to turn on such points. This would
: be maxim" its nconsttutionality depend
G on subordinate questions, on questions Of
t expedency, and questions of detail; up
!, on that which one man may think neces-
d sary, and another may not If the con-
/, stltutional question were made to hinge
!, on matters of this kind, how could it ever
= be decidedf All would depend on con.
$ lecture, on the complexional feeling, on
= the preJudlces, on the passions Of individ-
d uals; or more or less practical skill, or
" correct judgment, in regard to banking
l., operations, among those who should be the
e Judges; on the impulse of momentary in
e terest, party objects, or personal purpos-
= es. Put the question, in this manner, to
= IA court of seven Judges, to decide wheth-
d er a particular bank was constitutional,
and it might be doubtful whether they
y could come to any result, as they might
y well hold their various opinions on the
l. practical utility Of many clauses Of the
l. charter.
The question in that case, would be
it not whether the Bank, in its genera
= frame, character and objects, was a prop
t, er instrument to carry into effect the pow.
J. ers OF the Government; but whether the
e particular powers, direct or incidental
D. conferred on particular bank, were bet
re ter calculated than all others, to give sue.
m cess to its operations. For if not, ther
as the charter would be unwarranted accord
rt ing to this sort ofreasoning, by the con.
ry stitution. This mode of constituting the
as constitution is certainly novel discove.
,st ry. Its merits belong entirely to the
to President and his advisers. According
mt to this rule of Interpretation, ifthe Presi-
e j.. dent should be of opinion that the capita
e.: of the bank was larger by thousand dol
Al. lars, than it ought to be (; or that the tim'
Nv for the continuance Of the charter was
n year too long; or that il was unnecessar,
by to require it, under penalty, to pay spe
IL Gle; or needless To provide for Furnishing
e as forgery, the coupterfeiting of its bills
be- either Of these reasons would be suflicien
ch to render the charter, 10 his opinion, un
on constitutional, invalid and nugatory. Thi
N is a legitimate conclusion from the argu
ID, ment Such view Of the subject he
a. Al "