Vandalia Whig and Illinois intelligencer. [volume] (Vandalia, Ill.) 1832-183?, 1833-10-09

first insertion-thirty seven and a half cents fol
each subsequent insertion. Is.
Reasons assigned By The President for auth.
drazving The Public Deposities from The
Bank Of The United States.
READ TO THE CABINET ON THE 1orrr or
SEPTEMBER, 1888. ~ s'
Having carefully aud anxiously consid-
cred all the facts and arguments, which
have been submitted to him, relative to a
removal Of the public deposites from the
Bank Of the United States, the president
deems it his duty to communicate in this
manner, to his cabinet, the final conclu-
sions Of his own mind, and the reasons on
which they are founded, IN order to put
them in durable form: and prevent mis-
conceptions.
The presidents conviction Of the dan.
gerous tendencies of the Bank Of the U.
hlted States, since signally illustrated by
its own acts, were SO overpowering when
he entered upon the duties Of chief ma.
gistrate, that he fell it his duty, notwith-
standing the objections Of the friends by
whom he was surrounded, to avail himself
OF the first occasion, to call the attention
of congress and the people to the question
Of its recharter. The opinions expressed
in This annual message of December, | e29.
were reiterated in those of December.
1880 and 1881, and in that of 1880 he
threw out for consideration, some sugges-
tions in relation to substitute. AT the
session of 1912, an act was passed by ii
majority Of both houses of congress, re-
chartering the present Bank, upon which
the president felt il his duty 10 put his
constitutional veto. 10 his message re.
turning that act, he repeated and enlarg
ed upon the principles and views briefly
asserted ia his annual message, declaring
the Bank to be, in his opinion, both mex
pedlent and unconstitutional, and announ-
cling to. his countrymen, very unequivo'
cally, his firm determination never to sane.
ton, by his approval, the continuance Of
that institution, or the establishment Of
any other upon similar principles.
There are strnna rn..snns for believing
that the motive of the Bank, in asking ioi
"A recharter at that session of congress
was TO make it a leading question in the
election of president of the u. State:
the ensuing November,and all steps deem
ed necessary were taken to procure from
the people reversal Of The presidents
decision.
Although the charter was approaching
its termination, and the Bank was aware
that it was the intention of the govern
ment to use the public deposit as fast as
it accrued, in the payment of the public
debt, yet did it extend its loans from Jan.
1881, to May, 1882, from S42,403,304 ga
to S7O,428,O7O 70, being an increase Of
S28,o25,765 A., in sixteen months. k is
confidently believed that the leading OBJ
jecto of this immense extension gifts loans,
was TO bring large portion of the PEG
pie as possible under its power and infu-
~ence and it has been disclosed, that some
of the largest sums were granted OH very
unusual terms to conductors Of the public
press. In some of these cases, the motive
was made manifest by the nominal or in
sufficient security taken for the loans, by
the large amounts discounted, by the ex
Extraordinary time allowed for pay ment, &
especially by the subsequent conduct Of
these receiving the accommodations.
Having taken these preliminary steps
ITO obtain control over public opinion, the
Bank came into congress and asked new
charter. The object avowed by many
of the advocates of the Bank, was to pu
the president to the test, that the country
might know his final determination rela
tive to the Bank prior to the ensuing cleo
aion. Many documents and articles were
printed and circulated at the expense o.
7the Bank, 10 bring the people to favor
able, decision as TO its pretensions. Those
whom the Bank appears to have made it
debtors for the special occasion, were
warned of the ruin which awaited them
should the president I've sustained, and at
Temps were made to alarm the whole
people by painting the depression in the
price Of properly and produce, and thu
general loss, Inconvenience, and distress
which it was represented would immedl
atcly follow the reelection Of the presi
dent in opposition to the Bank.
Can it now be said that question Of {
.recharter of the Bank was not decided a
the election which cnsued? Had the We
TO been equivocal, or had it not covered
the whole ground--if il had merely takeI
exceptions to the details of the bill, or Il
the time Of its passage-ifit had not me
the whole ground Of constitutionality ant
expediency, then there might have beeI
some plausiblity for the allegation tina
the question was not decided by the pee
sPle. Il was to compel the president t
take his stand that the question was bro
forward at that particular time. He me