Alexandria gazette. [volume] (Alexandria, D.C.) 1834-1974, 1834-01-02
GAZETTE.
Mr.. POLK'S SPEECH.
On the removal Of the Deposites,
T-coNTINUED. |

gress; aud that, u he shall remove the uep0sltes,
he Is TO assign his reasons. not to the President,
but to Congress. Aud why is this, it is asked,
unless he be independent OF the President! SIR.
! wili not repeat what have already SAID. Dnt
will say that If the act intended by TINS provision
to control the Presidents power of removal, 1t IS
Unconstitutional and void. But Why, then, must
he su bmit his annual report to Congress! an
swer. lst, because Congress is the guardian OF
the public purse; il passes the laws by which the
revenue is collected and by which alone 1t IS dis
bursed: aud it is peculiarly proper that the head
of the Treasury Department should report to
that power which controls the money OF the coun-
try. II is matter of convenience. and facilitates
the pubic business But is this inconsistent with
his responsibility to the President? Not at all.
Not in the least degree. But he IS required 10
give to Congress his reason tor removing 'he ue.
nosites. Yes, sir, and wbys The first reason
have already given; and second is, that without
this enactment, ami prior to il. Congress bad the
right to call on him for those reasons During
the existence of the old Bank Ut the United
States, when the Secretary was not required o.
law TO place the public moneys IN that bank, but
placed them where he thought most conducive to
the public convenience, Congress bad right 10
inouire his reasons the moment he changed the
place of deposite. This enactment Is only
standing call on him, instead OF special lnqui-
ry. But Why is he to give this account to Con
gres,? That we may know whether he has acted
corrup,Iy or no. That we may know what he
has done with the public money. and where he
has put il Because, the moment lie has reno
we'd the deposites from the Bank Of the United
States. we have entire control over the location
of them He reports to US. for these reasons
But does this make him independent OF the Ex-
ecutive.
But. sir, the power exercised by the Secretary
seems TO me to have been greatly misaPprehend-
ed in all the discussions have yet heard on this
subject. AnimpressiOn seems to prevail that
this is a novel procedure, without any precedent
in the history of this country. Sir shall show
the Presidents control over the Secretary 10
directing the place where the pubic money
shall be deposited; and what shall say on
il shall not r st on mere assertion. 1t Is an
interesting part of the documentary history OF
our country, which seems to have lain IN
great degree hidden from the view OF most Of
those who have entered on this subject. | shall
be able to show you that from the days of Ham.
ilton, till now. as well before as since the enact
ment Of the bank charter, the power OF liking the
place Of the public deposites has been claimed by
all thesSecretaries of the Treasury, and never
has been considered either By Congress, by the
bank, or by the people. as any violation OF right.
or transsression OF the constitution. On the con-
trary it has ever been held necessary for that of
fcer to possess such power, In order that be
may preserve just equilibrium in the circulating
medium of the country. call the attention OF
the House to what's the power OF the President
in this matter, and as to ewhat was the under
standing of those who chartered the bank, as to
the power of the Secretary In relation to il.
There Mr. Polk read various passages from
Mr. Cra~ford's letters, in support of his posi-
ton.
Bya regulation of toe Bank 0f the United
States, the pills of State banks were refused, ex-
cept those of banks - established In places where
they were respectively rendered IN payment"
In consequence of this. the collectors of the Dis
,rict of Columbia, of Virginia. and Maryland,
made their deppsites 10 the Metropolis Bank of
this city; and Ct the sums paid remain still
principally with 1.-the bank" The same thing
occurred with the Bank OF Pennsylvania.
Again: :. In declining to transfer the baan
ces which remained in the banks of this Dis
trict, at the time that the Office IN this city
commenced business. and 10 the cases stated
to have occurred in Philadelphia and Boston,
- ,ras influenced by a consideration Of the
pressure feh by the State and local banks,
:. during several months subsequent to the re
:. resumption of specie paynents, and Of the SER
pices rendered to The GoUernWent by those
banks during the period that they t0ere used as
I" flaces ofpudhc deposite by the Treasury Al
.. immediate transfer of the public money depOs
g tied in them would probably have produced
''pressure upon the debtors Of those banks. which
- might have inflicted upon them evils greatly
IS beyond the benefit which would have resulted
- from the measure to the Bank of the United
:. States"
These reasons were communicated to Congress
and the whole Congress acquiesced IN their pro-
prietv. The Bank did not then allege that its
rights were Interierred with. The Bank had not
then set itself up 10 an antagonist attitude against
the Government When these reasons were as
signed, there was no one, IN all the country, who
doubted that they we're satisfactory and sufficient
What did these reasons establish?
1st That il IS sufficient reason for retaining
the public money from the Bank OF the United
States, and making the deposite in State Banks,
that il is done to enable the latter to resume spe
Gle payments.
I'd That the Treasury may give support (by
a deposite of public money! to the State Banks,
to enable them to pay specie.