Martinsburg gazette. [volume] (Martinsburg, Va. [W. Va.]) 1833-1855, 1834-01-30

which he has exercised bis power ovei
the deposites.
J 8. The whole people Of the United
States derive an interest from the public
deposites in the Bank ofthe United States
as stakeholder, in that Institution The
Bank is enabled, through its branches, q
throw capital into those parts Of the Uni
on where IL is most needed. Thus il dis
tributes and cquslizcs the advantages &C
cruing from the collection Of large pub.
lie revenue, and the conse quent public
deposites. Thus IL neutralizes the inius.
tice, which would otherwise flow from the
people of the West and the interior pay
ing their full proportion of the public bur
thens without deriving any corresponding
benefit from the circulation and deposites
Of the public revenue. The use Of the
icaptsl Of the Bank has been signally be-
neficial to the West. We there want ca
pitsl. domestic. foreign--any capital that
we can honestly get We want il to sti-
mulate enterprise, 10 give activity to bu.
siness, and TO develop the vast resources
which the bounty Of nature has concen.
trated in that region. But, by the Score.
tary's financial arrangements, the twenty
five or thirty millions OF the public reye-
nue. collected from all the people Of the
United States, Including those Of the
West,l will be retained in few Atlantic
ports. Each port will engross the public
moneys there collected. And, as that Of
New York collects about one half the pub
| lie revenue, al thc people Of the United
states will be laid under contradiction, nor
for the sake Of the people Of the city Of
| New York, but OF Two or three banks in
that city, in which the people of the Uni
ted States, collectively, have not parti
Gle of interest; to banks the stock in which
IS or may be held by foreigners.
Three months have elapsed, aud the
secretary has not yet found places Of de.
posite for the public money, as substitutes
for the Bank Of the United States. He
tells US. in his report OF yesterday, that the
bank at Charleston, to which he applied
TO receive them, declined the custody and
that he has yet found no other bank vii.
ling to assume it. Bnt he states that the
public interest docs not in consequence
suffer. No. What is done with the pub.
lie moneys constantly receiving in the i'm
porsant port of Charleston, the largest
port New Orleans excepted) from the
Potomac TO the Gulf Of Mexico? What
with the revenue bondsp II appears that
he has not yet received the charters from
all the banks selected as places OF depo-
site. Can any thing be more improyidcnt
than that the secretary should undertake
to contract with banks, without knowing
their power and capacity TO contract by
their chaIters2 That he should venture
to deposite the Peoples money in Banks,
without full knowledge Of every thing
respecting their actual condition? But he
has found some banks wiling 10 receive
the public deposites, and he has entered
into contracts with them. And the very
first step he has taken has been in direct
violation Of an express and positive sta
fute Of the United States BY the act Of
the LIST May. 1920, sixth section, it is en-
acted, "that no contract shall be hereafter
made by the secretary Of state Of the
Treasury, or Of the Department Of War,
or OF the Navy, excepting under law au.
tborizing The same, or under an appropri-
alton adequate TO its ful6lmeni; and ex
cepting, also, contracts for the subsistence
and clothing Of the army or navy. and
contracts by the Quartermaster's Depart.
ment, which may be made by the secreta-
ries of those Department." Now, sir,
what law authorized these contracts with
the local Banks. made by the secretary OF
the treasury The argument, II under.
stand The argument Intended TO be EN-
nloyed on either side, is This: that. by The
Bank charter, the secretary is authorized
TO remove the public deposites, and that
includes the power in question. But the
act establishing the Treasury Department
confides, expressly, the safe keeping Of
the public moneys Of the United States to
the Treasurer OF the United States, and
not to the secretary; and the Treasurer,
not the secretary, gives bond for the n
deity with which he shall keep them. The
moment, therefore, that they are with
drawn from The Bank Of the United States,
they are placed. by law, under the charge
and responsibility Of the Treasurer and
his bond, and not OF the secretary, who
has given no bond But LET US trace this
argument little further. The power to
remove the deposiies, says the secretary,
from given place, implies the power 10
designate the place 10 which they shall be
removed. And this implied power to de-
signate the place TO which they shall be
removed, implies the power TO the secre-
| tary Of the treasury 10 contract with The
new Banks OF depo.ite. And, on this
third link, in The chain OF implications, a
fourth is constructed, TO dispense with the
express duties Of the Treasurer Of the q.
States, defined in positive statute; and
vet a fifth, TO repeal a positive statute OF
Congress, passed four years after the pas
| sage OF the law containing the parent
source Of this most extraordinary chain OF
implications. The exceptions ia the act
Of 1870. prove the inflexIbility Of the rule
which it prescribes. Annual appropria-
lions are made for the clothing and sub
sistence OF the army and navy. These ap-
| propriatlons might have been supposed TO
be included in a power to contract for
those articles, notwithstanding the prohi-
bitory clause in that act. But Congress