Alexandria gazette. [volume] (Alexandria, D.C.) 1834-1974, 1834-05-30

the hooks of the Bank to be inspected, and to
testify touching the matters OF such an INQUIRY
could be legal. The object OF the process was
unauthorized by law.
incident to this fatal objection to the process,
is another notices. so. A subp9nd duces tecunl
is process, not issuing to the party crlmlna-
ted orimplicated inthe trial. or Interested IN the
suit but to third person to appear ana Drlng
with him any paper in his possession whicn may
be lawfully used as evidence in the trial OF SUIT,
without prejudice to the person summoned, OF
his title. The process of the committee was IN
tended TO be addressed to those whose abuses,
corruptions, and malpractices were the suoJects
of inquiry; and the books they were ordered 10
bring with them, were to be used IN their own
elimination.
The form of the process, and its mode OF ser
vice are believed by the undersigned 10 De not less
Objectionable than its object, ana equaily latai
TO its legal characters but on this topic they omit
to dwell
Notwithstanding the strong objections to It's
LEGALITY. the persons to whom it was addressed,
individuals unsurpassed for probity, intelligence,
and weight of character in the community.
treating it with the respect due to the House OF
Representatives, obeyed its call, and appeared
before the committee, at their champef III .he
North American Hotel. Their answer 10 the
simmons was communicated in writing, ana
appears among the documents as paper NO. 4o.
They state therein, that they do not produce
the books of the Bank, because they are not IN
the CUSTODY of either Of Them, but in that OF the
Board of Directors. By the Board, II VIII De
recollected the books had been conhoeo 10
committee Of their number, to be by them SUI
m;tted TO the Committee of Investigator. Ii
y We're tbe purpose of the Committee OF the
House to address their process TO the parry
having the actual possession OF the DOCKS, IL
would seem that the Committee OF the DHec-
tors was that party delegated by the board, ana
recognised throughout the transaction as theH
AGENT by the Committee Of the House. II, on
the other hand il were intended to address it to
the nartv to whom the books ultimately belong
cd i would seem that it should have gone 10
the Corporation.
The written answer Of the Directors CATER
stating their ignorance, whether they shoulo De
called on to testify,) expressed purpose not 10
testify to the matters of the inquiry IN conslaela
ton of the character Of the inquiry, and their
own relation to it. as corporators and directors
But as none of the persons summoned were re-
oured bv the committee testify, no actual re-
flsal to testify took place, and consequently no
contempt (supposing an actual felusal Wouio
have been contempt, which the undersigned DO
not admit) was committed by the DIRECTORS
against the authority OF the House
The undersigned are aware that, supposing
the nrocess valid in its object, substance, form,
and service, it was matter of difference, as faf
as the question of right is concerned, what DOCK
or books the Directors were required by II 10
produce But they cannot but express the opin-
ion, that demand for the credit BOOKS OF the
Bank, showing the accounts OF every ihalvluu-
al with the institution, was the last winch, IN a
tender regard to the rights and feelings OF
third persons, it would have been expedfent to
make.
So sacred is the confidence of individuals
dealing with the Bank that the charter eXempts
the state of their accounts from the weekly IN
specton which the Secretary OF the treasury
is authorized to make; and the bylaws which
have been in force from the foundation OF the
institution, forbid director, without special au
thority. to inspect the cash account OF ndlvl-
duals To require the Directors to take from the
banking house. convey through the public street,
and open for inspection in the chamber OF
hotel the book containing the account OF every
individual of the Bank, would seem to indicate
the purpose of putting to the severest test the
power of the House, the obedience of the Bank,
and the patience of innocent third parties,
whose vital interests might be jeoparded in this
procedure.
The previous demands ofthe committee, hav-
ing assumed the form of requests, could only be
objected to in their spirit and tendency. There
is nothing which committee authorized 10 IN
ouire may not request, because there is no re-
quest which, as such, may not De reused ne
law knows nothing of the requests; their retu
sal puts no one in contempt But the process
now under consideration assumes the form OF
legal and compulsory instrument, authenticated
by the seal of the House. and the signature OF
the Clerk. Obedience to such an instrument Qt
it is lawfully issued) canbe compelled against
all obstacles and opponents, and those VINO
maintain its legality, must maintain the power
of enforcing it How shall it be s enforced in
case il be disobeyed and resisted? Shall they be
brought prisoners to the seat OF Government
and the bar of the House, attached for refusing
to produce and bring their books to the North
American Hotel, and for avowng purpose
(Which was not put to the tesD not to submit to
an examination on oath, touching their own
crimes and misdemeanors? A satisfactory an
swer, consonant to reason and justice, and
grounded on the Constitution and laws OF the
United States, must be found to this question:
by all persons who maintain the validity OF the
process issued by the committee That such
process is no subpoena duces team, is obvious
from the fact that it is addressed to the parties
implicated 1t is no process in chanoery, re-
quiring party to produce his books and pa
pers; for its avowed Objects to inquire whether
ga criminal prosecution shall be instituted;" an
object for which the Chancellor will require no
Al