Richmond enquirer. [volume] (Richmond, Va.) 1815-1867, 1834-12-18

ioud 10 De 80 very extraordinary in their tone in their
illusions, and assertions that, unpleasant the task IL,
this Department has, under all the circumstances, felt
constrained to submit such remarks in relation to them
as are deemed appropriate, and impcratvey to
be required. The Bank may therefore, sir assured,
that though your letter arrived late tho
submission OF to the President before preparing his
nual message, TO the Attorney General before his
opinion was requested the case and to deprive the
undersigned from offering any due comment il in his
report to Congress concerning this subject yet in rela
ton to the affairs of which treats appeal from the
Jaws has never, us you appear to intimate, been made
by this Department, nor is in contemplation. Any
such appeal Is LETT to those who, without the sanction
oil an appropriation by Congress, without legal
prccep seize upon the public property, and convert it
to their private cmoumcnt. But, after n violation
of the rights of The United States and diversion of its
revenue from the Treasury and the public service, into
the vaults off, Bank fthc latter expects that the Chief
Executive Magistrate of the Union, the Secretary OF
the Treasury, will be SILENT and not communicate
y and full information concerning the outrage, TO tho
People and their Reprcscnativcs-and that those public
officers are to be deferred from this discharge OF
Tenn duty because the Bank entetans opinon that
such course is an ''appea from the laws you have
yet to learn that both the character of tat Chief Mags
trae and the obligations ofduy entertained by this De-
partment, have been greatly misapprehended
In proceeding to the other contents letter il is
conceded with you that thc whole appears exceed
iagiy simple. The Bank sets up claim against the
Dnted States 1t is presented and disalowed by the
accounting officers, because considered in itself neither
equitable legal because il had received the
sanction of the United States by appropriations; and
because, if just branch of the Government except
Congress, had any constitutional power to authorize its
payment.
1hereupon, the Bank, instead ofresortng to Congress
for that sanction, proceeded without it, and without any
legal precept to seize the dividends belonging to the
United States and TO them its private
The vital of the Bank this subject appears
have been, in supposing that the Treasury and
compiling officers any thing but agents of Con-
grcss to superntend the settlement of what has been
pSopriaed If, the solicitation of the Bank, any
individual however powerful they allowed settled any
thing else than what had been sanctioned by appro-
priaton, it would manestly be connving peculaon,
or msappication of the public money Unjust be well
known to the Bank, that tie first and proper inquiry at
the Treasury to every applicant is where is the appro
priation to pay the claim? And next, where is the
evidence of its correctness, under the appropriation Ii
rather unreasonable TO insist, that the Treasury
possesses almost unlimited power when the Bank wants
iavors, but TO deny TO it almost all power when apprc-
hending danger from il
Beside all the decisive against the reprehens-
bic conduct Of the Bank in this transaction, which
contained in the late Message of the President and in
the opinion Of the Attorney General the Bank if pos
sess as has been ntmatcd another conoverted claim
against the United States, for the removal Of the public
Depostes, might this principle, in order discharge
it, atone for any other pretended wrong not only
fuse to pay dividends but refuse, to the
claimed the payment of its bills received by the
Treasury for the public revenue and when this consi
deraton is weighed, will readily be that the
whole operations OF the Government, in and in
peace, while by law, the notes of the Bank must be
ccved for the public revenues liable, at the pleasure
oil the Bank DO be palalyzcd and the public faith there
by violated.
After these objections, and when the common, the
equitable, aud constitutional tribunal of Congress was,
aud stii Is, for the Bank as for all other claimants
against the Government similarly situated, open for
resort to obtain danagesit is lanented that the Bank
nconsderatcy advised appeal to this other
course novel; dangerous, and unnecessary of Selling
upon the public revenue, being in your opinion "he
best If not only of settling the question You
state further that this has been done by the Bank only
to vndIcate ITS own rights, when case is believed
TO exist where person not receiving money officer
or contractor OF the Government, money not prev-
ousy granted by Congress- under special or gene
raj appropriation (n which mode the Bank did not re-
eeiva these dividcnds has been able 'vndcae
his supposed rghts, by retaining the money to meet
founded. he
ment and when application by the Bank for relief in
this case had never been presented Congress- and
fused, so to furnish the slightest apology for being
obliged IN oESer to procure redress to resort to this
usual remedy.
But if the views of the Department on this proceeding
be erroneous, much qualification would be derived from
having the particular and clause quoted by the Bank
on which it relies in making the assertion, that "lhe
tanning OF TINS money was mere form to comply with
the act of Congress" This Department has not been
fortunate to discover any and much less the
cited Of March 3D. 1897 which requires of claim
ant against the Government that he should i'm contro-
vered case, seize its property, order 'to comply with
the act ct Congress nor any statute which authorizes
recognizes, palates such seizure in order force
the Government into law suit and thus, through the
agency of The Judiciary attempt effect the payment
oil doubtful claims to which money has been appro-
pracd nor Legislative sanction given. The proposition
of the Bank to make arrangement to have this
question brought before the Courts and the assurance
now given that, in such event it would Immediately
have released the money, would have deserved much
more attention and stronger confidence, had this as
suT3nce been more promptly given, and that ami
by the Bank, in having at least requested such an
arrangement before the dividends were withhcld-
Before committing that aggression, the Bank not
pleased to notify the Treasury that il wished tho
question of damages settled by litigation, and it COM
muncatcd not the slightest ntimation Of desire To
make any arrangement with the Treasury TO bring the
case before the Courts" But the Bank having ON
these points preserved perfect silence and the Depart
mont ard Congress having thus been lullcd into secu
rty till alter the adjournment Of the latter then sudden
~, and without previous notice, portion of the accr
ing revenue, estimated and expected TO aid i'm meeting
the large appropriations which had just been made
and TO pay the residue Of the public debt was withheld
by the Bank, and not offered to be restored I'LL
after the termination of a suit probably protracted
for many years. After committing that aggression,
and still Withholding in its possession the money of the
United States, the Bank then, and till then "inyt-
ed this Department to bring the subject of the dana
gcs III way before the courts and thus indirectly
to sanction the appeal of the Bank from the authority
of Congress this matter and to acquicsce til
adjusted by litigation in the Banks unprecedented
aud ruinous to the public rcvenica course
involving principle which, under all the circum-
stances Of this case, If adopted. might disorqa-
nize our whole collections by the seizure Of them
without legal prccepi under pretence another and
as previously explained, place even disbursements
far the public funds consist Of United States Bank
notes at the sole mercy cfan rritaed and interruptions
corporation. But this the Department could not sane
ton however urgently "inviicd without proving faith
less to every principle of public duty and public safety
Late is even that invitation is remarkable that your
letters expressed nothing about the money itself "being
an object Of Indifference to the Bank, that it "would
instantly have released the money any arrangement
with the Treasury 10 bring the before the courts
On tho contrary though persons may for some time
was can object Of indifference 10 the Bank in comparf-
with other Objects is difficult to discover