Richmond enquirer. [volume] (Richmond, Va.) 1815-1867, 1834-02-22

SPEECH OF MIR. JONES. OF GEORGIA.
On the Removal of the Deposites: delivered i'm The
House Of Representatives.. United States, Jan 1884,
CONTINUED

On the Removal of the Deposites: deiipered in The
House Of Representatives. United States, jan 1884:
[CoNTINuEp1
In the outline Of the Bank the amour, Of the bonus
and his reasons for fixing that amount, are giveu
ne subscribers shall pay premium to the Govern.
nent Tor us charter (Which he before says should be
ciusive) Estimating the profits Of the bank from the
probable advance in The value Of its stock and the result
oil its business when in full operation per cent.
bonus oil 81 100000 payable IN equal nsalmeD,s Of two
three and four years, alter tho bank commences its ope
rations might under all circumstances be considered
about four per cent upon its capital aud would constitute
reasonable mnd that the bonus intended and requir
ell Tor the exclusive privilege OF banking for 20 years
and The incidental advantages resulting from that exciu.
sive privilege, and that the depostes formed no part Of
that consideration. But Mr. Dallas does not leave us
here to draw the correct and legitimate inference, that
when one consideration is named aud Is sufficient it
Is the exclusion Of others, and shoud look
Tor others which are not necessary. AS with pro-
Pheuc eye he had peeped into iututy and foresaw
THIS controversy, he Is not content with showing that
the bonus was given Tor the exclusive privilege
not given Tor the depostes he proceeds show what
10 be the Tor the depositssIn the let
ter he says: "AdePendent Of the bonus here proposed
to be exacted, there undoubtedly many public adj
rdntages TO be drawn from the establishment of the
kind and Gas the dep0sfe and distribution OF the rcve.
nue) may be regarded in the light OF equiudiens
the monopoly of the charter but for the reciprocal adj
odnfdges Of fiscal connexion tcifh the TREASURY"
NOW sir, we have coup deI Of the whole mind Of Mr..
Daias The public advantages and the fiscal connection
Wuh me Treasury are reciprocal. The depOsites and
erciusre monopoly is considered ample
for The bonus Of 81 500 600. But will add my feeble
powers ILLUSTRATION TO the lucid and powerful deonsa
ton oil his gigantic inteec il would be but holding up
'orch-light 10 illuminate the pathway OF the traveller
amidst the respondent brightness of the meridian
We are warranted in the opinion that the views
entertained by MIR. Calhoun who for acuteness of
understanding and dsincness Of perception unsurpass
ed and who daughted the bill in accordance with The
outline which had been furnished by the Secretary for
the section which requires the public money be depo
sited in the Bank is wholly omitted. While the bonus
was required in reconsideration of the exclusive privileges
aud benefits conferred by the ac look in vain for
section which requires the deposes 10 be made in that
bank, and consequently, they could not form any OF
that consideration Why need add more' II there be
any one who has given his attention, and yet doubts after
this mass Of strong and conclusive testimony che would
not be persuaded though one rose from the dead"
IL may be asked how could the bank transfer the
public money if it not deposited in her vaults }
The answer is easy When the Secretary Of the Treasu
ry wished money transferred from place TO another
he could have check State bank the opposite side
Of street presented, or $500 for instance and
quire the Bank Of the United States to place that much
money at his credit in Charleston or New Orleans and
bound to transfer the funds as they had been deposited
with her.
The section which required The deposes to be made in
the Bank the United States till the Secretary ofte rea
suiy should otherwise order and direct subsequently,
inserted, at the suggestion OF gentleman Mr. Webste
have been nfor med,) who untrendy 10 the char
ter, and who exered his powerful talents 10 prevent the
passage Of the bill. 1t done, TO enlarge, but 10
restrain the powers Of the bank lest implication might
ney, the deposes must, "of necessity be made there's
and, unless there was provision 10 them, it
might be commended, il now is in the face OF that pro-
vision, that the Secretary of the Treasury had pow
er TO remove Them That section, therefore, which is
now relied upon TO restrain his power, the very
which has subjected them TO his order and direction
tits admitted that the Secretary has the right OF
val the bank should become unsae fail pay checks
or transfer the funds when required The charter has
such specification and why these contingencies
ieced! AS wish to discuss this question fairly and
didy, am willing admit that failure pay
fer, may be considered az niracton of the conhac
and the United States might, therefore, claim the rig
wi hdraw the deposes But there is nothing in the char
ter about the safety the public fund.- and the bank may
well the United States have right 10 declare them
unsafe The failure TO pay transfer he commended 10 be
the best aud only sufficient proof of their want of safety;
and have authority declare them unsafe until the
bank has actually failed TO pay. Ii wait of safety and
failure pay the only sufficient for the re-
mova OF the dePosi,es, in the Of why
not say so Why did not the section read, unl the bank
should become unsafe should fail TO pay the checks
transfer the public money when thereto required" This
language plain and simple, and would convey precisely
the meaning which is contended for by the advocates Of
the bank. The gentleman who drew that section knows
well the force Of words, and knows well which TIC
convey his meaning. No one can misunderstood Mr..
Webser. he had intended the deposes should remain
till the bank became unsafe, or failed 10 pay when
quired he would have used words proper convey
tina, definite idea. But he opposed to The bank, and
wished TO give The Government check upon il; and,
therefore, he gave the Secretary OF the Treasury the
right 10 the depo-ites whenever il necessary
to protect the interest Of the people.
he dePosites, then, were part oil The consideration
for the bonus and the contract nothing less
than This in relation TO them-at the dPosifes should
remain in The Bank Of the United States till the Secre-
fdry of The Treasury should otherUise order and direct;
and ,ohen he did he should giue his reasons to Con-
gress. The language conveys other meaning, and
not be mistaken Indeed, the gentleman from Pennsyl-
vana did much object TO the meaning the terms
OF the Secretary; and ii the view have taken be
by the very of the contract the stockholders have
agreed that the Secretary may ihem and the bank
has right call for his The bank has al
interest such CALI and il is matter Of i'm
portance whether the satisfactory the bank
and far the bank Is concerned or interested he is
bound 10 give reasons at all. The gentleman from
Pennsylvania has told you the bank has deep inter-
in the reasons of the removal. No, sir the gentle
is mistaken the bank has deep interest in the fact
OF the renewal The factor who does my business has
deep interest in doog my businesthe merchant in my
custom, and the mechanic in my employing him but
they have interest in the which induce TO
continue withhold that custom business have
they q right TO ask me why ! have Withdrawn II iom
them. So with the bank. IL has an interest in the
deposes Of profit, but il has RICH, 10 ask
why they have been removed; nor can we expect any
will be satisfactory 10 her which causes their
movsi. The Secretary may, then, remove The deposies
whenever he thinks proper and Is bound to give his rea
sons Congress and IL is entirely sufficient II those
sons are satisfactory TO the representatives. oil the people
shall proceed then, to consider what reasons may be
sufficient 10 authorize their removal
II is admitted all Sides that il the bank fails 10 pay
transfer the public money, that is sucen the bank
gentleman from Pennsylvania that "te power Of removal
given the Secretary to be exercised for the promo
ton OF particular interest, the remedy Of particular
mischief, and nothing else. shall contends further, That
when the bank does any act tending TO injure the s.
90 destroy the purity Of eleconsO prevent the Govern
menl from the exercise OF lis due influence 70 us AFFAIRS
when uncomfortable demands are made on The Govern
ment and the interest Of the people OF the IT, :.