Southern Argus. [volume] (Columbus, Miss.) 1834-1842, 1838-10-23

these powers, that body win render then1
shbservieut TO the great purposes AZ our
national compact. Your COMMITTEES there.
fore beg leave to recommend 10 this House
the following resolutionsss
"ResOlUed, That the Legislature & he
State Of South Carolna 10 not concur IL
the amendment Of the Constitution Of tbs
United States, proposed BY Pepnsylva.
MIA.
"RssOlUod. That the House DO agree
to the report.
Ordered, That it Be sent to the Senate
for concurrence" p
In THE SkNATE, Dc. q. 1921.
ResOzped, Tint this House docoacu,
with the House Of Representatives. in he
foregoing report.
Ordered, That the report be returned
to the House Of Representative. ?
The Legislature was acting legitinately
and constitutionalIy in this matter, On tli,e
proposition Of sister State to amend The
national constit nion-not merely declaring
an opinion to intimidate s'other public
servants" or for other party ends-bul
expressing its views on a constitutional
question, regularly and properly before it
as matter of business. Authority there
fore accompanied the act--it was a solemn
adjudication in the name of the people OF
South Carolina, by her rightful represent.
atives. constitutionally empowered to act
on the specific subject before them. South
Carolina then has solemnly adiudged that
congress is constitutionally vested with
the right to incorporate bank" and that
sit would be unwiSe and impolitic" to re-
strict its operations within such narrow
limits as the District of Columbia," in 9TH
er words, that congress is constitutionaIIy
vested with the right to incorporate Ma
tional Bank land this decision Of her lie.
gislature has been repeat dly confirmed by
her judiciary. This adjudication Of South
Carolina, we hold to be irrevocable- she
was deciding whether she had or had not
! yielded a certain right to the general gov.
ernment-her decision was, that she had
not yielded the right, and Der testimony
against herself as the grantor can never
be retracted. History has set its irrevo
cable seal upon the decd, and the grantee
can never be denied its benefit. A Ma
tional Bank was not only held constifu-
tional, but was almost universally popular
in our State, until Notification moved her
from her constitutionalpropri That
cloud has now passed from our horizon,
and there is nothing to prevent us from
again basking in the sunshine Of our first
love.
Although we regard tt. --,..s,;.,,,;,,,,1
ity Of a National Bank as res jHdlcdtd,
both as respects the general government
and our State, we yet have no objection
10 say word or two on it as an original
question. Theobiection urged against it
as nerely.a negative one, founded on the
rejection, by the convention, which framed
the constitution, of a proposition to confer
on congress the general power TO grant
charters of incorporation. There was not
even the rejection ofa specific proposition
to confer the right of chartering a Ma
ito al Bank. A General power of incor
poration may have been deemed objec-
tionable, while a. specific power of incor-
porating bank, as fiscal agent of the
government may not only have been re-
garded as -unexceptionable, but as already
sufficiently provided for, whenever the
emergency might demand its exercise, as
incidental to one or more granted powers.
We have a strikinglY analogous case. to
quote,-On the 29th May, 1887, Mr.. c.
Pinckney, submitted the plan of consti.
tuition, with this clause congress shall
have power to borrow money, and emf
bills on the credit of the u. S." On the
10th August, 1887, this clause came up
for consideration, and on a motion to strike
out the words ''and emit bills'' the vote BY
States stood, yeas 8, nays 2,-and the
words were never restored. If it be un.
constitutional to charter a National Bank
because the convention refused TO invest
congress with the general power of grant
/ ing charters Of incorporation, a fortiori Is
! that body debarred the right of emitting
| bills of credit, by the express rejection Of
/ a proposition, 10 confer that specific pow
| err. But Mr.. Calhoun and his school are
| the advocates Of "bilIs ofcredit now issued
| by congress in the shape Of Treasury
| Notes. and be is openly in favor of a Gov
eminent paper currency, and of"ernlttIng
bills on the credit ofthe United States, e
the amount of ''many millions beyond the
demands of the Government. For hin
and his disciples, then, to object to q Ma
tional Bank on such score, is maniestly
10 strain at a gnat and swallow camel
There is obviously more reason 70 argue
| the unconstitutionality Of treasury notes o.
other Government paper to serve q cur
/ rency, than of National Bank from the
action of the convention, and the argu
nlent in the former case may perhaps de-
rive some strength from the express con
stitutional restriction on the several states
against emitting bills Of credit, or making
anything but eold OF silver a legal tendel
| ia payment Of debts. But We are willing
10 waive this vantage ground, and conceds
that the constitution contains no express
prohibition against emitting bills Of credit
or chartering a National Bank: ana v
fare willing to give Hr. Calhoun hls treas
0ry notes, and GoYernnent paper cur
rency too, If he can show them 70 Be
means necessary and proper to carry illis
effect any Of the powers expire 81 gfantei
to the General Government, provided b
VIII yield rs our National Bank ol llk'
frrnar The rea ssf fllh convention &