Madison Whig advocate. [volume] (Canton, Miss.) 1839-1841, 1839-03-02
MIR. RIvEs' SPEECH.
(Conclnded.l

| all the systems yet suggested LOT couuu.
/ ting the finances of the country, this, to
nv mind, IS fraught with the deepest
dangers to the public liberty. What,
Isir, banks to be .sused or nor as fiscal
agents. according as the President and
/ Sec retarv of the Treasury may deter
mine it to be useful, polite, or conve-
| nient TO do so. The consequence would
necessarily be to put all the moneyed IN
istitutions of the country under the pow
CIR and at the discretion of the Executive
/ No rule of lar being established regula'
i ting the employment of banks-no limit
! fixed to the number which might be EN-
pIoyed, or terms prescribed on which
they should be employed, as one might be
lemployed to-day, and another tomorrow
as those already employed might be dis
missed and new ones taken into the
service of the Government, at the sole
will and pleasure of the Executive
/ what would this be. but TO convert the
whole community of banks into suitors
i for Executive favor, and to subject them
to the dominion of Executive power!
Under this system, if the Executive SO
willed it, the Sub-Treasury scheme
might be carried out, in one section OF
the country, with all its desolating ex-
actions of specie, runs upon the banks,
&C., while, in another, banks would be
the favored agents of the Government,
and through them every facility be Civ
en- TO the operations of industry and
trade. What would this be, again ask,
but to create in the hands of the Execu-
tive power absolutely despotic over the
pecuniary concerns of the People? 1t
would give to the Executive not merely
that exclusive custody and entire con-
troll of the public moneys" which is the
great end of the Sub-Treasury scheme,
but it would invest them with a sweeping
dominion over the whole of the money
ed institutions of the country. To so
| fearful an accumulation of power in the
hands of Department of the Govern
ment, whose patronage and influence
have already proved an oyermatch for
the Representatives of the People and
the States, and, sometimes fear, for the
People and the States themselves, |, for
one, will never consent. No, sir; if
banks are the safest repositories and best
fiscal agents of the Government, as |
believe them to be, and the practice, and
in a great degree the language, of the
Administration admit them to be, let their
employment be regulated by lar; let the
number % be employed be limited by lac
let the terms and conditions on which
they are to be employed, the manner of
their selection, and the services they are
to perform, be all defined by lar; let the
power of the Executive over them be
strictly guarded by legislative decIara-
ton of the sole causes for which, when
once employed, they shall be discontin-
ued, and requiring, in every such case,
a prompt report to Congress of the spe-
cial reasons of the discontinuancc. In
so grave and important trust as the
care and management of the public treas
ure-one, too, so peculiarly the province
of the Legislative department to super
wise, and which, in all countries, is felt
to be SO intimately connected with the
public liberty-let us leave nothing TO
Executive discretion, which can be defn-
ed and regulated by law,
The progress of this great financial
controversy has, as it seems to me, Mr..
President, at length brought us to this
single issue-a grave and portentous one
il most assuredly is, but yet simple and
disembarrassed. That the State banks
are to be employed as fiscal agents of the
Government is, as | have shown, admit
ted both by the practice and language of
the Administration. The only question
is, how and in what manner they are to
be employed. Are they to be employed
at the sole Will and pleasure Of the Erec-
attire, or are they TO be employed under
the sanction, limitations, and response
bIity ofla,c? The Sub-Treasury scheme.
though still recommended, and even ear
nestly recommended in name, and inten-
dedi, possibly, 10 be pressed in fact, is vir-
tually abandoned in argument. The OBJ
jections taken to it by its opponents have,
one by one, been practically admitted,
not only by the public reason, which has
emphatically pronounced its condemna-
ton of the scheme, but by the Admins
tration itself. The great and vital prin
clple OF the system is the collection of
the revenue in hard money. This, ac-
cordingly, was put forward most prom
inently in the message of the President
at the extra session of Congress, and
was urged by him with peculiar earnest
ness. The legislative discussion, dur
ing that session, it will be recollected by
all of us, turned mainly on that funda-
mental principle of the system. 1t was
found to be untenable in the open field
of argument, and accordingly we have
heard nothing more of it in either of the
two subsequent messages of the Presi-|
dent, or annual reports of the Secreta-
ry of the Treasury.
The next great question on which is
sue was joined between the advocates
and the opponents of the Sub-Treasury
scheme was the comparative safety of
the banks and of public officers, as de-
positories of the public money Not
withstanding the triumphant appeal we
made to the past experience ofthe Gov
eminent on this head, and the vast
amount of losses which we showed by
the authentic records of the Treasury
had been sustained from defaulting pub
lie officers, it was still contended that
banks were less safe than individual
agents, and reports were called forth
from the Secretary of the Treasury. ex-
planning away the conclusive testimony