, 1841-08-28

meut OF q National BANK Wnicn mas oeen q
subject Of contention 10 those cities"
Here (Mr. c. said) it was shown that the
first, and obviously the chief ground acted
on in opposition to the motion BY Mr.. Rufus
King, than whom no member Of the body
was, perhaps, more distinguished for ~intellec.
tuaI power and discrimination, was that it
would be sreferred I the establishment Of. q
National Bank" The very first idea that
struck his mind was, that the power to create
o corporation was a power to create a Bank.
And did any member Of that enlightened
body deny the fact o raise any ques.
ton Of the soundness Of his construc.
toni No sir, no. So far from coptrovert-
ing the opinion Of Mr.. King on that point,
M. Wilson virtually admits its correctness,
by remarking: "as to banks, he did not agree
with Mr.. King that the Pooer IN that point Of
pic,p uosM ercie the prexdices and parties
unprecedented" He admitted. in effect, that
the TO create a Bank would be EN-.
braced in Mr.. Madison's motion; but he de-
MED that it would excite "the prejudices and
parties unprecedented" or in other words, be
as unpopular as was supposed.
Upon the suggestion Of Col. Mason: the
motion was so modified, as to tnke the ques.
ton, in the first place, on DR.. Franklin's pro-
POSITION; and what was the RESULT Why
the motion was lost; only three states voting
10 the affirmative, and eight in the negative.
And Mr.. Madison remarks:
"The other part fell Of course, as included
in the power rejected"
Mr.. c. said this evidence would seem TO
be sufficient, Of itself, to settle the question;
but it did not stand uneorroborated. Long
before the publication OF the book from
| which he had read, the fact had been asser-
ted, and reiterated again and again. Mr..
| Madison, in his speech against the Bank,
| which was chartered in the year 1891, be.
sides arguing against the policy and expedi
ency Of the measure, among other things,
used the following language:
tin making these remarks on the merits Of
The bill, he had reserved to himself the RICH,
to deny authority Of Congress to pass it. He
had entertained this opinion from the date oil
the Constitution. His impression might per.
haps be the stronger, because he pen recoNec.
ted that a po,oe, to grant charter Of ineorpo.
ration had been proposed in the General GOu.
ernment, and rejected. Cong. Debates o.
l7so-'sI, VOL 4.
Here Mr.. Madison preserved to himself
the right to deny the authority Of Congress
to pass" the Bank charter; and why did he
do sol "Because he well recollec,s that a
power to grant charters Of incorporation had
been proposed in the General Convention,
and rejected" Is IL, not manifest, from this
remark, that Mr.. Madison understood the
power to charter an incorporation, and ere.
ate a Bank, as one and the same thing,-
Does he not treat them rs identicali Sir,
said Mr.. c., no one can denyit.
To the same point, Mr.. C. said, we also
had the evidence Of that great man, and dis.
tngui,hed patriot, Mr.. Jefferson, who. al.
though no, a member Of the Convention. was
contemporary with it, and probably knew
more of its secret history than any man who
did not belong 10 that body. When called
on by Gen. Washington to give his opinion
Of the Bank charter which passed in 1891
he adverted to the fact, now attempted to be
denied, and in that important state paper he
made the following remark:
81 is known that the very power TO create
a Bank now proposed as a means, was rejec
ted as an end by the convention which form
ed the constitution. A proposition was made
to them TO authorize Congress to open ca
nails, and an %amendatory one, to empower
them to incorporate. But the whole was re
jected; and one Of the reasons Of rejection
urged in the debate was, That they Their
would have a power to erect Bank which
would render the great cities, where there
were ~preiudices and jealousies on that sub
iect, adverse to the reception Of the Constitu
tion."
!, is thus seen said Mr.. C. that Mr.. Jeffer
son, on that grave occasion, alluded TO thi
very power to charter corporations, as iden
teal with that TO create n Bank. He spok'
of it, not as a matter Of opinion, or c%onjec
lure, but as a historical truth, that the propo
si,ion to grant to Congress the power Il
charter corporations involved the power 4
create a bank-and said .the whole was re
jected."
Mr.. C. remarked, such was the high an,
incontrovertible evidence on which the op
p~onents Of a National Bank rested their as
~sertion, that a motion had been made to con
fer the power on Congress to create such al
D institution, and that motion had been rejec,
ed in the convention. Could any thing NOR
: conclusive be shownf Could any one doub