Daily Richmond Whig. [volume] (Richmond, Va.) 1840-1842, 1841-01-14

as the representative OF the people on the one hand
ana the individuals who subscribe for the stock in
Sueh corporations on the other; and that no law
can oe passed altering or ahrdging the terms Of
such charters or contracts. Now, an individual be-
fore he bee me party To this charter, by subscr-
bing Tor tins stock IN the institution, would have
examined the terms Of that charter, and he would
then have found that the institution to be I'M
der the CONTROL OF nine Directors, five to be chosen
by the SoekhOiders, and four by the Executive OF
the State. Now he should consider the mode Of
appointment Of the officers OF such an institution 10
be material and essential part OF this charter or
contract The stockholders clearly have the right
to insist on the appointment Of these Directors &C
cording tote terms OF the charter-They have tho
right To insist on the appointment OF these Drec
tors, nninagenesd and uncontrolled by the action
OF the legislature Now what is the effect Of these
resolutions, but TO transfer the appointments from
the Executive to the Legislature1 Is this n sub
sianiiai compliance with the terms OF the charter to
which you are partyf Is 1t not at least a viola
ton of the spirit of the agrtemeai2 Might not the
individual stockholders have preferred that the APP
polntment Of the officers should be made by the
Executive of this State, who from the high charac-
ter with which we are TO suppose him to be endow
ed-irom the experience and ability which we are
TO suppose 10 belong TO the Chief Magistrate of this
Commonwealth-iha by the numerous body of
which this Legislature is composed made up OF in
dlviduals nne-tenths Of whom are entirely unskill
ed IN the management OF such institutions 1t is
evident, then, the appointment of those Directors
tract, and Notwithstanding as reement on your part
you are now seeking To evade its terms by indirect
means. For himself, he looked on the proceedings
as violating the spirit Of the agreement. The gem
tleman from Tyler has censured in very strong
terms the conduct Of the stockholders in proceed
ing to elect the FIVE Directors and amongst them the
President of the Bank, as they were authorized by
The charter TO do. lie could see no earthly ground
for complrint from any one. The stockholders, by
the law, had the right Of choosing five of the Di.
has
had a right-elected the FIVE they had a right 10
elect. Now so far from their deserving censure
Tor not waiting the action OF this body, he
thought they would, by contrary course, by
torbearng to exercise their undoubted rights have
behaved rather rs suppliants for legislative favour,
| rather rs asking legislative cemcncy than as men
concious OF their rights and daring to maintain them.
But there Is one view TO which will beg leave par
ucularly 10 ask the attention of the House: The
live Directors here been elected BY the Stockholders
II Is impossible that do more than to defeat
| the election of DR.. Brockenbrough What, then, is
the inevitable consequence either that there should
not be any election oil the President, or that the
| five Directors elected by the stockholders should
yie'd TO the four appointed by the State. Does it
comport with the guardian character which the
State should exercise towards all OF its citizens and
all OF Its Institutions that we should thus acquire for
our smaller interest IN the institution the controu
over their larger INTEREST," Now one effect or the
other is inevitable, either that we stop the opera
tons OF the institution that force the FIVE Di-
reciors appointed by the stockholders TO vote for a
President selected by the four Directors appointed
by the State Now the Sta'e 10y the charter, has the
appointment OF number OF Directors much larger
than her proportion of the stock which she holds. But
1t seems that are not satisfied with the power
which we reserved IN the charter; but endea-
vor 10 get the entire control. Ii argued by the
gentleman from Rappahannock, that the Legislature
was the guardian OF the interest OF the State, and
had, OF course, the power TO interfere ! deny that
the Legislature can absove itself from her engA- E.
ments, whether 1t be the guardian OF the public in
teteSt IN this Bank or not The State, this in
stance, has guardian Of her interest IN the Execu-
tive OF the State, and in the Directors appointed by
HIM. BUTT is asked by the gentleman from Tyler,
whether, rs tins House had the right TO order in
vestisGton, they had not the power TO ae' on that
| investigation The question then recurs, IN what
way are we to act Was there ever a more mon
sIrous proposition The power TO investigate is ex
pressly given 10 the Stale. But whyl Because
the State is a stakeholder. But surely this simple
ciluse authorizing investigation cannot be con-
strued TO give to the State any other power the
institution than what it purpors to give. Ii il has
the effect which is ATTRIBUTED TO it by the gentleman
from Tyler, why, then, II gives 10 the State unmi
ted power over the institution. IL will he observed
that this same power 10 investigate is given also,
express terms, TO any three stockho ders owning IN
their own right one hundred shares Of the stock.
lie maintained, therefore, that this right TO ryeSt-
gate gives 10 the State other right than the rig
TO investigate and report the facts TO the Legislature
We can then act upon the fac,s reported. But then
| only in accordance with the charter. He would ca
the attention Of members the consequences of this
interference with the afflirs OF the Bark. Will not
they become, asSuredly, political Banksl We to-
| day request the Executive to appoint individual $
entertaining certain opinions in relation the pro-
| priety Of re-appointing John BrOckenbrough. Will
not this he precedent which, in party times may
be appealed TO for the purpose Of justfyng reSo-
luton Of the Legislature requesting the appointment
Of either Wing or Democratic Drectors1 This is
| no improbable suppoStion. Such a resolution did
some thirty wears ago pass the Legislature of this
State The Inev;s bic effect Of this legislative tam
pering with the Banking institutions, would be TO
render them the ob ects Of our abhorence-Gorern-
n'snt Banks. | will 90 iog no interference with them,
either directly or indirectly. The fact which was
brought to our recollection by the gentleman from
Richmond 10 relation TO the removal OF the deDo-
sites from the Bank of the L. s. IS illustration Of
this proceeding BY the Bank charter, the depOsItt
were to be made IN the Bunk, until Otherwise direct
ed by the Secretary OF ihe Treasury. The PTc,i-
dent, by the exercise ofhe power of removal effected
that indirectly which he could not DO directly. Now,
are we not doing by Induction what We have no
powerto do directly? Are ave not assuming to direct
the Executive, Just the President, in that case d.
Feeted and controlled the Secretary And did not
the whole Wig Party, with one voice, excllim
against the violation ci the rights Of the stockholders
in the Bank OF The United states2 He knew roth
ing Of the views Of the Executive on this subject
He knew not in what light he regarded this, q, he
conceived, insulting interference Siih his duties
But this he would say, that having the view Of this
matter he then had u he stood IN the position of the
Executive, he should resist, in the most decided
manner, whit he conceived TO Se an insOlent inter-
ference with Executive duties. But Il is said we
are merely to give him advice. Who constituted
this House the Executive Council The privilege
OF advising the Executive is not conferred on this
House, but on the Executive Council Of the State
lie did not pretend 20 enter into the subject Of the
misconduct Of the President Of the Bdnk-he be-
lieved there had been gross mismunagement in the
insiliuton-he was willing to vote that there had
been, but he was unwilling 70 interfere with the
discharge OF duties not conferred this House.
but on another department Of this Government. lie
was unwilling to violate the spirit OF the csrtract
entered iEto with the stockholders. lie was unwIl.
ling to set precedent which, in high party times.
might be referred 20 u justify an interference with
vested rights
that House who was more reluctant than himself To
pnss eensure upon the conduct OF the president "a
the Bank Of Viz ini1. lie would give much 10 es-
cape from such vote, but as one Of that BODY he
should Of course shrink frcm the performances OF no
duty which his seat in that hail n,gEt impose uu,n
him. The Committee on Banks, acting under the
orders Of that house, had onqured into the eorJ,.
ton Of the institution over which that officer pres-
ded, and Into the condgci OF Is officers and they
had reported delacaiion Of more than half mil.
lion OF dollars which they asserted has been occa.
sioned by the negligence Of the president and other
officers OF the bank, and they had accordingly pre-
sentsd for their adoption the following resolution:
"RsNtUtf, That the power OF the State. in the
appointment Of directors Of the Bank Of Virginia
ought 10 he so cNcFczed % prevent the re-eIec-