The Madisonian. [volume] (Washington City [i.e. Washington, D.C.]) 1837-1845, 1841-07-22
IN SENATE,
TUESDAY. July %.

National Bank
From citizens of New York, from st Johns New
York, also from citizens of Reading, Pennsy wanna
in favor of Bankrupt Law.
Mr. McROBERIS rose to state that he was absent
when the vote was taken on the Loan Bill but had
he been present he should had voted against it.
The resolution submitted by Mr.. BUCHANAN some
days since, calling for the OF persons removed
since the 1th March, lsil, and amended by Mr.. MAN
CUM so as to include removals made since the 4th
March, 1929, to the 4th March 1871 being under con
sideratlon--
Mr.. BENTON rose and spoke some time beyond
the morning hour against the principle of the removal
Of Government officers and insisted tina, political of
fences were undefinable and could not be brought
within the rule prescribed by the late letter Of the Sec
rotary OF State, directed 10 the officers of the Gov
eminent.
Mr.. LINN asked the yeas and nays on the adop-
ton of the resolution, but afterwards withdrew the
call,
The question then taken on the adoption of the
resolution and carried.
Mr.. HUNTINGTON, from the Committee on
Commerce reported the House bill for the extension
of the port of New Orleans without amendment, and
recommended that ii be laid on the table
The bill from the House making appropriations for
Qualifications and the suppress OF Indian hostiities
twice read and referred.to the Committee Mil
Itary Affairs.
FISCAL BANK.
The Senate then proceeded to the consideration of
Bank of the United States; when
Mr., SMITH of Connecticut, rose and addressed
the Senate for near two hours against the general
principles of the BILL contendipg that a National
Bank was unconstitutional and inex pedent.
Mr.. NICHOLSON then moved amendment to
the effect that nothing contained in the bill should
take away impair the right of any State TO tax the
real and personal property OF said bank, including lis
debts due account its notes bills bonds, mortgages,
contracts, and public stocks, whether the in
bio. J,at of
said Bank, any person, agent trustee the
that States had the right TO tax their in
stitutions.
Mr. n said the amer dment similar to that Of
tered in 1892 and by reference to the Senate Journal
he found that there then - votes for II, incud
ing the two Senators from his State He did not
offer the amendment with any view to Cypress the
Bank, but simply because his State taxed It's own in
sttutions, and his object was to place this Bank on
the footing as other State institutions and that
the States should have the power TO tax it high
they did their own.
Mr. CLAY hoped the amendment would not pre-
vail the effect would be to place the Bank in the pow
er Of the State The Senator SAID the object not
To tax.thc Bank higher than the State did its own
Suppose any wild feeling against Banks should in
duce them to tax their own as to destroy them
The States already had the power to tax the property
of the Bank and the stakeholder, but they had no
right to tax the corporation itself.
Mr. BENTON said this question of taxation had
been extensively argued. 1t was argued that the
States sovereign that when they came into the
Confederation they delivered up part Of their sose-
reign power. Among the exceptions which the States
made to the right of taxation, this Bank not
found. 1t was true that the Supreme Court nodded
towards the idea that it free from taxation but It
was equally true that their whole argument turned on
the words " necessary and competent applied TO the
mother Bank This decision with reference to the
Bank was correct. They then went and said the
same construction applied to their branches. Here
was the error Congress decided it perfectly inn
material to them whether branches were established in
the States not BY virtue of the ghts of the States
these institutions taxable and It of them
came within the limits of his State ii would be
whether they had the taxing power.
Mr. HUNTINGTON said If the proposition OF
the Senator from Missouri correct the amend
ment was entirely unnecessary. The Supreme Count
nodded the Senator had said This was rather sin
gular, in deciding great constitutional question, that
the Supreme Court should nod, The question
solved itself INTO this, whether any of the twenty
six States had the power to destroy a branch and If
they prepared for that they might vote for the
amendment. He hoped ii would not be adopted.
Mr.. BENTON said the corporation went into the
State for the purpose of making money and must be
liable TO taxation
MIR. CLAY, of Alabama said this right oftaxation
belonged all the States without the prov sion now
made and was indispens be TO so, ereignty 1t was
xpressy provided tina, the States should of
the public lands within their mts-thus allowing the
right of taxation. Could ii be supposed that State
should not have right of taxing institutions from
other States equal to the amount they Sed their own
The right existed and could not he destroyed and un
less the States voluntarily surrendered the right they
had the undoubed right TO tax property Of either in
stitution in their limits On what principle of proprl-
iety should this be an eScepton2 Did they give any
bonus? No But they prop sed TO confer these in
portant exclusive privileges banking certain in.
ividuals without bonus, and give them the interest
on their exchanges without taxation.
Mr.. SEW TER said no would have dreamed OF
pIempiing this institution from taxation had IT not
been decided by the Supreme Court OF the United |
States What the difference between taxing the |
bank and taxing pcdlars, bankers and brokers1 They
Ia xed their banks and why should they not tins |
foreign corporation? II they taxed their own bro |
sers why should they not this great mammoth brokerl
He could reason, from expedency right, that
hey should not tsI this bank.
Mr.. NICHOLSON said the Senators on the other
side were accustomed to look with suspicion on any
amendments offered on this side OF the Senate. II |
hese branches were established without iaxation II
would create spirit Of jealousy. II would also cur
an the revenue ofthe States to the amount OF bu.
iness by taking from the business OF their banks
which paid taxes. The Senator from Kentucky said
hey might destroy these branches He thought this
was case improbable, II not impossible The ques
ion was will concede to The States the same power
which they had over their own institutions II tbs
light was not conceded this would be one Of the ht-i
questions raised in the States where branches were
coated and would be great cause OF bringing Tor
ward the question Of repeal It was therefore the ~
OF the friends OF the Bank 10 support The amend
ncnt
MIR. YOUNG said, unless you could tax the inrt
ution itself that was the only way you could reach
4 You couli not reach the stockholders Tor most OF
hem were non residents With regard = The equity
II this there could be no question y might he sad
hat the United States owned much OF the STOCK but
~ referring to the Dartmouth College case, he con
ended it made no difference. The only restriction