The Madisonian. [volume] (Washington City [D.C.]) 1837-1845, 1841-10-02
PErsasnuno, September 2sth, ls4l.

In Entre hios, medltatlng an INVASION OF CofriehcS
PETsRsHuRo, September 2sth, ls4l.
DEAR SR-It has been charged that Mr.. Ewing in
his recent revelation Of the transactions of a Ca
binet conference made gross misstatement of facts
That erroneous development was necessary to make
good the accusation that the President had vetoed
bill which he had promised his Cabinet he would
sanction.
How stand the facts as exhibited by the record ?
Mr.. Ewing says:
"The bill which reported to Congress- with your
APPRECIATION at the of the session. had
the clause relating to agencies, and the power to deal
in exchanges, as strongly developed the one you
have now rejected, and equally without The assent OF
the States"
Mr.. Els bill which you have said did contain the
principle of State assent, had in this fundamental
rule, to wit:
That the said corporation shall establish a com
petent Office of discount and deposit in any State by
the assent of the Legislature of such State, whenever
the directors may think fit to do and when estab-
lished the Office shall not be Withdrawn without the
assent of Congress"
cor, instead of establishing such Offices" [of dis
count and deposit) it shall be lawful for the drec
tors the said corporation, from time to time, TO
poy any individual, agent, or any other Bank or
Banks, to be approved by the Secretary Of the Urea
sury at any place places that they may deem safe
and proper manage and transact the business pro-
posed aforesaid other than for the purposes Of dis
count and to perform the duties hereinafter required
of said corporation, TO he managed aud transacted by
such offices, under such agreements and subject TO
such regulations, they shall deem just and proper"
Instead of that 18th fundamental rule which was
in Mr.. Ewng's plan, the bill introduced into the
House by Mr.. Sergeant, contained This, to wit:
10th. That, for the purposes of carrying on and
transacting the business of the said corporation herein
and hereby authorized and fulfilling the duties herein
and hereby required, it shall be Law fu for the drec
tors of the said corporation, from time time, to
tablish agencies in any State or Territory Of the
United States, at any place or places they may deem
safe and proper and to employ any agent agents.
with the appreciation Of the Secretary of the Treasu
ry, any Bank or Banks, under such agreements and
subject 10 such regulations they may deem just and
proper, not being contrary to law to this charter
and the same agencies, at their pleasure, to relnqush
or discontinue, and the same agent agents TO
move; and to commit to such agents, agencies
Banks, such portions of the business and of
the said corporation as they may think fit Prooided
al,oays, That neither the said &orporation, any
agent or agents thereof, nor any Bank Banks en-
poyed by the same, shall be authorized to discount
promissory notes with the money means of the sad
corporation, but shall employ the in the business
and dealing in foreign bills Of exchange including
bills and drafts drawn in State or Territory and
payable in another"
So speaks the whole record. And now, let us
if it be true asserted by Mr.. Ewing, that his
bill conferred ON the Directors the liberty to
tahlish agencies Nth the poaoer to deal in
changes as strongly Developed and fully conferred
as it was in Mr.. Sergeant's bill II is admitted that
the liberty to establish agencies without the previous
assent of the States is equally clearly conferred by
each But that is not the idea which the Secretary
has misstated. The idea is in the inquiry here nsti
tuted and the inquiry here instituted which is tho
true snd vital one, is this: Were not the powers
fered and to be exercised by the agencies under
Mr. Ewing's BILL restricted, less extensive, than
the powers of the agencies under Mr. Sergeants bill?
Observe; The agencies under Mr. Ewng's hill were
to manage and transact, the business proposed as
aforesaid, other than for the purposes ediscount," &C.
Thus, without any exception reservation, the acu
ty of discounting interdicted. Not so with the
agencies under Mr.. Sergeants bill This, as to any
useful or eflectual extent only nerdicted the di-
counting of promiSsory notes II will not be denied
that dealing in or buying bills Of exchange, would be
discoanting. Mr.. Badger, according to Mr. Bells
statement told the President that he could escape
the charge of Inconsistency, in that way. Nor it
be asserted that it unsubsantial distinction
that the President approved Mr.. Ewngs plan, in this
particular which prohibited discounting, and yet
jected Mr.. Sergeant's, which conferred that faculty
to an almost unlimited extent. He that insists on
State assent to the introduction Of agencies, when
large and dangerous powers conferred on them,
may, nevertheless, waive it, consistently with all his
doctrines and benefcent purposes when the agencies
are not invested with such powers but with such only
as are subsidiary and insignificant That President
Tyler has kept this idea in mind, is made manifest by
the amendment to Mr.. Sergeants BILL which he put
in the hands of a member Of the House, and which
one Of his foes has unwittngly given to the public in
an appendix to his recently published speech. In
preparing that amendment, President Tyler acted with
reference to the extent magnitude of the powers TO
be granted to the agencies and declared that the prn
ciple of the assent of the States by express
luon" of their Legislatures, must obtain in order to
secure his sanction to the BILL in such agencies
should "be authorized to deal trade as is allowed
in the 10th Fundamental rule, which is above rcccd
and shown to have been framed to confer much larger
and more dangerous powers than the somewhat sim
liar provision of Mr.. Ewing's bill.
If you will excuse the use of rather stale pun,
will add that he who cannot see that the clause re-
lating to agencies was less strongly developed"
and " the power deal in exchanges" which is dis
far less fully conferred in and by Mr.
Ewings plan-~hich, it is alleged, the President ap-
proved-than in Mr.. Sergeants bill, which he vetoed
and consequently that is demonstrated that MIR Ew-
ing made gross misstatement, must be as blind as
though his eyes were full of clay, PUBLIUS.