The Madisonian. [volume] (Washington City [i.e. Washington, D.C.]) 1837-1845, 1841-07-24


mitted TO continue in business, their Suspend paper
would take the place of a sound currency
Mr.. BERRlEN said he cN3d not vote Tor the amend
ment tie did not doubt the power OF COM ress TO
tablish system of bankruptcy he disposed 10
fee that The sovereignty OF the States was invaded by
any legitimate action of this kind But there were
other difficulties which presented themselves against
this amendment. The Senate would have been much
betlerprepared 10 vote for this had the ing
amendments intended by the mover been brought for.
ward on which would be the great difficulty to carry
Tins principle practically in detail Some OF the States
had applied the provisions Of bankruptcy, and had
gone beyond that with reference To their individual
banks Would not conflict arise between the pro-
visions OF an act OF Congress, and those which exist
ell IN the States The question would be- which act
should operate Was IL desirable 10 do this But
suppose the two systems could operate cotempora-
neously variety of difficulties would then arise in
tue practical operation of the two acts The form OF
the amendment he objected TO- lily designed TO
eiliae different interests and falling short of the
main object TO be accomplished The amendment
would operate 10 destroy the elementary grant OF the
Constitution to Congress- in regard Bankruptcy not
tending to uniformity in the system, there being a
great diversity in the condition OF Banks in the same
and IN different States, some Of the Banks were
owned by States and some not. Independently OF
any other consideration this amendment ought TO be
rejected on that ground.
But apart from these considerations, still he should
lind in the actual condition of the untry, nsuper-
able objection 10 this amendment In many Of the
States the Banks were now in state of suspension,
and they proposed to pass bill by which, without
previous warning these Banks TO be included In
the provisions of bankruptcy This would produce
universal distress Disposed, he was to restrain
the Banks within all proper limits, he could not, in
this state Of things vote for the amendment. he
would detan the Senate no longer as this question
had been discussed in full before and he could not
now the of proiractad discussion.
Mr.. NICHOLSON said as the Senator from Geoga
had opposed the amendment because the others were
not offered he would state the substance Of them,
with the declaration that if this prevailed, he would
offer them, providing that whenever any banking
corporation, except those owned in part or the
whole by States, should fail for thirty days to redeem
its notes in specie, they should be liable to become
bankrupt; and if, after the LIST of July 1872, they
| should decline to redeem their notes in specie, Il
should be the duty Of the Attorney General of the
United States, of the district where the branch
situated, 10 apply to the Supreme Court for an
injunction to restrain the Bank from further dealing,
and dividend to be then made Of its effects.
| He had still retained the principle of excluding
those banks which were in part or the whole owned
by States lie did not doubt the constitutionaty OF
including them, but he proposed in the amendment
to confne the operations of the bill to particular
class of banks. He did not believe that the Bank
rupt BILL applicable to banks, ought to take place,
until sufficient time was given for their resumption
The amendment, then, would be fixing the time
prospectvely for this TO commence operation, to a
distance when ample opportunity would be given for
the banks to resume.
His object was TO obtain expression of opinion,
| and if the amendment prevailed he should propose
his others, and that they with the BILL be referred
back to the Committee. With reference to the argi-
ments of his friend from Arkansas (Nlr SEWER, ii
clear, that if they depended the action of the
States, uniform system would never be adopted APP
pcable to all Banks scattered as they through
twenty-six States. II on this ground and not
from disrst of the intelligence of the States, that
he brought this forward.
MIR WALKER said the project of including
Banks had always been favorable to him, since it
was first proposed in 1887. He believed were this
included in Bankrupt BILL it might pass both Houses
with almost perfect unanmity, and he very sor-
~ TO hear the Senator from Georgia oppose this,
What the ground of his objections The diff
Guilty of settling the details This might be urged
with equal force to Bankrupt law in any of its ope
ratons. As to the cashing of this law with State
law, there would be no difficulty, because the SUI
preme Court had twice decided that the laws passed
by Congress took precedence Why was the power
to regulate commerce given to the General Govern
ment, when each State to some extent regulated its
own commerce. II was to produce uniformity
throughout the States; and so with Bankrupt law.
1t was said that were not to exercise this because
il was infringing on State power; he wonld tell those
who made the objection, that it was argument
against the Constitution and the whole interests of
the country. The States were much interested in
having specie currency in the States adj acent to
them in their own borders. II this want of
uniformity which had nearly broken up commerce.
Every State in the Union had equal interest in
this, because of their constant nterchanges with
each other. The power given by the several States
TO this Government the same as they originally
possessed with the restriction only, that of unifor-
nifty.
MIR. SEWER, as his friends did not precisely I'M
derstand his position, proceeded to recapitulae the
grounds he had taken, and urged further reasons
against the amendment
Mr. BAYARD gave his views in support of the
principle of the amendment. He should not vote
for it, because it defective and not sutii-
GENTLY comprehensive in its provisions He moved to
strike out the following part of the amendment
except those in which the stock is owned wholly
or in part by the State, for which State is re-
sponsibe.'
Mr., HENDERSON spoke at some length, and de-
| clared that he should vote for the amendment.
MIR. CLAY, of Alabama entertained difficulties at
any rate, to the powers of Congress to nermedde
with State corporations In the Convention that
framed the Constitution, the question of giving the
right to this Government to create corporations
voted down by eight to three When he connected
with this fact, that clause of the Constitution that
provided that all powers not granted therein
remained wuh the States the people, he conceived
this to be of the reserve powers of the States
He consequently doubted their power to interfere al
all with State corporations, but when the amend
ment made SO much broader he could not hest
tate moment to go against it, The State of Ala
bama had State bank and four branches which
were owned exclusively by the State, and she also
owned proportion in other banks. Under this view,
he could not vote for this amendment, and thereby
agree to have the State of Alabama brought up be-
fore any tribunal bankrupt. So far as regarded
the States any portion of the interest of his State
or any other, he should not vote for it,
Mr.. SMITH, of Connecticut, said bank which
had sound capital, would not fear the operation of
this bill As all the banks in his State were sound,
it was matter Of little interest to his State whcth-
or the amendment was adopted or not. II had been
urged against the amendment, that il would tend to
bring the powers of the General Government and
the State Governments into conflict, but the issue
might well be made now as at any time.
Mr. BENTON said many Of his friend, were not
prepared to vote on this amendment, and he would
propose that it be printed and lie over till tomorrow