Richmond enquirer. [volume] (Richmond, Va.) 1815-1867, 1841-12-03

.n',' ~, 80 ,..:y ncc,isatic:.s. \ more groundIcss
- ~ =. as M. following statement, will .4om, was never
malr- against, a public man. THIS statement w'll also'
trust. re.ev. tie opi"inn referred ~, from lie o'hci
ccu.urcs contained il he above extracts.
Presidrnl Jacksoa's reasons for retaining the cnrfch'
90 hi w;thou. acting definitely thereon, were stated ny
h;;,..lf in a N memorandum wiEch he left on ile IN tht
State Department., as follows:
.,rLr Nm rom he Senate, entitled, lin art dts'gna
INN asR @!i.a;ain. te .GaaGs ftfrtfed'e .tor Me reS'""e
II tie inosd SiaisS, came 10 ny ha"as s's"i''!
L Il !. o.ci,ck, l.. il. On ry7usirg Il, found rs pfofi
SONS 50 cnnaicx und uac.itaiu, 'hat Geeii!fd y IL
crssq-y IL obtain :hs cniainn IL the -.to:nrt -''ea"''
~ it,, United i:tal.s. 81. >..eiai important queriit'i'
,anchIns is construction and effect, ! tore comic d"
r,dr an the disposition &" IL liair ni y. ne A."'
ney. General inoH up the subject iinflrdla'.!F, atu u"
r.,iy was reported Ia me tins day. al =, l W. .asu"
officer. after a careful and laborions examination oi ne
bill, and a dis,inc; expression Of his OPINION oosion,
nuin,s proposed 10 him, still came 10 the con: a !aw.
4 liza, The construction Of the ball, should 1t beennnd doubt,
would vet be q subject Of much ~perpleSiltth my own
IA view Of the bill entirely consistent matter Of such
and as | cannot think it proper, u duplication, 10 APP
vital interest, and Of such consiaa' Of interpretations +;
prove a bill 50 liable 10 disernot had tame. amid tie
and more especially as hi ine, . eiyc the subject
duties constantly PRESTON which is Importance d..
that deliberate consids, i 10 retain tie bill without act
mands, aa consiaon aud 10 Tie cnd That ms rea-
Ing d"!in,i,vely hily H. fully understood, shall cause
sons ior this* i the opinion OF III. Attorney General
this paper, III question, To BE- drpnsii"d III The Depart
and the State. "ANDREW JACKSON.
menta suixGros, March Sd, 1887, before II, L. NJ.
he questions propounded 10 me by President Jack-
lon were designed 10 ascertain whether tie bill, if i
became a law, would compel the Treasury officers I"
receive bank nolcs al tho pleasure Of the drpoSisr BANK,
in payment If the public dues: would lake away an
cont.ai in this respect from the Secretary 81 Tie lrea.
,ury, an! wc"!! entirely repeal The i'int resolutions 81
ipf;i :;;lh, i-i:, which authorized the collection Of
,uiipc dues ~ lie legal currency Of the ! =: | rom
he tenor II Nr. E.wing'S resolution, d ~!"c'' lbs
h.!i ,ao.. iir i.!irc, from Tie speeches ~ sofa" = IT.
advocates. and !fa;a clarr circumstances, 's'S'c'i!'
Jackson had !.i.I.bra iAr innrcssiaa that sich .as III
trs,rn aad would b. th- ,fi.c; u tie bill: and had
co,l.. 10 the same conclusion, | nave no douD; the b:!I
would have been promptly rstocd. My answer 10 i'i-
aacsi,ons, as sill h. seen by referring TO the published
opinion, were, IN substance, That whatever might nave
bpru the wishes OF intentions Of individual members oi
CONGRESS, and notwithstanding the countenance given
to the opposite construction by the ambiguous phrase
olory adopted aud by extTinsic circumstances, the bil
did not, in lis true legal constructions, make bank notes
aLsolvteiy receivable, nor take away from the Secreta
~ Of the Treasury tie power If prohibiting their r.
cent, preside! sacA rrohiaiioH sticadri sh.e 10 ali
hsanfAcs n he p"hIf ror'"n,, nor repeal the CONT r.
solutions u The .4;l,. II .i?ri, l-iD, cScep; in lTii;ii.
IL some particulars, tie discretion Of the Secretary, am
especially III i~Irn,Ldiug hin . make an: dscrim.aa
GDn IN Tie funds receivable Tor di;irrcn, branches oi H.,
nuhl.c revenue. In other words, that the bill repcale,
tie Specie Nl-tU!il, ", ~ - N'AiHh' - 'oh'' -
cc;yat,e for pubic lands, end aid mt fftcnG 10 castumS,
and that i. forbade any such order for the future, IN.
lss5 il txteaded 10 customs as '7Gi as IL iands.
The answers thus given by me, to the questions 0
the President, were, III some sense, and probably IN the
sense Of the articles above quoted, an opiai0n IN fdr0'
III me bin because, ii | could have shown that IN,
construction was free from doubt, or could have salts
lied The President, rs thoroughly rs was iayscs: salts
lied, tina, no;w ithstanding all the room wheel! cNis!ca
T.. doubt and debate, NY construction was The true enc
have reason L. believe he mon.d hayc signcd The b,.i
\ Bat. ~uli.ourh cav, 1T large the reasons for ly con
s,ruc,ioa. and especially stated that had 'no oiIc,
.a,.l, as h IL. solndnc,s, than such - hs!0ass = ~
cu~sioEs Of THIS iia,;rr, auc 10 4 plc?e! sense oi Ill.
~fil,iajity ofhuman Judgment, was not able 10 affirm
TINT the suhjac, was free from officially. On The con
iiary, IVES obliged to say that the opposite con,irne
lion derived much support from Ike ambiguous Ian
suage employed from the views expressed IN debate
and from The history Of the bill and that, under these
circumstances, It's meaning, should il become n Iaw
sswould be a subject of d scussion and controversy, ant
probably remain involved III much p~erpleSity and douh
unt,i settled b. 4 judicial decision The President
concnrred very fully III he justice 81 these remarks OF
the ambiguity OF the bill and The difficulty Of tie sub
jcct, but lie iI ~. assent 10 NY construction Of is
provisions. Ills owa reflections, a. have stated, III
c!incd LHn 10 4 construction directly opposite 10 mae
and after the communications Of mr. answers - h.:
G,.estio.is, the subject ~as considerably discussed, hrs
between han ANA mrsc,f. and afterwards at 4 .ncciIn-
Of the Cabinet. Tins latter discussion was frequently
Interrupted By other matters demanding instant atten
ton, and was finally cut short, at the last moment by
the President determination to retain the bill Tor Tho
reasons stated b. him in the memorandum above quoted
Without gong into further details il is sufficient 10
me on The present OCCASION, to say that the answers
contained in my opinion as published, are the onil
answers ever gave TO the Presidents questions; tha
never uttered 10 him, or 10 any othcr person, a syria
bic inconsistent with that opinion: that Tie views *
pressed therein, 20 far from being Influenced by an
wishes Of his, were not uaiy ~ every sense my own
bat On HE n.aia point referred 10 nc, were directly -
pcs.te ,o what ! kncw to b. is decided impressions
VIXEN drc% TAP the OPINION and that the c"nsitrc
ton gwen hy NJ IL liz bill, though disaem.rd from i.
HIM wss ,eiaciously adhered 10 rs ne throughout n
our discussions.
I have always supposed that the cnlumnious rcportt
which am now replying, had lis origin in some Parila
or erroneous version Of the circumstances Just mention
ed, connected with entire misconceptions rs 10 the rea
character and bearing Of my official answer 10 The IRE
sident's questions; but whether those who put that re
port in circulation have this excuse for their conduct 0
no, the report itself, though sometimes repeated or al
luded 10 on the floor Of Congress, was always, a. hay
shown, perfectly false.
| Having thus yind,ca;cd the sincerity of nv published
opinion on the Currency Eii, will add = word or Is
~ 10 IT, sorldncss, although as do not claim 10 be ~
ia!!;blc, | shall IL bric: on this point.
First: y t. The alleged ohscnfity and ambiguity 9
the hhl. Tia; these qualities existed 10 the in!i *
tent stated BY nc, VIII, ] think, be admitted by an.
professional man Who shall examine lis provisions u
connection with their history, and with their pticr an
unrcpealed laws The proposal for repeating the lrea
sury order, commonly called the Specie Circular, wa
first presented 10 Congress b. 4 resolution introduced
INTO the Senate by Mr.. Ewing. That resolution wa
sufficiently clear and positive in lis language: but
was superseded hy a bill presented by Mr.. Rives; an
the latter, which vas not originally very pcrSlicuou
in lis lcrins, was rendered much les - by amendment
which il received in tie course Of is passage, and +