The Madisonian. [volume] (Washington City [i.e. Washington, D.C.]) 1837-1845, 1841-07-08
which is said to exist among the American people will

that il the arguments OF the gentleman from Virginia
Mr. Hives could be maintained, unquestonepy we
appeal which he had made To the friends OF tins great
measure ought 10 be heard. The exerton OF power
merely from the fact of It's possesson was not neces-
sary But, on the point Of fact thus assumed ny lhe
gentleman fTomf Virginia he was disposed 10 take -
lie would preset TO the Senate one or two rules
ia relation 10 tile mode Of investigating legislative
action on this question An affirmative decision OF
the power Of Congress To charter Bank Of the United
States coantersniled many negative decisions. hen
they relied the affirmative decisions Of the Nation
al Legislature in 1891 in 1916 and 1882, they were
not TO be reiuted by one negative decision. DID the
refusal of the Congress of the United States in 1911
The charter of The Bank Of the United States
evidence the fact that majority denied the power Of
Congress 10 incorporate Bank of the United Statesi
Certainly not. Ii the legislative history Of the coun-
try was examined, if there any question settled,
il this the Congress Of 1921 incorporated the
Bank of the United States; the Congress Of 1916
recharercd the Bank, and the Congress Of 1882
passed bill for the Incorporation of the Bank Of the
United States. Against these affirmative decisions,
clearly asserting the constitute nal power Of Con
to establish Bank Of the United States what was
there IN the legislative action Of the country that
could be opposed to il Ii not the refusal IN this
body in 1871 to recharter the Bank and that vote
passed by the single voice of the presiding officer
The failure TO pass this bill would be evidence Of
the denial OF the constitutional power Of Congress TO
pass this bill.
In the Executive Departments of the Government
the argument in favor Of the constitutionalty Of the
Bank equally strong He referred 10 the opinions
Wasl ngton, who signed charter TO the Bank, 0
those of the elder Adams of Jefferson, whose OPP
MONS were at first questioned, but who subsequently,
affirmed that rover, of Madison, Monroe, Of the
younger Adams, of Jackson, who expressly admitted
the power of establishing Bank of the United States,
and Of Van Buren, whose objections were on the
ground Of expectancy not originally calling in ques-
ton the constitutional power Of Congress These
all admitted the constuonalty of Bank.
Hp waulI untnl detail To the judicial de-
csions on this subject they had been uniform. The
Judiciary Department OF ihe Government was, by the
Constitution made the power TO interpret The Con
-ttution. They were bound to submit to the decis
ions Of that court Then if this question were at
frmed by all the departments of Government, and
to he cons dered still unsettled question: he asked
how it could be settled Superadded in proof Of
this was the fact that during forty years, the as
seriion If this power by the fathers OF the Consli
tuition in their early assemblages, had been acted
on, and taken as granted.
The advocates OF this amendment concluded that.
among the PEOPLE, 1t was an unsettled question. he
thought that the evidences of the public VIII were
too decisive To be mistaken for a moment. II was
referred to the vote of the people IN the reelection
of Jackson, in 1852 TO prove that the people were
against bank, There the least OF all possible
foundations for this inference. Jackson had avowed
the existence Of the power, and the question Of
Jackson's opinions was not in issue before the peo'
pie at that time. The election of Van Buren, IN
1886, had also been referred to- Van Buren, was
opposed to Bank of the United States he was
elected 1886; ergo, the people disheeved the
stltutionaliiy of bank. There was less pretence
even, in this than in the other inference. He was
supported the South, the advocate of Southern
principles, or as the Northern man. with Southern
principles" but least of ALL on the ground that he
was an ant-bank man. If they passed TO the cleo
ton OF Harrison, it seemed 10 him. they had the
most decided will OF the people and distinct afiir
nation Of the public opnlon, in relation TO The
stuonal power and expedIency, and the necessity
of such measure, to satisfy the wants of the peo-
pie and the necessities of Government.
fiji true tina, the bill open question, the
next inquiry would be, first, was The amendment cal
cuated the constitutional scruples said TO
oppose III And if that was true,
Next, !, efficient in its operations :
He then proceeded to show the dl crepances be
tween the advocates of this measure in the grounds
taken on it. The discussion of the Alabama did
relieve the advocates of the bill from the difficulty
The principle settled in this was that, although
corporation possessed extra territorial power, yet
the fact OF its existence might be recognised by o
reign sovereign and that II would be IN the absence
of re usa by that sovereignty. The very clause which
affirmed the power of Congress to charter Bank of
the United States, and Incorporate 1t within the Dis
trct of Columbia, with faculties OF acting for the Dis
trict, would maintain the power OF establishing
branches. The bill, with the amendment, asserted
and included all the power of Congress to establish
Bank of the Unitcd States, and if this amendment
serted the full power of Congress and consequently
could remove constitutional scruples, why would
they introduce the fundamentally would they not
adopt the original bill The supporters Of this blI
affirmed and denied in the same breath,
lie dou bed the the States TO the establish
ment of the branches. They would see that this
mere delusve currency. There would also be dit
tculty where in the States, the branches should
be located He had the evidence already ofthis in his
State, where little excitement had arisen between
two cities where the books of subscription should
be opened.
Had the Legislatures of all the States power, under
their Constitutions, give their assent H. the bill
He found article in the Constitution OF the State
of Illinois which prohibited it. The also existed
in the Constitutions of Indiana, Arkansas, and Ala
bama. The Legislatures of these States did not pos
sess the power to give their assent the bill Was
then wise when they establishing Fiscal A. cnt,
for the nation TO impose on il restrictions which pre-
vented its being called into active exercise in of
the States the Union
And finally he propoundcd the question with these
difficulties oyerhanging the institution, what was the
character OF the capitalists who likely invest
their funds in such an institution Would not the
stocks be taken up for speculation and mol 10y sound
and permanent subscribers
II these views had any thing OF reality in them, why
should they depart from the old way that had been
marked by the footsteps of our fathers He hoped,
with the outcry that had been made by the Why par
~ agaIns, experiment, that they would not adopt TINS
Mr. CUTHBERT was understood inquire of
his colleague Air. Berren) whether Van Buren, was
not elected on the grounds OF MS opposition 10 pank
MIR. BERRlEN said, within the sphere OF his per
sonal observation, he not supported that
giolnd.
Mr.. CUTIlBERT then would ask his colleague,
whether resolutions had been passed at that nc
by the Legislature of Georgia, declaring against Ma
lional Bank
Mr. BERRIEN could not state with accuracy in
he affirmative negative, hut belle, cd that the Lee
gsature of Georgia had passed resolutions against
Bank of the United States.
Mr. Gu ilBER / had consulted two Of his COLI
leagues OF the other House, who concurred with him
that such resolutions had been passed liter the pas