The daily Madisonian. [volume] (Washington City [i.e. Washington, D.C.]) 1841-1845, 1841-12-30
THE EXCHEQUER BILL.


In framing a law for the regulation of the II
n,nces, pan for properly securing the public
reyenue must be necessarily regarded as the
m ST important object. No matter what method
nav be devised, it is evident that some risk
m,st always be incurred establish what legal
safeguards you please, much OF the security OF
me pubc treasure must depend on the integrity
Of the officers to whose keeping i is intrusted,
All that the law can do is to diminish as far as
possible, the opportunities of embezzlement and
10 insure The people from loss in the work Of
regulation The accomplishment Of these OBJ
iects has been considered in the preparation of
line Exchequer plan, as claiming an importance
paramount to every consideration. For the
sat,kecping Of the revenue, choice was TO
Be mate between two methods. 1t must be de-
t5mined whether il were tie better plan TO de-
g,sit the money when collected in banks, or TO
place itin the hands % r"blic officers, who should
be made responsible by bonds, with sufficient
surtties for lis safety. BY which method would
heltast risk be incurred? The question is impor
tant but we believe the decision correct, which
crelers the agency Of bonded officers to the
guarantee supposed TO be afforded by the CAPT
tai of banks. The reasons for the preference,
We conceive to be palpable. In the first place-it
he public treasure is liable to embezzement, by
passing into the hands Of public officers-the
Danger j. by no means diminished by its depo-
SIT in bank IL first comes into the posses
son Of a collector or receiver and the deposit is
made by him. If he is dishonest, the commits
son ofihe peculation is in his power as soon as
hereceives the money, and he may deposit in
tie bank what his fraud may deem proper so TO-
lace IN apparent security. Unless we are BIZ
ased by some singularity of prepossession, we
cannot suppose that the money receives new
insurance Of safety by being confined TO the
vault, OF abank. We have no reason, either
puoti, or suggested by experience to believe
hat bank officer Is more likely TO be honest
th,n pubic officer. Dishonesty may find its
way behind the counter of bank, as well as
he people, by transmission through the hands
Of public agent into the keeping ola bank Off
ce,, is exposed to double danger If it escape
in safety through the honesty of the former, its
danger may be renewed by being intrusted
10 the fragile integrity Of the latter Again, il
tle custody of the bank it is obnoxious TO more
ltIck' of fraud, than in the care of the single
public officer, because there is more than one
man in the bank to whom the deposits are ac-
cessble. Every consideration tends to evince,
HAT tha' rav -. b,t
rl6us in the hands OF an agent, obligated by off
elal bonds, with satisfactory sureties for the
hthlul performance ofhs duties, than they pos
slo'y can be in the keeping of irresponsible bank
sffcers.
But there is still another reason for prefcrring
lie security OF bonded officers to the irresponsi-
bllty ola bank Granting that the deposits are
ia no danger from the frauds of the persons en-
Ioyed in the bank, there is still another obiec-
|uoA, and strong one, against selecting such a
pace OF deposit. Excessive loans and extrava-
cant accommodations frequently endanger the
safety of!he bank, and by consequence the funds
that are intrused 10 its keeping There is no
guarantee that the impulses Of sef-interest, will
not, at any moment, drive it 20 the commission
u the imprudences which will not merely
leopard It's safety, but will insure its destruction
land in that case all who have not had the
warning to withdraw their deposits in time be.
come participants in its losses. When commit
led 10 the skill Of bank officers, and to the pledge
q bank capital, assuming tie honesty of the for
mer and the reality of tile latter, there IS still
much 10 be apprehendcd for the safety of the
ople's money. But when in addition to this
consideration, we reflect that the intrusion OF
dishonesty into bank is as possible and proba-
Ae as its existence elsewhere, we perceive
ample reason for the preference given to
Individual agencies regulated and controlled by
proper checks and securities. The plan of the
ESchequer for the safe-keeping Of the public
money, Is liable to as little objection as possible
'endeavors 70 simplify, as far as practicable,
ne mode OF collecting and discussing the public
money; It's agents are reduced to the smallest
lumber consistently with the performance of the
!ects 1t contemplates to fulfil, and Obligated BY
Oond and security for the faithful execution OF
oeir duties; 1t makes no loans and gives no
ccommodatlons, and consequently Goes moi
xpose the funds, intrusted to its charge. to the
azards of speculation. Ithas done all that or.
aoary foresight can devise for effecting the most
Important object Of its establishment; it has
NoWn around the public treasure every feasibl,
'aeguard, and it can do no more. Every ave
lug OF dangerous ingress cannot be completely
'pcKaded. No mode can be conceived for secu
W. me public money in which some reliance
..ss' not be placed on the integrity of the per.
s's % whom 1t is intrusted. All that alaw car
: 70 diminish the chances of fraud and in.
n T'ng decentralization when loss is incurred
Y ESchequer bill appears to us to make al
necessary provisions TO attain these ends
a,r MANS MAGAZINE for January, 1912 is over
d Ds WIN magnificent embellishments, and swell
,s IVY WIN the rich and rare productions of able con