Burlington free press. [volume] (Burlington, Vt.) 1827-1865, 1841-08-13

10 establish branch at the city of New Orleans
great political revolution had happened in the
country, and Mr.Jeforson was at the head Of
affairs. The bank had then been established
thirteen years and bill authorizing it to es-
tablish branches within the Territory of the
United States, passed both Houses and reccy.
ed the signature Of the President; in conse.
lquence Of which the branch at New Orleans
went into operation. Hesdid not suffer the bill
to become law by neglectng to return it with
objections, butthe actually signed it. Yet he
was the head and leader of the party who had
previously been opposed to the bank, who held
as strong notions in relation to its unconstituton.
atty as any Of those most opposed to it. BY
signing bill TO establish new branch of the
institution, he virtually sanctioned the estab.
ment of new bank. This was in 1904 Pre-.
yously,in !e0l, the Commissioners of the Sinking
FUND, established for the payment of the nation.
al debt, had been authorized to sell the stock of
the bank subscribed for by the United States
the sale was made,and the full value Of the stock
received into the Treasury.
| In 1911, the charter of the first bank expired
and from that time down to 1915 the financial
affairs OF the country had been in state of per.
feet confusion: opportunity had been offered
then, as now, to individuals to take ADVANTAGE,
OF the government and Of each other: specu1a-
ton abounded, defalcatons multiplied, and af-
fairs became worse from day to day, till then,
as now, the community cried out with one uni
ted voice, Z" Let US have Bank of the United
States" A bill for the charter of bank was
accordingly brought into Congress, passed both
houses, and was sent to Mr.. Madison for his sig.
nature. That great man had not only been Cd.
posed to the incorporation Of the first bank, but
in that, as in all else he did, had sicnalized him.
self by the zeal and ability he displayed he
was IN fact one Of the chief champions of those
VINO maintained the unconstitutionality of such
an institution; more especially after the adop.
ton OF the memorable resolutions of 179S, when
he was considered also as a Waterman peculi.
| arly commissioned to watch over the sanctty of
what then came to be known as the Estate
| rights" cause. Mr.. Madison returned tho hin
| with objections, not however to its constitution.
atty, but to its expdency. His veto MESSAGE
was dated January &c. 1916; and in the fol.
lowing year Congress passed bank charter
which removed his objections to the expedencv.
and he signed the bill. Here, then, were the
lllustrious names Of Thomas Jefferson and lac
Madison, the one affirming the power of Con.
gress to extend the power of bank already in
existence, the other to establish a new bank
There they stood in company with the name If
George Washington on the records of the GOV.
crnment as sanctioning the power. Mr.. s. stood
upon the record. Nor would it do to tell him
that the assent was extorted by necessity the
moment any man resortcd to that argument. be
surrendered the question Of unconstitutionalitv
II the charter was rendered constitutional bv a
case OF urgent necessity, then it was copstt,,.
t'onai now the necessity only being shown to
exist. "
Congress had again been called to vote on thu
question in 1887. 1t had then more than n
glimpse Of that great substitute for ali tbinrs
called the Sub Treasury or the Independnnt
Treasury" To prepare the way for that favo.
rite measure, the Chairman of the Comm,,co
of Ways and Means had brought in a Resolu.
ton, declarng-wlat that it was uncons,itu-
tlonal to establish bank of the United States !
No-but that it was inerpedient; which must
be construed to mean that, as the Sub. Trooou
ry would be adequate to the supply of all rho
fiscal wants Of the government, a Nation,l
Bank would not be required. Would rentle'
men tell him that under this allegation. VIZ tbo,
to create bank was inexpedent, there was
contained the proposition that it was unconst;.
tutional This would be to attempt to do what
was no less intellectually then physically i'm.
possible, viz made the less contain the grca,ar
IL the bank was unconstitutional, then the cues.
tion o. Its exPedlency. was not open; it then
the House voted it to be eXpedient, thew voted
in way which implied that, if it had been ex.
pedlent, they would have had a right to prant
the charter.
TINS, Mr. 5. said, was hasty glance at the
legislative action in relation to the question :.
and, without going any further, he miobt here
stop and ask if any candid man would now al.
lege that National Bank is in itself unconsti-
tutional! '''''
lie next proceeded to look at the iud,cia, re-
cognitlons of its consttutionality. which had
taken place. They were, indeed, infinite too
numerous for particular reference, and in rverv
variety OF form but, without regarding these
Congress had made two express and solemn do
clslons on the direct question, viz: one in tho
celebrated case of McCulloch vs. the State of
Maryland' and the other that of Osborne against
the Bank OF the United States. What was the
question 1t was one which arose nnde er , ,he
Constitution and Laws of the United States
and what was the jurisdiction of the Sunreme
Court on such questions 1t was final and con.
elusive over all subordinate tribunals its deci.
sion settled the law. In this case it's iurisdic.
ton was exclusive, and every citizen might 90
INTO court with its decision as being of final aI.
thorlty, against which no objection would lie As
to the unconsttutionality of the bank. What
an anomaly would it be that that which is do.
clared by the supreme tribunal of the country
to DO constitutional law, binding on the whole
land and every individual in it, should be held
not TO be constitutional If man should he
sued by the bank, could he plead that the hank
was not constitutional! Certainly not because
its constitutionaty was settled question.
lie did not, indeed, pretend that the authority
OF ouch decision extended to opnions-it was
not necessary to insist on any such thing bn,
it extended to rights. A man might retain the
same opinion after the decision that he did h..
fore it, Gas happened in all courts every day:I
but when the question was to the right of the
country to have what, according to the lanpuau,.
OF the old Congress, was indispensable ;" to il.
then no one was at liberty to controvert their.
right any more than he would be in court.
On this point. Mr.. S. would Law down mod
est and reasonable proposition, which he hoped
none would dony. lie had ieIerreu to Mr..
Joforson's signing bill for the New Orleans
branch in 1904, and Mr.. Madison's signing the
charter of the bank in 1916, after having, in Is.
Is, given his objections to it in that Case hc
considered the question of constitutionali,y set.
tied, not only as to the existing bank, but on the
general question of the rights Of the People of
the United States to have bank whenever
they wished it. Now, he asked whether, sic.
-, Al IT.. L.