The Democratic Whig., 1843-10-05

i In the Union Bank charter, tAerel are ty
i laws; the 1st law he's fOF rs object the raising
i of the money recesss ry.tc carry into operation
the Union Bank; the I'd contains provisions
for the establishment Of the Bank. The ls
/ is found in the Ist and 5tE sections of the char
/ ter; the rest Of the act contains tie necessar,
provisions for the incorporation, establishment
and regulation cf the Bank. An,act Of incor
poratiOn need not receive the action of the .tw.
Legislatures to render it constitutional; but th.
constitution Of Mississippi requires that Law
pledgingth the faith Of the State, should be passed
by two, succeeding legislatuFes to orender it va
lid. In the, act of inrorptf Of the u. baIll
for which Mr.. Brown voted, -QnlY iha. la.s
vIding for raising the funds BY pledging the
/ faith of the State was referred to two legisla-
| lures; that was aIf that was deemed necessary
! 10 be referred in conformity with the constitui-
ton. Mr.. C1aytoa cited several other acts in
which the faith If the State was pledged, and
for which Ger Brown had voted; in all oftEese
only that p,rtion Of the bills pledging the faith
of the Sate was directed to be referred to a
succeeding legislature. Among these acts
was one providing for the internal improve
meut of the State" by which the faith Of the
State was pledged for five millions, and anoth-
er was TO aid the Commercial Rail Road and
Banking Company of Vicksburg to prosecute
the work of Internal Improvement by which
the faith of the State was pledged for one mill
lion. For both these acts Gen, Brown yo-
ted, and IN eachit is provided that the sections
of the acts, whereby the faith of the State is
pledged, be referred to the succeeding legisla.
tures thus shelving that the members of the
Legislature and Mr.. Brown amcng them took
the same view of the constitutional reduisiiion
in regard to referring the law pledging the faith
Of the State to succeeding legislature, which
Mr. Clayton did, and he therefore concluded
that so much of these acts as required but one
legislative action could be altered and amend
ed at pleasure. Mr. Clayton said that it had
been c5htended that the execution of the mort
cages contemplated in the act, for the security
of the State, was a condition precedent, and
As that had been omitted to be done, that there
ore the State was underno obligation to meet
It's bonds. Mr.. Clayton satisfactorily answered
his objection; he said, suppose the mortgages
hal not been executed. but it had been repre-.
sented by the commissioners that they had,
and the Governor under this impression had
issued the bonds. can the innocent purchasers
.AEa4.az. bonds ba m.las e sns1isf or the fsith-
lesshess Of our state ] agents.
He Showed conclusivelv that Mr.. Browns
position in having voted against the supple
mentary bill whilst he voted for the original
charter did not in the slightest degree justify
his present advocacy ofthe doctrine OF re3udi-
alton or make his Inconsistency less than if he
had voted for both bills. He asked, did the
act change the original design Of
he act! No sir, it provided Cor the States be-
corniUg a stockhnlder in the Institution. and no
one, he presumed, would assert, that the State
could not take stock in this bank as well as
any other n Mississippi. The only changes
which this supplemental act made, were, to
provide for the States taking five millions Of
stock, and an alteration of the original act pro-
7iding for the appointment ofa provisional di- |
ectory, which under the supplementary act
Vas T0QuITGQ 10 OO COLupOSCQ
ioners selected by the provisions of the second
ectIon ofthe charter. These changes neither
fected the law p'edging the faith OF tho State
cf interfered with the object proposed in the
harter, but were alterations in the details of
he bill entirely unimportant. Mr.. Clayton
hen in a forcible and unanswerable manner
xposed Mr.. Browns inconsistencies on this
ubiect. He mentioned the fact that whilst
e was in the legislature of 1889. he was.
1ember of a committee, which introduced
III giving additional privileges to the U. bank,
(which bonds ten millions five hundred thous-
nd additional dolls. were proposed to be issued
nd sold for the benefit of this institution He
oted for tins bill at its passage, and after it
,as vetoed by Gov. McNuit voted for its pas
ace over the Governor's . veto, BY y'the consti-
ltional majority of two thirds. The question
rises, why was the sum of one million ME
indred thousand dollars selected for the a.
ount of bonds proposed to be issued! The
1swer is obvious, because this sum and the
rst five millions, which had already been me-
ociated, together made up the amount proVi-
ID for in the original charter ofthe Union
ark, and establish the fact, tthat the Honora-
,le A. G.. Brown did not at that time attach |
nv Importance to the States not having been |
.cured by mortgages for the FIVE millions
hich had been obtained. This pretext is an
terthought, for as 4 member OF the Leglslar |
ire acting under the solemnity Of af oath nel /
,uld not have considered the exeeution of the |
lor tgages i condition precedent er he wouid |
1t have supported this naeasurA Mr.. Brown I
So introduced into the house resolution that
q two we houses proceed to the election Of ten |
,anarerrs; when motion was made for the
,stponement Of his resolution hsvoted against
and e,viiinced the utmost anxiety TO have the
ank carried into immediate operation, whilst /
.lsbury and Tncker and others, who were op-
ooyed to the bank. threw every obstacle.. in his
,av. The honorable gentleman knew very
eli that the bank would 60 into Op sratiOn