Richmond enquirer. [volume] (Richmond, Va.) 1815-1867, 1843-01-31

the scheme oil q Government BANK. 10 snow mat III
had not missated the report, he would read the follow
ing passage:
These banking powers, thus conferred upon ih'
Exchequer, for the purpose OF furnishing paper CIR
cua,,on, distinguish this plan from that of the Sub
Treasury
They under the apprehension that when one,
established, this would be converted into great Go
vernment hank. Bat, that there was reason 10
this apprehension, was evident !rom various pas
sages in the report. The repor, acknowledged tina
the independent treasury plan made 1t felony punish
able by fine and Imprisonment for officer of thai
institution to use any of the public moneys intrused tc
It's keeping They had therefore, what had beer
urged the main objection 10 IT, at once given up
The AFFECTIONS fell TO the grounh they vanished into
ar-into thin ur Ii had been frequently SAID tina
aoor that it was very difficult to tell what precise issue
was determined By the late presidential election. A
any rate he would contend, with great confidence
that whenever the sub treasury scheme presented
as distinct issue TO the people, they approved it,
But !. was said, by distinguished Wing, this or
that the election OF members TO the popular branch
tbs Congress turned upon their being for or agans
this scheme.
Tue gentleman from New York had gone over ons
Of the old arguments against The Independent Treasury
scheme bu in doing that, he had admitted (and he
thought The admission did great credit &c his candor
that the only objection to The scheme was, that it pro
vided after The money was deposited that was unde
The control of officers of the Government, and not Off
GERS OF The bank And he understood the gentleman tt
say that since the foundation of the Government
cep, during interval of year, the moneys of The
Government had always been deposited in BANKS This
was during The year in which the Independent Treasury
.Tas IN operation.
An a!usisn gas made i'll the report-a order to chow
bat he danger was ia IhiFus:ius The public moneys II
the hands olnd,vidnalso the case of Mr. Swaftv out
But this, he apprehcnded, not which bore
any analogy That which they were considering Hao
he Independent Treasury scheme been in operation
Ar S.ariwou never could have carried these frauds
and depreda,ions against the Government. This then
furnished no argument against the establishment of ar
Independent Treasury.
|, was stated in the report and had been repeated in
the House, tina, bank cannot abscond To be sure, il
could not Il had no, substance enough Ii was thing
altogether as mpapab shadow
Lille shadows they Gene, like shadows they Depart
But could not cashcrs-could not presidents abscond
Did the history Of the times show that they pure
fie thought not. Why should banks come in anc
demand the use of the public moneys between The
time Of collection and of disbursement What righ
had they 10 speculate with the money Of the Govern
nen: If The right not to be granted TO individuals
why should be granted TO corporations, 1t appeared
from documents before them that the loss had not beef
one hafso great under the operation Of the Sub treasury