The daily Madisonian. [volume] (Washington City [i.e. Washington, D.C.]) 1841-1845, 1843-01-11

ludt DANA, Win Iun5Cut VI 'he ~ u'Sss w ~
cate branches in the States. And so desirous
was he 70 secure the cooperation of Mr.. Clay
and his friends, that he told Mr.. Ewing that
being protected in this point. 50 as 10 save the
constitutional question, he left the details OF the
bill 10 Congress, and 10 the Secretary OF the
Treasury. And 50 reasonably did this sugges-
ton appear, that his Cabinet pledged themselves
10 man TO stand by him.
Whig. Did not all his Cabinet concur in say
ing that he pledged himself to sign the second
bill?
Democrat They labored 10 make that charge,
but if you will read their letters you viii find
that the conversation out of which they would
manufacture such a pledge, took place before the
second bill was submitted TO him, and that in
stead of his pedgiug himself to approve that
bill, they pledged themselves TO him to obtain
from the party such bill a, he could approve.
| Knowing his opinions, we have only to CON
pare the bill with his known opinions TO see that
| it was impossible for him to approve this bill !;
and this brings us to the motive of Mr.. Clay and
his party, in refusing to pass such bill as he
could have approved.
Wig. Ay, you say that their purpose was
| to keep the currency question open as a means
Of political agitation.
| Democrat Yes, and is il not obvious? DO
you not admit that it is impossible to restore In .
prosperity Of the country, without having first
adjusted the currency?
| Wig Yes; and go further, aud insist that
this cannot be done withouta National Bank.
Democrat. You will admit that the only ques-
ton between the Wings aud Mr.. Tyler was
the right claimed by Mr.. Clay to establish
branches in the States against their consent.
Whig. A very material difference it was.
| Democrat. In whal2 If the Bank was ena
bled TO locate many branches as the public in
terests might require, why make 1t a sine qua
non that they should be located by an act OF
Congress? Would not branch located by au-
,horiy of State Legislature, have been as eff
Glen. for all purposes if it had been forced up
on the State, against its consent, by an act OF
Congress?
Wig. If | admit that it does not follow that
the Srates would have authorized the Bank TO
locate branches
honor; but insist that if the assumption that
the People are for the Bark be true-and that is
the ground assumed by the Whigs-t follows
that the right to locate branches would be Civ
en-. go furlher-I insist that it was in the
power Of Congress TO secure the location OF
branches in all or most oflhe States, for who can
believe that Pennsylvania, Maryland, New York,
| &C tha tata ,unntI of nor
mission TO locate branch, if the effect Of that re-
fIsal would be 10 cause the public moneys re-
| ceived in the Stale so refusing to be carried
into another State, TO be there deposited in
branch of the Bank 2 Would the merchants Of
New York permit the moneys paid into the
| Treasury in New York TO be transferred TO
Philadelphia, 10 branch there, rather than au-
thorze branch in New York 7 No one can
believe this.
Wig. Do you infer, then, that Mr.. Clay and
his friends refused TO pass such bill Mr..
Tyler recommended, because they wished to
keep the Bank question open
Democrat. Do not all Mr. Clay's par,isans
say that Mr. Clay must be elected, because il is
impossible 10 restore the public prosperity with
out Bank, and that it is.impossible to get
Bank unless Mr. Clay is elected7
Wig. Certainly they do. That is The set
tied conviction of the public mind, and we rely
on that conviction TO secure Mr. Clay's cleo
ton.
Democrat. II we cannot restore the prosper
ity Of the country without Bank, why did not
Mr. Clay take Bank, the branches 10 be loca-
ted by the consent Of the STATES 2
Wing. Because that would have been sur
render of the right TO locate the branches against
the consent Of the States, and Mr.. Clay was I'M
willing TO surrender the power which the Con
stilu,ion gave TO Congress.
Democrat. You admit that you cannot re
store the prosperity Of the country without a
Bank you admit that we might have had q
Bank ii Mr.. Clay would have consented to take
charter requiring the consent Of the States 10
the location of branches, and you justify MIR
Clay, who defeated the charter, by insisting on
a naked abstract right 10 locate the branches
against the consent of the States, while you
condemn MIR Tyler, who would have violated
his known constitutional opinions, if be had
approved Of Mr.. Clays bill. You admit that
the operation Of the Bank would have been
precisely The same whether the branches were
located by one mode OF the other but you over
look the fact that Mr.. Clay requires Mr. Tyler to
violate The Constitution which be has sworn 10
support, while Mr.. Tyler asks Mr.. Clay to 20 to
the Stale Legislature for that which he will be |
sure to obtain, because Mr.. Tyler does not be- |
ieve that Congress have the power to granrit7 !
Now,is 1t not strange that you who believe that a
Bank is the pdnoceo for the pubic distress,