Richmond palladium. [volume] (Richmond, IA [i.e. Ind.]) 1839-1854, 1844-05-17

have confided to Congress but believe that in
the exercise of these powers that body will render
themselves subservient to the great purposes of
national compact.
The House and the Senate both agreed the
Report.
In 1921. the Legislature of New Hampshire
one of the seven that supported Mr.. Van Buren,.
passed the following Resolution
That the Congress of the L. States have by
the Constitution power TO establish a Bank with
Offices of discount and deposite in the several
States, as is done by the act establishing the Bank
of the United States and that the exercise of this
power is necessary to the due administration OF
the fiscal affairs of the L. States
Surely the author of this Address does not
mean to impeach the democracy of New
Hampshiro. This Resolution passed by u ma
iorty of I72 to 81
In June 1882 the Legislature of Pennsylvania,
State which ga,e an overwhelming vote TO Gen.
Jackson. passed the following Resolutions almost
unanimously
That, connected as the prosperity of agricul-
turc and manufactures Is with tho successful IL
nancial operations and sound currency OF the
country. we view the speedy recharterng OF the
Bank of the L nited States. with such alterations
as may secure the rights of the States, if any be
necessary, as Of vital importance to tho pubic
welfare.
Do the authors of this address mean to say
that the State OF Pennsylvania was Federal at
that time
But we have an authority which these gentIc-
men will not and dare not, attempt to treat light
H. 1t is that of Andrew Jackson. In his veto
Incssa &c no
"a Bank is Constitutional: but it is the province
of the Legislature to determine whether this or
that particular power, privilege, or exemption IS
necessary and proper to enable tho Bank to
discharge its duties to the government, and from
their decision there is no appeal to the Courts OF
Justice.''
There is no such thing going around this
plain and unqualified declaration - "A BANK Is
ICONSTTTUTIONAL!" We have here, an
authority from which there is no appeal for Lo-
cOtocOism.
Mr.. Madison in his letter in 1881, TO Charles
J. Ingersoll, himself distinguished Democrat
| and a Representative from tho Democratic
State of Pennsylvania, says
1.-THE act he observed, :. orr glnally cstab-
fishing the Bank had undergone ample discus
sons in its passage throughout the several
branches of the Government. 1t had been car
riod into oxocution throug hout period OF twenty
years, with annual Legislative recogntions at
one instance indeed, with positive ramiticatlon
of it into new State and with the cntlro acqui-
esconce of all the local authorities as VOL as the
nation at large, to all of which may be added 4
decreasing prospect of any change IN the public
opinion adverse to the constutlonalty OF such
an institution. A veto from tho executive under
such circumstances, with an admission OF the OK
pediency, and almost necessity of the measure,
would have been q defiance of all the obligations
derived from of procedents amounting
to the requisite evidence of the national judgment
and Intention
We ask pardon of our readers for quoting 50
largely from own columns. Our apology IS,
that these are facts from the record, and they
cannot be too often repeated.
/ If. then the members of tho late democratic
meeting, are determined to write Henry Clay q
: Federalist because he supported the Bank OF the
United States, insist upon placing james Mad
ison. John C.. Calhoun. Andrew Jackson. and the
entire States of Now Hampshire, Ponnsy lvania'
and South Carolina. in the same category. Mr..
CLAW is precisely as much of a Fedoralist they.
and not one particle more