Iowa territorial gazette and advertiser. [volume] (Burlington, Iowa Territory [Iowa]) 1840-1846, 1844-02-03

explain his vote, and state the motives that gov.
erned him. This leg stature had no power
whatever to repeal this charter. & The reserva-s
ton upon which they relied was hr from giving
| them that power. The power depended upon 4
contingency, and it was not competent for this
Legislators to assume that that contingency had
happened. We were asked 10 do an act which
depended upon facts; but no facts had been
shown No c6li,mitt.e had been appointed, no
evidence had bcea brought forward. We had
had nothing but defamation and assertion. The
| power to ind these facts rested with the Judi
cIary. Il wa, paced there by the Organic law,
which was or Constit ,ton; and this legislature
was expressly forbidden to exercise judicial
| powers The Ordinance or ~, and the Consti-
tuition OF thc United States We're equally ssain.t
the actj and he warned the gentlemen upon this
floor how they rashiy iieri!cd their oaths; in un.
dertakir'g TO do whit the Constitution Under
which they acted forbade them to do
NJ: BAKER said he was against the Bank and
~ iavos OF an unconditional repeal Of its charter
| tie was opposed to all Banks and all corpora
tlons, upon principle. These Banks were the
hens that Matched the chickens Of credit; and
credit would be abused when we had such MAJ
chimes to foster it. This Bank he believed to
have acted corruptly and Justly forfeited its
charter; and he believed in the power of the Le-
gslature to repeal this or any other charter
The gentleman from Scott had poked perjury at
them But the democracy Of the House were
not to De frightened from their purposes in that
way. lie would not vote to sustain Bank,
even though his constituents instructed him to do
so. lie should believe his constituents to be de-
celyed or mistaken, and would take the resrjon-
slbillty OF opposing the measure; and then APP
peal to their sober second thought, to sustain
him in what he had DONE
MIR. Robb said men of capital and character
were proposing to rcsusctate the Miners Bank,
and large majority of the voters of some Of the
democratic counties had instructed their repre-
sentatives to vote for bill compelling the Mi
ners' Bank to resume. Yet they We're disobey-
ed. One gentleman told us in round terms that
ne would disobey instructions. The spirit of
party demanded sacrifce--and by their own
showing they had found very proper sacrifice
"a dead and rotten carcass. Locofocoism pre-
tended to go against all moncpolies, and would
probably soon be found going against marriages
opposing one mans appropriating exclusively
70 himself one woman-and calling that mo-
nopoly. But we were told Banks are unc0nsti-
tutional. Who approved the first United States
Bank? Was it not George Washington, the Fa-
Their Of his country, and the President of the Com
vention that framed the Constitution? And who
approved the second Bank? Was it not that
Democratic President, James Madison who was
The penman OF the Constitution? But our de-
mocracy has grown wiser than Washington and
Madison They were fools, like the gentleman,s
constituents! They didn't know what they were
signing!
Mr. Sunderland wishes il known that he de-
clines the nomination of City Engineer.