Mississippi Democrat. (Carrollton, Miss.) 1844-18??, 1845-07-09
LETTER OF LUKE LEA, ESQ.
JACKSON, June 4, ls45.

JACKSON, June 4, lS45.
Dear Sir: have Just received your
letter of the 3lst ultimo, informing me that
Gen. Foote, in recent speech to the peo-
pie at Port Gibson, represented me as hav-
ing, with other citizens of this county,
come out in favor Of the Briscoe bill; and
you ask, can it be trueP | take pleasure
in answering your enquiry, but regret mat
/ cannot now give you my views oil THIS
question more at length.
!, 1t is always the part OF wisdom to look
at things as they really exist. NO man IS
practical who does otherwise. think It a
public misfortune that the Briscoe bill was
ever brought forward. With the excep-
lion of the injunction clause it contains
nothing new. The principles Of the CON-
mon law are amply sufficient, had they
been carried into effect, to have swept
away, long since, every bank in the State
that had violated its charter--and this is
what ought to have been done. For N.Y.
self, have ever been opposed to the whole
system of State banks. Their existence
has been, and is, in my judgment, stand
inc violation of the true spirit of the Fee
deral constitution. The Stale, unquestion-
ably, has the right to enforce a forfeiture
against bank for a violation of its char
ter. By the common law, judgment of
forfeiture annihlates the corporation, and
extinguishes its demands and liabilities.
In creating the banks, the State was in
no way bound, should forfeiture ensue,
TO save the claims of creditors by any spe-
cial legislation. The common law makes
no provision for administering on the es-
tates Of dead corporations nor do | con-
slider that the State is under any legal
obligation to do so. But from political
and moral considerations, | have been anx-
ious TO see the banks speedily wound up,
and their effects applied to the payment
of their debts. | should rejoice to believe
that this could now be done. But no one,
as far as am informed, expects that the
present law will be repealed or amended
in any particular, so as to make it more
favorable to the Banks. The only ques
ton IS, shall the present law stand, or the
Briscoe bill be substituted in its place? Ii
choosing between them, cogent reasons
present themselves to my mind why the
bill, obnoxious as il may be, should be pre-
ferred. Looking at things as they are,
cannot resist the conclusion that none 0
the banks in the State will ever be permit
ted to do any good. The law as it stands
will ultimately destroy them all. 1t viii
accomplish in gears what the bill woult
accomplish in months. The creditors o
the banks have, probably, nothing to gail
by prolonging their existence. The soon
er they are dead and buried, out of sigh
and out of mind, the better for all concern
ed--and most especially would ii be bette
for the wing party. Sudden death is pre-
ferable to slow poison.
/ have thus briefly defined my positio
in reference to the Briscoe bill. Being
candidate for judicial station, shoul
have felt delicacy in expressing an opir
ion touching the subject, had not the prit
ciples of the bill been sanctioned by III
High Court OF Errors and Appeals. Th
validity Of the amendment is matter I
doubt with some, and | shall express n
opinion as to that--nor should have don
so as TO the bill itself, but for the purpos
of correcting misrepresentation of m
views. regret to differ from some Of m
most valued friends on this subject.
them | freely accord purity oil purpos
Whether they are equally just to me, is NJ
essential to me, so long as continue {
friendly terms with my own conscienc
Right or wrong, | have the happiness
be assured that large majority Of Il
good people of this county are of my VIZ
of thinking. If we are deceived, il is IF
ly unfortunate, for the delusion is certain
becoming more and more general.
Very sincerely, your friend,
L. LEA.
P. w. TonpKINs, ESQ.