The news & observer. [volume] (Raleigh, N.C.) 1894-current, 1895-09-15

the eXpeBSs S OF WHICH may NO paul. Il
thought advisable, by allowing its officers
to sell bills of exchange to private indi
viduals at a moderate premium.
This bark was not TO be a corporate
institution, il was to have no stock
holders. debtors, or property, and but
few Cffieers it was to issue no bills, tC
serve as a currency, but might receive
the bills CT the State banks OF deposit al
long AS they were redeemable in specie
1t found little favor, and died as ar
embryo, "still bora" I5 was doubt ess
suggested bg some one Of General Jack
sons friends, who thought it necessary
to fad substitute for The United States
Bank.
Tne annual message Of December,
1881 refers to the bank question in
general terms, but left it, for the con
sideration of ian enlightened people
and their representatives.
But in 1882, the war began in earnest.
Congress passed an act for the re-char-
ter of the United States Bank. 1t
passed the Senate, June II, 1882, by
| yeas %, nays 90. On July 3, it was
passed in the House Of Representatives
by yeas 100, nays 81 The bill as it was
passed by the two Houses, reduced the
corporate term from twenty to fifteen
years. Other changes of less Importance
were made. The measure was debated
at great length, and a committee, to
whom the bill was referred, sent in re-
majority and minority reports.
The committee'in the House of Repre-
sentatiyeS consisted of Messrs. Au-
gustine S. Clayton, of Georgia, John
Quincy Adams, of Massachusetts, Geo.
McDuffie, of South Carolina, Richard M.
Johnson, of Kentucky, Churchill @.
Cambreleng, of New York, Francis
Thomas, of Maryland and John G. Wat
mough, of Pennsylvania
The majority report, against the re
charter of the bank, was made by
Messrs. Clayton, Johnson, Cambreleng
and Thomas.
The minority report was made jointly
by Messrs. McDuffie, Adams and Wat
mough, and Mr.. Adams made an ad-
ditional, very long report, which is as
sented to by Mr.. Watmough.
The majority report is weak and con-
fused in style. The minority report,
from the trenchant pen Of McDuf-
fie, dissects that Of Clayton, and
shows the futllity of every aser-
ton contained in it. That of Mr..
Adams is able and learned, of course, but
so long that have not had time to ex-
plore it. The bank was doubtless well
and wisely managed But that was not
the main question involved, and General
Jackson, in his very able veto message,
gives little consideration 10 Biddle's
management of the bank, which bust
ness he leaves in the hands of Clayton's
majority. 1t is true that the veto mes
sage endorses, in general terms, the
conclusions of that report, and that en-
dorsement Is the only weak thing in it.
Otherwise, it is conclusive vlndication
of the Presidents course in withholding
his approval from the bank bill. He
shows that the charter gave a monopoly
of exclusive privileges to the bank in vi
olation of the Constitution.
The capital stock of the bank amount
ed to thirty FIVE million dollars. Seven
millions were held by the government,
and twenty eight millions by private
stockholders OF the twenty-eight mil
lions, eight millions, four hundred and
five thousands were held by foreigners,
mostly E1glshmen. The charter au-
thorized the States TO tax the stock held
by their citizens; and thus 1t was that
the foreign stockholders were exempted
| from taxation. The amount Of stock
held in the nine Western States, which
included Ohio, Indiana, Illinois, Mis-
souri,, Tennessee, Kentucky, Alabama,
Mississippi and louisiana, was only
$40. 200; and in the four Southern
States, Virginia, North Carolina, South
Carolina and Georgia, s., 623 100. The
Eastern aud Middle States held $13, 522, :
000 So that foreigners he'd a great
deal more OF the National Bank stock
than the South and West put together.
And yet, of the profits of the bank,
amounting to So, 455, 598, above one
half, VIZ, 1892, 555, accrued in
the Western and Southern States.
This disparity between the amount
of stock held in the South and
West, and the business done by them
with the bank, arose from the fact that
the bank stock was subscribed for in
| 1891 and 1916, when those sections were
| thinly peopled and poor. The veto meg
sage calls attention to the fact that an
effort was made to allow of a new sub
scription for stock under the proposed
re charter. But this by no means suited
the views of the bank. They held the
! twenty eight millions of stock, which
was very valuable aud source of great
revenue, and they had no idea of giving
| it up. The veto message states that the
country was then in a condition to have
taken two hundred millions of stock, if
a bank were needful.
The message calls attention to a privi
lege conceded to the State Banks by the
bill, which is withheld from individuals,
and declares it to be most unjust But
| this discrimination in favor of banks
as against individuals, is a radical and
normal principle in banks of circulate n
and all other chartered institutions
Stockholders are only held responsible
for the amount Of their stock. A bank
or corporation may run in debt far be
yond the amount of its subscribed
capital, and may go inro bankruptcy,
aud pay creditors five, ten, or fifty cents
on the dollar, while the aggregate wealth
Of the share holders is ten times greater
| than the amount of Indebtedness. But
an individual, or firm who runs in debt
beyond his or their means, will be per.
sued until the last cent is squeezed out
of him, or them, by the sale of house
and home, and whatever the sheriff can
lay his hands on.
! The or Y,ctn%