BANK OF THE UNITED STATES--RECHARTER COMMENCEMENT OF THE PROCEEDINGS.
In the month of December 1831, the "National Republicans" (as the
party was then called which afterwards took the name of "whig"),
assembled in convention at Baltimore to nominate candidates of
their party for the presidential, and vice-presidential election,
which was to take place in the autumn of the ensuing year. The
nominations were made--Henry Clay of Kentucky, for President;
and John Sergeant of Pennsylvania for Vice-President: and the
nominations accepted by them respectively. Afterwards, and according
to what was usual on such occasions, the convention issued an
address to the people of the United States, setting forth the
merits of their own, and the demerits of the opposite candidate;
and presenting the party issues which were to be tried in the
ensuing elections. So far as these issues were political, they were
legitimate subjects to place before the people: so far as they were
not political, they were illegitimate, and wrongfully dragged into
the political arena, to be made subservient to party elevation.
Of this character were the topics of the tariff, of internal
improvement, the removal of the Cherokee Indians, and the renewal of
the United States Bank charter. Of these four subjects, all of them
in their nature unconnected with politics, and requiring for their
own good to remain so unconnected, I now notice but one--that of the
renewal of the charter of the existing national bank;--and which was
now presented as a party object, and as an issue in the election,
and under all the exaggerated aspects which party tactics consider
lawful in the prosecution of their aims. The address said:
"Next to the great measures of policy which protect and
encourage domestic industry, the most important question,
connected with the economical policy of the country, is
that of the bank. This great and beneficial institution, by
facilitating exchanges between different parts of the Union, and
maintaining a sound, ample, and healthy state of the currency,
may be said to supply the body politic, economically viewed,
with a continual stream of life-blood, without which it must
inevitably languish, and sink into exhaustion. It was first
conceived and organized by the powerful mind of Hamilton. After
having been temporarily shaken by the honest though groundless
scruples of other statesmen, it has been recalled to existence
by the general consent of all parties, and with the universal
approbation of the people. Under the ablest and most faithful
management it has been for many years past pursuing a course
of steady and constantly increasing influence. Such is the
institution which the President has gone out of his way in
several successive messages, without a pretence of necessity or
plausible motive, in the first instance six years before his
suggestion could with any propriety be acted upon, to denounce
to Congress as a sort of nuisance, and consign, as far as his
influence extends, to immediate destruction.
"For this denunciation no pretext of any adequate motive is
assigned. At a time when the institution is known to all to
be in the most efficient and prosperous state--to be doing
all that any bank ever did or can do, we are briefly told in
ten words, that it has not effected the objects for which it
was instituted, and must be abolished. Another institution is
recommended as a substitute, which, so far as the description
given of it can be understood, would be no better than a machine
in the hands of the government for fabricating and issuing paper
money without check or responsibility. In his recent message
to Congress, the President declares, for the third time, his
opinion on these subjects, in the same concise and authoritative
style as before, and intimates that he shall consider his
re-election as an expression of the opinion of the people that
they ought to be acted on. If, therefore, the President be
re-elected, it may be considered certain that the bank will be
abolished, and the institution which he has recommended, or
something like it, substituted in its place.
"Are the people of the United States prepared for this? Are
they ready to destroy one of their most valuable establishments
to gratify the caprice of a chief magistrate, who reasons,
and advises upon a subject, with the details of which he is
evidently unacquainted, in direct contradiction to the opinion
of his own official counsellors? Are the enterprising, liberal,
high-minded, and intelligent _merchants_ of the Union willing
to countenance such a measure? Are the cultivators of the West,
who find in the Bank of the United States a never-failing source
of that _capital_, which is so essential to their prosperity,
and which they can get nowhere else, prepared to lend their
aid in drying up the fountain of their own prosperity? Is
there any class of the people or section of the Union so lost
to every sentiment of common prudence, so regardless of all
the principles of republican government, as to place in the
hands of the executive department the means of an irresponsible
and unlimited issue of paper money--in other words, the means
of corruption without check or bounds? If such be, in fact,
the wishes of the people, they will act with consistency and
propriety in voting for General Jackson, as President of the
United States; for, by his re-election, all these disastrous
effects will certainly be produced. He is fully and three times
over pledged to the people to negative any bill that may be
passed for re-chartering the bank, and there is little doubt
that the additional influence which he would acquire by a
re-election, would be employed to carry through Congress the
extraordinary substitute which he has repeatedly proposed."
Thus the bank question was fully presented as an issue in the
election by that part of its friends which classed politically
against President Jackson; but it had also democratic friends,
without whose aid the recharter could not be got through Congress;
and the result produced which was contemplated with hope and
pleasure--responsibility of a veto thrown upon the President.
The consent of this wing was necessary: and it was obtained as
related in a previous chapter, through the instrumentality of a
caucus--that contrivance of modern invention by which a few govern
many--by which the many are not only led by the few, but subjugated
by them, and turned against themselves and after having performed
at the caucus as a _figurante_ (to make up a majority), become
real actors in doing what they condemn. The two wings of the bank
friends were brought together by this machinery, as already related
in chapter lxi.; and operations for the new charter immediately
commenced, in conformity to the decision. On the 9th day of January
the memorial of the President, Directors & Company of the Bank
was presented in each House--by Mr. Dallas in the Senate, and Mr.
McDuffie in the House of Representatives; and while condemning the
time of bringing forward the question of the recharter, Mr. Dallas,
in further intimation of his previously signified opinion of its
then dangerous introduction, said: "He became a willing, as he was
virtually an instructed agent, in promoting to the extent of his
humble ability, an object which, _however dangerously timed its
introduction might seem_, was in itself as he conceived, entitled to
every consideration and favor." Mr. Dallas then moved for a select
committee to revise, consider, and report upon the memorial--which
motion was granted, and Messrs. Dallas, Webster, Ewing of Ohio,
Hayne of South Carolina, and Johnston of Louisiana, were appointed
the committee--elected for that purpose by a vote of the Senate--and
all except one favorable to the recharter.
In the House of Representatives Mr. McDuffie did not ask for the
same reference--a select committee--but to the standing committee
of Ways and Means, of which he was chairman, and which was mainly
composed of the same members as at the previous session when it
reported so elaborately in favor of the bank. The reason of this
difference on the point of the reference was understood to be this:
that in the Senate the committee being elective, and the majority of
the body favorable to the bank, a favorable committee was certain
to be had on ballot--while in the House the appointment of the
committee being in the hands of the Speaker (Mr. Stevenson), and he
adverse to the institution, the same favorable result could not be
safely counted on; and, therefore, the select committee was avoided,
and the one known to be favorable was preferred. This led to an
adverse motion to refer to a select committee--in support of which
motion Mr. Wayne of Georgia, since appointed one of the justices of
the Supreme Court, said:
"That he had on a former occasion expressed his objection to the
reference of this subject to the Committee of Ways and Means;
and he should not trouble the House by repeating now what he
had advanced at the commencement of the session in favor of the
appointment of a select committee; but he called upon gentlemen
to consider what was the attitude of the Committee of Ways and
Means in reference to the bank question, and to compare it
with the attitude in which that question had been presented
to the House by the President of the United States; and he
would ask, whether it was not manifestly proper to submit the
memorial to a committee entirely uncommitted upon the subject.
But this was not the object for which he had risen; the present
question had not come upon him unexpectedly; he had been aware
before he entered the House that a memorial of this kind would
this morning be presented; and when he looked back upon the
occurrences of the last four weeks, and remembered what had
taken place at a late convention in Baltimore, and the motives
which had been avowed for bringing forward the subject at this
time, he must say that gentlemen ought not to permit a petition
of this kind to receive the attention of the House. Who could
doubt that the presentation of that memorial was in fact a party
measure, intended to have an important operation on persons
occupying the highest offices of the government? If, however,
it should be considered necessary to enter upon the subject at
the present time, Mr. Wayne said he was prepared to meet it. But
when gentlemen saw distinctly before their eyes the motive of
such a proceeding, he hoped that, notwithstanding there might
be a majority in the House in favor of the bank, gentlemen
would not lend themselves to that kind of action. Could it be
necessary to take up the question of rechartering the bank at
the present session? Gentlemen all knew that four years must
pass before its charter would expire, and that Congress had
power to extend the period, if further time was necessary to
wind up its affairs. It was known that other subjects of an
exciting character must come up during the present session and
could there be any necessity or propriety in throwing additional
matter into the House, calculated to raise that excitement yet
higher?"
Mr. McDuffie absolved himself from all connection with the Baltimore
national republican convention, and claimed like absolution for the
directory of the bank; and intimated that a caucus consultation to
which democratic members were party, had led to the presentation
of the memorial at this time;--an intimation entirely true, only
it should have comprehended all the friends of the bank of both
political parties. A running debate took place on these motions, in
which many members engaged. Admitting that the parliamentary law
required a friendly committee for the application, it was yet urged
that that committee should be a select one, charged with the single
subject, and with leisure to make investigations;--which leisure
the Committee of Ways did not possess--and could merely report as
formerly, and without giving any additional information to the
House. Mr. Archer of Virginia, said:
"As regarded the disposal of the memorial, it appeared clear
to him that a select committee would be the proper one. This
had been the disposal adopted with all former memorials. Why
vary the mode now? The subject was of a magnitude to entitle it
to a special committee. As regarded the Committee of Ways and
Means, with its important functions, were not its hands to be
regarded as too full for the great attention which this matter
must demand? It was to be remarked, too, that this committee,
at a former session, with little variety in its composition,
had, in the most formal manner, expressed its opinion on the
great question involved. We ought not, as had been said, to put
the memorial to a nurse which would strangle it. Neither would
it be proper to send it to an inquest in which its fate had
been prejudged. Let it go to either the Committee of Ways and
Means, or a select committee; the chairman of that committee
would stand as he ought, in the same relation to it. If the
last disposal were adopted, too, the majority of the committee
would consist, under the usage in that respect, of friends of
the measure. The recommendation of this mode was, that it would
present the nearest approach to equality in the contest, of
which the case admitted.
"Mr. Mitchell, of South Carolina, said that he concurred
entirely in the views of his friend from Georgia [Mr. Wayne].
He did not think that the bank question ought to be taken up at
all this session; but if it were, it ought most unquestionably
to be referred to a select committee. He saw no reason, however,
for its being referred at all. The member from South Carolina
[Mr. McDuffie] tells us, said Mr. M., that it involves the vast
amount of fifty millions of dollars; that this is dispersed to
every class of people in our widely extended country; and if
the question of rechartering were not decided now, it would
hazard these great and complicated interests. Mr. M. said he
attached no importance to this argument. The stockholders who
met lately at Philadelphia thought differently, for, by a solemn
resolution, they left it discretionary with the president of
the bank to propose the question to Congress when he saw fit.
If they had thought that a postponement would have endangered
their interests, would they not have said so? This fact does
away the argument of the member from South Carolina. The bank
question was decided by the strongest party question which could
be put to this or any House. It has been twice discussed within
a few years. It was rejected once in the Senate by the vote of
the Vice-President, and it afterwards passed this House with a
majority of two. It would divide the whole country, and excite
on that floor, feelings of the most exasperated bitterness.
Not a party question? Does not the member from South Carolina
[Mr. McDuffie] remember that this question divided the country
into federalists and republicans? It was a great constitutional
question, and he hoped all those who thought with him, would
rally against it in all their strength. But why refer it to
the Committee of Ways and Means? It was committed before to a
select committee on national currency. If this question was
merely financial, as whether we should sell our stock, and, if
we did, whether we should sell it to the bank, he would not
object to its being referred to the Committee of Ways and Means.
But it was not a question of revenue. It was one of policy and
the constitution--one of vast magnitude and of the greatest
complexity--requiring a committee of the most distinguished
abilities on that floor. It was a party question in reference to
men and things out of doors. Those who deny this, must be blind
to every thing around them--we hear it every where--we see it
in all which we read. Sir, we have now on hand a topic which
must engross every thought and feeling--a topic which perhaps
involves the destinies of this nation--a topic of such magnitude
as to occupy us the remainder of the session; I mean the tariff.
I hope, therefore, this memorial will be laid on the table, and,
if not, that it will be referred to a select committee."
Mr. Charles Johnston, of Virginia, said:
"The bank has been of late distinctly and repeatedly charged
with using its funds, and the funds of the people of these
States, in operating upon and controlling public opinion. He did
not mean to express any opinion as to the truth or falsehood
of this accusation, but it was of sufficient consequence to
demand an accurate inquiry. The bank was further charged with
violating its charter, in the issue of a great number of small
drafts to a large amount, and payable, in the language of the
honorable member from New-York [Mr. Cambreleng], "nowhere;"
this charge, also, deserved inquiry. There were other charges
of maladministration which equally deserved inquiry; and it was
his [Mr. J.'s] intention, at a future day, unless some other
gentleman more versed in the business of the House anticipated
him, to press these inquiries by a series of instructions to
the committee intrusted with the subject. Mr. J. urged as an
objection to referring this inquiry to the Committee of Ways
and Means, that so much of their time would be occupied with
the regular and important business connected with the fiscal
operations of the government, that they could not spare labor
enough to accomplish the minute investigations wanted at their
hands. We had been further told that all the members of that
committee were friendly to the project of rechartering the bank,
and the honorable gentleman [Mr. Mercer] had relied upon the
fact, as a fair exponent of public opinion in favor of the bank.
He [Mr. J.] added, that although he could by no means assent to
the force of this remark, yet that it furnished strong reason
for those who wished a close scrutiny of the administration of
the bank, to wish some gentlemen placed on the committee of
inquiry, who would be actuated by the zeal of fair opposition to
the bank; he conceded that a majority of the committee should
be composed of its friends. He concluded, by hoping that the
memorial would be referred to a select committee."
Finally the vote was taken, and the memorial referred to the
Committee of Ways and Means, but by a slender majority--100 against
90--and 24 members absent, or not voting. The members of the
committee were: Messrs. McDuffie, of South Carolina; Verplanck of
New-York; Ingersoll, of Connecticut; Gilmore, of Pennsylvania; Mark
Alexander, of Virginia; Wilde, of Georgia; and Gaither, of Kentucky.