Newspaper Page Text
I - : ? . .. - . & - , '
(II Kit AW GAZETTE. m. maclean editor & profrietor. CIIERAW, S. C., TUESDAY, MAY 24, 1836. m. t jib.* ^ > I I Published eveiyTuesday. IEBWS. If paid wilhia throe months, - . . 3. OC It paid withinthree montns after tne close ot the year, - ------- 3. 5( If not paid within that time, . . . . 4. 0( A company of six persons taking the paper ; the same rust Office, shall be entitled to it at ?1 paid in advance, and a company of ten persoi at #20 ; provided the names be f orwarded togeti er, accompanied by the money. So paper to be discontinue but at the optio of the Editor till arrearages are paid. Advertisements inserted for 75 cents per squai the first time, and 37 J for each subsequent inse tion. Persona sending in advertisements are requcs ed to specify the number of times they are to I inserted; otherwise they will be continued ti N ordered out, and charged accordingly. Jj'The Postage must be paid on all commi nications sent by mail. Extracts from Mr. Garland's Speech in reply t Mr. Bell. The honorable gentleman from Tennes ' a *> ?t\ _ ^ ^ see, oai) in assigning mv re?u?uu which have induced him to abandon uth party" now sustaining the Administration charges, 1st. That the Administration cam into power upon the profession of one set o principles, and practices upon anotl>er. 2d That the Administration has been grossh derelict in its duty in recommending prope measures and providing for the defence o the country. 3d. That its practices an prodigal and corrupt in the employment am disbursement of the public funds used in dis pensatingtlie patronage of the Government And 4th. That it has attempted to deludi the People, and produce public excitemen upon subjects which th\?y recommend, am never intended to carry out into practice Before, however, I proceed to answer thesi charges, I propose to ascertain the true poin of responsibility* if they be found true. Th< honorable gentleman from Tennessee sayhe attaches but a slight degree of responsi bility to the President, for t!?e practices am neglect which he charges upon the Admin istration; but holds his lieutenants, as hi calls them, responsible, and thinks the Vici President himself should be held somewha responsible; that he ought, to some extent to examine into the practices of the Govern ment, and correct abuses. I do not, Mr Chairman, concur with the honorable gen tleman in his views upon this subject. 1 hold the President himself responsible foi all and every abuse of Executive neglect o " rni /i ? duty or abuse ot power, i ne lonsuuuioi charges him with the whole Executive duty he appoints to office and removes at his will it* abuses exist, the Constitution has placet in his hands the corrective power; and if hi fails, whenever he has knowledge of abuse to apply the corrective, I hold him resoon sible to the country. I will not separate be tween the President and Executive officers because all his duties consist in controlling tiieir action and correcting their mulpracti cos. It is here abuses.may sometimes exis for a tune without his detectiou; but whci he docs detect them; it is his duty to correct and, if he fails, he is deeply responsible Mut upon what priuciple the Vice Presiden is to be held responsible, I confess I canno discern. He is charged by the Constitutioi simply with the duty ol* presiding over th< deliberations of the Senate; ho can neithci appoint nor remove an Executive officer, no can he constitutionally do a single Execu tive act, unless he is charged with the dutie of the office of President, by the death, re moval, or resignation, or disability of tin President. Sir, the Vice President is upor 4io principle responsible for any abuses o the Government, however glaring or cor rupt, for the simple reason Jhat he has n< constitutional power to correct thcpi. It i 'obvious, however, that lie is to be held res ponsibleby his opponents, with a view t* affect him in the comingPresidentiul election I come now, Mr. Chairman, to conside the charges of the honorable gentlemai from Termessce.against the Administration in doing so, 1 shall attempt to defend th Administration by fact and reason. I shal not employ opprobrious party epithets, o impeach the motives of any man upon thi floor. Conscious of the integrity of my o wi opinions, I shall extend to others with whor I differ as much credit for integrity of opic ion as 1 claim for myself. Knowing, as do, the liability of the human mind, and it pronencss to err, and being unwilling to clair to myself infallibility, if facts and reason cannot be foond to sustain my opinions, am sure denunciation will not. The firs charge that I propose to consider is, th th Administration came into power protessin one set of principles, and that it practice upon another. The first specification mad by the gentleman from Tennessee, which shall discuss, is the subject of "Internal I it provemeni." He charges that the presei ^ Administration came into power professin opposition to this system, and in practice ha expended more money than in the same p< * riod of any pre-existing Administratioi * First, then, sir, as to the profession, and the the practice. And here 1 might rest tl defence of the Administration against tl charge, by simply quoting from the soeec of the gentleman from Kentucky (Mr. Aliei the charge that the President came into pov er favoring Vie system of Internal Improve ments, while his practice has overthrown i This gentleman read an extract from a lett< ' from the President to the Governor of Ind ana, in which the President refers to his vofc as a member of the Senate upon this subjec and asserts his opinions to be unaltere This letter, the gentleman from Kentucl fhs West into the snniwri OUJ O, IVIUUVV ???v f "?? the President. He says: 'This letter, throug out the West, was considered as removii every doubt, and the vote of that count was given upon the faith of the positi pledge it containedThe gentleman ss castically says that this pledge was i deemed by the veto of the Maysville j and that the veto of the bill for the be eiit of the Louisville canal, in the latter t which the President expressed this sound and orthodox opinion : "Positive expert. 1 C7ice, and a more thorough consideration of I the subject, have convinced me [the President] ) of the impropriety as well as inexpediency of at such investments After the gentleman 5. had spoken of the shock and disappointment 18 which the Maysville and Louisville canal l' | had produced in the West, and their tenden(I1 ! cv to weaken the ties which bind together ; representative and constituent, and denying "e ! the right of a representative to change his r- j pledged opinion, he says; "But it teas vc. t 1 cessaty to break the shock which this disap. l0 \pointment caused in the West." U | This purpose was accomplished, says the ! gentleman, in the message of 1829. Sir, j this is certainly a most singular state of I -i 'ni. _ 'c j. ,i .] J mini's. x nu iuicu vi sjjuck uiiu uiaup0 ! pointment created by the Maysville veto message of May, 1830, in the West, is broken by the annual message of December, s 1829. Most singular?the force of a shock e which took place in May, 1830, is broken by i, a message delivered about six months before I c I leave the gentleman to make the best of ,f this argument he can; for it is, I admit, . greatly beyond my comprehension. In addition to this testimony; I will offer that of r; Mr. (Any, who pronounced, I think in 1834, f i the death of his favorite system of internal 2 i improvement under the blow given it by the 1 J Maysville veto. Every member know9 the . 1 particular solicitude with which that gentle. , . , man watched over his favorite system, and 2 ; that, from his public or private relations with t! the President, be would not be disposed to J i do him more than justice; yet, as late as . t 1834, he pronounced the system crushed 5! beneath the power of the veto. Now, sir, t J this gentleman, or the gentleman from Tennf ci. no Ia fhn I 2 j IKJSSUVf XUIdlOA^U* l/Ul) OH 9 ??o IV vt.w 3 j protested principles of the President upon . j this subject when he came into office; indc1 | pendent of this testimony, I think I shall be .; able satisfactorily to prove that tho I resident, s I in the administration of the Government, has 5 been consistent with himself, in profession 1 t and practice, in relation to this subject. The ,: Mavsville veto was the first occasion upon i . I which the President made a particular avow. ! al ofhis opinions upon this all important i . question of constitutional power, in'which [ j he denies the right of this Government to r! construct works of internal improvement f i within the boundaries of a State, or to ap1 ; propriatc money in aid of such w orks, by ; j subscriptions for stock or otherwise. lie I ; | avows also the opiniou that this Government j has the powe:? j appropriate money for re2 moving obstacles from, and imrpoving the , navigable rivers within, the limits of a State, .; or where it is the boundary between States, . : and for constructing works of improvement , in the Territories; in all of which he distinr | guishes between works of u national aud . j those of a mere local cirnrUcter. The Pre t sideut, however, in the veto message, ex- j a: presses himself doubtfully of what is the ! ; . true boundary line, within which the Govern-: . j meat may appropriate money, and rccom11 meuds such an amendment oftlie Constitut! tion as will place the exercises of this imi; portant power upon its true ground, defining : j the line over which" the Government shall r 1 not go, and putting to rest forever this vexed r j question. The V resident repeated in each . ( of his succeeding messages the difficulty s i under which ho labored, and the recommen. j dation of a constitutional amendment, to res ! licve the Executive from the difliculty. This i ; recommendation of his, merely to define by f j constitutional declaration mis power, uus . | not been responded to by the'represcutatives 51 of the People, and the responsibility for its 5 failure rests upon then). It cannot be forgotten that the Maysviiie [> veto was hailed with enthusiastic delight by . the opponents of this power, as cutting off r the whole system of local improvements a within the limits of the States, and though i; not achieving the whole, yet achieving much a | very much, for the principle of strict conU ; st ruction. All the public journals so regardr j ed it, and this was the view which was tas i ken by the whoie nation. This, sir, is the n | principle which the Administration profess, n ! ed; and I contend that in all the appropriai j lions for works of internal improvement, 11 none have been constructed of h local char, s acter, incompatible with the principles avow, n ed in the Maysviiie veto and subsequent s messages. If there is one, sir, it lias4 escaI ped my memory, and I should like to know >t the truth. e [Mr. Wise rose and said, that understandg ing his honorable colleague (Mr. Garland) s | to inquire or to ask lor a specification of any e act of approbation bv the Executive of the I principle of internal improvement since his i. veto of the Maysviiie road bill, he would, it with his colleague's permission, specify a rr single instance during the fast Congress. O C" " o * v? rt d Mr. Garland gave way, and Mr. Wise 2- proceeded to state that daring last Congress i. there was a bill of appropriation lor the cooid struction of certain harbors on the lakes, in le I the States of New York and Ohio. That ie | when that bill came np for consideration, his :h colleague (Mr. Mercer) moved to amend it, i) by adding an item of thirty thousand dollars v- or thereabout, for surveys for ivories of intere nal improvement. This sum lias been for it. several years annually appropriated for in- j ?r ternal improvement, and had ever been conli. sidered thefoundation of the whole system. 2s It was the nucleus the nest egg of works of 5t, internal improvement; for without previous d. surveys no works whatever could be coney structed. It involved the whole 'principle of of the system without limitation, without the b- refined distinction ever involved in the word ig "national." So viewed, when this amendry ment was offered to this harbor bill, a few te strict constructionists from theSouth of whom it- I was ore, determined to make one more *e- efTort to resist the principle of internal iinill, j provemenf, and to strike a blow at the very1 ii-! foundation of the system. Accordingly, C* w her. the bill came u*, wv rrf gen:! .men and | * 1 O i i???BBsaa myselfappealed to the gentlemen of "(he parly," particularly from New Yirk, to aid us in resisting this amendment of my col. bague> (Mr. xMercer.) My honorable colleague (Mr. Archer,) when the amendment was offered, called for the yeas and nays, and, to our gratification, it was rejected by the rotes of .^the party" from New York, united with the strict constructionists of the South. We congratulated ourselves upon the triumph; and 1 remember well that I was cordially congratulated by several gentle, meu from New York upon the evidence which they had given us that they were with the South on the question of internal improvements. I relied upon their evidences and their smiles, but was doomed to disappointment, and, in turn, to defeat. My colInnrrnn /Mr IVIfiiv>o?>\ on/] tVi/i V<it!r.nnl l?n 1VW0UV i'AVlV/UI J UUU I llv AlUUUliUl AW. publicans, as they are called, generally, seeing the manner in which their favorite appropriation for surveys had been defeated, turned around and united with the strict constructionists in voting against the harbors of New York and Ohio. Thus we, in fact, defeated the whole bill; but the rejection lasted only twenty four hours, for the moment uthc party" of New York saw their harbors fail, they forgot they were against the principles of internal improvement, which they admitted, and all admit, is involved in the appropriation for surveys, came in the next day, moved a reconsideration ef the vote rejecting the amendment of my colleague?it was moved by Mr. Beardsley, ofNew York. The amendment, then, was passed by their votes. The vote rejecting the harbors was then reconsidered; the bill, containing surveys and harbors was passed, and the Preaidsnt. nf thp Tnitnd Stntpp siirnpfl. and <tiinr. tioiied the att with all its features of Internal improvement in every form.] Mr. Garland resumed. I do not doubt at all the truth of the statement of my lionorable friend from Virginia. I know lie would make no intentional misstatement; nor is it material to my argument to vindicate or defend the course ofmcmbers on this floor, who may act inconsistently with themselves: that is their own business; with which I have no concern, and with which I shall not meddle; butl do not think the 830,000, referred to by my colleague, at all conflicts with the truth of the assertion; for there is nothing in it, nor has there been any prac 1 .M 1 M.. j| * tice unucr ir, incompatible wnn me principles of the Maysvilfe veto. The first appropriation for f>lans and surveys was made on the 30th of April, 1824, and is in these words: "Be it enacted tyc. That the President of the United States is hereby authorised to cause the necessary surveys, plans, and estimates to be made of the routes of Such roads and canals as he may deem of national importance in a commercial or a military point of view, or necessary for the franspoi tation of the public mail; designating in the case of each canal, wli^t points may be made capable of sloop navigation," <fcc.; in which the surveys to be made are to be lor works of "national importanceand in its execution restricted to such works as are of national importance in a commercial or r>/ivnf nf firth nr nrmenni inr fht> mil4K4#y VJ VfrVlV) W #?wwvwrvwjf ^ v# ?iw transportation of thepiiblic mail. The first appropriation for this object during this Administration is in these words: For'defraying the expenses incidental to making examinations and surveys for nationalitorks under the act of 30th April, 1824, &c. thirty thousand dollars'?Act of May 3d, 1830; in which the appropriation directly refers to the surveys, &c. centemplated by the act of 1824, and only incorporates the principles of that act. Every appropriation since is in the same language, aud is made to procure the surveys, plans, &c. contemplated by the act of 1824; and is expressly restriotcd to the objects named in that act. Whatever, then, is wrong in the annual appropriation referred to by my friend from Virginia, is to be traced to the act of 1824, for which the republican Administration of Mr. Monroe is rosponsible. In that act, the distinction is taken between local and national works, and is the distinction taken in the Mayavflle veto and running throughout the messages of President Jackson. I admit, sir, for I never will disguise truth for any consideration, that ' on Ann .l.ii wis annual appropriation 01 ov,vuv uoaurs contains within it aprincrple of internal improvement, not an unrestricted and unlimited principle, such as was claimed bv the preceding Administration* but a restricted principle. restricted to national works, the very principle of the veto. Yet, sir, I am free to confess that this principle is broader than my own notion of constitutional power, and incompatible with the strict doctrine of the Virginia school upon this subject. I disagree with the President as to the power which he asserts over rivers within a State, or where the jurisdiction of two States extends over it. I am not attempting to prove that the doctrines of the President are entirely in accordance with the Virginia doctrines upon this subject; I know they are not, and he never pretended that they were. I am only contending that he is consistent with himself in principle and practice inrc' - ' T -x '1 AUI <* WMAAIiaa kn luiioii lo tins suujeci ; uuu tu mis uv has done much, very much, to restore the practice of the (Government to the true constitutioual standard for which he has my sincere thanks. Much has been said, Mr. Chairman, by all the gentlemen who have preceded me in this debute, about the immense surplus in the Treasury, and its rapid increase. I here summit statements showing the actual I amonnt of the surplus at the close of the j last year; and what will be its probable amount at tiie close of the current year, depends upon the appropriations of the present session. 1. The actual surplus in the Treasury on the 1st of January, 1636. after deducting > unavailable funds, and all outstanding ap! propriaiions, was about 18,000,000 dollars. ; The b 61'ar.ee cn hand was about 05,731 1521 dollars," and the outstanding appropria-' tious near eight millions.. This surplus was larger than had been previously estimated, on account of the great importations in the last quarter of the year, made before the apprehended difficulties with Fia:ice should probably end in commercial restrictions and war; and on account of the unexpected continuance of extravagant j speculations in public lands through the months of November and December. 2. The amount of the surplus at the close ot 1936, will of course, depend on the receipts tluring the year,, and the expenditures, which have not yet been ascertained, for a single month with entire accuracy. But, if the estimates made in the last an. nual report of the receipts should be ex ceeded by three or four millions of dollars, as seems probable froft the large imports to supply the destruction of goods by firg in New York, and fr*f& a continuance in January and February of large purchases of public lands, then the*jrhole receipts in the year may be expected "*to ~ equal about 25,000,000 dollars. ..Yhe receipts lrom lands are so uncertain, they may exceeded or fall short of the allowance included in the above computation". I do not see any indications that the United States Bank intends to pay into the Treasury mudv if Wit, of our capital stock during 1836, so as to swell the surplus from that source. From this 25,000,000 dollars is to be deducted the expenditure during 1836 of new appropriations, whiph , have been estimated in tho annual rcpdft about 23,900,000 i _n . 4HRvPW. uumirs. ; ? . If the expenditures in *ife3(5 of new appropriations should equal that sum, the balance of receipts in the year would exceed tho expenditure abot&2)600,000 dollars. But if to those expa^flfeftes, as estimated seveu months ago, are added the pew items for the Florida war, and olhpr incidents, equalling five millions,, the balance of expenditures over receipts would be 3,000,000 dollars, and thus what might be deemed a surplus in the Treasury, January, 1837, would bo only about 15,000,000 dollars, instead of what it was January 1, 1836, of about 18,000,000 dollars. Should Congress, however, appropriate still more to the fortifications ancLNavy, to build custom houses, <Sjc. dec., than was contemplated in the estimates submitted last December, (and it is expected they may to the amount of at least six or seven millions.) all tluiLexcess will pro tanlo reduce the surplus below fitleen millions, and make it not over seven or eight millions. So if the receipts from duties are actually postpoued much to subsequent years by the New York fire bill, or are diminished by any large remission of duties, the surplus will be further reduced. On the contrary the receipts from lands dec., may be larger and then it will be increased. From this statement, there was actually in the Treasury, at the close of the year, about 810,000,000, after deducting actual expenditures and unexpended appropriations, which must be expended. And this, sir, is the immense surplus over which the Executive wields an uncontrolled authority, and with \<-hich the nation is to be corrupted ! Sir, it is true it is rapidly increasing and will continue to do so, unless we pass the necessary appropriation bills. Sir, this surplus, with the decreasing duties under the act of.1802, will not remain long, although it amounts in calculation almost to 850,000,000, but will be only in calculation, not in cash. I am Mr. Chairman, much amused at the change in the state of things. Two years ago we heard nothing but woful prophecies of a bankrupt Treasury and a ruined People. A% resort to direct taxation, arising from the folly and usurpations of this Administration, was predicted .ritli great confidence. This very year was the period of fulfilment? 1 ? 1?1 kz-ih/vl#! ii?n o%.A oln??mn/1 \\ IlL'Il IO i auu wv oi<j iiui imui iiiuu on account of a bankrupt Treasury and a ruined country, but, sir, because of an overflowing Treasury and a. prosperous People. Wcarc actually alarmed because we have so much money we do not know what to do w th it. What a singular fulfilment of prophecy this! There is, Mr. Chairman, a ready way to relieve all our difficulties upon this subject?relieve the taxes of the People by reducing the tariff*, and the surplus will soon be reduced. I hold myself indcr no obligation to abide any compromise of conflicting interests, which shall unnecessarily bunden the great body of the Pcopkv . I come mw, Mr. Chairman, to consider the subject $f the deposite banks. It is said by the gentleman. from Tennessee | (Mr. Belli that the deposite of the public i money in tie State banks, extending as j they do over the whole nation, secures to ; the Exec at ve an extensive and dangerous \ influence *ver the moneyed concerns of ! the country to an extent dangcrous.to public i virtue and iberty; that the deposite banks will be enirely subservient to its views. Sir, the pii>lic money must either be con. centrated it one point, in the Treasury Department, which would be unsafe and dangerous or in the hands of individuals which w odd also be unsafe, or in banks; and the qiestion is, which would be the most judcious deposite? Mr. Gallatin, for whose opinions 1 entertain very high respect, ha report to Congress in* 1811, when thecharter of the old United States Bank w? under consideration, used this language " The banking system is now firmly esablished, and in its ramifications ' extends t> every part of the United States. Under tut system, the assistance of banks appearsto me necessary for the punctual collectifi of the revenue, and for the safe kcepiniand transmission ofpublic moneys. That te punctuality of payments is prinripaltyd'-jo to banks, is a fact generally fic. j I i knowledged," dec. This argument is used merely to prove the necessity of using banks, because the system is firmlv incorporated into our system. He then goes on to argue the advantages of a national, over State banks; but says: "If, indeed the Bank of the United States could be removed without affecting either its nume. rous debtors, the other moneyed institutions, or the circulation of the country, the or- 1 dinary fiscal operations of the Government would not bo materially deranged and might be carried on by means of another general bank, or of State banks." This concedes the whole ground 1 desire; and that State batiks can be effectively and i* i.. i i * i i M ' . i 1 saieiy empjoycu, is aireauy provea oy aciuai experiment. Tlie concession comes, too, 1 from a mau favoring a national bank. The reasons, under existing cirCum- ' stances, of selecting State banks, by the Executive, are manifest; it was an act of 1 necessity. There is no la\v directing 1 wht re the public money should be deposited,. ; in case of the expiration of the U. S. Bank charter, or in case the Secretary, J under the discretion with which he was 1 vested, should deem it expedient to remove ; them: the State banks were the only safe 'l places which could be selected. At the opening of the session of Congress succeeding the removal of the public deposites, the President in his message notified Con- j gress to make suitable -regulations. He \ said," the attention of Congress is earnestly J invited to the regulation of the deposites in ! the State banks, by law. Although the 1 power now exercised by the Executive 1 Department in this behalf is only such as I ti'oo nm u IVO UllUVillUJ' bill Vf Vl^ Administration, from the origin of tiie i Government up to the establishment of 1 the present bank, yet it is one which is 1 susceptible of regulation by law, and tliere- ' fore ought to be so regulated. The power J of Congress to direct in what places the ' Treasurer shall keep the moneys in the 1 Treasury, and to impose restrictions upon * the Executive authority, in relation to their 1 custody and removal, is unlimitedand 1 Pnmrrace fV/\m tKnt fimrt tr\ (Kis li.ic filling i VUHq1 Wv> iiv?4 kliu% UII1W VV IIMW tVMiwi to do so. The reason is obvious. The ' bill regulating this mutter was embarrassed I in its progress with clogs and restrictions, J which might induce tho State banks to ' refuse to receive the deposiles, and thus to ( bring about the necessity of renewing the ' charter of the United States Bank, or < chartering a new national bank. Sir, we < should cease to assail the Executive about ' its influence and control over the State 1 banks, and of the public money. The < Executive lias earnestly invited and urged 1 you to regulate the deposites, and restrict ! its control over the public money. 1 Gentlemen complain of the influence 1 which the Executive will exert over the ' community?an influence, they say, don. I gerous to liberty?through medium ul* thedeposite banks. I submit it to the country to decide whether there be less danger from a connexion with a national bank of $35,000,000, having its branches j in tiie capital of every State, controlled by a single board of directors, or the saxae ] number of State banks, having each its in- 1 dependent board of directors, controlled i by the vigilance of 24 State Governments, ' each interested for its own security in i restraining any. undue influence over State : institutions by the National Government, even with $50,000,000, of capital. I am, myself, AIr. Chairman, no friend of banking j institutions: the whole system is corrupt in its tendency, and is as successfully building < up aristocracy in this country as the laws ! of primogeniture and succession sustain it in Great Britain. < i But, sir, gentlemen not only profess to be j alarmed at the influence .possessed by the j Government over these institutions, and the dangerous tendency of that influence, i but they strike up another panic, and assert 1 that the deposite banks are not safe; that 1 the public money will all, or nearly all, be I lost. I here exhibit a table showing the j true condition of the deposite banks up to ' the 1st February, by which it will be seen < that all the demands against thein amount | to $06,814,736 36, and their means to < meet them $129,074,570 15; leaving a sum over and above all demands of $41,229,833 79. ' It appears that the immediate liabilities of all the deposite banks are as fol. i lows: * i Owing to other banks, $14,679,161 45 i Pfmilntinn fr? he redfiemod 26.243.688 36 ' Private depositcs, 15,043,03d 61 i Public depositcs 30,768,879 91 < Aggregate $86,844,763 36 Their immediate means to meet their i immediate liabilities were: Due from other banks $15,712,977 35 j Specie on hand 10,198,659 24 i Notes of specie-paying banks 9,573,089 53 < , i Aggregate $33,484,726 12 ] So that their? nmediate means were as 1 ] to about 21-2 of their immediate liabilities. < This is a proportion larger than most of < the other banks in the Uuited States; larger 1 than the United States Bank itself used < generally to have when a public depository, ; and larger than the Bank of England usually has. (See supplemental report, 1834, table AA, Doc. No. 27, Ho. of i Eeps.) '. -j But beside these immediate mean* the deposite banks had also other means to i secure the Government and other depositors t and the holders of their notes, of about 50 i per cent, more than the amount of all their 1 immediate liabilities. < Thus, beside the above immediate means, ' tlrev have bills of exchange, in many cases as available as specie, amounting i to $27,149,935 39 They have due t?them on. J note? and obligations ., ?* discounted the sum. of And add to this their immediate means of 35,484,72$ 12 j?1?- i And thev have* in aft the . '/ , sum of 0428,O7^MF7O 15 to pay and secure their haaiedinte , . % 66,644,763 dollars 36 cents. " ' ..^J| In addition to this, the Twgdfijr hoUs v collateral security of most of these tanks, ** ? to sccut^wbatis due to the Unijta$ States as suggested in annual report, page 81. z&tijk The reports up the 1st of Masph. varyZ^SS this view but little. It is num&flfcijheie* tare, Mr. Chairman, that so much alarm-for the safety of the public money k totallyunfounded. It is easy to discover that all iKpco t<w)M nrul ?Inwno c kftirt tl\A. ^MAarin banks, this irresistible influence of the Ex. tjcutive over the.fubficwirid, through their ~ igency, me intea&ed to efiect som# ofl* r tkvorittj- object *mj$ ?paM at another national bank. I do not allude to any gentleman on this floors Bui; sir,, does it not recur to gentlemen, if these deposit# banks a j are all broke, that they cap exercise' no deleterious influence upon the country, and tliat tliese fears arc entirely visionary X The next subject of complaint on the part of the honorable gentleman from Tennessee (Mr. Bnx) to which I shall advert is the subject of Executive patronage, the increase and dangerous tendency of which seem to excite so much apprehension for i the virtue and safety of the natioo, on the part of that gentleman. In discussing this [jucstif n, Air. ChairmanrI shall not stop to inquire what friend of the Administration ma v or mav not beinvolvodin inconsistency; jt ~ 4 r ? - | that is immaterial to me. i shall present * my own views upon this as upon an other questions which shalTcome under consideration, withoutregardtothe consequences to others. The question is, what^are the principles of this Administration upon tiffs subject? not what is, or what has been, the opinion of this or that indhridaal friend; md whether, upon this subject, the proSbs* ron and practice of the Administration , : tiave been consistent. The honorable 3 gentleman says the bill,now before the -j tlouse, sent hither by the Senate, is 'in* tended to restrict and cut off improper Executive patronage. This bill provides that the limitation of four years .to the duration of the term of the public office rs, to whoso 4 offices itnow applies, shall be repealed, \ md that, in case of removal from offiae < before the nomination of a successor is ;j icted upon, the President shall assign to the Senate his reasons for the removal* Now, sir, I deny that this bill is in accordance with the professed opinions of the Administration. The views of the President upon this subject were announced in his first annual message to Congrcifc, in wbUi Ui ?j ** ?i*TWo nru porhnpg fcvr TOfU w ho O? for an}* great length of time enjoy office and power, without being more or less unJ 'nd.,A?AA IA uur uiu uiiiucuw vi tccuugs uuimvtwwiu w a faithful discharge of their public duties. ^ Their integrity may be proof Ugaktst improper considerations immediately address. ed to themselves, but they are sot to acquire a habit of looking with md il&reace trnon the public interests, and of duct from which an unpractised ttmKpJtouJd revolt. Office is considered as a iepeeies " of property, and Governmen^JMfcCMk#' a means of promoting individual interests, ? than as an inst%nent created solely % . . i the service of the People. Cprruptioa ifi some, and in others a perversion of correct feelings and principles, divert Government from its legitimate ends, and make it an engine for the support of ihe few at the expense of the many, The duties of all public officers are, or at least admit pf % being made so plain and simple that men of intelligence may readily qualify themselves for their performance j and 1 cannot Jtoit ' j believe that more is lost by the long continuance of men in office than is generally to be gained by their experience. / xabmit, therefore, to your consideration whether the j \jficiency of the Government wtuld not be f promoted, and afdalinduxtry and integrity ; belter secured, by a general externum of (he ^ law which limits appointments to four yean. " In a country where offices ire created . ? snlpJv flirthfthcnelll nf fhp P<?nnlft,?n ?hn i man has any more intrinsic right to official station than another. Office? mre Dot | established to give support llo lyriyikr men, at the public expense. Nowldiridual wrong is therefore done by removal, since neither appointment to, nor condmoce in, office is matter of right. The incumbent became an officer with a view to public benefits; und when these require "Ins removal, they are not to be sacrificed to private interests. It is the People and they alone, who have a right to comp&o when i a bad officer is substituted for a gpod sue. j He who is removed has the same means of ] obtaining a living, that areeojoyed by the millions who never held office. The j*roposed limitation would destroy the idea of property, now so generally connected with official station; and although individual distress may be sometimes produced, it . would, by promoting that rotation which constitutes a leading principle in the re. publican creed, give healthful actkfei to the system.*' If any man can discern in these viewr^of" the President the slightest accordance with the principles of tiie bill from the Senate, he has more acuteness than 1 have. The Senate's bill proposes to repeal the Kmita. lion of four years entirely, while the Pre. sident recommends on enlargement of the limitation of four years to nearly all tiie offices under the Government; certainly a very materio! difference. The Senate's bill requires the President to assign bis reasons for removal; the President nowhere intimates the propriety of such a requisition? r X ' ' f . , / " * i * - S _