H. OF R.] Public Moneys-Consular Certificates--Judicial System. broke down the guards against precipitate legislation in regard to one bill, we might with equal propriety do the same thing as to all bills. While he said this, he entertained perfect confidence in the committee from which the bill was reported, but he could not take every measure upon the faith of the recommendation from a committee. Mr. CHINN said that the public interest was in no way connected with this bill, and he hoped it would not be committed; if it was it would be lost. Mr. PARKER moved to postpone the further consideration of the bill till Monday; which was agreed to. PUBLIC MONEYS. Mr. GAMBLE moved to take up and consider a resolution heretofore offered by him, calling on the Secre tary of the Treasury for a plan for the keeping and disbursement of the public moneys without the agency of a bank or banks. The motion being objected to, Mr. GAMBLE moved to suspend the rule of the House, in order that he might attain his object; which was negatived. CONSULAR CERTIFICATES. Mr. FOSTER, from the Committee on the Judiciary, reported a bill to define and further to provide punishment for the crime of forging or counterfeiting consular and other certificates and attestations; which was read twice; when Mr. FOSTER moved its engrossment, after explaining that the bill was recommended by the Secretary of State, in consequence of a recent and very ingenious forgery, for which there was no provision in the pres ent law. After a few words from Mr. FILLMORE, Mr. McKINLEY moved to postpone the further consideration of the bill till Monday; which was agreed to. JUDICIAL SYSTEM OF THE UNITED STATES. Mr. FOSTER, from the Committee on the Judiciary, reported the following resolution; which was read: [FEB. 11, 1835. was not a new one. It was matured and understood, and it had once been thoroughly discussed in the Committee of the Whole. The time had arrived when every one must see that the South and West were as much entitled to the benefits of the circuit court system as the Eastern States. The only question was, whether we should enlarge the present circuits, or establish new ones; and that was a point on which the House could decide in one hour as well as in a year. The bill had been once reported, but could not be taken up, on account of some informality. It was recommitted in order to get rid of this objection, and now the committee refused again to report it. He hoped the committee would not be discharged. Mr. HARDIN moved to lay the whole subject on the table. Mr. THOMAS, of Maryland, hoped, he said, that the gentleman would withdraw that motion, and permit the House to take a direct vote on the question whether the subject should be taken up for consideration at this session or not. He had not a word to say on the subject. Every member would judge whether, at this stage of the session, the House had time to take up and consider a bill remodelling the whole judiciary system of the United States. Mr. HARDIN thought, he said, that an appropriate way to dispose of the subject would be to lay it on the table. Mr. FOSTER asked whether, if the resolution was laid on the table, the committee, not having been discharged, would not be obliged to report the bill. The SPEAKER replied, that to lay the resolution on the table would be considered as an indication, on the part of the House, that it would not expect the committee to report. The motion to lay the subject on the table was then withdrawn, at the request of Mr. GARLAND, who strongly opposed the proposition to discharge the committee. The subject, he said, had been presented to Congress as one demanding its attention in almost every message from the President for several years past; but it had always been postponed in consequence of the press of business. He asked whether it was denied or doubted by any member, whether the new States were entitled to the same privileges with the old States? Why could not the bill be reported? Would the committee be discharged on the presumption that the House would not act on the bill? He bo Resolved, That the Committee on the Judiciary be discharged from the further consideration of that part of the President's message which relates to the extension of the judiciary system of the United States, and of the bill from the House of Representatives to amend the judicial system of the United States, it being manifest that the time to elapse before the constitutional termina-ped the committee would report the bill, in order that it tion of the present Congress is insufficient to mature and pass any law on the subject to which the message and bill refer. Mr. FOSTER said this resolution was reported by a majority of the committee, and, as he dissented from it, he moved the following amendment to it: Strike out all after the word "resolved," and insert, "That the Committee on the Judiciary, to whom was referred that part of the President's message which relates to an extension of the judicial system of the United States, be instructed to report a bill by which the benefits of said system may be equally extended to all the States of the Union." Mr. FOSTER said the committee had reported this resolution for their discharge from the consideration of the subject, on the ground that there was not suffi cient time remaining for the House to act on the bill. He submitted that this reason was insufficient, as the committee, he thought, ought to obey the order of the House, and make their report; when it would be for the House to determine whether it would act or not upon the bill. In the next place, he thought the reason insufficient, because, in his opinion, the House had the necessary time for acting on the bill. The measure might be ascertained whether the House would refuse to do justice to the new States. Until the House had voted directly against the proposition, he would not believe that they were disposed to withhold from the West and Southwest the benefits of the circuit court system. If the resolution were laid on the table, that would be an indirect mode of expressing the opinion of the House. He hoped the House would not evade the question, but meet it by a direct vote, that it might be seen who were the members who were disposed to exclude the new States from a share in the advantages given by law to the old States. Mr. McKINLEY felt, he said, as much solicitude as any one on this subject. It had long been before Congress, but he had never seen any disposition manifested to do any thing with it. He saw no hope of bringing the question to a proper result within the few weeks which would intervene between this and the close of the session-the expiration of this Congress. He was far from being satisfied with the bill before the committee; and, if they reported it, it would only take up the time of the House for nothing. He moved to postpone the further consideration of the subject till Tuesday next. Mr. THOMAS, of Maryland, appealed to the gentle.. man from Alabama to withdraw that motion, and enable the House to act finally on the subject this morning. Mr. WATMOUGH moved that the House proceed to the orders of the day; which was agreed to, 122 rising in the affirmative. Mr. CROCKETT said he must throw himself on the indulgence of the House, to ask, what was no more than justice, that the House would take up a bill reported early in the session The CHAIR stated that the motion was out of order. By the vote of the House yesterday, all the bills were postponed till the bills embraced in the motion of the gentleman from Tennessee [Mr. POLK] were disposed of. DEPOSITE BANKS. The House resumed the consideration of the bill to regulate the public deposites of the United States in certain local banks. Mr. ROBERTSON continued the argument commenced by him yesterday in opposition to the bill introduced by the Committee of Ways and Means. [Mr. R's remarks are given entire in yesterday's debate.] Mr. CAMBRELENG said, it is with great reluctance, Mr. Speaker, that I differ with the gentleman from Virginia [Mr. ROBERTSON] on this question, concurring as I do entirely in his principles, not only in relation to the Bank of the United States, but to the powers of our federal Government. I must, however, be pardoned, sir, for differing with that gentleman, in considering it my duty at this time to adopt some measure limiting executive discretion, and regulating in the best practicable manner, under existing circumstances, the deposite of the public money. The gentleman from Virginia [Mr. GORDON] has stated that, under this new system, New York has the "lion's share." It is true, sir, we have the lion's share, but not of the profits of your revenue system. Under our old laws, granting long credits, we enjoyed the use of the public money, and some millions of capital were employed for the purposes of trade; but under our modern plan of cash duties and short credits, we have the lion's share of the burden of advancing more than half of the whole of our revenue from imports, before it is possible to collect it from the trade of the country. It would, therefore, be manifestly unjust to withdraw from the banks in New York any portion of the public money faster than it may be required for the service of Government. But were such a measure proposed, would either of the gentlemen from Virginia ever advocate the transfer of our revenues from place to place merely for the uses of trade? Would they ever sanction, in any form, so manifest an abuse of the public money? I am sure they would vote for no such proposition. Gentlemen seem to think that New York is exclusively favored. She desires not, sir, that the public money should remain with her a day after it may be required for public use elsewhere; but, as she is compelled to advance the revenue to Government, she has a just right to expect that it will be withdrawn only for the service of Government, and not for the purpose of furnishing capital to facilitate trade in any quarter of the country. It has, sir, suited the purposes of the advocates of a Bank of the United States, ever since the commence. ment of our Government, to represent the collection, safe keeping, distribution, and disbursement, of our national revenues, as a very mysterious and complicated affair. While trade annually collects, deposites, transfers, and disburses, its thousands of millions, it is gravely contended that this Government cannot manage its twen ty or thirty millions without the agency of a national bank. Why, sir, if there was not an incorporated bank in the Union, there would be no difficulty whatever in [H. OF R. the management of our finances, for other agents equally efficient would occupy their places; and I hope that the time will come when we shall be able to dispense with the agency of all banks, especially those of circulation. I am as little disposed as either of the gentlemen from Virginia to advocate the cause of State banks; but at the present moment there are two reasons for continuing the plan judiciously adopted by the Treasury. The State banks selected are the safest places of deposite for the public money; but the strongest motive which induces me at this time to advocate the system is, that by continuing to collect our revenue through these agents, we can make them instrumental in the great work which has been so successfully commenced, of reform in our currency, by aiding in excluding our small note circulation. The gentleman from Virginia [Mr. GORDON] has told us that the President has "possessed himself of the whole revenue of the country," and that "our rights and our liberties are in danger." The gentleman surely cannot have forgotten the act of March, 1809, referred to by the Secretary of the Treasury, under which all public moneys in the hands of disbursing officers are directed to be deposited in banks to be designated for the purpose by the President of the United States;" an act which was not repealed even by the charter of the Bank of the United States, and which stands to this day the law of the land. Under that act, sir, continued for six-and-twenty years, our Presidents were authorized to control, so far as the mere question of deposite was concerned, some five hundred millions, for the use of our army, navy, and for other Government purposes. If there is any thing substantial in this argument about the union of the purse and the sword, or any abuse in the exercise of this control over the public money, the legislative and not the executive branch is responsible to the country for its origin. [Mr. GORDON disclaimed having said any thing about the union of the purse and the sword.] I know, sir, the gentleman did not use the words, but it was the inevitable inference from his argument. But, Mr. Speaker, higher subjects have arisen out of the simple question whether our revenue should be deposited in one or another set of banks-questions of federal power and executive patronage. I had hoped, sir, for the sake of the public tranquillity, that after the violent storms of party through which we have so recently passed-in which our social ties were dissolved and even the strong bonds of friendship and affection broken--[ had hoped that ambition would have been satisfied with the sacrifice, and that we should have at least enjoyed a temporary armistice. But it seems the war is to be renewed, and that after our triumphant victory in the general contest throughout the Union, we are to be involved in a guerilla warfare. Sir, let it come when it may, and in what form gentlemen please. We have but one favor to solicit from our antagonists. It is, that whatever may be the character of the war, whether local or general, it may be conducted in a more liberal, generous, and tolerant spirit, than has been exhibited by our public men in the late struggle for political ascendency. There are also some other preliminaries to be settled. Gentlemen may borrow our name or adopt our principles if they please. I do not now refer to the gentlemen from Virginia, who have always occupied democratic ground, but to their new allies. They must, however, pardon the friends of this administration for protesting against this novel and bold attempt, by an adroit movement, to take from them the ground which they have so long and successfully occupied, and suddenly to convert them into advocates of federal power and executive patronage. We have been denounced, sir, here and elsewhere, even by members of this body, as the supple instruments of H. OF R.] Deposite Banks. [FEB. 11, 1835. the Executive, and as the partisans of power. And it is stockholders, officers, dependants, and customers, not a little singular that we have been most loudly con- throughout the Union. Faithful to the constitution, this demned by those who have been zealously employed for bold public servant rejected their petitions and the powtwenty years in erecting here an enormous fabric of er proffered by the legislative branch, and drew upon federal power, with all its abuses, corruptions, and pat- | himself a storm of abuse, unparalleled in the history of ronage. And now sir, these architects of power sudden- political warfare. ly turn about and denounce, as vassals of the President, the very men who have been instrumental in laying their great federal work in ruins. The gentleman from Virginia, too, [Mr. GORDON,] tells us that "a majority of the representatives of the people are seen rallying on the side of power." I appeal, sir, to the candor and the justice of that gentleman, who is an old member of this House, whether this is not the first House of Representatives in twenty years containing a majority of republicans faithful to the constitution. The time seems to have arrived, sir, when obedience to the will of our constituents is a proof of vassalage to power, and when to violate our instructions is a constitutional prerogative of the Representative, and a manly evidence of exclusive patriotism and independence! But the fate of this House, sir, is moderate, when compared with the President's. He is the universal dispenser of patronage--the ambitious absorbent of all power. The gentleman from Virginia [Mr. GORDON] has charged him with executive usurpation. I again appeal, sir, to the candor of that gentleman, whether the whole history of his administration does not, in all its great measures, contradict the charge. When that distinguished man was first elevated to preside over the executive department of our Government, he found the broad banner of federalism--I care not for names, sir--floating over both of our legislative halls; he found every branch of this Government moving on in a harmonious career of usurpation. The President saw his position, between power on the one side, and the welfare of his country on the other. Had he abandoned the cause of those who placed him in that high station, he would have become at once the idol of every advocate of federal power throughout the Union. But, with the fidelity and patriotism of a great and honest man, he formed the bold resolution to grapple with wealth and power. It was under his administration that the great work of reform commenced. With a wise caution, he made his approaches gradually. He was the first President since the war who had the moral courage to encounter the hostility of our manufacturing corporations, by recommending an equalization of our taxes, and the reduction of our revenue to the measure of an economical public expenditure. Alarmed by these executive movements, sustained as they were by the people, the great architects of our restrictive system produced their celebrated compromise bill. Was the President an advocate of executive patronage when he voluntarily rejected this branch of it, and drew upon himself the vindictive hostility of our manufacturing corporations? Was he an advocate of federal power and patronage when he returned to the legislative branch the bill to recharter the Bank of the United States? To that very body from whence it emanated--to that Senate, now presenting itself to the nation as the stern and unyielding adversary of federal power and patronage--to those distinguished gentlemen, who are now most loud in denouncing executive patronage, and who appear to be most alarmed at the extent of it, and most shocked at the abominable abuses and corruptions of Government. It depended on the President alone to determine whether federal power should continue to rest on this broad foundation, and whether the Executive should be armed with this monstrous engine of corruption and patronage. Had he decided on signing that bill, if he had not gained their support, he would have at least moderated the hostility of all concerned in the fate of that institution--of its thousands of presidents, directors, But again, sir--was the President an advocate of federal power and patronage when he returned bill after bill relating to internal improvements?—when he rejected these propositions of the legislative branch to arm the executive with a power spreading the engineers and the revenues of this Government into every State and every congressional district in the Union? Clothe the Executive with that power, give the President that patronage, and you revolutionize your Government; for he would effectually command a majority of this House. Yet he who has rejected these repeated propositions of both branches of the Legislature is now denounced as the great absorbent of power by the very men who projected this magnificent scheme of federal internal improvements! The President, sir, has been instrumental in effecting a great reform of the corruptions and abuses of federal legislation. He has restored to trade, so far as this Government is concerned, its natural jurisdiction over banking and manufacturing, and to each community, the construction, regulation, and control, of its internal improvements. He has raised the States from a condition little better than provincial, and elevated our legislation above the concerns of trade, to the higher and more dignified offices of State. He has, in his public course, exhibited an extraordinary spectacle to the world. We have seen under his administration the Executive repeatedly rejecting the temptations of the legislative branch of our Government. Exercising a rare public virtue, and, contrary to the inherent tendency of executive power, he has sternly rejected measures calculated to enlarge his patronage, and to extend the sphere of executive dominion. Contrary to the anticipations of those who framed our constitution, the legislative branch, neglecting its duty, had ceased to be the vigilant sentinel of the Executive. On the other hand, through the firmness and integrity of the President, Congress has been arrested in a wild career of usurpation. He his given us, too, sir, another evidence of his patriotism. It is seldom that we shall see a man of military habits, and of martial character, when transferred to the highest civil station in our land, firmly resisting the encroachments of wealth and power, and rejecting, throughout his administration, a patronage which would have enabled him to rule the nation. shall not often, sir, see a man of acknowledged martial propensities, steadily adhering to the democratic principles of earlier years, and never abandoning his great purpose of relieving his country from the despotism of a Government corrupted and controlled by avarice and ambition. He stands, sir, on a proud, a "great eminence, where the eyes of mankind are turned to him. He may live long, he may do much; but here is the summit." We It is at the close of this great reform that, from amidst the scattered ruins of federal power, we hear the accents of despair and doleful lamentations about the corruptions and abuses of our federal Government. We are told of the demoralizing effects of patronage; that our experiment is about to fail; that our Government ought not to be and will not be supported in some parts of the country; that our destiny as a free and united prople is almost fulfilled; that the citadel of liberty totters to its base; and that reform or revolution is inevitable! Fortunately for our country, it is not very difficult to discriminate between the inspirations of the prophet and the wailings of ambition. Happily for FEB. 11, 1835.] Deposite Banks. [H. OF R. our Union, the hopes of many generations of distinguish- partment for more than forty years wholly unregulated ed men are destined to perish in our political conflicts, and uncontrolled, and then wonder at abuses and corbefore the time will arrive when the assaults of ambi-ruptions, which have existed from its origin, and which tion can shake the strong foundations of our Republic. I congratulate both the gentlemen from Virginia, Mr. Speaker, that some of our ancient adversaries seem to have abandoned their principles, and that we are all now to become the stern enemies of federal patronage and power; that for once we are to be united in a vigorous attempt to reform the abuses and corruptions of our Government. But, sir, gentlemen must pardon me; this is not merely a question of custom-house officers, pensioners, and postmasters; ambition should have a loftier aim: it should strike at the source of patronage and power, corruption and abuse; at that vicious system of legislation which was corrupting and breaking down the Government of our Union, and is now silently but inevitably revolutionizing every State Government in the land. We must go back, sir, to the origin of our Government fully to comprehend the nature of the evil, before we can understand the remedy. The origin of all our corruptions and abuses will be found in a vicious and corrupt system of legislation, adopted by Congress in 1789. There were among our public men of that day, Mr. Speaker, in reference to affairs of Government, two master minds: the one bold, able, and eloquent; the other profound, comprehensive, and original. These two distinguished men advocated opposite plans of Government. Hamilton adopted the ancient mercantile system of Europe, which had grown up under a monarchy, and was harmonious with despotic institutions. Jefferson was a disciple of a new school: he advocated a more simple and free plan of government, better adapted to develop and increase the resources of a nation, and entirely harmonious with the nature and design of our free institutions. Hamilton's plan was founded on avarice-Jefferson's on patriotism. The tendency of the former system was to universal corruption, dissension, and restriction; of the latter, to universal justice, harmony, and freedom. Habit and education favored the adoption of the ancient system, and to this origin may be ascribed all the vices, corruptions, and abuses, which have since grown up under State and federal legislation. Under this federal Government we persevered in it till it was about producing, what it must in time produce in every country where it is adopted, universal corruption, dissension and restriction. Another generation of such legislation would have destroyed our confederacy. Fortunately for the country, we have, under this administration, checked the vicious course of federal legislation. We have ceased to intermeddle with the concerns of trade in banking and manfacturing; we have given up to each community the construction and control of its roads and canals; and now, sir, relieved from these laborious and officious duties, with which we never had any legitimate or constitutional right to intermeddle, we have leisure to attend to those high offices of State which we have neglected ever since the adoption of the constitution. Instead of employing ourselves, session after session, in making tariffs, banks, roads, and canals, we can now make amends to the country for past negligence, and begin the work which should have been commenced in 1789. We leave our Post Office Department entirely isolated, unconnected with, and irresponsible to, any other Department of the Government; we allow it to collect and disburse its own revenue, without the agency of the Treasury or the authority of appropriation; to enlarge or contract its business and its engagements; we suffer it to grow up, from an insignificant beginning, till its receipts and disbursements amount to millions, and till our post routes have been extended from thousands to millions of miles; we leave the De can bejalone ascribed to the negligence of the Legislature. We impose restriction on restriction on our foreign trade; enact hundreds of vexatious and useless commercial regulations, calling for the services of thousands of officers; and the very legislators who framed these absurd laws are now astonished at the result of their own labors, and are the most clamorous against custom-house officers and executive patronage. We abandon the high offices of State to manage the affairs of trade, and leave our land and Indian concerns to take care of themselves, and then are surprised that abuses should exist in these departments. Such, sir, are some of the consequences of acting upon what may be termed, on this side of the Atlantic, the Hamiltonian plan of government. We have done much to reform the abuses and corruptions flowing from it under federal legislation, but we have still more to do. Half of our absurd and useless commercial regulations should be repealed-the Post Office, Land Office, and Indian bureau, nay, every department of our Government, require investigation and organization. But, sir, the reform must not stop with an inquiry into the corruptions and abuses of federal legislation. Our State Governments, some at least, if not all, have outstripped even this Government in a rapid career of vicious and corrupt legislation. We have spread over the country thousands of corporations in every branch of trade, and erected Government companies to disturb and rival the ancient and natural establishments of frugality and enterprise. We have introduced a spirit of gambling into every branch of trade, by giving these companies a credit not founded upon capital, but law, and have granted our chartered adventurers the privilege of bankruptcy without holding their property responsible to their honest, and, in some instances, ruined creditors. We have gone on from one absurdity to another, creating offices and salaries for the dependant relatives of the capitalists, till we have at last ascertained that the whale trade cannot be conducted without Government aid, and an act of incorporation! After having prosecuted this bold trade for more than a hundred years, with a courage and enterprise justly commanding the admiration and the wonder of the world, our wise legislators of this Hamiltonian school have at last discovered that Government whaling companies are absolutely necessary to enable us to conduct this branch of trade with economy and success. have travelled through the whole circle of industry, and have given a political power to corporations, which, if this spirit be not arrested, will control every State Government, introduce gambling into every branch of trade, and pauperism into every county in the Union. We The credit of the State, too, is resorted to on every occasion, and for all purposes. Following our vicious example, the States have become stock-jobbers, moneybrokers, and dealers in exchange. In some, they have made themselves partners in banking institutions of their own creation. In other States the banks are founded on borrowed capital, for which the credit of the State is pledged. Louisiana has recently become an endorser for two banks to the amount of seventeen millions and even one of our Territories has followed this vicious example. We may soon expect to hear of Florida bonds on the royal exchange. The credit of the State should be sacred. It should never be used but for great public purposes, or in the emergencies of war. Legitimate commercial credit-that credit which is sound, because legislation has no agency in its creation, never would appeal to Government for its aid at any crisis. But in England and in this country we H. OF R.] Deposite Banks. have authorized a species of bank credit, which cannot sustain itself in periods of alarm without producing universal distress; and Governments have been compelled to interpose, to save the country from mischiefs of legislative origin. Abolish your Government bank credits, and trade would never appeal to you for aid. The credit of the State would then be used, as it ought to be, only for the purposes of the State. But, Mr. Speaker, the greatest and most alarming abuse now existing in this country is the incorporation of near 600 banks of circulation, with an aggregate capital of more then two hundred millions of dollars. It is to this point reform should be mainly directed; for until this legislative abuse is corrected, there can be no effective and permanent reform of the currency of this country. Banks of deposite, discount, transfer, and exchange, savings banks, and trust companies, are useful institutions for facilitating the operations of trade, giving velocity to the circulation of commercial credits, and securing the accumulations of labor and wealth. But these institutions are the natural creations of trade, and would have grown up in this age of commercial improvement in every civilized country, without the aid of Government, and through voluntary associations of capital, had not bankers been taught, by a vicious system, the habit of dependence upon Legislatures-had they not profited by the folly and injustice of Government, which granted to them the use and profits of a circulation, founded on law and on the authority of Government, at the expense of sound private credit, and the credit and currency of the State. These banks of circulation are the offspring of law, and not of trade; and, like every legislative interference with the business of men, they produce incalculable mischief. Happy would it be for the country if the evil could be remedied by the suppression of small notes. This measure, so far as it may tend to diminish the quantity of circulation and to substitute a better currency, is advantageous; but if we stop there, we still leave the country exposed to the great calamities flowing from this abuse of legislation. We perpetuate, in another form, a vicious species of credit, to contend with and to impair sound commercial credit—a currency which can neither be regulated by Government nor controlled by the laws of trade, and a legislative standard of value which conflicts with the standard of the world. Trade, sir, is destined to suffer at all times, and in all countries, from an inherent and universal tendency to speculation. Modern ingenuity has contrived a variety of commercial credits, which undoubtedly accelerate the circulation of national wealth but unfortunately increase disasters resulting from over-trading. Government, yielding to the selfish representations of avarice, has interposed its authority, and has rendered this existing and permanent evil truly calamitous, by aiding in the circulation of a credit which trade, if left to itself, would never tolerate. On what basis, sir, does this Government bank credit rest? Departing from every rule established by trade for regulating and sustaining private credit, our Legislatures have incorporated banking institutions throughout the country, and, in most cases, have authorized them to loan their whole capital, and to issue twice that amount, and in some instances more, in notes payable in specie on demand. What capitalist, sir, whether possessing one hundred thousand or ten millions of dollars, who traded on such principles, could ever keep his notes in circulation, whether promising to pay specie or not? The public could have no confidence in an adventurer whose speculative spirit would tempt him to risk suspending payment, whenever commercial confidence should be impaired, from any cause whatever. Such is the solid foundation of that [FEB. 11, 1835. credit which is patronised by the State. Government What reform, sir, of the currency can we accomplish while we have four-and-twenty Legislatures, besides our Territorial Councils, authorizing their banks to issue some three or four hundred millions of notes redeemable in specie, when every bank charter in the Union is essentially an act to prohibit the importation of specie into the United States? This contest between our constitution and State legislation, between a metallic and a paper currency, ought not to be, and will not be, tolerated by the democracy of this Union, who are resolved to carry out the principles of this administration, and firmly to adhere to the constitution of their country. It is unworthy the dignity of legislation to recognise the quibbling distinction between bank notes and bills of credit. The former are essentially bills of credit, issued under authority of the State, and bills of the most mischievous character. If we do not abandon this legislative abuse, we may surrender all hope of reforming the currency. The great experiment, Mr. Speaker, attempted in this country, and on the other side of the Atlantic, to substitute paper for that ancient standard which has been adopted by the world, and has continued to measure the value of property for thousands of years, will be found, in the end, as visionary in principle as it is disastrous to nations. No nation can establish its own independent paper standard, without subjecting property to the fluc |