MAY 16, 1834.]

The Public Deposites.

[H. OF R.

bat even in this we find evidence in favor of the conclu- which all political and legal writers have used that term, sions which I have deduced from an examination of our and in which it is universally understood wherever it has

constitution and laws, instead of against it. Some of the been used. He is not vested with one whit more power same men who framed the constitution of the United in relation to the sword, or military subjects, than other States were delegates in the State convention of Penn-subjects upon which Congress are authorized by the sylvania, which framed the constitution about two years af- constitution to legislate. What is the money power, or terwards. A provision was inserted in that constitution power of the purse, which he has been denounced as for the annual election of a State treasurer, by the Le- endeavoring and struggling to unite in his own hands gislature; and also for the appointment of a secretary of with the political power, and the power of the sword? state, by the governor, to hold his commission during It is understood, as universally as the other, to be the the governor's continuance in office, if he should so long power of taxation and appropriation of money, and is behave himself well: thus evidently manifesting that the so used by all political writers who speak of it. I at framers of the Pennsylvania constitution viewed those once admit this is not vested in the President, nor has departments as in themselves executive, and embraced it ever been exercised or claimed. This division of in the general executive power vested in the governor; powers by subjects is unwarranted and unauthorized by and in order to make them exceptions from his super- the constitution--is an utter stranger to it, and would vision and control, it was necessary to do so in the con- lead to interminable conflict and confusion, if attemptstitution; and, if not, it could not form the subject of fu-ed to be brought into practical operation, and destroy ture legislation. the harmony and beauty which is clearly discernible We have had here some new divisions of powers, not throughout all the parts of that well-digested and hapwarranted by the constitution or usage of the country. pily framed instrument. The question is, not what subPowers are conceded to the President which, I humbly ject of action, sword or purse, or any thing else, beconceive, were never conferred by the constitution, and longs to or is vested in the Congress, and what in the others which are clearly conferred are taken away, it President; but what is the nature or character of the would seem, for the purpose of bringing the present act to be done in relation to that subject, be it what Chief Magistrate within the grave charge of usurpation. it may. Is it legislative or executive? If it be the forThe honorable and venerable gentleman from Rhode mer, whether it relates to the army or navy, the money, Island, [Mr. BURGES,] at page 3, part 2d, of his remarks revenue, lands, or whatever else, the property or inon this subject, speaks of the "effort made by the Chief terest of the United States, it clearly belongs to ConMagistrate of the United States to bring into his own gress. If it be the latter, no matter what the subject control the money power of the nation, and thereby to be, it as clearly belongs to the President. The honorunite, in his own hands, this overwhelming power with able gentleman from Rhode Island [Mr. BURGES] has the political power vested in him by the constitution." laid much stress upon the difference in the phraseology What political power, I pray, is vested in him by the of the first and second articles of the constitution; the constitution, separate from his power and duty to see first conferring "all legislative power" on the Congress, that the laws are faithfully executed?" By what article, and the second "the executive power" on the Presisection, clause, sentence, or syllable of the constitution, dent. As I understand him, "all legislative power

is the political power of this Government vested in the herein granted" means the legislative power, and, in President? To me, this division of power is perfectly addition to it, an undefined, undesignated part of the unintelligible. It has no foundation in the constitution, executive and judiciary powers of the Government, any law, or the most remote inference that can be drawn (because the judiciary power is conferred by the defrom either. Sir, the political power, as I understand finite article the, as well as the executive,) and that that term, is reserved to the people, and has never been the executive power does not mean all the executive surrendered by them to any branch of their public ser- power, but only a part of it; including that part of the vants, and was not necessary to be surrendered. It has legislative power which relates to the army and navy-never been claimed by any President, and I trust it will the power of the sword, which he is willing to connever be yielded to any. Again, at page 9, he says: cede to the President entire, provided he can compro"The Executive power, the power of the sword, is all mise it by convicting him of usurpation in performing an the power continually abiding with the President,' " &c. executive duty with regard to the Treasury DepartHe here puts forth Executive power and the power of ment. But the honorable gentleman's criticism upon the sword as synonymous and equivalent terms, meaning the phraseology of the sections would cut both ways. the same thing, no more and no less; and asserts that as If all legislative powers granted by the constitution be continually abiding (by the constitution, I suppose) with vested in a Congress--that Congress consisting of a Senthe President, or, in other words, conferred upon him by ate and House of Representatives--it excludes all possibilthe constitution. Sir, I deny that the President possesses ity of any legislative powers being reserved for the Treasany power over the sword in the sense in which that ury Department--ergo, that Department is not legislative. phrase has been used in that country from which it is bor But in sober seriousness, what is the amount of this dif In England, it is a figurative expression, and ference in the wording of the article relating to the Legismeans the power of declaring war, of raising armies, and lative branch, and that of the other two articles relating making peace; which, there, is an exclusive and acknow-to the Executive and Judiciary; the word "all" being ledged prerogative of the Crown, as every one knows used in the first, and not in the other two? It is very who has ever read even the elementary writings on the clear it was not intended to convey a greater or more exlaws and policy of that Government. Not so, however, tensive universality; for although the word all is used in in the United States. Here, war cannot be declared, nor the first section of the first article, yet the seventh secarmies raised, but by a solemn act of the representatives tion of the same article restrains its application, by giving of the people in Congress; nor peace concluded, but with the President a qualified veto upon the action of Conthe consent of two-thirds of the Senate. The power of gress. The framers of the constitution had mainly in view the sword, about which we have heard so much sense- the designation of the subjects to be surrendered by the less clamor, is not vested in the President by the constitu- States to the General or National Government. In the 1startion--has never been attempted to be exercised, and ticle, they provide that "all legislative powers herein grantnever claimed by him. His being, by constitutional in- ed shall be vested in a Congress," &c.; that is, the power vestment, the commander-in-chief of the army and navy, of legislation respecting all subjects embraced in the convests not in him the power of the sword, in the sense institution, and yielded by the States, by its terms, shall be

rowed.

H. OF R.]

The Public Deposites.

[MAY 16, 1834.

vested in a Congress, &c.; and as the legislation of a Mr. Speaker, it is matter of some curiosity and amuseGovernment is the foundation of all other action, they pro- ment to cast an eye over the various discordant, repugceed in other sections of that same article to mark the nant, and irreconcileable doctrines which honorable gen boundaries of the National Government, and to point out tlemen have laid down here, upon which to base the dethe subjects of its action, in the powers of Congress. In nunciations of usurpation and tyranny against the Chief the second article they proceed: "The executive power Magistrate; scarcely two of them agreeing with themshall be vested in a President," &c., having reference to selves, and no one of them not contradictory to the plain the foregoing article. Having laid the foundation in the spirit and meaning of the constitution and laws passed in first article, all that was necessary in the other two to con-accordance with its provisions. One stoutly asserts that vey their meaning was to refer to it by the use of the de- the dismissal or removal of the Secretary of the Treasury finite article the. The executive of what? Why, of that was a legislative act, that department being a Legislative of which the foregoing article is the legislative; and is the department; and sustains it with a great deal of broad and whole executive power, which is entirely conferred by vehement declamation. Another admits that it is an Exethat section upon the President, and so remains, except-cutive department, but that the removal could only be ing so far as is limited and restrained by the succeeding effected by the same power which made the appointmentsections of the same article. The gentleman has urged the President and Senate united. Another admits that it as an argument against the executive power being vested is an Executive department, and the officer an Executive in the President the physical impossibility in his perform- officer, and removable, too, by the President, but that ing or personally overseeing and superintending all the there is no official connexion or responsibility-no right executive action of the Government, and contends that to direct or superintend in any way; or, in other words, executive power means only the power of commander-in-that the President may remove, but not upon any means chief. This argument proves too much, and, therefore, of ascertaining whether the removal ought to be made nothing. It would be as impossible for the President to or not: he may remove, but he must have no reason for be personally present, actually and in person superintend- that removal; and that the removal would be a usurpaing and commanding in the various divisions, regiments, tion and tyranny upon the officer. And one honorable &c. which might be necessarily scattered in many distant gentleman from South Carolina [Mr. McDUFFIE] assum parts of the Union, on the ocean, or in foreign countries, ed the high and startling position, with an apparent sinas it would to superintend and oversee even the details of cerity and zeal, and with a boldness only equalled by the different civil departments. It is very clear that it was its palpable and glaring absurdity, that the constitution not intended by the constitution, in vesting the executive confers no power whatever upon the President, and power in the President, or in constituting him commander gravely and solemnly pronounces it a "monstrous revoli in-chief, that he should attend in person to all the details being heresy," to suppose that it was designed for any longing to either. He was constituted the responsible other purpose than merely "to designate the title of the head of all the Executive departments; to lay down the Chief Magistrate!" (See his speech.) Yes, that the wise general rules of administration--to direct and control in and eminent men, brought up in the school of practical the great leading principles of carrying into execution life, who framed the constitution, were guilty of the the laws of the land, as passed by Congress; and for this solemn and profound mockery of requiring, in the expurpose, might require in writing the opinion of any of press provisions of that instrument, the highest qualifica the executive officers, as well to assist and aid him with tions for the Chief Magistrate; that he should be a na their reasons and arguments, as also to enable him to as-tural born citizen, or a citizen at the time of its adoption certain what their qualifications were, and whether their should have attained the age of thirty-five years, and opinions harmonized with the general plan of administra- been fourteen years a resident-the obligation of an oath tion marked out under the legislation of the country; and, more solemn and imposing than that required of ary if not, that he might dismiss them, and give their places other officer, to "preserve, protect, and defend the to others. Without this single and united responsibility constitution of the United States;" and declaring that there could be no harmony in any administration. It "the executive power shall be vested in a Presiden," would be unreasonable and unjust to expect it. But it &c.; and yet all this, for the mere silly purpose of “de has been said that the officers of the Treasury Depart- signating the title!" ment are accountable to Congress. I admit it to the full extent; and so are all executive officers, by impeachment, and subject to be called upon by Congress for information in relation to their respective departments; but they are more immediately accountable to the President, as their executive head. There is no distinction among them in that particular.

66

These various incongruities and heterogeneous sole cisms furnish an illustrious example to be recorded on the page of our political history, and handed down to posterity, of "harmonious confusion;" and present beautiful system of wretched variety." As the port

expresses it-

Much has been said by the gentleman from Rhode Island "Like some patch'd dog-hole ek'd with ends of wall." on the third section of the fourth article, which authorizes But they all harmonize wonderfully in the same com Congress "to dispose of," and make all needful rules and clusion deduced by such various and irreconcileable regulations respecting the territory and other property means, that the constitution has been violated; and yet of the United States." Who ever questioned the power its bleeding wounds are to be all healed, simply by reof Congress to dispose of, and make needful rules and storing the people's money to the false-named Bank regulations respecting the property of the United States? the United States.

No one. Who ever thought of the President disposing Sir, upon the most mature, calm, and unbiased reflec of the property of the United States but under a law of tion, and the fullest and broadest examination of this Congress authorizing that disposition? Nobody. Con- part of the subject of which I am capable, my mind has gress must pass the law for the disposition, as their wis- arrived at the clearest conviction, that there is no just dom and discretion may dictate; but, when the law is pass-foundation whatever for the charge against the President ed, it must be carried into effect through the instrumen- of either assumption of Legislative power, or usurpation tality, and on the responsibility of the agent designated or tyranny upon the officer; that all the eloquence and in the constitution-the President, or some of the subor-zealous declamation which has been expended here to dinate executive officers; and that agency would seem to sustain it is but empty, vain, and unmeaning clamor; that me necessarily to carry along with it the custody, the the Treasury Department is clearly designated, and mere safe-keeping of the property to be disposed of. expressly recognised and demonstrated by law, and al

MAY 16, 1834.]

The Public Deposites.

[H. of R.

ways treated in practice as an Executive department, officer, designating him by his official character as such, and consequently subject to the supervision and direction the right of supervision and control of that superior is of the President; that the power of the President to re- necessarily carried into the enactment, by legal intendmove the principal officer in the Department at his dis-ment, and considered as being in the view of the Legislacretion, and on his responsibility, follows as a natural ture in the passage of the law. I could easily furnish examconsequence, and is, besides, explicitly recognised in ples to illustrate this principle, if it were necessary, or the very act establishing the Treasury Department; and time would permit. If a deputy sheriff were required to that, therefore, in the removal of the deposites from the perform a certain duty, by a law which characterized Bank of the United States, so far as the President was him officially as such, it would not interfere with the right concerned, in discharging Mr. Duane from the Depart- of his principal to dismiss him at any time he thought ment, because, among other reasons, he omitted and proper, and for no other reason than his not performing refused to carry into effect that measure, and change the that very duty; nor in any way dissolve the connexion beplace of deposite of the public money, although he had tween them. Nay, more; the sheriff would be responsible promised to do so, there was not the least violation of on his bond for the failure of his deputy to perform it. the constitution and laws; but, on the contrary, if the So, the section here quoted names the Secretary of the President conceived, as I think he well might, that the Treasury, who is to give the order with regard to the measure was a necessary and important one, he would deposites in the bank, and names him in his official charhave been faithless to his trust, if he had not done what acter as such; and as I think it abundantly proyed that he he did. If the President had been opposed to the re- is an Executive officer, subject to the supervision and dimoval of the deposites, and the Secretary in favor of it, rection of the President, as such, it is equally clear that and had been permitted to have changed the place of the power and duty conferred upon him by its terms, is deposite, without the President's dismissing him, charges to be understood sub modo-subject to all the conditions, of a very different description--of weakness and pu- restraints, and circumstances, under which the tenure of sillanimity, would have been rung in our ears from the his office is placed, either by the constitution or prior lesame quarter, with the same zeal and vehemence which gislation; and is not to be construed as affecting in any we have heard on the present occasion. While, there- way, or taking away this right of the President to control fore, we are guarding the Legislative branch from en- or superintend the Secretary of the Treasury in the percroachments upon its powers and rights by the Execu-formance of that or any other duty, or of removing him tive, it becomes us to be cautious lest we run into the from office; and, in fact, becomes a part of the business other extreme; one, I apprehend, much more likely, placed, in contemplation of law, under the superintend and perhaps not less dangerous, of encroaching ourselves ence and control of the President. This is the view taken upon the rightful and constitutional duties of the Execu- by Mr. Rush, in that part of his letter which I have already quoted. It is far from meant or intended here, Mr. Speaker, I beg pardon of the House for dwelling that this official subordination, necessary in all Governthus long upon this part of the subject, and will promise ments, and in all communities governed by laws, creates, greater brevity in the examination of the remaining in-in our republican form of government, any personal disquiries. tinctions whatever.

tive.

The next branch of the subject I have proposed to examine, is contained in the following inquiry:

With this principle, then, in view, what is the contract contained in this part of the charter? The 16th section, Was the removal of the deposites illegal, and a breach already quoted, contains the agreement on the part of of the contract with the bank, as contained in the charter? Congress, that the deposites of the money of the United This question arises, and is to be determined upon the States shall be made in the bank and branches, "unless fair construction of the 16th section of the act of the 10th the Secretary of the Treasury shall at any time otherwise April, 1816—“ An act to incorporate the subscribers to order and direct." This section confers no power on the the Bank of the United States," which provides "that Secretary, but leaves him just with the powers he had the deposites of the money of the United States, in places before-reserves that in this stipulation with the bank, in which the said bank and branches thereof may be es- precisely as it was, subject only to the requirement of his tablished, shall be made in said bank, or branches there- reasons to be laid before Congress, for ordering and diof, unless the Secretary of the Treasury shall at any time recting that the deposites should be made otherwise than otherwise order and direct; in which case the Secretary in the United States Bank and branches; and contains a of the Treasury shall immediately lay before Congress, if declaration to the bank, recognising in the Treasury in session, and, if not, immediately after the commence- Department the superintendence and control of the revement of the next session, the reasons of such order or di-nue, so far as regarded its collection and custody. This rection." This section was not originally in the bill, as is not only manifest from the bare reading of the secit was reported by the committee, but was inserted in the tion, and the whole act taken together, but is rendered course of its passage before it became a law; and would, still more clear by referring to the circumstances that extherefore, seem not to have been considered a provision isted at the time of its passage, which must be supposed originally of much consequence. However, it was em- to have entered into the view of Congress. By the act braced as a part of the law, and is now entitled to the establishing the Treasury Department in 1789, (vol. 2, same respect in construction, as if it had formed a part of L. U. S. page 48,) it was made the duty of the Secretary the original projet. I admit, sir, it is a contract; all con- "to prepare plans for the improvement and management tract, if you please, as asserted by my colleague, [Mr. of the revenue, and for the support of public credit; to BINNEY, but a qualified, conditional contract; and it prepare and report estimates of the public revenue and strikes me to be perfectly plain what is its meaning, with- the public expenditures; to superintend the collection of out any comment or illustration on the subject; as much the revenue," &c. By the act of May 1792, (2d vol. L. so as any course of reasoning could make it. That the U. S. page 504,) he shall direct the superintendence Secretary of the Treasury is an Executive officer and sub-of the collection of the duties on imports and tonnage, as ject to the control and direction of the President, has he shall judge best," &c. By the continued practice of been already clearly shown; and from this arises another the Government, through the successive terms of Hamilprinciple, as I apprehend, a universal principle of law, which must be taken into consideration in its construction as applicable to the circumstances here. It is this: that whenever a duty is imposed by law upon a subordinate VOL. X.--258

ton, Gallatin, and Dallas, as Secretaries in that Department, for nearly thirty years, the collection, custody, safekeeping, and depositing of the public money, had been conducted and managed by the Secretary of the Treasury

H. OF R.]

The Public Deposites

[MAY 16, 1834.

for the time being, as might be thought best. The de-lected and in safe keeping, and that to be afterwards colposites were removed from one bank to another, as was lected and deposited, which is left as the subject of the supposed by the Department best to suit the convenience order and direction of the Secretary of the Treasury. of the country and serve the interests of the public. On The money that is collected and deposited does not therethis state of circumstances the law passed, and this part by cease to become "the money of the United States," of the contract, on the part of Congress, is clearly condi- and become the money of the depository. Mr. Rush, in tional or qualified, depending upon the discretion of the another part than that quoted, of the same letter referred Treasury Department unrestrained, further than that the to, meets the argument very fully, and from which I reasons should be submitted to Congress. The Secretary select one or two sentences, with which I fully concur. is not limited to any specific reasons-nor bound by the He says: "The power of the President, under the 16th mere consideration of the safety of the money, or the in-section of the act incorporating the bank, to withhold deterests of the bank, although both these always ought to posites, could only have been conferred from the public have their due weight; and, of course, his duty would re- danger to their being longer made. To imagine that the quire that the public money should not be deposited same reason would not be applicable towards enabling where it would be unsafe. But the bank has put in him to withdraw those made hitherto, would involve an the modest claim of damages! on account of the remo-incongruity not to be charged on any Legislature. It fol val of the deposites, alleging that the sum of one million lows from unavoidable construction upon the context, as five hundred thousand dollars, was paid in consideration in various other cases in law. To deny it would be to say of the agreement contained in the 16th section, on the that the nation need not put to risk any more of its funds part of the Government, to deposite the public money in in this receptacle, but must lose, without an effort, all its vaults; which was absolutely its right under the char- there already-like the den into which the footsteps of ter, subject only to the condition of the deposites being victims might be traced, whilst none were ever seen reunsafe. This is clear and palpably a misconstruction of turning." It seems very clear to me that, even confining the act. The 20th section requires the bank to pay one the examination to the narrow limits of the single section million five hundred thousand dollars, "in consideration alone, it will not in fairness endure the nice construction of the exclusive privileges and benefits conferred by this contended for; but when the whole context, and the exact upon the said bank." The next succeeding section isting circumstances on which that clause of the charter (the 21st) contains the exclusive privileges and benefits, was passed, are taken into view, it dwindles into a mere that no other bank should be established during its con-verbal criticism. The Secretary of the Treasury, prior tinuance, and to bring suits, use its corporate name, &c., to the passage of the bank act of 1816, had always exer after the expiration of its charter for two years. These cised the right and performed the duty of managing and were the equivalent for the consideration mentioned in conducting the details connected with the collection and the 20th section, as the conditional custody of the public safe keeping of the public revenue, and selecting the money, as contained in the 16th section, is the equivalent places of deposite in such manner as best suited the c for the duties required in the 15th section-"to give the venience of the people, and which contributed most, in necessary facilities for transferring the public funds from the judgment of that Department, (always subject to the place to place, without charging commission," &c. The advice and approbation of the President,) to the facilita 16th section contains no exclusive privilege or benefit, ting and securing the collection of the revenue. This and therefore forms no part of the consideration contain- clear, from all the communications from that Department ed in the 20th section. The exclusive privileges and among which, I refer to the letter from Mr. Gallatin, of benefits conferred by the 21st section alone, that no other the 8th January, 1812; and surely it would be a reflection bank should be established, were more than an equiva- upon the Congress of 1816, to suppose that a constant lent for the sum required under the 20th section, and practice of the Government, which existed up to that time, could now command more than twice or thrice that sum was entirely overlooked and lost sight of. Is it not manfrom any new company we might incorporate on the same fest that it is that very practice which is alluded to in terms; besides the important privilege granted in the 14th expression, "unless the Secretary of the Treasury sha section, making its bills and notes a legal tender in pay-at any time otherwise order and direct?" This is sti ment of all debts due to the United States, unless Con- further confirmed by the practice afterwards, as appears gress should pass a law to the contrary. In Pennsylvania, by the letter of Mr. Crawford, in February, 1823. From it has been very common to receive a bonus from a bank. 1817 until October, 1821, he had made about fifty trans ing company of five per cent. on its stock, a greater sum fers of public money from the Bank of the United States in proportion than was required of this bank for the mere to various State banks-not only withheld from the bank, privilege, not exclusive, of banking under the authority or ceased to deposite with it several millions, but withdrew of that State, where there are numerous other banking to that amount, of what had been collected and deposand companies, and there has always been a rushing anxiety to subscribe for the stock.

there; for reasons of policy, too, which he assigns. The distinction now taken, between the money collected and A distinction has been attempted to be drawn on the deposited, and that to be collected and deposited after the 16th section of the bank charter, between the money order and direction of the Secretary, did not then, wher which had been already deposited in the bank, and that the reasons and principles of the act were fresh in the re which had not. It has been said, that although the Sec- collection of every one, seem to be taken. But the ch retary might cease to make deposites in the United States cers and managers of the bank were not so learned in the Bank, or might withhold from it the moneys to be col-law then, as now! and perhaps had not so much occas lected, yet he had no authority to withdraw from it those to resort to its nice technical distinctions for protection already deposited. This distinction is more plausible than But it has been said that the Secretary of the Treasury was valid; and when it comes to be tested, will be found to be the umpire between the bank and Congress; and yet it a mere technicality, and is based upon a confused and has been seriously and gravely contended that it was a erroneous impression, made by the use of the word breach of the agreement for the Secretary to exercise his "made," in the future tense, and referring it to the duty as such, without an expression or direction from wrong date-referring it to the period of the collection Congress to that effect first given. Between individus, of the money, instead of that of the passage of the act, to when a matter was referred to an umpire when or how which it was manifestly designed to be applied. It is to act, it would be universally admitted that he was not "the money of the United States"-the whole money of to await the direction of one of the parties; nay, it would the United States, without distinction between that col- be considered improper and indelicate in either of the

16, 1834.]

The Public Deposites.

[H. OF R.

ies to direct when or how the decision should be made; at some time or other exist between the Executive deI cannot perceive, on the gentleman's own grounds, partment and Congress on this subject; and to any inconit is to distinguish this from a case between individuals; venience arising from the opinion and exercise of discrewhy that should not be corrupt and improper in a Gov-tion by the Treasury Department against it, until the reament, which all men would say was so in an individual sons should be examined and reversed by Congress, as en. It is very obvious that the law did not contem- the great supervisory tribunal, if the reasons were found e an expression, or even an indication from Congress, to be unjust and insufficient, the bank agreed, by the re the direction should be given by the Secretary, very terms of the charter, to submit. If Congress had h less require it; but that he was authorized to give first directed the Secretary to remove the deposites from order and direction first, and lay his reasons before the bank, it might have had better grounds for complaint gress, for the act done; not whether he should do it of a breach of contract; not that Congress had not originot, if in session, and if not, immediately after the com- ally, as the immediate representatives of the people, the cement of the next session. The vocabulary of paramount controlling and guarding power over the pubce and unmeasured abuse has been ransacked for epi- lic money, to direct by law, when, how, and where, is suitable to degrade and render odious the Secre- it should be deposited and kept, and the Executive bound of the Treasury. He has been called the pliant tool, to carry it into effect in the manner thus prescribed; but cuting the mere will of the President-no more than simply because the Congress of 1816 had stipulated and mere pen that wrote the order, &c. I shall not oc- agreed with the bank, in the charter, that the deposites y time in refuting unmerited and unfounded reproaches should be made with it, unless the Secretary should at has these. It was well known what the opinion of any time otherwise order and direct; and that in giving present Secretary of the Treasury was, as regarded this order and direction, there should be the check and measure, before his appointment was made, and it restraint of the reasons being laid before Congress immeresponded with that of the President; and that is the diately after the order given, to be judged of by that ead and front of his offending." As a jurist, and as a body. The idea of any claim for damages, then, by the ral, upright man, of unshaken firmness and integrity bank, I consider as perfectly ridiculous and absurd. All character, he would, perhaps, not suffer in comparison the bank can possibly claim, under the contract, is, the h any of the honorable gentlemen who have thought restoration of the deposites, or its former relations with per to use language of that unworthy description in the Government; and that only on the grounds that the tion to him. reasons presented to Congress, under all the circumstances, are not sufficient for withholding from it the custody and temporary use of the public money.

Vithout dwelling longer on this part of the subject, it ms to me this sixteenth section of the act of 1816, has one reading, and does not give to the bank any thing From a full and thorough examination of the whole sube an unconditional, unqualified contract for the keep-ject thus far, I think it clearly established, that the Treas of the people's money, as the officers now seem to ury Department is Executive in its character, established im for the benefit of themselves and their wealthy and by law, under the constitution of the country, as a necesiring stockholders. I apprehend, in the first place, sary auxiliary, under the direction, supervision, and conit the Congress of 1816 had no right to make a contract trol, of the Executive branch, to carry out the details of that description, binding upon all future Congresses for legislation on the subject of revenue; that when the prinenty years; and, therefore, we are not to suppose that cipal officer at the head of that Department is designated, y intended it; and that their language will not bear any officially, to perform any act, it does not dissolve this à construction, without the greatest violence, that they official connexion between the President and him, but is It furnishes to the bank nothing more than a strong predicated upon it; and that official connexion and rebability of the custody of the public money. The de-sponsibility is understood as carried into and embraced sites of the public money are to be made in the bank within that designation; that the Secretary of the Treas1 branches, unless the Secretary of the Treasury, who ury is subject to removal from office by the President, at always theretofore managed and conducted the de- his discretion, and on his responsibility; and that, in the led arrangements with regard to the collection and safe removal of the deposites, the terms of the charter were eping of the public money, should at any time other pursued in the manner prescribed by Congress and ace order and direct; and when he should so order and di- cepted by the bank. There has, therefore, been no viot, that he should lay before Congress, for the time being,lation of the constitution, nor of the law, nor breach of e reasons which induced him to give the order, not desig- the contract with the bank. It has no claim upon the ting or dictating to that Congress what should, or should Government on the ground of a broken contract; its claim t, be sufficient reasons, but leaving to them to judge, is entirely directed to the discretion of Congress, whether the representatives of the people, at the time it should its faithful, upright, and correct conduct, as the fiscal me before them, as of right they should, in their discre-agent of the Government, while that relation existed, in n, on all the facts and circumstances, whether the reasons equity and honor deserves, and good policy requires, that on which he had acted were sufficient and sound or not.it should be the depository of the public money in prefannot perceive, then, either in the withholding or with-erence to all other institutions. This brings me to the awing of the public money from the bank, by the Secre- remaining inquiry which I proposed to examine. y of the Treasury, any breach or violation of contract. Was the removal of the deposites from the bank withThe very terms of the charter were pursued in the out sufficient cause, either on the score of public policy, thdrawal of the money from the bank. The order and or arising out of the conduct of the bank? ection was given by the organ designated by the agree- Before I proceed to the investigation of the reasons ent, and in a manner not contravening its provisions. laid before us by the Secretary of the Treasury, I beg e discretion contemplated and expressed in the act leave to correct one or two errors into which gentlemen is exercised, and followed by the submission of the rea- have run, by some means, in professing to quote the Secns, just as provided in the agreement proposed by Con-retary. One of my colleagues, [Mr. BINNEY,] in remarkess, and accepted by the bank, by their acting under ing upon that part of the Secretary's letter in which he If the bank were even injured or wronged, it was no asserts that, "by the plain terms of the contract, as conre than one of those contingencies and inconveniences tained in the section above quoted, (the 16th section of which they agreed to submit, by accepting of the char- the charter,) the stockholders have agreed that the power in the terms in which it was expressed. It could reserved in the Secretary over the deposites, shall not be rdly be expected that a difference of opinion might not restricted to any particular contingencies, but be absolute