2. Congress has no power to coin money, of paper.

3. It has no power to make any thing but gold and silver a legal tender.

4. That the powers, rights, and privileges conferred upon the bank are not warranted by the national Constitution.

The bank and the National Republican and Whig parties accepted these issues, and prepared for and opened the fight. They demanded for the bank what they did not show it was entitled to. True, a corporation may contract debts, but where is the power to make its contracts, in one form, more than another, a legal currency? Where is the constitutional provision that authorizes the creation of a corporation, clothing it with power to make and open a lawful currency to fill the place of gold and silver? No two have ever been able to agree upon the source of power to create a national bank, authorized to issue bills, and control the business of the country, and, for the best of all reasons, because its source cannot be found in the national Constitution, which authorizes no law giving advantages to the few which are not conferred upon all.

General Jackson's veto is one of the most powerful and conclusive documents ever issued, leaving no doubtful point for future discussion and decision. His principles were those of the Democracy. He stood upon the Constitution, and surveyed the whole horizon. He nowhere saw any ground upon which to sustain the bill, or the claims of its friends. He scrutinized Democratic principles, but found none that would authorize the creation of a bank outside the District of Columbia, where several charters then existed. Duty pointed out his path, and no human considerations could induce him to desert it.

The bill rechartering the bank was passed, with the intention of cramping him, and to extort his assent, for fear it should exert its power and influence to defeat his reëlection. The object was clearly apparent, and not attempted to be concealed. Some of its friends proclaimed that, instead of his killing the bank, the bank would kill him. Like an honest and fearless man, he accepted the issue, and demanded a verdict from the great national jury, the voting people. Although a majority of his Cabinet did not support

him, he vetoed the bill without fear or hesitation. He was confident that his duty required it, and he cheerfully trusted to Providence for the consequences. He believed he was right, and he had no fears but that the American people would sustain him. He was not disappointed.

As he expected, some professed friends in Congress, some editors, and a few others, deserted him. But where one left, ten came and gave him honest and hearty support. Discounts of nominal paper, and immense sums for nominal counsel-fees and unscrutinized printing-bills, did not blind their eyes. An immense concentrated money power, wielded by politicians and reckless speculators, had no charms for the honest masses. They believed him wise, and knew he was fearless and honest. The people love fearless and honest men,—and they cheerfully followed him as a leader worthy to be followed.

The supporters of the bank claimed that it was constitutional, but could not agree in what part of the Constitution the authority to charter it could be found. Some supposed it was found in the war-power, others in the commercial, others in the financial. The Supreme Court had twice declared it constitutional, because it was an agency which Congress had deemed necessary for the management of our finances, and as such, like national bonds, could not be taxed by the States. It was wholly above State laws or authority. It was claimed that these decisions were binding upon the President, as well as Congress and the people. The President denied that they were binding, except in the particular cases, but did not bind the other departments of the Government. He insisted that the opinion of Congress could neither confer nor exclude constitutional power. Congress, in 1791, exercised the power claimed, and refused to do so in 1811; and in 1815 one Congress decided against a bank charter, and in 1816 another granted one. These precedents were even, and proved nothing, except the varying opinions of Congress. He denied that there was any necessity for a bank as a fiscal agent, and that a national bank had any special fitness for such a purpose. Experience, and especially since the establishment of an independent Treasury, with rational adaptations to business, has demonstrated

the truth of this position. He denied that the mind and judgment of men could be rightfully trammelled by precedents where they were not fortified and supported by reason. The court held that Congress could create an artificial person, and endow such person with governmental functions. But Jackson said, the Government agents authorized by the Constitution were not nonentities, but men of flesh and blood, who could be indicted, and, if convicted, imprisoned for violation of law and duty. He seemed to appreciate the value of precedents lightly, and well he might, as there are volumes devoted to showing multitudes of them, overruled by the courts themselves, as hostile to the authority of reason and justice. Men sworn to support the Constitution should be as free to act as juries, whose oath permits them to find as they understand the evidence. A President does not swear to support the Constitution, as understood by others, nor would he be justified in so doing, when he believed them wrong. If he should do so, it would be moral perjury. A large share of all the cases decided in courts have not the character of

unanimity among their members, and many are affirmed by the judges being equally divided. The civil law, wiser in many things than the common law, follows precedents only when their reasons commend themselves to the understanding. Such were clearly General Jackson's opinions, and on them he acted. He was unwilling to permit any one to shackle his opinions upon any question.

On the question of the policy of granting to the owners of the bank a franchise for a comparatively small sum, for which others had offered very large ones, he was equally explicit. The bank offered three millions, payable by instalments, for a renewal of its charter. This was hardly equal to its exemption from taxation, and for the use of the deposits. Others had offered far more. All understood, if the charter was renewed, the stock would sell for at least fifty per cent. premium. Here would be fifteen millions secured, and this among a few hundreds of stockholders, onefourth of whom were non-residents. He believed if Congress had the power to create and sell franchises, they should be thrown open to all, and secure as large a sum as was possible, and not give

those who had long enjoyed these advantages the privilege to continue them for another series of years. He also objected to concentration of the money-power of the country so that it might be used for unjustifiable purposes.

The bank had at will made money plenty and then scarce, thus controlling the business of the country, and it threatened to control its politics. It was neither necessary nor expedient to create an artificial and irresponsible being which could exert such influences.

The country was with General Jackson upon all the issues. He received 219 votes, and Mr. Clay, the great champion of the bank, only 49. Nothing could be more hostile to democratic principles than the renewal of the charter of the bank. It would have added to means by which the rich could be made richer, and the poor poorer. It conferred princely favors on the few, and none on the many. It committed to irresponsible hands the power to make money plenty or scarce, to make and break whom it pleased, and control elections by lending liberally to one class, and collecting with a vengeance from those who refused to submit to its tyranny. Instead of protecting the people and their industry, it conferred the power of plundering and crushing them. It had not one solitary approved principle to stand upon. Those who then were loudest in favor of the bank have, to a large extent, abandoned it, and conceded that General Jackson was right. Mr. Webster, then its ablest friend, afterward referred to it as an 66 obsolete idea."

In another place we shall refer to the present litter of national banks, and bestow some attention on those who begat them, and the authority they rest upon, they not having the pretences urged in favor of their deceased predecessor.

66.-THE REMOVAL OF THE DEPOSITS.

The act incorporating the Bank of the United States, in order to give it the semblance of constitutionality, provided that the Government might use it as a depository of public moneys, and which might be removed in the discretion of the Secretary of the Treasury. After his veto of the renewal of its charter, and the

bank had commenced its political career and expenditure, General Jackson came to the conclusion that it was not a proper and safe depository for them. Louis McLane, then Secretary of the Treasury, hesitating about the removal, was promoted to the State Department, and William J. Duane appointed. On his refusing to act, he was removed, and the late Chief-Justice Taney, then Attorney-General, succeeded him. He, and Mr. Woodbury, of the Navy Department, fully concurred in the President's views. The common expression, “removed the deposits," led to erroneous conclusions. They were not removed, but other depositories were selected to receive the accruing revenues, and the current expenses were paid out of the money then in the bank. The Whig party identified itself with the bank, which became its financial ally, and paid its heaviest expenses.

After hearing opinions for and against the course best to be pursued in relation to the deposits, General Jackson read a paper, containing his own views, to his Cabinet. In this document he demonstrated the propriety of his intended action to the satisfaction of a large majority of the American people, as is proved by the fact that it brought him a material accession of strength. The public debt was then finally paid, and the surplus of public money was large amounting to many millions—which the bank used without charge. The failure to enjoy these deposits upon such terms was equivalent to a large diminution of its capital, and its income was millions less on that account. The only remedy was in building up the Whig party, filling Congress with its partisans, and obtaining a charter over the President's veto, which it was sure to encounter.

By way of punishing Mr. Taney for his share in this matter, his nomination as Secretary of the Treasury was rejected in the Senate, a majority of which was composed of friends of the bank. This was good fortune for Mr. Taney, who was soon nominated as successor of Mr. Justice Duval, and, before that was consented to, the Senate became politically revolutionized, when he was nominated and confirmed Chief Justice, in place of John Marshall, deceased, in which elevated position he served upward of twenty-eight years. No act of similar importance to this disposition of the public