specie capital actually paid in, but upon the private notes of the stockholders, furnishing no grounds for any safe system of banking operations. Banks which meant to maintain their credit, and be what they professed, could do but very little business; those which put their credit at hazard by extensive discounts soon found themselves obliged to stop payment. A circulating medium by which commerce could be carried on, and debtors enabled to meet the demands of their creditors, was not supplied by these institutions. On general principles, regulating the intercourse of society, nothing can satisfy the demands of a creditor, but the payment in specie of the amount of his debt; or the delivery of some equivalent which he is willing to receive. While these principles were rigidly adhered to, property was constantly passing from debtor to creditor, regulated in amount, only by the conscience of the latter.

Relief laws of Kentucky. To relieve her citizens from their pecuniary embarassments resulting from such a state of things, Kentucky, the eldest sister of the west, undertook an experimental essay, in legislation on the subject of the relations between debtor and creditor. The debtor interest became predominant in the legislative and executive branches of the government. It found itself trameled by that clause of the constitution, which provides, that "no state shall emit bills of credit, or make any thing but gold or silver coin a tender in payment of debts ;" and by an intelligent and independent national judiciary, competent to pronounce any law invalid, which should infringe upon the principles of that instrument. Under the denomination of relief, or as they were more familiarly called stop laws, a system of legislation was adopted, calculated to release the debtor from the obligation of his contract, or enable him for a long period to evade payment. A bank was established, in which the state was much the largest stockholder, and of which it had the direction, without a specie capital, authorized to make loans on landed security for long periods, and to issue bills promising to pay the amount specified on the face of them, on demand, with no expectation of a fulfilment, or provision for that purpose, other than what might be obtained from the redemption of the mortgages, or sale of the property at some future period. In this scheme, debtors found a ready mode of obtaining money of a certain character. It was evident, however, that this was, to every practical purpose, only a renewal of the old paper money system, which had long since, by universal consent, been abandoned;

and that, in short, it was nothing less than an ingenious at tempt to evade the constitution. The bills, answering no purpose for remittance, rapidly depreciated; creditors refused to receive them, and debtors found themselves unrelieved. Their credit was attempted to be sustained by a law, providing, that in all cases where a creditor refused to receive bills in satisfaction of a judgment, execution should be suspended on certain terms for two years. Another provision was likewise made, that when property was taken upon execution, it might, at the option of the debtor, be appraised, and if it could not be sold for two thirds of its appraised value, no sale was to be made. The national judiciary uniformly decided that laws of this character were unconstitutional, as operating to impair the obligation of contracts. The supreme court of the state, notwithstanding the popular excitement, with an independence honorable to their character, conformed to this decision. Debtors were still unrelieved. The judges, holding their offices by the state constitution, by a permanent tenure, were not removable at the pleasure of the legislature.

New organization of their courts. Another experiment of a singular nature was resorted to. The legislature repealed the judiciary act under which the court was constituted, and immediately re-enacted another, and appointed a new set of judges. The old court denied the constitutionality of this proceeding, claimed the right of exercising theirjudicial functions, and refused to recognize the existence of the new. The latter also entered upon their duties, denying the existence of any other supreme court than their own. Two supreme courts, each claiming exclusive jurisdiction over the same matters, and denying the right of the other, sitting at the same time and place, produced a scene of confusion readily conceived and greatly to be deplored.

Proceedings in the United States courts. In the mean time, the United States courts proceeded in their regular course. All cases within their jurisdiction, embracing all of any considerable magnitude, where the plaintiff was a foreigner or citizen of another state, were brought before those tribunals. Judgments were rendered and executions issued against the bodies and property of debtors in usual form, according to the provisions of the United States judiciary act of 1792. Nothing but specie payment, or the imprisonment of the debtor's body could satisfy these judgments. No stop laws of the state impeded their execution. The debtors, in these suits, were generally the retail merchants

of Kentucky, the middle men, between the wholesale dealers in the east, and the consumers in their own neighborhoods, and while their bodies and property were exposed to execution on the judgments of the United States courts, the state laws prevented the collection of debts due them from their customers, the actual consumers of the goods which were unpaid for. Matters progressed in this downward course, involving the citizens of Kentucky in still greater difficulties at every stage, until a redeeming spirit in the people produced a change in their representation, which effected a reinstatement of the old court, and a repeal of the stop laws.

The neighboring states watched the progress of this system of legislation in Kentucky with great interest, and anxiety. Its result taught them to avoid its evils-to submit to temporary inconveniences, which time and a rigid economy will always cure, rather than hazard the experiment of unsettling the principles on which commercial intercourse is based. During the early stages of this scene in Kentucky, and for the purpose of affording relief to a numerous class of citizens affected by judgments of the national courts, Mr. Johnson, a senator of that state, introduced the bill in question, and labored with untired assiduity in its support, for a number of sessions, and finally procured its passage through the senate. The house of representatives determined that they would not change the mode of collecting debts coeval with the existence of the states, nor interfere with the existing relations between debtor and creditor.

CHAPTER XVI.

Presidential election of 1825-Different modes of designating the chief magistrate in different countries-Original provisions of the American constitution-Amendment in consequence of the election of 1801-Attempts to amend the constitution in the congress of 1823-4-Five candidates presented-Their claims-Mr. Calhoun withdrawn-Organization of the parties-preparation for the contest-Number of newspapers in the United States-Their influence-Different modes of choosing electors-Proceedings of New York-Congressional caucus-Its result-State of the electoral votes-Candidates returned to the house-Preparations for the caucus-Mr. Clay's conduct impeached by Mr. Kremer-Brought before the house, and a committee of investigation appointed at the instance of Mr. Clay Their proceedings and report-Joint meeting on the 9th of February -State of the votes in the house-Mr. Adams elected-Inauguration-Formation of the cabinet-Mr. Adams' course in relation to appointments and removals-Second meeting of the 18th congress-Message Progress of the United States under Mr Monroe's administration-Proceedings of congress-Mr. Johnson's bill to abolish imprisonment for debt-Debates on the the Cumberland road bill-Claims of the west on the subject of internal improvements.

Presidential election of 1825. The designation of a person to administer the government for the presidential term, commencing the 4th of March, 1825, early in Mr. Monroe's last period, began to be the subject of much discussion. In all well regulated governments it has become a settled axiom, that the executive branch must be " one and indivisible." Under whatever title this power is exercised, whether that of president, king, consul, or emperor, the trust is of the highest magnitude.

In the Different modes of designating the executive. governments of the eastern continent, some fortunate individual in each has been able to secure to himself, and his posterity the enjoyment of this power. The eldest son, however inferior his capacity, has usually succeeded to the throne of his father, with as little controversy as the child comes to the inheritance of any other patrimony. In some instances, the reigning prince has been allowed to appoint a successor by will, and dispose of the territory and subjects of the nation, in the same manner that individuals are allowed to dispose of their acquisitions. In the few instances where the elective principle has been attempted, it has been

attended with such confusion and bloodshed, that the people have been glad to resort to hereditary succession. They have considered it as one of the greatest calamities to have the right of succession become doubtful, so as to call upon them to exercise any powers in relation to the choice of a national chief. In European governments, experience has demonstrated that the elective principle is impracticable. Recent events in the republics of the south seem to confirm the same opinion; one military chief after another, in rapid succession, and at the expense of the blood of his fellow-citizens, is placing himself at their head. Far better would it be that the executive should be permanent, and hereditary, than that the nation should periodically go through scenes of bloodshed, and domestic war, or be agitated by a constant succession of intrigues between rival aspirants to the office.

The rapidly increasing wealth and population of the United States, their rising importance in the view of Europe, and the great patronage attached to the office of chief magistrate, render each successive election more and more a matter of interest. Thousands of individuals, expecting more or less personal emolument from the elevation of their favorite chief, fall into his ranks, and bring to his aid a numerous train of dependents. Thousands of others, for the mere purpose of making themselves of consequence in the scale of society, enter the lists. Notwithstanding all the evils incident to a popular election of a chief magistrate in any form, hereditary accession, or even a tenancy for life, is hostile to the first principles on which the American government is based, and is not to be resorted to until all other modes have been unsuccessfully tried.

Original provisions of the constitution. In no part of their labors did the framers of the constitution find greater difficulties, than in settling the manner of designating the chief magistrate. It finally resulted in a mode singular, intricate, and guarded with pecular caution. Electors were to be chosen in the several states, and their votes given for two persons, one of whom was to execute the office of president for the ensuing four years, without designating which. The person having the greatest number of votes, so be it, it was a majority of the whole number of electors, was to be the president, and the next highest the vice president. If no one had a majority, or if the highest two had an equal number, the house of representatives, voting by states, were to elect one of the two for president, and the next highest was of course to be vice president. One object of the lat