PRESIDENT JACKSON'S 
 
 VETO MESSAGE 
 
 ON THE 
 
 Willi aVAVaiS W&MTSLi 
 
 To the Senate : 
 
 The bill to " modify and continue" the act entitled " an act 
 to incorporate the subscribers of the Bank of the United States," 
 was presented to me on the 4th inst. Having considered it 
 with that solemn regard to the principles of the Constitution 
 which the day was calculated to inspire, and come to the con- 
 clusion that it ought not to become a law, I herewith return it 
 to the Senate, in which it originated, with my objections. 
 
 A Bank of the United States is, in many respects, conven- 
 ient for the Government and useful to the people. Entertaining 
 this opinion, and deeply impressed with the belief that some of 
 the powers and privileges possessed by the existing Bank are 
 unauthorised by the Constitution, subversive of the rights of 
 the States, and dangerous to the liberties of tho people, I felt 
 it my duty, at an early period of my administration, to call the 
 attention of Congress to the practicability of organizing an in- 
 stitution combining all its advantages and obviating these ob- 
 jections. I sincerely regret that, in <he act before me, I can 
 perceive none of those modific^^ s of the Bank charter which 
 are necessary, in my opinion, to make it compatible with jus- 
 tice, with sound policy, or with the Constitution of our country. 
 
 The present corporate body, denominated the President, Di- 
 rectors and Company of the Bank of the United States, will 
 have existed, at the time this act is intended to take effect, 
 twenty years. It enjoys an exclusive privilege of banking un- 
 der the authority of the General Government, a monopoly of i(s 
 
 A 
 
favor and support, and, as a necessary consequence, almost a 
 monopoly of the foreign and domestic exchange. The powers, 
 privileges and favors bestowed upon it, in the original charter, 
 by increasing the value of the stock far above its par value, op- 
 erated as a gratuity of many millions to the stockholders. 
 
 An apology may be found for the failure to guard against this 
 result, in the consideration that the effect of the original act of 
 incorporation could not be certainly foreseen at the time of its 
 passage. The act before me proposes another gratuity to the 
 same stock, and, in many cases, to the same men of at least 
 seven millions more. This donation finds no apology in any 
 uncertainty as to the effect of the act. On all hands it is conce- 
 ded that its passage will increase at least twenty or thirty per 
 cent, more, the market price ol its stock, subject to the payment 
 of an annuity of $200,000 per year, secured by the act ; thus 
 adding, in a moment, one-fourth to its par value. It is not our 
 own citizens only who are to receive the bounty of our own 
 government. More than eight millions of the stock of this 
 Bank are held by foreigners. By this act, the American Re- 
 public proposes virtually to make them a present of some mil- 
 lions of dollars. For these gratuities to foreigners, and to some 
 of our own opulent citizens, the act secures no equivalent what- 
 ever. They are the certain gains of the present stockholders 
 under the operation of this act, after making full allowance for 
 the payment of the bonus. 
 
 Every monopoly, and all exclusive privileges, are granted 
 at the expense of the public, which ought to receive a fair equiv- 
 alent. The many millions which this act proposes to bestow 
 on the stockholders of the existing Bank, must come directly or 
 indirectly out of the earning of the American people. It is 
 due to them, therefore, if their Government sell monopolies and 
 exclusive privileges, that they should at least exact for them as 
 much as they are worth in open market. The value ol the mo- 
 nopoly in this case may be correctly ascertained. The twenty- 
 eight millions of stock would probably be at an advance of 
 fifty per cent, and command in market at least forty-two mil- 
 lions of dollars, iubject to the payment of the present bonus. 
 The present value of the monopoly, therefore, ia seventeen mil- 
 
 '.Duksr. 
 
ON THE V. f . BANK. 
 
 5 
 
 lions of dollars, and this act proposes to sell it for three millions, 
 payable in fifteen annual instalments of $200,000 each. 
 
 It is not conceiveable how the present stockholders can hare 
 any claim to to the special favour of the Government. The 
 present corporation has enjoyed its monopoly during the period 
 stipulated in the original contract. If we must have such a cor- 
 poration, why should not the Government sell out the whole 
 stock, and thus secure to the people the full market value of the 
 privileges granted? Why should not Congress create and sell 
 twenty-eight millions of stock, incorporating the purchasers 
 with all the powers and privileges secured in this act, and put- 
 ting the premium upon the sales into the Treasury ? 
 
 But this act does not permit competition, in the purchase of 
 this monopoly. It seems to be predicated on the erroneous idea, 
 that the present stockholders have a prescriptive right, not only 
 to the favor but the bounty of Government. It appears that 
 more than a fourth part of the stock is held by foreigners, and 
 the residue is held b^ a few hundred of our own citizens, chief- 
 ly of the richest class : for their benefit does this act exclude the 
 whole American people from competition in the purchase of this 
 monopoly, and disposes of it for many millions less than it 
 worth. This seems the less excusable because some of our cit- 
 izens, not now stockholders, petitioned that the door of compe- 
 tition might be opened, and offered to take a charter on terms 
 much more favorable to the Government and country. 
 
 But this proposition, although made by men whose aggregate 
 wealth is believed to be equal to all the private stock in the ex- 
 isting Bank, has been set aside, and the bounty of our govern- 
 ment is proposed to be again bestowed on the few who have been 
 fortunate enough to secure the stock, and, at this moment, wield 
 the power of the existing institution. I cannot perceive the 
 justice or policy of this course. If our Government must sell 
 monopolies, it would seem to be its duty to take nothing less 
 than their full value ; and if gratuities must be made once in fif- 
 teen or twenty years, let them not be bestowed on the subjects 
 of a foreign government, nor upon a designated and favored class 
 of men in our own country. It is but justice and good policy, 
 so far as the nature of the case admits, to confine our favors to 
 
4 VETO MESSAGE 
 
 our fellow-citizens, and let each in his turn enjoy an opportu 
 nity to profit by our bounty. In the bearings of the acts before 
 me upon these points, I find ample reasons why it should not be- 
 come a law. 
 
 It has been urged as an argument in favor of re-chartering the 
 present Bank, that the calling in its loans will produce great 
 embarrassment and distress. The time allowed to close i(s 
 concerns, is ample, and if it has been well managed, its pres- 
 sure will be light, and heavy only in case its management has 
 been bad. — If, therefore, it shall produce distress, the fault will 
 be its own, and it should furnish a reason against renewing a 
 power which had been so obviously abused. But, w T ill there 
 ever be a time when this reason will be less powerful ? To ac- 
 knowledge its force, is to admit that the Bank ought to be per- 
 petual, and as a consequence, the present stockholders, and those 
 inheriting their rights, as successors, be established a privileged 
 order, clothed both with great political power, and enjoying im- 
 mense pecuniary advantages from their connection with the gov- 
 ernment. 
 
 The modifications of the existing charter, proposed by this 
 act, are not such, in my view, as make it consistent with the 
 rights of the State or the liberties of the people. The qualifica- 
 tion of the right of the Bank to hold real estate, the limitation 
 of its power to establish branches, and the power reserved to 
 Congress to forbid the circulation of small notes, are restrictions 
 comparatively of little value or importance. All the objection- 
 able principles of the existing corporation, and most of its odi- 
 ous features, are retained without alleviation. 
 
 The fourth section provides « that the notes or bills of the 
 said corporation, although the same be on the faces thereof, re- 
 spectively made payable at one place only, shall, nevertheless, 
 be received by the said corporation at the Bank, or at any of the 
 offices of discount and deposit thereof, if tendered in liquida 
 tion or payment of any balance or balances, due to said corpo- 
 ration or to such office of discount and deposit from any other 
 incorporated Bank." This provision secures to the State Banks 
 a legal privilege in the Bank of the U. States, which is with- 
 held from all private citizens. If a State Bank in Philadelphiaj 
 
ON THE U. S. BANK. 
 
 5 
 
 owe the Bank of the U. States and have notes issued by the St. 
 Louis Branch, it can pay the debt with those notes ; but if a 
 merchant, mechanic, or other private citizen he in like circum- 
 stances, he cannot by law pay his debt with those notes, but 
 must sell them at a discount, or send them to St. Louis to be 
 cashed. This boon, conceded to the State Banks, tho' not un- 
 just in itself, is most odious, because it does not measure out 
 equal justice to the high and the low, the rich and the poor. 
 
 To the extent of its practical effect, it is a bond of union 
 among the banking establishments of the nation erecting them 
 into an interest, separate from that of the people, and its neces- 
 sary tendency is to unite the Bank of the U. S. and the State 
 Banks in any measure which may be thought conducive to their 
 common interest. 
 
 Tho ninth section of the act recognizes principles of worse 
 tendency than any provision of the present charter. 
 
 It enacts that" the Cashier of the Bank shall annually report 
 to the Secretary of the Treasury the names of all stockholders 
 who are not resident citizens of the CJ. States, and on the appli- 
 cation of the Treasurer of any State, shall make out and trans- 
 mit to such Treasurer a list of stockholders residing in, or citi- 
 zens of such State, with the amount of stock owned by each." 
 Although this provision, taken in connection with a decision of 
 the Supreme Court, surrenders by its silence, the right of the 
 States to tax the banking institutions created by this corporation 
 under the name of branches, throughout the Union, — it is evi- 
 idently intended to be construed as a concession of their right to 
 tax that portion of the stock which may be held by their own 
 citizens and residents. In this light, if the act becomes a law, 
 it will be understood by the states, who will probably proceed 
 to levy a tax equal to that paid upon the slock of the banks in- 
 corporated by themselves. In some States that tax is now one 
 per cent, either on the capital or on the shares, and that may be 
 assumed as the amount which all citizens or resident stockhold- 
 ers will be taxed under the operation of this act. As it is only 
 the stock held in the States, and not that employed within them, 
 which would be subject to taxation ; and as the names of for- 
 eign stockholders are not to be reported to Treasurers of the 
 
e 
 
 VETO MESSAGE 
 
 States, it is obvious that the stock held by them will be exempt 
 from this burden. Their annual profits, will, therefore, be one 
 per cent, more than the citizen stockholders, and as the annual 
 dividends of the Bank may be safely estimated at 7 per cent., 
 the stock will be worth 10 or 15 per cent, more to foreigners 
 than to citizens of the U. S. To appreciate the effects which 
 this state of things will produce, we must take a brief review of 
 the operations and present condition of the Bank of the United 
 States. 
 
 By documents submitted to Congress at the present session, it 
 appears that on the first of Jan. 1832, of the 28 millions of the 
 private stock in the corporation, $8,405,500 were held by for- 
 eigners, mostly of Great Britain. The amount of stock held in 
 the 9 Western and Southwestern States, is $140,200: and in 
 the four Southern States, is $5,623,100 ; and in the Middle and 
 Eastern States is about $13,522,000. — The profits of the Bank 
 in 1831, as shown in a statement to Congress were about $3,- 
 455,598 ; of this there accrued in the 9 Western Slates about 
 $1,640,048; in the 4 Southern States about $352,507, and in 
 the Middle and Eastern States about $1,463,041. As little 
 stock is held in the west, it is obvious that the debt of the peo- 
 ple in that section to the Bank, is principally a debt to the eas- 
 tern and foreign stockholders ; that the interest they pay upon 
 it, is carried into the eastern Slates and into Europe, and that it 
 is a burden upon their industry, and a drain of their currency, 
 which no country can bear without inconvenience and occasion- 
 al distress. To meet this burden and equalize the exchange 
 operations of the Bank, the amount of specie drawn from those 
 States through its branches within the last two years, as shown 
 by its official reports, was about $6,000,000. More than half 
 a million of this amount does not stop in the eastern States, but 
 passes on to Europe to pay the dividends of the foreign stock- 
 holders. In the principle of taxation recognized by this act, the 
 western States find no adequate compensation for the perpetual 
 burden on their industry, and drain of their currency. 
 
 The branch bank at Mobile made, last year, $95,140; yet, 
 under the provisions of this act, the State of Alabama can raise 
 no revenue from these profitable operations, because not a share 
 
ON THE U. S. HANK. 
 
 7 
 
 of the stock is held by any of her citizens. Mississippi and 
 Missouri are in the same condition in relation to the branches at 
 Natchez and St. Louis; and such, in a greater or less degree, 
 is the condition of every western State. 
 
 The tendency of the plan of taxation which this act proposes, 
 will be to place the whole United States in the same relation to 
 foreign countries, which the western States now bear to the eas- 
 tern. When by a tax on resident stockholders the stock of this 
 bank is made worth 10 or 15 per cent, more to foreigners than 
 to residents, most of it will inevitably leave the country. 
 
 Thus will this provision, in its practical effect, deprive the 
 eastern, as well as the Southern and Western States, of the 
 means of raising a revenue from the extension of business, and 
 great profits of this institution. It will make the American peo- 
 ple debtors to aliens in nearly the whole amount due to this 
 bank, and send across the Atlantic from two to five millions of 
 specie every year to pay the bank dividends. 
 
 In another of its bearings this provision is fraught with dan- 
 ger. Of the 25 directors of this bank, five are chosen by the 
 Government, and 20 by the citizen stockholders. From all 
 voice in these elections, the foreign stockholders are excluded 
 by the charter. In proportion therefore, as the stock is trans- 
 ferred to foreign holders, the extent of suffrage in the choice of 
 directors is curtailed. Already is almost a third of the stock in 
 foreign hands, and not represented in elections. It is constantly 
 passing out of the country, and this act will accelerate its de- 
 parture. The entire control of the institution would necessari- 
 ly fall into the hands of the few citizen stockholders, and the 
 ease with which the object would be accomplished, would be a 
 temptation to designing men to secure that control in their own 
 hands by monopolizing the remaining stock. — There is danger 
 that a President and Directors would then be able to elect them- 
 selves from year to year, and without responsibility or control, 
 manage the whole concerns of the Bank during the existence of 
 its charter. It is easy to conceive that great evils to our coun- 
 try and its institutions might flow from such a concentration of 
 power in the hands of a few men irresponsible to the people. 
 
 Is there no danger to our liberty and independence, in a Bank 
 
6 
 
 VETO MESSAGE 
 
 that in its nature has so little to hind it to our country ? The 
 President of the Bank has told us, that most of the State Banks 
 exist by its forbearance. Should its influence become concen- 
 trated, as it may, under the operation of such an act as this in 
 the hands of a self elected Directory, whose interests are identi- 
 fied with those of the foreign stockholder, will there not be 
 cause to tremble for the purity of our elections in peace and for 
 the indedenpence of our country in war ? Their power would 
 be great whenever they might choose to exert it ; but if this 
 monopoly were renewed every fifteen or twenty years, on terms 
 proposed by themselves, they might seldom, in peace, put forth 
 their strength to influence elections or control the affairs of the 
 nation. But, if any private citizen or public functionary should 
 interpose to curtail its powers or prevent a renewal of its priv- 
 ileges, it cannot be doubted that he would be made to feel its in- 
 fluence. 
 
 Should the stock of the bank principally pass into the hands of 
 the subjects of a foreign country, and we should unfortunately 
 become involved in a war with that country, what would be 
 our condition ? Of the course which would be pursued by a 
 Bank almost wholly owned by the subjects of a foreign power, 
 and managed by those whose interests, if not affections, would 
 run in the same direction, there can be no doubt. All its ope- 
 rations within, would be in aid of the hostile fleets and armies 
 without ; controlling our currency ; receiving our public mon- 
 ies, and holding thousands of our citizens in dependence, it 
 would be more formidable and dangerous than the naval and 
 military power of the enemy. 
 
 If we must have a bank with private stockholders, every con- 
 sideration of sound policy, and every impulse of American feel- 
 ing, admonishes that it should he purely American. Its stock- 
 holders should be composed exclusively of our , own citizens, 
 who, at least, ought to be friendly to our government, and wil- 
 ling to support it in times of difficulty and danger. So abundant 
 is domestic capital, that competition, in subscribing for the stock 
 of local banks, has recently led almost to riots. To a bank, ex- 
 clusively of American Stockholders, possessing the powers and 
 privileges granted by this act, subscriptions for two hundred 
 
t>N THE U. S. BANK- 
 
 ft 
 
 millions of dollars, could be readily obtained. Instead of send- 
 ing abroad the stock of the bank, in wkicfa the government must 
 deposit its funds, and on which it must rely to sustain its credit 
 in times of emergency, it would rather seem to be expedient to 
 prohibit its sale to aliens under penalty of absolute forfeiture. 
 
 It is maintained by the advocates of the bank that its constitu- 
 tionality to all its features ought to be considered as settled by 
 precedent, and by the decision of the supreme court. To this 
 conclusion I cannot assent. Mere precedent is a dangerous 
 source of authority, and should not be regarded as deciding ques- 
 tions of constitutional power, except where the acquiescence of 
 the people and the states can be considered as well settled. So 
 fur from this being the case on this subject, an argument against 
 the bank might be based on precedent. One Congress in 1791 
 decided in favor of a bank ; another in 1811 decided against it. 
 One Congress in 1815, decided against a Bank, another in 1816 
 decided. in its favor. Prior to the present session, therefore, the 
 precedents drawn from that source were equal. If we resort to 
 the States, the expressions of Legislative, Judicial and Exec- 
 utive opinions against the bank, have been probably to those in 
 its favor, as four to one. There is nothing in precedent, there- 
 fore, which, if its authority were admitted, ought to weigh in 
 favor of the fact before me. 
 
 If the opinion of the Supreme Court covered the whole 
 ground of this act ; it ought not to control the co-ordinate au- 
 thorities of this government. The congress, the Executive and 
 the Court, must each for itself, be guided by his own opinion of 
 the Constitution. Each public officer who takes an oath to sup- 
 port the Constitution swears he will support it as he understands 
 it, and not as it is understood by others. It is as much the duty 
 of the House of Representatives, of the Senate and of the 
 President to decide upon the Constitutionality of any bill or 
 resolution which may be presented to them for passage or ap- 
 proval, as it is of the Supreme Judges when it may be brought 
 before them for judicial decision. The opinion of the judges 
 has no more authority over congress than the opinion of con- 
 gress has over the judges, and on that point the President is in- 
 dependent of both. The authority of the supreme court must 
 
10 
 
 VETO MESSAGE 
 
 not, therefore, be permitted to control the congress or the ex- 
 ecutive, when acting in their legislative capacities, hut to have 
 only such influence as the force of their reasonings may deserve. 
 
 But in the case relied upon, the supreme court have-not de- 
 cided that all the features of this corporation are compatible 
 with the constitution. It is true that the court have said that the 
 law incorporating the Bank is a constitutional exercise of pow- 
 er by congress. But, taking into view the whole opinion of the 
 court, and the reasoning by which they have come to that con- 
 clusion, I understand them to have decided that, inasmuch as a 
 bank is an appropriate means for carrying into effect the enu- 
 merated powers of the general Government, therefore, the law 
 incorporating ifis in accordance with that provision of the con- 
 stitution which declares that congress shall have power " to 
 make all laws which shall be necessary and proper for carrying 
 those powers into execution." Having satisfied themselves that 
 the word/ necessary" in the Constitution, means " needful," 
 « requisite," " essential," " conducive to," andthat " a Bank" 
 is a convenient, a useful and essential instrument in the prose- 
 cution of the Government's " fiscal operations," they conclude, 
 that to "use one must be within the discretion of congress," 
 and that " the act to incorporate the Bank of the U. S. is a law 
 made in pursuance of the Constitution :" "but," say they, 
 "where the law is not prohibited and is really calculated to 
 effect any of the objects entrusted to the government, to un- 
 dertake here to enquire into the degree oj its necessity, would 
 be to pass the line which circumscribes the Judicial Depart- 
 ment and to trample on Legislative ground." 
 
 The principle here affirmed is that « the degree of its neces- 
 sity " involving all the details of a banking institution, is a 
 question exclusively for legislative consideration. A Bank is 
 constitutional; but it is the province of the Legislature to de- 
 termine whether this or that particular power, privilege or ex- 
 Pmption, is « necessary and proper" to enable the bank to dis- 
 charge its duties to the government, and from their decision 
 there is no appeal to the courts of justice. Under the decision 
 of the Supreme Court therefore it is the exclusive province of 
 congress and the President to decide, whether the particular 
 
02f THE U. S. BANX. 
 
 features of this act are " necessary and proper," in order to cna- 
 blo the Bank to perform conveniently and efficiently the public 
 duties assigned to it as a fiscal agent, and therefore constitution- 
 al, or u nn ccessary and impropcr^nd therefore unconstitutional. 
 
 Without commenting on the general principle affirmed by tho 
 Supreme Court, let us examine the details of this act in accor- 
 dance with the rule of legislative action which they have laid 
 down. It will be found that many of the powers and privileges 
 conferred on it cannot be supposed necessary for the purpose for 
 which it is proposed to be created, and are not therefore means 
 necessary to attain the end in view, and consequently not justi- 
 lied by the constitution. 
 
 The original act of corporation, section 21, enacts c: that no 
 other bank shall be established by any future law of the United 
 States during the continuance of the corporation hereby created, 
 for which the faith of the United States is hereby pledged, Pro- 
 vided, congress may renew the existing charter for Banks 
 within the District of Columbia, not increasing the capital ther- 
 of, and may also establish any other bank or banks in said Dis- 
 trict, with capitals not exceeding in the whole six millions of 
 dollars, if they shall deem it expedient." This provision is 
 continued in force by the act before me, fifteen years from the 
 3d of March, 1S3G.* 
 
 If congress possessed the power to establish one Bank, they 
 had power to establish more than one, if in their opinion, two or 
 more banks had been " necessary" to facilitate the execution of 
 the powers delegated to them in the constitution. If they pos- 
 sessed the power to establish a second bank, it was a power de- 
 rived from the constitution, to be exercised from time to time, 
 and at any time when the interests of the country or the emer- 
 gencies of the government make it expedient. It was posses- 
 sed by one congress as well as another, and by all Congresses 
 alike and alike at every session. But the congress of IS 16 has 
 taken it away from from their successors for 20 years, and the 
 Congress of 1S32 proposes to abolish it for 15 years more. It 
 cannot be " necessary" or "proper" for a congress to barter 
 away or divest themselves of any of the powers vested in them 
 by the constitution, to be exercised for tho public pood. It is 
 
n 
 
 VETO MESSAGE 
 
 not u necessary" to the efficiency of the bank, nor is it " prop- 
 er" in relation to themselves and their successors. They may 
 properly use the discretion vested in them ; but they may not 
 limit the discretion of their successors. This restriction on 
 themselves and grant of monopoly to the bank is therefore uncon- 
 stitutional. 
 
 In another point of view, this provision is a palpable attempt 
 to amend the constitution by an act of legislation. The consti- 
 tution declares that the " Congress shall have power to exercise 
 exclusive legislation in all cases whatsoever" over the District 
 of Columbia. Its constitutional power, therefore, to establish 
 banks in the District of Columbia, and increase their capital at 
 will, is unlimited and uncontrollable by any other power than 
 that which gave authority to the constitution. Yet this act de- 
 clares that congress shall not increase the capital of existing 
 banks, nor create other banks, with capitals exceeding in the 
 whole six millions of dollars. The constitution declares, that 
 Congress shall have power to exercise exclusive legislation 
 over this district, M in all cases whatsoever ; and this act de^ 
 clares that they shall not. Which is the supremest law of the 
 land? This provision cannot be "necessary 3 ' or "proper," or 
 constitutional unless the absurdity be admitted, that whenever 
 it be " necessary and proper," in the opinion of congress, they 
 have a right to barter away one portion of the powers vested in 
 them by the constitution as a means of executing the rest. 
 
 On two subjects only does the constitution recognize in con- 
 gress the power to grant exclusive privileges or monopolies. It 
 declares that " Congress shall have power to promote the pro- 
 gress of science and the useful arts, by securing, for limited 
 times, to authors and inventors, the exclusive right to their re- 
 spective writings and discoveries." Out of this express dele- 
 gation of power, have grown our laws of patents and copy- 
 rights. As the constitution expressly delegates to congress the 
 power to grant exclusive privileges in these cases as the means 
 of execuiing the substantive power " to promote the progress 
 of science and useful arts," it is consistent with the fair rules 
 of construction to conclude that such a power was not intended 
 to be granted as a means of accomplishing any other cnd= On 
 
OH THE U. a. BANK. 
 
 13 
 
 every other subject which comes within the scope of congres- 
 sional power, there is an ever living discretion in the use of 
 proper means which cannot be restricted or abolished without an 
 amendment of the constitution. Every act of congress, there- 
 fore, which attempts by grants of monopolies, or sale of exclu- 
 sive privileges for a limited time, or a time without limit, to re- 
 strict or extinguish its own discretion in the choice of means to 
 execute its delegated powers ; is equivalent to a legitimate 
 amendment of the constitution, and palpably unconstitutional. 
 
 This act authorises and encourages transfers of its stock to 
 foreigners, and grants them an exemption from all state and 
 national taxation. So far from being u necessary and proper" 
 that the bank should possess this power to make it a safe and ef- 
 ficient agent of the government in its fiscal operations, it is cal- 
 culated to convert the Bank of the U. S. into a foreign bank, to 
 impoverish our people in time of peace, to disseminate a foreign 
 influence through every section of the republic — and in war to 
 endanger our independence. 
 
 The several States reserved the power at the formation of the 
 constitution, to regulate and control titles snd transfers of real 
 property, and most, if not all of them, have laws disqualifying 
 aliens from acquiring or holding lands within their limits. But 
 this act, in disregard of the undoubted right of the states to 
 prescribe such disqualifications, gives to aliens, stockholders in 
 this bank, an interest and title, as members of the corporation, 
 to all the real property it may acquire within any of the States 
 of the Union. This privilege granted to aliens is not "neces- 
 sary to enable the Bank to perform its public duties, nor in 
 any sense "proper" because it is vitally subversive of the 
 rights of the States. 
 
 The government of the U. S. has no constitutional power 
 to purchase lands within the States, except " for the erection of 
 forts, magazines, arsenals, dock-yards, and other needful build- 
 ings," and even for these objects only u by consent of the legis- 
 lature of the state in which the same shall be." By making 
 themselves stockholders in the bank, and granting to the corpo- 
 ration the power to purchase lands for other purposes, they as- 
 sume a power not granted in the constitution, and grant to oth- 
 
14 
 
 VETO MESSAGE 
 
 ers what they do not themselves possess. It is not necessary 
 to the receiving, safe keeping, or transmission of the funds of 
 the government, that the hank should possess the power, and it 
 is not proper that Congress should thus enlarge the powers del- 
 egated to them in the constitution. 
 
 The old Bank of the U. S. possessed a capital of only eleven 
 million of dollars, which was found iuliy sufficient to enable it 
 with despatch a#d safety, to perform all the functions required of 
 it by the government. — The capital of the present Bank is thir- 
 ty-five millions of dollars — at least twenty-four more than ex- 
 perience has proved to be necessary to enable the bank to per- 
 form its public functions. The public debt which existed du- 
 ring the period of the old Bank, and on the establishment of the 
 new, has been nearly paid off, and our revenue will soon be re- 
 duced. The increase of capital is, therefore, not for public but 
 for private purposes. 
 
 The government is the only "proper" judge where its agents 
 should reside and keep their offices because it best knows where 
 there presence will be "necessary." It cannot, therefore, bo 
 " necessary" or " proper" to authorize the Bank to locate 
 branches where it pleases, to perform the public service, with- 
 out consulting the government, and contrary to its will. The 
 principle laid down by the Supreme Court concedes, that Con- 
 gress cannot establish a bank for purposes of private specula- 
 tion and gain, but only as a means of executing the delegated 
 powers of the general government. By the same principle, a 
 branch bank cannot constitutionally be established for other 
 public purposes. The power which this act gives to establish 
 two branches in any state without the injunction or request of 
 government, and for other than public purposes, is not u neces- 
 sary" to the due execution of the powers delegated to Con- 
 gress. 
 
 The bonus which is exacted from the Bank is a confession up- 
 on the face of the act that the powers granted by it are greater 
 than are "necessary " to its character of a fiscal agent. The 
 government does not tax its officers and agents for the privilege 
 of serving it. The bonus of a million and a half, required by 
 the original charter, and that of three millions proposed by this 
 
M THE U. S. BANK. 
 
 act, are not exacted for the privilege of giving " the necessary 
 facilities for transfenng the public funds from place to place 
 within the U, S. or the teritory thereof, and for distributing the 
 same in payment of public creditors, without charging commis- 
 sion or claiming al'owance on account of the difference of ex- 
 change," as required by the act of corporation, but for some- 
 thing more beneficial to the stockholders. The original act de- 
 clares, that it ((he bonus) is granted " in consideration of the 
 exclusive privileges and benefits conferred by this act upon the 
 said Bank," and the act before .me declares it to be 14 in consid- 
 eration of the exclusive benefits and privileges continued by 
 this act to the said corporation for fifteen years aforesaid." It is 
 therefore, for u exclusive privileges and benefits," conferred for 
 their own use and emolument, and not for the advantage of the 
 government, that a bonus is exacted. — These surplus powers, 
 for which the Bank is required to pay, cannot surely be u ne- 
 cessary," to make it the fiscal pgent of the Treasury. If they 
 were, the exaction of a bonus for them would not be "proper" 
 It is maintained by some that the bank is a means of execu- 
 ting the constitutional power " to coin money and regulate the 
 value thereof." Congress has established a mint to coin mon- 
 ey, and passed laws to regulate the value thereof. The money 
 so coined, with its value so regulated, and such foreign coins as 
 Congress may adopt, are the only currency known to the con- 
 stitution. But if they have other power to regulate the cur- 
 rency, it was conferred to be exercised themselves and not to be 
 transferred to a corporation. If the bank be established for that 
 purpose, with a charter unalterable, without its consent, Con- 
 gress have parted with their powers for a term of years, during 
 which the constitution is a dead letter. It is neither necessary 
 nor proper to transfer its legislative powers to such a bank, and 
 therefore unconstitutional. 
 
 By its silence, considered in connexion with the decision of 
 the Supreme Court in the case of McCulloch against the state 
 of Maryland, this act takes from the States the power to tax a 
 portion of the banking business carried on within their limits, in 
 subversion of one of the strongest barriers which secured them 
 
16 
 
 VETO MESSAGE 
 
 against federal encroachment. Banking, like farming, manu- 
 facturing, or any other occupation or profession, is a business, 
 the right to follow which is not originally derived from the 
 laws. Every citizen, and every company of citizens in all of 
 our States, possessed the right until the State Legislatures deem- 
 ed it good policy to prohibit private banking by law. If the 
 prohibitory State laws were now repealed, every citizen would 
 again possess the right. The state banks are a qualified restora- 
 tion of the right which lias been taken away by the laws against 
 banking, guarded by such provisions and limitations as in the 
 opinion of the State Legislatures, the public interest requires. 
 These corporations, unless there be an exemption in their char- 
 ter, are, like private bankers and banking companies, subject 
 to state taxation. The manner in which these taxes shall be 
 laid depends wholly on legislative direction. It may be upon 
 the Bank, upon the stock, upon the profits, or in any other mode 
 which the sovereign power shall will. 
 
 Upon the formation of the constitution, the states guarded 
 their taxing power with peculiar jealousy. They surrendered 
 it only as it regards imports and exports. In relation to every 
 other object within their jurisdiction, whetner persons, property, 
 business or professions, it was secured in as ample a manner as 
 it was before possessed. All persons, though U. S. officers are 
 liable to a poll tax by the states within which they reside ; the 
 lands of the U. S. are liable to the usual land tax, except in the 
 new states from whom agreements that they will not tax un- 
 sold lands, are exacted when they are admitted into the Union ; 
 horses, wagons, any beasts or vehicles, tools or property, be- 
 longing to private citizens, though employed in the service of 
 the U. S., are subject to State taxation. Every private busi- 
 ness, whether it be mixed with public concerns or not, even if 
 it be carried on by the government of the U. S. itself, separately 
 or in partnership, falls within the scope of the taxing power of 
 the state. Nothing comes more fully within it than banks and 
 the business of Banking, by whomsoever instituted or carried 
 on. Over this whole subject matter, it is just as absolute, un- 
 limited and uncontrolable as if the Constitution had never been 
 adopted, because in the formation of that instrument, it was re- 
 
ON THE V. S. BANK. 
 
 17 
 
 served without qualification. 
 
 Tho principle is conceded that the States cannot rightfully 
 tax the operations of the general government. They cannot 
 tax the money of tho government deposited in the State Banks, 
 nor the agency of those Banks in remitting it ; but will any 
 man maintain that the mere selection to perform this public ser- 
 vice for the general government would exempt the state banks 
 and their ordinary business from State taxation. Had the U. 
 S., instead of establishing a bank at Philadelphia, employed a 
 private Banker to keep and transmit their funds, would it have 
 deprived Pennsylvania of the right to tax his bank and his usual 
 bank operations ! It will not be pretended. Upon what principle 
 then,are the banking establishments of the bank of the U. S. and 
 their usual banking operations to be exempted from taxation. It 
 is not their public agency of the deposits of the government which 
 the state claims a right to tax, but their banks and their banking 
 powers, instituted and exercised within state jurisdiction for 
 their private emolument — those powers and privileges for which 
 they pay a bonus and which the states tax in their own Banks. 
 The exercise of these powers within a State, no matter by 
 whom, or under what authority, whether by private citizens in 
 their original right, by corporate bodies created by the States, 
 by foreigners or the agents of foreign governments located with- 
 in their limits,fbrms a legitimate object of state taxation. From 
 this, and like sources, from the persons, property/and business, 
 that are found residing, located or carried on under their juris- 
 diction, must the states since the surrender of the right to raise 
 a revenue from imports and exports, draw all the money ne- 
 cessary for the support of their governments and the maintain- 
 ance of their independence. There is no more appropriate sub- 
 ject of taxation than 'banks, banking and banking stocks, tnd 
 none to which the states ought more pertinaciously to cling. 
 
 It cannot be necessary to the character of the bank,as a fiscal 
 agent of the government, that its privato business should be ex- 
 empted from that taxation to which all the state banks are lia- 
 ble ; nor can I conceive it proper that the substantive and most 
 essential powers reserved by the states shall be thus attacked 
 and annihilated as a means of exectting the powers delegated 
 
18 
 
 VETO MESSAGE 
 
 to the general government. It may be safely assumed that none 
 of those sages who had an agency in forming or adopting our 
 constitution ever imagined that any portion of the taxing power 
 of the states, not prohibited to them nor delegated to Congress, 
 was to be swept away and annihilated as a means of executing 
 certain powers delegated to Congress. 
 
 If our power over means is so absolute that the Supreme 
 Court will not call in question the constitutionality of an act of 
 congress, the subject of which is " not prohibited, and is really 
 calculated to effect any of the objects entrusted to the govern- 
 ment," although, as in the case before me, it takes away pow- 
 ers expressly granted to congress, and rights scrupulously re- 
 served to the states, it becomes us to proceed in our legislation 
 with the utmost caution. Though not directly, our own pow- 
 ers, and the rights of the States may t be indirectly legislated 
 away in the use of means to execute substantive powers. We 
 may not enact that congress shall not have the power of exclu- 
 sive legislation over the District of Columbia, but we may 
 pledge the faith of the U. S., that, as a means of executing oth- 
 er powers, it shall not be exercised for 20 years or forever. We 
 may not pass an act prohibiting the states to tax the banking 
 business carried on within their limits, but we may, as a means 
 of executing our powers over other subjects, place that business 
 in the hands of our agents, and then declare it exempt from 
 State taxation, in their hands. — Thus may our powers and the 
 rights of the States, which we cannot directly curtail, or invade, 
 be frittered away and extinguished in the use of means employ- 
 ed by us to execute other powers. That a bank of the U. S., 
 competent to all the duties which may be required by the gov- 
 ernment, might be so organized as not to infringe on our own 
 delegated powers, or the reserved rights of the states, I do not 
 entertain a doubt. Had the executive been called upon to fur- 
 nish the project of such an institution, the duty would have been 
 cheerfully performed. In the abscence of such a call, it was 
 obviously proper that he should confine himself to pointing out 
 those prominent features in the act presented, which, in his 
 opinion, make it incompatible witk the constitution and sound 
 policy. A general discussion will now take place, eliciting 
 
OK Till. I . s. h . 
 
 10 
 
 new light and settling important principles ; and a new congress, 
 elected in the midst of such discussion, and furnishing an equal 
 representation of the people, according to the last census, will 
 bear to the Capitol the verdict of public opinion, and I doubt 
 not, bring the important question to a satisfactory result. 
 
 Under such circumstances, the Bank comes forward and asks 
 a renewal of its charter for a term of 15 years, upon conditions 
 which not only operate as a gratuity to the stockholders of many 
 millions of dollars, but will sanction any abuses, and legalize 
 any encroachments. 
 
 Suspicions are entertained and charges arc made of gross 
 abuse and violation of its charter. An investigation unwilling- 
 ly conceded and so restricted in time as necessarily to make it 
 incomplete and unsatisfactory, discloses enough to excite suspi- 
 cion and alarm. 
 
 In the practices ol the principal bank partially unveiled, in 
 the absence of important witnesses, and in numerous charges, 
 confidently made, and as yet wholly uninvestigated, there was 
 enough to induce a majority of the committee of investigation, a 
 committee which was selected fi um the most able and honora- 
 ble members of the House of Representatives to recommend a 
 suspension of further action upon the bill, and a prosecution of 
 the enquiry. As the charter had yet four years to run, and as a 
 renewal now was not necessary to the successful prosecution of 
 its business, it was to have been expected that the bank itself, 
 conscious of its purity and proud of its character, would have 
 withdrawn its application for the present, and demanded the se- 
 verest scrutiny into all its transactions. In their declining todo 
 so there seems to be an additional reason why the functionaries 
 of the government should proceed with less haste and more cau- 
 tion in the renewal of their monopoly, 
 
 The bank is professedly established as an agent of the Execu- 
 tive branches of the Government, and its constitutionality is 
 maintained on that ground. Neither upon the propriety of pres- 
 ent action nor upon the provisions of this a:t was the Execu- 
 tive consulted. It has had no opportunity to say (feat i( m ,-her 
 needs nor wants an agent clothed with such powers and favored 
 bj such cxcmptions.^-Tucre is nothing in its legitimate func- 
 
20 
 
 VETO MESSAGE 
 
 tions which make it necessary or proper. Whatever interest or 
 influence, whether public or private, has given birth to this act, 
 it cannot be found either in the wishes or necessities of the Ex- 
 ecutive Department, by which present action is deemed prema- 
 ture, and the powers conferred upon its agent not only unneces- 
 sary, but dangerous to the government and country. 
 
 It is to be regretted that the rich and powerful too often bend 
 the acts of government to their selfish purposes ? Distinctions 
 in society will always exist under every just government- 
 Equality of talents, of education, or of wealth, cannot be pro- 
 duced by human institutions. In the full enjoyments of the gifts 
 of Heaven, and the fruits of a superior industry, economy and 
 virtue, every man is equally entitled to protection by law. B ut 
 when the laws undertake to add to these natural and just advan- 
 tages, artificial distinctions, to grant titles, gratuities and ex- 
 clusive privileges, to make the rich richer, and the potent more 
 powerful, the humbler members of society, the farmers, me- 
 chanics' and laborers, who have neither the time nor the means 
 of securing like favors to themselves, have a right to complain 
 of the injustice of their government. 
 
 There are no necessary evils in government. Its evils exist 
 only in its abuses. If it would confine itself to equal protection, 
 and, as Heaven does its rains, shower its favors alike on the 
 high and the low, the rich and the poor, it would be an unquali- 
 fied blessing. In the act before me, there seems to be a wide 
 and unnecessary departure from those just principles. Nor is 
 our government to be maintained, or our union preserved by in- 
 vasions of the rights and powers of the several States. In thus 
 attempting to make our general government strong, we make it 
 weak. Its true strength consists in leaving individuals and 
 States, as much as possible, to themselves — in making itself felt, 
 not in its power, but in its benificence, not in its control but in 
 its protection, not in binding the states more closely to the cen- 
 tre, but leaving each to move unobstructed in its proper orbit. 
 
 Experience should teach us wisdom. Most of the troubles 
 our government now encounters and most of the dangers which 
 impend over our Union have sprung from an abandonment of 
 the legitimate objects of government by our national legislation. 
 
OX VllV. V. 3. BANK. 
 
 ami the adoption of such princples as arc embodied in this act. 
 Many of our rich men have not been content with equal protec- 
 tion and equal benefits ; but have besought us to make them 
 richer by acts of Congress. By attempting to gratify their de- 
 sires we have in tho results of our legislation, arrayed section 
 against section, interest against interest, and man against man, 
 in a fearful commotion which threatens to shake the foundation 
 of our Union. It is time to pause in our career, to review our 
 principles, and if possible, revive that devoted patriotism and 
 spirit of compromise which distinguished the sages of the revo- 
 lution and the fathers of our Union. Jf we cannot at once, in 
 justice to interests vested under improvident legislation, make 
 our government what it ought to be, we can at least take a 
 stand against all new grants of monopolies, and exclusive priv- 
 ileges, against any prostitution of our government, to the ad- 
 vancement of the few at the expense of the many, and in favor of 
 compromise and gradual reform in our code of laws and system 
 of political economy. 
 
 I have now done my duty to my country. If sustained by 
 my fellow-citizens I shall be grateful and happy ; if not, I shall 
 find in the motives which impel me ample grounds for content- 
 ment and peace. In the difficulties which surround us, and the 
 dangers which threaten our institutions, there is cause for nei- 
 ther dismay nor alarm. For relief and deliverance, let us firmly 
 rely on that kind providence, w T hich I am sure, watches over the 
 peculiar destinies of our republic, and on the intelligence of 
 our countrymen. Through His abundant goodness and their 
 patriotic devotion, our liberty and Union will be preserved. 
 
 ANDREW JACKSON. 
 
 Washington, July 10, 1832. 
 
PLAIN FACTS. 
 
 The U. S. Branch Bank at the city of New-York, has an average deposit of 
 revenue, belonging lo the People, of about §3,000,000, and for which it pays 
 no interest or tax. Was Ibis deposit put in the market, it would sell from 3£ to 
 5 per cent, as our canal fund sells, and would be worth to the people,(say at an 
 averege value of 4 percent.) §120,000 per annum— a sum of great moment in 
 relieving our " hard fisted yeomanry" from taxation. 
 
 The three branches in this state, (at New-York, Utica and Buffalo,) employ 
 a capital of about 3£ millions of dollars; and while the people are taxed on ev- 
 ery dollar of their property, and on their professions also, and our local banks 
 on their capital, these branches are exempt from all taxation !— Were these 
 branches taxed, the people would be relieved in their taxes, just the sum that 
 the said 3£ millions would contribute. Is this nothing? Is this immunity right 
 and just? The people can and will answer this question. 
 
 State Banks are taxed upon their whole capital. That capital is liable to be 
 assessed for state, county and all local expenditures. Why should the capital 
 of the United States Bank be exempted? 
 
 Suppose the several taxes assessed upon the state banks amount to one per ct. 
 upon their capital. They pay, upon that supposition, no less than $5220,000 
 annually, towards defraying the public expenses. Now if the $3,500,000 capi- 
 tal which is employed in the U. S. Branch Banks at New-York, Utica and Buf- 
 falo, contributed in the ratio with the State Banks, it would pay $35,000 per 
 annum, and the people would be relieved just the same amount. 
 
 The use of the deposit of three millions has been shewn to be worth $120,- 
 000 per annum. Add to this the §35,000 which the branches ought to pay for 
 ordinary taxes,and we find the round income of ONE HUNDRED AND FIF- 
 TY-FIVE THOUSAND DOLLARS ANNUALLY.of the people's money, di- 
 vided among the stockholders of a Mamraouth Bank, nearly one-third of whom 
 are foreign Barons, Lords and Nabobs. 
 
 Our state banks are also compelled to pay one half of one percent, per an- 
 num for the public security. This sum on an aggregate capital of 22,000,000 
 dollars is $110,000 per annum contributed to the Safety Fund. The people of 
 this state, through their representatives, have very properly compelled the in- 
 stitutions, in which are vested the right to furnish the paper circulating medi- 
 um of the state, to contribute a fund for the certain redemption of every note 
 issued. Why should the United States Bank, in addition to its many immuni- 
 ties, be exempted from guaranteeing a redemption of all its issues? What sccu- 
 
PL. VI N I A ( IS. 
 
 rity have the public that the United States Hank writ] rodecm lU the biil6, noics 
 and checks which it throws cut into the world? Government if not bound to 
 pay one dollar for such a purpose. There is no safety fund. The directors are 
 notpersonally responsible for such a redemption; indeed if they were, it would 
 bo an inadequate guarantee. 
 
 What security then have the people that the United Stales Bank can or will 
 redeem its enormous amount of notes now in circulation, — 60 or 70 millions of 
 dollars? It may be that the bank will keep its credit good so long as it is for its 
 interest to do so, but how much longer none can foretell. Many of the direc - 
 tors are but nominal stockholders, and of course are but slightly interested in 
 the welfare or failure of the monopoly. THE PEOPLE MUST BE A- 
 WAKE AND ON THEIR GUARD, or an evil will b< fall them which will 
 carry penury , distress and wretchedness into every quarter of the Republic. 
 
 Thanks to the Roman inflexibility of the patriot Jackson, this GOLDEN 
 MONOPOLY, so powerful and oveireaching in its childhood, — in its 15th year 
 — has been checked in its rapid strides, and will soon be arrested in its withering 
 advances towards the OVERTHROW OF THE LIBERTIES OF THE 
 AMERICAN PEOPLE. 
 
 From the Washington Globe. 
 
 THE VETO AND THE BANK. 
 
 The first objection made by the President to the act re-chartc-ring the Bank .»( 
 the U. S., ought of itself to be conclusive in a country of equal right.— He 
 shows conclusively, so orach so that no advocate of the Bank in the Senate or 
 out of it. has dared to deny it, that the act would have operated as a PRES- 
 ENT, from the people to the stockholders, of more than SEVEN MILLIONS 
 OF DOLLARS I 
 
 But what apology was there for the Congress of 1332, to give to the holders 
 of this stock seven or eight millions more ? Certainly, those who had by fraud- 
 ulent subscriptions originally monopolized the stock and the bounty of the 
 Government, did not deserve" to be rewarded by anew gratuity. Nor is there 
 either policy or justice in giving to the foreigners, who own $3,405,500 of the 
 6tock, two or three millions at the expense of the American people. Nor is 
 there any propriety in giving, by act of congress, 25 or 30 per cent, even to the 
 honest purchasers "of the stock among our own citizens. It is not the business 
 of Congress to make presents, at the expense of the people. As justly and as 
 properly might they appropriate seven or eight millions out of the Treasury, 
 giving jach stockholder his share by name. What would be the language of 
 the American people had they appropriated that sum out of the Treasury to a 
 few of our rich citizens who have fraudulently monopolized a large por- 
 tion of the stock, and to the nobility and gentry of" the British Empire ? Would 
 they not have loudly demanded of their representatives, why it was that they 
 had so trilled with their essential interests ? 
 
 In a list of stockholders, communicated to Congress by the Secretary of the 
 Treasury on the 23d January last, we have the mimes of those who were to 
 receive this gratuity, ami the number of shares held by each. We select a few 
 of the foreigners for the information of the people. 
 
 "The Right Llonorablc Sir William Alexander, Knight, fcc. and others, " 
 owning $5, 000, would have received at least $1,250, not of the royal, but of the 
 republic in bounty. 
 
 •' The Ripht Honorable Sarah, Countess Downger of Castle Stewart,'* own- 
 ing$l0,000 in 6tock, would have received $2,500. 
 
 " Most Honorable Francis C. S. Conwnv. Mnrqui9 of HattT," owning $100,- 
 300, would have received at least $25,000 '! 
 
PLAIN FACTS. 
 
 •« Right Honorable Lord Henery Visoount Gage," owning $19,000, would 
 
 have received §3,000. 
 
 " Rev. George Gordon, D. D. Dean of Lincoln," owning $31,000, Would have 
 
 received $7,772. 
 
 "Sir William Keppel, General in his Brittanio Majesty's forces, Knight 
 Grand Cross of the Bath, &c." owning $72,200, would have received $18,050 ! 
 
 " Sir Marmeduke Warren Peacoke, Lieutenant General, &c. &o." owning 
 $50,000 would have received $12,500. 
 
 "Baring, Brothers & Co.," one of whom was recently selected to consti- 
 tute a member of a Tory Anti-reform Cabinet, in England, but deterred from 
 accepting by the overwhelming power of public opinion in favor of Reform, 
 owning $790,500 in stock, would have received at least $197,875 of our repubii- 
 can bounty ! / 
 
 Is it right for Congress to legislate money at this rate, not only into the pock- 
 ets of our own rich citizens, but into the cqjlersof the enemies of Liberty in Great 
 
 Britain ? 
 
 The PEOPLE of the U. S. can have no inducement to sanction acts of this 
 kind ; but this may not be the case with some of their members of Congress. 
 Those on whom such favors are bestowed, have favors to give in return. 
 Some members of Congress are interested indirectly, if not directly, in the 
 Stock of the Bank. Others have received extensive accommodations. Others 
 are their feed lawyers — feed to at a most extravagant rate. The two leaders 
 of the Bank phalanx in the Senate, were Daniel Webster and Henry Clay. 
 
 The name of Daniel Webster appears on the list of stockholders ; but he de- 
 clared, in his speech against the Veto, that he held no stock, having probably 
 transferred it after the Bank applied for anew charter, lest he should appear to 
 vote for giving money directly to himself. But Daniel Webster's chief interest 
 was not in the stock which he held. It was discovered by the Committee of 
 Investigation that he had received from the principal Bank, as lawyer's tees, 
 upwards of $8,000. What he has received from the branches they did not as- 
 certain. In one case disclosed by the committee, the Bank gave him one hun- 
 dred dollars for writing eight wards, being at the rate of twelve dollars and fifty 
 cents per word! Had not Mr. Webster an interest in a vote which was to pre- 
 serve such a valuable climt ? 
 
 Mr. Clay, irr 1811, voted and spoke against the old Bank of the U. S. on the 
 ground that it was both inexpedient and unconstitutional. At a subsequent 
 time, having sulfered great losses, he quitted public life and re-commenced the 
 practice of law. He was employed to attend to all the law business of the 
 Branches in Kentucky and Ohio ; but what he received for those services, has 
 never been disclosed. The committee, however, ascertained, that he had re- 
 ceived from the principal Bank " for professional services" upwards of $17,- 
 000. This much is certain ; and it is probable, he has received enough from 
 the branches to make it THIRTY THOUSAND ! Had Mr. Clay no interest in 
 his vote for this Bank ?— Had he not a motive to be liberal to the stockholders 
 of an institution which had been so liberal to him ? 
 
 But he had another interest. The Bank has undertaken to make him Presi- 
 dent ! He himself avows, that the object of the Bank in coining forward now, 
 was to ascertain whether Gen. Jackson would consent to re-charter it or not ; 
 that all those interested might go against him, if he would not, in the coming 
 election. — And whom will they go for if they go against Gen. Jackson? For 
 the opposing candidate, Mr. Clay. The object of the Bank, therefore, as Mr. 
 Clay well understood, was to support him for President in case Gen. Jackson 
 refused to award them a new charter. That he would refuse Clay never had 
 a doubt. 
 
 Iu voting to re-charter the bank, therefore, Mr. Clay had both a pecuniary 
 and political interest. It was to him a most valuable client, and it had resolved 
 to put forth all its money and power to make him President. 
 
 In these interests of leading men in Congress, the people may find the reason 
 why that body was deluded into giving to the titled Aristocracy in England and 
 the monied aristocracy of America seven or eight millions of dollars. They will 
 know how far the Bank candidate for the Presidency deserved the support of 
 those whose interests he had thus endeavored to sacrifice ; and they will duly 
 appreciate the firmness and patriotism of that man who dares to set ajl these 
 corrupt influences at defiance and rely for support on the virtue and intelli- 
 gence of his countrymen. 
 
 Keinble & Hooper, Printers, Budget Office, Troy, N. Y.