« PrejšnjaNaprej »
(Dec. 29, 1836.
wbich drafts are at a premium; and this is the indulgence lands had been sold on credit; evils had resulted from it, of receiving notes instead of specie, and a proof that the and Congress declared that no more credits shall be giv. Secretary of the Treasury may refuse all notes! Logi- en, but complete payment be made on the day of sale. cal reasoning, this.
The object was to reduce the price to $1 25, and to re. But I beg to inquire, if the law of 1820, the resolution quire cash sales; and they say nothing of specie or lawof 1816, or any thing else, required specie only to be re. ful tender, or currency of the constitution. This matter ceived, how could Mr. Crawford, in eighteen hundred they left as it was before; and this we have seen was and twenty-three, direct notes of Eastern banks to be re payment in specie or notes krown to Congress, long ceived at the land offices in the West? The argument practised and justified by the resolution of 1816. If they must cut both ways. It must prove that the legal cur. had intended to change the mode of payment they would rency, only, “ought generally to be permitted," and bave so said. They did not, and the practice continued yet that the Secretary has the right to direct, by way of in. until the 11th July last uninterrupted. dulgence, the notes of any banks he selects to be received. Does the 4th section alter this general provision for
We are thus brought to the law of 241h April, 1820. the sales of all the public land, and prescribe a different To construe it correctly it is necessary that we should rule for the sales of the forfeited lands? It would be ex. recollect the previous legislation.
traordinary if it did so. It merely provides that these The old Congress, on the 20th May, 1785, had direct. forfeited lands shall not be sold for less price than the ed certaia of the public lands to be sold, and fised the other lands, $1 25 per acre, “nor on any other terms price at one dollar in specie, or loan office certificates than that of cash payment." In other words, that they reduced to specie, or certificates of liquidated debts of shall be sold at the same price and on the same terms as the United States. The provision was necessary, be all the public lands. Cas!! payment, in this section, cause there was then no other currency but specie and means precisely what is meant in the 20 section by depreciated paper. The sole object was to secure a the words “shall on the day of purchase make complete specified valuie or the land sold.
payment therefor.” It means payment at the time of Several changes were made, but none affecting the entry. No lawyer, at least no judge, would put a dif. question under discussion, until Congress, after the estab. | ferent construction on them; and the Executive never Jishment of the Federal Government, on the 18th May, did, until last July, when an apology was to be bunted 1796, passed a law directing sales of certain parts of the up to justify an interference with the currency of the land, and the terms; but it uses the expression, money-country, and to cover over the purpose of defeating, as purchase-money, without designation of kind.
far as possible, the operation of the distribution bill. The act of 3d March, 1797, establishes the raies at But even if the 4ih section does' require specie for the which the evidences of public debt shall be received in forfeited lands, it does not justify the order. That re. payment for lands.
lates not to forfeited lands, but to all the public lands The law of 10th May, 1800, says that “paj ment may within the Union. be made for the same by all purchasers, either in specie The only remaining precedent or authority to which or in evidences of the public debt,” &c., accordii g to the we have been relerred is the instruction of Mr. Rush, in provisions of the act of 1797. These acts are similar to 1826. He came in in 1825; found the notes of speciethat of 1789, respecting the customs, and were under. paying banks constantly received; fell desperately in love stood and practise i on in the same way. Thus far sales with the Bank of the United States; lauded it' highly, had been on credit; and, notwithstanding the phraseolo- and desired to make it the sole instrument of the Treas. gy, the Secretary, with the knowledge and approbation ury in its operations; and he directs the receivers to re. of Congress, received notes of banks as equivalent to quire specie, or notes payable in specie en demand, specie; the terms being regarded as fixing the amount and otherwise in good credil; and not to receive notes to be received, not the kind of money.
which would not be received as cash where they were to Next came the resolution of 1816; and, whatever may be deposited, or which the receivers thought it not discreet have previously been the construction, it expressly au. to receive. Mr. Rush did not, in this, directly violate thorized the receipts to be in notes of specie-paying the resolution of 1816; because that resolution could not banks. And this resolution, and the practice under it, reasonably be construed to require the receipt of notes were in full force when this aci of 24th April, 1820, was where they could not be turned into specie at full passed.
amount. But he did place in the hands of the receivers Did this act repeal the resolution of 1816, and require a discretion which might be wielded to oppressive rethe payments to be only in specie?
sults, where there was a desire to injure particular It is so suggested by the Secretary, and so argued by banks. The correct action, under that resolution, would several Senators.
have been to receive notes of State banks, which could, The Secretary says that directing payments to be on demand, or near the office, and without loss, be made in "cash,” countenanced the idea that such coin turned into specie-lo make the demand for payment alone should be generally permitled to be received. And promptly, and whenever that de mand was not answered two Senators argue that cash payments can mean only | io refuse at once other notes of the bank. payments in the lawful tender,
Upon this review of the laws, resolutions, and pracThey all look to the 4th section, and to the word cash, rice, I have not been able to discover any thing which as their guide, and overlook the 21 section, which can justify the Executive in changing the mode of pay. is more important, to fix the meaning of the law. It re. ment for the public lands-demanding specie and refu. lates to all sales of the public lands: the 41h only to sing all notes of all banks. It is an assumption of legisresales of lands forfeited for non payment. It provides lative power, and a violation of the plain meaning of ihe tbal, in all sales, no credit shall be allowed after the 1st scis of Congress. of July of that year; "but every purchaser at public sales There is another feature in this order which deserves shall, on the day of purchase, make complete payment decisive reprobation. It forbids receiving any thing but therefor, and purchasers at private sales shall produce gold and silver, “provided that until the 15th Decem. to the register a receipt from ihe Treasurer of the United ber next the same indulgences heretofore extended, as States, or from the receiver, for the amount of the pur. to the kind of money received, may be continued, for chase-money," &c. It is perfectly apparent that this sec any quantity of land not exceeding 320 acres to each tion relates only to the time of payment, and not at all purchaser, who is an ac!ual settler or bonafide resident to the currency in which payment should be made. The l in the state wbere the sales are made.”
Dec. 29, 1836.]
The meaning is, that actual settlers or bonafide resi- of New Jersey, also, who, at particular elections, have dents of the State may buy 320 acres, and pay for it in no right to vote, not because they are not citizens, but any money they please; all others must pay in gold and because they have not resided in the county or township silver. I wish the Senator from New Hampshire had long enough, and paid taxes. The citizens of Pennsyl. persuaded himself to bend his mind to this proviso. He vania have no right to vote there, for the same reason; seems to have examined the order with some labor, and yet the citizens of Pennsylvania are on a perfect equality to have been prepared with reasoning and references to with the citizens of the State, under like circumstances. sustain it; but he entirely overlooked this most extraordi Let them reside there the time, and do other acts prescri. nary feature. After his argument was closed, his atten. bed for her own citizens, and they will have the same right. tion was called to it by the Senator from Ohio, but he was They can acquire it in the same time and by the same quite unprepared to give us a constitutional view of the
The same rules govern with regard to both. difficulty which it presents. He, however, referred us One enjoys the right, because he has complied with the to the exposition of the Senator from Mississippi; and I requirements; the other does not, because he has not suppose ihat exposition is all that we are to hope for to complied. relieve our consciences and satisfy our judgments.
So with regard to all other rights; any citizen of the The objection to this part of the order is, that it Union may, in any State, enjoy the same rights as the makes a distinction between actual settlers and others, citizens of that State, by doing what they have done, and and between the citizens of the States where the lands placing liimself in the same circumstances. lie and all others, and allows advantages to the former It is the common obligation of citizens in all the States which are denied to others. The argument in support to perforin certain prescribed duties, in order to entitle of it, and to which we are referred, amounts to this: it them to the enjoyment of the common rights. If a citiis no violation of right, nor of the constitution, because zen of any other State will perform the same prescribed the constitutional provision does not conser on the citi. duties, be shall have the enjoyment of the same common zens of one Stale all the righ!s of citizens in every other rights. And this article gives to every man, everywhere, State, such as voting, &c.; and there is a distinction rec the high and sacred privilege of being a citizen on the ognised by law and practice in favor of actual settlers same terms. The Senator need not be alarmed about the and against speculators, as in case of the pre-emption hosts of Xerxes or of Peteus, and lest Delaware should laws. The Senator will find it difficult from his premises pour out her million of votes on this construction. The to show the right of the Executive to create and estab. adjoining States can afford her many voters, and when lish distinctions between citizens, such as this order cre they shall have done what her own citizens have, they ales. He will discover that he must make great leaps will be able to add to her popular vote, but not till then. in his process of reasoning, and surmount more than one So, also, the interest in even the exclusive common sturdy non sequitur-quite as troublesome as that result property of a State may be acquired by any one becoming from the logic of figures.
ing a citizen, and it may be lost by ceasing to be a citiThe constitution, article 4, section 2, says: “ The citi The rule is equal to all. zens of each State shall be entitled to all privileges and This principle as to States is nothing more nor less immunities of citizens in the several States."
than that which is applied at every election in every This is one item in that article which provides for the State, in regard to their counties. An inhabitant of one relative rights and duties of the Federal Government county cannot vote in another, because he does not re. towards the States and towards each other, such as side in it; and so an inhabitant of one State canno: vote
Giving faith and credit to judicial proceedings; in anolher, because he does not reside in it; but each
Delivering up fugitives from justice, and from service may, at his own pleasure, and on the same terms, relieve or labor;
himself from his disability, The admission and rights of new States;
But whether this construction of the act can be carThe security of representative forms of government ried thus far or not, is it not distinctly true that if there to all the States;
be special privileges, such as voting, which cannot be And the power to dispose of and make rules respect. equally enjoyed, the distinction arises from Stale laws ing the territory and property of the United States. and institutions, not from the laws and institutions of the
The association of it with these subjects shows the Union? And if this be so, how does it relieve the Execu. spirit in which it ought to be construed, and the object ( tive when he draws distinctions in virtue of the powers of which it sought. This object was entire equality be- the Union? The States may make their own internal regutween the States and the citizens of all the States, freelations, always regarding constitutional restraints; but dom of intercourse, and interchange of privileges; and does it follow that any such power has been vested in the the article itself is the most important in that great work General Government and, above all, in the Executive of to accomplish some of its avowed ends, “ to form a more that Government? Does the constitution say that he perfect union, establish justice, insure domestic tran may make distinctions in favor of a State--then may he quillity,” &c. Its construction, by every principle of not make them against a State? And is there not there. tegal and philosophical reasoning, should be liberal to by a power erected which may trample upon the equality attain these objecis.
of the States--bestow favors upon favorites, and wreak The terms are clear, and were intended to be a sub- vengeance upon opponents? Sir, I have not so lead the stitute for that article of the confederation which relates constitution of, my country. I have not so learned the to the same subject, and which was most confused and doctrine of State rights. The grounds of defence here inexplicable. *" The citizens of each State"-all the are abhorrent to every principle contained in our insticitizens of every State—“to all privileges and immuni- tutions; and an authority is claimed, which, if sanctioned ties of citizens in the several Stateb”—to all the immuni. and practised, will creaie a despotism or sever the Union. ties and privileges which the citizens of those States en There are great fundamental privileges and immunijoy under similar circumstances.
ties belonging, of right, to all citizens of free Govern. Now, this does not mean the right of voting, whether ments, and which bave especially belonged to all the an inbabitant or not; nor those other rights to which the citizens of all the States since they became free, indeSenator from Mississippi refers. The citizens of Penn. pendent, sovereign, and confederated. Equal protec. sylvania have not the right of voting in New Jersey; and tion by Government; enjoyment of life, liberiy; the why? Because they bave not the residence, and other acquisition and possession of property; the benefit of qualifications, which are necessary. There are citizens hubeas corpus: passing through and residing in any part
(Dec. 29, 1836.
of the Union, for trade, agriculture, professional pur Now, I do not understand Mr. Hamilton as the Senasuits, or other occupations; the maintenance of actions tor from Missouri does. lle was proposing a plan for for the defence of rights; the purchasing, holding, and the disposition of the public lands. To effect the sales disposing of property, real and personal, with many was the leading object--as an operation of finance, it others--ihese constillite us one nation, these make the claimed primary attention.” This, he thought, ought Union. And shall the Executive, at bis will, deny us to be pursued in conformity with the convenience and the enjoyment of any one of them all? And sball he do interests of those who were to buy and occupy them, as it, especially, in relation to the common property of all an inducement to them to make purchases. His scheme, to the public lands? Do Senators remark ihe extent of therefore, had these objects, and none other. They the power which has been assumed? The common priv. could be attained most effectually by suiting the scheme ilege and immunity is to buy and hold land where the to the character of the several kinds of purchasers; and citizen pleases, without being burdened in the acquisi- i he gives a list of them-a mere description of classes of tion and possession more than others; more than the men: moneyed individuals and companies, who buy to citizens of the Stale where he acquires and holds it. sell; associations to form settlements; and single persons Can this privilege be violated by a State? Can Indiana or families, who had or might settle there. And it is forbid a citizen of New Jersey from buying and possessing this description or list which the Senator converts into a her lands? or, if he do buy, compel him to pay for it distinction “recognised in the nature of things, and otherwise than her own citizens may? Not while the sanctioned by laws." 41h article of the constitution exists--not while the Union But does Mr. Hamilton advise that any distinction shall lasts. Can Congress do it? And does the executive be made between them.-ihat the setilers shall be perpower reach to that which neither the State nor Con mitted to buy on other and better terms than other gress may touch? Yet this the Executive has done, and classes? This is the point complained of in the Treasudone more. He has forbidden the people of other States ry order; and the Senator must exercise both ingenuity to buy the common property of the Union, within Indi and imagination before he will make the discovery of it ana and the other Stales, except under a severe restric- in this paper. It requires optics keen to see what is not tion. And if he may impose one restriction, where shall
to be seen. On the contrary, Mr. H. expressly says: he be limited ?
“ Hence a plan for the sale of the Western lands, while I have always, Mr. President, esteemed this provision, it may have a due regard to the last, (the settlers,) and the article of which it forms a part, as the most pre should be calculated to obtain all the advantages which cious in the constitution of the country, and most neces. may be derived from the two first classes," (ihe mon. sary for its peace and prosperity. You may alter the eyed individuals, companies, and associations.) This executive powers, enlarge or limit the Judiciary, am language needs no comment. It was reserved for the plify or restrain the Legislature, and your Government Senator to see in it a preference of the setiler over the may still retain iis character and usefulness; but violate speculator. But if Mr. Hamilton did advise such a disand destroy that article, and the fabric is shattered: we tinction and preference, it was advice only--not legislaare no longer common and equal citizens of a common tion: a plan for the sales--not an execution of the plan. and glorious nation, made glorious by equal laws. Congress did not make a law which sanctioned it. The
And, sir, how is this act of the Executive, which vio act of 1797, nor any other of the acts, contains any such lates that article, defended? The defence ought to be provision. And thus we learn the value of this evidence, clear, beyond cavil or debate. I understand the Senator which is offered to defend the eatablishment of such a from Missouri to assert that there has heretofore been a distinction and preference by an order of the Executive, distinction drawn and maintained between actual settlers and at the executive pleasure. And it is by such perand speculators in the land, between residents and non versions of documentary evidence that executive usurpresidents; and that Congress has sanctioned the distinc-ations are sustained. tion, by numerous pre-emption and other laws, for above Again, Mr. President, the Senator insists that the forty years—from the first plan for the sale of the public same distinction between settlers and those who are lands, down to the time when propositions were made not-between residents and non-residents, has been for dividing the proceeds of the lands. The first evi- drawn by the pre-emption laws. These laws have never dence to which we are referred to sustain the allegation been favorites of mine. They have produced frauds is an extract from the report of Mr. Hamilton, Secretary and perjuries without number. Where they have faof the Treasury, in 1790. It is in the following words: vored one honest claim, they have covered hundreds of
“ That, in the formation of a plan for the disposition those which are dishonest and base. They have offered of the vacant lands of the United States, there appear to rewards for the violation of law, and the plundering of be two leading objects of consideration: one, the facility the public properly. But, bad as they are, they afford of advantageous sales, according to the probable course no apology for this assumption of executive power. of purchases; the other, the accommodation of individu- They give to the man who has settled on and improved als now inhabiting the Western country, or who may the public lands, under the circumstances slated in the hereafter emigrate thither. The former, as an operation laws, a right to buy at the minimum price. In considof finance, claims primary altention; the latter is impor- eration of settlement and improvement, Congrese agree tant, as it relates to the satisfaction of the inhabitants of not to sell the land settled and improved to others, but the Western country. It is desirable, and does not ap to give a title to it, provided the settler will pay the reg. pear impracticable, to conciliate both. Purchasers may ular price for it. They will not throw that land into pubbe contemplated in three classes: moneyed individuals lic competition, because he has it in possession, and by his and companies, who will buy to sell again; associations cultivation has added to the value of it, and of the adjoinof persons who intend to make settlements themselves; ing public lands. But, sir, this gives no preference to single persons or families, now resident in the Western one citizen over another, under the same circumstancountry, or who may emigrate there bereaster. The It does not permit one man to buy at public sales, two first will be frequently blended, and will always want at one price, and forbid others, similarly situated, to buy considerable tracts; the last will generally purchase at the same price. It does not prolibit citizens of other small quantities. Hence a plan for the sale of the West Slates from purchasing on the same terms as the citizens ern lands, while it may have a due regard to the last, of the States where the lands lie. And if it did, it is a should be calculated to obtain all the advantages which distinction drawn by Congress, and limited to those almay be derived from the two first classes.”
ready on the lands. By what right does the Executive
Dec. 29, 1836.]
extend it to other settlers and bonafide residents? most unequally, oppressively, and injuriously, on the Where does he get his legislative power? By what au West. The lands are the great and only source of debts thority does he extend a law made for one object to em to the Government there. To compel them to pay in brace another? Has he no limit; no restraint? Is he to specie, while others were paying elsewhere in the ordibe permitted to wrest any and every law from its pur- nary currency, was an act of gross oppression. To force pose? And is there to be no end of his trespasses on them to gather up their gold and silver, and to deposite the legislative authority of the Union? The pre-emption it in a few of their banks, so as to take it out of circula. laws did not apply to these sales; and he knew that con tion, and compel all the rest of their banks to curtail gress had refused to give those laws a further extension. their accommodations, was a refinement of despotism During our last session the subject was before us, not which would naturally excite the indignation of all who only on private petitions, but on a memorial from the were not the humblest slaves of power. The effect was Legislature of the State of Indiana. (Journal, 97.) They feared. The elections were approaching—the succesrequested us to continue the pre-emption laws for three sion might be put in jeopardy. The force of the blow years. A bill was reported on the subject. The Com was to be weakened, and an exception was made in famittee on the Public Lands expressed an opinion against vor of those States. Michigan, Indiana, Illinois, Missouit; and the bill was rejected by a vote of 23 to 17. Yet, ri, Alabama, Mississippi, and Louisiana, lave a temporary - the moment Congress adjourner), the Executive issued suspension as to them and their citizens. They are to an order more unequal than any pre-emption law; and be permitted to buy as they have heretofore done. But we are now to be outraged by being told that because how long, sir? Until the 15th December-until the Congress has drawn some distinctions on former occa elections were over. And it had its effect. The sucsions, the President may draw more, and that the Exec cession was saved in almost all those States; wbile, but ulive has the power, without the authority, and against for the exception, they might have shared the fate of the will of Congress, to regulate the sales of your public Kentucky, Tennessee, and Ohio. Indeed, I believe that lands as he pleases. Every argument in support of this even the exception would have been insufficient, had it order is an apology for executive usurpation.
not been for an assurance from the very cabinet of the There is but one other suggestion of the Senator that palace itself that tlie order should be revoked—an asI deern it important to notice. He says, if it be uncon. surance deceptive and untrue, because there was no in. stitutional to discriminate between revenue payments, tention in the Executive to revoke it. If it be revoked then Congress cannot do it; and yet Congress has done it will be by the power of Congress; or, perchance, the it, and that in relation to the lands themselves; that in policy of those who are preparing for the 4th March March, 1823, an act was passed to make foreign gold next. The amendment of the Senator from Virginia coins receivable in payment of the public lands. Tbis may serve, perhaps, to evade it--to escape from it-withwas a discrimination and an exception, for an act of out the manliness to condemn it. 1819 had illegalized the circulation of foreign coins. Mr. President, in this review of the laws and practice
And who, Mr. President, has said that it was unconsti of the Government, I have been able to find no justifitutional to discriminate between revenue payments?
cation for this executive interference with the currency Congress has an undoubted right to decide what shall be of the country. He has no constitutional right to regreceived for any or for all its dues, provided they re. ulate the currency; his duty is to execute the laws as quire the same payment equally from all the citizens. Congress may make them. And I regard this order as
They may receive foreign gold for customs, as they al. a gross usurpation of power. The Secretary saw it; he ways have done. So they may for the lands. But does had not the manliness to issue his order in the common it follow that the President may, of his own authority, form of instructions from his Department. He felt the do this? Where does he get his power?
necessity of calling in the magic of a name to sanction Besides, I do not understand what the Senator means his oppression. He had experienced the power of that by the foreign coins being illegalized in circulation. name, and its potency in silencing all complaints against Their circulation has never been illegal. It has, at all trespasses on the constitution and the laws. And he times, been lawful to offer and to receive them. Their thought, in this emergency, “the President of the Unicirculation has been legal, but they have not at all times ted States has given directions" would be the best arbeen a lawful and compulsory tender between citizen gument which he could use. And, sir, it may produce and citizen, but all were at liberty to pay and to receive its effect. They who would have found no difficulty in them. The act of 1819 did not illegalize their circula- condemning Levi W., will hesitale before they distion, nor that of 1823 make them a lawful tender. So approve the act of President Jackson. I wish the Secfar as regards their circulation between citizen and citi-retary could have contrived to bestow upon it the name zen, the latter act did not affect them at all. The law which its real paternity demands. The records of the of 1819 was one of the chain of laws which made certain Senale furnish the heraldic guides which would not foreign coins a lawful tender for definite periods. It ex- have misled him. But is the act less a violation of law pired by its own limitation. It was not the will of Con- and duty, and are we the less bound to speak the truth gress to renew it; but subsequent to its expiration they in regard to it? I regard it as inferior to no infringeauthorized those coins to be received for the public ment upon the rights of Congress, no stretch of execulands. This they had an undoubted right to do; and the tive authority, which we bave heretofore witnessed. It only legitimate inference from that law is the one to is the greatest, and I hope it will be the last; and, as it which I have before called the attention of the Senate; is said to have been proclaimed as the “crowning glory that there is a clear distinction between the lawful curs of my administration," no fu'ure effort for glory will be rency or tender, and the money which the Government essayed, and that the hour approaches when we shall has agreed to receive for its duesma distinction which have a name less potent, and a disposition less presudestroys the whole argument in support of the order of ming, with purposes more consistent with the constitution the Executive.
and laws, to save us from at least unnecessary encroachI now repeat again my inquiry, where is the apology ments. for the discrimination between the kinds of money, and A few words as to the amendment, and I will cease to between the citizens of different Staies!--and what | fatigue the Senate. The Senator from Virginia has, by could have been the temptation to make it? May it not his amendment, created some embarrassinent with me. be found in the anticipated operation of the order itself? I am not unwilling to express the opinion that the order The contriver of it could not fail to see that it must act must be rescinded. I desire to do so. I feel it to be a
Land Bill-Admission of Michigan.
[Jan. 2, 1837.
duty to do so. Yet I should prefer his amendment to should as soon think of digging open the grave, and vio. doing nothing but submitting quietly to this assumption lating there the maxim, nil de mortuis, as of casting unne. of power. But, as I prefer the original resolution, Icessary censure on the decaying idol. But, sir, when I be. must vote against the amendment; and then it is possible lieve that the great interests of our common country that, by defeating it, we may also defeat the resolution. have been injured, the constitution and the laws disBut be it so.
regarded, and I see no imperative obstacle to the ex. The amendment may be regarded as having three ob pression of my opinions, I cannot refrain from the jects:
decisive vote which those interests and that constitution 1. To declare that the dues of the Government may require at my hands. I believe that the order was unbe received in specie or specie-paying notes. Thus far authorized; that it has been injurious; and I cannot conit is a mere reiteration of the resolution of 1816, in alınost sent to evade the direct and proper expression of my precisely the same words; and it leaves the authority of opinions. If, in doing so, the amendment should be de. the Secretary exactly where that resolution left it. Pass seated, and the order remain unrevoked and unaltered, it, and the Secretary has the same right to refuse every I must leave the responsibility with those who sustain it, thing but specie that he had in July last; and he will, of and on whom that responsibility ought to rest. course, exercise it in the same way, for Congress will [About the usual hour of adjournment, Mr. SOUTHARD have expressed no opinion against it. It is intended as gave way for a motion for adjournment by Mr. Ewing. a repeal of the order. It may operate as such, but it Before the Senate adjourned, however, Mr. Rives evades, it does not directly and straightforward compel gave notice of his intention to modify his amendment to the repeal.
Mr. Ewing's resolution on the subject of the Treasury 2. It limits the notes which are to be received to the order, so as to cause it to read as follows, viz: banks which do not now issue of a less denomination Resolved, That hereafter all sums of money accruing than five dollars, and shall not, after 1st July, 1839, or becoming payable to the United States, whether for those of ten dollars, and after 1st July, 1841, of twenty customs, public lands, taxes, debts, or otherwise, shall dollars. I have no great repugnance to this progression, be collected and paid only in the legal currency of the although, I think, too rapid, and that the convenience United Stales, or in the notes of banks which are payaand interest of the country will not be promoted by it. ble and paid on demand in the said legal currency, unIt is much more slow, however, than the locomotive der the following restrictions and conditions in regard to progress of the proposed bill of the last session “to re. such notes; that is, from and after the passage of this establish the currency of the constitution for the Federal resolution, the notes of no bank which shali issue bills or Government." That brought us, in 1841, to the receipt notes of a less denomination that five dollars shall be reof no notes of any bank which issued notes less than one ceived in payment of the public dues; from and after thousand dollars, and no note after 1842. I prefer, for the 1st day of July, 1839, the notes of no bank which the present, the rule given in the deposile bill. But as shall issue bills or notes of a less denomination than ten Congress will retain the power of repealing this provi- dollars, shall be receivable; and from and after the 1st of sion, if the circumstances of the country required it, 1 July, 1841, the like prohibition shall be extended to the should not for it alone vote against the amendment. notes of all banks issuing bills or notes of a less denom.
3. I object also to the mixed discretion of the Secre. ination than twenty dollars; provided, however, that no tary and the banks which the amendment to the amend. notes shall be taken in payment by the collectors or re. ment produces; and I prefer, when we legislate in re ceivers, which the banks in which they are to be depos. gard to the currency, to do it directly, and in the or ited shall not, under the supervision and control of the dinary forms of law.
Secretary of the Treasury, agree to pass to the credit We are informed that we cannot agree to the resolu. of the United States as cash."
The amendment, thus amended, was orilered to be but must take the amendment, which will avoid the printed, and then the Senate, on motion of Mr. Clar, action of the order, and not condemn the President. adjourned over to Monday next.] should like to be informed what we can do, and wbat opinion we may express. We declared that we thought the act of the Executive in taking the public treasure
MONDAY, JANUARY 2. from the legal depository was not justified by the con Mr. KING, of Alabama, presented the credentials of stitution and laws, and we sinned so that our act is to be the Hon. John McKinley, elected by the Legislature of expunged. And now we may not, by legislative action, the State of Alabama a Senator from that State, to serve by law, repeal an order of the Executive which violates for six years from the 4th of March next. the laws, and regulates the currency and the sales of the Mr. Preston appeared in his seat to-day. public lands. Wbat, I repeat, may we do? Under this
LAND BILL. ductrine the Executive has only to get ahead of Con.
Mr. WALKER, from the committee to whom it was gress, do any act which his ambition or his caprice ray dictate, and our mouths are closed, our legislative au
referred, reported Mr. Clar's land bill, with an amendthority is gone, and we are powerless for any purpose
ment, striking out the whole bill save the enacting but to approve the act of tyranny. It is a doctrine of clause, and substituting another which restricts the sales servility and base subserviency. I cannot act upon it.
of the public lands to actual settlers, and to them in Officially, I must do my duty; privately, I have no wish
small quantities, accompanied with many guards against to censure or condemn. I can bave no desire, sir, at
its being evaded by speculators. this moment, to cast any censure there, which is not de.
ADMISSION OF MICHIGAN. manded by the obligations of public duty. When age Mr. GRUNDY moved that the previous orders of the and disease are obtaining their gloomy triumplis over day be postponed, for the purpose of considering the the body and the intellect; when earthly honors are bill to admit the State of Michigan into the Union. escaping with the rapidity of the passing hours; when Mr. CALHOUN was opposed to the motion; the doc. sycophants and dependents are beginning to exhibit their uments accompanying the bill had but this morning been conviction that their devotion is no longer required by laid upon the tables, and no time bad been allowed for their interests; and when a name which has gratified even reading them over. ambition and secured power is fast loosening its hold Mr. GRUNDY insisted on his motion. Of one point upon popular prejudice, credulity, and confidence, 1 be was fully satisfied that Michigan had a right to be