CLAY 
 
 Speeches Delivered by H. Clay, 
 of Kentucky. 
 
 irwtf-i'iif J«ii jii' ' - J 
 
 . Pwt ««.-'««•' ju-^- i>Yw •.tjk-iUhit^m'm^iir^ir^rt'i^UST
 
 SANTA B/ilvS/JlA 
 SPEECHES 
 
 DELIVERED BY 
 
 H. CLAY, OF KENTUCKY, 
 
 In the Senate of the United States, on '.he 19th of August, 1841, 
 
 ON 
 
 THE MESSAGE OF PRESIDENT TYLER, RETURMG THE BANK BILL, WITH HIS VETO, 
 
 AND 
 
 IN REPLY TO MR. RIVES, DEFENDING THE MESSAGE. 
 
 Mr. CLAY, of Kentucky, rose and addressed the Senate as follows : 
 
 Mr. President: The bill which forms the present subject of our deliberations 
 had passed both Houses of Congress by decisive majorities, and, in conformity 
 with the requirement of the Constitution, was presented to the President of the 
 United States for his consideration. He has returned it to the Senate, in which it 
 originated, according to the direction of the Constitution, with a message announc- 
 ing his veto of the bill, and containing his objections to its passage. And the 
 question now to be decided is, Shall the bill pass, by the requi-ed constitutional 
 majority of two-thirds, the President's objections notwithstanding] 
 
 Knowing, sir, but too well that no such majority can be obtained, and that the 
 bill must fall, 1 would have been rejoiced to have found myself at liberty to abstain 
 from saying one word on this painful occasion. But the President has not allow= 
 ed me to give a silent vote. I ihink, with all respect and deference to him, he has 
 not reciprocated the friendly spirit of concession and compromise which animated 
 Congress in the provisions of this bill, and especially in the modification of the 
 sixteenth fundamental condition of the bank. He has commented, I think, with 
 undeserved severity on that part of the bill ; he has used, 1 am sure unintention- 
 ally, harsh, if not reproachful, language ; and he has made the very concession, 
 which was prompted as a peace offering, and from friendly considerations, the 
 cause of stronger and more decided disapprobation of the bill. Standing in the rela- 
 tion to that bill which I do, and especially to the exceptionable clause, the duty 
 which I owe to the Senate and to the country, and self-respect, impose upon me 
 the obligation of at least attempting the vindication of a measure which has met 
 with a fate so unmerited and so unexpected. 
 
 On the fourth of April last the lamented Harrison, the President of the United 
 States, paid the debt of Nature, President Tyler, who, as Vice President, suc- 
 ceeded to the duties of that office, arrived in the city of Washington on the sixth of 
 that month. He found the whole metropolis wrapt in gloom, every heart filled 
 with sorrow and sadness, every eye streaming with tears, and the surrounding hills 
 yet flinging back the echo of the bells which were tolled on that melancholy occa- 
 sion. On entering the Presidential mansion he contemplated the pale body of his 
 predecessor stretched before him, and clothed in the black habiliments of death. 
 At that solemn moment I have no doubt that the heart of President Tyler was 
 overflowing with mingled emotions of grief, of patriotism, and of gratitude — above 
 all, of gratitude to that country by a majority of whose sufl'rages, bestowed at the 
 preceding November, he then stood the most distinguished, the most elevated, the 
 most honored of all living Whigs of the United Stales. 
 
 It was under these circumstances, and in this probable state of mind, that Presi° 
 dfint Tyler, on the tenth day of the same month of April, voluntarily promulgated 
 an Address to the People of the United States. That Address was in the nature 
 of a coronation oath, which the Chief of the State, in other countries, and under
 
 other forms, takes, upon ascending the throne. It referred to the solemn obliga- 
 tions, and the profound sense of duty, under which the new President entered 
 upon the hig!i trust which had devolved upon him, by the joint acts of the People 
 and of Providence, and it stated the principles and delineated the policy by which 
 he would be governed in his exalted station. It was emphatically a Whig Address, 
 from beginning to end — every inch of it was Whig, and was patriotic. 
 
 In that Address the President, in respect to the subject-matter embraced in the 
 present bill, held the following conclusive and emphatic language : 
 
 " I shall promptly give my sanction to any constitutional measure which, originating in 
 Congress, shall have for its object the restoration of a sound circulating medium, so essentially 
 necessary to give confidence in all the transactions of life, to secure to industry its fust and 
 adequate rewards, and to re-establish the public prosperity. In deciding upon the adaptation 
 of any such measure to the end proposed, as tvell as its conformity to the Constitution, I shall 
 resort to the Fathers of the great Republican school for advice and instruction, to be drawn from 
 their sage views of sur system of government, and the light of their ever glorious example." 
 
 To this clause in the Address of the President, I believe, but one interpreta- 
 tion was given throughout this whole country, by friend and foe, by Whig and De- 
 mocrat, and by the presses of both parties. It was, by ever)' man with whom I 
 conversed on the subject at the time of its appearance, or of whom I have since 
 inquired, construed to mean that the President intended to occupy the Madison 
 ground, and to regard the question of the power to establish a national bank as im- 
 movably settled. And I think I may confidently appeal to the Senate, and to the 
 country, to sustain the fact that this was the contemporaneous and unanimous judg- 
 ment of the public. Reverting back to the period of the promulgation of the Ad- 
 dress, could any other construction have been given to its language 1 What is ill 
 "I shaW promptly give my sanction to any constitutional measure which, origi- 
 nating in Congress,^'' shall have certain defined objects in view. He concedes 
 the vital importance of a sound circulating medium to industry and to the public 
 prosperity. He concedes that its origin must be in Congress. And, to prevent 
 any inference from the qualification which he prefixes to the measure, being in- 
 terpreted to mean that a United States Bank was unconstitutional, he declares 
 that, in deciding on the adaptation of the measure to the end proposed, and its 
 conformity \o the Constitution, he will resort to the Fathers of the great Republi- 
 can school. And who were they 1 If the Father of his Country is to be excluded, 
 are Madison, (the Father of the Constitution,) Jefferson, Monroe, Gerry, Gallatin, 
 and the long list of Republicans who acted with them, not to be regarded as among 
 those Fathers'? But President Tyler declares not only that he should appeal to 
 thera for advice and instruction, but to the light of their ever glorious example. 
 What example] What other meaning could have been possibly applied to the 
 phrase, than that he intended to refer to what had been done durmg the adminis- 
 trations of Jefferson, Madison, and Monroe? 
 
 Entertaining this opinion of the Address, I came to Washington, at the com- 
 mencement of the session, with the most confident and buoyant hopes that the 
 Whigs would be able to carry all their prominent measures, and especially a Bank 
 of the United States, by far that one of the greatest immediate importance. I 
 anticipated nothing but cordial co-operation between the two departments of 
 Government ; and I reflected with pleasure that I should find at the head of the 
 Executive branch a personal and political friend, whom I had long and intimately 
 known, and highly esteemed. It will not be my fault if our amicable relations 
 should unhappily cease, in consequence of any diflference of opinion between us on 
 this occasion. The President has been always perfectly familiar with my opinion 
 on this bank question. 
 
 Upon the opening of the session, but especially on the receipt of the plan of a na- 
 tioaal bank, as proposed by the Secretary of the Treasury, fears were excited that
 
 the President had been snisunderstood in his Address, and that he had not waived 
 but adhered to his constitutional scruples. Under these circumstances it was hoped 
 that, by the induls;ence of a mutual spirit of compromise and concession, a bank, 
 competent to fulfil the expectations and satisfy the wants of the People, might be 
 established. 
 
 Under the influence of that spirit, the Senate and the House agreed, 1st, as to 
 the name of the proposed bank. I confess, sir, that there was something exceed- 
 ingly outrie and revolting to my ears in the term " Fiscal Bank ;" but I thought, 
 " What is there in a name ? A rose, by any other name, would smell as sweet." 
 Looking, therefore, rather to the utility of the substantial faculties than to the name 
 of the contemplated institution, we consented to that which was proposed. 
 
 2. As to the place of location ot the bank. Although Washington had passed 
 through my mind as among the cities in which it might be expedient to place the 
 bank, it was believed to be the least eligible of some four or five other cities. 
 Nevertheless, we consented to fix it here. 
 
 And, lastly, in respect to the branching power, there was not probably a solitary 
 vote given in either House of Congress for the bill that did not greatly prefer the 
 unqualified branching power, as asserted in the charters of the two former Banks 
 of the United States, to the sixteenth fundamental condition, as finally incorpora- 
 ted in (his bill. It is perfectly manifest, therefore, that it was not in conformity 
 with the opinion and wish of majorities in Congress, but in a friendly spirit of 
 concession towards the President and his particular friends, that the clause assum- 
 ed that form. So repugnant was it to some of the best friends of a national bank 
 in the other House, that they finally voted against the bill because it contained 
 that compromise of the branching power. 
 
 It is true that, in presenting the compromise to the Senate, I stated, as was the 
 fact, that I did not know whether it would be acceptable to the President 
 or not ; that, according to my opinion, each department of the Government should 
 act upon its own responsibility, independently of the other ; and that I presented 
 the modification of the branching power because it was necessary to ensure the 
 passage of the bill in the Senate, having ascertained that the vote would stand 26 
 against it to 25, if the form of that power which had been reported by the commit= 
 tee were persisted in. But I nevertheless did entertain the most confident hopes 
 and expectations that the bill would receive the sanction of the President ; and 
 this motive, although not the immediate one, had great weight in the introduction 
 and adoption of the compromise clause. I knew that our friends who would not 
 vote for the bill as reported were actuated, as they avowed, by considerations of 
 union and harmony, growing out of supposed views of the President, and I pre- 
 sumed that he would not fail to feel and appreciate their sacrifices. But I deeply 
 regret that we were mistaken. Notwithstanding all our concessions, made in a 
 genuine and sincere spirit of conciliation, the sanction of the President could not 
 be obtained, and the bill has been returned by him with his objections. 
 
 And I shall now proceed to consider those objections, with as much brevity as 
 possible, but with the most perfect respect, official and personal, towards the Chief 
 Magistrate. 
 
 After stating that the power of Congress to establish a national bank, to operate 
 per se, has been a controverted question from the origin of the Government, the 
 President remarks : 
 
 " Men most justly and deservedly esteemed for their high intellectual endowments, their vir- 
 tue and their patriotism, have, in regard to it, entertained different and conflicting opinions. 
 Congresses have differed. The approval of one President has been followed by the disapproval 
 of another." 
 
 From this statement of the case, it may be inferred that the President considers 
 the weight of authority, pro and con, to be equal and balanced. But if he in- 
 tended to make such an array of it — if he intended to say that it was in equilib-
 
 4 
 
 rium — I must respectfully, but most decidedly, dissent from him. 1 think the con- 
 joint testimony of history, tradition, and the knowledge of living witnesses prove 
 the contrary. How stands the question as to the opinion of Congre-sses ? The 
 Congress uf 1791, the Congress of 1813-M4, the Congress of 1815-'16, the Con- 
 gress of 1831-'32, and, finally, the present Congress, have all respectively and 
 unequivocally affirmed the existence of a power in Congress to establish a na- 
 tional bank to operate per se. We behold, then, the concurrent opinion of five 
 difierent Congresses on one side. And what Congress is there on the opposite 
 side ] The Congress of 1811 1 I was a member of the Senate in that year, when 
 it decided, by the casting vote of the V^ice President, against the renewal of the 
 charter of the old Bank of the United States. And I now here, in my place, add 
 to the testimony already before the public, by declaring that it is within my cer- 
 tain knowledge that that decision of the Senate did not proceed from a disbelief 
 of a majority of the Senate in the power of Congress to establish a national bank, 
 but from combined considerations of expediency and constitutionality. A major- 
 ity of the Senate, on the contrary, as I know, entertained no doubt as to the power 
 of Congress. Thus the account, as to Congresses, stands five for and not one, or, 
 at most, not more than one, against the power. 
 
 Let us now look into the state of autliority derivable from the opinions of Pres- 
 idents of the United States. President Washington believed in the power of 
 Congress, and approved' a bank bill. President .Jefferson approved acts to ex- 
 tend branches into other parts oi the United States, and to punish counterfeiters 
 of the notes of the bank — acts which were devoid of all justification whatever 
 upon the assumption of the unconstitutionality of the bank. For how could 
 branches be extended or punishment be lawfully inflicted upon the counterfeiters 
 of the paper of a corporation which came into existence without any authority, 
 and in violation of the Constitution of the land? James Madison, notwithstand- 
 ing those early scruples which he had entertained, and which ho probably still 
 cherished, sanctioned and signed a bill to charter the late Bank of the United 
 States. It is perfectly well known that Mr. Monroe never did entertain any scru- 
 ples or doubts in regard to the power of Congress. Here, then, are four Presi- 
 dents of the United States who have directly or collaterally borne official testi- 
 mony to the existence of the bank power in Congress. And what President is 
 there that ever bore unequivocally opposite testimony — that disapproved a bank 
 charter in the sense intended by President Tyler? General Jackson, although 
 he did apply the veto power to the bill for rechartering the late Bank of the Uni- 
 ted States in 1832, it is within the perfect recollection of us all that he not only 
 testified to the utility of a Bank of the United States, but declared that, if he had 
 been applied to by Congress, he could have furnished the plan of such a bank. 
 
 Thus, Mr. President, we perceive that, in reviewing the action of the Legisla- 
 tive and Executive departments of the Government, there is a vast preponderance 
 of the weight of authority maintaining the existence of the power in Congress. 
 But President Tyler ha<, I presume unintentionally, wholly omitted to notice the 
 judgment and decisions of the third co-ordinate department of the Government 
 upon this controverted question — that department whose interpretations of the 
 Constitution, within its proper jurisdiction and sphere of action, are binding upon 
 all ; and which, therefore, may be considered as exercising a controlling powei 
 over both the other departments. The Supreme Court of the United States, with 
 its late Chief Justice, the illustrious Marshall, at its head, unanimously decided 
 ihat Congress possessed this bank power; and this adjudication was sustained and 
 reaffirmed whenever afterwards the question arose before the court. 
 
 After recounting the occasions, during his public career, on which he had ex- 
 pressed an opinion against the power of Congress to charter a Bank of the United 
 States, the President proceeds to say : " Entertaining the opinions alluded to, 
 and having taken this oath, the Senate and the country will see that I ceuld not
 
 5 
 
 give my sanclion to a measure ot the character described without surrendering all 
 claim to the respect of honorable men— all confidence on tlie part ot the People — 
 all self-respect — all regard for moral and religious obligations ; without an obser- 
 vance oi" whicn no Government can be prosperous, and no people can be happy. 
 It would be to commit a crime which I would not wilfully commit to gain any 
 earthly reward, and which woMjustli/ subject me to the ridicule and scorn of all 
 virtuous men." 
 
 Mr. President, 1 must think, and hope I may be allowed to say, with profound 
 deference to the Chief Magistrate, that it appears to me he has viewed with too' 
 lively sensibility the personal consequences to iiimself of his approval of the bill ; 
 and that, surrendering himself to a vivid imagination, he has depicted them in 
 much too glowing and exaggerated colors ; and that it woul%'have been most happy 
 if he had looked more to the deplorable consequences of a veto upon the hopes, 
 the interests, and the happiness oi" his country. Does it follow that a magistrate 
 who yields his private judgment to the concurring authority of numerous decisions, 
 repeatedly and deliberately pronounced, after the lapse of long intervals, by all 
 the departments of Government, and by all parlies, incurs the dreadful penalties 
 described by the President 1 Can any man be disgraced and dishonored who 
 yields his private opinion to the judgment of the nation? In this case, the coun- 
 try, (1 mean a majority,) Congress, and, according to common fame, a unani- 
 mous cabinet, were all united in favor of the bill. Should any man feel himself 
 liumbied and degraded in yielding to the conjoint force of such high authority? 
 Does any man, who, at one period of his life shall have expressed a particular 
 opinion, and at a subsequent period shall act upoH the opposite opinion, expose 
 himself to the terrible consequences which have been portrayed by the President ? 
 How is it with th^ judge, in the case by no means rare, who bows to the authority 
 of repeated precedents, settling a particular question, whilst, in his private judg- 
 ment, the law was ollierwise 1 How is it with that numerous class of public men 
 in this country, and with the two great parties that have divided it, who, at differ- 
 ent periods, have maintained arid acted on opposite opinions in respect to this 
 very bank question? 
 
 How is it with James Madison, tiie bather of the Constitution — that great man 
 whose services to his country placed him only second to Washington — whose vir- 
 tues and purity in private life — wiiose patriotism, intelligence, and wisdom in pub- 
 lic councils stand unsurpassed ? He was a menjber of the National Convention 
 that formed, and of the Virginia Convention that adopted, the Constitution. No 
 man understood it better than he did. He was opposed in 1791 to the establish- 
 ment of the Bank of the United States upon constitutional ground ; and, in 1816, 
 he approved and signed the charter of the late Bank of the United States. It is 
 a part of the secret history connected with the first bank, that James Madison had, 
 at the instance of General Washington, prepared a veto for him in the contingen- 
 cy of his rejection of the bill. Thus stood .Tames Madison when, in 1815, he ap- 
 plied the veto to a bill to charter a bank upon considerations of expediency, but 
 with a clear and express admission of the existence of a constitutional power in 
 Congress to charter one. In 1816, the bill which was then presented to him being 
 free from tlie objections applicable to that of the previous year, he sanctioned and 
 signed it. Did James Madison surrender " all claim to the respect of honorable 
 men — all confidence on the part of the People — all self-respect — all regard for 
 moral and religious obligations V Did the pure, the virtuous, the gifted James 
 Madison, by his sanction and signature to the charter of the late Bank of the Uni- 
 ted States, commit a crime wh]ch justly subjected him " to the ridicule andscortj 
 of all virtuous men ?" 
 
 Not only did the President, as it respectfully appears to me, state entirely too 
 strongly the consequences of his approval of the bill, but is he perfectly correct in 
 treating the question (as he seems to mc to have done) which he was called apon
 
 to decide, as presenting the sole alternative ol his direct approval or rejection oi 
 the bill ? Was the preservation of the consistency and the conscience ol" the Presi- 
 dent wholly irreconcilable with the restoration of the blessings of a sound curren- 
 cy, regular and moderate exchanges, and tlin revival of confidence and business 
 which Congress believes will be secured by a national bank? Was there no al- 
 ternative but to prolong the sufferings of a bleeding country, or to send us this 
 veto? From the administration of the Executive department of the Government, 
 during the last twelve years, has sprung most of the public ills whicli have afflict- 
 ed the People. Was it necessary that that source of suffering should continue to 
 oprrate, in order to preserve the conscience of the Presideit unviolated 1 Was 
 that the only sad and deplorable alternative? I think, Mr. President, there were 
 other alternatives worili^ of the serious and patriotic consideration of the Presi- 
 dent. The bill might have become a law in virtue of the provision which required 
 its return within ten days. If the President had retained it three days longer, it 
 would have been a law without his sanction and without his signature. In such a 
 contingency, the President would have remained passive, and would not have been 
 liable to any accusaiion of having himself violated the Constitution. All that could 
 have been justly said would be, that lie did not choose to throw himself in the way 
 as an obstacle to the passage of a measure indispensable to the prosperity of the 
 nation, in the judgment of the party which brought him into power, of the Whig 
 Congress which he first met, and, if public fame speaks true, of the Cabinet which 
 the lamented Harrison called around him, and which he voluntarily continued, 
 in an analogous case, Thomas McKean, when Governor of Pennsylvania, than 
 whom the United States have produced but few men of equal vigor of mind and 
 firmness of purpose, permitted a bill to become a law, although, in his opinion, it 
 was contrary to the Constitution of that State. And I have heard, and, from the 
 creditable nature of the source, I am inclined to believe, although 1 will not vouch 
 for the fact, that, towards the close of the charter of the first Bank of the United 
 States, during the second term of Mr. Jefferson, some consideration of the ques- 
 tion of the renewal of the charter was entertained, and that he expressed a wish 
 that, if the charter were renewed, it might be effected by the operation of the ten 
 days' provision, and his consistency thus preserved. 
 
 If it were possible to disinter the venerated remains of James Madison, leani- 
 mate his perishing form, and place him once more in that chair of state which he 
 so much adorned, what would have been his course, if this bill had been presented 
 to him, even supposing him never to have announced his acquiescence in the set= 
 tied judgment of the nation? He would have said that human controversy in re- 
 gard to a single question should not be perpetual, and ought to have a termination. 
 This, about the power to establish a Bank of the United States, has been long 
 enough continued. The nation, under all the forms of its public action, has often 
 and deliberately decided it. A bank, and associated financial and currency ques- 
 tions, which had long slept, were revived and have divided the nation during the 
 last ten years of arduous and bitter struggle ; and the party which put down the 
 bank, and which occasioned all the disorders in our currency and finances, has it- 
 self been signally put down by one of those great moral and political revolutions 
 which a free and patriotic People can but seldom arouse itself to make. Human 
 infallibility has not been granted by God ; and the chances of error are much 
 greater on the side of one man than on that of the majority of a whole People and 
 their successive Legislatures during a long period of time. I yield to the irresist- 
 ible force of authority. I will not put mj'self in opposition to a measure so imper- 
 ativel}' demanded by the public voice, and so essential to elevate my depressed and 
 suffering countrymen. 
 
 And why should not President Tyler have suffered the bill to become a law 
 without his signature ? Without meaning the slightest possible disrespect to him, 
 (nothing is further from my heart than the exhibition of any such feeling towards
 
 that dislingushed citizen, long my personal friend,) it cannot be forgotten that he 
 came into liis present ol^ce under peculiar circumstances. Tlie People did not 
 foresee the contingency which has happened. They voted for him as Vice Pre- 
 sident. They did not, therefore, scrutinize his opinions with the care which they 
 probably ought to have done, and would have done, if they could have looked into 
 futurity. If the present state of the fact could have been anticipated — if at Har- 
 risburg, or at the polls, it had been foreseen that General Harrison would die in 
 one short month after the commencement of his administration ; that Vice Presi- 
 dent Tyler would be elevated to the Presidential chair ; that a bill, passed by de- 
 cisive majorities of the first Whig Congress, chartering a national bank, would 
 be presented for ids sanction ; and that he would veto tlie bill — do I hazard any 
 thing when I express the conviction that he would not have received a solitary 
 vote in the nominating Convention, nor one solitary electoral vote in any State 
 in the Union ? 
 
 Shall I be told that the honor, the firmness, the independence of the Chief Ma- 
 gistrate might have been drawn in question if he had remained passive, and so 
 permitted the bill to become a law? 1 answer that the office of Chief Magistrate 
 is a sacred and exalted trust, created and conferred for the benefit of the nation, 
 and not for the private advantage of the person who fills it. Can any man's rep- 
 utation for firmness, independence, and honor, be of more importance than the 
 welfare of a great People? There is nothing, in my humble judgment, in such a 
 course, incompatible vvith honor, with firmness, with independence, properly un- 
 derstood. Certainly, I must respectfully think, in reference to a measure like this, 
 recommended by such fiigh sanctions — by five Congresses — by the authority of 
 four Presidents — by repeated decisions of the Supreme Court — by the acquiescence 
 and judgment of the People of the United States during long periods of time — by 
 its salutary operation on the interests of the community for a space of forty years, 
 and demanded by the People whose suffrages placed President Tyler in that sec- 
 ond office from whence he was translated to the first, that he might have sup- 
 pressed the pronjptings of all personal pride of private opinion, if any arose in 
 his bosom, and yielded to the wishes and wants of his cejjntry. Nor do I be- 
 lieve that, in such a course, he would have made the smallest sacrifice, in a just 
 sense, of personal honor, firmness, or independence. 
 
 But, sir, there was still. a third alternativi-, to which I allude, not because I mean 
 to intimate that it should be embraced, but because I am reminded of it by a me- 
 morable event in the life of President Tyler. It will be recollected that, after 
 the Senate had passed the resolution declaring the removal of the public deposites 
 from the late Bank of the United States to have been derogatory from the Con- 
 stitution and laws of the United States, for which resolution President, then Sen- 
 ator, Tyler had voted, the General Assembly of Virginia instructed the Senators 
 from that State to vote for the expunging of that resolution. Senator Tyler de- 
 clined voting in conformity with that instruction, and resigned his seat in the Sen- 
 ate of the United States. This he did because he could not conform, and did not 
 think it right to go counter, to the wishes of those who had placed him in the Sen- 
 ale. If, when the People of Virginia, or the General Assembly of Virginia were 
 his only constituency, he would not set up his own particular opinion in opposi- 
 tion to theirs, what ought to be the rule of his conduct when the People oi" twenty- 
 six States — a whole nation — compose his constituency ? Is the will of the con- 
 stituency of one State to be respected, and that of twenty-six to be wholly disre- 
 garded 1 Is obedience due only to the single State of Virginia ? Tlie President 
 admits that the bank question deeply agitated and continues to agitate the nation. 
 It is incontestable that it was the great, absorbing, and controlling question, in all 
 our recent divisions and exertions. I am firmly convinced, and it is my deliber- 
 ate judgment, that an immense majority, not less than two-thirds of the nation, 
 desire such an institution. All doubts in this respect ought to be dispelled by the
 
 8 
 
 recent decisions of the two Houses of Congress.. I speak of them as evidence of 
 popular opinion. In the House of Representatives, the majority was 131 to 100, 
 If the House had been full, and but for the modification of the I6th fundamental 
 condition, there would have been a probable majority of 47. Is it to be believed 
 that this large majority of the immediate Representatives of the People, fresh from 
 amongst them, and to whom the President seemed inclined, in his opening mes- 
 sage, to refer this very question, have mistaken the wishes of their constituents? 
 
 I pass to the sixteenth fundamental condition, in respect to the branching; pow- 
 er, on which I regret to feel njyself obliged to say that I think the President has 
 commented with unexampled severity, and with a harshness of language not fa- 
 vorable to the maintenance of that friendly and harmonious intercourse which is 
 so desirable between co-ordinate departments of the Government. The Presi- 
 dent cniild not have been uninformed thai every one of the twenty-six Senators, 
 end every one of the hundred and thirty-one Representatives who voted for the 
 bill, if left to his own separate wishes, would have preferred the branching power 
 to have been conferred unconditionally, as it was in the charters of the two for- 
 mer Banks of the United States. In consenting to the restrictions upon the ex- 
 ercise of that power, he must have been perfectly aware that they were actuated 
 by a friendly spirit of compromise and concession. Yet nowhere in his message 
 does he reciprocate or return this spirit. Speaking of the assent or dissent 
 which the clause requires, he says : " This iron rule is to give way to no circum- 
 stances — it is unbending and inflexible. ' It is the language of the master to the 
 vassal. An unconditional answer is claimed forlhioithy The "high privilege" 
 of a submission of the question, on the part of the Stale Representatives, to their 
 constituents, according to the message, is denied. He puts the cases of the pop- 
 ular branch of the State Legislature expressing its dissent " by a unanimous vote, 
 and its resolution may be defeated by a tie vote in the Senate," and " both branch- 
 es of the Legislature may concur in a resolution of decided dissent, and yet the 
 Governor may exert the veto power conferred on him by the State Constitution, 
 and their legislative action be defeated." "The State may afterwards proves/ 
 against such unjnist inference, but its authority is gone.'''' The President contin- 
 ues: " To inferences so violent, and, as they seem to n\e, irrational, \ cannot 
 yield my consent. No court of justice would or could sanction them, without re- 
 versing all that is established in judicial proceeding, by introducing presumptions 
 at variance with fact, and inferences at the expense of reason. A State in a con- 
 dition of duresse would be presumed to speak as an individual, manacled and in 
 prison, might be presumed to be in the enjoyment of freedom. Far better to say 
 to the States, boldly and frankly, Congress wills, and submission is demanded.'''' 
 
 Now, Mr. President, 1 will not ask whether these animadversions were prompt- 
 ed by a reciprocal. spirit of amity and kindness, but 1 inquire whether all of them 
 are perfectly just. 
 
 Beyond all question, those who believed in the constitutional right of Congress 
 to exercise the branching power within the States, unconditionally and without 
 limitation, did make no small concession when they consented that it should be 
 subjected to the restrictions specified in the compromise clause. They did not, it is 
 true, concede every thing ; they did not absolutely renounce the power to establish 
 branches without the authority of the Statesduring the vyholn period of the existence 
 of the charter ; but they did agree that reasonable time should be allowed to the 
 several States to determine whether they would or would not gi\'e their assent to the 
 establishment of branches within their respective limits. Thoy did not think it 
 right to leave it an open question, for the space of twenty years; nor that a State 
 should be permitted to grant to-day and revoke to-morrow its assent ; nor that it 
 should annex onerous or impracticable conditions to its assent, but that it should 
 definitively decide the question, after the lapse of ample time for full deliberation. 
 And what was that time? No State would have had less than four months, and
 
 9 
 
 some of them from five to nine montns, for consideration. AVas it, therefore, en- 
 tirely correct for the President to say that an " unconditional answer is claimed 
 forthwith?'''' Forthwith means immediately, instantly, without delay, which can- 
 not be affirmed of a space of time varying from four to nine months. And the 
 President supposes that the " high privilege" oi' the members of the State Legisla- 
 ture submitting the question to iheir constituents is denied. But could they not 
 at any time during that space have consulted their constituents? 
 
 The President proceeds to put what I must, with the greatest deference and re- 
 spect, consider as extreme cases. He supposes the popular branch to express its 
 dissent by a unanimous vote, whicii is overruled by a tie in the Senate. He sup- 
 poses that " both branches of the Legislature may concur in a resolution of decid- 
 ed dissent, and yet the Governor may exert tlie veto power." The unfortunate 
 case of the State whose legislative will should be so checked by Kxecutive autho- 
 rity, would not be worse than that of the Union, the will of whose Legislature, in 
 establishing this bank, is checked and controlled by the President. 
 
 But did it not occur to him that extreme cases brought forward on the one side, 
 might be met by extreme cases suggested on the other? Suppose the populai 
 branch were to express its assent to the establishment of a branch bank by a unan 
 imous vote, which is ovei ruled by an equal vote in the Senate. Or suppose that 
 both branches of the Legislature, b}' majorities in each exactly wanting one vote 
 to i>,ake them two-thirds, were to concur in a resolution inviting (he introduction 
 of a branch within the limits of the State, and the Governor were to exercise the 
 veto power, and defeat the resolution. Would it be very unreasonable in these 
 two cases to infer the assent of the State to the establishment ola bank? 
 
 Extreme cases should never be resorted to. Happily for mankind, their atilairs 
 are but seldom aftected or influenced by them, in consequence of the rarity of 
 their occurrence. 
 
 The plain, simple, unvarnished statement of the case is this : Congress believes 
 itself invested witli constitutional power to authorise, unconditionally, the estab- 
 lishment of a Bank of the United States and branches, anywhere in the United 
 States, without asking any other consent of the States than that which is already 
 expressed in the Constitution. The President does not concur in the existence of 
 that power, and was supposed to entertain an opinion that the previous assent of 
 the States was necessary. Here was an unfortunate conflict of opinion. Here 
 was a case for compromise and mutual concession, if the difference could be re- 
 conciled. Congress advanced so lar towards a compromise as to allow the States 
 to express their assent or dissent, but then it thought that this should be done 
 within some limited, but reasonable time ; and it believed, since the bank and its 
 branches were established for the benefit of twenty-six States, if the authorities of 
 any one of them really could not make up their mind within that limited time 
 either to assent or dissent to the introduction of a branch, that it was not unreason- 
 able, after the lapse of the appointed time, without any positive action, one way 
 or the other, on the part of the State, to proceed as if it had assented. Now, if 
 the power contended for by Congress really exists, it must be admitted that here 
 was a concession — a concessiow, according to which an unconditional power is 
 placed under temporary restrictions — a privilege ofU'ered to the States which was 
 not extended to them by either of the charters of the two former Banks of the 
 United States. And I am totally at a loss to comprehend how the President 
 reached the conclusion that it would luive been '' far better to say to the States, 
 boldly and frankly. Congress wills, and submission is demanded." VV'as it better 
 for the States that the power of branching should be exerted without consulting 
 them at all ? Was it nothing to afl'ord them an opportunity of saying whether 
 they desired branches or not ? How can it be believed that a clause whicii quali- 
 fies, restricts, and limits the branching power, is more derogatory fiom the digni- 
 ty, independence, and sovereignty of the States, than if it inexorably refused to
 
 10 
 
 {.he States any power whatever to deliberate, and decide on tlio introduction of 
 branches 1 Limited as the time was, and micondiiionally as tiiey were required 
 to express tliemselves, still tiiese States (and that probably would have been the 
 case with the greater number) that chose to announce their assent or dissent could 
 do so, and get or prevent the introduction of a branch. But the President re- 
 marks that " the State may express, after the most solemn form of legislation, 
 ' its dissent, which may from time to time therfafter be repeated, in full view «{ 
 ' its own interest, wiiich can never be separated from the wise and beneficent ope- 
 ' ration of this Government; and yet Congiess may, by virtue of the last proviso, 
 ' overrule its law, and upon grounds which, to sin h State, will appear to rest on 
 ' a constructive necessity and propriety, and noil iiig more." 
 
 Even if the dissent of a Stale should be overruled, in the manner supposed by 
 the President, how is the condition of that Stale worse than it would have been if 
 the branching power had been absolutely and unconditionally asserted in the 
 charier ? There would have been at least the power of dissenting conceded, with 
 a high degree of probability that if the dissent were expressed no branch would 
 be introduced. 
 
 The last proviso to which the President refers is in these words: " And pro- 
 ' vided, nevertheless. That whenever it shall become necessary and proper for 
 ' carrying into execution any of the powers granted by the Constitution, to estab- 
 ' lish an office or otiices in any of the States whatever, and the establishment 
 ' thereof shall be directed by law, it shall be the duty of the said directors to es- 
 ' tablish such office or offices accordingly." 
 
 This proviso was intended to reserve a power to Congress to compel the bank 
 to establish branches, if the establishment of them should be necessary to the great 
 purposes of this Government, notwithstanding the dissent of a Stale. If, for ex- 
 ample, a Slate had once unconditionally dissented to the establishment of a 
 branch, and afterwards assented, the bank could not have been compelled, with- 
 out this reservation of power, to establish the branch, however urgent the wants of 
 the Treasury might be. 
 
 The President, I think, ought to have seen, in the form and language of the 
 proviso, the spirit of conciliation in which it was drawn, as 1 know. It does not 
 assert the power ; it employs the language of the Constitution itself, leaving every 
 one free to interpret that language according to his own sense of the instrument. 
 Why was it deemed necessary lo speak of its being " the language of the mas- 
 ter to the vassal," of" this iron rule," that " Congress wills, ;ind submission is de- 
 manded?" What is this whole Federal Government but a mass of powers ab- 
 stracted from the sovereignty of the several Stales, and wielded, by an organized 
 Government, (or their common defence and general welfare, according to the 
 grants of the Constitution? These powers are nc'cessaiily supreme; the Consti- 
 tution, the acts of Congress, and treaties being so declared by the express words 
 of the Constitution. Whenever, therefore, this Government acts within the pow- 
 ers granted to it by the Constitution, submission and obedience are due from all; 
 from States as well as from persons. And if this present the image of a master 
 and a vassal, of Stale subjection and Congressional domination, it is the Consti- 
 tution, created or consented lo by the States, that ordains these relations. Nor 
 can it be said, in the contingency supposed, that an act of Congress has repealed 
 an act of State legislation. Undoubtedly, in case of a conflict between a State 
 Constitution or State law, and (he Constitution of the United Slates, or an act of 
 Congress passed in pursuance of it, the State Constitution or Stale law would 
 yield. But it could not at least be formally or technically said that the Stale Con- 
 stitution or law was repealed. Its operation would be suspended or abrogated by 
 the necessary predominance of the paramount authority. 
 
 The President seems to have regarded as objectionable ihat provision in the 
 clause which declares that a branch being once established, .it should not after-
 
 11 
 
 wards be withdrawn or removed without ihe previous consent of Congress. Thai 
 provision was intended to operate both upon the bank and the States. And, 
 considering the changes and fluctia'ions in public sentiment in some of the States 
 within the last few years, was tlie security against them to be found in that pro- 
 vision unreasonable? One Legislature might invite a branch, which the next 
 might attempt, by penal or other legislation, to drive away. We have had such 
 examples heretofore ; and I cannot think that it was unwise to profit by experi- 
 ence. Besides, an exactly similar provision was contained in the scheme of a 
 bank which was reported by the Secretary of the Treasury, and to which it was 
 understood the President had given his assent. But, if I understand this message, 
 that scheme could not have obtained his sanction, if Congress had passed it with- 
 out any alteration whatever. It authorized what is termed by the President local 
 discounts, and he does not believe the Constitution confers on Congress power to 
 establish a bank having that faculty. He says, indeed, " I regard the bill as as- 
 ' serting for Congress the right to incorporate a United States Bank, with power 
 ' and right to establisli offices of discount and deposite in the several States of this 
 ' Union, with or without their consent ; a principle to which I have always here- 
 ' tofore been opposed, and which can never obtain my sanction.'''' I pass with 
 pleasure from this painful theme, deeply regretting that I have been constrained 
 so long to dwell on it. 
 
 On a former occasion I stated that, in the event of an unfortunate difference of 
 opinion between the Legislative and Executive departments, the point of differ- 
 ence might be developed, and it would be then seen whether they could be brought 
 to coincide in any measure corresponding with the public hopes and expectations. 
 i regret that the President has not, in this message, favored us with a more clear 
 and explicit exhibition of his views. It is sufficiently manifest that he is decided- 
 ly opposed to the establishment of a new Bank of the United States formed after 
 the two old models. 1 think it is fairly to be inferred that the plan of the Secre- 
 tary of the Treasury could not have received his sanction. He is opposed to the 
 passage of the bill which he has returned ; but whether he would give his appro- 
 bation to any bank, and, if any, what sort of a bank, is not absolutely clear. I 
 think it may be collected from the message, with the aid of information derived 
 through other sources, that the President would concur in the establishment of a 
 bank whose operations should be limited to dealing in bills of exchange, to depos- 
 ites, and to the supply of a circulation, excluding the power of discounting prom- 
 issory notes. And I understand that some of our friends are now considering 
 the practicability of arranging and passing a bill in conformity with the views of 
 President Tyler. Whilst I regret that I can take no active part in such an ex- 
 periment, and must reserve to my:^^lf the right of determining whether I can or 
 cannot vote for such a bill after I see it in its matured form, I assure my friends 
 that they shall find no obstacle or injpediment in me. On the contrary, I say to 
 \ them, go on : God speed you in any measure which will serve the country, and 
 preserve or restore harmony and concert between the Departments of Govern- 
 ment. An Executive veto of a Bank of the United States, after the sad experi- 
 ence of late years, is an event which was not anticipated by the political friends of 
 the President ; certainly not by me. But it has come upon us with tremendous 
 weight, and amidst the greatest excitement within and without the metropolis. 
 The question now is. What shall be done? What, under this most embarrassing 
 and unexpected state of things, will our constituents expect of us ? What is re- 
 quired by the duty and the dignity of Congress? I repeat, that if, after a careful 
 examination of the Executive message, a bank can be devised which will afford 
 any remedy to existing evils, and secure the President's approbation, let the pro- 
 ject of such a bank be presented. It shall encounter no opposition, if it should 
 receive no support, from me. 
 
 But what further shall we do? Never, since I have fnjoyed the honor of par-
 
 12 
 
 ticipati.ng H) the public councils of the nation — a poriod now of neat thirty-fivs 
 years — have I met Congress under more happy or morn favorable auspices. Ne- 
 ver have I seen a House of Representatives animated hy more patriotic disposi- 
 tions — -morL' united, more determined, more business-like. Not even that House 
 which declared war in 1812; nor that which in 1815-'16 laid broad and deep 
 foundations of national prosperity, in adequate provisions for a sound currency, 
 by the establishment of a Bank of the United States, for the payment of the na- 
 tional debt, and for the protection of American industry. This House has solved 
 the problem of the competency of a large deliberative body to transact the public 
 business. If happily there had existed a concurrence of opinion and cordial co- 
 operation between the different departments of the Government, and all the mem- 
 bers ot thii party, we should have carried every measure contemplated at the extra 
 session, which the People had aright to expect from our pledges, and should have 
 been, by this time, at our respective homes. We are disappointed in one, and 
 an important one, of flrit series of measures ; but shall we therefore despair ? Shall 
 we abandon ourselves to unworthy feelings and sentiments? Shall we allow our- 
 selves to be transported by rash and intemperate passions and counsels? Shall 
 we adjourn and go home in disgust? No! No! No! A higher, nobler, and 
 more patriotic career lies before us. Let us hero, at the east end of Penn- 
 sylvania avenue, do our duty, our whole duty, and nothing short of our duty, 
 towards our common country. We have repealed the sub-Treasury. We have 
 passed a bankrupt law, a beneficent measure of substantial and extensive re- 
 lief. Let U5 now [lass the bill for the distribution of the proceeds of the public 
 lands, the revenue bill, and the bill for the benefit of the oppressed people of this 
 District. Let us do all — let us do every thing we can for the public good. If 
 we are finally to be disappointed in our hopes of giving to the country a bank 
 Avhich will once more supply it with a sound currency, still let us go home and 
 tell our constituents that we did all that we could under actual circumstances ; and 
 that, if we did not carry every measure for their relief, it was only because to do 
 so was impossible. If nothing can be done at this extra session to pot upon a 
 more stable and satisfactory basis the currency and exchanges of the country, let 
 us hope that hereafter some way will be found to accomplish that most desirable 
 object, either by an amendment of tlie Constitution limiting and qualifying the 
 enormous Executive power, and especially the veto, or by increased majorities in 
 the two Houses of Congress competent to the passage of wise and salutary laws, 
 the President's objections notwithstanding. 
 
 This seems to me to be the course now incumbent up»n us to pursue ; and, by 
 conforming to it, whatever may be the result of laudable endeavors now in pro- 
 gress or in contemplation in relation to a new attempt to establish a bank, we 
 shall go home bearing no self-reproaches for neglected or abandoned duty. 
 
 Mr. Rives having replied to the remarks of Mr. Clay — , 
 
 Mr. CLAY rose in rejoinder. 1 have no desire, said he, to prolong this un- 
 pleasant discussion, but I must say that I heard with great surprise and regret the 
 closing remark, especially, of the honorable gentleman from Virginia, as, indeed, 
 T did many of those which preceded it. That gentleman stands in a peculiar sit- 
 uation. 1 found him several years ago in the half-ioay house, where he seems 
 afraid to remain, and from which he is yet unwilling to go. 1 had thought, after 
 the thorough riddling which the roof of the house had received in the breaking up 
 of the pet-bank system, he would have fled somewhere else for refuge ; but there 
 he still stands, solitary and alone, shivering and pelted by the pitiless storm. The 
 sub-Treasury is repealed — the pet-bank system is abandoned — the United States 
 bank bill is vetoed — and now, when there is as complete and perfect a re-union 
 of the purse and the sword in the hands of the Executive as ever there was under 
 General Jackson or Mr, Van Buren, the Senator is for doing nothing ! The Sen-
 
 13 
 
 alor is for going home, leaving the Treasury and the country in tlieir lawless con- 
 dition ! Yei no man has heretofore, more than lie has, deplored and deprecated 
 a state of things so utterly unsafe and repugnant to all just precautions, indicated 
 alike by sound theory and experience in free Governments. And the Sonatoi 
 talks to us about applying to tlie wisdom ol practical mep, in respect to banking, 
 and advises further deliberation ! W by, I should suppose that we are at present 
 in the very best situation to act upon the subject. Besides the many painful years 
 we have had for deliberation, we have been near three months almost exclusivel\ 
 engrossed with the very subject itself. We have heard all manner of facts, staie- 
 juents, and arguments in any way connected with it. VVe understand, it seems to 
 me, all we ever can learn or comprehend about a national bank. And we have, 
 at least, some conception too of what sort oi' one will be acceptable at the other 
 end of the avenue. Yet now, with a vast majority of the People of the entire 
 country crying out to us for a bank — with the People throughout the whole valley 
 of the Mississippi rising in ilieir majesty, and demanding it as indispensable to 
 their well-being, and pointing to their losses, their sacrifices, and their sufferings,'^ 
 for the want of such an institution — in such a state of things, we are gravely and 
 coldly told by the honorable Senator from Virginia that we had best go home, 
 leaving the purse and the sword in the uncontrolled possession of the President, 
 and, above all things, nsA'er to make a party bank ! Why, sir, does he, with all 
 his knowledge of the conflicting opinions which prevail here, and have prevailed, 
 believe that we ever can make a hank but by the votes of one party who are in 
 favor of it, in opposition to the votes of anotiier party against it ? I deprecate this 
 expression of opinion from that gentleman the more, because, although the hon- 
 orable Senator professes not to know the opinions of the President, it certainly 
 does turn out in the sequel that there is a most remarkable coincidence between 
 those opinions and his own ; and he has, on the present occasion, defended the 
 motives and the conrse of the President with all the solicitude and all the fervent 
 zeal of a nuniber ofhis Privy Cuuncil. [A laugh.] There is a rumor abroad 
 that a cabal exists — a new sort of Kitchen Cabinet — whose object is the dissolu- 
 tion of the reglulai Cabinet — the dissolution of the Whig party — the dispersion of 
 Congress, without accomplishing any of the great purposes of the extra session— 
 and a total change, in fact, in the whole face of our political affairs, I hope, and I 
 persuade myself, that the honorable Senator is not, cannot be, one of the compo 
 nent members of such a cabal ; but I must say that there has been displayed by 
 the honorable Senator to-day a predisposition, astonishing and inexplicable, to 
 misconceive almost all of what I have said, and a perseverance, after repeated 
 corrections, in misunderstanding — for I will not charge him vvith wilfully and in- 
 tentionally misrepresenting— -the whole spirit and character of the address which, 
 as a man ol" honor and as a Senator, I lelt njysell bound in duty to make to tliis 
 body. 
 
 ,,. The Senator begins with saying that 1 charge the President with " perfidy ! " 
 Did I use any such language? 1 appeal to every gentleman who heard me to say 
 whether I have in a single instance gone beyond a fair and legitimate examination 
 of the Executive objections to the bill. Yet he has charged me with " arraign- 
 ing" the President, with indicting him in various counts, and with imputing to him 
 motives such as 1 never even intimated or dreamed, and that, when I was con = 
 stantly expressing, over and over, my personal respect and regard for President 
 Tyler, for whom I have cherished an intimate personal friendship of twenty years' 
 standing, and while I expressly said that, if that friendship should now be inter- 
 rupted, it should not be my fault ! Why, sir, what possible, what conceivable 
 motive can I have to quarrel with the President, or to break up the Whig party? 
 What earthly motive can impel mo to wish for any other result than that that party 
 shall remain in perfect harmony, undivided, and si'iall move undismayed, boldly, 
 and uniiedly forward to the accomplishment of the all-important public objects
 
 14 
 
 which it has avowed to be its aim ? What imaginable interest or feeling can I 
 have other tiian the success, the triumph, the glory of ihe Whig parly? But that 
 there may be designs and purposes on the part of certain other individuals to place 
 me in inimical relations wiili the President, and to represent me as personally op- 
 posed to him, I can well imagine — individuals who are beating up for recruits, and 
 endeavoring to form a third party with materials so scanty as to be wholly insuffi- 
 cient to compose a decent corporal's guard. 1 fear there are such individuals, 
 though I do not charge the Senator as being himself one of them. What a spec- 
 tacle has been presented to this nation during this entire session of Congress ! 
 That of the cherished and confidential friends of John Tyler, persons who boast 
 and claim to be, par excellence^ his exclusive and genuine friends, being the bitter, 
 systematic, determined, uncompromising opponents of every leading measure of 
 John Tyler's administration ! Was there ever before such an example presented, 
 in this or any other age, in this or any other country 1 1 have myself known the 
 President too long, and cherished towards him too sincere a friendship, to allow 
 my feelings to be affected or alienated by any thing which has passed here to-day. 
 If the President chooses — which I am sure he cannot, unless falsehood has been 
 whispered into his ears, or poison poured into his heart — to detach himself from 
 me, I shall deeply regret it, for the sake of our common friendship and our com- 
 mon country. I now repeat, what I before said, that, of all the measures of re- 
 lief which the American People have called upon us for, that of a national bank 
 and a sound and uniform currency has been the most loudly and importunately 
 demanded. The Senator says that the question of a bank was not the issue made 
 before the People at the late election. I can say, for one, my own conviction is 
 diametrically the contrary. What may have been the character of the canvass in 
 Virginia, I will not say ; probably gentlemen on both sides were, every where, 
 governed in some degree by considerations of local policy. What issues may, 
 therefore, have been presented to the people of Virginia, either above or below 
 tide-water, 1 am not prepared to say. The great error, however, of the honora- 
 ble Senator is in thinking that the sentiments of a particular party in Virginia are 
 always a fair exponent of the seniiments of the whole Union. [A laugh.] I can 
 tell that Senator that wherever 1 was* — in the great valley of the Mississippi — in 
 KeBtucky — in Tennessee — in Maryland — in all the circles in which I moved — 
 every where, " Bank or no Bank" was the great, the leading, the vital question. 
 At Hanover, in Virginia, during the last summer, at one of the n)ost remarkable 
 and respectable and gratifying assemblages that I ever attended, I distinctly an- 
 nounced my conviction that a Bank of the United States was indispensable. As 
 to the opinions of General Harrison, I know that, like many others, he had enter- 
 tained doubts as to tlie constitutionality of a bank ; but I also know that, as the 
 election approached, his opinions turned more and more in favor of a national 
 bank ; and I speak from my ewn personal knowledge of his opinions when I say 
 that 1 have no more doubt he would have signed that bill than that you, Mr. Pre- 
 sident, now occupy that chair, or that I am addressing you. 
 
 I rose not to say one word which should wound the feelings of President Tyler. 
 The Senator says that, if placed in like circumstances, I would have been the last 
 man to avoid putting a direct veto upon the bill, had it met my disapprobation; 
 and he does me the honor to attribute to me high qualities of stern and unbending 
 intrepidity. 1 hope that in all that relates to personal firmness — all that concerns 
 a just appreciation of the insignificance of human life — whatever may be attempted 
 to threaten or alarm a soul not easily swayed by opposition, or awed or intimi- 
 dated by menace — a stout heart and a steady eye that can survey, unn)oved and 
 undaunted, any mere personal perils that assail this poor transient, perishing frame, 
 1 may, without disparagement, compare with other men. But there is a sort of 
 courage which, I frankly confess it, I do not possess — a boldless to which I dare 
 not aspire — a valor which I cannot covet. I cannot lay myself down in the wry
 
 15 
 
 of ihe welfare and happiness of my country. Tliat I cannot, I have not the cour- 
 age to do. I cannot uiterpose the power with wliich I may be invested — a power 
 conferred, not for my personal benefit, nor for my agjrrandizement, but for my 
 country's good — to check her onward march to greatness and glory. I have not 
 courage enough, I am too cowardly, for that. I would not, I dare not, in the ex- 
 ercise of such a trust, lie down, and place my body across the path that leads my 
 country to prosperity and happiness. This is a sort of courage widely different 
 from that which a man may display in his private conduct and personal relations. 
 Personal or private courage is totally distinct from that higher and nobler courage 
 which prompts the patriot to offer himself a voluntary sacrifice to his country's 
 good. 
 
 Nor did I say, as the Senator represents, that the President should have re- 
 signed. I intimated no personal wish or desire that he should resign. 1 referred 
 to the fact of a memorable resignation in his public life. And what I did say was, 
 that there were other alternatives before him besides vetoing the bill; and that it 
 was worthy of his consideration whether consistency did not require that the ex- 
 ample which he had set when he had a constituency of one State, should not be 
 followed when he had a constituency commensurate with the whole Union. Ano- 
 ther alternative was, to suffer the bill, without his signature, to pass into a law 
 under the provisions of the Constitution. And I must confess I see, in this, no 
 such escaping by the back-door, no such jumping out of the window, as the Sen- 
 ator talks about. Apprehensions of the imputation of the want of firmness some- 
 times impel us to perform rash and inconsiderate acts. It is the greatest courage 
 to be able to bear the imputation of the want of courage. But pride, vanity, ego- 
 tisnj, so unamiahle and offensive in private life, are vices which partake of the 
 character of crimes in the conduct of public affairs. The unfortunate victim of 
 these passions cannot see beyond the little, petty, contemptible circle of his own 
 personal interests. All his thoughts are withdrawn from his country, and concen- 
 trated on his consistency, his firmness, himself. The high, the exalted, the sub- 
 lime emotions of a patriotism, which, soaring towards Heaven, rises far above all 
 mean, low, or selfish things, and is absorbed by one soul-transporting thought of 
 the good and the glory of one's country, are never felt in his impenetrable bosom. 
 That patriotism which, catching its inspirations from the immortal God, and leav- 
 ing at an immeasurable distance below all lesser, grovelling, personal interests 
 and feelings, animates and prompts to deeds of self-sacrifice, of valor, of devotion, 
 and of death itself — that is public virtue — that is the noblest, the sublimest of all 
 public virtues ! 
 
 1 said nothing of any obligation on the part of the President to conform his 
 judgment to the opinions of the Senate and House of Representatives, although 
 the Senator argued as if I had, and persevered in so arguing, after repeated cor- 
 rections. I said no such thing. I know and respect the perfect independence of 
 each department, acting within its proper sphere, of other departments. But I 
 referred to the majorities in the two Houses of Congress as further and strong evi- 
 dence of the opinion of the People of the United States in favor of the establish- 
 ment of a Bank of the United States. And I contended that, according to the 
 doctrine of instructions which prevailed in Virginia, and of which the President is 
 a disciple, and in pursuance of the example already cited, he ought not to have 
 rejected the bill. 
 
 I have heard that, on his arrival at the seat of the General Government to en- 
 ter upon the duties of the office of Vice President, in March last, when interro- 
 gated how far he meant to conform, in his new station, to certain peculiar opin- 
 ions which were held in Virginia, he made this patriotic and noble reply: " I am 
 Vice President of the United States, and not of the State of Virginia ; and I shall 
 be governed by the wishes and opinions of my constituents." When I heard of 
 this encouraging and satisfactory reply, believing, as I most religiously do, that a
 
 i 
 
 16 
 
 large niajorily of the People of the United States are in favor of a national bank, 
 i (and gentlemen may shut their eyes to the fact, deny or dispute, or reason it aWay 
 as thev please, but it is my conscientious conviction that two-thirds, if not more, of 
 the People of the United States desire such an institution,) I thought I beheld a 
 ■ sure und certain guaranty for the fulfilment of the wishes of the People of the United 
 States. I thought it impossible that the wants and wishes of a great People, who 
 had bestowed such unbounded and generous confidence, and conferred on him such 
 • exalted honors, should be disregarded and disappointed. It did not enter into my 
 •' imagination to conceive that one, who had shown so much deference and respect 
 to the presumed sentiments of a single State, should display less towards the sen- 
 timents of the whole nation. 
 
 [ hope, Mr. President, that, in performing the painful duty which had devolved 
 on me, I have not transcended the. limits of legitimate debate. I repeat, in ail 
 truth and sincf^rily, the assurance to the Senate and to the country, that nothing but 
 a stern, reluctant, and indispensable sense of honor and of duty could have forced 
 from me the response which 1 have made to the President's objections. But, in- 
 stead of yielding without restraint to the feelings of disappointment and mortifica- 
 tion excited by the perusal of his message, I have anxiously endeavored to tem- 
 pr-r the notice of it, which T have been compelled to take, b}' the respect due to 
 the office of Chief Magistrate, and by the personal regard and esteem which I 
 have ever entertained for its present incumbent.
 
 AA 000 588 670 o 
 
 THE LIBRARY 
 UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA 
 
 Santa Barbara 
 
 THIS BOOK IS DUE ON THE LAST DATE 
 STAMPED BELOW. 
 
 Series 9482