principally to shew that banks founded on the credit of Governments, and on public stocks, had not been as generally unsuccessful as had been contended; and he then compared the present system with that which came from the Senate, to the latter of which he gave a decided preference.

.

Mr. INGHAM, of Pennsylvania, believed, he said, a National Bank to be es sentially necessary, to give relief to the present embarrassed state of things. Believing this bill would contribute, in some degree, to relieve the national wants, it would receive his vote, though reluctantly; and he wished it to be distinctly understood, that, instead of its being a preferred measure, he considered the first bill as more efficient, and calculated to give the Government all it wanted. The vote of the House this day, he said, would be no test of the excellence of this system, or even of the approbation of it by the House; the question being whether the House would take this or no bank. Mr. I. made a statement of the comparative advantages and disadvantages of the two plans, giving the decided superiority to the original plan, &c.

The question on the final passage of this bill was then decided as follows:

Those who voted in the affirmative, are,

So the bill was passed, and the amendments sent to the Senate for their

concurrence.

IN SENATE.

JANUARY 9, 1815.

Ordered, That the bill and amendments from the House of Representatives, be referred to a select committee, and Messrs. Smith, Bibb, Anderson, Giles, and Varnum, were appointed the said committee.

JANUARY 13, 1815.

Mr. SMITH, from the said committee, reported the bill with a number of amendments.

[The amendments to the amendments of the House, propose to increase the fixed capital of the bank from thirty to thirty-five millions of dollars; to make the capital consist of shares of four hundred instead of one hundred dollars each; that the five millions proposed to be added to the capital, shall be added also to the amount subscribable in public debt; to disagree to the proposition of the House for striking out the section which authorizes suspension of payments in specie; to agree to the section which compels the bank to commence its operations before the first day of January, and to disagree to that which proposes to authorize a committee of Congress, at any time, to examine the books, &c. and prescribes the course of proceeding in the courts against the bank, in case of violation of its charter.]

The consideration of this report was postponed to, and made the order of the day for, to-morrow.

JANUARY 14, 1815.

The Senate resumed the consideration of the report of their select committee, on the amendments received from the House of Representatives.

On the proposition to make the fixed capital of the bank thirty-five, (instead of thirty millions, as proposed by the House) there were,

For the increase-Messrs. Anderson, Barbour, Bibb, Chase, Condit, Giles, Kerr, Lacock, Morrow, Roberts, Smith, Tait, Taylor, Turner, Varnum, Walker, Wharton—17. Against it-Messrs. Brown, Daggett, Dana, Fromentin, Gaillard, German, Gore, Horsey, Hunter, King, Lambert, Mason, Thompson, Wells-14.

On the proposition to increase by five millions the amount of public debt on war stock, to be subscribable to the bank, the vote was precisely the same as the above.

After making further progress in the discussion, the Senate adjourned before they had gone through the bill.

JANUARY 16, 1815.

The Senate were engaged nearly the whole of the day on the amendments to the bill; which subject they finished just before adjournment. They agreed to the amendments of the House, amended by increasing the capital five millions, so as to make it thirty-five, and reinstating the section to authorize the bank, in case of necessity, to suspend payment in specie.

JANUARY 17, 1815.

The Senate resumed the consideration of the subject of the bill. Various questions relating to the amendments and re-amendments to the same, were decided by the yeas and nays; among which was the following:

On the question to reinstate in the bill the section authorizing a suspension, in certain cases, of payment in specie by the bank, (which section was stricken out by the House of Representatives) the votes were as follow:

For retaining the section-Messrs. Anderson, Barbour, Bibb, Chase, Condit, Howell, Lacock, Morrow, Roberts, Robinson, Smith, Tait, Taylor, Turner, Varnum, Walker, Wharton-17.

Against it-Messrs. Brown, Daggett, Dana, Fromentin, Gaillard, German, Giles, Gore, Horsey, Hunter, Kerr, King, Lambert, Mason, Thompson, Wells-16.

The Senate having then agreed to some, and disagreed to others of the amendments of the House, the same were returned to the House.

HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES.

JANUARY 17, 1815.

A motion was made by Mr. INGHAM, of Pennsylvania, that the inaining orders of the day be then postponed until to-morrow, in order to take up the message this morning received from the Senate respecting their decision on the amendments to the national bank bill; which motion was negatived by the following vote:

For the motion,
Against it,

719

73.

JANUARY 18, 1815.

The House resumed the consideration of the message from the Senate, announcing their amendments to the amendments of this House to the bill. The first amendment having been stated, which proposes to make the capital of the bank thirty-five millions instead of thirty millions

Mr. M'KEE, of Kentucky, expressed his hope that the amendment would not be agreed to, considering it as the key-stone of all the amendments of the Senate. He could see no possible advantages to result from the addition of five millions of capital, particularly as connected with the section authorizing the stoppage of payment in specie. He could see no consequence to result from that clause, which was not disastrous and ruinous, &c., and he therefore hoped it would not be agreed to.

Mr. HAWKINS, of Kentucky, denied the applicability of the remarks of Mr. M'KEE to the amendments of the Senate. The only question, since the Senate had agreed to expunge the condition of a permanent loan to the Government, was, whether the Senate should be accommodated by increasing the capital of the bank by the addition thereto of five millions: for, in fact, the retention of the clause authorizing the suspension of specie payment was immaterial, unless that it is more expedient to incorporate such a provision at once, than yield it to the importunity of the bank hereafter. For he had no doubt, if the war continued, the bank must, sooner or later, suspend specie

payment-even the banks of Kentucky and Ohio (where specie abounded) had at length been compelled, in self-defence, to stop payment of specie. The advantage to Government, in the proposed amendment, Mr. H. argued, would be found in the taking out of the market so much more of the war stock, &c. Something, he contended, was due to the Senate, in the spirit of accommodation which that body had exhibited in yielding so far to the wishes of the House, as to accept the greater part of the amendments-and particularly, inasmuch as, in several cases of difference with that body, the House had exhibited much pertinacity in adhering to its peculiar opinions, &c. &c. He treated, as altogether ideal, the argument of danger to the existence of the republic, from the refusal to incorporate a bank. He had, he said, higher opinions of the destinies of this Government, and of its durability and ability to overcome every difficulty; opinions which gained ground by every day's experience, &c. &c.

Mr. STOCKTON, of New Jersey, rose to say, that he, and those with whom he had acted, in the concessions they had made relative to the features of the bank bill, had gone as far as they could go, and further than they had originally intended, in order to conciliate with gentlemen on the other side of the House. After they had done this, it could not be expected, he said, that they should recede. He wished it, therefore, to be understood, that, whilst he should be happy to pay all due respect to the other branch of the Legislature, it could not be expected that they should yield up to them their honest convictions; and, therefore, that they could not yield their assent to the amendments of the Senate.

Mr. WRIGHT, of Maryland, made a speech of some length, expressive of his hope that a spirit of accommodation would have induced the House at once to have acceded to the amendmen.s of the Senate, which he deemed advantageous. He considered it particularly important, that a provision should exist to prevent the agents or friends of the enemy from drawing all its specie from the vaults of the bank. The state of war, he considered as changing essentially the usual state of mercantile operations, and requiring from the banks a suspension of payments in specie. He concluded his speech with the following quotations from legal authorities-Inter arma silent leges; necessitas non habet legem.

Mr. GROSVENOR, of New York, after remarking that he felt not at all encumbered by the stipulations of compromise, inasmuch as he was not a party to it, having voted against the bill, proceeded to assign the reasons why he should vote for this amendment. He found himself obliged to do so from a regard to his own consistency: for, though he doubted of the efficacy of any bank that could be established, he was pretty certain that the plan of the bank would be improved by the addition to its capital as proposed by the Senate.

Mr. FORSYTH, of Georgia, advocated, at some length, the adoption of the amendments of the Senate. He believed the addition of five millions to the capital of the bank would operate as a benefit to the Government, by taking so much of the stock out of the market, &c. He denied the necessity, or even the propriety, of any part of the House sacrificing their views of the national interest to any ideas of compromise or conciliation. At least, he disclaimed, for himself, the operation of any such consideration on him.

Mr. CUTHBERT, of Georgia, made a speech of some length against the amendments of the Senate. He considered them as inseparably connected with each other, and being so, he was altogether opposed to them. To the amendment now under consideration, he was particularly opposed, because, by extending the quantity of war stock to be purchased, the ability to purchase treasury notes would be so far diminished, and the immediate benefits to the Government so far curtailed. Mr. C. also dwelt with some emphasis on the propriety of carrying into effect, in good faith, the compromise, by the aid of

which the bill had passed this House in the form in which it had been returned to the Senate, &c.

Mr. FORSYTH denied the operation on him of the compromise alleged to have taken place in regard to this question. He was no party to it, and was ignorant of its terms. If the agreement had been in writing, he should like to see the names signed to it, to know who it was that was willing to bind the solid interests of the country as a propitiatory sacrifice on the altar of conciliation.

[Considerable further debate took place on this amendment, in the course of which Mr. HAWKINS, of Ken., Mr. TELFAIR, of Geo., Mr. RHEA, of Tenn., and Mr. ALSTON, of N. C., denied the authority of the compromise alleged to have taken place on a former occasion; which was, on the other hand, asserted by Mr. CUTHBERT and Mr. OAKLEY, and incidentally by Mr. M'Kee, The first named gentleman supported the amendment, and the latter opposed the amendment. Mr. HAWKINS, in the course of his speech, took occasion to pay a high tribute to the talents and independence of the present Secretary of the Treasury, of which he challenged a denial.]

Mr. FORSYTH, in conclusion of the debate, by way of disproving the obligation of the republican to conciliate the federal side of the House, on any question affecting the national bank, quoted the yeas and nays on the question of reconsideration of the bill, (after it had been rejected by the casting vote of the Speaker) from which it appeared that, of the fifty-four who voted against reconsideration, but six belonged to the republican side of the House.

The question on concurrence in the first amendment of the Senate, was finally decided in the negative, by yeas and nays, as follows:

The other material amendments were also disagreed to, after debate. Among others, was the amendment going to reinstate the section suspending payment in specie; on which the vote was as follows:

For reinstating it,
Against it,

So the House refused to reinstate that section.

80,

85.

The House, after agreeing to some other amendments, determined to insist on those of their amendments to which the Senate had disagreed, and ordered the bill to be returned to the Senate.

IN SENATE.

JANUARY 19, 1815.

The Senate proceeded to the consideration of the message from the House, announcing its disagreement to the amendments of the Senate.

[The state of this question is so intricately interwoven with matters of forin, and technicalities, that we shall, in describing the question which came up to-day, disregard the mere form of them, and endeavor to present our readers with the substance.]

The first question was, the proposition sent from the Senate, to which the House had disagreed, to increase the capital of the bank, five millions, to be subscribable in public stock created since the war.

On this proposition, Mr. BIBв proposed to insist.

This motion was supported by Mr. BIBB, Mr. SMITH, Mr. ROBERTS, and Mr. TAYLOR, and opposed by Mr. BARBOUR, Mr. KING, and Mr. GILES. The debate turned principally on the merits of the specie-payment-suspending section, (to which also the other House had disagreed) which was considered as intimately connected with the question immediately before the Senate.