SENATE.] Treasury Circular. [DECEMBER, 1836. fixed the price of the public lands, the manner | sumed by the Secretary. He does not consider of sales, and the time of payment, but which the receipt of bank notes hitherto, or up to the have fixed, also, with equal precision, the me-time of issuing the order, as an indulgence, but dium, or kinds of money, or of other things, which shall be received in payment. It has neglected no part of this important trust; it has delegated no part of it; it has left no ground, not an inch, for executive interposition. The only question, therefore, is, what is the law, or what was the law, when the Secretary issued his order? The Secretary considers that that which has been uniformly done for twenty years, that is to say, the receiving of payment for the public lands in the bills of specie-paying banks, is against law. He calls it an "indulgence," and this "indulgence" the order proposes to continue for a limited time, and in favor of a particular class of purchasers. If this were an indulgence, and against law, one might well ask, how has it happened that it should have continued so long, especially through recent years, marked by such a spirit of thorough and searching reform? It might be asked too, if this be illegal, and an indulgence only, why continue it longer, and especially why continue it as to some, and refuse to continue it as to others? But, sir, it is time to turn to the statute, and to see what the legal provision is. On the 30th of April, 1816, a resolution passed both Houses of Congress. It was in the common form of a joint resolution, and was approved by the President; and no one doubts, I suppose, that, for the purpose intended by it, it was as authentic and valid as a law in any other form. It provides that, "from and after the 20th day of February next, (1817,) no duties, taxes, debts, or sums of money, accruing or becoming payable to the United States, ought to be collected or received otherwise than in the legal currency of the United States, or Treasury notes, or notes of the Bank of the United States, or in notes of banks which are payable in specie on demand, in the said legal currency of the United States." This joint resolution authoritatively fixed the rights of parties paying, and the duties of officers receiving. So far as respects the notes of the Bank of the United States, it was altered by a law of the last session; but, in all other particulars, it is, as I suppose, in full force, at the present moment; and as it expressly authorizes the receipt of such bank notes as are payable and paid on demand, I cannot understand how the receipt of such notes is a matter of "indulgence." We may as well say that to be allowed to pay in Treasury notes, or in foreign coins, or, indeed, in our own gold and silver, is an indulgence, since the act places all on the same ground. The honorable member from Missouri has, indeed, himself furnished a complete answer to the Secretary's idea; that is to say, he defends the order on grounds not only differing from, but totally inconsistent with, those as | as a lawful right while it lasted. How he proves this right to be now terminated, and terminated by force of the order, I shall consider presently. I only say now, that his argument entirely deprives the Secretary of the only ground assigned by him for the Treasury order. I am, therefore, of opinion that the Treasury order of the 11th of July is against the plain words and meaning of the law of 1816; against the whole practice of the Government under that law; against the honorable gentleman's own opinion, as expressed in his resolution of the 23d of April; and not reconcilable with the necessity which was supposed to exist for the passage of the act of last session. THURSDAY, December 22. Treasury Circular. The Senate resumed the consideration of Mr. EWING's resolution to rescind the Treasury order of July 11th, 1836, and to prohibit the Secretary of the Treasury from delegating his power to specify what kind of funds shall be received in payment for the public lands. Mr. NILES said there were reasons, he thought weighty reasons, which would justify Senators in voting against this resolution, without committing themselves in any sense, or in any degree, in regard to the great questions of currency and revenue, to which the Senator had referred. Without reference to what might be his opinion as to the true policy of the Government in the collection of the revenue, whether from the public lands or the customs, he was prepared to vote against this resolution. To pass this resolution, would be to censure and condemn an act of the Executive as being wrong, ab initio, or at the time of its adoption. Whether the rule prescribed in the Treasury order be a wise and just one, for the settled action of the Government, is a question entirely distinct from that, whether it may have been expedient and proper at the time it was adopted. He was satisfied that the Treasury order could be justified, viewed as a temporary measure only, intended to remedy evils of great magnitude, arising from the extraordinary circumstances connected with the sales of the public lands; and he was not sure that this was not the true light in which it ought to be considered. It was the duty of the Executive to watch over the public revenue, and see that it was secure. Was there no hazard from the extensive and gambling speculations in the public lands paid for only in bank bills, which were handed over by the receivers to the deposit banks and placed to the credit of the United States? A large portion of the purchases were paid for in bills of the deposit banks, which, after going into the hands of the receivers, were returned and loaned out again, to go through the same operation. This was virtually reviv DECEMBER, 1836.] Admission of Michigan. [SENATE. ing the old credit system, as the United States | necessary to decide whether the rule prescribed received nothing but credit for the lands. If in the order shall be maintained, or the old there was no hazard to the revenue from these practice restored; and if we do any thing on practices, and from the magnitude and extent this subject, our action should be more compreof the sales made upon this kind of credit, then hensive; it should embrace the whole subject, gentlemen over the way had altered their opin- and be settled by law what currency shall be ions very much within the last six months. received for the payment of the revenues, not During the last session of Congress, we were only from the lands, but from customs, and all repeatedly, and almost daily, told by those who other dues. The doubt and uncertainty which now oppose the Treasury order, that the funds hangs over this subject ought to be removed. of the Government in the Western deposit banks were insecure, and that nothing but credit was received for the public lands. Can gentlemen have forgotten their often-repeated declarations on this subject? If so, they must be blessed with short memories. Again and again did Senators refer to the small amount of specie in those banks, and an impression was attempted to be made, that their specie funds were the only solid security for the large sums due the United States. The order was calculated to correct, and, to a considerable extent, no doubt, has corrected, this evil. It insured something valuable for the lands, and that something valuable was transferred to the deposit banks, and formed a more solid basis for the Government credits. The order was also calculated to check speculation in the public lands, which, in itself, was an evil of no small magnitude, transferring the best part of the national domain into the hands of heartless speculators, to the great injury of actual settlers, and the detriment of the whole country. Public opinion was rising up against it, and required that something should be done to arrest an evil of so extensive and serious a nature. What other or better measure could have been adopted, until Congress should convene, which might adopt such further legislation in regard to the sales of the lands as the public interests may require? Sir, said Mr. N., there is another reason why I cannot vote for the resolution before the Senate. A new rule has been adopted in regard to the sale of the public lands, that has been in operation for a time and which has a tendency to check speculation. I would not repeal that rule, and open again the floodgates of speculation; certainly not until I know whether Congress will pass any act regulating the sale of the public lands. It is, I think, the duty of Congress to do this; the interest of the country requires it; public sentiment demands it; and it is strongly recommended by the President. If Congress suffer the session to pass off, without attempting to regulate the sale of the public lands so as to check speculation, they will neglect their duty to the country. Believing that there will be additional legislation on the subject, which may supersede the Treasury order, he was not at this time prepared to disturb it. Changes in any extensive business are always attended with some inconvenience, and should be avoided as much as possible. When it shall be settled that Congress will not alter the system, it may become VOL. XIII.-5 For these reasons, therefore, he should vote against rescinding the Treasury order, even if he was satisfied that the rule it prescribes was not one which it would be expedient and just to establish as a settled policy. MONDAY, December 26. The Expunging Resolution. Mr. BENTON laid on the table a resolution to expunge from the journal of the Senate the resolution of March, 1834, censuring the conduct of the President for removing the deposits from the Bank of the United States, &c.; which was ordered to be printed. [The resolution is in the same words with the one on the same subject introduced by Mr. BENTON at the last session.] TUESDAY, December 27. A Message was received from the President of the United States, on the subject of the admission of Michigan into the Union, with documents, stating that Michigan had complied with the regulations of the conditional act of admission. Mr. GRUNDY moved that the Message and documents be printed, and referred to the Committee on the Judiciary. Mr. BENTON remarked that, as the President had given his opinion that Michigan had complied with the requisite terms of admission, and as he had said that he should have issued his proclamation accordingly, had the information arrived during the recess of Congress, he (Mr. B.) regarded the proposed reference as a mere matter of form, and would prefer that a joint resolution of admission should forthwith be passed by both Houses. Mr. GRUNDY Would still prefer the course which he had suggested, and on this account: that the first convention had not assented to the terms of admission, but another convention had decided to accede to the proposition made by the Congress of the United States. The great inquiry now was, are the proceedings in accordance with the act of admission? The decision of which question depends on information which ought to be ascertained before the actual admis sion, though the President had said that, in his opinion, all was right, and, if the information had come during the recess, he would have act SENATE.] The Treasury Circular. [DECEMBER, 1836. ed accordingly. Mr. G. had no design to pro- | of the House of Representatives, or an order of duce any delay, by a reference to a committee. | the Judiciary. He should not withdraw his motion, and he hoped the Senator would withdraw his opposition. The Message was referred. The Treasury Circular. One branch of the Government, exercising its powers and its duties within the constitution and the law, cannot have its acts rescinded and set at nought by the action of any other branch of the Government. If the order, then, has been issued by the The Senate proceeded to the special order, Secretary of the Treasury in pursuance of law, the further consideration of the joint resolution the mode proposed to get rid of it is objectionintroduced by Mr. EwING, of Ohio, on this sub-able, and, in my view, unwarrantable. If not ject, the question being on the amendment or substitute offered by Mr. RIVES to that resolution; which substitute proposes to refuse to receive for the public dues the bills of such banks as issued, after certain specified periods, bills under certain specified denominations; the substitute also leaving in the power of the deposit banks to refuse such funds as they may think proper. Mr. HUBBARD addressed the Chair: Mr. President-The first resolution seeks to repeal the Treasury order-"the specie circular," as it is called-of the 11th of July, 1836. The second is intended to prohibit the Secretary of the Treasury, by his authorized agents, from directing what funds shall be received for customs, or for the public lands, and prohibiting him from making any discrimination in the funds so receivable between different individuals, or between the different branches of the public revenue. The main purpose of the resolution is to rescind the order of the Executive, bearing date on the 11th of July, 1836, directed to "receivers of public money and to the deposit banks." Can this be accomplished? Is this matter within our power? It seems to me that if these resolutions should pass both Houses of Congress, the object which the Senator from Ohio has in view would not thereby be effected. If the order of the 11th of July, 1836, was issued by authority of law, the resolution of the Senator from Ohio should seek to repeal the law upon which the order is based, and which gave authority for issuing the order. If the order of the Secretary of the Treasury has not been issued in pursuance of law, the order itself is of no effect; and any resolution which we could pass, rescinding such an order, would be alike ineffectual. If the Secretary had the legal power to send forth the order, it is beyond the legislative control of Congress. If the Secretary, or the President, through the Secretary, had the right to promulgate the circular, he may be answerable for the manner in which he exercises that right; but the act cannot itself be repealed by any legislation of Congress. If the Secretary had not the autnority, the power, the right to issue the order, then the order itself is perfectly nugatory. The Executive is an independent branch of the Government. The Senate can have no more power over the rightful acts of that branch of the Government, than it has over an order issued in pursuance of law, the adoption of the resolution would seem to me equally objectionable and unwarrantable. In such a case, the officer should be, and ought to be, held amenable for such an assumption of power. It therefore occurs to me, that the object the Senator from Ohio has in view cannot be attained in the way proposed; and if the last resolution of the Senator from Ohio should be adopted, it seems to me that the direct effect would be to prohibit receivers from accepting the paper of local banks, under any circumstances, in payment of the public dues. It proposes, in terms, to take the power from the Secretary of the Treasury to designate the kind of money receivable; and, should it be adopted, if any effect shall be produced whatever, it will be to exclude from the offices of our receivers all local bank paper. They would be bound to take nothing but gold and silver, unless the joint resolution of April, 1816, is imperative and obligatory; and if that be so, the Executive had no authority to restrain the legal operation of that resolution; for, if binding, it gives to the debtor rights which cannot be infringed or taken away by executive power. If the order of July 11, 1836, was unauthorized, the resolution to rescind it would be unnecessary. Its adoption could not prevent the immediate promulgation of a similar order, in case the Executive, charged with the execution of the laws, should consider it to be his duty to do so. To accomplish the object the Senator from Ohio has in view, we must go beyond the order itself; we must go to the law on which that order was based, and in the execution of which it is presumed that the order in question was issued. To render the order of no effect, we must amend the law. I propose, Mr. President, first to examine the question, whether the Executive had a legal authority to issue the order of the 11th of July, 1836; and, if he had the power, whether it was a matter of policy for him to exercise it at the time and under the circumstances he did. Had the President, through the Secretary of the Treasury, the power to issue the order of the 11th of July last? On this point I can entertain no doubt. It seems to my mind to be clear and free from difficulty; and so far from its being a wanton assumption of power, so far from its being illegal, it is a power in strict accordance with the requisitions of existing laws, and which the President, charged with their execution, was bound to issue if he considered the public interest demanded it. [SENATE. issued this order. It was nothing less than a settled conviction that the public interest demanded the measure. He designed it as a mere temporary expedient; and it remains now for Congress to decide whether any thing, and, if any thing, what shall be done in relation to this matter. I cannot, then, consider the order of the 11th July last as illegal-as against the material binding provisions of the resolution of the 30th April, 1816. I cannot regard the issuing of that order as any assumption of power on the part of the President. And, for aught I see, the order must stand, unless the President shall see fit himself to withdraw it; or unless Congress, by its own legislation, shall take away the foundation upon which that order rests-shall pass some law that shall render the order itself inop-measure. I gave my vote in favor of that bill, erative. In reference to the policy and expediency of that measure, I am free to admit that a great. diversity of opinion is entertained by different portions of the business community. The President says that he directed the issuing of the order with a view to the safety of the public funds, and to the interests of the people generally. No man, unless familiarly acquainted with the state and condition of the banks which had in deposit the public funds, the practices of those institutions with reference to the facilities furnished to the purchasers of the public domain, the amount of the actual sales of the public lands, and the means used in making these acquisitions from time to time, could determine the policy, expediency, or necessity, of such an order as that which was issued on the 11th of July last. The reasons which induced the President to direct the issuing of the specie circular, are given in the circular, and in the Message, and in the report of the Secretary of the Treasury. It seems to me they were reasons in no way conflicting with the constitution or the law. Certainly some of the very reasons had been urged by gentlemen on the other side during the last session of Congress. To save the public domain from passing into the hands of speculators, to prevent an improper use of the public funds in deposit, to check the issues of overtrading banks, and to save the property of the nation, were among the reasons which induced the Executive to send forth the specie circular. And these very considerations were reiterated time and again on this floor in the course of the last session, in relation to the security and safety of the money of the nation then deposited in the State banks. The President, then, was bound, if the reasons stated were founded in fact, to issue this order, which was to effect the very objects so much desired at the last session-the safety of the public funds, and the preservation of the public domain. The order could never have been issued from any political considerations from any desire for individual popularity: every man must have known that its political effect would have been precisely that which has been produced. Higher considerations than a thirst for personal popularity, or for political distinction, must have prompted the President to have The I have nothing further to add, in answer to the charge made against the Secretary, for the course pursued by him in the execution of the deposit bill. I should not have troubled the Senate with any remarks, had I not wished to avail myself of this opportunity to speak of that and I have reason to believe that that vote has received the decided sanction of the yeomanry of New Hampshire. The bill passed both Houses of Congress by unexampled majorities, and yet the minority in the Senate, as well as in the House of Representatives, comprise some of our most distinguished statesmen and purest patriots. The bill, as it passed, was most emphatically and most truly nothing more nor less than a bill for the regulation, deposit, and safe keeping of the common treasure of the whole country. There is no room for doubt, with respect to the character of that measure. thirteenth section of that bill, among other things, provides that the States receiving their proportion of the surplus shall pledge their faith "to pay the said moneys, and every part thereof, from time to time, whenever the same shall be required by the Secretary of the Treasury for the purpose of defraying any wants of the public Treasury." Whatever may be the practical operation of this measure, it was regarded at the time in no other light than a bill to regulate the local banks having the public money in deposit, and to transfer from those banks portions of the common fund to places of greater security, the respective treasuries of the several States. I cannot believe that among those then belonging to the Senate, who gave to this bill their support, there was a single individual of the number, who would for a moment countenance the idea of taxing, directly or indirectly, the people for the purpose of distributing money to the people. I never could have yielded my assent to any such principle; and, in voting for the deposit bill, no Senator could believe that he was thereby yielding his assent to any such doctrine. I hold it to be subversive of the very foundation upon which rests our representative Government. Such a principle is opposed to the best and purest feelings of patriotism; to the letter, the spirit, the genius of our free institutions. I never could have given my vote for this bill as a distribution bill. This character has been most unjustly given to this measure here and elsewhere. The Senator from Mississippi is mistaken if he supposes that it is so understood by the great body of the people of the States. The legislative act of New Hampshire shows most clearly the sentiments of that State with reference to this measure. She has voted to receive her portion of the SENATE.] WEDNESDAY, December 28. Unexpended Appropriations. [DECEMBER, 1836. remaining applicable to its objects, under the act of 1795, for two full years after the year in which the appropriation was made. The doc money; but the legislation of that State has most sacredly guarded the principal as rightfully belonging to the United States; that while she considers herself justly entitled to the bene-ument contains a detailed statement of each ficial use of her portion of the surplus, so long object, and in the list would be found objects as it shall remain uncalled for, she holds the belonging to every branch of the public serprincipal to be of right the property of the Gen- vice; and every State would find some objects eral Government. It is true that New Hamp-near and dear to itself, and for which the State shire by her act will deposit her share of the had been long soliciting. Among these objects fund among the several towns of that State for were the branch mints in the South and in New safe keeping. But the State possesses the power, Orleans, the custom-houses in Boston and New by her distress warrants, to enforce collection York, the Treasury and Patent Offices in this at any time, against any town which should city, many fortifications, roads, and blockneglect or refuse to pay when demanded; and houses, west of Missouri and Arkansas, half a the pending act subjects the town to indict- dozen Indian tribes, and among them the Cherment, in case any part of the principal of the okee treaty, on which alone the balance was money therein deposited should be used for any $4,245,000. This latter was a good specimen of purpose; and the court are required to impose the whole of these delayed appropriations, and on such a town a fine equal to the part of the illustrated the manner practised at the last sesprincipal thus appropriated, and to issue execu- sion to create an unavoidable surplus. First, tion against any such a town, to be levied and the ratification of the treaty was kept off to collected in the usual mode. Thus had his own the last possible moment, and then all possible State managed in relation to this matter; and exertions made to defeat it; then the approgentlemen may be assured that whenever occa- priation law under the treaty was kept off to sion shall demand that any portion of this the last possible moment, and then all possible money should be returned to the National efforts made to defeat it. Finally, on the 2d Treasury, for the use of the General Govern- day of July, the appropriation passed; and then ment, that State will promptly and properly Mr. John Ross, a true coadjutor of the surplus comply with such a demand. party, went home to prevent the Indians from receiving the money; and succeeded; and so saved this four millions and a quarter for distribution, as a part of that unavoidable surplus for which the States are told, and even Georgia herself is told, the Federal Government has no use! Now, there was some use for this four and a quarter millions. The United States would have to raise it otherwise if she did not get it back from the States; for the compact with Georgia, made thirty-four years ago, and by which the United States obtained Alabama and Mississippi, will have to be carried into effect. And so of every object mentioned in the document. There were above two hundred of these objects, and money would have to be provided for carrying each of them into effect; for they were not of a nature to be abandoned; and this head of mine, (said Mr. B., putting his finger to his forehead,) this head of mine, as belonging to a member of the Finance Committee, was now occupied with this subject, and was considering how far duties could be reduced, and how far they would have to be kept up, and what tax otherwise unnecessary must be retained to supply the place of these fourteen and a half millions, if the deposit act is perverted by any of the States into a distribution law. Now, he wanted this fact carried home to the people of the States in such form that it could not be disputed. He would therefore move to have this document printed, and five copies sent to the Governor of each State, ten copies sent to each branch of the State Legislatures, and 1,000 extra copies be supplied to the Senate for its distribution. Unexpended Appropriations. Mr. BENTON rose to move the printing of the document from the Treasury Department, which had been called for on his motion, and had come in a few days ago. It was a document showing the unexpended balances of appropriations which would remain in the Treasury on the 1st day of January next, the amount of each balance, the object to which it was applicable, and the date of the law by which the appropriation was made. It was the amplification and substantiation of that part of the President's Message at the commencement of the session, in which he said that these unexpended balances were estimated at $14,636,062, exceeding by $9,636,062 the amount which will be left in the deposit banks, and which are outstanding appropriations, to be met by reimbursements from the States, if the revenue fall short of meeting them; and that this large amount unexpended was the effect of the lateness of the period at which the appropriations had been made. This fourteen and a half millions has been called a surplus, for which the Government has no use; and it would seem that some States, acting on this idea, were for treating the deposit act as a distribution law, and using the money deposited with them, as if the Government in reality had no use for it. Nothing, he said, could be more erroneous than this idea. This fourteen and a half millions were not a surplus, but appropriated moneyappropriated too late to be used this year, but Mr. CALHOUN rose to make a very few remarks on the very extraordinary motion of the |