| |
|
Establishment of the Second United
States Bank
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
An important part of the
vigorous policy outlined by
Dallas when he took charge of
the treasury department in 1814
was the establishment of another
United States Bank For this
there were two reasons: at first
emphasis was placed upon the
advantage which the bank would
afford in supplying financial
resources to an embarrassed
treasury, and later it was held
indispensable for the
restoration of a national
currency. Dallas appropriately
recognized the services of a few
of the State banks during the
war; but declared that " the
charter restrictions of some of
the banks, the mutual relation
and dependence of the banks of
the same State, and even of the
banks of the different States,
and the duty which the directors
of each bank conceive they owe
to their immediate constituents
upon points of security or
emolument, interpose an
insuperable obstacle to any
voluntary arrangement upon
national considerations alone
for the establishment of a
national medium through the
agency of the State banks." In
Dallas' view a national bank
could conciliate, aid, and lead
State banks in the restoration
of the currency to a specie
basis; the government in turn
would find its benefit in the
rise of value of public
securities and in increased
confidence in the treasury
notes.
Constitutional objections to a
bank reappeared, but President
Madison, Secretary Dallas, and
the legislative leaders agreed
in putting that argument aside
and devoting attention to the
financial and economic elements
involved in the question at
issue. For a time it was
impossible for the advocates of
a bank to agree on details which
they could all support; hence a
brief discussion of the various
projects brought forward is
desirable in order to illustrate
the conflicting state of public
opinion, although not one of
them was finally adopted in its
entirety. Three distinct and
often conflicting purposes stood
out in the debates : the need of
a bank to give financial support
to the government; the fear of
governmental participation in
banking; and the necessity of
properly securing the note
circulation, ideas which were
the key-notes of similar
discussions during the next
twenty-five years. Dallas
originally proposed (in a
report, October 17, 1814) a bank
with a capital of $50,000,000;
recognizing, however, that it
would be impossible to secure so
large a subscription in coin, he
advised that of the $50,000,000
but $6,000,000 be subscribed in
specie, and the remainder in
government stock and treasury
notes. Provision was made that
the government should hold stock
in the bank, and that the bank
should lend $30,000,000 to the
government; and in the bill
reported in the House from the
committee on ways and means,
November 7, the president was
given discretionary power to
allow suspension of payment of
specie by the bank. The chief
purpose of this plan was to
secure loans to the government;
the capital of the bank was to
consist largely of government
credit in the shape of stock,
and in return the bank was not
absolutely bound down to pay on
demand its obligations
outstanding in the form of
circulating notes.
Calhoun objected to a financial
partnership of this character in
which the government would
borrow back its own credit, and
in a second plan proposed that
the government should use its
own credit directly without the
intervention of a bank, that
one-tenth of the capital should
be in specie and the remainder
in treasury notes to be
thereafter issued; beyond this
indirect relation the United
States was to have no stock in
the bank, no control over its
operations, and no (?wer) to
suspend specie payments. This
plan would give support to
treasury notes to the
disadvantage of government
stock, but as treasury notes by
this time had many friends it
was for the moment favored by
the House. Dallas came out
strong in opposition, because
the fresh issue of treasury
notes would gratuitously give an
advantage to a single class of
creditors and would tend to
depreciate the value of the rest
of the public debt; more than
that he held that it would be
extremely difficult to get
$45,000,000 of treasury notes
into circulation, either with or
without depreciation. In later
years Calhoun had to meet
repeatedly the charge of
inconsistency for his support at
this time of a federal banking
institution. His answer was
always frank : he supported a
national bank as an instrument
of compulsion to force the local
banks to resume specie payments;
distrust of the State banks led
him to waive for the time being
his political philosophy.
In the course of the debate
(December 29, 1814) Webster
proposed still a third plan, a
bank with a capital of
$30,000,000, with no obligation
on the part of the bank to loan
money to the government, with no
permission to suspend specie
payments, and with a penalty on
a refusal by the bank to redeem
its notes. In support of his
measure Mr. Webster delivered an
instructive speech : he thought
that the advantages to result
from a bank were overrated; for
banks are not revenue; the
foundations of revenue must be
sunk deeper; and the principal
good from a bank was in the
future, not in the present. The
bank proposed by Calhoun seemed
to him most extraordinary and
alarming; with a capital of
$5,000,000 in specie and
$45,000,000 in government notes,
such an institution looked less
like a bank than a paper-money
department of the government: "
the government is to grow rich
because it is to borrow without
the obligation of repaying, and
it is to borrow of a bank which
issues paper without liability
to redeem it."
The first bill passed was along
the lines suggested by Webster;
the capital authorized was
$30,000,000, of which the United
States might subscribe
$5,000,000 in government stock;
of the private subscription of
$25,000,000 one-half was to be
in treasury notes, one-third in
stock, and one-sixth in coin. No
loan was to be made to the
government exceeding $500,000 ;
the bank could not purchase
government indebtedness ; and no
permission was given to suspend
specie payments. This bill did
not meet the approval of
Secretary Dallas, and was vetoed
by President Madison, January
30,1815, for the following
reasons: the amount of the stock
to be subscribed would not be
sufficiently in favor of the
public credit to cause any
considerable or lasting
elevation of the market price of
government stock; the people
would reap no adequate benefits,
since the bank was free from all
legal obligations to make loans
to the government; and the bank
as constituted would not provide
a sufficient circulating medium,
for it would be obliged to pay
its notes in specie or be
subject to loss of its charter.
In brief, Madison's objection
was that the bank as proposed
would fail to provide a reliable
circulating medium, or to
furnish loans to the government
in return for its franchise.
In December, 1815, Secretary
Dallas again placed the subject
before Congress, with some
modification of his previous
propositions: he now recommended
a bank with a capital of but
$35,000,000, to consist
three-fourths of government
stock (with no mention of
treasury notes) and one-fourth
of specie; instead of demanding
that the bank make loans to the
United States it was under
obligation to pay a bonus to the
government in return for the
benefits of its charter ; and,
finally, he insisted that no
opportunity should be given for
a suspension of specie payments
in case of emergency. In
accordance with these principles
a bill was introduced early in
1816. Calhoun gave his support,
together with a violent attack
upon State banks, which he
accused of circulating
$170,000,000 of banknotes on not
more than $15,000,000 of specie
in their vaults. . " The
metallic currency has left our
shores," said he ; " we have
treated it with indignity ; it
leaves us and seeks a new asylum
on foreign shores." Smith of
Maryland coincided with Calhoun
that a bank was necessary but
resented the attack upon the
State institutions; during the
war, he said, " they had been
the pillars of the nation, now
they were the caterpillars."
John Randolph opposed the bill
specifically and in general. A
bank " would be an engine of
irresistible power in the hands
of any administration; it would
be in politics and finance what
the celebrated proposition of
Archimedes was in physics, a
place, the fulcrum, from which
at the will of the executive the
whole nation could be hurled to
destruction." " Every man
present in the House or out of
it, with some rare exceptions,
was either a stockholder,
president, cashier, clerk, or
doorkeeper, runner, engraver,
paper-maker, or mechanic in some
way or other to a bank." " It
was as much swindling to issue
notes with the intent not to pay
as it was burglary to break open
a house." " But a man might as
well go to Constantinople to
preach Christianity as to get up
here and preach against banks."
Clay, then speaker of the House,
favored the bank, although
formerly, when a member of the
Senate, he had opposed the
renewal of the charter of the
first bank. In explanation he
assigned his former opposition
to three causes: first, he had
been instructed to oppose the
charter by the legislature of
his own State; secondly the old
bank had abused its powers in
the interest of a political
party; and, thirdly, he had
previously doubted the
constitutional authority of
Congress to establish the bank.
The situation in his opinion was
changed in 1816, since it was
now clear that such an
institution was indispensable to
treasury operations.
Finally, on March 14, 1816, the
new bill, framed more in
accordance with the ideas of the
administration, was passed by
the House by a vote of 80 to 71
; of the minority 38 were
Federalists and 31 were
Republicans. The bill passed the
Senate and was approved by the
president April 10.
|
|
Website: |
The
History Box.com |
|
Article Name: |
Establishment of the Second
United States Bank |
|
Researcher/Transcriber |
Miriam Medina |
|
Source: |
BIBLIOGRAPHY:
Financial history of
the United States by Davis
Rich Dewey, PH.D., LL.D.,
Fourth Edition; Longmans,
Green, and Co. 1912 |
|
Time &
Date Stamp: |
|
|
 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|