Imágenes de páginas
PDF
EPUB

or

directors of the bank and their proceedings, spect the books and examine the proceedings but the rights, the interests, the fortunes, and of the corporation, and to report thereon. the reputation of individuals not responsible But they are not authorised to examine for those proceedings, and whom neither the report upon the accounts or proceedings of committee nor the House had the power to try, individuals. The examinations by comitor even to accuse before any other tribunal. tees anthorised by the charte, are from the In the examination of the books and proceed-context of the sections, evidently given as preings of the bank, the pecuniary transactions of liminary means, for bringing the corporation in multitudes of individuals with it, must necessa- the event of malpractice, on their part, real or sarily be disclosed to the committee, and the suspected, before a judicial tribunal for tral. proceedings of the president and directors of Whenever a committee so appointed, reports the banks, in relation thereto, formed just and that the charter has been violated, the final acproper subject of inquiry; not, however, in the tion of Congress in the case is limited to the opinion of the subscriber, to any extent, which discretionary power of directing that a scire fawould authorise them to criminate any individ-cias should be sued out from the Circuit Court of ual other than the president, directors, and of-the U. States, for the district of Pennsylvania, reficers of the bank or its branches-nor them, quiring the corporation to show cause why their otherwise than as forming part of their official charter should not be declared forfeited. But proceedings. The subscriber believed that the so justly and so wisely tender was the Congress authority of the committee, and of the House which constituted the corporation to reserve to itself, did not extend, under color of exam-the president and directors of the bank the enining into the books and proceedings of the joyment of their civil rights, that the same secbank, to scrutinize, for animadversion or cen- tion which gives to Congress this control over sure, the religious or political opinions even of them expressly provides that for the trial of the the president and directors of the bank, nor facts at issue between them and the United their domestic or family concerns, nor their pri-States, upon the return of the scire facias, they vate lifes or characters, nor their mor or po-shall be entitled to the benefit of a jury. The litical, or pecuniary standing in society, still corporation, therefore, cannot ultimately suffer less could he believe the committee invested by deprivation of their rights upon the unfavorwith a power to embrace in their sphere of in-able report of any committee of Con ress, nor vestigation, researches so invidious and inquisitorial over multitudes of individuals having no connection with the bank other than that of dealing with them in their appropriate business of discounts, deposites, and exchange.

even by the order of Congress itself, thai a scire facias should be sued out. The protec tive shield of the constitution, trial by jury, is extended over them; the sacred trus of their franchises is expressly placed under the guar dianship of that power conservative of all individual rights—the verdict of their peers.

In these views he felt himself the more confirmed, because he perceived no other course of inquiry that could be pursued, without in- In the present case, the resolution originally vading the sanctuary of private life, and com- offered by the chairman of this committee, was mitting outrage upon the most precious of so- avowedly presented for another purpose-not cial rights. The transactions of the bank, with with a view that the final action of the House their customers, are in the ordinary course of upon the result of the examination should be the heir business, highly confidential; an examina-direction that a scire facias should be sued out tion into them by strangers, so far as it impli- to give the corporation the benefit provided for cates the individuals with whom the bank has them by the law itself, of a fair trial by jury, dealings, bears all the exceptionable and odious but that by ransacking all the books and proproperties of general warrants and domiciliary ceedings of the corporation from its first orga visits. The principle of this protection to in-nization to the present day, some latent frand, dividual rights, is recognised in the charter of looseness, or irregularity, might be detected in the bank itself, and in its by-laws. By the fif-the proceedings of the president and directors, teenth fundamental article of the charter, a present or past, of the company, which might limited power is given to the officer at the be elaborated and wrought up into an arguinent head of the Treasuay Department, to inspect against the renewal of the charter of the instithe general accounts and books of the bank, tution. This was the avowed purpose of a mem. with an express exception of the account of ber claiming the right of being considered as a any individual, and in the by-laws of the bank, perfectly fair, cool, and impartial investigator there is a provision that no stockholder shall be of those proceedings, and, at the same time, permitted to inspect any account of any per- that if the result of them should be to exone son with the bank other than his own. The rate from all blame the responsible officers of same restriction is not indeed applied to the he company, the inquisitor should still be at liauthority given in the twenty-third section of berty to vote and speak against the revewal of the charter to the committees of either House the charter upon the ground of constitutional of Congress, appointed to inspect the books, cruples.

and examine the proceedings of the corpora It was only by virtue of the 23d section of the tion; but that section neither gave nor could act of incorporation of the bank, that the House give powers of judicial authority to be exer- possessed the power of appointing a committee cised over any individual for purposes of crimi- with authority to examine the books and pro nation or of trial. The committee are to in-ceedings of the corporation; and that section

distinctly indicated the purposes for which this pecuniary transactions, and to scrutinize the power was reserved. It was to furnish the fortunes and characters of thousands of indivimeans in the event of the commission of gros dual citizens of the Union, merely because they abuses on the part of the president and direc have an account in bank, which, in the examitors, to put them upon trial. The right of try nation of the books and proceedings of the coring them is not reserved to the House itself-poration, must incidentally be disclosed. The nor can it, by the House, be conferred upon any subscriber is under the deep and indelible im committee. It belongs, exclusively, to the ju-pression that no such power is given to Condicial courts. It is a familiar argument to many gress by the charter of the bank, nor does he expounders of the Constitution of the United believe that such a power can be exercised, States, that no power granted to Congress can without a flagrant violation of the principles up"be exercised for any other purpose than that on which the freedom of this people has been for which it was granted. The importance of founded.

this principle may be seen in the consideration It was under this impression that he moved that it is the only foundation of the argument the amendment, which received the sanction of against the constitutionality of a protective ta- the House, to the resolution originally offered riff It is contended that a grant of power to for the appointment of an investigating commitlevy taxes, duties, and imposts, to pay the debts tee. That amendment was carried by a conand provide for the common defence and gene- sideaable majority of votes in the House. The ral welfare, cannot justly be construed into a course of investigation pursued by the majority power to levy the same duties, taxes, imposts, of the committee has, however, been not conand excises, for the protection of manufactures. formable to the principles of the resolution If there be any soundness in this principle, ap- adopted by the House, but to those of the oriply it to this reservation of power in either ginal resolution, which the House did not acHouse of Congress to appoint investigating and cept; a consequence which was naturally to be examining committees on the books and pro- expected, from the circumstance that a majori ceedings of the bank. The power is reserved ty of the committee was appointed from the for th purpose of enabling either House of Con- minority of the House-that is, from those gress to put the president and directors upon who had voted against the amendment adopted trial for delinquency; upon trial by the judges by the House. of the land; upon tria! by a jury of the vicin The question of the principles upon which age. It is not reserved for the purpose of ena the examination was to be conducted, occurred bling a committee of the House to ruin the pre- immediately after the arrival of the committee sident and directors in fortune and reputation, at Philadelphia, and it was determined confor by a partial, prejudiced, electioneering report, mably to the views of a majority of the comcondemning them as victims of political rancor, mi tee, representing, so far as the views of the without law or justice-without judge or jury; House had been manifested, a minority of the nor is it reserved even to enable the House to House.

determine the expediency of renewing the char- There was accordingly no restriction to the ter of the bank. The power is not reserved for latitude of investigation, as it had been propos that purpose; nor, if there be any soundness in ed in the original motion of the chairman of the argument against the constitutionality of the the committee. No objection was made on protecting tariff, can it be exercised for that the part of the president and directors of the purpose. In this view of the subject, the House bank, excepting that the President did remind would not even have possessed the lawful pow- the committee of the confidential nature of the er of appointing the committee. The committee transactions between the bank and its customwas appointed not for the purpose of putting ers, with the assurance of his reliance that it the president and directors of the bank upon would be considered and respected. All their trial; nor was it intended by the mover of the books, and all the accounts of individuals with resolution that they should have the benefit of the bank, called for by any member of the a trial by jury. committee, were exhibited to them.

It is not the intention of the subscriber to Had there been a member of the committee press this course of reasoning; to which, in its thirsting for the ruin of a personal enemy, or a application to the tariff, he does not yield his political adversary, and who, by this inquisition assent. To those who hold the doctrine that into the accounts of all who had dealt with the the purpose for which a power is granted forms bank, could have been put in possession of an indispensable condition for the lawfulness of facts, the disclosure of which might have deits exercise, he leaves the argument, to bear stroyed his peace, his fortune, or his fame, the with its proper weight. But if under a power opportunity afforded him by this course of proto appoint investigating committees, to ascer-ceeding would have been to inviting to have tain by the verdict of a jury whether the char- been resisted. That there was such a member ter has been violated or not, a constructive pow-upon the committee, the subscriber does not er is given to sport with the feelings, and for affirm. The eagerness with which private actunes, and reputation of honest and honorable counts were sought for: and, in an especial men, because they happen to hold the offices of manner, those of editors of newspapers, mempresident and directors of the bank of the Uni-bers of Congress, officers of Government, and ted States, there is surely no authority given in all indeed possessing political influence themthe bank charter to pry into the accounts and selves, or likely to suffer in public estimation

by exposure of their private and pecuniary considered as affecting the integrity of the persons cerns, flowed, it is to be presumed, altogether upon whom they might chance to fall. He frefrom patriotic principles, and a stern abhorrence quently di-claimed all intention of putting up. of corruption. The natural and irresistible on trial the character of the president of the tendency of all investigations conducted on bank, and he appears to have been quite unasuch principles, must be to substitute passion ware upon whom his denunciations might evenin the place of justice, and political rancor tually be found to descend. The subscriber in the place of impartiality. In all times of believed that there was a great want of preci party excitement, the members of the Legisla sion in the definitions by the chairman of the tive assembly are placed in attitudes of keen committee, in his original motion, of the crimes and ardent opposition to each other. We have which he denounced. Take, for example, the constant experience of the personal animosi- charge of subsidizing the press. If a violation ties into which all debates on questions of of law be an essential ingredient in the compo deep public interest are continually running. sition of crime, there was no law which prohiAn individual member of this House, who pre-bited the bank from subsidizing the press; nor sents himself in the attitude of an accuser, not was there any law which prohibited the presionly calls for the investment in himself of an dent and directors of the bank from affording extrarodinary power; but if he prosecute him facilities and accommodations to editors of self, the accusation claims the exercise of pow-newspapers. On the other hand, there is,perers which in no general system for the administration of equal justice can ever be united. The spirit of the prosecutor, is not the spirit of the judge. Whoever voluntarily assumes the former capacity, disqualifies himself for the unimpeachable performance of the latter.

During the present session of Congress, two instances have occurred of inquiries instituted into the conduct of Executive officers of this government-one bearing upon the second au ditor of the treasury, and the other upon the Commissioner of the General Land Office. I each of those cases the member instituting the inquiry moved its reference to a committee of which he was not himself a member. There was no law, nor even any rule of the House, which imperatively required this; but the members themselves felt the delicacy of their situa tions, and of their own accord divested themselves of that invidious combination of character which unites the prosecutor and the judge. The prosecution of the bank has been the only exception to this course of proceeding. The chairman of the committee commenced his career as a prosecutor by exhibiting an indictment, so called by himself, of twenty-two charges against the bank. The bank is a corporation consisting of a president, directors, and company of stockholders. The bill of indictment, therefore, being ostensibly against the bank, seemed to be divested of personal animo sity, and this, perhaps, may have induced the chairman to lose the consciousness of incongruity in the exercise at once of prosecuting and of judicial powers. These observations are deemed indispensably necessary to elucidate the spirit in which the examination was conducted, partaking, throughout, of this unusual union of the prosecuting and of the judicial character. Among the charges exhibited by the indictment, not ostensibly against any indi vidual, but against the bank, was one of subsidizing the press by special favors and accommodations to editors of newspapers-another for special favors and accommodations to members of Congress. In all this the chairman of the committee appears to have entertained the opinion that because the charges were, in form, against the bank, they were not at all to be con

haps, no class of citizens in the community, who, by the nature of their profession, may more frequently need the aid of bank facilities, or to whom they may be more signally useful, and in proportion to the extensiveness of a printing establishment, will, of course, be the amount of the accommodations which they may require. Why, then, should the bunk be laid under an interdict for subsidizing the press? Why should the president and directors of the bank be chargeable with gross and palpable corruption, because large accommodations and facilities, in the regular course of banking operations, have been afforded to editors of newspapers? There appears to the subscriber to be included in the principle of this charge a very dangerous assault upon the freedom of the press. A principle, proscriptive in its nature, and the application of which, if once assumed by the authority of the legislature, could be successful only in reducing the press to servile subserviency to whatever party might command a momentary majority in the two Houses of Congress. The editors of newspapers are not responsible to Congress for the political principles which they may advocate or oppose; nor can the legislature take cognisance either of their consistency or their political purity.l'hey are responsible for their opinions to their subscribers, and to the public opinion of their country. To hold them to this responsibility, their rivals and competitors, and political adversaries, are sufficiently watchful and sufficiently armed. The opinions and interests of majorities in Congress will never lack for presses to sustain themselves. But if, in addition to that common interest of the majority, and of their favorite presses, in the competition for public favor, they are to assume a ce sorial power to punish or stigmatize the editors who support the opinions or interests of the minority, in what does this differ from an imprimatur in the hands of the governing power-an engine for the suppression of all freedom of the press, as well as for the oppression of every editor whom it may suit the purpose of the predominant party to discredit or destroy.

Entertaining these opinions, and believing that the principle on which they were founded

bad been sanctioned by the House itself in the protectors of the freedom of the press, the resolution, as adopted, for the appointment of subscriber is of opinion that neither Mr. Webb the committee, the subscriber did earnestly, nor Mr. Noah ought to have appeared in perthough ineffectually, resist and oppose the call son or by affidavit before the committee. If, by the committee for the accounts with the in their transactions with the bank, they had bank of editors of newspapers. To all persons committed any violation of law, they could not of that highly respectable and important pro- be examined as witnesses to criminate themfession, their accounts in bank were, as well as selves; if they had committed no violation of to other members of the community, their pri- law, the inquisitorial powers of the committee vate and domestic concerns, which no power did not extend to them. Their transactions to examine the books and proceedings of the with the bank, unforbidden by the law of the bank could authorize a committee of this House and, were no more within the lawful scrutiny to expose the public gaze. To single out the of the committee, than the dwelling house, the editors of newspapers for this invidious expo- fireside, or the bedchamber of any one of them. sure was, in the opinion of the subscriber, to These, even in the darkness of heathen antidisfranchise them of their rights as citizens and quity, were the altars of the household gods. as men, and was to assail them in their reputa- To touch them with the hand of power is protion, their interest, and their credit. Not for fanation. Assailed, however, in reputation, as the purpose of bringing them to trial by jury, they already were, and had been, on account where they might defend themselves, their for- of these transactions, by their political enetunes, and their characters, in presence of their mies, and the enemies of the bank, from false peers, but to hold them up as accomplices in and exaggerated rumors concerning them corruption with the bank. To accomplish two which had crept into public notice, it was cerobjects by one operation-so defame the bank tainly not unnatural, and, perhaps, not improby colorable charges of corruption, which it per in them, to state, in full candor and sinwould never have an opportunity to repel by cerity what their transactions with the bank had a fair trial, according to the laws of the land-been. and to defame any editor of a newspaper hav

From these, it appeared, that in August, ing an account in bank, whose politics might 1831, James Watson Webb obtained at the be obnoxious to a majority of the committee, Bank of the United States, a loan of twenty instigated by the rivalry and hatred of antago- thousand dollars upon his own note endorsed nis: editors of other newspapers in the same ci- by Mordecai M. Noah. The application for ty or neighborhood. this loan, made in person by Mr. Webb, was

The majority of the committee did, the sub- sustained by a letter from Mr. Noah, and sunscriber doubts not, with pure intentions, other dry statements relating to the pecuniary conwise decide, and the accounts of editors of dition and credit of the New York Courier and newspapers with the bank were called Enquirer. The letter from Mr. Noah was enfor. In reviewing this decision, and the closed to the president of the bank by Walter proceedings of the committee subsequent upon Bowne, Mayor of the city of New York, who it, he deems it his duty to declare, that none had been one of the earliest directors of the of bis objections to it have, in his judgment, bank, with a recommendation of the applica been removed. He views it as a precedent of tion itself, to be considered as a business transportentous evil; as an unjustifiable encroach-action. It was so considered by the board of ment of arbitrary authority upon the freedom of directors who acceded to the loan desire. the press; as an odious persecution of individual But the editors of the Courier and Enquirer had citizens, to prostrate the influence of personal long been, as they still are, ardent and active or political adversaries, by the hand of power, political partisans, and their newspaper has Of this class of accounts thus produced. been, and continues, deeply immersed in hat those of one newspaper establishment only un-portion of political affairs immediately connectderwent the investigation of the committee.ed with elections. The peculiar character susThose of James Watson Webb and Mordecia tained by the paper and its editors, at the time M. Noah, editors of the New York Courier and when this application for a loan was made, was Enquirer, one of the most distinguished and that of devoted friends to the present adminisextensively circulated journals of the Union. tration, and particularly to the eminent citizen Mr. Webb was examined upon oath by the at its head. This character they and their pacommittee, at his own request. Mr. Noah per still retain. They have, of course, nutransmitted to the committee his own affidavit merous adversaries of the opposing party, and made before a magistrate of the city of New numerous rivals in their own. Sometime before York. Mr. Silas E. Burrows, a private citizen, this application for a loan from the Bank of the not an editor of a newspaper, but connected United States, there had been between them with the responsibilities of Messrs. Webb and and some of their competitors for party and Noah in the bank, was subpoenaed to appear public favor, a newspaper war, with regard to before the committee, but, as the subscriber the conduct of their journal, and the opinions believes, with a just estimate of his own rights, of its editors with reference to the Bank of the did not give his attendance. No proposal was United States. In all this the interests of rival made in the committee to issue a compulsory printing offices, and rival banks, may, without process against him. As editors of a public breach of charity, be presumed to have been journal, and in that character as guardians and very willing auxiliaries to editorial virtue and

tee.

the unsullied purity of the public press. The peachment of their veracity. The committee politics of the paper had been, or were thought could not, in the opinion of the subscriber, pos. to have been, successively hostile and friendly sess the right of calling upon the presidents of to the Bank of the United States. In this state the New York banks for the reasons of their of things, it is stated by M ssrs. Webb and refusing discounts to James Watson Webb or Noah, that two or three banks in the city of to any other man. The call itself was a violaNew York denied them the accommodation of tion of individual right, and the refusal to anloans which they had previously yielded, and swer it, though in terms entirely respectful and refused to discount for them paper of anques-dispassionate, carries with itself a censure uptionable credit. They affirm that these city on usurped authority, not undeserved. banks, in punishment of their friendliness for To this call upon the presidents of the New the Bank of the United States, withdrew from York banks, the subscriber had another objec them facilities previously extended to them, tion. The chairman of the committee had, by and required the payment of a large accommo- an act of Congress, authority to administer oaths dation loan for which they were indebted. To to witnesses, and the committee had received discredit these imputations, re-affirmed by from the House authority to send for persons Messrs. Webb and Noah in their testimony up-and papers. But the subscriber did not consider on oath before the committee, a majority of the committee as possessing the power of dethe committee deemed themselves author zed legating to other men authority to take depo. to send a commission and request the presidents sitions from persons, whom the committee were of the two cay banks in New York to make authorized to call before themselves, and to affidavits before a magistrate, giving notice hear in person. No member even of the comthereof to Messrs Webb and Noah, and to tee, other than the chairman, was authorized transmit those affidavits to the chairman of the to administer an oath. To administer paths to committee at Washington. The depositions of witnesses was in the competency of the chairIsaac Wright, president of the City Bank, and man specially authorized by the statute. To of Albert Gallatin, president of the National send for persons and papers existing, was in the Bank, at New York, were accordingly taken competency of the committee, authorized by and transmitted to the chairman of the commit- the House. But to direct to be taken, and to They did not in the slightest degree im- receive as testimony, depositions of persons pair the testimony of either Mr Webb or Mr. whom the committee might have summoned to Noah. On the contrary, they confirmed, so far appear and testify before themselves, was, as as they could confirm, that part of their evi- the subscriber believed, to transcend their lawdence which it had been the purpose, in re-ful authority, and to set a precedent which quiring the affidavits from the two New York would lead to most pernicious abuses. This banks, to invalidate. They proved that at both encroachment of power could not be justified of those banks, in July, 1831, notes offered for by the request of the chairman of the commit. discount by James Watson Webb, with an en- ee to the deponents, that James Watson Webb dorser of unquestionable credit, were rejected. and Mordecai M. Noah, the persons whose tesThe reasons of those objecsions, both the presi- timony it was supposed these depositions would dents of the banks, with great propriety, de- discredit, should have notice of the time and clined to give. They state that at one of the place, when and were they should be taken. banks no note is discounted, if objected to by To give notice of a deposition to be taken to any one member of the board of directors. Aimpeach the testimony of another is the duty of the other bank, any note is rejected to which a party to a cause, and not of the deponent two of the directors concur in objecting, and himself. The witness whose testimony is to that no director is required to asssgn any reason be discredited cannot be bound to receive a nofor is oujection to any discount. In these an-tification from the witness called to discredithim. swers of the two presidents, the subscriber canThe volunteering of a committee to send forth not forbear to remark a demonstration of the mandates in search of contradictory evidence, impropriety of the call by the committee upon to fasten imputations of perjury upon witnesses those gentlemen for their testimony in this case. of veracity, before them unimpeached, has, in The object of the call was to impeach the truth the view of the subscriber, an aspect, too unjust of tesumony given by the two witnesses, and odious in itself, to be legitimated by any Webb, and Noah, upon oath before the com. notice given to the witnesses thus outraged in mittee; witnesses whose veracity stood a fair be their feelings and their rights. The whole fore the committee as that of any other citizen of procedure was, in the opinion of the subscrithe community, and who, in the opinion of the ber, unlawful and unjust. He recorded against subscriber, could consider the call itself on the it his vote upon the journal of the committee; presidents of the New York banks to con- and he deems it his duty to repeat his protesta tradict them, in no other light than that of a tion against it in this report. gratuitous and wanton insult upon themselves. But whatever may have been the true state Of the fact that notes offered by Webb had of the relations between Messrs. Webb and been rejected at the New York banks, no doubt Noah, and the local banks of New York, it was was or could be entertained. The reasons of with these statements and allegations that Mr. the rejection were avowedly inferences of Mr. Webb, in August, 1831, applied to the preWebb and Mr. Noah, which might even have sident and board of directors of the Bank of the been incorrectly drawn by them, without im-/United States, for an accommodation loan of

« AnteriorContinuar »