language Ui supicmavy, uum. uommmxv —„„ --------- . not the great mass of the people had sufficient experience, with regard to a national bank? have they not felt its benefits and its evils, its advantages and disadvantages ; and have they not condemned it—1 had almost said, with the voice of unanimity? And shall they be deemed incompetent to judge of the utility, character, and tendency of such an institution ? Sir, by what other criterion than that of public sentiment, clearly expressed and fairly ascertained, shall we judge of a public measure? Shall We adopt the views and opinions of the few, to the exclusion of the many? Shall we not allow the groat majority to determine what is, as well as what is not for their welfare? And have not that majority solemnly decreed, in a voice that is still ringing in our ears, that a national bank is not a national benefit, but a national evil; that it is not a public blessing, but a public curse ? If we regard public sentiment, therefore, as a proper test of this measure, we must necessarily decide against it. We are bound to believe that it would not be productive of public good, as represented by the petitioners—but of public mischief, as declared by a majority of the people. It will not be disputed, but that any class of citizens have a right to ask, at the hands of Government, the adoption of such measures, or the enactment of such laws, as may, in their opinion, subserve their interests: provided always, that such measures, or laws, do not conflict with other interests of the (State, or revolt the “ stomach of the public sense.” A national bank does both; and has, consequently, no claims to the favorable regard of Congress. Sir, let us consider, for a moment, whether we can look with safety or propriety, for wise, patriotic, disinterested or salutary council from the source whence the petitions and demands for a national bank proceed. Do we find the patriotic, the clear-headed and honest-hearted yeomanry and mechanics of the country clamoring for a national bank ? No sir; No—the productive and laboring classes appreciate their political welfare too highly, to desire such an institution. The great majority of bank advocates are to be foundamong the non-producers—the traffickersandspeculators of thecountry —'l children of lofty hopes and low desires,” most of whom are peculiarly affected by the present pressure of the times. And would it be the part of wisdom to give heed to counsel emanating from such sources ? Can it be reasonably expected, that men relying solely upon bank facilities—men suddenly disappointed in their high expectations of immediate wealth and consequent influence, would be the most competent to direct the action of Government and control the destinies of the nation, at such a conjuncture? No, sir—their habits of life—of thinking—their peculiar situation—the circumstances which influence their judgments and impel them to action— all—all conspire to disqualify them for the task. We know, sir, that it is more natural for men in affliction—whether, physical or political—to have recourse to palliatives—to immediate and temporary expedients, than to deliberate on the means necessary to secure permanent relief.
RkJQdWJsaXNoZXIy MTM4ODY=