IN SENATE.
FRIDAY, February 4, 1859.BANK OF THE STATE OF INDIANA
Mr. WAGNER moved to postpone the order of business to enable the Senate to proceed with the discussion of the repeal of the Bank charter.
On motion by Mr. HEFFREN, a call of the Senate was had. Eleven Senators being reported as absent, on motion, further proceedings in the call were suspended.
The yeas and nays were demanded on the motion to postpone the order of business, and being ordered and taken, resulted - yeas 33, nays 6.
So the motion was agreed to, and the Senate proceeded to the consideration of Mr. Conley' bill (S. 42) revealing the charter of the Bank of the State of Indiana - the question being on the adoption of the majority report of select committee to which it had been referred, recommending its passage.
Mr. McLEAN contended that we would not properly represent the sovereignty of the people were we to repeal the charter of a bank which is now furnishing us with the best circulating medium we have; and proceeded to read a written speech setting forth his position upon this subject.
Mr. WEIR. Mr. PRESIDENT: l am in favor of the majority report, and hence of the repeal of this charter of monopolies. Democrats here argue that they are in political faith constitutionally and individually opposed to all banks. They argue their theory of opposition, and show themselves practically in favor of bank monopolies, by voting to sustain an institution of this kind without security to bill-holder or depositor, with privileges sufficient to enable them to drive out of existence any banking institution in the State. They can control the entire commercial interest of the State, either furnish or refuse to furnish a currency, as bad as it may be: all is at their option, and the people at their mercy. The free banks offer some security to the bill holder. He argued at some considerable length (for about an hour) the provisions of the charter, noticing sections 15, 20, 86 and 91, and argued to show that no great evils would result to the people by its repeal. The circulation of this bank and branches, if drawn in, would be replaced by better. The free banks, driven out of existence by this monopoly, would again resume business, &c.
Mr. JOHNSTON hoped it was not the case that Senators wanted to repeal this charter in order to enact another, that they may get pay for it, as they have charged upon other Senators who voted for the charter two years ago. He really hoped no Senator wanted to repeal this charter for the purpose of selling himself out and passing another. The people wanted a currency at the time of the expiration of the old State Bank, and there were men here who were willing to supply this want. He would rather have a State bank that we can rely on than to have shinplaster currency. There was not a man in his district that would not rather have the bills of the Bank of the State of Indiana than any other in the United States, except the Bank of the State of Kentucky. His constituents were satisfied with the bank we have, and he should vote against the repeal.
Mr. MURRAY contended that nothing in the details of the bill affected the question, as to the Legislative power to repeal this bank charter. The charges of corruption against the members of the Legislature of 1855, were in a great measure untrue. He was a member of the body in the other end of the Capitol at that time, and voted for the bill, and would do so more readily to-day than he did then. By reading the Proceedings and Debates of the Constitutional Convention, it will be found that it was the intention of the page: 131[View Page 131] framers of our State Constitution to create a bank just like the one now in contemplation, when the charter of the old State Bank should expire. He expressed the opinion that the terms of this charter were of the same binding form as a contract. The charter was passed the General Assembly, as the journals of that session will show, and no power can change those journals - the Supreme Court cannot, and he was sure the Legislature of 1859 can not; no General Assembly can vitiate the acts of any former Legislature in which were granted vested rights to individuals or corporations- He was satisfied the Legislature had the power to charter this bank and branches without collateral security - that such a bank has been chartered, and that this Legislature has no power to vitiate it.
Mr. STEELE thought at first nothing serious was intended by those who favored repealing the charter, but by the long and earnest discussion that had taken place to-day, he was convinced now that they were in earnest. He was willing to hear them through and let the question be settled, but he denied that the Democracy was against State banking. He said the old State Bank was the legitimate offspring of General Jackson's administration, as he had crushed out the Bank of the United States, and recommended putting the Government deposits in State Banks, Indiana having none, the Jackson Legislature that assembled immediately afterward, established the State Bank.
Governor Wright then being the member from Parke, boasted of having assisted in drafting the charter of that institution, took the ground that it was a Jackson measure; and so it was - it went on and fulfilled the object of its mission. The charter being about to expire, the State passed, in '52, a Free Bank law. That law being not sufficiently guarded, an immense number of free banks sprang up. The State, seeing unless an important change could be effected the law would not answer the purpose, in '55 the present charter was passed. His opinion was that the charter would have been a duplicate of the old bank had not the Constitution prevented the State from holding stock. For his own part, he would have been glad if the State could have had stock, the same as in the old, so as to give us in the next twenty years three millions of dollars more to educate the rising generation as the late bank had done.
The charter of the new is as near as can be, a complete transcript of the old bank. His opinion was that you might as well try to repeal the charter of the Terre Haute and Richmond Railroad, and tear up the rails, as to take away, at this late day, the franchises and privileges of this institution, given and granted by the Legislature, and sactioned and declared legal and constitutional, by the highest judicial tribunal in our State. He was not here as the interested advocate of this bank for he had no stock in it.
How will a repeal effect my constituents? Why, sir, the large surplus products of the Wabash Valley where I live, it takes large amounts of money to move it to market. Where do we get it? We have been in the habit of getting our accommodation at the old bank at Terre Haute. Now that is gone, we go to the same place and to the same banking house, and the same men that conducted the old bank and get those accommodations. I can say that the two counties that I represent have over $100,000 of the $361 ,000 that was discounted in the months of November and December by the branch at Terre Haute, and by them is invested mostly in the article of pork. This money has been scattered wherever there was a fat hog or a bushel of wheat to purchase. The produce dealers have done well, the people have done well; and I have heard of no petition for repeal. I never heard one of my constituents say they desired a repeal of this bank charter.
The Senator from Montgomery said : Repeal the charter and the free bank circulation would fill the vacuum at once. Now let us see : The bank of the State has, to-day, five millions of circulation, all the free banks have only one million and that is growing beautifully less every day.
Now, sir, the whole free bank circulation would not be more than sufficient to purchase the produce that is shipped at Terre Haute in one year : then where would we get our circulation ? Why, from Michigan, Illinois and Wisconsin. I am for no such circulation, and am distinctly in favor of keeping our banks as they are now, the safest and soundest currency.
I want nothing to do and will have nothing to do with any institution that does not pay gold and silver at the counter for its bills: no Senator has denied this bank doing that through the most fiery ordeal any institution ever went through, and when the banks of the great States of Pennsylvania, New York and Virginia had refused. Sir, I shall vote with all my heart against a repeal.
AFTERNOON SESSION
Mr. STUDABAKER, by leave, from a select committee, returned the bill (144), to amend sections 8 and 9 of an act entitled an Act creating the 12th and 13th Judicial Circuits, and providing for the election of Judges thereof, approved February 9, 1855, [fixing the time of holding the courts in the 13th Judicial Circuit], with a substitute therefor, recommending its passage.
The report was laid on the table for the present.
Mr. WEIR, by leave, presented the memorial of the Sergent-at-Arms of the last regular session of the Senate, praying for compensation for services as such, to the amount of $56, which was referred to the Committe on Claims.
Mr. STEVENS, by leave, offered the following resolution, which was adopted :
Resolved,That the Trustees of the State University be requested to furnish to this Senate during its present session, a report of the financial affairs of that institution, with all other matters that they may deem of importance to the people of the State.
On motion by Mr. SHOEMAKER, his bill (90) to provide for the collection, safekeeping and disbursement of the public money, and fixing the salary of Treasurer of State, was taken from the files and referred to the Committtee on Finance.
page: 132[View Page 132]On motion by Mr. STUDABAKER, the bill (144) laid upon the table a few minutes since, was taken therefrom, read through the third time, and finally passed the Senate by yeas 34, nays 0.
BANK OF THE STATE OF INDIANA.
The Senate resumed the consideration of Mr. Conley's bill (42) repealing the charter of the Bank of the State of Indiana.
Mr. STEVENS said gentlemen had been quoting the opinions of men of other ages on the question now before us, but he thought such opinions could not be brought to bear with any effect upon the bill under consideration. We now have a circulating medium that the people throughout the length and breadth of the State are satisfied with. If we repeal this charter the whole country will be flooded with the paper of eastern banks that we know but little about. He would not blame any Senator who was in favor of hard currency if he were to vote against such a charter as this upon its introduction in the Legislature, but now, as it has been passed, he believed it would be impolitic and ruinous to vote for its repeal. He had never heard of any petitions coming up here asking for the repeal of this charter; he had never heard a single voter murmur on account of it, and he did not believe there were 500 in the whole State that would ask for a repeal of this charter.
Mr. MARCH then occupied the floor in a speech of nearly two hours. He argued in favor of the passage of the bill, and earnestly and ably battled against the arguments advanced by Senators on the other side of the question. He did not look upon this bank charter in the light of a contract; but admitting, for the sake of argument that it was, he contended it was obtained by fraud, and the contract thereby vitiated. He cited many passages from Chief Justice Marshall and Chief Justice Taney's decisions, from Kent's Commentaries, the Indiana and Ohio Reports, and other authorities, supporting his views upon this question.
Mr. HEFFREN obtained the floor, and after a few remarks in opposition to the bill, gave way for a recess till 7 o'clock p. m.
NIGHT SESSION.
Mr. HEFFREN continued his remarks in opposition to the proposition for the repeal of the charter of the Bank of the State of Indiana speaking from 7 o'clock till 8:15.
Mr. WAGNER followed in a speech of three-quarters of an hour, taking the same view of the question.
And then the Senate adjourned.
