H. OF R. Alabama Territory. FEBRUARY, 1819. ALABAMA BILL, For enabling the people of that Territory to form a constitution and State government, and for the admission of the same into the Union on an equal footing with the original States. THURSDAY, February 18. On the whole, Mr. Chairman, said Mr. McL., it seems to me that we have no right to impose this restriction; and that, if we had, it would be useless, impracticable, and unavailing. At the same time, I do not mean to abandon the policy to which I alluded in the commencement of my Much time was busily employed by the Comremarks. I think it but fair that both sections of mittee in receiving and disposing of various the Union should be accommodated on this sub- amendments proposed to the details of this bill, ject, with regard to which so much feeling has and in considering and deciding on its provisions. been manifested. The same great motives of Messrs. CROWELL, POINDEXTER, COBB, and others policy which reconciled and harmonized the jar- entered into the discussion. The Committee ring and discordant elements of our system, ori-negatived one or two motions to rise, and perseginally, and which enabled the framers of our vered through the bill; when the Committee happy Constitution to compromise the different rose, and reported both bills to the House, with interests which then prevailed upon this and the amendments made thereto; and at near five other subjects, if properly cherished by us, will o'clock the House adjourned. enable us to achieve similar objects. If we meet upon principles of reciprocity, we cannot fail to do justice to all. It has already been avowed by gentlemen on this floor, from the South and the A new member, to wit: ROBERT RAYMOND West, that they will agree upon a line which REED, from Georgia, elected to supply the vacanshall divide the slaveholding from the non-slave- cy occasioned by the resignation of John Forholding States. It is this proposition I am anx-syth, appeared, produced his credentials, was ious to effect; but I wish to effect it by some qualified, and took his seat. compact which shall be binding upon all parties, and all subsequent Legislatures; which cannot be changed, and will not fluctuate with the diversity of feeling and of sentiment to which this Empire in its march must be destined. There is a vast and immense tract of country west of the Mississippi yet to be settled, and intimately connected with the northern section of the Union, upon which this compromise can be effected. Believing as I do that the Constitution and the compact before mentioned will not permit us to extend our policy over the whole, I will be very willing to take as great a part as I can obtain: and in so doing-though I may lament that the humane policy of those who are so anxious to effect this end cannot be more widely diffusedI shall at least enjoy the consciousness of having conformed to the Constitution of the country, and executed the national compacts in good faith. The motion was advocated by Messrs. TALLMADGE, LIVERMORE, SPENCER, and CUSHMAN; and was opposed by Messrs. CLAY, ROBERTSON, TYLER, HUGH NELSON, STORRS, JOHNSON, of Virginia, BARBOUR, of Virginia, and KINSEY. Several of the gentlemen spoke more than once, and the debate was maintained, with much animation, until near 4 o'clock. The question was finally taken on the first part of the motion (it having been divided) in the following words: "That the further introduction of slavery or involuntary servitude be prohibited, except for the punishment of crimes, of which the party shall have been convicted." And it was decided in the negative: For the motion 68; against it 80. The remaining part of the proposition, to declare all the children free after twenty-five years of age, who shall be hereafter born in the Territory, was negatived without a division. The Committee then proceeded with the bill, and having gone through it, next took up the Mr. BLOOMFIELD, from the Committee on Revolutionary Pensions, reported a bill, supplementary to "An act to provide for certain persons engaged in the land and naval service of the United States in the Revolutionary war;" which was read twice, and committed to a Committee of the Whole to-morrow. Mr. PLEASANTS, from the Committee on Naval Affairs, to which was referred the bill from the Senate, entitled "An act for the relief of John B. Timberlake," reported the same without amendment, and it was ordered to be read a third time to-morrow. Mr. REED, of Maryland, moved the House to take into consideration the resolution submitted by him on the 23d ultimo, for the erection of a monument to the memory of the late Major General the Baron de Kalb; which motion was negatived. Mr. HOLMES submitted the following resolution: Resolved, That a committee be appointed to inquire into the expediency of providing for the first meeting of the next Congress, at an earlier period than the first Monday of December, and that the committee have leave to report by bill. The resolution was read, and the question being taken to agree thereto, it was determined in the negative. On motion of Mr. STORRS, the Committee of Claims were directed to inquire into the propriety of so amending the act for the relief of Major Loring Austin and George R. Wells, as that the Secretary of War shall settle the claim of the said Austin, for eight hundred and twentyseven dollars and ninety-five cents, instead of the sum of six hundred and seven dollars and twentysix cents, for his expenses incurred in the defence of the suits therein named; and that the amount to be settled as the like claim for expenses by said Wells, be reduced from the sum of six hundred aud eighty-seven dollars and four cents to the sum of one hundred and seventy-seven dollars and thirty cents. The bill from the Senate, entitled "An act to regulate the pay of the army when employed on fatigue duty," was read twice, and ordered to be read a third time to-morrow. H. OF R. wood, Southard, Spencer, Tallmadge, Tarr, Taylor, NAYS-Messrs. Anderson of Kentucky, Austin, Ball, Barbour of Virginia, Bassett, Bayley, Beecher, BloomBills from the Senate of the following titles, field, Blount, Bryan, Burwell, Butler of Louisiana, to wit: An act for the relief of Rees Hill; Anwards, Garnett, Hall of North Carolina, Harrison, Cobb, Cook, Crawford, Culbreth, Desha, Earl, Edact for the relief of Pierre Dennis de la Ronde; Hogg, Holmes, Johnson of Virginia, Johnson of KenAn act for the relief of Gabriel Godfroy; An act tucky, Jones, Kinsey, Lewis, Little, Lowndes, Mcfor the relief of Nathan Ford; An act for the re- Lane of Delaware, McLean of Illinois, McCoy, Marr, lief of David Henly; An act for the relief of the Mason of Massachusetts, H. Nelson, T. M. Nelson, heirs and legal representatives of Nicholas Vree- New, Newton, Ogden, Owen, Parrott, Pegram, Peter, land, deceased; An act authorizing the purchase Pindall, Pleasants, Porter, Quarles, Reed of Georgia, of live oak timber for naval purposes; and, An act Rhea, Robertson, Sawyer, Settle, Shaw, Simpkins, to authorize William Prout to institute a bill in Slocumb, S. Smith, Alex. Smyth, J. S. Smith, Speed, equity, before the circuit court for the District of Stewart of North Carolina, Storrs, Stuart of Maryland, Columbia, against the Commissioner of the Pub-Terrell, Trimble, Tucker of Virginia, Tucker of South lic Buildings, and to direct a defence therein; Carolina, Tyler, Walker of North Carolina, and Wilwere severally read the first and second time, and liams of North Carolina. referred, the first, second, third, fourth, and fifth, to the Committee of Claims; the sixth, to the Committee on Pensions and Revolutionary Claims; the seventh, to the Committee on Naval Affairs, and the eighth, to the Committee on the Judiciary. The bill from the Senate, entitled "An act confirming the claim of Alexander Macomb, to a tract of land in the Territory of Michigan," was read the third time, and passed. ARKANSAS TERRITORY. So that part of Mr. TAYLOR's motion was decided in the negative. The question was then taken on the remaining clause of said proposed amendment, in the following words: "And all children born of slaves within the said Territory, shall be free, but may be held to service until the age of twenty-five years." And decided in the affirmative-yeas 75, nays 73, as follows: YEAS-Messrs. Adams, Anderson of Pennsylvania, The House then proceeded to the considera-Barber of Ohio, Bateman, Bennett, Boden, Boss, tion of the report of the committee on the bill to establish a separate Territorial government in the southern part of the present Missouri Territory. Mr. TAYLOR moved to amend the same by inserting the following proviso in the bill: Comstock, Crafts, Cushman, Darlington, Drake, Ellicott, Folger, Fuller, Gilbert, Hall of Delaware, Hastetter, Hubbard, Hunter, Huntington, Irving of New brouck, Hendricks, Herrick, Heister, Hitchcock, HosYork, Kirtland, Lawyer, Lincoln, Linn, Livermore, W. Maclay, W. P. Maclay, Marchand, Merrill, Mills, "That the further introduction of slavery, or in- Robert Moore, Samuel Moore, Morton, Moseley, Murvoluntary servitude, be prohibited, except for the pun-ray, J. Nelson, Ogle, Orr, Palmer, Patterson, Pawling, ishment of crimes, whereof the party shall have been fully convicted. "And that all children born within the said State, after the admission thereof into the Union, shall be free at the age of twenty-five years." The question on this motion being divided, was first taken on agreeing to the first clause thereof, in the following words: "That the further introduction of slavery, or involuntary servitude, be prohibited, except for the punishment of crimes, whereof the party shall have been fully convicted." And decided in the negative-yeas 70, nays 71, as follows: YEAS-Messrs. Adams, Allen of Massachusetts, Anderson of Pennsylvania, Barber of Ohio, Bateman, Bennett, Boden, Boss, Comstock, Crafts, Cushman, Darlington, Drake, Folger, Fuller, Hall of Delaware, Hasbrouck, Hendricks, Herrick, Heister, Hitchcock, Hostetter, Hubbard, Hunter, Huntington, Irving of New York, Lawyer, Lincoln, Linn, Livermore, W. Maclay, W. P. Maclay, Marchand, Mason of Rhode Leland, Merrill, Robert Moore, Samuel Moore, Morton, Moseley, Murray, Jeremiah Nelson, Ogle, Orr, Palmer, Patterson, Pawling, Rice, Rich, Richards, Rogers, Ruggles, Sampson, Savage, Scudder, Seybert, Sher Rice, Rich, Richards, Rogers, Ruggles, Sampson, Savage, Schuyler, Scudder, Seybert, Sherwood, Southard, Spencer, Tallmadge, Tarr, Taylor, Terry, Tompkins, Townsend, Wallace, Wendover, Westerlo, Whiteside, Williams of Connecticut, Williams of North Carolina, Williams of New York, and Wilson of Pennsylvania. NAIS-Messrs. Abbot, Anderson of Kentucky, Austin, Ball, Barbour of Virginia, Bassett, Bayley, Beecher, Bloomfield, Blount, Bryan, Burwell, Butler of Louisiana, Cobb, Cook, Crawford, Cruger, Culbreth, Desha, Earl, Edwards, Garnett, Hall of North Carolina, Harrison, Hogg, Holmes, Johnson of Virginia, Johnson of Kentucky, Jones, Kinsey, Lewis, Little, Lowndes, McLane of Delaware, McLean of Illinois, McCoy, Marr, Mason of Massachusetts, Middleton, H. Nelson, T. M. Nelson, Nesbitt, New, Ogden, Owen, Parrott, Pegram, Peter, Pindall, Pleasants, Quarles, Reed of Maryland, Reed of Georgia, Rhea, Robertson, Sawyer, Settle, Shaw, Simkins, Slocumb, S. Smith, Alexander Smyth, J. S. Smith, Speed, Stewart of North Carolina, Storrs, Stuart of Maryland, Terrell, Trimble, Tucker of Virginia, Tucker of South Carolina, Tyler, and Walker of North Carolina. So that part of Mr. TAYLOR's motion was agreed to. Mr. WILLIAMS, of North Carolina, then moved to reconsider the vote just taken. He had voted with the majority, for the purpose of obtaining for himself the privilege of moving a reconsideration, wishing for a full expression of the opinion of the House on this important question, which could not now be obtained, as many members were out of the House. The question was taken on reconsidering the vote, and decided in the negative-yeas 77, nays 79, as follows: YEAS-Messrs. Abbott, Anderson of Kentucky, Austin, Ball, Barbour of Virginia, Bassett, Bayley, Beecher, Bloomfield, Blount, Bryan, Burwell, Butler of Louisiana, Cobb, Colston, Cook, Crawford, Cruger, Culbreth, Desha, Earle, Edwards, Garnett, Hall of North Carolina, Harrison, Hogg, Holmes, Johnson of Kentucky, Jones, Kinsey, Lewis, Little, Lowndes, McLane of Delaware, McLean of Illinois, McCoy, Marr, Mason of Massachusetts, Middleton, H. Nelson, T. M. Nelson, Nesbitt, New, Newton, Ogden, Owen, Parrott, Pegram, Peter, Pindall, Pleasants, Quarles, Reed of Maryland, Reed of Georgia, Rhea, Ringgold, Robertson, Sawyer, Settle, Shaw, Simkins, Slocumb, S. Smith, Alexander Smyth, J. S. Smith, Speed, Stewart of North Carolina, Storrs, Stuart of Maryland, Terrell, Trimble, Tucker of Virginia, Tucker of South Carolina, Tyler, Walker of North Carolina, Walker of Kentucky, and Williams of North Carolina. FEBRUARY, 1819. bill from the Senate, to authorize a State government in the Territory of Alabama, and for its admission into the Union. The amendments were concurred in by the House, and, after an ineffectual attempt by Mr. CROWELL further to amend one of the sections, were ordered to be engrossed, and, with the bill, read a third time. BANK OF THE UNITED STATES. The House then resolved itself into a Committee of the Whole, (Mr. H. NELSON in the chair,) on the state of the Union, to whom had been referred the report of the committee appointed to investigate the affairs of the bank, the conditional restrictions subsequently submitted by Mr. SPENCER, the resolution absolutely to repeal the charter, submitted by Mr. JOHNSON, of Virginia, and that offered by Mr. TRIMBLE, to issue a scire facias. The particular subject first in order was the bill reported by the bank committee to enforce the provisions of the act incorporating the bank, and it was accordingly announced by the Chairman. Mr. JOHNSON, of Virginia, observed that, as there were two other propositions before the Committee, the adoption of either of which would supersede the necessity of acting on the bill, he thought it would be the preferable course first to take up for consideration one of those propositions; and he moved that the Committee proceed to consider the resolution moved on the 9th instant by himself, in the following words: "Resolved, That the Committee on the Judiciary be instructed to report a bill to repeal the act, entitled the United States, passed April 10, 1816.” 'An act to incorporate the subscribers to the Bank of NAYS-Messrs. Adams, Allen of Massachusetts, Anderson of Pennsylvania, Barber of Ohio, Bateman, Bennett, Boden, Boss, Comstock, Crafts, Cushman, Darlington, Drake, Folger, Fuller, Gilbert, Hale, Hall of Delaware, Hasbrouck, Hendricks, Herrick, Heister, Hitchcock, Hostetter, Hubbard, Hunter, Huntington, Irving of New York, Johnson of Virginia, Kirtland, Lawyer, Lincoln, Linn, Livermore, W. Maclay, W. P. Maclay, Marchand, Mason of Rhode Island, Merrill, Mills, Robert Moore, Samuel Moore, Morton, Moseley, Murray, Jeremiah Nelson, Ogle, Orr, Palmer, Patterson, Pawling, Rice, Rich, Richards, Rogers, Ruggles, The Committee agreed to take up this resoluSampson, Savage, Schuyler, Scudder, Seybert, Sher-tion, which was read. wood, Silsbee, Southard, Spencer, Tallmadge, Tarr, Mr. SPENCER rose, and stated that he owed it Taylor, Terry, Tompkins, Townsend, Upham, Wallace, Wendover, Westerlo, Whiteside, Williams of Connecticut, Williams, of New York, and Wilson of Pennsylvania. The question being then stated on ordering the bill to be engrossed for a third reading Mr. BASSETT, deeming every effort called for on the part of the minority on this subject, to sustain their Constitutional rights, which he considered to be assailed in the amendment just adopted, moved that the bill be recommitted to a select committee. Some conversation took place between Messrs. PINDALL, COLSTON, EDWARDS, SCOTT, LOWNDES, and MILLS, as to the course now most expedient to give the bill; in the course of which, Mr. LOWNDES moved that the bill be laid on the table, stating at the same time that, to prevent its being called up, and decided by surprise, he should, at 12 o'clock to-morrow, move for a call of the House, and take up the bill for a decision. This motion prevailed, and The bill was laid on the table. The House next took up the amendments reported by the Committee of the Whole to the to the civility of Mr. JOHNSON, that, in violating the usual custom on such occasions, which allowed the mover of a proposition to commence its discussion, he was sanctioned by the assent of Mr. JOHNSON. Mr. S. begged leave to remind the Committee that there were three distinct propositions before it: the first was the resolution of the gentleman from Virginia, (Mr. JOHNSON,) the second was that he had the honor of submitting some days since, directing the issuing a scire facías, if the bank did not, on a certain day, express its assent to a modification of its charter; and the third was the resolution of his friend from Kentucky, (Mr. TRIMBLE,) directing a scire facias absolutely and unconditionally. Mr. S. observed that he should prefer a modification of the charter, even if it should, by some, be esteemed a new compact, to the total destruction of the bank, with the views and apprehensions he entertained at present of the consequences of such a measure. If the Committee should reach the resolution he had submitted, it was his inten tion to modify it, in some respects, particularly to omit the third proposition, which proposed giving the President the power of removing any director, and he should in other respects amend his propositions, as time and reflection had enabled him, he thought, to improve them. And, if the Committee should reach the bill reported by the select committee, Mr. S. observed, he should, with the approbation of the gentlemen composing that committee, submit an amendment which would require the stockholders, constituting an attorney to vote for them, to swear to their own ership of the stock. Mr. S. thought it proper to apprize the Committee of these intentions, that the subject might be fairly considered. For the reason before stated, Mr. S. said, he should at present vote against the resolution for the repeal of the charter, and against that directing the issuing of a scire facias; but, if he should not succeed in at least the plan of the propositions he had submitted, although he should not be tenaeious of each particular one, he should feel it his duty to vote for a scire facias unconditionally. Mr. S. proceeded to make explanations of some expressions in the report. The remark, that "the principal business of the bank certainly has been to discount on notes secured by a pledge of stock," was liable to misconstruction. The expression used does not convey the meaning of the committee; it was either an inadvertence in the draught, or an error in copying; he believed the expression originally was, "a principal part of the business," &c., and it was intended to confine the remark to the business of the bank at Philadelphia, which was sometimes loosely designated as the bank. With respect to the bank and all its offices, it would appear that about one-fourth had uniformly been discounted on pledged stock; while at Philadelphia the discounts on stock had frequently very nearly equalled those on personal security. With regard to the expression, in the close of the report, that, "whatever differences of opinion can exist among them (the committee) as to the result and inferences to be drawn from the facts stated, they unanimously concur in 'giving to the preceding statements of facts, and 'abstracts of documents their sanction." Mr. S. observed that he thought the expression sufficiently precise, but he understood it was liable to a misconstruction. When inferences were mingled with facts, the unanimous sanction did not extend to these inferences; but that, in all cases wherever a fact was definitely stated, the committee meant to sanction it. Mr. S. remarked, that the report had been prepared at a time of severe indisposition, and when the committee had been fatigued and almost exhausted with labor, and he should not be surprised if many erroneous expressions were found in it. Mr. JOHNSON, of Virginia, rose in support of his motion. The circumstances, said he, by which we are now surrounded, are different, very different, indeed, from those by which we were cheered at the commencement of the present session of Congress. All then was peace, tranquillity, harmony, and prosperity. The President of the United States gave to this House, and to the nation, a picture of our national felicity, truly interesting and flattering. The people of the H. of R. United States were represented as more prosperous and happy than at any former period of their existence; as infinitely more prosperous and happy, than any other people on the face of the globe. What, now, is our condition? Surrounded by one universal gloom. We are met by the tears of the widow and the orphan. Pictures of highly wrought suffering, of misery, and of distress, are crowded upon us. Our sympathies are assailed. We are pointed to the Bank of the United States, and gravely told, that destroy but this corporation, and you dissolve the charm which secures to the people of this nation prosperity and happiness. And is it possible, said Mr. J., that the ten millions of people in this country depend for their prosperity, their happiness, and their repose, on the conduct of the directors of this bank? This corporation, which by its very first act put our authority at defiance, by the first step which it took, violated the charter which created it. Sir, I should consider this country in the most deplorable, the most melancholy condition, if the proposition be true, that by the act to incorporate the subscribers to this bank, which gives them exclusive privileges for twenty years, we enable them to direct the destinies of this nation, and make it happy or miserable as they shall choose. And what, he asked, had been the course of conduct pursued by a majority of the directors? Had they pursued that course which the public interests pointed out, or had they been engaged in practising fraud and corruption; in the prostration of all those principles which he considered as most interesting and most valuable to this country? I will not presume, said Mr. J., that any member of this House has taken less pains than I have done, in the examination of the facts disclosed by the report of the select committee appointed to investigate the conduct of the directors of the Bank of the United States. Has any gentleman, he continued, read the affidavits of Dennis A. Smith and James W. McCulloh, who entertains a doubt as to the facts established by their testimony? What does their evidence establish? Not that the public interest, or that the public good has been the object of a majority of the directors of this institution, but that the interest of a few large favored stockholders has been the constant and steady object of their pursuit. What were the means used to obtain the complete control of this bank? The charter was violated; shares were split up and taken in the names of individuals not interested in them, to enable the persons really owning them to give as proxies a much larger number of votes than, according to the fundamental rules of the charter, they were authorized to give, on the choice of directors, in order to obtain an undue preponderance at the board. This was known to the judges of the election. What was the next course adopted to secure completely the interest of this favored class? I know not, said Mr. J., how to speak of it, or of individuals who are not present to respond to me. In what terms shall I describe the conduct of the president of the bank? There was a transfer to him of $15,000, not in stock; H. OF R. Bank of the United States. FEBRUARY, 1819. both witnesses concur in stating that the stock borrowed, it seems part of the Executive authorwas not transferred to him; that he paid nothing ity. The King, by his letters patent, creates corfor it; that it was a transfer of money, of profit porations. Shall we, then, decide this question made on stock purchased and held by a few in- by the Roman or by the common law? I ask, terested individuals, large stockholders, who sold said Mr. J., if either of these codes be in force in 1,000 shares of the stock held by them for a profit the United States? If he were not deceived by of $15,000, and paid to Mr. Jones, in money, the his memory, the Supreme Court had solemnly amount of this speculation. Shall we call this a decided that the common law of England was douceur, a present, or shall we give it a harsher not in force in the United States. He understood name? These moneyed speculators, said Mr. J., the Supreme Court as having settled that queswho have an eagle eye to their interest, and pur- tion; but, if not settled, Mr. J. said he should still sue it with an appetite as keen as death, are not contend, and felt himself prepared to prove, that in the habit of making presents to this amount the common law of England was not the law of without some adequate and interested view. the United States. The first settlers of this Having pursued the course necessary to secure to country, Mr. J. said, fled from the civil and relithem a convenient weight and influence in the gious persecutions of England, of Europe; they direction, it became necessary to approach the sought here that independence and happiness president, to touch his pulse, to soften his heart, which had been denied them in the countries and fix him securely in their interest. In what which gave them birth. In this new world, on light shall these honorable stockholders be view- this expanded continent, they found themselves ed? Shall I be permitted to apply to them the as free from the shackles and despotic systems of doctrine held on a late interesting and important Europe, as the winds and the waves which wafted subject that the instigator to bad actions is them hither. They were capable of adopting any worse than the actor; that he who places in the system of laws which they thought proper to sehands of the assassin the dagger, to be plunged lect. With regret, he had heard it said in this into the bosom of innocence, is worse than the House, that our ancestors brought with them the murderer? And what has been the consequence principles of the common law; that it was their of all this art, this management? A few indi- birthright and inheritance-a sort of heir-loom. viduals have been enriched at the expense of the This he denied, and contended that they came innocent and the honest. This shaving institu- here free from all municipal laws but such as tion-bas it really, said Mr. J., any claim on the they chose to adopt. True, many principles of justice or the liberality of this House, or of this the common law were adopted by the first setnation? No; justice hides her face; she wishes tlers, from choice, because they were best known not to look at the black catalogue of iniquities to them. This was natural. But what was the which this institution presents; humanity would course adopted after the Revolution, which suregladly drop the tear of oblivion on the sickeningly dissolved all the charms of this boasted system scene. Mr. J. said he could not speak of this subject in the way it deserved, but would proceed as well as he was able. of British jurisprudence, and left the people of the United States, as a nation, free to choose such system of law as they pleased? Look at all the Has this corporation, said Mr. J., by all the acts legislation of the States after the Revolution, and of which it has been guilty, by the division of after their respective constitutions went into opervotes, by the evasion of the second specie instal-ation; they adopted for their own municipal regment, by the judges of the first and second elec-ulations such portions of the common law as tions allowing many persons to give more than were applicable to their situation, not contrary to thirty votes each, under the pretence of their their bills of rights and constitutions, and not lobeing attorneys for others, in whose names shares cal to the kingdom of Great Britain. Many then stood when those judges, the directors, and years after the State governments had been in officers of the bank perfectly well knew that the successful operation, when the principles of libshares really belonged to the persons offering to erty and free government were well known and vote upon them as attorneys-forfeited its char-clearly and distinctly understood by the people ter? If the charter was forfeited, what, he asked, of this country, the present Constitution of the was the remedy which it was proper to apply? United States was adopted. The people of the What the course proper for this House to pur- United States, by this instrument, which is an sue? Here a difficulty presented itself. The original, social, written compact, freely and volCongress of the United States, as he contended, untarily entered into by the contracting parties, without authority, and contrary to the Constitu- in which all the powers of the Government are tion, had created this corporation, which could expressly enumerated and clearly defined, which not be tested by the application of the principle had for its object the union and harmony of the of any known system of laws in the world. Shall States, their security against domestic disquiet we, said Mr. J., refer this charter to the standard and foreign aggression and danger, to regulate the of the civil or the common law? The Roman intercourse of the States with each other, and law is represented to be the source of incorpora- with foreign nations, adopted for national and tion-according to which law, a voluntary asso general objects, and not with a view to local and ciation of individuals, at any time, or for any municipal regulations. Have the United States purpose, was capable of producing it. In Eng- or the legislative power of the United States, Mr. land, whence our notions of it are immediately J. asked, by any act, declared the principles of |