that number was the celebrated Dr. Dodd, who was executed in England many years age, for forgery-who had been guilty of many heinous crimes; but was religion to be ridiculed and reviled, because there happened to be some bad men among its professors? Undoubtedly not. There were many instances in our own country, of men having crept into the public confidence, who were dishonest and unworthy to be trusted. This, however, only proved that there were some bad men, but it did not prove that all were so. Now, in relation to the Bank of the United States, which seemed, like a ghost, to be haunting some gentlemen every hour of the day, and he presumed, perhaps, of the night too. Indeed, if one might judge from the feeling manifested by them, it was no great stretch of the imagination, to suppose that they dreamt about it. He recollected reading that the editor of a paper in the west, used language in reference to the institution, which was to this effect: "The United States Bank must be put down, and if it could be effected in no other way, he and many others were ready to aid in razing it to the ground; and that it should be done, and salt strewed over its foundation." Whence, he would ask, did that strong feeling originate? And, was it true that the majority of the people of the state of Pennsylvania were opposed to the bank-that they had condemned it, and those who voted for giving it a charter? He could not arrive at any such conclusion after looking at what had transpired, both before and after the charter was granted. The gentleman, presiding temporarily over this body, (Mr. Cunningham) and the delegate from Beaver, (Mr. Dickey) both represented districts, prior to the passing of the charter, where the dominant party in the nation had the ascendency, and they did what they deemed best calculated to promote the welfare of the state. And, having since been before the people, they had sent them to this convention, which was a clear and unequivocal proof, that there had been a change in those districts. Those who called themselves the democratic partybut he denied that they belonged to that party-were diminishing in numbers, for a great many had left it, and pursued the independent course which the gentleman, (Mr. Cunningham) had done. He repeated, that it had been proved beyond all question, that the people of the commonwealth of Pennsylvania, approved of the recharter of the Bank of the United States, and that they did now. The people never changed their opinions without some good reason; and if they were to be deduced from the meetings, he would say, that the popular voice was most decidedly as strong, at least, as ever it was in favor of the bank. He desired to know, if there was any one delegate in this convention, who would rise in his place, and undertake to declare that the people were almost unanimously in favor of the institution in 1831-32-33-34? He thought there was not. The voice of the people was to be ascertained by the public feeling. He begged leave to read the resolutions that were adopted at a meeting of the old General's friends, at Williamsport, in 1832, when it was rumored that he intended to veto the bank bill. The meeting was composed of some of the leading and distinguished men belonging to the same party to which the delegate from Luzerne (Mr. Woodward) was attached. Here was an example set us! The resolutions were accompanied by a preamble, which, however, he did not deem it necessary to read: "Whereas, Our country has enjoyed a degree of prosperity, unparalleled," &c. Therefore, "Resolved, That the rumours in circulation of the President's intention to veto the bill for rechartering the United States Bank, we deem SLANDEROUS, intended to subserve electioneering purposes, and that the course of the president, will conform to the almost unanimous wishes of Pennsylvania, and to the interests of the Union, when that bill shall be presented to him for his sanction." 66 Resolved, That General Jackson will not desert the interests of the state most prominent in its zeal in his behalf, and that she will not be deserted by him in the hour of trial. Signed by, W. F. PACKER, Secretary. Williamsport, May 5th, 1832." DAVID REYNOLDS, President. J. B. ANTHONY, ELLIS LEWIS, Vice-Presidents. Mr. C. resumed. He believed all those gentlemen were known to the gentleman from Luzerne, (Mr. Woodward.) If he was not mistaken, Ellis Lewis was appointed a judge by Governor Wolf. J. B. Anthony is a member of congress. Now, this was a very large meeting, held by the political friends of the delegate from Luzerne, and those who continued to act with him. If those resolutions contained the truth, that the voice of Pennsylvania, was almost unanimous in favor of the re-charter of the bank, and inasmuch, as no good reason had since been given, why the people had changed their opinions, it was to be taken for granted, that they were still in favor of the bank. J. B. Anthony, and other distinguished men, notwithstanding that their great leader put his veto on the bill, still clung to him! Yes, as he (Mr. Cox) had already stated, J. B. Anthony presided at the meeting, and he was now spoken of to fill the office of governor, by the self-styled democratic party. Now, those men, whose names he had read, were honest and intelligent, candid and open, in the avowal of their sentiments, as set forth in the resolutions. They had fully and carefully examined the subject. The bank had existed, in 1832, for many years previously, and its effects and influence upon the business community, were then perfectly well known. The subject of the re-charter of the bank, had been discussed for many years, and the few individuals who were opposed to the measure, had assigned all the reasons they had to urge against it. He would reiterate what he had already said, and that was, that the people had, after long and mature deliberation, made up their minds as to the propriety of re-chartering the institution. The resolutions which he read, stated that the almost unanimous sentiment of the people of the commonwealth of Pennsylvania, was in favor of the continuance of that bank. If it were so in 1832, as he had before observed, what reason had we to believe that it was not so at the present time? Where was the evidence that would warrant this convention in saying that the people had changed their opinions on the subject? Or, that the large majority which was in favor of the measure, had now shrunk into an insignificant minority? ile, was not aware of any evidence of the kind. He knew a gentleman of high standing, belonging to the same party as the delegate from Luz rne, (Mr. Woodwar) who travelled through the interior of this state last summer, and conversed with numerous individuals in relation to the bank, and he met with only one person, that condemned the re charter of that institution by the legislature. He (Mr. C.) could mention the name of the gentleman, but, as it was rather a confidential matter, he did not like to do so. He knew that there were individuals, who had acted from sinister motives and considerations, and tried to get up an excitement. In making this remark, however, he did not wish to be understood, as alluding to any gentleman in this body. It was manifest from the political complexion of the convention, that there was a party in it, that wished to accomplish certain ends. Was it not, he asked, a well known fact, that the delegates to this convention, were elected shortly after the re-charter of the bank? And, was it not also notoriously true, that some of the leaders of the Van Buren, or locofoco or whatever gentlemen might please to call them,-party, were among them? He would inquire of delegates, if they were not aware, when elected, that they would have to do certain things here, which, must, afterwards, be submitted to the people for their decision? He contended that the election of deleg tes, by those in favor of reform, was put upon the ground, that they would support the insertion of a provision in the constitution, annulling the charter of the Pennsylvania Bank of the United States. Yes! the election of the Van Buren delegites rested on that very ground. The leaders of the party told the people it was useless for them to make long appeals-that if they wished to be free from & corrupt institution-from a great monopoly which would bind them hand and foot, and make slaves of them, they must rise in the majesty of their strength, and insert such a provision in the constitution. Every means was tried, and every exertion made, that could possibly be, to get up a strong feeling against the bank, but in vain. For, it would be found, that the good people of Pennsylvania were not quite so much terrified and alarmed about it, as some gentlemen would have us believe. What, he would inquire, did the freemen of Pennsylvania do? Why, they returned a majority of delegates, known to be in favor of the institu tion. And yet, this convention were to be toll, that the people had condemned the bank, and the legislature that granted the charter. Surely, gentlemen who talked in this strain, must have entirely forgotten the evidence on the subject. He would avail himself of the present occasion, to tell the gentleman from Luzerne, who remarked, that the people would continue to condemn the bank and the legislature, and he had better note in his common place book, the prediction he (Mr. Cox) would now make-that at the next fall election, he would find, that the party who would attempt to raze the Bank of the United States-to put down that monopoly, as it was called, would be in a pitiful minority in the lower bran h of the legislature. The delegate, and others, would discover that the freemen of Pennsylvania were not quite so gullible as they might suppose. Those gentlemen would find, that they would again rise in the majesty of their strength, and return to the house of representatives, a majority of the unbought freemen, who were in favor of promoting the best interests of the commonwealth. 46 We had now the old cry of " monopoly," he would not say within doors, for he could not suppose delegates to be actuated by such considerations, as some individuals out of doors, who thought, the very salvation of their party depended upon keeping up the cry of monopoly"-" monopoly." The reason why the cry was kept up was, for the purpose of creating the impression on the public mind, that chains were being forged for them, and that they would be deprived of their liberties, unless they put down this great moneyed power-this "monster." One argument which he had heard urged against banks, generally was, that the people had sustained heavy losses by them. Some gentlemen in this convention, he understood, were in favor of a metallic currency, together with a limited amount of paper, of a certain denomination. Not long since, he was in conversation with an old German farmer, who was a man of shrewdness and intelligence, and possessed of a considerable fortune. He remarked, that he had heard a great deal said about banks, and of the liberties of the people being endangered by them, and that they ought to be put down. He said he could not understand such reasoning, and he reasoned thus: if he borrowed nothing of the banks, he owed nothing. If he did not choose to take their notes, or have any thing to do with them, how they could deprive him of his liberty, he knew.not. He said, that he had been doing business for forty yearsthat he had sold a great many articles of produce, one-tenth of which was paid for in cash, and nine-tenths in paper, and that he did a good deal on credit. He declared, that he had lost ten times as much by trust ing individuals, as he had done by the banks-that if the banks were to be put down, he would be obliged to give more credit, because, specie would be scarce, and he would, consequently, lose more than at present. He did business with the banks-kept an account with them, because he found that he lost less by so doing, than he did by crediting those in his neighborhood. If gentlemen entered into a full examination of the subject, it would be found that nine-tenths of all the money which had been lost in the city of Philadelphia, had been through particular individuals, and not by the banks. He would venture to say, that there had been more money lost in one year, by trusting individuals, than by the banks, within twenty years. Now, if that were true, there was ten times as much lost to the community, by crediting individuals, as there had been by trusting the banks. What, he asked, would be our situation, supposing all the banks to be extinct, and nine-tenths of all the business that was done in the com monwealth, done on credit-the debts ultimately to be paid in gold and silver? Why, as the old farmer truly said, the loss would be much greater then, than under the present system. There was more money lost by the public in one year, through two individuals only, in Philadelphia, than there was in twenty years, by twenty banks; and, if this was true, he would like to know, what would be our situation if there were no banks, and if all our business was done on credit?our losses would then be much greater than they are now. There is so much talk about banking institutions, and their dangers and evils, that one would suppose, the party opposed to them, would steer clear of them; but, we see the very men who are loudest in their declamation, against banks and bankers, going on for years, creating the very monopolies, which they so much affect to dread. Why is it, that they have created three or four hundred banks in various states of the Union? Gentlemen here, who oppose banks, are honest no doubt, but how comes it, that so small a part of their own party support them, by pouncing upon all projects, for increasing banking capital and banking operations? Gentlemen are not willing, probably, to say, that their own friends are bankbought and corrupt. They might infer from the very circumstance of their own friends going for the banks, that the people are in favor of creating and supporting them. We find, sir, according to the report of the secretary of the treasury, that in 1835-6, twenty-three banks were created in the state of Maine. Every one knows, that the Van Buren party have the majority in that state, but they made twenty-three new bank monopolies. Rhode Island, in the same year, created six new banks, and New York, twelve; yes, the empire state-the state in which Mr. Van Buren received a large majority, created twelve new banks. Vermont, created one; Alabama, five; Mississippi, five; Arkansas, two; and, the little state of Michigan, with but one representative in congress, created nine banks. Can it be possible, that a party which believes banks to be monopolies, can go on so rapidly in creating them. If banks are so ruinous to the country, can they wish to plunge the country into such immediate and irretrievable ruin? If they are honest in their belief, that banks are calculated and intended to enslave the people, then they have been traitors to their country, in participating so largely in their creation. If they really believe these institutions to be fraught with such evil consequences as they pretend, why is it, that they are not only asleep at their posts, but aiding and assisting in bringing the enemy into our camp? These institutions, which they say, are calculated to deprive the people of their liberty, they have assisted to crease and cherish. They tell us, over and over again, that there is an express provision, in all the charters but one, that the charter shall be modified, altered and repealed, at the pleasure of the legislature, whenever the legislature may suppose it to come into collision with the interests of the people, and yet they insist that banks are at war with liberty and equal rights, and that they are monopolies and aristocracies. These banks, which are so odious and dangerous, that they cannot be safely tolerated, are yet subject to the repeal and alteration of the legis. lature, whenever the public interest shall require it. If they are serious, why do they not begin the work of destruction, and sweep away all the little monsters? Why do they not introduce a bill, to repeal all the bank charters? They ought to do it, if they believe, as some of them pretend to do, that they are so destructive of liberty and republican principles. Why did not they do it in 1834, or last year, when they had so great a majority in the legislature? Perhaps, they think the people are not yet |