Thank you for visiting SNEWPapers!
Sign up freeDaily Cincinnati Republican
Cincinnati, Hamilton County, Ohio
What is this article about?
On August 16, 1841, a Washington correspondent reports President John Tyler's veto of the Bank Bill, citing constitutional limits on establishing branches without state consent. He details Tyler's views on permissible bank functions and notes the Senate's reaction amid anticipation.
OCR Quality
Full Text
Bank Bill Vetoed.
WASHINGTON, 16th August, 1841.
The long and anxious suspense is ended. As I predicted in my last letter, the Bank is vetoed—The Bill was returned to-day at 12 o'clock, with the reasons which prevented the President from assenting to it, in its present form.
The Senate was so much crowded at an early hour, that I could not obtain a seat in the gallery, and could only hear parts of the message, from my position in the lobby. As I understand it, Mr. Tyler asserted the opinion, that under the Constitution, Congress had no authority to charter a bank with power to establish branches in the States, without their assent. He admitted that agencies might be established to issue notes, receive deposits and buy bills of exchange, without such consent; and he enumerated that such a Bank would answer all the purposes, and confer all the advantages anticipated and all that could be desired from establishing such a Bank as was contemplated by the Bill, as passed.
The difference between his views and those in the Bill, was simply this, as far as I could comprehend them: He is favorable to the establishment of a Bank with full power to create branches, or agencies to transact a banking business, except that of discounting local notes; and in such States as will assent, he is willing that the branches or agencies should have the power of discounting notes, but he thinks the Bank would succeed better without such power.
I am told the message will be printed this evening. If so, you will receive it by the same mail that takes this letter. Much as I dislike to communicate this intelligence, still I anticipated the result long since. I informed you several weeks ago that no Bank would be chartered unless the assent of the State was required to the establishment of branches. When the compromise amendment was proposed, I hoped the difficulty was settled, so because I thought anything substantial was yielded by the amendment, but for the reason that I did not imagine Mr. Clay and his friends would propose so great an amendment, without first ascertaining whether it would accomplish the desired object.
I never doubted the power of Congress to establish precisely such a Bank as that proposed by Mr. Clay and would always have preferred such a measure had I been convinced from my own observation and not from any positive information, that such a measure could not be passed. It was from this reason alone, that I suggested such a modification as the one in the Bank Bill. It assured red and atlealail nd som re irt. I aa lt,sers fr fram lengan afveere of he wetopower exon in ermecies whetir the ihs n is ee oen whiis ju t hp, theree widtr matrtamsevesin Imtina d iete i Chiv waltgffeate Do the Whts to tie such a Bansisteyen olan Ihala lanzemestion tehi wth Me Ie. nox. roarky cadierotthe U. S. Bank. and hess decilaile of opntn thot such a Bonk o Mr. P. tadds vould ahsver al the purpaadife aaf la d he fean talieung thn it woult to be a coiter iolrotien than df it had the power to dis is!: is Tn Syan ais conded to overd vin donng the renling of the messige, and notawin Toaine the tole e alxiery of all pfesctt, te feest Ipfeet s ence prevaild I ei withn toin tot af d, and head o thia I a outak I tat ferl wh migh iatehun ccott, Iagt imm intely alte the rradir, was fmahel that prage a deate Is thed,a w.i vi wi r [:, :-tr1 l:T :t x t r t ! sal sethe 100 A.t- He would Hred to theirChet Maats rute "S ane sBank b ught ruifi an' hnd pire. sumedto b e had hero it he fad om there the h ot anle lond ma!e a; his nitr.d thit the ray as shald sulfer fortrra auy. the mated tat tho - ..ra:t-a:-\u,a kts.rt1o1blz 1 s0n rel if.yi l..t i ti:e .ue, thh ma ih ngf.hu—! thgi t iegh Li w m-—:::ltg ticrl. a, tip axitty trit mn thr sulger, le . -_ wlrs. wi: gau de irun w t ndu:t had bern yrtei. wui il ieini anv gruirain to gi.t hus wij-ieta! bea:t thr his-aid he vmd t., i.W..;si u at.A.r. ca lix way lrouen t. gol-ry uidnrim ticu,rt. 1e nts a4 trf iti s.i !w a.ir i : jr n : hrv l.i: w,w t , :l. ..I:..T ".l{.-... n'rif ti C.:Mrs." f.r'taralc.- n..'. S,t unin the courrthCa ie wii r-. nr wre of o;:n that m. mewui inI thrkdrtv, ut 1, t'-:rt|o;a:'['rrl}j- ".i.au't lhe lprt t. g.a (1 iied,r;nivfan virx ocarcurr- w:e.t.Th!yfCm i. p: 1., t:sI:.r"i iw- s:-s, in, g'dcrcck u : pnirt, I slgec:l_ : (aae W at saee tr Its:t isia :ru s5 ,E pr-r w3v :ha: ie ra ny' ccir Ain T in..m. 1 (..ai. l.ey.: til i 'a 1 wt j.w,-riI i. J:cF..:..:.,.utystecnl toin thtg in puiy fie
What sub-type of article is it?
What themes does it cover?
What keywords are associated?
Letter to Editor Details
Main Argument
president tyler vetoed the bank bill on august 16, 1841, arguing that congress lacks constitutional authority to charter a bank with branches in states without their assent, though he supports agencies for certain functions and prefers the bank without power to discount local notes.
Notable Details