spread and almost universal error, which has decoyed us into an inextri cable labyrinth, and, in a measure, compelled us to adopt a similar policy in self-defence. War and homicide are, in the abstract, evils of fearful magnitude, and yet nations and communities may justify both in self-defence. We have been carried along the tide of popular error under the same strong delusion which seems to have pervaded all classes, of all political complexions, not only in Pennsylvania, but the whole mass of the community, from Maine to Louisiana,―from the Atlantic to the Mississippi.

When the question of incorporating the first United States Bank was being agitated, William Pitt, one of the most distinguished statesmen of modern times, made this prophetic exclamation: "Let the Americans adopt their funding system, and go into their banking institutions, and their boasted independence will be a mere phantom." Were not these words spoken in the spirit of prophecy? Is not the literal fulfilment now before us? Are not bank monopolies as deleterious, as subversive of the real independence of the great mass of the people, as were the feudal tenures, which sapped the foundation of European liberty? There, every other interest was made to succumb to the interest of the land holder-here, every other interest is disregarded for the benefit of the paper bank speculator.

Thomas Jefferson, the great apostle of the rights and liberties of the people, the acknowledged standard of correct political peinciples-opposed the creation of that bank with all the powers of his Herculean mind. He objected to a national bank on constitutional grounds; and he objected to that, and all other paper money establishments, on the ground that "it would raise up a monied aristocracy in our country, which would set both the government and the people at defiance; that it would take deep root, in the hearts of that class from which our legislators were to be drawn. And, thus, those whom the constitution had placed as guards to its portals, would be sophisticated, or suborned from their duties. That by breaking up the measure of value, it would make a lottery of all pri vate property." Had Thomas Jefferson lived to witness the events of the last two years, and especially the last six months, and had he spoken of the past, could he have portrayed our actual condition more lucidly, or with greater accuracy, than when he uttered the foregoing prophetic sen tences? Had the warning voice of the father of democracy been duly heeded, we should not now have found the barque of our national pros perity, wrecked in an ocean of worthless rag currency.

Alexander Hamilton, than whom no man was more conversant with the spirit of our fundamental code, remarked: "The emitting of paper money is wisely prohibited to the state governments.' This he said by way of preface to what he was about to say in relation to a national bank; not as a disputed or disputable proposition, but as a postulate, or common place remark, which no one, at that day, would presume to question, He adds, "and the spirit of the prohibition ought not to be disregarded by the United States government. Though paper emissions, made under a general authority, might have some advantages, not applicable, and be free from some disadvantages, which are applicable, to the like emissions by the states, separately, yet they are of a nature so liable to abusesand, it may be affirmed, so certain of being abused-that the wisdom of

government will be shewn in never trusting itself with the use of so seducing and dangerous an expedient. In great and trying emergencies there is almost a moral certainty of its being mischievous." Here then we have the words of truth and soberness" proceeding from the great apostle of that political party, now contending so stoutly for the continuance and perpetuation of all the manifold evils of an inconvertible paper

currency.

Why have the disciples of Hamilton contemned the counsels, and eschewed the wisdom, of their patriarchal head? Why have they refused to listen to the prophetic warnings, and to regard the sound maxims of their patron saint? Is it not, as Jefferson foretold, that the bank mania has taken "deep root in the hearts of that class, from which our legislators" have been drawn? Is it not because they have been "sophisticated or suborned" from their duties? Is it not that the private interests of bank speculators have taken precedence of the public welfare in our legislative halls? Is it not, that the love of lucre with that class who claim "all the property, all the talents and all the refinement," has superseded that active patriotism which was wont to influence Hamilton and his coadjutors? But this is not a question between the disciples of Jefferson, and those of Hamilton; for, on this subject, the views of these great political leaders were identical, or nearly so. It is a question between the aristocracy of wealth," embracing about one-tenth part of the community, and the "democracy of numbers," the remaining ninetenths of the people. The interests of the former party are identified with the banking system, and diametrically opposed, not only to the interests, but to the constitutional rights of the mass of the people-that is to say nine-tenths of the people. The line of distinction between these parties is easily drawn, and may be clearly traced. It is a tangible and visible line, and proves, at first sight, that the interests of the former are necessarily incompatible with the inherent rights of the latter. Those of the former, or speculating party, live upon, and enrich themselves from the proceeds of the labor of the latter. Those of the latter, or industrious party, sustain themselves and their families on the fruits of their own industry, in some necessary and honest trade, occupation, or profession. The speculating party includes all those whose private interests are promoted by the existence of banks, such as bank officers, stockholders, stockdealers, and speculators of every description, who become such, or are prompted to reckless speculation, by bank facilities.

The industrious party include all operatives, and a vast number, who thoughtlessly advocate the banking system, but who live by honest industry, and whose interests are inconsistent with the existence of banks. They, also, from the same source-active industry-sustain and enrich all the members of the speculating party, without a murmur, and a portion of them are among the loudest in praises of the banking system. It is because they do not see the operation of bank machinery, by which the fruits of their toil and labor are insensibly and clandestinely drawn into the coffers of the speculator. In the same spirit in which monastic asylums, orders of nobility, and feudal tenures, were once considered necessary adjuncts to organized communities, do these men, really belonging to one party, but constantly playing into the hands of their adversaries, look upon banks as something which always have been, (so far as

Again no particular bill, of the sixty-one millions, was convertible, except upon a remote contingency-that of being among the first bills presented for payment. Bills convertible on a remote contingency, or, indeed, on any contingency, do not represent money; and, therefore, it may be truly affirmed, that no fraction of the sixty-one millions, then afloat was the representative of wealth. To issue, and characterize it as such, was a gross fraud upon the people. One peep behind the curtain, by the bill holders, whose interests were involved, and a scramble for preference would have ensued; the bubble would have burst, and the industrious classes would have lost at the least forty-six millions, which were then safely deposited in bank coffers. Corporations without souls. being destitute of moral accountability, deaf to the calls of justice and the cries of humanity, governed solely by interest, seldom pay a debt, what ever may be their claims against customers, after their credit is ruined, and their means of peculation destroyed. Hence I am justified in saying, if the truth had been disclosed the loss to the industrious would have been at least forty-six millions. The currency was rotten at the core; it has continued decaying, daily more and more, till the external semblance of the thing has passed away, has left us prostrate and humiliated, with an apparent inclination to bow, submissively, to the mandates of a haughty and insatiable monied aristocracy. We have not had a sound currency since the Bohon Upas of bank guardianship spread its broad branches over this widely extended country. Without a sound currency, no nation can

continue to prosper.

Sir, it is the duty of the general government "to regulate the curren cy," but it has not been done, because the states have usurped the powers of that government, in regard to this subject, and, under present circumstances, it is not in the power of that government to relieve us, 25 it is presumed that public opinion is not prepared for penal enactments against the circulation of state paper. Is it not then the duty of this con vention to awaken from this fatal lethargy; to restrain the legislature in its ruinous policy; to interpose its agency to arouse us to a sense of our abject condition, to renovate our energies, for one united and desperate struggle, to save the commonwealth from the withering influences, and paralizing effects of a depreciating currency?

Here Mr. READ yielded the floor; and,

On motion of FULLER, the committee rose and reported progress; The Convention adjourned.

and,

FRIDAY, NOVEMBER 17, 1837.

Mr. SELLERS presented a petition from citizens of Montgomery county, praying that measures may be taken to prevent all amalgamation between the white and coloured population in regard to the government of our state, which petition was ordered to lie on the table.

Mr. KONIGMACHER, of Lancaster, moved that the convention proceed to the second reading and consideration of the following resolution offered by him yesterday, viz:

"Resolved That the printing of petitions and memoria's presented to this Conven tion, will hereafter be dispensed with, unless ordered by two thirds of the members present."

The motion being agreed to, the resolution was read a second time, amended and adopted.

+

A motion was made by Mr. MAGEE, of Perry county,

That the convention proceed at this time to the second reading and consideration of resolution No. 48, in the words following, viz:

“Resolved, That a committee be appointed to inquire into the expediency of so amending the constitution of Pennsylvania, as to prohibit the future emigration into this state, of free persons of colour and fugitive slaves, from other states or territories."

Mr. MAGEE said, that he did not desire to elicit debate, nor should he himself detain the committee with any observations, unless the course persued by other gentlemen might require him to do so. The resolution explained itself. It simply called for a committee of inquiry, and as it had now been lying a considerable length of time on the files of the house, he trusted that the resolution would be adopted, and that the subject would be forthwith investigated.

Mr. DONNELL demanded the yeas and nays.

Mr. THOMAS, of Chester county, moved to amend the same, by inserting between the words 66 of" and " free," in the third line, the word

"foreigners."

Mr. T. said, that he was desirous to have a detailed report from a committee, on the subject of all emigration into the state of Pennsylvania: and if such a committee was to be appointed at this time, it would be better that the whole range of emigration of every kind should be embraced in the inquiry.

Mr. M'CAHEN demanded the yeas and nays on the amendment.

Mr. MAGEE said, that he had risen simply for the purpose of inquiring of the gentleman from Chester county, (Mr. Thomas) what was the object he had in view, in offering his amendment? The intention of the amendment as he conceived, was to throw ridicule on the subject of the original resolution. No other construction could be put upon it; and it was extremely out of place here. I am not myself, continued Mr. M. a foreigner, although, I am a descendant of foreigners; and if, as I suppose, it is the design of the gentleman from Chester county, to throw ridicule upon that class of our citizens and to bring them into dis

repute, I can only say that he shews a very mistaken judgment in selecting this as the plan for such attempts. I will tell the gentleman that the class of men upon whom he would thus throw slight, taken as an aggre. gate, are not to be surpassed in point of intelligence, moral character, of patriotism, by any other class of people in the state of Pennsylvania. I do not indeed know what the situation of the country would be at the present time, if it had not been for the presence of foreigners. I think: would have been but a wild wilderness, and that its situation to day would have been rather awkward. It would have been a difficult matter w settle between the whites and the blacks, as to who should have the mas tering in our political institutions; and no man can tell what the resul might have been. But, sir, I shall not pursue the subject farther. My resolution merely proposes an inquiry into a subject, which we all acknowledge to be of great importance to the people of this state. I do not think that it is a fit subject for ridicule, and I hope that the gentleman from Chester county will withdraw his proposition.

Mr. MARTIN, of Philadelphia county, said it appeared to him that the amendment proposed by the gentleman from Chester county, travelled out of the road, and contained matter which lay beyond the power of this convention. It would be in the recollection of every gentleman here, that the subject of the powers of this body had, in the early stages of its ses sion, been fully discussed, and had been settled upon very liberal principles. In his view, the convention would be going beyond all calculation, if it undertook to inquire into the expediency of annulling the constitution of the United States. And this, said Mr. M., is in effect the proposition contained in the amendment of the gentleman form Ches ter county.

The constitution of the United States provides for the emigration of foreigners into these states; and yet we have here a proposition for the appointment of a committee to inquire into the expediency of prohibi them from coming. Where do we find our authority for this proceed ing? Or, are we about to set up this convention as a supreme tribunal over the whole land, to put down the constitution of the United States, and to do any other unjust and illegal acts which may suggest themselves to our fancy? It will behoove this body to look to its acts, and to be care ful that it does not go beyond its legitimate sphere of action-that it does not travel over the border line of the state of Pennsylvania, trespassing on other states, and invading the powers of other tribunals. Sir. I think the subject of the resolution proposed by the gentleman from Perry coun ty, is a very grave one, and that it ought to receive the deliberate consid eration of this convention. And if the gentleman from Chester county. who moved this amendment, intended merely to ridicule the principle which is laid down in that resolution, I must tell him that he is not treat ing with fairness such of the members of this body as are in favor of the proposed investigation. If, however, the gentleman is in earnest, I would recommend him to turn to the constitution of the United States, and then he will be able to satisfy himself that his object is not tangible. I hope, therefore, that he will save the time of the committee by withdrawing his amendment ;-if he does not, I trust it will be rejected.

Mr. WOODWARD moved to amend the amendment by adding thereto, the words" and that the said committee be also instructed to inquire into