THE BANK, THE SUB-TREASURY, AND PARTY DEVELOPMENT BETWEEN 1832 AND 1842
[Jackson and the Bank after the Election of 1832]—[The Power of the Secretary of the Treasury over the Government Deposits]—[Removal of McLane and Duane]—[Taney's Report to Congress of December 3rd, 1835]—[Abuses of Power by Jackson and Taney]—[The Senate's Censure of the President and Secretary of the Treasury]—[National Republicans Take the Name of Whigs]—[The Cardinal Doctrine of the Whigs]—[The Change of the Deposits, and the Specie Order of 1836]—[Van Buren's Election and the Panic of "'37"]—[The Sub-Treasury Idea]—[The Establishment of the Sub-Treasury System]—[The Election of 1840]—[Whig Legislative Projects in Regard to the Bank and the Tariff]—[The Party Treason of Tyler and the Whig War upon the President's Veto Power]—[The Whigs Unable to Encounter the Questions of Territorial Extension and Slavery Extension.]
When the violent agitation of the slavery question, in the middle of the fourth decade, came so suddenly upon the nation, it found the great political parties divided upon issues which partook more of the character of economic policies than that of rights, or of governmental forms and powers. It is true that the protective tariff, the Bank, and internal improvements had been denounced by some persons as unconstitutional, but neither party held this view of these subjects at the beginning of the fourth decade of the century. They were regarded by the two great parties from the point of view of economic policy, and were supported or opposed by them on the ground of conduciveness or lack of conduciveness to the public welfare. More exactly, the Bank was the chief political issue between 1832 and 1840. It was in the conflict between Congress and the President in regard to the Bank that the national Republicans took the title of Whigs, anti-prerogative men.
| Jackson and the Bank after the election of 1832. |
After the election of 1832 upon the Bank issue, President Jackson, naturally for him, regarded himself as the only representative of the present will of the people in the Government. The Congress, at the time of the election, was, as we know, favorable to the Bank. The newly elected members of the House of Representatives would not assemble for a year probably, and the Senate would probably sustain the Bank after that. The President, therefore, resolved to do by edict what Congress would not do by statute—destroy the Bank.
| The power of the Secretary of the Treasury over the Government deposits. |
The sixteenth section of the Bank Act provided that the funds of the United States should be deposited in the Bank or its branches, unless the Secretary of the Treasury should at any time otherwise order and direct. The Secretary of the Treasury was thus impliedly authorized by Congress to cease depositing these funds in the Bank or its branches at his own discretion, and was made directly responsible to Congress in the exercise of this authority, by the provision that he must report, so soon as possible, to Congress his reasons for making use of the power. The President thus had no direct authority in the matter. He could exercise only an indirect control through his power over the tenure of the Secretary. At this period in the history of the tenure of office in the United States, the power of removal was regarded as a prerogative of the President alone.