quiet and friendship between the whites and the blacks at the South be promoted by depriving the whites of all means of reviving their industry, and, consequently, of employing the blacks and paying them wages? What the whites of the South want, at this time, above all other things, is the means of developing their industry, by employing their own labor, and the labor of the blacks, to the best advantage; and what the blacks want, at this time, above all other things at least, above all other things that they are at all likely to get is labor and wages, abundant labor, and the highest possible wages. To both of these classes, then, currency, and a great amount of it, are indispensable. The price of cotton is now so high, and will be for years, that, if the whites can but get capital to carry on their industry, the competition among them for the labor of the black man will insure him protection, good treatment and high wages; and the whites and blacks will thus be brought together by a union of interest and mutual dependence and benefits; a union that will secure the permanent security of both; and the only union that will secure permanent peace and friendship between them. But let the United States make war upon this system at the South, and it, so far, virtually enforces and perpetuates the stagnation of industry, the consequent poverty of the whites, their inability to employ the labor of the blacks, and the consequent idleness, vice, crime and wretchedness of the blacks, and perpetual and violent hatred and conflict between the two races.

The carrying of capital from the North to. revive the industry of the South, is like carrying water in pint cups to irrigate an immense territory parched with drought. My banking system, based upon their own lands, would give an ample and perpetual supply. The general adoption of this system by the South would, almost instantly, double the value of all her real property, and also speedily double her productive industry. It would at once establish her credit in the North and in England, and enable her to supply herself with everything she needs. And the benefits of this increased wealth, industry and credit would not be monopolized by the whites, but would be liberally shared in by the blacks as a necessary result from the increased demand for their labor.

Will the Government be, in any manner, justified in suppressingto such a degree as, by the prohibition of this system, it would suppress the industry of ten millions of people, whose industrial rights it is, at this time, as much constitutionally bound to protect, and whose industrial interests it is, at this time, as much constitutionally bound to promote, as it is to protect the industrial rights, and promote the industrial interests, of any other ten millions of the people of the United States. Will it be, in any manner, justified in suppressing all this industry for the contemptible, tyrannical, and senseless purpose of compelling them to use a currency which they are incapable of supplying themselves with? or to adopt a banking system which they are utterly unable to put in operation?

But, sir, suppose that, from any motive, the Government should

attempt to suppress all this industry in order to force the national banking system upon the South, the important question arises, Is the attempt likely to succeed?

You have yourself already (in your last annual report) declared the legal tender acts unconstitutional; and I can hardly conceive that you can any longer claim that the bank act, of which the legal tender acts are so vital a part, is constitutional.

In

But, independently of this particular feature, all the judicial opinion extant is against the constitutionality of the bank act. the case of "McCulloch vs. Maryland," the Supreme Court declared that the charter of the old United States bank was constitutional distinctly and solely upon the ground that the bank was a needful and proper agent for keeping and disbursing the public moneys; which duties the bank, by its charter, agrees, and was required to perform, free of all charge to the Government. The opinion of the Court was simply this, that, if the Government needed such an agent for fulfilling any of its constitutional duties, it had the power to create one for that purpose. But this opinion, which went to justify the creation of a single bank, with a few branches, needful and convenient for the performance of specific duties on behalf of the Government, has no tendency whatever to justify the creation of fifteen hundred banks, for which the Government has no use, and that are required to perform no duties at all for the Government.

The real object of Congress in establishing these banks, and suppressing, so far as they can, all others, is to limit and control the currency of the country; and that is equivalent to limiting and controlling the credit, industry, commerce and wealth of the country, and bestowing them, as privileges, upon their favorites, which favorites, in this case, are the bankers and their customers. No possible attempt, on the part of Congress, could be more flagrantly unconstitutional, tyrannical or unjust than this. It is equivalent to a declaration that the rights of credit, commerce, industry and wealth are no longer to be regarded as the natural or constitutional rights of the people at large, to be enjoyed justly and impartially by all; but that they are henceforth to be considered as mere privileges, to be dispensed at will by Congress to their favorites.

If Congress have any power to say who may, and who may not, issue bank notes, they have the same power to say who may, and who may not, issue promissory notes; for bank notes are nothing but promissory notes, differing, in no legal quality, from any other promissory notes; and Congress have as much constitutional authority to suppress one of these kinds of notes as the other. They have as much constitutional power to confer upon their favorites the exclusive privilege of issuing common promissory notes as they have to confer upon their favorites the exclusive privilege of issuing bank notes; and one of these acts would be à no more direct or flagrant attack upon all freedom and equality in regard to credit, industry, commerce and wealth than is the other.

Under what color of authority is this astounding usurpation at

tempted? Solely this: It is said that Congress may have occasion to deposit money with more or less banks; and, therefore, they have power to assume absolute control of all the banking business of the country, and confer it as a privilege upon their favorites. As well might it be said that, because Congress have occasion sometimes to advertise, in public newspapers, proposals for furnishing certain supplies to the Government, therefore they have power to assume absolute control of all newspaper printing in the country; to incorporate all newspaper printers; to say who may, and who may not, publish newspapers; to say who may, and who may not, advertise in them; to prescribe the conditions on which alone newspapers may be published and advertisements inserted in them; and thus to confer these privileges upon their favorites. Or, as well might it be said that, because Congress have occasion to procure more or less other printing to be done for the Government, and may have power to incorporate one or more companies so do the Government printing, therefore they have power to astume absolute control of all the printing in the country; to incorporate such companies as they please, and to suppress all others; and, in short, to say who may, and who may not, practice the art of printing, and to prescribe all the conditions upon which printers shall be allowed to print books or anything else for the people at large. Or, as well might it be said that, because Congress have occasion, at times, to contract with shipowners to transport men and supplies for the Government, and may have power to incorporate those with whom they thus contract, therefore they have power to assume absolute control of all shipping and shipping business; to incorporate so many companies of shipbuilders and shipowners as they see fit; to prescribe the kind of ships to be built, and the terms on which alone they shall be owned and employed; and to suppress all other shipbuilding and navigation in the country. Equally well, also, might it be said that, because Congress may have occasion to make contracts for the supply of horses, beef, pork, grain, carrriages, clothing, etc., etc., for the army, and may have power to incorporate those with whom these contracts are made, therefore they have power to assume entire control of the whole business of raising horses and cattle and grain, and the making of carriages and clothing of the people at large; to prescribe who may, and who may not, engage in these several occupations, and all the conditions on which they may be carried on; and to limit the supply of all these commodities at their discretion.

All these usurpations would be no more flagrantly unconstitutional and tyrannical than is that of Congress in attempting to control the paper currency of the country-the great instrumentality by which nearly all the industry and commerce of the country are carried on-and giving the privilege of supplying it to corporations of their

Whether the Courts will sustain these usurpations remains to be If they should, it will be equivalent to a declaration that, so far as they are concerned, the Constitution is at an end.

seen.

It is worthy of notice, that, of the nine justices now on the bench of the Supreme Court, at least six of them, viz, Wayne, Nelson, Grier, Clifford, Swayne and Field were members of the party that put down the old United States bank on the ground of its being unconstitutional.

Chase also stands committed against the unconstitutionality of that bank. When seeking the senatorship from Ohio in 1849, in a letter to J. G. Breslin, urging "a cordial union between the old line Democracy and the free Democracy," he said:

"The free Democracy, holding in common with the old line Democracy, the cardinal and essential doctrines of the Democratic faith, believe that the time has come for the application of those doctrines to the subject of slavery, as well as to the subjects of currency and trade. I am a Democrat, unre

servedly, and I feel earnestly solicitous for the success of the Democratic organization and the triumph of its principles. The doctrines of the Democracy, on the subjects of trade, currency and special privileges, command the entire assent of my judgment.*.

Of "the doctrines of the Democracy on the subject of currency," none were so conspicuous as that of their opposition to a United States bank.

I do not know the former opinions of the other two justices, Miller and Davis, but it is highly probable that they were the same with those of their associates.

It is also worthy of notice that, with a single exception (Curtis), all the other justices of that Court who received their appointments within the last thirty-five years, viz: Taney, McKinley, Catron, Barbour, Daniell, Woodbury and Campbell, held the same opinion as to the constitutionality of the old United States bank.

If, after so uniform a course of judicial opinion, for so long a period of years, as to the unconstitutionality of the former bank (which, to say the least, had some color of argument in its favor), the present bench shall sanction such an utter monstrosity as the present national banking system, they will thereby virtually proclaim to the world, that, with them, the Constitution is a dead letter, and that usurpation never found, or could desire, more supple and corrupt instruments than themselves. And yet the prospect, or the supposed prospect, of such corruption on their part, is the only ground on which the present banking system rests for its chance of being sustained.

It is further worthy of notice that the present President of the United States originally held the opinion that the old United States bank was unconstitutional. If his opinion on that point remains unchanged, he is bound not only to veto every modification of the present system, but to use his whole influence for the destruction of the system itself.

Moreover, there can be no doubt that a great majority of the people at large held the old bank unconstitutional; and such is very likely the opinion of a majority of the people at this time in regard

This letter was afterwards brought up in the Senate, and is given in the Cong. Globe for 1849-50, p. 185.

to the present system. At any rate, none can reasonably doubt that open and vehement war will be made upon the present system, so soon as more urgent matters are disposed of.

The prospects of sustaining the present system, therefore, are evidently not such as to justify the Government in resisting the introduction of any other system whatever, that stands on legitimate principles, and which the people may desire.

I should like to say much more, but trust I have already said enough to secure your careful consideration of this matter. Your obedient servant,

Boston, Mass.

LYSANDER SPOONER.

ART. VI.-NOVELS OF SIR E. BULWER LYTTON.

THE mischievous spirit of wanton boyhood, which takes delight in throwing stones through the neighbor's window, and then, from some secure retreat, watching the disgusted landlord as he fumes and frets over his broken panes that spirit does not pass away with the frolicsome hours of youth, but only finds a more sedate and dignified form of expression.

Behold yon critic in his lonely closet, and by his well-trimmed lamp, and you will see that the love of mischief is there, only that instead of the shining face of the light-hearted boy, it wears a countenance bearded, and wrinkled, and severe.

In that well-used book before him are gathered the set phrases and smooth sentences that he has as carefully selected as the barefooted stripling selects his pebbles from the brook, and which here lie in keeping for future sport and fun. At last his opportunity comes. An aspiring author transforms his castles in the air into solid structures of paper and ink, and he listens anxiously for the world's praise of this well-built edifice of his brain. But the critic sees only its glass windows, its weak places; out comes his sling, and away go the chosen stones whizzing through the air; then there is heard a shivering of glass; the poor author tears his hair, stamps his foot, and rails out wild maledictions upon this evil world; and the critic laughs in his sleeve. And we see full well that the child has been father to the man.

Many, indeed, have been the sportful critics who have let fly their missiles at the polished panes of Bulwer, and if they have not been smashed to pieces, it has been because such tiny pebbles, from such feeble arms, make no impression upon their strong surface, but only tapped it lightly, and fell down as harmlessly as gentle drops of

rain.

We do not mean to intimate that Bulwer is impervious to criticism, but we do mean to censure these ready-made critics, who, having read superficially and studied not at all, have set to work to demolish his fair name by applying to his character such epithets as "Sugared Monsters, "Painted Devils," and "Devils in Disguise." Petty mischief in the merry-making boy may be looked over, but