nterest of banking
institutions and their stockholders throughout the Union to use their
exertions for the increase of taxation and the accumulation of a surplus
revenue, and while an excuse is afforded the means are furnished for
those excessive issues which lead to extravagant trading and speculation
and are the forerunners of a vast debt abroad and a suspension of the
banks at home.

Impressed, therefore, as I am with the propriety of the funds of the
Government being withdrawn from the private use of either banks or
individuals, and the public money kept by duly appointed public agents,
and believing as I do that such also is the judgment which discussion,
reflection, and experience have produced on the public mind, I leave the
subject with you. It is, at all events, essential to the interests of
the community and the business of the Government that a decision should
be made.

Most of the arguments that dissuade us from employing banks in the
custody and disbursement of the public money apply with equal force to
the receipt of their notes for public dues. The difference is only in
form. In one instance the Government is a creditor for its deposits, and
in the other for the notes it holds. They afford the same opportunity
for using the public moneys, and equally lead to all the evils attendant
upon it, since a bank can as safely extend its discounts on a deposit
of its notes in the hands of a public officer as on one made in its own
vaults. On the other hand, it would give to the Government no greater
security, for in case of failure the claim of the note holder would be
no better than that of a depositor.

I am aware that the danger of inconvenience to the public and
unreasonable pressure upon sound banks have been urged as objections
to requiring the payment of the revenue in gold and silver. These
objections have been greatly exaggerated. From the best estimates we may
safely fix the amount of specie in the country at $85,000,000, and the
portion of that which would be employed at any one time in the receipts
and disbursements of the Government, even if the proposed change were
made at once, would not, it is now, after fuller investigation, believed
exceed four or five millions. If the change were gradual, several
years would elapse before that sum would be required, with annual
opportunities in the meantime to alter the law should experience prove
it to be oppressive or inconvenient. The portions of the commun