institution. On the other hand, a majority of the people are believed
to be irreconcilably opposed to that measure; they consider such a
concentration of power dangerous to their liberties, and many of them
regard it as a violation of the Constitution. This collision of opinion
has doubtless caused much of the embarrassment to which the commercial
transactions of the country have lately been exposed. Banking has become
a political topic of the highest interest, and trade has suffered in
the conflict of parties. A speedy termination of this state of things,
however desirable, is scarcely to be expected. We have seen for nearly
half a century that those who advocate a national bank, by whatever
motive they may be influenced, constitute a portion of our community too
numerous to allow us to hope for an early abandonment of their favorite
plan. On the other hand, they must indeed form an erroneous estimate
of the intelligence and temper of the American people who suppose that
they have continued on slight or insufficient grounds their persevering
opposition to such an institution, or that they can be induced by
pecuniary pressure or by any other combination of circumstances to
surrender principles they have so long and so inflexibly maintained.

My own views of the subject are unchanged. They have been repeatedly and
unreservedly announced to my fellow-citizens, who with full knowledge
of them conferred upon me the two highest offices of the Government.
On the last of these occasions I felt it due to the people to apprise
them distinctly that in the event of my election I would not be able to
cooperate in the reestablishment of a national bank. To these sentiments
I have now only to add the expression of an increased conviction that
the reestablishment of such a bank in any form, whilst it would not
accomplish the beneficial purpose promised by its advocates, would
impair the rightful supremacy of the popular will, injure the character
and diminish the influence of our political system, and bring once more