Mr. Madison vetoed the bill, principally on account of this provision. But $28,000,000 of bonds were substituted for treasury notes, as capital of the bank; and by a combination of the Federal party and a few Democrats it was chartered. The charter provided that no other such bank should be chartered by Congress for twenty years. This implied, also, that all treasury notes intended to circulate as money should be withdrawn, and that this bank should furnish all the national paper circulation for twenty years. For this privilege the bank paid $1,500,000. The contract on the part of the government was disgraceful, but, having been made, it had to be carried out; and it was carried out, as the following acts of Congress show: _The Act of March 3, 1817 (Statutes 3, p. 377)._—The second Bank of the United States had just gone into operation. Congress was compelled to comply with its part of the contract. It, therefore, passed this law, which repealed all laws authorizing the reissue of the “treasury notes of 1815.” But the people had these government notes, and they preferred them to bank notes or coin. They knew that the repeal of the law authorizing their reissue could not affect the value of those then in their hands, for a valuable consideration paid the government. They, therefore, held on to the notes (as our people should now, in spite of Sherman, Gage & Co.) Instead of paying them into the treasury, where the law required them to be destroyed, the people held on to them, and used them in business, greatly to the annoyance of the bank and of the Secretary of the Treasury, then a bank man (Mr. Dallas). This officer ordered the collector of revenue to refuse to receive these notes for duties on imports, supposing that by this means he could injure their credit and force their presentation at the treasury for payment in coin or national bank notes, that they might be canceled. This gave rise to a suit in Boston. A firm presented treasury notes in payment of duties on imports, for which the law creating them provided that they should be received. The government refused to receive them, and brought suit for the duties. The defendants pleaded a tender of treasury notes. The government answered that they were not legal tender. Judge Story, in 1819, heard the case, and decided for the defendants. The decision is that “Treasury notes are legal tender for everything for which the government makes them receivable.” This decision is in 2 Mason, pages 1 to 18. This decision, though against the government, was never appealed to the Supreme Court. It, therefore, stood as the law of the land.