President Harrison died just one month after his inauguration, a casualty from which the Whig party never fully recovered. To the Congress which convened in extra session May 31, 1841, President Tyler intimated his desire that the members of that body should request a plan for a national bank from Mr. Ewing, then Secretary of the Treasury. In pursuance of the resolutions for this purpose adopted by both Houses, Mr. Ewing sent in a bill for the incorporation of the "Fiscal Bank of the United States," the essential features of which were framed in accordance with the President's suggestions. The bill passed Congress August 6, with a clause concerning branch banks differing from Mr. Ewing's, which was vetoed by the President. The letter from Mr. Tilden which follows was a criticism of this bill, and probably had something to do with its untimely fate. It does not appear from the copy to whom this letter was addressed by Mr. Tilden, but it was probably to Senator Wright. Congress subsequently passed another bill intended to meet the objections of President Tyler. He concluded he could not approve it without inconsistency, and therefore vetoed that bill also, by which act he alienated the United States Bank wing of the Whig party to such an extent as to make many friends among the party of the opposition. It is to that phase of that absorbing bank issue at Washington that Mr. Tilden refers in the succeeding letter to Mr. Nelson J. Waterbury, then a very earnest, active, and intelligent Democratic politician, a few years Mr. Tilden's junior. TO MR NELSON J. WATERBURY "NEW LEBANON, _September 11, 1841_. "MY DEAR WATERBURY,--On a flying visit of a few hours, which I made to the city some two weeks ago, I received your letter, but I was so busy in running about the country that I did not get a chance to answer it. "You judge rightly as to my sympathy with your sentiments and action in regard to the veto. Our line of duty is plain. While we render to Tyler liberal credit for every good act he does, and sustain every right measure which he proposes, and defend him against the unjust and unconstitutional attacks of the Whigs, we cannot give his administration an unqualified support, or commit ourselves in favor of his re-election. So far, we agree with him only on the bank question--and there as to _act_ of the veto, not as to its reasons, which are qualified and hesitating, and mingled with crudities and unsoundness; while as to the other questions--some of which are of great, if not equal, importance--we differ from him. If his course had been less objectionable we ought still to keep ourselves uncommitted as to the succession. We cannot enter into a bargain of office for measures. Whatever he does right, he must do spontaneously, and we will freely and heartily support, leaving the future to take care of itself.