Mr. Clay used to boast of his consistency, averring that he had never changed his opinion upon a public question but once.  We think he was much too consistent.  A notable example of an excessive consistency was his adhering to the project of a United States Bank, when there was scarcely a possibility of establishing one, and his too steadfast opposition to the harmless expedient of the Sub-treasury.  The Sub-treasury system has now been in operation for a quarter of a century.  Call it a bungling and antiquated system, if you will; it has nevertheless answered its purpose.  The public money is taken out of politics.  If the few millions lying idle in the “Strong Box” do no good, they at least do no harm; and we have no overshadowing national bank to compete with private capital, and to furnish, every few years; a theme for demagogues.  Mr. Clay saw in the Sub-treasury the ruin of the Republic.  In his great speech of 1838, in opposition to it, he uttered, in his most solemn and impressive manner, the following words:—­

“Mr. President, a great, novel, and untried measure is perseveringly urged upon the acceptance of Congress.  That it is pregnant with tremendous consequences, for good or evil, is undeniable, and admitted by all.  We firmly believe that it will be fatal to the best interests of this country, and ultimately subversive of its liberties.”

No one acquainted with Mr. Clay, and no man, himself sincere, who reads this eloquent and most labored speech, can doubt Mr. Clay’s sincerity.  Observe the awful solemnity of his first sentences:—­

“I have seen some public service, passed through many troubled times, and often addressed public assemblies, in this Capitol and elsewhere; but never before have I risen in a deliberative body under more oppressed feelings, or with a deeper sense of awful responsibility.  Never before have I risen to express my opinions upon any public measure fraught with such tremendous consequences to the welfare and prosperity of the country, and so perilous to the liberties of the people, as I solemnly believe the bill under consideration will be.  If you knew, sir, what sleepless hours reflection upon it has cost me, if you knew with what fervor and sincerity I have implored Divine assistance to strengthen and sustain me in my opposition to it, I should have credit with you, at least, for the sincerity of my convictions, if I shall be so unfortunate as not to have your concurrence as to the dangerous character of the measure.  And I have thanked my God that he has prolonged my life until the present time, to enable me to exert myself, in the service of my country, against a project far transcending in pernicious tendency any that I have ever had occasion to consider.  I thank him for the health I am permitted to enjoy; I thank him for the soft and sweet repose which I experienced last night; I thank him for the bright and glorious sun which shines upon us this day.”

And what was the question at issue?  It was whether Nicholas Biddle should have the custody of the public money at Philadelphia, and use the average balance in discounting notes; or whether Mr. Cisco should keep it at New York in an exceedingly strong vault, and not use any of it in discounting notes.