Mr. EDMUNDS. The question suggested by the Senfrom Maine is not exactly germane to m amendment, and I shall confine myself to t at. This is a matter of sufficient mortanee to Ijustify a little time devoted to it, therefore shall be excused for trespassing on the Senate. I do not think it is a true principle in legislation that we are to impose unjust burdens and taxes upon those who manifest a sincere desire to obey the law for the sake of catching a few rogues who in the State of Ohio or elsewhere may be disposed to defraud. It is perfectly true as the Senfrom Maine said, that it is the policy of the Government, and it is a correct policy in my judgment, to get rid of this old circulation, and that where State banks have taken a vantage of the double mode which is authorize by the statute of the U.S. to become national banks, and have therefore got 2 banks running in the same place over the same counter, it is perfectly right to tax them, and they ought to be taxad for that species of performance. But where, as in the‘great majorit of instances in NewEngland, and elsewhere have no doubt, these banks have turned over under the statute the very same bank and have been met by the C“omptroller of the Currenc with the statement, You cannot have any dition to your State circulation in national currency at all until on come down to the 90%, ” and when they stop issuing altogetier (as all the banks in the State of Vermont that turned over did, more than 2 dozen of them,) in order to obey the law and get new circulation and have not for a year past issued a dollar, and yet still on account of the high credit of these banks $20,000 or $30,000 or $40,000 of their currency is still circulating as a part of and not in excess of their 90%. I say it is unjust to impose any penalty upon banks of this description for this still outstanding circulation. When I therefore propose to relieve them from that penalty which ought to be imposed upon the wron doer, to still guard the Treasury and nor the policy of the Government by havin it operate yet upon all new issues, and upon all acts of the banks intended to keep it out for the amendment is not merely to “issue” but to “ kee out” I do not think it is afair ar rument to e met with the observation that t iis will be disobeyed, that somebody will expose himself to the penalties of the statute by evading it. Undoubtedly some will; but we oughtnot to leave the innocent entirely defenseless and burdened because some persons may wrong fully, in fraud of the law and subjecting themselves to the penalties of it by so doing, evade it. It appears to me that it is right and wise to adopt this amendment.