Lincoln, Gold, and Greenbacks
by
Thomas J. DiLorenzo
When
Abraham Lincoln first entered politics in 1832 he announced to Illinois
voters that "My politics are short and sweet, like the old
woman’s dance. I am in favor of a national bank . . . in favor of
the internal improvements system and a high protective tariff."
These three things – central banking, protectionism, and what we
today call corporate welfare (for the railroad and road-building
industries) are what Lincoln would devote the next twenty-eight
years to achieving, working tirelessly in the political trenches
of the Whig and Republican parties. In doing so he became a master
politician, a designation that the founding fathers warned all citizens
to be fearful of.
The
year 1832 is significant because that was the year of the big showdown
over the rechartering of the Bank of the United States between President
Andrew Jackson and the bank’s president, Nicolas Biddle. Jackson
won the showdown, the bank became defunct, and the Whig Party was
created largely in response to it and in response to Henry Clay’s
failure to prevail with the "Tariff of Abominations,"
which would have raised average tariff rates to nearly 50 percent.
A
central bank was the potential political lifeblood of the Whig Party,
and no one was more devoted to resurrecting it than was Lincoln.
As University of Virginia historian Michael Holt writes in his treatise,
The
Rise and Fall of the Whig Party, during the 1840, 1844,
and 1848 elections Lincoln "crisscrossed the state ardently
and eloquently defending specific Whig programs like a national
bank . . . . Few people in the party were so committed to its economic
agenda as Lincoln." In 1848 Lincoln stumped for Zachary Taylor,
promising that if he were elected he would revive the central bank.
He would continue to criticize Jackson and advocate central banking
for the rest of his political career.

In Monetary
Policy of the United States Richard Timberlake clearly explained
the paramount importance of central banking to the political ambitions
of Lincoln and his fellow Whigs: "To the Whigs . . . a national
bank was their life – the vital principle – without which they could
not live as a party – the power which was to give them power . . . . To
lose it, was to lose the fruits of the election, with the prospect
of losing the party itself." In other words, the Whigs always
intended to use a central bank, and the printing of paper money
not backed by gold or silver, as the means of financing massive
patronage schemes ("internal improvements") that they
hoped would keep them in power indefinitely. This is precisely why
the Jacksonians were so opposed to it.
Andrew
Jackson and the Bank War
The
best published account of the "bank war" between Andrew
Jackson and Nicolas Biddle is Robert Remini’s Andrew
Jackson and the Bank War. Jackson considered fiat money
to be "the instrument of the swindler and the cheat. For Andrew
Jackson, hard money – specie – was the only legitimate money; anything
else was a fraud to steal from honest men." (Remini, p. 19).
Jackson also believed that the doctrine of states’ rights meant
that a central bank was unconstitutional. This view was quite pervasive,
especially in the South. As Timberlake writes (p. 83): "The
states . . . . were properly jealous and
fearful of encroachment by the federal government. Since a central
bank would necessarily be a federal bank and would maintain and
operate state branches from a distant center, proponents of states’
rights found opposition to a national bank almost mandatory."
Jackson
suspected that a central bank would be controlled by Northern bankers
and would be used to manipulate politics. Remini does point out
that the strongest support for the bank came from New England, whereas
the fiercest opposition came from Southern politicians like Jackson.
Jackson
had good reason to fear political manipulation by a central bank.
The first president of the Bank of the United States (BUS) was Navy
Captain William Jones, who had no banking experience and who had
just gone personally bankrupt. Murray Rothbard blames him for the
Panic of 1819 in his book of the same title, which is cited by Remini.
The
Second BUS was run by Nicolas Biddle, who continued to politicize
the bank in many ways, including granting low-interest loans and
"consulting contracts" to politicians who would support
the bank’s expansion. Jackson’s Treasury Secretary, Roger B. Taney
(the future chief justice of the U.S. Supreme Court) complained
of the bank’s "corrupting influence" and "its patronage
greater than that of government" for good reason. As Henry
Clay biographer Maurice Baxter wrote in Henry
Clay and the American System, Clay (Lincoln’s political
role model) left Congress for two years in 1822 after having incurred
$40,000 in personal debt to become general counsel of the BUS. His
income from this caper "apparently amounted to what he needed"
to pay off his personal debts, writes Baxter. "When he resigned
to become Secretary of State in 1825, he was pleased with his compensation."
Another
prominent Whig, Daniel Webster, did not even bother resigning from
Congress before collecting bribes. He simply demanded a "retainer"
from Biddle "If it be wished that my relation to the Bank should
be continued."
Biddle
proved Jackson’s charges of political corruption to be correct when,
during the 1828 election he spent more than $100,000 of the bank’s
money in support of Jackson’s political opponents; promised BUS
money to friendly politicians to spend on "internal improvements"
schemes; paid for the reprinting of Henry Clay’s speeches in support
of the BUS; and paid for newspaper ads that promoted himself and
the bank and attacked Jackson.
The
U.S. Supreme Court ruled that a central bank was constitutional,
but it is important to keep in mind that, prior to the War for Southern
Independence, it was not at all universally agreed that the federal
government itself should be the arbiter of the limits of its own
powers. That is, Supreme Court decisions were viewed by many, including
President Andrew Jackson, as mere opinions and not Holy Writ, as
they are today. As Jackson said in response to the Court’s decision:
To this
conclusion I cannot assent. Congress and the president as well
as the Court must each for itself be guided by its own opinion
of the Constitution . . . . the opinion
of the judges has no more authority over Congress than the opinion
of Congress has over the judges, and on that point the president
is independent of both. The authority of the Supreme Court must
not, therefore, be permitted to control the Congress or the executive
when acting in their legislative capacities.
For
the next several decades the political battle would continue over
central banking, with such advocates of a more centralized and omnipotent
state as John Quincy Adams, Webster, Clay, and Lincoln on one side,
and John C. Calhoun and the Jacksonians on the other. As Remini
writes, "Calhoun argued in favor of a system that would convert
the United States to the gold standard exclusively."
The
Independent Treasury System
The
demise of the BUS led to an alternative banking system known as
the Independent Treasury System, which was put into place in 1840,
ended by the Whigs in 1841, resurrected in 1846, and ended finally
during the Lincoln administration. As Jeffrey Hummel wrote in an
essay on President Martin van Buren in Reassessing
the Presidency, the Independent Treasury System, under which
the only legally recognizable money was gold and silver coins and
all currency was redeemable in specie on demand, "ushered in
an era of financial deregulation at the national level." It
was probably the most stable monetary system in American history,
according to Hummel. Timberlake writes that "The Independent
Treasury may well appear in retrospect as the optimal monetary-fiscal
institution within the basic framework of a gold standard."
Lincoln
the Bank Whig
Abraham
Lincoln was fiercely opposed to the Independent Treasury System.
On December 26, 1839, he gave a speech in opposition to it and in
support of central banking in Springfield, Illinois. The speech
was Clintonian in length and charged that the system would generate
economic instability, be extremely expensive to operate, would be
an insecure depository of money, and would "reduce the quantity
of money in circulation." These turned out to be red herring
arguments.
Lincoln’s
speech was quite extreme and even bizarre in some respects. He quite
hysterically claimed, for instance, that under a gold and silver
standard "All [will] suffer more or less, and very many will
lose everything that renders life desirable."
Lincoln
was not a religious man, and many of his contemporaries believed
he was an atheist. But being a consummate politician he frequently
invoked Scripture in his speeches, including this one. "The
Savior of the world chose twelve disciples, and even one of that
small number, selected by super-human wisdom, turned out a traitor
and a devil. And, it may not be improper here to add, that Judas
carried the bag – was the Sub-Treasurer of the Savior and his disciples."
An Independent Treasury System would supposedly be a "traitor"
to the American public just as Judas betrayed Jesus, said Lincoln.
About
a year later Lincoln had become a leader in the Illinois legislature
and he repeatedly opposed proposals by Democrats to audit the Illinois
state bank. In December 1840 the Illinois Democrats wanted to require
the bank to make payments in gold or silver instead of paper. The
bank was authorized to continue its suspension of specie payment
through the end of the year. Lincoln wanted desperately to avoid
this outcome, so he bolted for the door and instructed his fellow
Whigs to follow him. Without a quorum the legislature could not
vote to adjourn, and the suspension of specie payment would continue.
But
the door was locked and guarded, so Lincoln literally jumped out
of the first-floor window, followed by his lemming-like Whig followers.
The Democrats ridiculed him as "Lincoln and his flying brethren,"
and his stunt failed anyway.
In
What
Has Government Done to Our Money? Murray Rothbard explained
the significance of the phrase, "suspension of specie payment."
This explanation clarifies just what it was that Lincoln and the
Whigs (and later the Republicans) were fighting so vigorously for.
The bluntest
way for government to foster inflation . . . is to grant the banks
the special privilege of refusing to pay their obligations, while
yet continuing in their operation. While everyone else must pay
their debts or go bankrupt, the banks are permitted to refuse
redemption of their receipts, at the same time forcing their own
debtors to pay when their loans fall due. The usual name for this
is a "suspension of specie payments." A more accurate name would
be "license for theft," for what else can we call a government
permission to continue in business without fulfilling one’s contract?
Richard
Timberlake was right: The Whig Party failed to revive the BUS and,
without an ability to promise taxpayer-financed subsidies to its
big business supporters, the party imploded in the early 1850s.
Many of the same special interests that had supported the Whig Party
then supported the new Republican Party. Lincoln assured his Illinois
constituents that there was not policy difference at all between
the Whig and Republican Parties.
Lincoln’s
Banking Legislation
As
soon as Lincoln took office the old Whig coalition finally controlled
the entire government. It immediately tripled the average tariff
rate, began subsidizing the building of a transcontinental railroad
in California even though a desperate war was being waged,
and on February 25, 1862, the Legal Tender Act empowered the Secretary
of the Treasury to issue paper money ("greenbacks") that
were not immediately redeemable in gold or silver. The National
Currency Acts of 1863 and 1864 created a system of nationally chartered
banks that could issue bank notes supplied to them by the new Comptroller
of the Currency, and a 10 percent tax was placed on state bank notes
to drive them out of business and establish a federal monetary monopoly.
The government’s paper money flooded the banks so that by July 1864
greenback dollars were worth a mere 35 cents in gold.
Ever
since the days of Andrew Jackson American presidents had opposed
a fiat money system. The Jacksonian opposition to central banking
was ended, literally, at gunpoint. Lincoln’s main role was to avoid
doing what presidents had done for the previous three decades: veto
central banking legislation. There was no chance of that since Lincoln,
unlike Jackson and President John Tyler, was a career-long advocate
of central banking and fiat money.
Financing
the American Empire
The
Republican Party establishment, led by Lincoln, was very clear on
what it hoped to achieve with a central bank. As Heather Cox Richardson
recounts in The
Greatest Nation on the Earth: Republican Economic Policies During
the Civil War, Senator John Sherman, brother of General
William Tecumseh Sherman and chairman of the U.S. Senate Finance
Committee, declared, "nationalize as much as possible, even
the currency, so as to make men love their country before their
states. All private interests, all local interests, all banking
interests, the interests of individuals, everything, should be subordinate
now to the interest of the Government." This is a perfect rendition
of the collectivist philosophy that would plague the twentieth century
with its insistence that citizens are to be the mere servants of
the state, rather than the other way around.
The
sponsor of the banking legislation in the House of Representatives
was Congressman Elbridge G. Spaulding, a New York banker. Spaulding
clearly argued that the new fiat money system would finally clear
the way for the mercantilist system of massive "internal improvement"
subsidies. The New York Times published a celebratory editorial
on March 9, 1863, in which it said, "The legal tender act and
the national currency bill crystallized . . . . a
centralization of power, such as Hamilton might have eulogized as
magnificent."
Kentucky
Democrat Lasarus Powell was not as enthusiastic. "The result
of this legislation," he said, "is utterly to destroy
the rights of the states. It is asserting a power which if carried
out to its logical result would enable the national Congress to
destroy every institution of the States and cause all power to be
consolidated and concentrated here [in Washington, D.C.]."
But of course it would; that was always the intention of The Party
of Lincoln.
The
Party of Lincoln wanted to transform the American government from
the limited, constitutional republic of the founding fathers to
an empire that would rival Great Britain’s, and they knew they needed
a central bank to achieve that task. Empires are very expensive
propositions, as they require sending armies and navies all over
the globe. As Richardson explains: "By 1863 the Republicans
envisioned a dominant international role for a unified American
nation, and [Senator John] Sherman promised that the bank bill,
with its implicit strengthening of the national government, would
advance that goal" (emphasis added). The Republicans under
Lincoln "were building a new economic role for an increasingly
powerful national government, permanently involving it in the country’s
monetary affairs."
September
24, 2002
This
paper was delivered at the First Annual Burton S. Blumert Gold
Conference, San Mateo, California, September 14, 2002. Thomas
J. DiLorenzo [send him mail]
is
the author of the LRC #1 bestseller, The
Real Lincoln: A New Look at Abraham Lincoln, His Agenda, and an
Unnecessary War
(Forum/Random House, 2002) and professor of economics at Loyola
College in Maryland.
Copyright
© 2002 LewRockwell.com
Thomas
DiLorenzo Archives
|