1. Skip to navigation
  2. Skip to content
  3. Skip to sidebar

Organization of Debt into Currency and Other Papers
by Charles Holt Carroll

Previous Chapter *  Next Chapter
Table of Contents

Chapter 1
The Currency and the Tariff


(Reprinted from Hunt's Merchants' Magazine and Commercial Review, XXXIII (Aug., 1855) , 191-99.)

FREEMAN HUNT, Esq., Editor of the Merchants' Magazine, etc.:—

Dear Sir:—I ask the attention of your readers to some plain thoughts on the currency and the tariff, differing from those generally promulgated. Some misapprehension of the difficulty and the profound depths of the science of political economy, in its relation to these subjects, so intimately blended in their action upon the industry, commerce, and prosperity of the nation, appears to have oppressed the minds and embarrassed the arguments of most of the writers upon them. But the normal principle, that genius, intelligence, industry, and integrity are entitled to their equivalent reward, underlies the science of political economy; and it is the duty of every man who has a thought to spare, to give it voice, and claim for this principle its just prerogative in the institutions and policy of the nation.

We see that our commercial system is in a state of antagonism to this normal principle, or national law of industry and trade; and the most marked peculiarity of our history is found in the constant drain of the precious metals—the frequent mercantile failures, the severe money pressures, and consequent prostration of industry, and the violent and unjust transitions of property that succeed—notwithstanding the genius, intelligence, and unparalleled industry of the people. Nothing of this sort occurs to any comparative degree in any other country, and in some countries such events are wholly unknown.

It is the wont of businessmen to look widely abroad, or to dive deep into the unfathomable science of political economy for the cause of the frequent pressures and panics that disturb the trade and industry of this country. It appears to me that cause is near at hand—on the surface, and capable of a very simple illustration. Let me present one that I have already published elsewhere.

Suppose, Mr. Editor, that you and I, and Peter and John, and ninety-six others, form a community large enough for varied in` dustry and mutual support, engaged in the business of life. Peter and John dig gold, and we adopt the produce of their labor for our medium of exchange and measure of value. It is plain that the produce of their labor in gold will be exchangeable for, and will properly represent the same amount of labor in your magazine, my leather, our neighbors' corn or potatoes, or anything else. This is the just condition or natural law of this state of things. Of course, he who works the most intelligently as well as the most industriously, will accumulate the most property. There will be some oscillation from excess of production in some branches, and deficiency in others, but the margin of that oscillation will be limited, soon observed, and we shall return to the proper distribution of labor, with the certainty of the vibrating pendulum to its center. It matters not how much or how little gold Peter and John produce, it will serve our purpose equally the same, and prices will keep parallel with the quantity brought into or deducted from the currency.

Some of us now discover that we can live with less labor by banking. We obtain a charter, offer the security of a strong vault, and by this and other temptations gather all the gold in the community into the coffers of our bank. We then, according to the charter, discount notes and bills receivable, credit the proceeds of the discounts to depositors, and issue bank notes, till the deposits and circulation payable in specie on demand amount to three times the sum of the gold previously constituting the currency. How much does this operation increase our property? Nothing. It will inevitably increase prices and expand our obligations of debt on the same quantity of property transferred threefold. It will give us magnitude of name for everything, but of wealth not a picayune more than before.

Now, there is another community of one hundred men in a country accessible to us—they have their Peter and John digging gold—they have no bank of credit discount—nothing of money but gold—they have as much gold as we, but only one-third the sum of money to settle the balances of trade—their price of a day's labor is necessarily one-third of ours, and the value in money of all their indigenous commodities and property must be one-third of ours. We open a commerce with this community. Does any sensible man need to be told that they will glut our markets with their commodities—nay, that they will manufacture our raw material, and sell the product back to us, charged with only one-third the sum for labor that we must pay on our own similar production, and by fair and legitimate commerce drain us of our specie? This is no mere hypothesis. It is very much the condition of our trade with Germany. Notwithstanding our reputation for whittling, they whittle out penny-whistles and Nuremburg babies, and with them whittle our specie out of our pockets. We deal with France upon similar terms for silks and gew-gaws, and with every other country in the world to a disadvantage in the exact proportion that we have depreciated our currency below theirs by the issue of bank notes and bank credits, redeemable in specie, beyond the equivalent value of bullion. With equal industry, under equal conditions of labor, they can help themselves to our gold almost without stint; and no tariff within any collectable scale of duty could prevent this result.

I make this statement broadly, to show the principle upon which this system of discounting upon the credit of the bank virtually operates. There is great protection to us in the folly and weakness of other nations, rather than in our tariff or our wisdom, which we will consider hereafter.

Meanwhile, this Briareus sits in our midst, grasping with his hundred hands our whole industry and commerce. Sometimes he appears to be reinforced by his two equally hideous brothers, who were once buried by their father in the bowels of the earth, in disgust at their deformity, and the whole three hundred handed giants are "huddling in our necks with their damned fingers," tickling us into a fancy that the dollar is almighty, and teaching us, pagans that we are, to worship its graven image in a paper note. It is but a kite. We are charmed with its graceful sweeps and curves and gyrations in the breeze; but the first squall snaps the twine, and lands our paper deity in a distant field, where other boys as foolish and as fond as we, launch it again into the air, to be admired, and lost, and found as before.

The immense variations in the quantity of this delusive currency that we call money, the greater part of which is but a mere "promise to pay" money that has no existence, produce corresponding variations in the money value of property and debts, so that no reliable estimate can be made of property for any considerable period of time. There can be no reasonable reliance that the quantity of money which measures an obligation for six months will be anywhere at its maturity to discharge the debt; and this baffling uncertainty renders the trade of the country but little better than licensed gambling.

Statisticians demonstrate that only three to five of every hundred who enter into trade in this country pass through life without failure or dying in poverty. When we consider the opportunities thus afforded to the unscrupulous of grasping the fruits of the labor of others, the distress of the conscientious, the sufferings of families, the broken health and broken hearts thus occasioned, this fact is perfectly appalling.

Perhaps the mode of estimating the exports and imports by our currency may be the only practicable way of aggregating them for statistical purposes; but it is a very indecisive and unsatisfactory account of their quantity; for it is quite possible that the quantity may remain the same, while by name in money value they would be doubled, or vice versa; and the same is true, of course, in regard to the wealth of the nation. Inflations or contractions of the currency may double the figures at one period, or reduce them fifty per cent at another. For this reason, our tabular statements of commerce and of consumption per capita are wholly unreliable; they can be frequently impressed into the service of falsehood as well as truth, and made to prove anything or nothing, to accommodate the theory or the prejudice of the writer.

In the city of Baltimore I observed for about twenty-five years the variations in the value and rent of a warehouse in the most central position for business, occupied in the first instance by Mr. Peabody, the present London banker, at the annual rent of $750 per annum. It had been built upon a ground rent of $900 per annum four or five years previously. The owner had been compelled by the monetary crisis attending the operations of the branch of the United States Bank in that city in 1819 to relinquish it to the owners of the ground, who, with one of the finest warehouses in the city added to their property, could not obtain for it within $150 per annum as much as they had before received for the ground alone. Flour at that period was worth $3.75 per barrel, so that 200 barrels of flour would represent the yearly rent of that warehouse. In the subsequent years during which it was under my observations, the rent increased from $750 to $2,000; and it is an instructive coincidence that at each new lease, 200 barrels of flour nearly or exactly represented the price of that rent, varying as it did in money, and increasing nearly threefold. No doubt that rent is worth nearly or precisely 200 barrels of flour today. This ought to show the little reliance to be placed in tabular statements of property in money, with our defective currency. The property in this case is unchanged, excepting by the depreciation of age. It is a warehouse, costing a certain amount of human labor and ground, in the same central position in regard to trade as at first. It is the same wealth, and nothing more. Yet a tabular statement of the property of Baltimore would contain this item at three times its value in 1823. Certainly flour is not a very stable measure of value, depending as it does upon varying crops and an uncertain foreign demand. Nevertheless, it is more reliable for long contracts than money, under our system, as this illustration demonstrates. The builder and owner of the warehouse in this case was wronged; he was despoiled of his property by our money system, and others possess the fruit of his labor without having granted any equivalent therefor. Every other city in the Union can furnish similar examples of this inaugurated iniquity.

Of what avail, then, is the provision of the Constitution of the United States that "Congress shall have power to coin money and regulate the value thereof," or the negative provision, that "no State shall emit bills of credit, make anything but gold and silver coin a tender in the payment of debts, or pass any law impairing the obligation of contracts"?

The value of money is regulated to disorder, to the impairing of contracts, and to the confusion of all just ideas regarding the rights of property, as effectually by the powers exercised by the States in granting bank charters, with authority to issue "bills of credit,"—for bank notes are nothing less nor more—and those bills are as effectual and forcible a legal tender in practice as if the several State Legislatures passed direct laws upon the subject at every session, or even authorized the issue of base coin. And the following strange anomaly or rank absurdity presents itself to every ingenuous mind disposed to consider language to mean what it says:— "A principal authorizing a thing to be done, does it himself, and what a principal cannot do himself, he cannot authorize to be done." This is good law and good common sense; in defiance of which, and in defiance of the plain provisions of the Constitution, we find the States creating banks, authorizing the issue of notes— bills of credit, in fact, and nothing else—and directly emitting bills of credit in the form of bonds themselves. I am aware that special pleading has proved to the satisfaction of many minds that these bank notes and State bonds are not bills of credit within the meaning of the Constitution, and I once saw a letter to this effect from Mr. Webster to Mr. Peabody, of London, who with others entertained some scruples in regard to the validity of State bonds. I suppose it satisfied Mr. Peabody; it did not satisfy me. If the bank notes and State bonds are not bills of credit, it is impossible for a candid mind to determine what else they can be.

In the matter of State debt, which I believe is one difficulty in the way of the interpretation of this part of the Constitution, it seems to me that a sufficient voucher might be provided by entering the amount subscribed to a loan in a book in the hands of the creditor, after the manner of our bank deposits, and by transfers on orders from the creditor, recorded in the books of the State Treasurer. There would seem to be no constitutional objection to this; but in regard to the "bank bill of credit," that huge power of evil, a traveling tinker among the currency, changing values all the time, causing violent transfers of property, a constant discouragement to the conscientious, enterprising merchant, urging the unscrupulous and cunning to dash boldly forward and occupy, to the exclusion of better men, the avenues of trade, the great source of poverty and distress to honest, industrious men and their families, and, finally, the cause of broken hearts, recorded in the bills of mortality under every name but the true one; it should be utterly repudiated and abolished, along with the credit deposits that belong to its system.

In our government scheme of finance, for raising surplus from impost duties, we must meet a struggle of opinion between the advocates of the principles of protection and revenue, so purely political and partisan, as to blind the opponents to the plain facts that lie at the bottom of all prosperity, whether of the individual, the family, the community, or the State. This prosperity rests upon the free untaxed labor, genius, and intelligence, of the people; and the less the government has to do with it the better. One man working ten hours of the day, and exchanging his surplus produce with another, working with the same intelligence and industry only seven hours of the day, must bring the latter in his debt, if both are equally prudent in their consumption, and exchange their products on an equal measure of value. This simple fact we lose sight of in our arguments upon the tariff question. There cannot be a doubt that the labor of the people of this country, with their power of machinery and unequaled general intelligence applied to the production of wealth, is in the ratio of ten to seven of that of England, the next most favored nation of the world, or even greater. We need no protection against such weakness, and we should ask of the government no teaching, only protection for life, liberty, and property, and the smallest possible tax of any kind. The principle of protection applied to the tariff, is in my opinion, a chimera; and it is clearly a method of inflating prices, and checking exports; thereby increasing the evil it was designed to remedy; causing the export of specie, the returns of which come to us in luxuries and manufactured articles, in competition with our home industry. If I pay my neighbor for his home-made article more than the foreign one would cost, I charge him the more for my labor in return, and we reciprocally raise prices on each other, and on all other producers, and thus aid the credit banking system to raise the prices of all commodities, till their export becomes unprofitable.

In a recent controversy upon this subject I took occasion to present the following proposition. Suppose it costs you $600 to maintain your family for a year, without any tariff on your cotton and woolen cloth, tea, coffee, and other necessaries; and during the year you can produce flour and potash, that can be sold for export to England at the extreme limits of $650. What will be your condition and that of the export trade, if, by reason of a tariff on the necessaries consumed in your family, your living is made to cost you $700? You could not afford to sell your produce at the exporter's limits of $650, and would not be likely to do it. England would procure her supplies from the Baltic ports or elsewhere, and draw on us for $650 of specie that we should otherwise pay in flour and ashes. This principle must run through the whole field of domestic labor, as I view the subject, and through all the ramifications of trade: therefore it appears to me the lower we can keep the duties the better. My correspondent replies by another question that covers the whole argument for the protective policy, so called. "If," he says, "by the aid of a tariff we create a home market, that enables you to realize $800 for your flour and ashes—how then?" Why then, I rejoin, it is nonintercourse and nothing else. But the export of such specie and the receipt of such commodities as will and must come to buy it, for if our usual products cannot be exported by reason of their high cost, it is plain that we must sell our specie or our foreign trade is at an end, and the industry it fosters is at an end with it. It would be a severe tariff, the scale of which its advocates have never measured, that under the operation of our system of inflated prices would prevent the importation of foreign products, more than sufficient to drain us of all the specie we could well spare, and run us in debt for a large balance into the bargain. The true policy under this supposition would be to have a nonintercourse act at once. This would at least save to us the California gold. Nonintercourse, embargo, and war, first established our cotton and woolen manufactures, and nothing else will sustain them if they are not sustained abroad, for the tariff does not help us.

I have no prejudice against the tariff policy. Badged with the log cabin, drilled in the Whig procession, fed with hard cider, and taught to consider hard money and free trade devices of the enemy, my prejudices and my reading have been all the other way. I read the Tribune dutifully still, and have never voted any but a Whig ticket, but the issues of that party are dead, and the party is dead along with them. There has been time for some calm consideration and independent thought upon the subject, and I make no doubt that ere long, most practical merchants will agree with me, that the protective tariff policy, and paper money, are both mistakes that need to be rectified.

I do not now propose to examine the question of a revenue tariff: but I must say that I cannot see its justice. I cannot comprehend why the producer with a large family, who must necessarily be a liberal consumer of foreign products, and who is apt to be a poor man, should be taxed more than a wealthy unproductive bachelor, or a wealthy childless man, or as much as any wealthy man, who consumes less or no more of foreign products than he. It would seem therefore, that the more equitable mode of raising revenue for the government would be by direct taxation.

Our true and efficient protective tariff is the intelligence, enterprise, industry, and integrity of the people, to which nothing in the known history of mankind bears any comparison, and the folly and weakness of Europe. These are our protection and our strength.

With the people of Europe war is the most honorable employment and the chief business of life, requiring and using the strongest men; and it operates with a more than twofold power against the resources of the nation. It changes an able producer to an exhausting consumer. It employs large numbers of the population in furnishing food and material for the army, and the labor and the cost of supporting men, women, children, and brute animals thus employed, are lost to the accumulative power and wealth of the nation. Judicious writers assert that no nation can carry on an aggressive war for any considerable period that shall require for its army more than one-fifth of its able-bodied men, the remaining four-fifths being indispensable for the maintenance of the army abroad and the mass of the population at home.

"In peace prepare for war," is the motto of all Europe. Accordingly, we see the nations bristling with bayonets in time of profound peace. It is a common idea that extravagance is the reason of the balance of trade being so generally against this country, and the cause of our commercial embarrassments; but there is nothing in it. Exceptional individuals there are who are extravagant, and spend more than they earn; but, as a whole people, we earn and pay for all the elegancies and luxuries we enjoy, and have abundant means left. No nation on the globe is so little extravagant as our own, in the true sense of that term.

But war is an extravagance. A standing army in time of peace is an extravagance. The army of France, which I think rarely falls below 400,000 men on the peace establishment, is a plaything more costly and exhausting to the resources of the nation than all the gay equipages, rich furniture, silks, satins, jewels, operas, and the other baubles that furnish interest and amusement to all the vain men and frivolous women in our land; and from these the principal nations of Europe are no more exempt than we. A privileged aristocracy, exempt from labor; an established church, costing, as in England, $35,000,000 per annum; a cumbrous mass of pauperism—all these are extravagances, the results of an old and decaying civilization, from which we, as a nation, are almost wholly free. Our comparative exemption from these, and the intelligent industry of the masses of the population, promoted and secured by our common schools, are carrying us forward to a height of power and prosperity, and with a rapidity such as the world never before saw equaled; and we are teaching the world with emphasis the important lesson for human happiness, that peace, not war, is the true mode of securing power, and the true policy for mankind.

Nevertheless, we exploiter each other in our business relations at home, and we fritter away a considerable portion of our productive labor for the benefit of other nations. With a productive power in proportion to our consumption, constantly applied, equal to 10 to 7 at least of the next most favored nation of the world, the balance of trade is almost constantly against us. True, we can spare this balance, and have the means of prosperity left, but it is wasted on wars and on objects foreign to our interests, or to the advancement of mankind. We should do better to keep it at home.

The explanation of this apparent paradox, this constant unhappiness and continued prosperity, is before us in the inflated, staggering currency, which is never anywhere in a reliable position twelve months at a time, and in the never-ceasing industry of the people. The tariff is of secondary importance.

It remains to consider the remedy for the evils we experience. This is a matter requiring the careful consideration of our merchants. As a class, it appears to me they have unaccountably neglected a subject easy of comprehension, the right understanding of which is of vital importance to their prosperity, and to the general welfare of the nation.

It is a trite remark, that it is easy to point out an evil, but not so easy to devise a remedy. Perhaps it may be a sufficient answer to this to say, that an idea must be created before it can have power to discover or enforce its remedy; and I think the true idea in regard to the currency has yet almost to be created in this country. The evil is the offspring of State legislation; and most men look to legislation for the remedy. The efforts of several of the States to pass laws to suppress the issue and circulation of small bank notes, are in the right direction. Such laws have been passed in several of the States, but are effectually enforced, I think, only in Maryland and Virginia; they have had a most beneficial effect in strengthing the currency of those States, and none passed through the money pressure of the latter half of last year with so little inconvenience or suffering.

But it would be impossible to get a uniform system of legislation in the several States upon the subject. An attempt to pass a law in the Massachusetts Legislature at its last session, restraining the issue and circulation of small bank notes, was defeated by the selfish interest of the members, many of whom, and some of the members of the banking committee, were bank officers or directors, and by the general ignorance of the whole, who were satisfied with the shallow idea that a one-dollar note will buy as much as a silver dollar, and they seemed to think that it would be an affliction to carry the weight of specie in their pockets. But such a measure, if adopted by all the States, would be only an alleviation—not a cure.

The true remedy I conceive lies with the people, and more immediately with the merchants in their individual capacity. If any number of merchants in New York or Boston would realize one or two millions of dollars in coin, and establish therewith a "mercantile treasury," it could, I think, be so directed as to become the nucleus of a power that would shortly reform the whole system of the currency of this country.

There are men in New York, and in every other city and community, thank heaven, who can be trusted. We know them and we trust them now. Their note is as good as any bank note of the best quality, and their word is as good as their bond. If such men would establish an institution or commercial firm of this character, manage it themselves, pledge themselves to each other and to the public, to receive, pay, and loan nothing but specie or the precious metals—unless it might be desirable to the public for the convenience of portability, to receive certificates of deposit, and never to issue one dollar of that description unless for the equivalent coin retained in hand—it could be made a substitute for our savings banks, that are now little else than satellites of the other banks of the credit system. They could borrow money at four, and loan it at six or seven per cent; they could charge a commission on accounts, loans, or transfers; they might deal in exchange, perhaps make advances for a commission on bullion or plate deposited; and other sources of profit might be found in the practical working of the institution to remunerate the proprietors. But it would operate with power, I think, in the correction of the evils of the present diseased currency, by keeping in check the issues of the banks of the credit system, for whose notes, to the extent of its operations, it would substitute specie.

It is a circumstance generally unknown or unthought of, that when the alarm in regard to the Provident Institution for Savings in Boston took place last fall, in consequence of the fact becoming known to the public that the institution had invested largely in the stock of the Webster Bank, the deposits in that institution and the other savings banks in the city and suburban towns, amounted to between eight and nine millions of dollars. They had nothing to pay out but notes of the Boston banks. The whole sum of specie in those banks was only $2,400,000, and they had before as much as they could do to take care of themselves, their customers, and their circulation previously issued. New York was as much pressed for specie as Boston. There was no resource for an immediate additional supply. In this emergency, a Catholic priest and a wealthy Irishman addressed the assembled multitude, who were clamoring for the return of their deposits, assuring them of their safety; and the excitement subsided. It was full time. Such a state of things is preposterous, and should carry a condemnation of the system that produces it.

The reduction in the quantity of money, and the fall of prices that would follow the substitution of coin for our entire paper currency, I have not now time to consider. It may form the subject of a future article; but it may be well now to say that great misapprehension exists concerning this. The change would be almost entirely a substitution of the one for the other, and not a great reduction in quantity to cause a general or disastrous fall of prices in this country; for the balance of trade is legitimately in our favor, as I have already demonstrated, to secure the coin to any desired extent as soon as we shall require its use. No nation in the world could exchange products with us on a specie, or any other equal measure of value, without falling in our debt. This is the explanation of the early and entire success of the subtreasury that politicians supposed would require and absorb all the specie, and break every bank in the United States. That admirably devised scheme of finance now retains in the country twenty or thirty millions of dollars of specie that would inevitably cause inflation, fluctuation, and widespread disaster, as before, and would disappear like magic, if the government funds should be again committed to the custody of the credit banking system. That money alone, in my opinion, preserved our banks from a general suspension of specie payments during the recent pressure.

In the present delusion of the public mind regarding banks, the system of expansion and inflation cannot stand still. The establishment of a bank is generally considered, in a country neighborhood, equivalent to the creation of wealth to the sum of its capital at least; and the legislature cannot equitably refuse a loan so valued, and already so freely granted, to any town that may petition for it. More capital, more capital, is the constant cry. Everyone thinks it necessary to provide more money for increasing prices and increasing demands. Nobody thinks of the natural remedy for a deficiency of money—lower prices, till they fall in an avalanche on all the property touched by the magic finger of the idolized bank. The sapient member of the Legislature, a duality of statesman and bank director, says a bank note will buy as much as the specie. It is money, in his opinion, real money, therefore the making of a bank is the making of money; and so we apparently go ahead, but really advancing backwards; and so we must go, so far as I can see, if we depend on legislation, till the bubble bursts in a general suspension of specie payments. Then will a specie deposit bank, or an institution such as I have described, be the only one having character or capacity to do anything; and then will its merits commend it to public favor in a manner that will probably put an end to the present credit banking system in this country forever.

Now, a "mercantile treasury" of this character might place and keep in circulation, in coin, a large portion or all of the money usually held on deposit in the "savings institutions," so called, which serve at present in a great degree as a means of inflation in other banks, and it could not be pressed for its engagements. It would substitute the thing promised to be paid for the mere "promise to pay," and it would be a public benediction.

I am not alone in this opinion. A new sentiment wholly independent of politics is fast growing into importance, that would rally around and sustain any reliable institution established to give it practical effect.




Previous Chapter *  Next Chapter
Table of Contents