Skip to main content

Fascinating letter: TBT

Image result for thomas jefferson clipart

From the National Archives, here's a letter by Thomas Jefferson discussing monetary policy.

This is an explicit explanation of his views on the economic merits of the question, not simply the constitutional question of whether the federal government can charter a national bank (an argument with which I presume the readership of this blog is familiar).

Jefferson is an "elder statesman" when he writes this letter, in November 1813. He hasn't been President for more than four years. Further, the original "Bank of the United States," the one that Hamilton created over Jefferson's strident objections, is no longer in operation. Its charter had expired and gone unrenewed during Madison's first term.

BUT ... it was proving difficult to finance the ongoing war without a central bank, and this caused some soul-searching within the Republican-Democratic Party, by now the only national political party left. Hence the discussion. Eventually the party would split over this issue, with the Whigs supporting a new Bank going their own way (and uniting in the process with the remnants of the Federalists). But that's in the future.

The letter may be considered part of the war-financing-inspired soul searching.

Jefferson's own view it seems is that the optimal situation is for "specie" (precious metals) to serve not only as the backing of money but AS money, as the chief circulating medium.  He acknowledges Adam Smith's view that circulating money (paper notes BACKED by specie) can be a valuable corollary, but he is very wary about that. It sounds too Hamiltonian to him.

Let's just call this post my contribution to Throwback Thursday.


Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

A Story About Coleridge

This is a quote from a memoir by Dorothy Wordsworth, reflecting on a trip she took with two famous poets, her brother, William Wordsworth, and their similarly gifted companion, Samuel Taylor Coleridge.

We sat upon a bench, placed for the sake of one of these views, whence we looked down upon the waterfall, and over the open country ... A lady and gentleman, more expeditious tourists than ourselves, came to the spot; they left us at the seat, and we found them again at another station above the Falls. Coleridge, who is always good-natured enough to enter into conversation with anybody whom he meets in his way, began to talk with the gentleman, who observed that it was a majestic waterfall. Coleridge was delighted with the accuracy of the epithet, particularly as he had been settling in his own mind the precise meaning of the words grand, majestic, sublime, etc., and had discussed the subject with William at some length the day before. “Yes, sir,” says Coleridge, “it is a majestic wate…

Cancer Breakthrough

Hopeful news in recent days about an old and dear desideratum: a cure for cancer. Or at least for a cancer, and a nasty one at that.

The news comes about because investors in GlaxoSmithKline are greedy for profits, and has already inspired a bit of deregulation to boot. 

The FDA has paved the road for a speedy review of a new BCMA drug for multiple myeloma, essentially cancer of the bone marrow. This means that the US govt has removed some of the hurdles that would otherwise (by decision of the same govt) face a company trying to proceed with these trials expeditiously. 

This has been done because the Phase I clinical trial results have been very promising. The report I've seen indicates that details of these results will be shared with the world on Dec. 11 at the annual meeting of the American Society of Hematology. 

The European Medicines Agency has also given priority treatment to the drug in question. 

GSK's website identifies the drug at issue as "GSK2857916," althou…

Hume's Cutlery

David Hume is renowned for two pieces of cutlery, the guillotine and the fork.

Hume's guillotine is the sharp cut he makes between "is" statements and "ought" statements, to make the point that the former never ground the latter.

His "fork" is the division between what later came to be called "analytic" and "synthetic" statements, with the ominous observation that any books containing statements that cannot be assigned to one or the other prong should be burnt.

Actually, I should acknowledge that there is some dispute as to how well or poorly the dichotomy Hume outlines really maps onto the analytic/synthetic dichotomy. Some writers maintain that Hume meant something quite different and has been hijacked. Personally, I've never seen the alleged difference however hard they've worked to point it out to me.

The guillotine makes for a more dramatic graphic than a mere fork, hence the bit of clip art above.

I'm curious whe…