History Of Central Banks Of America

The creation of the first national bank in the United States was of utmost importance in setting precedence for how much power the constitution actually grants the government. The debate over whether to create a national bank raised many questions over the constitution that hadn’t been tested before. It also raised questions about what the government can do when the constitution has no written clause on a certain subject. In looking at the arguments from Alexander Hamilton, James Madison, and Thomas Jefferson regarding a national bank, people can find out more about how some of the leading founders of the Constitution wanted to see the United States government run.

The Bank of the United States was designed to make money and build an economy. It was designed by men like Alexander Hamilton and Robert Morris, but did not benefit the common citizen as much as wealthy investors. Why did a fledgling government need to borrow millions from overseas in order to invest in a “national” bank, to turn around and then borrow the same money back and pay interest on it? The banking system developed by Alexander Hamilton and Robert Morris was prime pickings for speculators, and laid the groundwork for a history of unscrupulous activity regarding our nation’s money supply that continues to this day. The signatures on the Constitution were barely dry before corruption and

and thus pave the way for the modern national state that would emerge after the

Even before the creation of the Federal Reserve, banks were used by the public just as we use them today. Deposits were made into savings accounts. Loans were taken out to mortgage a home or finance a new business. Banknotes were issued and spent when the public borrowed from the banks. Borrowers spent these banknotes just as paper money is spent today. These bank notes were valued as money since they were backed by the promise that they would be exchanged on demand for either gold or silver.

Hamilton’s creation of the first bank in the United States continues to exist in today’s economic environment. However, at that time Hamilton’s proposal was met with widespread resistance from individuals such as James Madison and Thomas Jefferson who considered the creation of a federal bank as unconstitutional. The analysis made by Gordon in his book is consistent with arguments made by to have a bank that would be effective in order to implement the powers authorized by the government as it was implied in the constitution

Life: Where do we come from? How did we get here? These are questions each one of us eventually asks ourselves and, in so doing, searches for the answers. It is intrinsically woven into us to know the basis of what sustains us. Why is it then, that the general public is satisfied in knowing only about current celebrity gossip and is content to remain ignorant when it comes to where our currency originates and how it is produced? Some may find it too confusing and overwhelming a subject about which to think. Is it possible that its perplexity is not by mistake? James Corbett mentions in his documentary, Century of Enslavement: The History of The Federal Reserve, “Our monetary ignorance is artificial, a smokescreen that has been erected on purpose and perpetuated with the help of complicated systems and insufferable economic jargon.” (Corbett, J., 2014, July 6.https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5IJeemTQ7Vk)

The bank provided credit to growing enterprises, issued bank notes which served as a dependable medium of exchange throughout the country, and it exercised a restraining effect on the less well manages state banks. Nicholas Biddle, who ran the Bank, tried to put the institution on a sound and prosperous basis. But Andrew Jackson was always determined to destroy it (Brinkley, 249). The Bank had two opposition groups: the “soft-money” faction and the “hard-money” faction. Soft money advocates objected to the Bank of the United States because it restrained the state banks from issuing notes freely. Hard money advocates believed that coin was the only safe currency, and they condemned all banks that issued bank notes.

The credit system of the country had ceased to operate, and thousands of firms went into bankruptcy (Born...,.12). Something had to be done that would provide for a flexible amount of currency as well as provide cohesion between banks across the United States. (Hepburn, 399) This knight in shining armor, as described in the story of the bank run, was the Federal Reserve. The Federal Reserve Act of 1913 helped to establish banks as a united force working for the people instead of independent agencies working against each other. By providing a flexible amount of currency, banks did not have to hoard their money in fear of a bank run. Because of this, there was no competitive edge to see who could keep the most currency on hand and a more expansionary economy was possible.

This statement is insane, because when Jackson was elected the Bank was financially stable and had control of the money supply. Jackson was opposed to the Second U.S, but he did not oppose central banking. The members of congress that were in favor of the Second U.S Bank constructed a renewal for the banks, however, it did not go through because Jackson vetoed it(Second Bank of the United States (1816-1836). Jackson deemed it correct to use gold or silver as the country’s money supply, and he found using any foreign coin that congress accepted adequate as well.

The Bank of the United States was mainly protested because of its modelling after the Bank of England. Hamilton’s main purpose of founding this bank was to prevent inflation. This was done by having the bank issue currency so that Congress did not print off more money to pay off debt and cause inflation. The Bank of the United States shows explicitly how influential Hamilton was during this time because this bank stabilized the country then and is known as the Federal Reserve System

This brings us to the Federal Reserve. The Federal Reserve is a private entity that is not connected or governed by the United States. It came into existence in 1913 by the Federal Reserve act. Many people believed are still believe it is a part of our government. Sadly, they are greatly mistaken. It originated from Jekyll Island are very wealthy people gathered to create it for their own selfish and personal gain from which only they controlled. The founding fathers stated clearly in the Constitution that there should never be a central bank and that gold and silver should be legal tender. The Federal Reserve act single-handedly broke this law with the issuance of paper currency. The main consensus would be that the American people would now be able to store their gold and silver or “wealth” “safely” inside these banks behind both doors for a small fee. In return they would be given paper notes correlating with the amount of gold or silver they deposited in the bank. If they were to spend these notes at a merchant 's store the marching could then decide to go to the bank and deposit the notes for the equivalent in gold or silver. It was such a great system that other countries decided to trust it and store their gold in US banks. In return they also got US dollars. Seems like a pretty solid monetary system right? Well it was for a while, until certain people started to become greedy. The people with control and power took advantage of the system. Think

There have been many controversies since the United States declared independence in 1776. One of the many domestic issues that divided American citizens was developing the First National Bank in the late 1700s. Hamilton was in favor, while Jefferson opposed and American citizens chose their side based on what they believed what was best for the country. Hamilton proposed a Report on a National Bank in December of 1790 announcing what the National Bank would include. Hamilton’s proposal included, “The bank’s stock would be worth $10,000,000. 20,000 shares would be sold privately at $400 per share ... 5,000 shares or $2,000,000 of bank stock would be bought by the U.S. government. The bank would be run by a 25-man board of directors - 20 chosen by the shareholders and 5 by the government. The bank’s president would be elected by the board of directors. Notes and bills (money) issued by the bank would be redeemable on demand ... and would be accepted by the U.S. government for all payments due. The bank’s charter would run for 20 years and would be subject to renewal by Congress. The bank would be allowed to establish branch offices in other cities; its main branch would be in Philadelphia, the nation’s capital” (http://www.digitalhistory.uh.edu/teachers/lesson_plans/pdfs/unit3_ 4.pdf). Although the first part of the bank bill, establishing a national mint, did pass with ease, supporters and opposers debated the rest of the bill, which included the development of

The First Bank of United States – 1791 to 1811. Mr. Hamilton urged Congress to adopt the model he had come up with, which included one national bank that would hold the federal government’s deposits and would lend to the government and business. Though there was much opposition, the proposal was accepted but the bank’s charter was given a 20 year limit. The bank, known as First Bank or Bank of United States, helped to bring the economy of the country together. However, it was a private institution where foreigners owned 70 percent of the bank and this concerned the citizens of the United States. When the charter was up for renewal it was rejected and the bank was closed in 1811. ("First Bank of the United States" 1-16)

The idea of the National Bank was based on the British banking system and the belief of how it supported the country during times of difficulty and provided a central point for the country to coordinate commerce with other countries. The bank would create a common currency, establish credit here and abroad, and provide a financial backbone for this country to help stimulate economic growth. Shares in the National Bank would be available for purchase to foreign countries as a way to finance the United States, although the majority of the shares would be owned by the United States itself. At least this was the view of

The bank was not a central bank; it just held an account for the government and had little control over the fiscal policies in each state. However, the state banks still resented the power that the bank had. This is extremely hard to comprehend when comparing the power of the First Bank and the current Federal Reserve System.