THE JACKSONIANS, BANKING, AND ECONOMIC THEORY: A REINTERPRETATION JEFFREY ROGERS HUMMEL Department of History, University of Texas Andrew Jackson's war upon the Second Bank In his two books, A History of Banking in the of the United States and the economic conse- United States['] and Andrew quences stemming from it badly need a new Sumner presented an analysis that foreshadowed historical interpretation. The traditional inter- subsequent accounts and set the pattern for pretation asserts that Jackson's veto of the Bank what developed into the traditional interpre- re-charter and withdrawal of government tation. That such should be the case is extremely deposits caused an inflation; Jackson's Specie ironic, for Sumner, himself a staunch advocate Circular and the distribution of the surplus of laissez-faire,perceived that laissez-fore was caused a panic and depression. Recent research the central ideological tendency of the Jackson- has included much evidence that indicates that ians. "The democratic party was for a gener- this traditional interpretation requires economic, ation, by tradition, a party of hard money, free and also political, revision. More importantly, trade, the non-interference theory of govern- however, the traditional interpretation suffers ment, and no special legislation", he wrote.''] from a faulty economic theory. However, he differed in that the Jacksonians In no other field is the relationship between were radicals, using democratic means to throw theory and history more explicit than in off the power of the state, while Sumner was a economic history. The obvious effect different conservative, defending laissez-faire from the understandings of economic theory will have twin evils of plutocracy and mob rule. Sumner's upon the interpretation and explanation of animosity toward Jackson was a consequence specific historical-economic events makes the of focusing on the democratic and egalitarian importance of theory undeniable. It is also aspects of Jacksonianism. Sumner, and clear that, in most cases, the validity of the other members of what Charles Grier Sellers, theory is decided a priori to history, on some Jr., calls the "Whig" school of historiography,['] other basis, and then is applied to the data. objected to the increased political role of the Rarely is history used to generate new economic masses and the spoils system. Both of these theories. were procedural changes in the form of govern- I believe that the economic theory that has ment rather than substantive changes in its size guided the traditional interpretation of Jackson's and power, but Sumner saw them as creating a Bank war is wrong. In this paper, I will show the social environment hostile to the preservation evolution of the traditional interpretation and of a limited government. then survey the recent research that makes it On the Bank war, despite his frequent moral historically untenable. I will conclude with a judgments, Sumner was ambiguous, almost reinterpretation based on an economic theory contradictory. He called the Bank war "one of that is both theoretically sound and historically the greatest struggles between democracy and consistent. the money power", a "premonition of the conflict between democracy and plutocracy",1s1 and he applauded the bullionists of the Jack- The first economist to write about the Jackson- sonian party who "put a metallic currency high ians and banking was Wiam Graham Sumner. up on its banner".1*' Yet, he also felt that in 152 JEFFREY ROGERS HUMMEL waging war on the Bank "Jackson's-adminis- class converted Turner's sectional conflict into tration unjustly, passionately, ignorantly, and Schlesinger's class conflict and helped obscure without regard to truth, assailed a great and Sumner's insight into the anti-statist thrust of valuable financial instit~tion".l'~ Sumner's Jacl$onianism.'"' The Jacksonian opposition praise for the Bank was not without reservation, to state privilege was translated into an oppos- and he accused Nicholas Biddle, president of ition to capitalism, and the Bank war was the Bank, of insincerity, but on the whole he interpreted from that angle. considered the Bank a successful restraint on Arthur M. Schlesinger, Jr., in The Age of the inflationary proclivities of the state banks. Jackson,"" correctly evaluated Jackson's Sumner it should be noted, did not blame the destruction of the Bank as part of a calculated economic instability of the years from 1829 to hard-money campaign which included a change 1840 entirely on Jackson's policies. He of the mint ratio between gold and silver to mentioned international factors - British bring gold back into circulation, an effort to capital flows, the discount rate of the Bank of suppress bank notes of small denominations, England, and changing cotton prices - as the establishment of an independent treasury, contributing to the inflation of 1835-1836 and and an attack on state banks. However, he saw the Panic of 1837. this campaign as motivated by an underlying Ralph C. H. Catterall, in The Second Bank labor class consciousness. After the publication of the United States,"' filled in the details of Schlesinger's book, Joseph Dorfman wrote around Sumner's basic account, eliminating the "The Jackson Wage-Earner Thesi~",~"~an ambiguity and balance. Catterall, who wrote article demonstrating that the Jacksonians prior to the Federal Reserve System, believed were not anti-capitalist, but really anti- that the Second Bank had provided the United government. It is indicative of the strength and States with the soundest currency it had ever pervasiveness of Marxist class analysis among had and that the reasons given by Jackson for American historians that Richard Hofstadter, vetoing its charter were "in the main beneath in The American Political Tradition, managed c~ntempt".~~]"Jackson and his supporters to convert Dorfman's refutation of SchIesinger's committed an offense against the nation when class thesis into a new class interpretation - they destroyed the bank. few greater one with the Jacksonians as aspiring and rising enormities are chargeable to politicians than the entrepreneurs."51 destruction of the Bank of the United States."l'ol While the political nature of Jacksoniansm Catterall did not carry his story through the was the subject of considerable disagreement, later history of the Bank after it lost its national the economic account remained largely unaltered. charter and became a state bank, but his praise Schlesinger admitted that "In destroying the of Biddle was also qualified. Catterall's book Bank, Jackson had removed a valuable brake on the Bank was followed twenty years later by on credit expansion."'"' Hofstadter complained Reginald Charles McGrane's book on The that Jackson "had left the nation committed to Panic of 1837.'"' McGrane, like Catterall, a currency and credit system even more inade- blamed Jackson's ignorant policies for the Panic. quate than the one he had inhe~ited".~"'Dur- With the Progressive shift in American histor- ing the next decade, four additional books deal- iography at the turn of the century, the attitude ing directly with the Bank war expanded and of historians towards Jackson became friendlier. fortified the traditional interpretation. Walter Interestingly enough, despite the change in Buckingham Smith, in Economic Aspects of outlook, the historical debate was still conduc- the Second Bank of the United state^,^"' ted within the terms originally laid down by portrayed the Bank as an effective central bank, Sumner and his "Whig" contemporaries. although like Sumner, he also stressed inter- Sumner had condemned the Jacksonians for national factors. Thomas Payne Govan, in the unleashing majority rule; Turner, Beard, and biography, Nicholas Biddle: Nationalist and Schlesinger praised them for the same thing. Public Banker, 1786-1844,"s1 praised Biddle Later, the acceptance of the Marxist notion of as an astute central banker well ahead of his THE IACKSONIANS, BANKING, AND ECONOMIC THEORY: A REINTERPRETATION 153 time, as did Fritz Redlich, in his two volume nascent central bank, it was a useful institution. The Moulding of American Banking: Men and The state banks were inherently inflationary and Ide~s,'~' a work which particularly emphasized tended toward wildcat banking, and the the im ct of the European banking tradition Second Bank restrained them. Because it was on enca. The traditional interpretation national and because it was the government received its most effective and popular present- depository, the Bank held a dominant position ation in Bray Hammond's highly overrated in the U.S. economy. In the process of its Banks and Politics in America: From the operations, it tended to receive the notes of Revolution to the Civil War. I"] Hammond, state banks. Its mechanism of control was who had developed his ideas in a previous series forcing the state banks to redeem their notes in of articles, grafted the traditional economic specie. interpretation to the Hofstadter entrepreneurial Jackson, by vetoing the charter of the Bank thesis."" in 1832 and later removing from it the govern- The economic theory to which Hammond, ment deposits, destroyed the Bank's effective- Redlich, Govan, Smith et a/. adhere and which ness as a central bank. He consequently is at the heart of the traditional interpretation unleashed the state banks, which overissued may be called the sound banking doctrine. their notes and generated an inflationary boom. Banks have always issued more notes or deposit The government deposits were placed in pet liabilities than they have monetary reserves to banks, and this further encouraged credit cover. This process is called fractional reserve expansion. Traditional accounts differ as to the banking, and through it, banks create money. precise cause of the Panic of 1837 and on Thus, an ante-bellum bank which issued $1000 whether or not it was made inevitable by the in notes with only $100 in specie (gold or silver previous boom, but they all agree that certain bullion and coin) as reserves in its vault, had of Jackson's policies contributed to bringing it created $900 and had a reserve ratio of 10%.