Read Online America's Bank: The Epic Struggle to Create the Federal Reserve by Roger Lowenstein - Free Book Online
Authors: Roger Lowenstein
Ads: Link
Foregone Conclusion,
chapter 2.
“Don’t be anxious”: Wilson to Ellen Axson Wilson, July 27, 1913, in
The Papers of Woodrow Wilson,
28:84–85. For Ellen’s disregarding her husband, see for instance her letter of September 4 (ibid., 257), in which she asks him, “Is there fresh trouble about the currency bill—as the papers report?” Two days later (ibid., 260), she frets, “I am so concerned at the reports about the currency bill. They say you are fighting desperately with your back to the wall.” Wilson tries to soothe her nerves, replying on September 9 (ibid., 267), “I am perfectly well. . . . The Senate is tired, some of the members of its committee are irritable and will have to be indulged.” For Wilson’s September 28 letter to Peck, see ibid., 336–37; he also confesses to his old friend that he was fearful he might “lose his patience and suffer the weakness of exasperation.” An editor’s note in ibid. (257) emphasizes that by early September, Republican and some Democratic senators were making clear that they intended to hold “lengthy hearings” on the currency bill.
The President leaned: Cooper,
Woodrow Wilson,
217–18; for the Revenue Act of 1913, see Link,
The New Freedom,
194 (Link also quotes David Houston’s letter to W. H. Page of September 12, 1913). The detail of signing the law with two gold pens comes from “Wilson Signs New Tariff Law,”
The New York Times,
October 4, 1913.
“extremely annoying”: Vanderlip to James Stillman, September 12, 1913, Vanderlip Papers, Box 1-5.
“So I feel tonight”: “Wilson Signs New Tariff Law.”
Wilson tabled plans: “Foes of Money Bill Get Together,”
The New York Times,
October 1, 1913. For Wilson’s timetable, see “Money Bill Fight May Take a Month,” ibid., October 14, 1913. At his October 6 press conference (in
The Papers of Woodrow Wilson,
28:364–65), Wilson publicly expressed confidence that the bill would pass in the special session.
Wilson was adamant: “Altered Money Bill May Satisfy Wilson,”
The New York Times,
October 17, 1913.
When the ABA held its annual convention: For the ABA trashing of the bill as well as Wilson’s reaction, see press conference of October 9, 1913, as well as private correspondence to Ralph Pulitzer on October 9 and to Senator John Sharp Williams on October 11, all in
The Papers of Woodrow Wilson,
28:378–89; “2,000 Bankers Hit Money Bill Hard,”
The New York Times,
October 9, 1913; Willis,
The Federal Reserve System,
403; Link,
The New Freedom,
229; Link,
Wilson and the Progressive Era,
51; Glass,
An Adventure in Constructive Finance,
193; and Richard J. Ellis, ed.,
Speaking to the People; The Rhetorical Presidency in
Historical Perspective
(Amherst: University of Massachusetts Press, 1998), 170. See also
Proceedings
of the 39th Annual Convention of the Americans Bankers Association, available at http://babel.hathitrust.org/cgi/pt?id=njp.32101066788769;view=1up;seq=11.
Aldrich emerged from the obscurity: Aldrich’s address was delivered on October 15 at the annual dinner of the Academy of Political Science: see Michael Clark Rockefeller, “Nelson W. Aldrich and Banking Reform: A Conservative Leader in the Progressive Era,” A.B. thesis, Harvard College, 1960, 89; Primm,
A Foregone Conclusion;
and “Aldrich Sees Bryan Back of Money Bill,”
The New York Times,
October 16, 1913. Interestingly, Andrew said the Aldrich speech was “too denunciating”—one of the few times he ever criticized his former boss: A. Piatt Andrew,
Diary of Abram Piatt Andrew, 1902–1914,
ed. E. Parker Hayden Jr. and Andrew L. Gray (Princeton, N.J., 1986), entry of October 15, 1913. For Wilson’s mail on the bill, see “Money Bill Delay Stirs Up President,”
The New York Times,
October 7, 1913. For the endorsements from the Merchants’ Association of New York and the U.S. Chamber of Commerce, see Link,
The New Freedom,
235.
more than 25,000 banks: “Banking and Monetary Statistics,
chapter 2.
“Don’t be anxious”: Wilson to Ellen Axson Wilson, July 27, 1913, in
The Papers of Woodrow Wilson,
28:84–85. For Ellen’s disregarding her husband, see for instance her letter of September 4 (ibid., 257), in which she asks him, “Is there fresh trouble about the currency bill—as the papers report?” Two days later (ibid., 260), she frets, “I am so concerned at the reports about the currency bill. They say you are fighting desperately with your back to the wall.” Wilson tries to soothe her nerves, replying on September 9 (ibid., 267), “I am perfectly well. . . . The Senate is tired, some of the members of its committee are irritable and will have to be indulged.” For Wilson’s September 28 letter to Peck, see ibid., 336–37; he also confesses to his old friend that he was fearful he might “lose his patience and suffer the weakness of exasperation.” An editor’s note in ibid. (257) emphasizes that by early September, Republican and some Democratic senators were making clear that they intended to hold “lengthy hearings” on the currency bill.
The President leaned: Cooper,
Woodrow Wilson,
217–18; for the Revenue Act of 1913, see Link,
The New Freedom,
194 (Link also quotes David Houston’s letter to W. H. Page of September 12, 1913). The detail of signing the law with two gold pens comes from “Wilson Signs New Tariff Law,”
The New York Times,
October 4, 1913.
“extremely annoying”: Vanderlip to James Stillman, September 12, 1913, Vanderlip Papers, Box 1-5.
“So I feel tonight”: “Wilson Signs New Tariff Law.”
Wilson tabled plans: “Foes of Money Bill Get Together,”
The New York Times,
October 1, 1913. For Wilson’s timetable, see “Money Bill Fight May Take a Month,” ibid., October 14, 1913. At his October 6 press conference (in
The Papers of Woodrow Wilson,
28:364–65), Wilson publicly expressed confidence that the bill would pass in the special session.
Wilson was adamant: “Altered Money Bill May Satisfy Wilson,”
The New York Times,
October 17, 1913.
When the ABA held its annual convention: For the ABA trashing of the bill as well as Wilson’s reaction, see press conference of October 9, 1913, as well as private correspondence to Ralph Pulitzer on October 9 and to Senator John Sharp Williams on October 11, all in
The Papers of Woodrow Wilson,
28:378–89; “2,000 Bankers Hit Money Bill Hard,”
The New York Times,
October 9, 1913; Willis,
The Federal Reserve System,
403; Link,
The New Freedom,
229; Link,
Wilson and the Progressive Era,
51; Glass,
An Adventure in Constructive Finance,
193; and Richard J. Ellis, ed.,
Speaking to the People; The Rhetorical Presidency in
Historical Perspective
(Amherst: University of Massachusetts Press, 1998), 170. See also
Proceedings
of the 39th Annual Convention of the Americans Bankers Association, available at http://babel.hathitrust.org/cgi/pt?id=njp.32101066788769;view=1up;seq=11.
Aldrich emerged from the obscurity: Aldrich’s address was delivered on October 15 at the annual dinner of the Academy of Political Science: see Michael Clark Rockefeller, “Nelson W. Aldrich and Banking Reform: A Conservative Leader in the Progressive Era,” A.B. thesis, Harvard College, 1960, 89; Primm,
A Foregone Conclusion;
and “Aldrich Sees Bryan Back of Money Bill,”
The New York Times,
October 16, 1913. Interestingly, Andrew said the Aldrich speech was “too denunciating”—one of the few times he ever criticized his former boss: A. Piatt Andrew,
Diary of Abram Piatt Andrew, 1902–1914,
ed. E. Parker Hayden Jr. and Andrew L. Gray (Princeton, N.J., 1986), entry of October 15, 1913. For Wilson’s mail on the bill, see “Money Bill Delay Stirs Up President,”
The New York Times,
October 7, 1913. For the endorsements from the Merchants’ Association of New York and the U.S. Chamber of Commerce, see Link,
The New Freedom,
235.
more than 25,000 banks: “Banking and Monetary Statistics,
Similar Books
