Readings in Money and Banking Part 4

PROFITS IN AGRICULTURE

The farmers of the loyal states were among the unfortunate producers whose products rose in price less than the majority of other articles, and from this standpoint they were losers rather than gainers by the paper currency. Of course, it is possible that the farmer's loss from this inequality of price fluctuations might be more than offset by his gains at the expense of labourers, landlord, and lending capitalist.

But there is good reason for believing that the increase of the _entrepreneur's_ profits in the latter fas.h.i.+on was less in farming than in any other important industry. This conclusion seems to follow from the proposition that, other things being equal, profits varied directly as the complexity of business organization. The American farmers of the Civil War were in a large proportion of cases their own landlords, capitalists, and laborers. So far as this was true, they had few important pecuniary contracts with other persons of which they could take advantage by paying in depreciated dollars. Of those farmers who hired labor very many paid wages partly in board and lodging--an arrangement which threw a considerable part of the increased cost of living upon them instead of upon their employees. Finally, the renting farmer probably gained less on the average from the contract with his landlord than tenants of any other cla.s.s, because in a majority of cases the rent was not a sum of money, but a share of the produce. While, then, the general effect of the paper standard was in the direction of increasing profits, it seems very doubtful whether farmers as a whole did not lose more than they gained because of the price disturbances.

STATISTICAL EVIDENCE REGARDING PROFITS

It would be highly desirable to test our general conclusions by means of direct information regarding profits made in various branches of trade, but the data available for such a purpose are very meager. What sc.r.a.ps of information are available, however, support the view that profits were uncommonly large. Mr. David A. Wells, for example, in his reports as special commissioner of the revenue, has stories of "most anomalous and extraordinary" profits that were realized in the paper, woolen, pig-iron, and salt industries. A more general indication of the profitableness of business is afforded by the remark in the annual circular of Dun's Mercantile Agency for 1864, that "it is generally conceded that the average profits on trade range from 12 to 15 per cent."

But the most important piece of evidence is found in the statistics of failures compiled by the same agency. The following table shows Dun's report of the number of bankruptcies and the amount of liabilities in the loyal States from the panic year 1857 to the end of the war:

_Year_ _Number_ _Liabilities_

1857 4,257 $265,500,000 1858 3,113 73,600,000 1859 2,959 51,300,000 1860 2,733 61,700,000 1861 5,935 $178,600,000 1862 1,652 23,000,000 1863 495 7,900,000 1864 510 8,600,000 1865 500 17,600,000

The very great decrease both in the number and the liabilities of firms that failed is the best proof that almost all business enterprises were "making money."

From one point of view the small number of failures is surprising. An unstable currency is generally held to make business unsafe, and seldom has the standard money of a mercantile community proven so unstable, undergone such violent fluctuations in so short a time, as in the United States during the Civil War. Yet, instead of being extremely hazardous, business seems from the statistics of failures to have been more than usually safe.

The explanation of the anomaly seems to be that the very extremity of the danger proved a safeguard. Business men realized that the inflation of prices was due to the depreciation of the currency, and that when the war was over gold would fall and prices follow. They realized very clearly the necessity of taking precautions against being caught in a position where a sudden decline of prices would ruin them. They did this by curtailing credits. So long as prices continued to rise such precautions were really not needed by the man in active business except, in so far as he was a creditor of other men; but when prices commenced to fall prudence had its reward. Such a sudden and violent drop of prices as occurred between January and July, 1865, would have brought a financial revulsion of a most serious character upon a business community under ordinary circ.u.mstances. But so well had the change been prepared for, that the number of failures was actually less than it had been in the preceding year of rapidly rising prices.

The whole situation can hardly be explained better than it was by a New York business man writing in _Harper's Monthly Magazine_: "When the war ended," he said, "we all knew we should have a panic. Some of us, like Mr. h.o.a.r, expected that greenbacks and volunteers would be disbanded together. Others expected gold to fall to 101 or 102 in a few days.

Others saw a collapse of manufacturing industry, owing to the cessation of Government purchases. But we all knew a 'crisis' was coming, and having set our houses in order accordingly, the 'crisis' of course never came."

THE PRODUCTION AND CONSUMPTION OF WEALTH

PRODUCTION

What influence did the greenback currency have as one of the many factors that affected the production of wealth? In the first place, the paper standard was responsible in large measure for the feeling of "prosperity" that seems from all the evidence to have characterized the public's frame of mind. Almost every owner of property found that the price of his possessions had increased, and almost every wage-earner found that his pay was advanced. Strive as people may to emanc.i.p.ate themselves from the feeling that a dollar represents a fixed quant.i.ty of desirable things, it is very difficult for them to resist a pleasurable sensation when the money value of their property rises or their incomes increase. They are almost certain to feel cheerful over the larger sums that they can spend, even though the amount of commodities the larger sums will buy is decreased. Habit is too strong for arithmetic.

But, more than this, "business" in the common meaning of the word was unusually profitable during the war. The "residual claimant" is in most enterprises the active business man, and, as has been shown, his money income did as a rule rise more rapidly than the cost of living. In other words, "business" was, in reality as well as in appearance, rendered more profitable by the greenbacks. There is therefore no error in saying that the business of the country enjoyed unwonted prosperity during the war. And it may be added that the active business man is probably a more potent factor in determining the community's feeling about "good times"

and "bad times" than is the workingman, the landlord, or the lending capitalist.

The effect of high profits, however, is not limited to producing a cheerful frame of mind among business men. Under ordinary circ.u.mstances one would say that when the great majority of men already in business are "making money" with more than usual rapidity they will be inclined to enlarge their operations, that others will be inclined to enter the field, and that thus the production of wealth will be stimulated. But the circ.u.mstances of the war period were not ordinary and this conclusion cannot be accepted without serious modifications.

1. It has been shown that business men realised the precariousness of all operations that depended for their success upon the future course of prices--and nearly all operations that involved any considerable time for their consummation were thus dependent. So far did this disposition prevail that it produced a marked curtailment in the use of credit. The prudent man might be willing to push his business as far as possible with the means at his own disposal, but he showed a disinclination to borrow for the purpose. Thus the uncertainty which all men felt about the future in a large measure counteracted the influence of high profits in increasing production.

2. The foregoing consideration of course weighed most heavily in the minds of cautious men. But not all business men are cautious. Among many the chance of winning large profits in case of success is sufficient to induce them to undertake heavy risks of loss. On the whole, Americans seem to display a decided propensity toward speculative ventures and are not easily deterred by having to take chances. To men of this type it seems that the business opportunities offered by the fluctuating currency would make a strong appeal. But, while the force of this observation may be admitted, it does not necessitate a reconsideration of the conclusion that the instability of prices tended to diminish the production of wealth. For in a time of great price fluctuations the possibilities of making fortunes rapidly are much greater in trade than in agriculture, mining, or manufactures. Every rise and fall in quotations holds out an alluring promise of quick gain to the man who believes in his shrewdness and good fortune, and who does not hesitate to take chances. The probable profits of productive industry in the narrower sense might be larger than common, but this would not attract investors in large numbers if the probable profits of trading were larger yet; and such seems clearly to have been the case during the war when the paper currency offered such brilliant possibilities to fortunate speculators in gold, in stocks, or in commodities. Instead, then, of the greenbacks being credited with stimulating the production of wealth, they must be charged with offering inducements to abandon agriculture and manufactures for the more speculative forms of trade.

This tendency of the times did not escape observation. On the contrary, it was often remarked and lamented in terms that seem exaggerated. Hugh McCulloch, for instance, in his report as Secretary of the Treasury for 1865, said:

There are no indications of real and permanent prosperity ... in the splendid fortunes reported to be made by skilful manipulations at the gold room or the stock board; no evidences of increasing wealth in the facts that railroads and steamboats are crowded with pa.s.sengers, and hotels with guests; that cities are full to overflowing, and rents and the necessities of life, as well as luxuries, are daily advancing. All these things prove rather ... that the number of non-producers is increasing, and that productive industry is being diminished.

In one of his reports as special commissioner of the revenue, Mr. Wells said:

During the last few years large numbers of our population, under the influence and example of high profits realized in trading during the period of monetary expansion, have abandoned employments directly productive of national wealth, and sought employments connected with commerce, trading, or speculation. As a consequence we everywhere find large additions to the population of our commercial cities, an increase in the number and cost of the buildings devoted to banking, brokerage, insurance, commission business, and agencies of all kinds, the spirit of trading and speculating pervading the whole community, as distinguished from the spirit of production.

Within the period under review, then, it seems very doubtful whether the high profits had their usual effect of leading to a larger production of raw materials or to an increase in manufactures. The prudent man hesitated to expand his undertakings because of the instability of the inflated level of prices; the man with a turn for speculative ventures found more alluring opportunities in trade.

CONSUMPTION

No one can read contemporary comments on American social life of the later years of the war without being impressed by the charges of extravagance made against the people of the North. Newspapers and pulpits were at one in denouncing the sinful waste that, they declared, was increasing at a most alarming rate. The "shoddy aristocracy" with its ostentatious display of wealth became a stock subject for cartoonists at home, and earned a well-merited reputation for vulgarity abroad.

In trying to account for this unpleasant phase of social development, men usually laid the blame upon the paper standard. High prices were said to make every one feel suddenly richer and so to tempt every one to adopt a more lavish style of living than his former wont. Thus the view gained general credence that the greenbacks were ultimately responsible for a great increase in the consumption of wealth.

However, such a view regarding the consumption of wealth can be but partially true. The enormous profits of _entrepreneurs_ made possible the rapid acc.u.mulation of an unusual number of fortunes, and the families thus lifted into sudden affluence enjoyed spending their money in the ostentatious fas.h.i.+on characteristic of the newly rich. It is therefore true that the monetary situation was largely responsible for the appearance of a considerable cla.s.s of persons--of whom the fortunate speculator and the army contractor are typical--who plunged into the recklessly extravagant habits that called down upon their heads the condemnation of the popular moralist.

But if the greenbacks were in the last resort a chief cause of the increased consumption of articles of luxury by families whom they had aided in enriching, they were not less truly a cause of restricted consumption by a much larger cla.s.s of humbler folk. The laboring man whose money wages increased but one-half, while the cost of living doubled, could not continue to provide for his family's wants so fully as before. He was forced to practise economies--to wear his old clothing longer, to use less coffee and less sugar, to subst.i.tute cheaper for better qualities in every line of expenditure where possible. Similar retrenchment of living expenses must have been practised by the families of many owners of land and lenders of capital. In other words, the war time fortunes resulted in a very large measure from the mere transfer of wealth from a wide circle of persons to the relatively small number of residual claimants to the proceeds of business enterprises. The enlarged consumption of wealth which the paper currency made possible for the fortunate few was therefore contrasted with a diminished consumption on the part of the unfortunate many on whose slender means the greenbacks levied contributions for the benefit of their employers.

That the diminished consumption of wealth by large numbers of poor people escaped general notice, while the extravagance of the newly rich attracted so much attention, need not shake one's confidence in the validity of these conclusions. The purchase of a fast trotting-horse by a Government contractor, and the elaborateness of his wife's gowns and jewelry, are much more conspicuous facts than the petty economies practised by his employees. The same trait that leads fortunate people to flaunt their material prosperity in the eyes of the world leads the unfortunate to conceal their small privations. Even an attentive observer may fail to notice that the wives of workingmen are still wearing their last year's dresses and that the children are running barefoot longer than usual.

But though the newspapers were not full of comments on the enforced economies of the ma.s.s of the population, wholesale dealers in staple articles of food and clothing noticed a decrease in sales. In reviewing the trade situation in September, 1864. when real wages were near their lowest ebb, Hunt's _Merchants' Magazine_ remarked that "the rise in the prices of commodities has ... outrun the power of consumption and the fall trade has been almost at a stand. Those articles such as coffee, sugar, low grade goods, which form the staple products of the great ma.s.s of the people in moderate circ.u.mstances, have reached such high rates that the decline in consumption is very marked, amounting almost to a stagnation of the fall trade." The consumption of many articles of luxury increased very greatly, while the consumption of many staple articles declined.

THE GREENBACKS AND THE COST OF THE CIVIL WAR

The reader who goes back to the debates upon the legal-tender bills will find that most of the unfortunate consequences that followed their enactment were foretold in Congress--the decline of real wages, the injury done creditors, the uncertainty of prices that hampered legitimate business and fostered speculation. But a majority of this Congress were ready to subject the community to such ills because they believed that the relief of the treasury from its embarra.s.sments was of more importance than the maintenance of a relatively stable monetary standard.

GREENBACKS AND EXPENDITURES

What effect had the greenbacks upon the amount of expenditures incurred?

Few questions raised by the legal-tender acts have attracted more attention than this. Even while the first legal-tender bill was being considered its critics declared that if made a law it would increase the cost of waging the war by causing an advance in the prices of articles that the Government had to buy. As the war went on the soundness of this view became apparent.

When the war was over and the divers reasons that had deterred many men from criticizing the financial policy of the government were removed, competent writers began to express similar views with freedom. For example, Mr. C. P. Williams put the increase of debt at one-third to two-fifths; S. T. Spear, at a billion dollars; L. H. Courtney, an English critic, at nearly $900,000,000. Of later discussions that of H.

C. Adams has attracted the most attention. He estimated that of the gross receipts from debts created between January 1, 1862, and September 30, 1865, amounting to $2,565,000,000 the gold value was but $1,695,000,000--a difference of $870,000,000 between value received and obligations incurred.

A detailed consideration of the elements that enter the problem would seem to warrant a reduction of the estimates given to $791,000,000. It is hardly necessary to insist strenuously that this is but a very rough estimate.

THE GREENBACKS AND RECEIPTS

The total increase of receipts was approximately $174,000,000, as shown in the following table:

(In millions of dollars)

_1862_ _Fiscal Year_ _1866_ _(Six Months) 1863 1864 1865 (Two Months)_

Current receipts: From customs 33.5 69.1 102.3 84.9 31.3 From sales of public lands .1 .2 .6 1.0 .1 From direct tax 1.8 1.5 .5 1.2 .0 From miscellaneous sources .5 3.0 47.5 33.0 12.3 From internal revenue ... 37.6 109.7 209.5 64.4 ---- ----- ----- ----- ----- 35.9 111.4 260.6 329.6 108.1 Estimated actual increase 0 10 39 106 19

The caution is hardly necessary that the above results are to be accepted subject also to a wide margin of error.

There were other financial consequences of the s.h.i.+ft from the specie to the paper standard, however, that were not unimportant, though they were indirect and difficult to gauge. Two of the most prominent must be indicated.