A Plea Unheard: Warning Against Paper Money

Mr. Bandcoft's words were prophetic. People like Ron Paul have reinforced his point in modern times. And the sad part is people aren't making a big deal of it because they don't understand. But even a guy like me, who never took an economics course in my life, understands the consequences of giving people the power to print money indefinitely. It causes inflation and decreases the value. Because the more there is of something, the less it is worth. You can't give institutions like the Federal Reserve the power to print money and expect them to use it ethically, especially when they're organized to be indepentant. That gives them and the government way too much power and defies completely the principles of limited government. But so long as people don't get it, they won't demand change. And by the time that day comes it may already be too late.

Jack, I particularly liked this part of his conclusion under part 5, but this depends on men who value integrity above ideology…


In this case the court proceeded to its judgment on a case of which both sides were made up by one man, without even hearing or inviting a public argument. The present court itself should impartially reexamine what it has uttered, and cannot fail to perceive that it has somewhere fallen into error, since it has not failed to contradict itself. It is to be hoped that the court will not persist in an erroneous reversal of the just judgment of its predecessors, when better investigation establishes the rightfulness of that first opinion. In the immense amount of business by which the supreme tribunal is oppressed, mistakes may not always be avoided.

An error becomes an immorality only when it is persisted in after it has been found out to be an error.

The people should wait; the court from its allegiance to the constitution must correct its own misinterpretation…. "War begins when the laws are silent." The lovers of the constitution have a right to look to the court to establish order by restoring the rule of the highest law. No thought should be admitted of correcting the error of the present members of the court by seeking a change in the constitution; the constitution is already as clear as it can be made. [George Bancroft]

A very fitting exerpt, Valiant. If sound minds had been in place during 1916-1918, the courts may have actually scrutinized the decision to create an institution like the Federal Reserve. Because in the strictest context of the constitution, the federal government has no power to create a body with limitless authority to print money. It is as clear an example as an unconstitutional power as one can get. But unfortunately, cooler heads did not prevail. The country was at war at the time and few rational decisions can be made when fear and uncertainty dominate.

But the sad part is that even after the war and the peace that followed, no higher courts took the time to actually scrutinize institutions like the Federal Reserve to deem them as legitimate uses of power. And to this day nobody gives it a second thought. People just accept it as a fact of life, but they do so at their own peril because the Federal Reserves policies of printing money out of thin air have done more to hurt the economy than anything else. And until people realize that, we'll be living with the consequences of unjust people using unjust powers to propogate unjust policies.