Lincoln and his Dick invented greenbacks

[789]

This was never a "parting shot"; just an observation in August 2007.

People should pull their heads out of each others' rectum and check out reality.  These pedlers and purveyors of books, DVDs on the Illuminati, the FreeMasons, the New World Order, the Bankers, the Federal Reserve are just that: sellers of books and videos;  and individuals, sorely lacking knowledge, critical thinking, ability to reason, fall for these poster boys and girls and send them money and cheer for them.....


The whole conspiracy "movement" / industry is "lead" by liars and thieves, and populated by stupid dumb animals (a.k.a. home-grown white sludge). Stupid dumb animals made rich men out of plagiarists, scoundrels, thieves, liars, and all around scumbags; but regarded not, respected not the one who did the work.

Please download and listen and learn what happens to 'patriotic' etc. organizations and why they never get anywhere:
http://www.revilo-oliver.com/Audio/rpo1966_Self_Preservation_Congress_of_Freedom.mp3
http://www.revilo-oliver.com/Audio/rpo1966_Self_Preservation_Congress_of_Freedom.pls

90% of the 20th century conspiracy literature is plagiarism, shamelessly and uncritically stealing and regurgitating from one an other. The good books on conspiracy were written by non-conspiracists, actual researchers who were not afraid to go inside the library, and were willing to work (Fay, Pearson, Pakenham) Even Mr. Mullins went back only as far as 1907, as if it all started with the 1907 money panic. Not one of the 20th century conspiracy booksellers knows anything about the Greenback Party, its two election campaigns, Peter Cooper, Weaver, Berkey, Donnelly, the "Anti-Monopolist" and the 20 year war with the money power after 1865. And they know even less about what went on in the Congress in the 1830s.

Eustace Mullins' case shows the problem:
Mr. Mullins was about the only conspiracy writer/bookseller who set foot and spent time in the library. All those booksellers of the past 50 years who blab about Jekyll Island and the Federal Reserve are living and making money off Eustace Mullins' work. Stupid dumb animals idolize, and send money to people like Griffin from Jekyll Island, or the Lizzard of Oz, or bookpeddler Brown, but nothing to those (if there are any) who do the actual work. Not to mention the even more outrageous case of:

" 'H.S. Kenan' was the pen name of one of the nation's most notorious plagiarists, who reprinted the text of my book, 'The Federal Reserve Conspiracy' under that name, and made one million dollars during years of active promotion of this stolen book."
http://www.yamaguchy.com/library/mullins/media.html

In the 21st century we may see with our own eyes that people who are only in it for the money are the cream, (mis)leaders, upper crust, and idols of the discontented. (the millions of 911, illuminati, conspiracy books, tapes, DVDs sold without any result, except making some low-lifes rich)

The books and the Congressional Record (of 1908, 1913, 1857, the 1860s-70s, 1830s) are all there in the library, for anyone to read free-of-charge. But no, the stupid dumb animals rather send money to some book-selling windbag than go inside the library. They rather die than think, rather march off to world war I, "raw, raw, raw" "U.S.A., U.S.A." -- to be offered up as blood sacrifice, for that is all they are good for. When August Lindbergh spoke up against WWI, goons wanted to tar and feather him.


In WW2 also, "raw, raw, raw, U.S.A., raw, raw, raw Empire, damn the japanese, damn the germans", whilst the real enemies were in Washington and London, not in Tokyo or Berlin. British and american fly-goons are still proud of their incinerating of women and children.

Conspiracy writers, wind-bags, loud-mouths wouldn't tell the stupid dumb animals that State rights have been dead ever since Andrew Jackson sent federal troops against a member State to enforce the will of the central government; that the United States (union of sovereign States for common defense, mutual benefit and self government) have been dead since April 1865. There is no money in that; there is no money in telling the people that you may kick a dead horse, but you can never bring it back. There is no money in telling the dumb animals that throughout its existence the United States (for which Thomas Jefferson composed the declaration of independence) had only one enemy: the United Kingdom; and evil empire UK destroyed the United States (of T.J.)

There is no money in telling the dumb animals that through election you will never get a good government (for the people, by the people); you will never "throw the rascals out". In the 20th century there were how many elections ? And every time you got a worse government. As they say, one of the symptoms of mental illness when you keep repeating the same process, but expecting a different outcome.

At the same time the NWO is chugging along just fine. The marxists are not looking for soapbox, limelight, popularity, money. They work quietly, diligently, in a well-managed and disciplined organization. Whereas these headless chickens of the anti-NWO movement (for lack of better term) run around (and have been running around for 150 years) "buy this book", "read that video", "send money here and there", "write to or call so and so". Idiots ! They don't even know left from right, up from down -- tragy-comic.

(it is not marxists, masons, Jews, blacks, illuminsts, etc. who proudly take my work and present it as if their own production, but conspiracist white sub-humans)

There is an indian legend according to which long time ago, long before Columbus,there were whites in what is today America. The indians fought against them and exterminated them. The final group of white survivors escaped into a cave. The indians couldn't fight them there, so they built a large fire at the opening and smoked and fryed them.
So meditate on your future while mexicans and others infest your country; while marxists can march a million illegal aliens up and down the streets; while Peroutka or Phillips can't even get mail-in votes

yamaguchy incorporated
http://www.yamaguchy.com
the source of your finagled wisdom and knowledge
789 | Tue, 2007-08-14 02:05

[789]

Another hero in the conspiracist mythology is Thaddeus Stevens, the Grand Old Commoner.

Mr. Thaddeus Stevens, Chairman of the Ways and Means, certainly did not think anyone should have consulted Lincoln's Dick, he turned to the Bank of England for an example of legal tender paper money:--

I flatter myself that I have demonstrated, both from reason and undoubted authority, that such notes, made a legal tender and not issued in excess of the demand, will remain at par and pass in all transactions, great and small, at the full value of their face; that we shall have one currency for all sections of the country and for every class of people, the poor as well as the rich.

Some gentlemen are as much frightened as if this were an unwonted apparition, for the first time prowling forth to swallow the rich creditor and nurse the poor debtor. No nation, it is said, has ever tried anything like it.

Let us look at the greatest and wisest commercial nation in the world. In 1797 England was struggling for existence against armed Europe. She needed money, as we do now. She found it impossible to borrow. Gold was likely to leave the country. She passed a law prohibiting the Bank of England from paying coin for her notes until six months after the final ratification of peace. That law remained in force till 1823. It is said she did not make those notes a legal tender. She provided that whoever refused to take them for a debt should have no remedy for its collection; and that a plea of such tender should be a bar to the action. This, I think, is the most stringent legal tender; yet those notes never depreciated to any great extent.

--In the House of Representatives, February 6th 1862.

=============

but who was he before he became 'grand old'? how did he occupy himself prior to 1861 ?  what did he do for or against the money power before Lincoln's War ?

From 1833, Thaddeus Stevens was the able leader of the Pennsylvania Legislature where he organized Whigs and Anti-Masons to vote together;  in 1835 these two parties elected Joseph Ritner as Governor of the State.

The years between 1832 and 1836 were the years of Andrew Jackson's war against the Bank of the United States. Followed by 4 years of agitation against banks and for an Independent Treasury......
On March 4, 1836, the Charter of the Bank of the United States expired.  What did Mr. Biddle, the president of that bank do ?  In January 1836, in the Legislature of Pennsylvania, a bill "to continue the improvement of the State by railroads and canals" was introduced, and in short order, passed both houses.  This bill included a section for "other purposes," which "contained the entire draught of a charter for the Bank of the United States, adopting it as a Pennsylvania State bank."  The whole entire membership of the Pennsylvania Legislature --under the able leadership of Thaddeus Stevens-- managed NOT to notice this more then one page long charter of the Bank of the United States of Pennsylvania !?!  and Governor Ritner signed the act into law.

Some years later the Whigs and Anti-Masons were voted out of the Pennsylvania Legislature, and in January 1842 a committee opened an investigation into the affairs of this bank, relating to the charge of bribery.  This committee ascertained that $479,000 was advanced as bribes by the Biddle bank to obtain the State charter in 1836.....  Very good reason and explanation why those Whigs and Anti-Masons, and the future 'grand old commoner' himself, managed NOT to notice that bank charter in a canal bill.

So in 1863 Thaddeus wasn't ignorant of what he was doing when he not only voted for, but didn't even object to the National Currency Bank bill which established a banking system and national currency following the blue-print that was outlined by Nicholas Biddle;  Thaddeus Stevens knew full well what he was doing, he had already done it once before;  and the concept of sneaking bills through the Legislature was not alien or objectionable to him...... (on February 6, 1862, he used a similar procedure to pass a version of the greenback bill which no one has seen).....  Even if (big if) he did not take any money, he had to have known what was going on and what was in that canal bill......

---Oh dear, it is a good thing poor Sarah did not read history


On Tuesday, January 28, 1862, a strange sound came up from the Thaddeus:
"While I am up, I will follow an example which has been set me, and give notice of an amendment which I shall offer to the bill.  It is to make the semi-annual interest payable in coin."


And on December 19, 1862, he made this statement:
"I procured to be inserted a provision making the duties on imports payable in gold."
---poor Sarah spent a whole chapter on the "Exception Clause," blaming every shylock and banker for it, when all the while it was Thaddeus --and he explained why he did it; but Sarah did not read the Record.


To put cake on the icing, on June 23rd 1862, during the debates of the second issue of greenbacks, Thaddeus introduced an amendment to the bill which would have abrogated the right of the holder of greenbacks to convert them into 5/20 bonds at their face value.....
When it was pointed out to Thaddeus that it is convertibility that keeps greenbacks at par, this came up from him:  "I do not care what is the cause of their keeping at par"......
When he realized the majority of the House is opposed to his idea, Thaddeus retreated:  "I will withdraw my amendment, although it is in accordance with the wishes of the Secretary of the Treasury"

---the right to convert was not taken away until July 1, 1863.


"THE next scheme for robbing the people was the national bank act, passed in 1863.  Of all the villainous schemes of robbery ever practiced upon any people our national banking system stands pre-eminent."   ---writes Sarah in chapter 3, and she is right

So why has Thaddeus Stevens --grand old commoner and radical re-constructionist-- voted for the National Currency Bank bill ? who twisted his arms ?
What was he thinking? that bank notes will peacefully co-exits with U.S. notes ?
Perhaps he understood and went along with the plan outlined by Samuel Hooper (father of greenbacks), that greenbacks were a temporary measure, preceding a more permanent one:
"In order more fully to understand and more easily to meet any objections which may be urged against the first of these measures <greenbacks>, being the one now occupying the attention of the House, it will be desirable to notice the other two <taxation and national banks>, which are designed to be more permanent in their character, and upon the expected results of which the present measure is in some degree based."


Who opposed and voted against the National Currency Bank bill ?  Gold-ites!  Vallandigham, Pendleton, Roscoe, Collamer.
My oh, my;  Greenbackers were FOR National Currency Banks, gold-ites opposed them.

---poor Sarah, she must be spinning in her grave ever since

Representatives who voted for the National Currency Bank bill:--
Messrs. Aldrich, Alley, Ashley, Babbitt, Beaman, Bingham, Jacob B. Blair, Blake, Buffinton, Calvert, Campbell, Casey, Chamberlain, Clements, Colfax, Conway, Covode, Cutler, Davis, Delano, Dunn, Edgerton, Eliot, Ely, Fenton, Samuel C. Fessenden, Thomas A.D. Fessenden, Fisher, Frank, Goodwin, Granger, Hahn, Haight, Hickman, Hooper, Hutchins, Julian, Pig Iron Kelley, Francis W. Kellogg, William Kellogg, Lansing, Leary, Lovejoy, Law, McIndoe, McKean, McPherson, Marston, Maynard, Moorhead, Anson P. Morrill, Noell, Olin, Patton, Timothy G. Phelps, Potter, Alexander H. Rice, John H. Rice, Sargent, Sedgwick, Segar, Shanks, Shellabarger, Sherman, Sloan, Spaulding, Thaddeus Stevens, Trimble, Trowbridge, Van Horn, Van Wyck, Verree, Wall, Wallace, Washburne, Albert S. White, Windom and Worcester

---Yes, the Record is a cruel thing;  it can ruin the best day-dreams, so stay away from history;  ignorance is the greatest bliss on this planet

In 1862 greenbacker John Sherman spoke for an hour in favour of the legal-tender clause; a year later, he spoke for an hour in favour of National Currency Banks.  Sarah did not want to know that, either

[789]

As it seems, Thaddeus learned what he knew about money, finance, banking, from Nicholas Biddle and the Bank of the United States.  He did not understand that even if his version of the bill, which he snuck through the House on February 6th, had been accepted and enacted, it would have led to permanent debt and banker control over the currency and finances of the United States.  It contained in it the inherent flaw --fatal flaw-- of funding.  Mr. Stevens did not know that "funding" is just euphemism for making the debt --like the debt of England-- perpetual (and the basis of bank-note circulation).

Treasury notes, to work as Thaddeus imagined his greenbacks would work, have to be based on revenue dedicated to their redemption (as Thomas Jefferson wrote: "bottomed on taxes").  What Stevens proposed in reality meant to issue currency to facilitate the purchase of bonds (to "fund" the evidences of debt with other evidences of debt).  He should have stayed with blood-lust and pussy, instead of imagining himself financial benefactor of the nation.

On the morning of February 20th 1862, Mr. Stevens apparently took a fistful of Vitamin B12;  from the looks of it, reality dawned on him: he noticed that this Whig crew that took over the government, had a plan and intended to carry it out.

In his speech (the often quoted, never read, "doleful sound" speech) he recognized that the issuing of legal tender Treasury notes is means to an end;  that the market will intentionally be flooded with greenbacks;  the debt will be made permanent;  the country will be handed to bankers.

I do not expect one dollar of the $150,000,000 of legal tender notes ever to be invested in the twenty years bonds.  before we adjourn $150,000,000 will be asked for, which will never be funded in those bonds, and so on, as they are needed, as no bonds will be funded until our circulation will become frightfully inflated.

Mr. Stevens was mistaken, too, when he said that these bankers came to Washington to devour his legal tender bill (HR 240);  they did not come to Washington, they had been there since 1841, waiting and working for an opportunity, to finish what President Tyler interrupted.
_____________

Senator Chandler
Senate of the United States
Thursday, February 13th, 1862.

"I simply wish to say to the chairman of the Committee on Finance that any merchant in the United States with good securities can to-day borrow $1,000,000 at six per cent.  I can, with good securities;  and so can my friend from Maine."

____________
President H.A. Lincoln's cabinet--

Portland Chase,
Since 1832 Mr. Chase had been attorney for the Bank of the United States;  where he learned everything he knew about banking, central banking, national banking, and national currency.
Portland followed the same plan as Mr. Clay 20 years earlier:  get rid of the sub-Treasury, increase debt, set up a private fiscal agent for the government, use its notes as currency for the country

But there is no concealment, no mystery intended. I will tell the honorable Senator, [Mr. Calhoun] at once, and with all frankness, what I go for, and what I believe my friends who act with me mean to go for -- and that is a Bank of the United States. That is the object in view. But as the architect, before he erects a building, first clears away the rubbish which occupy and encumber the ground on which it is to stand, so the friends of a National Bank desire first to remove this Sub-Treasury scheme clean out of the way. When they have done that, then they are prepared to move in the direct accomplishment of their object. When they have got a clean and fair sheet of paper before them, then they shall be prepared to inscribe upon it whatever a majority of the Senate might deem most expedient for the public good.

William Seward, Whig
In 1840, during the election campaign, Mr. Seward busied himself as professional liar for the Whig Party.
William Seward, in the New York State Senate, January, 1834; upon the resolution of the Assembly of the State of New Nork, "That the charter of the Bank of the United States ought not to be renewed."

Two years since, I advocated here the necessity, in regard to the proper action of the General Government, and the commercial interests of the country, of a Bank of the United States. On that subject my opinions have undrgone no change, and as the question was then elaborately discussed, I trust I may expect from any member of the Legislature who on that occasion stood by my side, but has now fallen off, the reasons which have wrought the change in his opinions.
....
I deem a National Bank necessary.
....
With modifications limiting the power to establish branches, and subjecting the capital to the same taxes imposed by States upon local banks, I would vote for the renewal of this Bank, rather than create a new institution with the same powers, for the mere purpose of gratifying those desirious for a new distribution of stock.

Simon Cameron, Whig
After making his fortune in railways and banking, he turned to a life of politics.

Edward Bates, Whig

Caleb B. Smith, Whig

_____________
Pitt Fessenden, Chairman of the Committee on Finance
In 1841 he was sitting as a Whig member of the House of Representatives

[789]

In case you are still holding onto Lincoln's Dick for your salvation
--and to indicate further (for the 77th time) that cock-suckers like Ellen Brown, William Still, Edward Griffin, and all the other conspiracist book-peddlers from 1930 to 2010, from Ted Flynn to R.E. Search, to Gerald McGeer, to Jim Mars, never read the story of greenbacks--
one more nail in the story of Lincoln's Dick, from the Summer of 1841.

In the halcyon Summer of Clay's reckoning, the chartering of the Fiscal Bank of the United States was the talk of the town (every town);  and H.A. Lincoln and his Dick paid attention to monetary and banking affairs.  Whig Lincoln was an outspoken advocate of the destruction of the Independent Treasury, because the destruction of the Independent Treasury was essential before a national-currency-issuing central bank could be established.
Or, as his mentor --at whose stool Honest Lincoln grew up and learned-- put it:--
"I will tell the honorable Senator, at once, and with all frankness, what I go for, and what I believe my friends who act with me mean to go for -- and that is a Bank of the United States. That is the object in view. But as the architect, before he erects a building, first clears away the rubbish which occupies and encumbers the ground on which it is to stand, so the friends of a National Bank desire first to remove this Sub-Treasury scheme clean out of the way."

"But this is not a session for talking;  it is pre-eminently the season for action.  The day of judgment is come, [said Mr. Clay, with great emphasis and animation,] the day of judgment, I hope, is come"

Representative John Minor Botts
[September 16, 1802 -- January 8, 1869; studied law, admitted to the bar), Virginia, Whig]
speaking, 20 years before Lincoln consulted his Dick:--

[and I quote]
But I pass on to the fifth clause, which gives the power 'to coin money, and regulate the value thereof, and of foreign coin.' Upon this power I wish to dwell a while; and, first, I desire to call attention to the peculiar phraseology of this clause: it its not to stamp coin, and regulate the value thereof; but 'to coin money, and regulate the value thereof and of foreign coin.'

Let us, in the first place, ascertain what money is. I maintain that whatever receives the stamp or impress of Government as money, and is received in payment of public dues, and passes from hand to hand as money -- whatever composes the circulating medium of a country -- is money, to all interests and purposes; and upon this subject I propose to introduce some authority.

In Rees's Encyclopaedia, it will be found that "money, in commerce, is a general term for coin, paper, or any other measure of value, or representative of property, that passes, current from hand to hand as a circulating medium."

Again:  "By real money is understood coin, or any other circulating medium."  "Seneca observes there was anciently stamped money of leather."  "The Hollanders, we know," says the same work, "coined great quantities of pasteboard in the year 1574."

The Encyclopedia Britannica says:  "The term money is used to designate whatever commodity the inhabitants of any particular country, enter voluntarily or by compulsion, accept as an equivalent for their labor, or for all the commodities they have to dispose of."

Authorities on this subject could be multiplied to any extent. We have now seen what money is; and we have also seen that the term of the verb to coin is applicable to other money than metals; and that money is whatever constitutes the currency of a country.

Now let us see what is meant by the power to coin; and I wish particularly to call the attention of the committee to the difference between the substantive coin, as "foreign coin," spoken of in the Constitution, and the verb to coin. The substantive "coin" undoubtedly relates to metals; but the verb has a very different signification. Although it will apply to metals, it is by no means confined to them.

Webster says. "To coin, is to stamp a metal and convert it into money; to make, to forge, to fabricate."  "Coining," "the act, art, or practice of stamping money."  Then Congress has power to coin, to stamp, to make, to forge, to fabricate money, and regulate the value hereof; and what Congress is authorized to do, it can empower an agent to do.
[close quote]

20 years later Honest Whig Lincoln & Co. managed to accomplish what Henry Clay failed.

[789]

All that money and effort that was expended during the 1840 election campaign failed to accomplish the Whig plan of setting up a grand central bank that controls the volume of the nation’s money, and whose notes circulate as the nation’s currency.  William Harrison died before he could sign into law any act of the money power, and John Tyler was not willing to indenture the people to the bankers.  The repeal of the Independent Treasury, the Loan Act, and the Distribution Act became law because President Tyler could find no excuse to veto them, but he did reject the act to incorporate a central bank, and rejected it twice.

So, a longer range, more elaborate plan became necessary.  As Mr. Sergeant effectively told them “take the banker shaft now, the easy way;  or ye will be made to take it later, the hard way.”

Certain States defaulted on their bonds, and N.M. Rothschild took a nominal loss.  That, however, was merely a cost of doing business and a cost of accomplishing an aim.

To taint the jury’s mind after the fact, something to consider:--
N.M. Rothschild did not participate in the first Bank of the United States, chose not to take part in the second Bank, and there is no reason to think that they had any plan to take part in a third Bank.  Why ?  All three banks were a Baring, Brothers and Co. and British establishment enterprises.  As we know, in Europe the Rothschild family were in direct and merciless competition with Barings, Hopes and other houses;  why would they have gone into partnership with them in the new world ?  N.M. Rothschild had good reason to actively support the Loan Bill, the Distribution Bill, the Repeal of the Independent Treasury, but they had no conceivable reason to support a fiscal bank that would have been a Baring, Brothers & Co. branch office.

During Andrew Jackson’s Presidency, the account of the Federal government with Baring, Brothers & Co. was closed, and N.M. Rothschild was chosen to be bankers of the United States in Europe.......

What were the dominant banks of the National Banking System ?  what were the dominant banks of the Federal Reserve System ? and who owned them ? (circle of friends of N.M. Rothschild? or circle of friends of Barings and Hope ?)  The war from 1791 to 1913 was not just a war for a U.S. central bank, but also a war for “whose central bank ?”

In the 1840s the free bank concept started to spread, which freed the banks from the State charter and allowed them to issue and circulate their notes as State currency based on State indebtedness.  The flames of States Rights agitation, slavery agitation, free-trade agitation were fanned, and fueled as much as possible.  British agents infested the South and leading figures of the British establishment made Jefferson Davis and others believe that there was strong support for their cause in the United Kingdom.
When the appropriate moment for war came, and the South had no other way out than to fight and go down in flames or submit instantly, Lincoln opened up his war of conquest and extermination.

At the start of Lincoln’s war Mr. Hooper and company worked this free banking system into the National Banking System. The National Banking System allowed banks to incorporate without charter and circulate their notes as National Currency, based on Federal indebtedness.  By the end of the war, the South and the North had equally been shafted, the hard way, and saddled with a permanent and ever-increasing national debt, and with a privately owned banking system that had full control over the volume of currency  -- consequently control over prosperity.

[789]

James Gallatin,
The National Finances
(a reply to Samuel Hooper)
1864

[Mr. Gallatin was the leading voice in that banker delegation that travelled to Washington in February 1862, to speak to the representatives of Congress at the Treasury department.  A hint to the source of, and another nail in, the fairy tale regurgitated by book-peddlers that the State banks wanted 24% interest for their depreciated paper;  also, an indication that Hooper & Chase &co. came to Washington with a plan to set up a new banking system:  a 3rd Bank of the United States in different form and organization]

" Your [Mr. Hooper] pretence that patriotism forbad the Secretary of the Treasury [Mr. Chase] to employ the old banks to aid in conducting the Government business, lest they should, as you say, 'administer the Government,' is very clearly exposed by your solicitude for the creation of new banks to aid in transacting that business, or to 'administer the Government' hereafter.  So, also, with the insinuation that you make against me [Mr. Gallatin], that I advocated his selling his bonds for the depreciated notes of the banks --this is not the fact, and I demand of you to prove it-- your inconsistency is proved by the fact, that his and your new national bank notes cannot be exchanged for real money, even by your own law of Congress, at less than sixty-five per cent. premium for the coined money, at the Treasury counters.  He is now issuing his ten-forty loan for the new national bank notes at that rate of depreciation.  You cannot, or will not, understand that the old banks, here in New York, paid their notes in coined money until Government, by the act of Congress, which you defend, issued legal tender notes, and thus established suspension of specie payments by law.

But your attempt to give the Secretary of the Treasury the very doubtful credit of originating the Legal Tender Measure, is another evidence of your want of care in ascribing measures or suggestions to their proper authors.  It is an established fact, that the idea of the Legal Tender originated with Mr. Erskine Hazard, of Philadelphia, as early as 1839;  and he has stated in a pamphlet, which he published some months ago, that he communicated it to the Secretary, soon after Congress met in December, 1861."