Regarding the February 22 Reader article, “Idaho Senate committee kills popular sound money bill;” at the beginning of the article you identify the writer as JP Cortez, but at the end of the article he is identified as JP Morgan. I find this somewhat ironic, as it was J.P. Morgan, considered to be the most influential banker of his era, who, testifying before congress on Dec.8, 1912, had the following exchange with Mr. Samuel Untermyer.
Samuel Untermyer was chief counsel of the Pujo Sub-Committee of the House Committee on Banking and Currency, which was formed to investigate the influence of Wall Street bankers and financiers over the nation’s money and credit. He was attempting to determine whether a “money trust” that controlled American business and finance existed and if Mr Morgan was part of it.
Mr. Untermyer: I want to ask you a few questions bearing on the subject you have touched upon this morning, as to the control of money. A control of credit involves a control of money, does it not?
Mr. Morgan: A control of credit? No.
Mr. Untermyer: But the basis of banking is credit, is it not?
Mr. Morgan: Not always. That [credit] is an evidence of banking, but it [credit] is not the money itself. Money is gold, and nothing else
Mr Morgan is often misquoted to have said that “gold is money, and nothing else.” That may also be true, but in his testimony he was explaining how gold was used, that is, as money. Worthy of note is that he did not define the dollar as money, even though at that time dollars could be exchanged at banks for gold coins. Perhaps something to think about the next time one of your gentle readers pulls out a Federal Reserve Note from his or her pocket. Hint: look up the financial definition of a “note”.
Credit to Mr. James Turk and his article “What did J.P. Morgan Mean”, published 8-17-16 on goldmoney.com.
G.H. Gino Groseclose