America’s Bank

America’s Bank Plot Summary

Introduction

In the autumn of 1907, America's financial system teetered on the brink of collapse. As panic spread through Wall Street, depositors rushed to withdraw their savings, banks suspended cash payments, and the stock market plummeted. With no central authority to coordinate a response, the fate of the nation's economy rested in the hands of one man - the elderly financier J.P. Morgan, who worked from his private library to decide which institutions would survive and which would fail. This crisis revealed a fundamental weakness in America's fragmented banking system and set in motion a chain of events that would culminate in the creation of the Federal Reserve. The story of how America finally established a central bank after decades of resistance illuminates enduring tensions in American political culture. How could a nation deeply suspicious of concentrated financial power create an institution capable of managing a modern economy? How could technical expertise be balanced with democratic accountability? These questions dominated the political battles that surrounded the Federal Reserve's birth and continue to shape debates about its role today. For anyone seeking to understand America's unique approach to financial governance or the complex relationship between democracy and capitalism, this historical journey offers valuable insights into how Americans have struggled to reconcile their contradictory desires for both economic stability and dispersed power.

Chapter 1: The Panic of 1907: Crisis Reveals Banking Weakness

In October 1907, America's financial system faced its most severe test since the Civil War. The trouble began when speculators attempted to corner the market in United Copper Company stock, leading to their financial collapse and triggering runs on associated banks. Panic quickly spread to trust companies - lightly regulated financial institutions that held substantial deposits but maintained minimal cash reserves. When the Knickerbocker Trust Company failed on October 22, terrified depositors formed lines outside banks across New York City, desperately attempting to withdraw their savings before it was too late. Unlike European nations with established central banks, America had no institution capable of providing emergency liquidity or coordinating a response. Instead, J.P. Morgan, the 70-year-old titan of Wall Street, stepped into the void. Working from his library on Madison Avenue, Morgan summoned bank presidents and trust company executives, examined their balance sheets, and arranged emergency loans for institutions he deemed solvent. When the crisis threatened to overwhelm even Morgan's resources, he convinced Treasury Secretary George Cortelyou to deposit $25 million of government funds in New York banks - though the Treasury had limited tools at its disposal under existing law. The panic quickly spread beyond New York, revealing the fragility of America's fragmented banking system. With over 20,000 independent banks operating nationwide, reserves were scattered and immobilized when most needed. Banks in agricultural regions routinely faced liquidity pressures during harvest season, when farmers needed cash to pay workers and move crops to market. The system's inelastic currency supply - rigidly tied to government bonds rather than economic needs - exacerbated these seasonal strains. When panic struck, each institution acted in self-preservation, hoarding cash and refusing to make loans, creating a severe credit contraction that paralyzed commerce and industry. The consequences were severe and far-reaching. Banks nationwide suspended cash payments, forcing businesses to issue substitute currencies like clearinghouse certificates. Industrial production plunged, unemployment soared, and a recession took hold - all despite the underlying economy having been fundamentally sound before the panic. For many observers, the spectacle of one private citizen wielding such enormous power over the nation's financial destiny was deeply troubling. As one congressman remarked, "The entire country had to wait on the decision of one man, and that man not an official, before knowing whether or not there would be a panic." The 1907 crisis catalyzed a national conversation about banking reform. Even conservative bankers who had previously resisted change now recognized that America's antiquated financial architecture threatened the nation's economic development. Congress passed the Aldrich-Vreeland Act in 1908, providing temporary emergency currency provisions and establishing the National Monetary Commission to study potential reforms. The stage was set for the most significant overhaul of America's financial system since the Civil War - though the path forward would require navigating treacherous political waters and overcoming a century of resistance to centralized banking authority.

Chapter 2: Jekyll Island: Bankers' Secret Plan for Reform

In November 1910, an extraordinary secret gathering took place that would shape America's financial future. Senator Nelson Aldrich, chairman of the National Monetary Commission and the most powerful financial voice in Congress, boarded a private railcar at New Jersey's Hoboken Terminal along with five companions. Their destination: the exclusive Jekyll Island Club off the Georgia coast, where they would draft a plan for a central banking system. The group included some of the most influential figures in American finance: Frank Vanderlip, president of National City Bank (today's Citibank); Paul Warburg, a partner at Kuhn, Loeb & Co. and a German-born banking expert; Henry Davison, a senior partner at J.P. Morgan & Co.; and A. Piatt Andrew, Assistant Secretary of the Treasury. The Jekyll Island conspirators maintained absolute secrecy about their mission. They traveled under assumed names, used only first names during their discussions, and claimed to be on a duck hunting expedition. This caution reflected the political reality of the era - any plan perceived as a Wall Street creation would face overwhelming opposition from populist and progressive forces. As Vanderlip later admitted, "If it had been known that our group had written a banking bill, that bill would have had no chance whatever of passage by Congress." The secrecy surrounding the meeting would later fuel conspiracy theories about the Federal Reserve's creation, but it also represented a pragmatic recognition of the political challenges facing banking reform. For nine days, these men worked in isolation at the luxurious club, crafting what would become known as the "Aldrich Plan." Their task reflected a dramatic conversion for Aldrich, who had long defended the status quo in banking. After witnessing the devastation of the 1907 Panic and studying European central banks, Aldrich had become convinced that America needed a more resilient financial system. The group debated fundamental questions: How could a central banking authority be structured to provide stability without concentrating too much power? How could the currency supply be made more elastic to meet seasonal and emergency demands? How could reserves be mobilized effectively during crises? The solution they developed called for a "National Reserve Association" with fifteen branches across the country. This decentralized structure would be owned by member banks but governed by a mix of public and private representatives. It would hold bank reserves, issue a new form of currency backed by commercial assets, and serve as a lender of last resort during financial crises. The plan represented a compromise between European-style central banking and American traditions of decentralization. It would pool reserves nationally while preserving local input through its branch structure. When the group returned north, they maintained their silence about the meeting. The Aldrich Plan was presented to the public as solely the work of the National Monetary Commission, with no mention of the Jekyll Island conclave. While technically sound, the plan's close association with Aldrich - widely viewed as Wall Street's man in Washington - made it politically vulnerable. As one journalist observed, "Mr. Aldrich's plan has one fatal defect - Mr. Aldrich." Nevertheless, the Jekyll Island draft provided the technical blueprint for a modern central banking system that would eventually emerge, albeit in modified form, as the Federal Reserve System.

Chapter 3: Political Battleground: Progressive Era Banking Debates

As the Aldrich Plan emerged from the shadows in 1911, it collided with a powerful new force in American politics: progressivism. This reform movement, which had been gaining momentum since the turn of the century, represented a fundamental shift in American attitudes toward government, business, and society. Progressives believed that concentrated economic power threatened democracy and that government should play a more active role in addressing social inequities. They championed causes ranging from food safety regulations to labor protections, corporate oversight, and more democratic political processes like direct election of senators. Wall Street became a particular target of progressive ire. The Panic of 1907 had demonstrated the outsized influence of a small circle of New York bankers, and progressives were determined to break what they called the "Money Trust." This suspicion intensified in 1912 when the House Banking Committee, under the leadership of Arsène Pujo, launched a sensational investigation into financial concentration. The committee's counsel, Samuel Untermyer, subjected Wall Street's elite to withering cross-examinations that revealed extensive interlocking directorships and anti-competitive practices. J.P. Morgan himself was called to testify, creating a media spectacle. When asked if commercial credit was based primarily on a borrower's assets, Morgan famously replied, "No, sir; the first thing is character." The 1912 presidential election transformed the debate over banking reform. The Republican Party split between incumbent William Howard Taft and former President Theodore Roosevelt, who formed the Progressive Party after failing to secure the Republican nomination. This division opened the door for Democrat Woodrow Wilson, who campaigned on a "New Freedom" platform that emphasized breaking up monopolies and restoring competition. Wilson's victory, along with Democratic control of both houses of Congress, seemingly doomed the Aldrich Plan. The Democratic platform had explicitly rejected "the so-called Aldrich bill or the establishment of a central bank." However, Wilson recognized the need for banking reform and assigned the task to Representative Carter Glass of Virginia, a newspaper editor turned congressman with no formal education in finance. Glass approached the issue from a states' rights perspective, deeply suspicious of centralization and determined to create a system that would break Wall Street's grip on the nation's credit. Working with his adviser H. Parker Willis, Glass developed a plan for a decentralized system of regional reserve banks that would be owned and controlled by member banks in their districts. When Glass presented his plan to Wilson in December 1912, the president-elect made a crucial intervention. While approving the regional structure, Wilson insisted on adding a "capstone" - a central board in Washington that would coordinate the system. This federal oversight body would ensure the system functioned as a coherent whole rather than as isolated regional units. Glass reluctantly accepted this modification, though he continued to resist giving the central board too much authority. This tension between centralization and decentralization would define the political battles over the Federal Reserve's structure in the months ahead.

Chapter 4: Wilson's Compromise: Balancing Public Control and Banking Expertise

As the Glass bill moved through Congress in 1913, President Wilson faced the challenge of balancing competing visions of banking reform. The bill needed to be centralized enough to provide stability yet decentralized enough to avoid the appearance of a Wall Street-dominated central bank. It needed to give bankers sufficient operational control while ensuring ultimate authority rested with public officials. And it needed to satisfy both progressive reformers and conservative business interests. Wilson's political skills proved crucial in navigating these contradictions. Wilson's most significant decision came in June 1913 when he determined that the Federal Reserve Board would be entirely appointed by the president with Senate confirmation, with no banker representation. This was a major concession to progressive demands for democratic control. Wilson explained his reasoning with characteristic eloquence: "Will one of you gentlemen tell me in which civilized country of the earth there are important government boards of control on which private interests are represented?" At the same time, Wilson preserved banker influence at the regional level, with member banks owning and largely controlling the twelve Federal Reserve Banks. Secretary of State William Jennings Bryan, the Democratic Party's elder statesman and longtime opponent of banker control over currency, exerted his influence on the legislation. Bryan insisted that the new Federal Reserve notes be "obligations of the United States" rather than merely bank-issued currency. This seemingly technical change carried enormous symbolic weight, signaling that the nation's money supply was ultimately a public trust rather than a private banking function. When Bryan threatened to resign over this issue, Wilson crafted a compromise that satisfied the Great Commoner while preserving the bill's essential structure. To build public support, Wilson broke precedent by personally addressing Congress on banking reform in June 1913. He framed the issue not as a technical banking matter but as a moral imperative to democratize credit. "We shall deal with our economic system as it is and as it may be modified, not as it might be if we had a clean sheet of paper to write upon," he declared, reassuring business interests while promising meaningful change. This rhetorical approach reflected Wilson's academic background as a political scientist who understood the importance of public opinion in driving policy change. Throughout the legislative process, Wilson demonstrated his belief that effective governance required balancing competing interests rather than pursuing ideological purity. When agricultural Democrats demanded provisions for farm credit, Wilson incorporated their concerns without undermining the bill's core purpose. When bankers threatened to boycott the system unless given more control, Wilson stood firm on public oversight while making technical adjustments to ensure the system would be operationally sound. This pragmatic approach, combined with Wilson's moral framing of the issue, proved essential in navigating the treacherous politics of banking reform.

Chapter 5: The Federal Reserve Act: America's Unique Central Banking Solution

On December 23, 1913, President Wilson signed the Federal Reserve Act into law, creating America's first permanent central banking system. The signing ceremony in the Oval Office marked the culmination of a six-year journey that began with the Panic of 1907 and involved some of the most powerful figures in American finance and politics. As Wilson signed the legislation, he declared it "the first of the constructive measures" of his administration, one that would provide "the machinery for free and elastic and uncontrolled credits put at the disposal of the merchants and manufacturers of this country." The Federal Reserve System that emerged represented a uniquely American compromise. It created twelve regional Federal Reserve Banks, each owned by member banks in its district but supervised by the Federal Reserve Board in Washington. This structure balanced regional autonomy with national coordination, private ownership with public oversight. The system would hold member bank reserves, issue a new elastic currency backed by commercial paper and gold, provide check clearing services, and act as a lender of last resort during financial crises. National banks were required to join the system, while state-chartered banks could join voluntarily. The legislation contained elements from both the Aldrich Plan and progressive reforms. From the Aldrich Plan came the basic framework of a decentralized system with multiple reserve banks, the use of commercial paper as backing for currency, and the concept of pooling reserves. From progressive reformers came government appointment of the Federal Reserve Board, public obligations backing the currency, and agricultural credit provisions. This hybrid nature reflected the political necessity of addressing multiple constituencies while creating a technically viable system. Contemporary reactions to the Federal Reserve Act varied widely. Wall Street bankers, while disappointed by their exclusion from the Federal Reserve Board, generally welcomed the system's creation as preferable to continued financial instability. Progressive reformers celebrated the principle of public control while remaining vigilant against banker influence. Rural interests appreciated provisions for agricultural credit. The New York Times judged that the new system would be "a great advance upon any which this country has ever had." The Federal Reserve represented the culmination of the progressive movement's approach to economic reform - not abolishing private enterprise but subjecting it to public oversight in the broader national interest. It acknowledged that modern capitalism required governmental frameworks to function effectively. As one observer noted, the Act created "a peculiarly American institution" that reflected "the federal character of our government, the dual system of state and national banks, and the traditional American hostility to centralized control of banking and credit." The Federal Reserve's creation closed a chapter in American history that had begun with Andrew Jackson's war against the Second Bank of the United States in the 1830s. After decades of resistance, Americans had finally accepted the necessity of a central banking authority, albeit one carefully designed to reflect American values of federalism, checks and balances, and democratic accountability. The long struggle to create this institution revealed deep tensions in American political culture that would continue to shape its evolution in the century to come.

Chapter 6: Legacy: From Crisis Response to Economic Management

The Federal Reserve System that began operations in November 1914 bore the imprint of the political compromises that had made its creation possible. Power was divided between the twelve regional Federal Reserve Banks, each owned by member banks in its district, and the Federal Reserve Board in Washington, appointed by the President. This decentralized structure satisfied those who feared concentration of financial power, but it created coordination challenges that would become apparent in the system's early years. The New York Federal Reserve Bank, led by Benjamin Strong until his death in 1928, emerged as the system's dominant voice due to New York's role as the nation's financial center and Strong's forceful leadership. World War I accelerated the evolution of the Federal Reserve's role. The Fed helped finance America's war effort by encouraging banks to purchase Treasury securities, establishing a pattern of cooperation between the central bank and the Treasury Department that would continue for decades. The war also strengthened the international role of the dollar, as the United States shifted from being a debtor nation to a creditor nation. These changes expanded the Fed's responsibilities beyond domestic monetary management to include international financial coordination. By the 1920s, the Federal Reserve had begun to take a more active approach to monetary policy, using interest rates and open market operations to promote economic stability rather than simply responding to crises. The Fed's failures during the Great Depression led to major reforms in the Banking Acts of 1933 and 1935. These laws centralized power in the Board of Governors in Washington and the Federal Open Market Committee, reducing the autonomy of the regional Reserve Banks. They also gave the Fed new regulatory powers over member banks and separated commercial banking from investment banking through the Glass-Steagall provisions. These reforms created the basic structure of the Federal Reserve that would persist for decades and reflected a shift toward greater centralization of authority - a departure from the original compromise of 1913. Throughout the postwar era, the Federal Reserve gradually embraced a more active role in economic management. Under Chairman William McChesney Martin (1951-1970), the Fed adopted the goal of maintaining "stable prices and maximum employment," foreshadowing the dual mandate that would later be formalized in legislation. The challenges of combating stagflation in the 1970s, managing financial crises from the 1980s onward, and deploying unconventional monetary policies after the 2008 financial crisis all pushed the Fed to expand its toolkit and responsibilities far beyond what its founders had envisioned. Today's Federal Reserve bears both similarities to and differences from the institution created in 1913. The basic structure of a central board and regional Reserve Banks remains, though power has shifted decidedly toward Washington. The Fed's independence within government - free to make monetary policy decisions without direct political interference, but ultimately accountable to Congress and the public - reflects the careful balance struck by its founders. Perhaps most significantly, the Fed has evolved from an institution primarily focused on preventing banking panics to one expected to manage the overall economy, promote full employment, maintain price stability, ensure financial system resilience, and coordinate with other central banks globally. The Federal Reserve's journey from its controversial birth to its current position as one of the world's most powerful economic institutions illustrates how central banking in America has been shaped by the ongoing tension between technical necessities and democratic values. The compromises embedded in the Federal Reserve Act - between centralization and decentralization, expertise and democracy, stability and flexibility - continue to shape how Americans approach questions of financial governance more than a century later. As former Federal Reserve Chairman Ben Bernanke observed, the Fed's unusual structure "reflects our nation's dual commitment to democratic accountability and the benefits of private initiative."

Summary

The creation of the Federal Reserve System represents one of America's most significant experiments in balancing technical expertise with democratic governance. Throughout this story, we see a fundamental tension between the economic necessity of coordinated financial management and the political imperative to prevent concentrated power. The Federal Reserve's unique structure - neither fully centralized like European central banks nor completely decentralized as Carter Glass had originally proposed - embodies this tension. The system evolved from a limited crisis-prevention mechanism to a comprehensive economic management institution, yet it has maintained its distinctive hybrid character of public authority and private participation, central coordination and regional input. This history offers important lessons for addressing complex governance challenges in democratic societies. First, effective institutional design must acknowledge and accommodate legitimate political concerns rather than dismissing them as irrational. The Federal Reserve succeeded where previous central banking attempts failed precisely because it addressed Americans' deep-seated fears of concentrated financial power. Second, institutions must be able to evolve in response to changing conditions while maintaining their core principles. The Fed has dramatically expanded its role and tools over the past century while preserving its fundamental balance between independence and accountability. Finally, in a democracy, technical expertise alone is insufficient for institutional legitimacy - there must be mechanisms for ensuring that specialized knowledge serves public purposes rather than narrow interests. The ongoing debates about the Federal Reserve's power and accountability demonstrate that balancing expertise and democracy remains as challenging today as it was in 1913.

About Author

Loading...

Roger Lowenstein

Roger Lowenstein is an American financial journalist and writer. He graduated from Cornell University and reported for The Wall Street Journal for more than a decade, including two years writing its Heard on the Street column, 1989 to 1991. Born in 1954, he is the son of Helen and Louis Lowenstein of Larchmont, New York. Lowenstein is married to Judith Slovin.He is also a director of Sequoia Fund. In 2016, he joined the board of trustees of Lesley University. His father, the late Louis Lowenstein, was an attorney and Columbia University law professor who wrote books and articles critical of the American financial industry.Roger Lowenstein's latest book, Ways and Means: Lincoln and His Cabinet and the Financing of the Civil War, was released on March 8, 2022, and won the 2022 Harold Holzer Lincoln Forum Book Prize.

Read more

Related Books by Roger Lowenstein

Loading...

Buffett

Roger Lowenstein

The Making of an American Capitalist

★★★★☆4.2

Loading...

When Genius Failed

Roger Lowenstein

The Rise and Fall of Long-Term Capital Management

★★★★☆4.2