Chapter Two
Perhaps We Should Have Anticipated
Just Such a Development
Anyone familiar with the writings of John's Apocalypse might have suspected that
modern history would eventually contain the account of a gigantic complex of political and
economic power which would cover the whole earth.
John predicted that before the great epic of Messianic or Millennial peace, the human race
would be subjected to a ruthless, world-wide conglomerate of dictatorial authority which would
attempt to make all men subservient to it or be killed (Revelation 13
:15). He said it would
compel all men, "both small and great, rich and poor, free and bond," to be identified with it
(Revelation 13:16).
John also referred to its economic grip on humanity and said that unless a person were
identified with its monopoly network, "no man might buy or sell" (Revelation 13:17).
[page 7]
on the verge of
becoming a total reality. He points out that during the past two centuries when the peoples of the
world were gradually winning their political freedom from the dy
nastic monarchies, the major
banking families of Europe and America were actually reversing the trend by setting up new
dynasties of political control through the formation of international financial combines.
Dr. Quigley points out that these banking dynasties had learned that all governments must
have sources of revenue from which to borrow in times of emergency. They had also learned that
by providing such funds from their own private resources, they could m
ake both kings and
democratic leaders tremendously subservient to their will. It had proven to be a most effective
means of controlling political appointments and deciding political issues.
We quote Dr. Quigley verbatim as he describes how these banker families evolved into
vast, secret pockets of power. I have inserted topical sub-headings to facilitate reading.
The Banker Families Develop a Vast Network to
Control High Finance and the Affairs of Governments
"In time they brought into their financial network the provincial banking centers,
organized as commercial banks and savings banks, as well as insurance companies, to form all of
these into a single financial system on an international scale which manipul
industries on the other. The men who did this ... aspired to establish dynasties of international
ated the quantity and
flow of money so that they were able to influence, if not control, governments on one side and
bankers and were at least as successful a
t this as were many of the dynastic political rulers."
Introducing Some Of the Major Banking Family Dynasties
"The greatest of these dynasties, of course, were the descendants of Meyer Amschel
Rothschild (1743-1812) of Frankfort, whose male descendants, for at least two generations,
generally married first cousins or even nieces. Rothschild's five sons, establish
ed at branches in
Vienna, London, Naples, and Paris, as well as Frankfort, cooperated together in ways which other
international banking dynasties copied but rarely excelled....
"The names of some of these [other] banking families are familiar to all of us and should
1(6)
be more so. They include Baring, Laza
[page
8]
rd, Erlanger, Warburg, Schroder, Selingman, the Speyers,
Mirabaud, Mallet, Fould, and above all Rothschild and Morgan."
2(7)
Was This a Jewish Conspiracy? (a note by the reviewer)
It should be noted in passing that while the Rothschilds and certain other Jewish families
cooperated together in these ventures, this was by no means a Jewish monopoly as some have
alleged. Neither was it a "Jewish conspiracy." As we shall see, men of fi
nationalities and many religious or non-religious backgrounds collaborated together to create the
nance of many
super-structure of economic and political power which Dr. Quigley is about to disclose. No
student of the global conspiracy should fall for the
super "Jewish conspiracy." Nor should they fall for that long-since-discredited document,
Hitlerian doctrine that the root of all evil is a
Protocols of the Learned Elders of Zion
, which Hitler palmed off on the German people as an
authentic declaratio
n of policy by an all-Jewish congress. The spurious origin of this document
was proven decades ago and serves as an object lesson to those who are inclined to accept an
over-simplified explanation for the rise of the global power structure which has snared
mankind.
Some would answer this by saying that the Anti-Defamation League (ADL) and certain
other Jewish organizations have been in the forefront of the collectivist movement and also in the
suppression of American voices seeking to warn the nation. However, this
infiltration of the
Jewish community is no more applicable to the Jewish people as a whole than the scurrilous
left-wing activities of the National and World Councils of Churches is a reflection on all
Protestants or the liberal, irreligious Catholic left-
wing is a reflection on all Catholics. In
studying the global conspiracy it is important to keep in mind that it was not any particular race
or religion but the "passion for money and power" which has drawn the tycoons of world finance
into a tightly-knit,
mutual-aid society. Dr. Quigley identifies this group as the "International
Bankers."
The International Bankers Are Different From Ordinary Bankers
"... they remained different from ordinary hankers in distinctive ways: (1) they were
cosmopolitan and international; (2) they were close to governments and were particularly
concerned with questions of government debts ... (3) their interests were almost
exclusively in
bonds and very rarely in goods ... (4) they were, accordingly, fanatical devotees of deflation ... (5)
they were almost equally devoted to secrecy and the secret use of financial influence in political
life. These bankers came to be called
'international bankers' and, more particularly, were known
as 'merchant bankers' in England, 'private bankers' in
in the United States. In all countries they carried on various kinds of banking and exchange
[page 9]
France, and 'investment bankers'
ies, but everywhere they were sharply distinguishable from other, more obvious, kinds of
banks, such as savings banks or commercial banks."
3(8)
How the Centers Of Monetary Power Were Kept Secret
activit
The
"One of their less obvious characteristics was that they remained as private
unincorporated firms, usually partnerships, until relatively recently, offering no shares, no
reports, and usually no advertising to the public. This risky status, which deprived
surround such family wealth with the immortality of corporate status for tax avoidance purposes.
Nelson Perkins, Russell Leffingwell, Elihu Root, John W. Davis, John Foster Dulles,
them of
limited liability, was retained, in most cases, until modern inheritance taxes made it essential to
This persistence as private firms continued becaus
e it ensured the maximum of anonymity and
secrecy to persons of tremendous public power who dreaded public knowledge of their activities
as an evil almost as great as inflation. As a consequence, ordinary people had no way of knowing
the wealth or areas of
operation of such firms, and often were somewhat hazy as to their
membership. Thus, people of considerable political knowledge might not associate the names of
Walter Burns, Clinton Dawkins, Edward Grenfell, Willard Straight, Thomas Lamont, Dwight
Morrow,
and S. Parker Gilbert with the name "Morgan," yet all these and many others were parts of the
system of influence which centered on the J.P. Morgan office at 23 Wall Stree
t. This firm, like
others of the international banking fraternity, constantly operated through corporations and
governments...."
4(9)
The Campaign to Keep Governments From Controlling
Their Own Money Systems
"The influence of financial capitalism and of the international bankers who created it was
exercised both on business and on governments, but could have done neither if it had not been
able to persuade both of these to accept two "axioms" of its own ideol
ogy. Both of these were
based on the assumption that politicians were too weak and too subject to temporary popular
pressures to be trusted with control of the money system.... To do this it was necessary to
conceal, or even to mislead, both governments an
d people about the nature of money and its
methods of operation."
5(10)
[page 10]
The Rothschilds -- One of the Oldest Banking Dynasties
The founder of the famous Rothschild dynasty was Mayer Amschel Rothschild
(1743-1812) of Frankfurt, Germany. Although destined originally to be a rabbi, he became highly
successful in a number of commercial pursuits and eventually established his famous b
anking
house in Frankfurt with his five sons. Four of these sons were later sent to Vienna, London, Paris
and Naples, to set up branches of their family bank. This combine soon became the most
powerful banking establishment in Europe.
[page 11]
Amschel Rothschild (the eldest son) remained in Frankfurt with his
father. Eventually he became the Treasurer of the German Confederation.
Salomon, the second son, founder of the Vienna branch.
He became a leading personality in the Austro-Hungarian Empire.
Nathan, the third son, founder of the London branch.
He became the most powerful man in England.
Carl, the fourth son, who founded the Naples branch
and became one of the most powerful men in Italy.
James (Jacob), the fifth son, who founded the Paris branch
and soon dominated the financial destiny of France.
[page 12]
The Private Bankers Decide to Set Up the Bank Of England
As a Means of Creating Credit Out of Nothing
"Credit has been known to the Italians and Netherlanders long before it became one of the
instruments of English world supremacy. Nevertheless, the founding of the Bank of England by
William Paterson and his friends in 1694 is one of the great dates in wo
rld history. For
generations men had sought to avoid the one draw-back of gold, its heaviness, by using pieces of
paper to represent specific pieces of gold. Today we call such pieces of paper gold certificates.
Such a certificate entitles its bearer to ex
change it for its piece of gold on demand, but in view of
the convenience of paper, only a small fraction of certificate holders ever did make such
demands. It early became clear that gold need be held on hand
only
to the amount needed to
cover the
fractio
n
of certificates likely to be presented for payment; accordingly, the rest of the
gold could be used for business purposes, or, what amounts to the same thing, a volume of
certificates could be issued
greater
than the volume of gold reserved for payment.... Such an
excess volume of paper claims against reserves we now call bank notes.
"In effect, this creation of paper claims greater than the reserves available means that
bankers were creating money out of nothing. The same thing could be done in another way....
Deposit bankers discovered that orders and checks drawn against
given to a third person were often not cashed by the latter but were deposited to their own
deposits
b
y depositors and
accounts. Thus there were no actual movements of funds, and payments were made simply by
bookkeeping transactions on the accounts. Accordingly, it
was necessary for the banker to keep
on hand in actual money (gold, certificates, and notes) no more than the
fraction
of deposits
likely to be drawn upon
and cashed
; the rest could be used for loans, and if these loans were
made by creating a deposit [acc
ount] for the borrower, who in turn would draw checks upon it
rather than withdraw it in money, such 'created deposits' or loans could also be covered
adequately by retaining reserves to only a
fraction
of their value. Such created deposits also were
ation of money out of nothing, although bankers usually refused to express their actions,
either note issuing or deposit lending, in these terms. William Paterson, however, on obtaining
the charter of the Bank of England in 1694, to use the moneys he had w
[page 13]
Bank Of England Becomes the Secret Center Of Political Power
on in privateering, said,
'The bank hath benefit of interest on all moneys which it creates out of nothing.'"
6(11)
"In government the power of the Bank of England was a considerable restriction on
political action as early as 1819 but an effort to break this power by a modification of the bank's
charter in 1844 failed. In 1852, Gladstone, then Chancellor of the Excheq
uer and later prime
minister, declared, 'The hinge of the whole situation was this: the government itself was not to be
a substantive power in matters of Finance, but was to leave the Money Power supreme and
unquestioned.'
"This power of the Bank of England and of its governor was admitted by most qualified
observers. In January, 1924, Reginald McKenna, who had been Chancellor of the Exchequer in
1915-1916, as chairman of the board of the Midland Bank told its stock-holders
: 'I am afraid the
ordinary citizen will not like to be told that the banks can, and do, create money.... And they who
control the credit of the nation direct the policy of Governments and hold in the hollow of their
hands
the destiny of the people
.' In th
at same year, Sir Drummond Fraser, vice-president of the
Institute of Bankers, stated, 'The Governor of the Bank of England must be the autocrat who
dictates the terms upon which alone the Government can obtain borrowed money."
Concerning the Dynastic Powers Secretly Entrenched
Behind British Financial Life
7(12)
"Although this situation is changing slowly, the inner circle of English financial life
remains a matter of 'whom one knows,' rather than 'what one knows.' Jobs are still obtained by
family, marriage, or school connections; character is considered far mor
e important than
knowledge or skill; and important positions, on this basis, are given to men who have no training,
experience, or knowledge to qualify them.
a cre
"As part of this system and at the core of English financial life have been seventeen
private firms of 'merchant bankers' who find money for established and wealthy enterprises....
These merchant bankers,
with a total of less than a hundred active partner
8(13)
s
, include the firms of
Baring Brothers, N.M. Rothschild, J. Henry Shroder, Morgan Grenfell, Hambros, and Lazard
Brothers. These merchant bankers in the period of financial capitalism had a dominant position
with the Bank of England and, strangely enough
s
till have retained some of this, despite the
nationalization of the bank
by the Labour government in 1946. As [page 14]
Baring (Lord Cromer) was named governor of the bank, and his board of directors, called the
late as 1961 a
'Court' of the bank, included
representatives of Lazard, of Hambros, and of Morgan Grenfell, as
well as an industrial firm (English Electric) controlled by these."
Similar Financial Dynasties Developed in the United States
"This period, 1884-1933, was the period of financial capitalism in which investment
bankers moving into commercial banking and insurance on one side and into railroading and
heavy industry on the other were able to mobilize enormous wealth and wield enorm
ous
economic, political and social power. Popularly known as 'Society,' or the '400' they lived a life
of dazzling splendor. Sailing the ocean in great private yachts or traveling on land by private
trains, they moved in a ceremonious round between their s
fortress-like New York residences to attend the Metropolitan Opera under the critical eye of Mrs.
pectacular estates and town houses in
Palm Beach, Long Island, the Berkshires, Newport, and Bar Harbor, assembling from their
Astor; or gathering for business
meetings of the highest strategic level in the awesome presence
of J.P. Morgan himself.
J.P. Morgan with celebrated midget, Lya Graf, during Senate hearings, 1933.
"The structure of financial controls created by the tycoons of 'Big Banking' and 'Big
Business' in the period 1880-1933 was of extraordinary complexity, one business fief being built
on another, both being allied with semi-independent associates, the whol
e rearing upward into
two pinnacles of economic and financial power, of which
[page 15]
one, centered in New York,
was headed by J.P. Morgan and Company, and the other, in Ohio, was headed by the Rockefeller
family. When these two cooperated, as they gener
ally did, they could influence the economic life
of the country to a large degree and could almost control its political life, at least on the Federal
level."
9(14)
Monopolistic Financial Structure of the American Dynasties
"In the United States the number of billion-dollar corporations rose from one in 1909
(United States Steel, controlled by Morgan) to fifteen in 1930. The share of all corporation assets
held by the 200 largest corporations rose from 32 percent in 1909 to
49 percent in 1930 and
reached 57 percent in 1939. By 1930 these 200 largest corporations held 49.2 percent of the
assets of all 40,000 corporations in the country ($81 billion out of $165 billion).... In fact, in
1930, one corporation (American Telephone
and Telegraph, controlled by Morgan) had greater
assets than the total wealth in twenty-one states of the Union.
"The influence of these business leaders was so great that the Morgan and Rockefeller
groups acting together, or even Morgan acting alone, could have wrecked the economic system of
the country...."
10(15)
----------------------------------------
Chapter Three
No comments:
Post a Comment