ROTHSCHILDS, BARINGS, BIDDLE AND THE SECOND BANK OF THE UNITED STATES

Yesterday I questioned Gary Allen's trustworthiness by raising the question of a reference from Epperson's The Unseen Hand, in which Epperson quotes Allen quoting Gustavus Myers who claims that the Rothschilds were long time a power in the Second Bank of the United States.

I forgot that I had already addressed this in ANOTHER FACTOID.

The precise reference is:

Under the surface, the Rothschilds have long had a powerful influence in dictating American financial laws. The law records show that they were powers in the old Bank of the United States. August Belmont and Company were their American representatives. In 1873 it was estimated that $375,000,000 of American railroad securities were held abroad, chiefly by foreign bankers. The Final Report of the Industrial Commission in 1902 estimated (see page 404 of that report) the amount of these securities held by foreign banking houses and others abroad at about $3,100,000,000.

[source : History of the great American fortunes, Gustavus Myers, Vol 3, p.183]

The reason, I believe, why the search yesterday could not find this reference to the Rothschilds is because this is just a footnote. But it also does not have any reference to back up the claim.

So some of the confusion from yesterday has been cleared up.

But we still have the claim from Myers that the Rothschilds were powers in the Second Bank of the United States without any source or evidence. Myers mentions Belmont who didn't arrive in the USA until just days before the 1837 Panic began in New York, and by then the BUS2 was on its last legs. Until then the Rothschild agents in the USA were the little known Philips and Joseph, and if the Rothschilds really were that powerful before 1837 I am sure we would have heard alot more of Philips and Joseph.

What I am beginning to piece together is that:
1. the Rothschilds had very little if any power in BUS2
2. what power they may have had, that Myers may refer to, is due to Jackson making them bankers for the USA in Europe around 1834
3. Biddle was without question doing very well in developing the USA as President of the BUS2
4. but Biddle appears to have been very dependent on Barings for lines of credit (which at times were very significant) and at times annoyed Barings but they persisted with him because they eventually did well out of their business with him
5. but Barings were drug runners, according to Dope Inc

So the irony is that the USA may well have relied on the King's drug money for credit for its development.

And why didn't Myers write anything of any significance about the Rothschilds? Astor. Morgan. Vanderbilt. But nothing on Rothschild, but he is prepared to say without reference that "Under the surface, the Rothschilds have long had a powerful influence in dictating American financial laws."

This is getting very bizarre but very interesting, particularly when the works of Kirsch and Chaitkin are added to the mix.