ADDICTED TO STUPIDITY

 

"God... a being whose only definition is that he is beyond man's power to conceive."

Ayn Rand

I think Sir Francis Bacon is usually credited with the saying, “money is a good servant but a bad master”.  Actually, it was an old French proverb, far older even than the Elizabethan politician and writer, and Sir Francis merely translated it. His own original observation about money said the same thing, but was as prosaic as fertilizer. “Money is like muck,” Sir Francis said, “not good except it be spread.”

"The alleged short-cut to knowledge, which is faith, is only a short-circuit destroying the mind."

Ayn Rand

You see, Sir Francis believed in the biblical warning that “The love of money is the root of all evil” (Timothy 6:10).  You buy a loaf of bread and you employ the baker and the driver who delivers it, and the check-out clerk, the farmer who grows the grain...etc. 

Economists call this the “velocity of money multiplier effect”, or the VMME, and most economists multiply each dollar spent on bread by six. This is the material logic which – in addition to Judeo-Christian and Islamic and Hindu and Confuscusian morality - justifies food stamps and unemployment insurance.  And yet, today's devotees of Ayan Rand, meaning most Republican politicians, do not believe in the VMME. They believe wealthy Americans should act only out of self interest while the working poor, once known as the middle class, are sacrificed on the alter of more wealth for the wealthy. Heads the bankers win, tails, anybody who borrows from a banker, looses.  No wonder then that these days, every corporation wants to be a bank,  

"We will rebuild America’s system on the moral premise...that man is an end in himself."

Ayan Rand Atlas Shrugged

According to Wikipedia, “A bank connects customers that have capital deficits to customers with capital surpluses.” But in the post “Citizens Untied” world, where a Supreme Court majority can chose to believe that corporations have the same rights of free speech as individuals – and enough money to reduce “Free Speech” to an oxymoron - money has become the master. Five American banks now hold – hold - more than $8.5 trillion in assets – 56% of America's $15 trillion economy.  

As the stock market becomes increasingly detached from the real economy, these mega-bankers practice zombie capitalism, trading their cash surpluses back and forth between themselves, hedging their equity by shifting the money from this pocket to that, paying themselves a bonus every time their computers shift the funds. At some point reality must intervene in this monetary computer game world, as J.P. Morgan discovered back in 2007. And when it does, the destructive effect is suffered by the nation as a whole. Sacrifice might be required, but only for those who cannot afford to live in the fantasy world of 21^st century hedge fund managers.

"I will never live for the sake of another man."

Ayan Rand Atlas Shrugged

It brings to mind an observation once made by a very angry young man. He wrote, “There have been gambling manias before... (but) the ruling principle of the...the present mania, is... to speculate in speculation...” The angry man was Karl Marx, and he was writing about the swindle of the moment in September of 1856, the collapse of the Royal British Bank. 

It was a fabulous enterprise which seemed solid as granite at one moment and in the next a cruel fraud and a fantasy. And the most interesting thing about the case, besides the moral lessons the father of Communism saw in it, is that the bankers who perpetrated it actually went to jail, however briefly, without bringing down capitalism.

"Until and unless you discover that money is the root of all good, you ask for your own destruction."

Ayn Rand Atlas Shrugged. 

The Royal British Bank, created in 1849, was innovative. Previously, banking had been a rich man's game. Those with money had banded together to lend to those who could afford to borrow it - i.e. Royalty. But the fortunes created by the industrial revolution were not exclusively blue blooded, and both blue blood and non-blue blooded advanced thinkers in Scotland invented the publicly owned bank. They then convinced Parliament and the House of Lords to charter an institution which would allow small investors with a little extra cash to combine their money  And according to the new rules, once they had sold L50,000 in stock in the bank, they could open their doors and begin accepting accounts and lending money to make a profit. 

In this case the idea belonged to Londoner John Menzies (above), who suggested the idea to his lawyer, Edward Mullins. Together they printed up a prospectus (or Deed Of Constitution), and went looking for investors. But as England was in the middle of a recession (its fourth “Panic” since 1817) they found little money available for investment.

Until they approached shipbuilder John McGregor (above), who was also a Liberal Party politician representing Glasgow, Scotland. For the price of ten shares – at L10 per share –McGregor bought himself a seat on the board of the new bank. Cheap enough. 

He immediately suggested the board hire an old friend of his who had knowledge of the “Scottish style” of banking, fellow Minister to Parliament,  Hugh Innes Cameron (above).  A bank started by politicians, for the politicians. What could go wrong?

"If any civilization is to survive, it is the morality of altruism that men have to reject."

Ayn Rand Atlas Shrugged

Cameron was offered the position of Managing Director of the Royal British Bank. And with McGregor's help, Mr. Cameron obtained a seven year contract which would impress any modern equity or hedge fund manager. The first year Cameron would be paid L1250 (equivalent to $2 million today) , rising to L2,000 a year ($4.5 million today), with an annual housing allowance of L200 (about a hundred thousand modern dollars). Within a few months Cameron had squeezed out the man who first conceived of the idea for the bank, Mr. Menzies, buying him out  with L400 of investors' money. Now there was nobody looking over the shoulder of any of the bank's officers or investors. 

"If you ask me to name the proudest distinction of Americans...they were the people who created the phrase "to make money”.

Ayan Rand Atlas Shrugged

From that moment, the bank never stood a chance of surviving. Instead of the L50,000 the law required and which appeared on it's books, at its opening the Royal British Bank actually had no more than L18,000 in its vault. 

Over the next six years, while the 6,000 depositors supplied the salaries, advances and loans never repaid to the officers and directors of the bank, each of those men became involved in enumerable kickbacks, scams and frauds which removed even more of the  investor's  funds -  about L130,000, (or the equivalent of $247 million today). The whole thing collapsed in the summer of 1856, producing, yet another nation wide “Panic”, this one which taught so much to the Father of Communism..

"The question isn't who is going to let me; it's who is going to stop me."

Ayn Rand Atlas Shrugged. 

John McGregor escaped arrest by sailing to Boulogne, France. He died there, deeply in debt in April of 1857.  In February of 1859 the seven surviving board members were finally tried on seven counts of fraud. The jury convicted them of six. 

At sentencing the judge, Lord Cameron (above), could have been speaking directly modern Wall Street Crypto geniuses. “It would be a disgrace to the laws of any country” said the judge 150 years ago, “if this were not a crime to be punished. It is not a mere breach of contract with the shareholders and the customers of the bank., but it is a criminal conspiracy to do what must inevitably lead to a great public mischief, in the ruin of families and the reduction of widows and orphans from affluence to destitution; I regret to say that in mitigation of your offense it was said to be common practice. Unfortunately a laxity has been introduced into certain commercial dealings...and practises have been adopted without bringing in a consciousness of shame...”

"When I die, I hope to go to Heaven, whatever the Hell that is. And I want to be able to afford the price of admission."

Ayn Rand

Because it was his first conviction, Hugh Innes Cameron could only be sentenced to a year in jail. All the other board members received even lesser sentences, and one was only fined a single shilling. 

The scandal sold a few newspapers, and produced a marvelous pamphlet, “The Curious and Remarkable History of the Royal British Bank showing how We Got it Up and How it went down.” But judging by recent history, nobody learned anything from the affair, or any of the other enumerable “Panics”, recessions and depressions which have stricken capitalist economies once or twice every decade ever since. 

I think we learn nothing because greed makes you stupid, and the mega-bankers and their paid political apologists are purveyors of greed and thus are selling and buying stupidity . 

Which is why conservative politicians increasingly say really, really stupid things. We have seen this progression since biblical days. To acknowledge this reality and yet not deal with it is to acknowledge you are a zombie, addicted to greed, and without hope of ever seeing a better future. Just like Ayn Rand.

"You can avoid reality, but you cannot avoid the consequences of avoiding reality."

Ayn Rand

                                        - 30 - 

THE BATTLE FOR BRISTOL

 

I can’t imagine anyone was surprised that Sir Charles Wetherell (above) eventually inspired a riot. Sir Charles (above) was “…half mad, eccentric, ingenious…a coarse, vulgar mind, delighting in ribaldry and abuse …”  He was also rich and a bigot.  Remind you of any modern politicians? 

Sir Charles was fired from his cabinet post in the Duke of Wellington’s government because he made a vicious anti-Catholic speech, exactly when the government was trying to decriminalization Catholicism. And when the British government moved to reform the stifling limitations on the right to vote, Sir Charles opposed that, too. A colleague noted, “…no one spoke more than Sir Charles Wetherell; often to no good purpose.” 

The man who invented the London Bobby's,  Sir Robert Peel, watched his performance in the House of Commons and was not impressed. “This Wetherell unbuttoned his braces (suspenders) when he began to speak, and put his hands into the waistband of his breeches…Horace Twiss said he was very mad, and had but one brief lucid interval, which was between his breeches and his waistcoat.”

Sir Charles represented the tiny market town of Boroughbridge (above), 13 miles northwest of York and 187 miles northeast of London.  It was the very epitome of “a rotten borough”. 

The election districts of Parliament had not been redrawn in two hundred years, and fishing villages that had been washed out to sea, and hamlets long abandoned still had sent representatives to London. Meanwhile, newly industrialized population centers were underrepresented, In 1831, only 6,000 of the 104,000 citizens of the town of Bristol could vote,

Boroughbridge (above) was a typical rotten borough.  There were only 947 people in the village, and only 65 of the 154 households were recognized as “entitlements”, meaning ownership or occupancy brought with it the right to vote. 

Yet this village with just 65 legal voters still qualified for two representatives in Parliament, Sir Matthias Attwood, and Sir Charles Wetherell (far left on the teter-totter above). The public was desperate for reform of this system, and despite (or because) of Sir Charles’ opposition the Reform Bill easily carried the House of Commons by 345 to 239 votes. 

But Sir Charles was also a member of the cloistered red robed House of Lords (above), and as such was able to vote against the bill,  twice. He helped to kill it "in the Lords” by 41 votes and became the public face of the opposition to democracy.

There were riots and threats of more riots that fall in Manchester and Birmingham, and a half dozen other industrialized towns. But things came to head on Friday, 29 October, 1831, when the Courts were set to open in the west coast port city of Bristol. 

The Official Recorder for those courts  was none other than Sir Charles Wetherell,  He came parading into town in a carriage pulled by four magnificent matching grey horses, and it is hard to see how he could have chosen a worse time for a display of ostentation and privilege. Shops and markets had closed so no one would be dissuaded from joining the crowds gathering to “welcome” Sir Charles.

Expecting trouble three troops of Dragoons were stationed on the outskirts of Bristol. Sir Charles’ carriage was met by an additional 300 “marshals”, especially hired for the occasion. The crowd called them Sir Charles' Bludgeon Men. Some 2,000 people packed the route, hissing and booing as Sir Charles passed. And when the carriage crossed the bridge over the River Bath, stones were thrown.

The procession reached the Guildhall at noon. There the town clerk, Mr. Ludlow, tried to make a speech praising the reform movement. But the crowded courtroom would not be placated, and the hissing drove poor Mr. Ludlow into retreat. From atop the bench Sir Charles (above) imperiously threatened to arrest anyone interfering with the court, and the catcalling became even louder. Eventually Sir Charles had to withdraw himself. Once he was gone, the crowd gave three cheers for the King.

A carriage took Sir Charles through the thick crowds to the Mansion-house on Queen Square (above), where he was to spend the night. But once he was safely inside several of the “Marshals”,  sallied into the crowd to arrest individuals they or Sir Charles deemed as troublemakers. This increased the anger of the crowd, who attacked the house with rocks. The shower of missiles drove the mayor and the town council up the staircase to the second floor. 

This attack was stopped by the timely arrival of Lieutenant-Colonel Thomas Brereton, with a single troop of dragoons. Despite Sir Charles’ demand that the troops open fire on the crowd, Brereton spoke to them instead and they dispersed peacefully. At about three o’clock Col. Brereton returned with his troopers to their barracks. He immediately requested reinforcements, but he might have been more cautious had he known that while transporting their prisoners to jail, the Bludgeon Men were waylaid and the arrested “troublemakers” were freed.

The Mayor and council spent the night boarding up the broken windows and doors, but all their work was for naught. Saturday afternoon some six hundred angry men and women smashed through the front door, driving the mayor to clamber over the back garden wall (above), while Sir Charles escaped out the roof, jumping into a neighboring house. 

Sir Charles was then spirited out of town dressed as a groom. The city council spread the news, in the hope his retreat would calm the mob. But Sir Charles Wetherell's work in Bristol was done.

The Mansion-house was trashed and burned, and its wine cellar looted. Several other buildings surrounding Queen Square were ransacked as well. 

Then the New jail was attacked (above), followed by the Gloucester Prison. The gates were rushed, the jailers beaten, and some 200 prisoners released.

The Custom’s House, the Excise Office, and some fifty private houses and warehouses were looted and burned. But it was a very selective riot. All the lost property belonged to those who had opposed the reform bill. And no one was killed or even seriously injured by the rioters.

The city was finally 'brought under control' when the reinforcements requested by Col. Brereton arrived Monday afternoon and the dragoons were turned loose on the crowd. 

Several hundred were now killed. Total damages were estimated at between four and eight hundred thousand pounds sterling.

Sir Charles (above) was at first confused by what had happened. The night of his escape he confessed to an inn keeper, “I am not aware that I ever injured any individual in the city.” But by the time Parliament convened in December he was sure again.

He denounced the London press for laying for the blame for the riot on him. He also demanded that he be allowed to sit as judge of the rioters. That request was denied. However a statue of Sir Charles was erected in Queen Square, to remind the citizens who had won the battle for Bristol.

In January of 1832 eighty-two people went on trial for crimes committed during the riot. Despite a petition for clemency signed by 10,000 citizens of Bristol, four men were hung over the gates of the new jail. The punishment drove the hangman to sob uncontrollably so that he almost fell off the scaffold. But the four were hung, nevertheless. 

A fifth man, James Ives, was judged insane and his death sentence was commuted to transportation to Australia for life. Seventy-four others were also exiled to Australia, while forty-three were sentenced to hard labor in England. Of those forty-three, one old woman, convicted of receiving silver plate looted from the Mansion-house, hung herself in prison. 

Colonel Brereton was court-martialed for refusing to fire on the crowds, and after a week of testimony at his court-martial (above), he shot himself in the heart. He left behind two small motherless children. His second in command was allowed to resign and sell his commission. 

Meanwhile, seven of those sentenced to transportation to Australia died of cholera before their ship even set sail. Another, Matthew Warry, jumped ship. While swimming to shore he was shot and killed by a sentry, as was James Ives, the man too insane to hang for his crimes against property. And that was the fate of the victims of Sir Charles Wetherell’s “…coarse and vulgar mind…”, all save one.

No one tried to defend any of these victims. Instead the champions of reform concentrated their efforts on passing the Reform bill in 1832.  One of the last to speak against the bill, again, was Sir Charles, who knew he had done much to ensure the elimination of his own “rotten borough.” He concluded his remarks by saying, “This is the last dying speech and confession of the member for Boroughbridge.” And it was. 

The new reforms did not not increase the size of Parliament, but based the districts on the most recent  census. When Sir Charles stood for election that fall for one of the “new” seats from Oxford University he received so few votes he withdrew his name as a candidate.  He died of a “concussion of the brain” caused by a carriage accident, on Monday, 17 August, 1846. He left behind no heirs, except for those members of the American Republican Party, determined to hold onto power by any means, including schoolchildren shot or women who die by butchered abortion. 

And in 1983 his statue was finally removed from Queens Square in Bristol, because, in the words of the City Council Engineer, “We are redesigning the garden for the 17th century period and Sir Charles will not blend in”. They hid his effigy under an alcove behind the Red Lion Inn.  And that cleaned up  democracy in Great Britain forever.  Except, of course,  for those who continue to seek power for its own sake and for profit. 

- 30 -