In order to demonstrate that Ellen Brown plays lawyer games with this criticism, I must reprint my original criticism.
Ellen Brown has a terrible problem with calendars. They make no sense to her. We can see this in her discussion of the First Bank of the United States (1791-1811). We will see it again in her discussion of the Federal Reserve System.Jefferson was instrumental in Congress's refusal to renew the charter of the first U.S. Bank in 1811. [Web of Debt, p. 76.]She offers no footnote. This is understandable, since Jefferson left office in 1809.
His successor and long-term collaborator, James Madison, decided to switch sides and support the bank's recharter in 1811. The move failed by one vote in the House and one vote in the Senate: a tie-breaker from the Vice President.
Then she compounds her error.
When Congress later renewed the Bank's charter, Andrew Jackson vetoed it. [Web of Debt, p. 76]Well, no. Jackson fought the Second Bank of the United States (1816-1836). It had been chartered by Congress because James Madison wanted to replace the First Bank of the U.S.
She knows this. She explains it on the next page. But she does not pay attention when she writes. Her mind wanders. This is not good for a lawyer.
Here is her response:
13. Jefferson and Jackson fought the 1st Bank of the U.S.This is what I wrote:
Opposition to the First U.S. Bank was led by Thomas Jefferson, the country's third President; while opposition to the Second U.S. Bank was led by Andrew Jackson, the country's seventh President. (p 73)
It does not say this on page 73 of the 2006 and 2008 editions. It does say this on page 75. My point was clear: she does not remember what she has written. Her statement on page 76 is muddled. She wrote this: "When Congress later renewed the Bank's charter, Andrew Jackson vetoed it." But she has already said (accurately) that Congress failed to re-charter the First Bank. Therefore, the Bank that Jackson fought was not the re-chartered First Bank, which her words imply. It was a brand-new Bank. This is why I wrote: "But she does not pay attention when she writes. Her mind wanders. This is not good for a lawyer." I stand by these words.
She continues in her rambling response:
I was talking about the Second U.S. Bank with Jackson, not the First. On Jefferson, this is from Wikipedia:The establishment of the bank also raised early questions of constitutionality in the new government. Hamilton, then Secretary of the Treasury, argued that the Bank was an effective means to utilize the authorized powers of the government implied under the law of the Constitution. Secretary of State Thomas Jefferson argued that the Bank violated traditional property laws and that its relevance to constitutionally authorized powers was weak.I was, as I said in my earlier response, trying to make economics interesting, and for that I was using imagery from the Wizard of Oz. I tried to open every chapter with a quote from that story, and my opening quote for this chapter was this; I agree it was a bit of stretch applying it to Jefferson and Jackson, but I was running out of quotes (I had 47 chapters) --
Chapter 7
WHILE CONGRESS DOZES IN THE POPPY FIELDS:
JEFFERSON AND JACKSON SOUND THE ALARM
The Scarecrow and the Tin Woodman, not being made of flesh, were not troubled by the scent of the flowers. "Run fast," said the Scarecrow to the Lion. "Get out of this deadly flower bed as soon as you can. We will bring the little girl with us, but if you should fall asleep you are too big to be carried."
-- The Wonderful Wizard of Oz,"The Deadly Poppy Field"
Allow me to summarize this incoherent response.
It is important that readers not hold me accountable for accuracy. That would be unfair. I write things that I really don't mean. Therefore, I do not intend to respond to North's assertion that Jefferson was not instrumental in blocking the re-chartering of the Bank in 1811. The fact that North was talking about Jefferson's influence in 1811, for which I offered no evidence, and still do not, is irrelevant. What is relevant is that Jefferson opposed the Bank in 1791.
She fails to mention the section of her book on Jefferson vs. Hamilton in 1791. Here is what she wrote:
Jefferson remained suspicious of Hamilton and his schemes, but Jefferson also felt strongly that the new country's capital city should be in the South, in his home state of Virginia. Hamilton (who did not care where the capital was) agreed on the location of the national capital in exchange for Jefferson's agreement on the bank [Web of Debt, p. 52]
So, according to lawyer Brown on page 52, Jefferson capitulated on the Bank in 1791. This is historically inaccurate. He tried to persuade President Washington to veto the bill to charter the Bank. Here is his written opposition. The issue dividing Hamilton and Jefferson over which the nation's capital city was the trade was the assumption of state debts by the Federal government. That was in 1790, the year before the battle over the Bank.
She has dug herself deeper into a hole. She wrote on page 52 that Jefferson was instrumental in getting the Bank chartered, by means of his silence. According to her on page 52, Jefferson did not oppose the Bank in 1791, when he had influence. So, her citation of Wikipedia regarding his opposition to the Bank is irrelevant to her defense of what she wrote on page 76. Wiki gets the story right. She got it wrong on page 52.
Let me say it again: Jefferson was not involved in 1811, when the vote to re-charter the Bank was held. That was my original point. Lawyer Brown filled her response with fluff about making a book readable and the Wizard of Oz. She also quoted a Wiki article on what Jefferson's views were in 1791. All of this is irrelevant: smoke to cover the obvious fact that Jefferson was not instrumental in the 1811 vote on re-chartering the Bank.
The goal of a non-fiction author, above all, should be accuracy. The second goal is clarity. The other goals are way down the list.
Ellen Brown is inaccurate. She is also unclear. In her response, she did not remember what she had written on page 52 about Jefferson and Hamilton in 1791. Her response cited a Wiki article that undermines what she wrote on page 52. Wiki is correct about Jefferson in 1791. She is not. Furthermore, she is not accurate about Jefferson's influence in 1811. Finally, she is not accurate about Jackson's opposition to the First Bank of the United States: "When Congress later renewed the Bank's charter, Andrew Jackson vetoed it" (p. 76). Congress did not renew the Bank's charter.
She is correct about Andrew Jackson on page 75. He fought the Second Bank of the United States. But she is wrong on page 76 -- the point I made in my original criticism. That is why I wrote this: "But she does not pay attention when she writes. Her mind wanders."
So far, it is still wandering.
© 2022 GaryNorth.com, Inc., 2005-2021 All Rights Reserved. Reproduction without permission prohibited.