The Seven Men
The success of the Federal Reserve Conspiracy will raise many
questions in the minds of readers who are unfamiliar with the
history of the United States and finance capital. How could the
Kuhn, Loeb - Morgan alliance, powerful though it might be, believe
that it would be capable, first, of devising a plan which would
bring the entire money and credit of the people of the United
States into their hands, and second, of getting such a plan enacted
into law?
The capability of devising and enacting the "National Reserve
Plan", as the immediate result of the Jekyll Island expedition
was called, was easily within the powers of the Kuhn, Loeb - Morgan
alliance, according to the following from McClure's Magazine,
August 1911, "The Seven Men" by John Moody:
"Seven men in Wall Street now control a great share of the
fundamental industry and resources of the United States. Three
of the seven men, J.P. Morgan, James J. Hill, and George F. Baker,
head of the First National Bank of New York, belong to the so-called
Morgan group; four of them, John D. and William Rockefeller, James
Stillman, head of the National City Bank, and Jacob H. Schiff
of the private banking firm of Kuhn, Loeb Company, to the so-called
Standard Oil City Bank group... the central machine of capital
extends its control over the United States... The process is not
only economically logical; it is now practically automatic."
[32]
Thus we see that the 1910 plot to seize control of the money and
credit of the people of the United States was planned by men who
already controlled most of the country's resources. It seemed
to John Moody "practically automatic" that they should
continue with their operations.
What John Moody did not know, or did not tell his readers, was
that the most powerful men in the United States were themselves
answerable to another power, a foreign power, and a power which
had been steadfastly seeking to extend its control over the young
republic of the United States since its very inception. This power
was the financial power of England, centered in the London Branch
of the House of Rothschild. The fact was that in 1910, the United
States was for all practical purposes being ruled from England,
and so it is today.
The ten largest bank holding companies in the United States are
firmly in the hands of certain banking houses, all of which have
branches in London. They are J.P. Morgan Company, Brown Brothers
Harriman, Warburg, Kuhn Loeb and J. Henry Schroder. All of them
maintain close relationships with the House of Rothschild, principally
through the Rothschild control of international money markets
through its manipulation of the price of gold. Each day, the world
price of gold is set in the London office of N.M. Rothschild and
Company.
Although these firms are ostensibly American firms, which merely
maintain branches in London, the fact is that these banking houses
actually take their direction from London. Their history is a
fascinating one, and unknown to the American public, originating
as it did in the international traffic in gold, slaves, diamonds,
and other contraband. There are no moral considerations in any
business decision made by these firms. They are interested solely
in money and power.
History of the U.S. Banking
Establishment
Tourists today gape at the magnificent mansions of the very rich
in Newport, Rhode Island, without realizing that not only do these
"cottages" stand as a memorial to the baronial desires
of our Victorian millionaires, but that their erection in Newport
represented a nostalgic memorialization of the great American
fortunes, which had their beginnings in Newport when it was the
capital of the slave trade.
The slave trade for centuries had its headquarters in Venice,
until seventeenth century Britain, the new master of the seas,
used its control of the oceans to gain a monopoly. As the American
colonies were settled, its fiercely independent people, most of
whom did not want slaves, found to their surprise that slaves
were being sent to our ports in great numbers.
For many years, Newport was the capital of this unsavory trade.
William Ellery, the Collector of the Port of Newport, said in
1791:
"...an Ethiopian could as soon change his skin as a Newport
merchant could be induced to change so lucrative a trade.... for
the slow profits of any manufactory."
John Quincy Adams remarked in his Diary, page 459, "Newport's
former prosperity was chiefly owing to its extensive employment
in the African slave trade."
The pre-eminence of J.P. Morgan and the Brown Brothers firm in
American finance can be dated to the development of Baltimore
as the nineteenth century capital of the slave trade. Both of
these firms originated in Baltimore, opened branches in London,
came under the aegis of the House of Rothschild, and returned
to the United States to open branches in New York and to become
the dominant power, not only in finance, but also in government.
In recent years, key posts such as Secretary of Defense have been
held by Robert Lovett, partner of Brown Brothers Harriman, and
Thomas S. Gates, partner of Drexel and Company, a J.P. Morgan
subsidiary firm. The present [1981] Vice President, George H.W.
Bush, is the son of Prescott Bush, a partner of Brown Brothers
Harriman, for many years the senator from Connecticut, and the
financial organizer of Columbia Broadcasting System of which he
also was a director for many years.
George Peabody and Company
To understand why these firms operate as they do, it is necessary
to give a brief history of their origins. Few Americans know that
J.P. Morgan Company began as George Peabody and Company. George
Peabody (1795-1869), born at South Danvers, Massachusetts, began
business in Georgetown, D.C. in 1814 as Peabody, Riggs and Company,
dealing in wholesale dry goods, and in operating the Georgetown
Slave Market. In 1815, to be closer to their source of supply,
they moved to Baltimore, where they operated as Peabody and Riggs,
from 1815 to 1835. Peabody found himself increasingly involved
with business originating from London, and in 1835, he established
the firm of George Peabody and Company in London.
He had excellent entree in London business through another Baltimore
firm established in Liverpool, the Brown Brothers. Alexander Brown
came to Baltimore in 1801, and established what is now known as
the oldest banking house in the United States, still operating
as Brown Brothers Harriman of New York; Brown, Shipley and Company
of England; and Alex Brown and Son of Baltimore. The behind the
scenes power wielded by this firm is indicated by the fact that
Sir Montagu Norman, Governor of the Bank of England for many years,
was a partner of Brown, Shipley and Company. [32b] Considered
the single most influential banker in the world, Sir Montagu Norman
was organizer of "informal talks" between heads of central
banks in 1927, which led directly to the Great Stock Market Crash
of 1929.
Soon after he arrived in London, George Peabody was surprised
to be summoned to an audience with the gruff Baron Nathan Mayer
Rothschild. Without mincing words, Rothschild revealed to Peabody,
that much of the London aristocracy openly disliked Rothschild
and refused his invitations. He proposed that Peabody, a man of
modest means, be established as a lavish host whose entertainments
would soon be the talk of London. Rothschild would, of course,
pay all the bills. Peabody accepted the offer, and soon became
known as the most popular host in London. His annual Fourth of
July dinner, celebrating American Independence, became extremely
popular with the English aristocracy, many of whom, while drinking
Peabody's wine, regaled each other with jokes about Rothschild's
crudities and bad manners, without realizing that every drop they
drank had been paid for by Rothschild.
It is hardly surprising that the most popular host in London would
also become a very successful businessman, particularly with the
House of Rothschild supporting him behind the scenes. Peabody
often operated with a capital of 500,000 pounds [sterling] on
hand, and became very astute in his buying and selling on both
sides of the Atlantic. His American agent was the Boston firm
of Beebe, Morgan and Company, headed by Junius S. Morgan, father
of John Pierpont Morgan. Peabody, who never married, had no one
to succeed him, and he was very favorably impressed by the tall,
handsome Junius Morgan. He persuaded Morgan to join him in London
as a partner in George Peabody and Company in 1854.
In 1860, John Pierpont Morgan had been taken on as an apprentice
by the firm of Duncan, Sherman in New York. He was not very attentive
to business, and in 1864, Morgan's father was outraged when Duncan,
Sherman refused to make his son a partner. He promptly extended
an arrangement whereby one of the chief employees of Duncan, Sherman,
Charles H. Dabney, was persuaded to join John Pierpont Morgan
in a new firm, Dabney, Morgan and Company. Bankers Magazine, December,
1864, noted that Peabody had withdrawn his account from Duncan,
Sherman, and that other firms were expected to do so. The Peabody
account, of course, went to Dabney, Morgan Company.
The Banking Panic of
1837
John Pierpont Morgan was born in 1837, during the first money
panic in the United States. Significantly, it had been caused
by the House of Rothschild, with whom Morgan was later to become
associated.
In 1836, President Andrew Jackson, infuriated by the tactics of
the bankers who were attempting to persuade him to renew the charter
of the Second Bank of the United States, said:
"You are a den of vipers. I intend to rout you out and by
the Eternal God I will rout you out. If the people only understood
the rank injustice of our money and banking system, there would
be a revolution before morning."
Although Nicholas Biddle was President of the Bank of the United
States, it was well known that Baron James de Rothschild of Paris
was the principal investor in this central bank. Although Jackson
had vetoed the renewal of the charter of the Bank of the United
States, he probably was unaware that a few months earlier, in
1835, the House of Rothschild had cemented a relationship with
the United States Government by superseding the firm of Barings
as financial agent of the Department of State on January 1, 1835.
Henry Clews, the famous banker, in his book "Twenty-eight
Years in Wall Street" [33] states that the Panic of 1837
was engineered because the charter of the Second Bank of the United
States had run out in 1836. Not only did President Jackson promptly
withdraw government funds from the Second Bank of the United States,
but he deposited these funds, $10 million, in state banks. The
immediate result, Clews tells us, is that the country began to
enjoy great prosperity. This sudden flow of cash caused an immediate
expansion of the national economy, and the government paid off
the entire national debt, leaving a surplus of $50 million in
the Treasury.
The European financiers had the answer to this situation. Clews
further states, "The Panic of 1837 was aggravated by the
Bank of England when it in one day threw out all the paper connected
with the United States."
The Bank of England, of course, was synonymous with the name of
Baron Nathan Mayer Rothschild. Why did the Bank of England in
one day "throw out" all paper connected with the United
States, that is, refuse to accept or discount any securities,
bonds or other financial paper based in the United States? The
purpose of this action was to create an immediate financial panic
in the United States, cause a complete contraction of credit,
halt further issues of stocks and bonds, and ruin those seeking
to turn United States securities into cash. In this atmosphere
of financial panic, John Pierpont Morgan came into the world.
His grandfather, Joseph Morgan, was a well to do farmer who owned
106 acres in Hartford, Connecticut. He later opened the City Hotel,
and the Exchange Coffee Shop, and in 1819, was one of the founders
of the Aetna Insurance Company.
George Peabody found that he had chosen well in selecting Junius
S. Morgan as his successor. Morgan agreed to continue the sub
rosa relationship with N.M. Rothschild Company, and soon expanded
the firm's activities by shipping large quantities of railroad
iron to the United States. It was Peabody iron which was the foundation
for much of American railroad tracks from 1860 to 1890. In 1864,
content to retire and leave his firm in the hands of Morgan, Peabody
allowed the name to be changed to Junius S. Morgan Company. The
Morgan firm then and since has always been directed from London.
John Pierpont Morgan spent much of his time at his magnificent
London mansion, Prince's Gate.
The Banking Panic of
1857
One of the high water marks of the successful Rothschild - Peabody
- Morgan business venture was the Panic of 1857. It had been twenty
years since the Panic of 1837: its lessons had been forgotten
by hordes of eager investors who were anxious to invest the profits
of a developing America. It was time to fleece them again. The
stock market operates like a wave washing up on the beach. It
sweeps with it many minuscule creatures who derive all of their
life support from the oxygen and water of the wave. They coast
along at the crest of the "Tide of Prosperity". Suddenly
the wave, having reached the high water mark on the beach, recedes,
leaving all of the creatures gasping on the sand. Another wave
may come in time to save them, but in all likelihood it will not
come as far, and some of the sea creatures are doomed. In the
same manner, waves of prosperity, fed by newly created money,
through an artificial contraction of credit, recedes, leaving
those it had borne high to gasp and die without hope of salvation.
"Corsair, the Life of J.P. Morgan" [34] tells us that
the Panic of 1857 was caused by the collapse of the grain market
and by the sudden collapse of Ohio Life and Trust, for a loss
of five million dollars. With this collapse nine hundred other
American companies failed. Significantly, one not only survived,
but prospered from the crash. In "Corsair", we learn
that the Bank of England lent George Peabody and Company five
million pounds during the panic of 1857. Winkler, in "Morgan
the Magnificent" [35]says that the Bank of England advanced
Peabody one million pounds, an enormous sum at that time and the
equivalent of one hundred million dollars today, to save the firm.
However, no other firm received such beneficence during this Panic.
The reason is revealed by Matthew Josephson, in "The Robber
Barons". He says on page 60:
"For such qualities of conservatism and purity, George Peabody
and Company, the old tree out of which the House of Morgan grew,
was famous. In the panic of 1857, when depreciated securities
had been thrown on the market by distressed investors in America,
Peabody and the elder Morgan, being in possession of cash, had
purchased such bonds as possessed real value freely, and then
resold them at a large advance when sanity was restored."
[36]
Thus, from a number of biographies of Morgan, the story can be
pieced together. After the panic had been engineered, one firm
came into the market with one million pounds in cash, purchased
securities from distressed investors at panic prices, and later
resold them at an enormous profit. That firm was the Morgan firm,
and behind it was the clever maneuvering of [the firm of] Baron
Nathan Mayer Rothschild. The association remained secret from
the most knowledgeable financial minds in London and New York,
although Morgan occasionally appeared as the financial agent in
a Rothschild operation. [E1]
As the Morgan firm grew rapidly during the late nineteenth century,
until it dominated the finances of the nation, many observers
were puzzled that the Rothschildsseemed so little interested in
profiting by investing in the rapidly advancing American economy.
John Moody notes, in "The Masters of Capital", page
27, "The Rothschilds were content to remain a close ally
of Morgan... as far as the American field was concerned."
[37] Secrecy was more profitable than valor.
The reason that the European Rothschilds preferred to operate
anonymously in the United States behind the facade of J.P. Morgan
and Company is explained by George Wheeler, in "Pierpont
Morgan and Friends, the Anatomy of a Myth", page 17:
"But there were steps being taken even now to bring him out
of the financial backwaters -- and they were not being taken by
Pierpont Morgan himself. The first suggestion of his name for
a role in the recharging of the reserve originated with the London
branch of the House of Rothschild, Belmont's employers."
[38]
Wheeler goes on to explain that a considerable anti-Rothschild
movement had developed in Europe and the United States which focused
on the banking activities of the Rothschild family. Even though
they had a registered agent in the United States, August Schoenberg,
who had changed his name to August Belmont when he came to the
United States as the representative of the Rothschilds in 1837,
it was extremely advantageous to them to have an American representative
who was not known as a Rothschild agent.
J.P. Morgan and Company
Although the London house of Junius S. Morgan and Company continued
to be the dominant branch of the Morgan enterprises, with the
death of the senior Morgan in 1890 in a carriage accident on the
Riviera, John Pierpont Morgan became the head of the firm. After
operating as the American representative of the London firm from
1864-1871 as Dabney Morgan Company, Morgan took on a new partner
in 1871, Anthony Drexel of Philadelphia and operated as Drexel
Morgan and Company until 1895. Drexel died in that year, and Morgan
changed the name of the American branch to J.P. Morgan and Company.
LaRouche [39] tells us that on February 5, 1891, a secret association
known as the Round Table Group was formed in London by Cecil Rhodes,
his banker, Lord (Nathaniel) Rothschild, the Rothschild in-law,
Lord Rosebery, and Lord Curzon. He states that in the United States
the Round Table was represented by the Morgan group.
Dr. Carroll Quigley refers to this group as "The British-American
Secret Society" in [his book] "Tragedy and Hope",
stating that
"The chief backbone of this organization grew up along the
already existing financial cooperation running from the Morgan
Bank in New York to a group of international financiers in London
led by Lazard Brothers (in 1901)." [40]
William Guy Carr, in "Pawns In The Game" states that
"In 1899, J.P. Morgan and Drexel went to England to attend
the International Bankers Convention. When they returned, J.P.
Morgan had been appointed head representative of the Rothschild
interests in the United States. As the result of the London Conference,
J.P. Morgan and Company of New York, Drexel and Company of Philadelphia,
Grenfell and Company of London, and Morgan Harjes Cie of Paris,
M.M. Warburg Company of Germany and America, and the House of
Rothschild were all affiliated." [41]
Apparently unaware of the Peabody connection with the Rothschilds
and the fact that the Morgans had always been affiliated with
the House of Rothschild, Carr supposed that he had uncovered this
relationship as of 1899, when in fact it went back to 1835. [41b]
After World War I, the Round Table became known as the Council
on Foreign Relations (CFR) in the United States, and the Royal
Institute of International Affairs (RIIA)in London. The leading
government officials of both England and the United States were
chosen from its members. In the 1960s, as growing attention centered
on the surreptitious governmental activities of the Council on
Foreign Relations, subsidiary groups, known as the Trilateral
Commission and the Bilderberg, representing the identical financial
interests, began operations, with the more important officials,
such as Robert Roosa, being members of all three groups.
[For a more detailed history of these groups, see Final Warning,
chapters 5, 8 and 9 --ed]
Financing the U.S. Civil
War
George F. Peabody, History of the Great American Fortunes, Gustavus
Myers, Mod. Lib. 537, notes that J.P. Morgan's father, Junius
S. Morgan, had become a partner of George Peabody in the banking
business.
"When the Civil War came on, George Peabody and Company were
appointed the financial representatives in England of the U.S.
Government.... with this appointment their wealth suddenly began
to pile up; where hitherto they had amassed the riches by stages
not remarkably rapid, they now added many millions within a very
few years."
According to writers of the day, the methods of George Peabody
and Company were not only unreasonable but double treason, in
that, while in the act of giving inside aid to the enemy, George
Peabody & Company were the potentiaries of the U.S. Government
and were being well paid to advance its interests. [From the]
"Springfield Republic", 1866:
"For all who know anything on the subject know very well
that Peabody and his partners gave us no faith and no help in
our struggle for national existence. They participated to the
fullest in the common English distrust of our cause and our success,
and talked and acted for the South rather than for our nation.
No individuals contributed so much to flooding our money markets
and weakening financial confidence in our nationality than George
Peabody & Company, and none made more money by the operation.
All the money that Mr. Peabody is giving away so lavishly among
our institutions of learning was gained by the speculations of
his house in our misfortunes."
Also, New York Times, Oct. 31, 1866: "Reconstruction
Carpetbaggers Money Fund". [Quoted in] "Lightning over
the Treasury Building", John Elson, Meador Publishing Co.,
Boston 41, pg. 53,
"The Bank of England with its subsidiary banks in America
(under the domination of J.P. Morgan) the Bank of France, and
the Reichsbank of Germany, composed an interlocking and cooperative
banking system, the main objective of which was the exploitation
of the people."
Rothschild Control in
Britain and Europe
[Editor's note: William Guy Carr's speculative and fictionalized
account of the 'secret meeting' at Mayer Amschel Bauer's Frankfurt
shop in 1773 has been deleted.]
The Rothschild family has played a crucial role in international
finance for two centuries, as Frederick Morton, in The Rothschilds
writes: "For the last one hundred and fifty years the history
of the House of Rothschild has been to an amazing extent the backstage
history of Western Europe." p. 38 (Preface). Because of their
success in making loans not to individuals, but to nations, they
reaped huge profits, although as Morton writes, p. 36, "Someone
once said that the wealth of Rothschild consists of the bankruptcy
of nations." [43]
E.C. Knuth writes, in "The Empire of the City",
"The fact that the House of Rothschild made its money in
the great crashes of history and the great wars of history, the
very periods when others lost their money, is beyond question."
[44]
The Great Soviet Encyclopaedia, states,
"The clearest example of a personal linkup (international
directorates) on a Western European scale is the Rothschild family.
The London and Paris branches of the Rothschilds are bound not
just by family ties but also by personal link-ups in jointly controlled
companies." [45]
The encyclopaedia further described these companies as international
monopolies.
The sire of the family, Mayer Amschel Rothschild, established
a small business as a coin dealer in Frankfurt in 1743. Although
previously known as Bauer [45b], he advertised his profession
by putting up a sign depicting an eagle on a red shield, an adaptation
of the coat of arms of the City of Frankfurt, to which he added
five golden arrows extending from the talons, signifying his five
sons. Because of this sign, he took the name "Rothschild"
or "Red Shield".
When the Elector of Hesse earned a fortune by renting Hessian
mercenaries to the British to put down the rebellion in the American
colonies, Rothschild was entrusted with this money to invest.
He made an excellent profit both for himself and the Elector,
and attracted other accounts. In 1785 he moved to a larger house,
148 Judengasse, a five story house known as "The Green Shield"
which he shared with the Schiff family.
The five sons established branches in the principal cities of
Europe, the most successful being James in Paris and Nathan Mayer
in London. Ignatius Balla in "The Romance of the Rothschilds"
[46] tells us how the London Rothschild established his fortune.
He went to Waterloo, where the fate of Europe hung in the balance,
saw that Napoleon was losing the battle, and rushed back to Brussels.
At Ostend, he tried to hire a boat to England, but because of
a raging storm, no one was willing to go out. Rothschild offered
500 francs, then 700, and finally 1,000 francs for a boat. One
sailor said, "I will take you for 2000 francs; then at least
my widow will have something if we are drowned." Despite
the storm, they crossed the Channel. [E2]
The next morning, Rothschild was at his usual post in the London
Exchange. Everyone noticed how pale and exhausted he looked. Suddenly,
he started selling, dumping large quantities of securities. Panic
immediately swept the Exchange. "Rothschild is selling; he
knows we have lost the Battle of Waterloo". Rothschild and
all of his known agents continued to throw securities onto the
market. Balla says,
"Nothing could arrest the disaster. At the same time he was
quietly buying up all securities by means of secret agents whom
no one knew. In a single day, he had gained nearly a million [pounds]
sterling, giving rise to the saying, 'The Allies won the Battle
of Waterloo, but it was really Rothschild who won.'" [46b]
In "The Profits of War", Richard Lewinsohn says,
"Rothschild's war profits from the Napoleonic Wars financed
their later stock speculations. Under Metternich, Austria after
long hesitation, finally agreed to accept financial direction
from the House of Rothschild." [47]
After the success of his Waterloo exploit, Nathan Mayer Rothschild
gained control of the Bank of England through his near monopoly
of "Consols" and other shares.
Several "central" banks, or banks which had the power
to issue currency, had been started in Europe [including] the
Bank of Sweden, [founded] in 1656, which began to issue notes
in 1661. The earliest [of these] being the Bank of Amsterdam,
which financed Oliver Cromwell's seizure of power in England in
1649, ostensibly because of religious differences. Cromwell died
in 1657 and the throne of England was re-established when Charles
II was crowned in 1660. He died in 1685.
In 1689, the same group of bankers regained power in England by
putting King William of Orange on the throne. He soon repaid his
backers by ordering the British Treasury to borrow 1,250,000 pounds
from these bankers. He also issued them a Royal Charter for the
Bank of England, which permitted them to consolidate the National
debt (which had just been created by this loan) and to secure
payments of interest and principal by direct taxation of the people.
The Charter forbade private goldsmiths to store gold and to issue
receipts, which gave the stockholders of the Bank of England a
money monopoly. The goldsmiths also were required to store their
gold in the Bank of England vaults. Not only had their privilege
of issuing circulating medium been taken away by government decree,
but their fortunes were now turned over to those who had supplanted
them. [47b]
In his "Cantos", 46; 27, Ezra Pound refers to the unique
privileges which William Paterson advertised in his prospectus
for the Charter of the Bank of England:
"Said Paterson
Hath benefit of interest on all the moneys which it, the bank,
creates out of nothing."
The "nothing" which is referred to, of course, is the
bookkeeping operation of the bank, which "creates" money
by entering a notation that it has "lent" you one thousand
dollars, money which did not exist until the bank made the entry.
By 1698, the British Treasury owed 16 million pounds sterling
to the Bank of England. By 1815, principally due to the compounding
of interest, the debt had risen to 885 million pounds sterling.
Some of this increase was due to the wars which had flourished
during that period, including the Napoleonic Wars and the wars
which England had fought to retain its American Colony.
William Paterson (1658-1719) himself benefited little from "the
moneys which the bank creates out of nothing", as he withdrew,
after a policy disagreement, from the Bank of England a year after
it was founded. A later William Paterson became one of the framers
of the United States Constitution, while the name lingers on,
like the pernicious central bank itself.
Paterson had found himself unable to work with the Bank of England's
stockholders. Many of them remained anonymous, but an early description
of the Bank of England stated it was
"A society of about 1330 persons, including the King and
Queen of England, who had 10,000 pounds of stock, the Duke of
Leeds, Duke of Devonshire, Earl of Pembroke, and the Earl of Bradford."
Because of his success in his speculations, Baron Nathan Mayer
de Rothschild, as he now called himself, reigned as the supreme
financial power in London. He arrogantly exclaimed, during a party
in his mansion,
"I care not what puppet is placed upon the throne of England
to rule the Empire on which the sun never sets. The man that controls
Britain's money supply controls the British Empire, and I control
the British money supply."
His brother James in Paris had also achieved dominance in French
finance. In "Baron Edmond de Rothschild", David Druck
writes,
"(James) Rothschild's wealth had reached the 600 million
mark. Only one man in France possessed more. That was the King,
whose wealth was 800 million. The aggregate wealth of all the
bankers in France was 150 million less than that of James Rothschild.
This naturally gave him untold powers, even to the extent of unseating
governments whenever he chose to do so. It is well known, for
example, that he overthrew the Cabinet of Prime Minister Thiers."
[48]
The expansion of Germany under Bismarck was accompanied by his
dependence on Samuel Bleichroder, court banker of the Prussian
Emperor, who had been known as an agent of the Rothschilds since
1828. The later Chancellor of Germany, Dr. von Bethmann Hollweg,
was the son of Moritz Bethmann of Frankfurt, who had intermarried
with the Rothschilds. Emperor Wilhelm I also relied heavily on
Bischoffsheim, Goldschmidt, and Sir Ernest Cassel of Frankfurt,
who emigrated to England and became personal banker to the Prince
of Wales, later Edward VII. Cassel's daughter married Lord Mountbatten,
giving the family a direct relationship to the present British
Crown.
Josephson [49] states that Philip Mountbatten was related through
the Cassels to the Meyer Rothschilds of Frankfurt. Thus, the English
royal House of Windsor has a direct family relationship to the
Rothschilds. In 1901, when Queen Victoria's son, Edward, became
King Edward VII, he re-established the Rothschild ties.
Paul Emden in "Behind The Throne" says,
"Edward's preparation for his metier was quite different
from that of his mother, hence he 'ruled' less than she did. Gratefully,
he retained around him men who had been with him in the age of
the building of the Baghdad Railway... there were added to the
advisory staff Leopold and Alfred de Rothschild, various members
of the Sassoon family, and above all his private financial advisor
Sir Ernest Cassel."
The enormous fortune which Ernest Cassel made in a relatively
short time gave him an immense power which he never misused. He
amalgamated the firm of Vickers Sons with the Naval Construction
Company and the Maxim-Nordenfeldt Guns and Ammunition Company,
a fusion from which there arose the worldwide firm of Vickers
Sons and Maxim.
On an entirely different [level] from Cassel were businessmen
like the Rothschilds. The firm was run on democratic principles,
and the various partners all had to be members of the family.
With great hospitality and in a princely manner they led the lives
of grand seigneurs, and it was natural that Edward VII should
find them congenial.
Thanks to their international family relationships and still more
extended business connections, they knew the whole world, were
well informed about everybody, and had reliable knowledge of matters
which did not appear on the surface. This combination of finance
and politics had been a trademark of the Rothschilds from the
very beginning. The House of Rothschild always knew more than
could be found in the papers and even more than could be read
in the reports which arrived at the Foreign Office. In other countries
also the relations of the Rothschilds extended behind the throne.
Not until numerous diplomatic publications appeared in the years
after the war did a wider public learn how strongly Alfred de
Rothschild's hand affected the politics of Central Europe during
the twenty years before the war (World War I)." [50]
In "Inside Europe" [52], John Gunther wrote in 1936
that any French prime minister, at the end of 1935, was a creature
of the financial oligarchy, and that this financial oligarchy
was dominated by twelve regents, of whom six were bankers, and
were headed by Baron Edmond de Rothschild.
Control of the Media
With the control of the money came the control of the news media.
Kent Cooper, head of the Associated Press, writes in his autobiography
"Barriers Down": "International bankers under the
House of Rothschild acquired an interest in the three leading
European agencies." [51]
Thus the Rothschilds bought control of Reuters International News
Agency, based in London, Havas of France, and Wolf in Germany,
which controlled the dissemination of all news in Europe.
The iron grip of the "London Connection" on the media
was exposed in a recent book by Ben J. Bagdikian "The Media
Monopoly", described as "A startling report on the 50
corporations that control what America sees, hears, reads".
[53] Bagdikian, who edited the nation's most influential magazine,
the Saturday Evening Post, until the monopoly suddenly
closed it down, reveals the interlocking directorates among the
fifty corporations which control the news, but fails to trace
them back to the five London banking houses which control them.
He mentions that CBS interlocks with the Washington Post, Allied
Chemical, Wells Fargo Bank, and others, but does not tell the
reader that Brown Brothers Harrimancontrols CBS, or that the Eugene
Meyer family (Lazard Freres) controls Allied Chemical and the
Washington Post, and Kuhn Loeb Co. [controls] the Wells Fargo
Bank. He shows the New York Times interlocked with Morgan
Guaranty Trust, American Express, First Boston Corporation and
others, but does not show how the banking interlocks. He does
not mention the Federal Reserve System in his entire book, which
is conspicuous by its absence.
Bagdikian documents that the media monopoly is steadily closing
down more newspapers and magazines. Washington D.C., with one
paper, The Post, is unique among world capitols. London has eleven
daily newspapers, Paris fourteen, Rome eighteen, Tokyo seventeen,
and Moscow nine. He cites a study from the 1982 World Press Encyclopaedia
that the United States is at the bottom of industrial nations
in the number of daily newspapers sold per 1,000 population. Sweden
leads the list with 572, the United States is at the bottom with
287.
There is universal distrust of the media by Americans, because
of their notorious monopoly and bias. The media unanimously urges
higher taxes on working people, more government spending, a welfare
state with totalitarian powers, close relations with Russia, and
a rabid denunciation of anyone who opposes Communism. This is
the program of "the London Connection." It flaunts a
maniacal racism, and has as its motto the dictum of its high priestess,
Susan Sontag, that "The white race is the cancer of history."
Everyone should be against cancer. The media monopoly deals with
its opponents in one of two ways; either frontal assault of libel
which the average person cannot afford to litigate, or an iron
curtain of silence, the standard treatment for any work which
exposes its clandestine activities.
Although the Rothschild plan does not match [or conform to] any
single political or economic movement since it was enunciated
in 1773, vital parts of it can be discerned in all political revolutions
since that date. LaRouche [54] points out that the Round Tables
sponsored Fabian Socialism in England, while backing the Nazi
regime through a Round Table member in Germany, Dr. Hjalmar Schacht,
and that they used the Nazi Government throughout World War II
through Round Table member Admiral Canaris, while Allen Dulles
ran a collaborating intelligence operation in Switzerland for
the Allies.
Notes
32. John Moody, "The Seven Men", McClure's Magazine,
August, 1911, p. 418
32b. "There is an informal understanding that a director
of Brown, Shipley should be on the Board of the Bank of England,
and Norman was elected to it in 1907." Montagu Norman, Current
Biography, 1940.
33. Henry Clews, Twenty-eight Years in Wall Street, Irving Company,
New York, 1888, page 157
34. Corsair, The Life of Morgan
35. John K. Winkler, Morgan the Magnificent, Vanguard, N.Y. 1930
36. Matthew Josephson, The Robber Barons, Harcourt Brace, N.Y.
1934
37. John Moody, The Masters of Capital
38. George Wheeler, Pierpont Morgan and Friends, the Anatomy of
a Myth, Prentice Hall, N.J. 1973
39. Lyndon H. LaRouche, Jr., Dope, Inc., The New Benjamin Franklin
House Publishing Company, N.Y. 1978
40. Dr. Carrol Quigley, Tragedy and Hope, Macmillan Co., N.Y.
41. William Guy Carr, Pawns In The Game, privately printed, 1956,
pg. 60
41b. July 30, 1930, McFadden, Basis of Control of Economic Conditions.
"This control of the world business structure and of human
happiness and progress by a small group is a matter of the most
intense public interest. In analyzing it, we must begin with the
internal group which centers itself around J.P. Morgan Company.
Never before had there been such a powerful centralized control
over finance, industrial production, credit and wages as is at
this time vested in the Morgan group... The Morgan control of
the Federal Reserve System is exercised through control of the
management of the Federal Reserve Bank of New York."
42. William Guy Carr, Pawns In The Game, privately printed, 1956
43. Frederick Morton, The Rothschilds, Fawcett Publishing Company,
N.Y., 1961
44. E.C. Knuth, Empire of the City, p. 71
45. Great Soviet Encyclopaedia, Edition 3, 1973, Macmillan, London,
Vol. 14, pg. 691
45b. "The original name. of Rothschild was Bauer." p.
397, Henry Clews, Twenty-eight years in Wall Street.
46. Ignatius Balla, The Romance of the Rothschilds, Everleigh
Nash, London, 1913
46b. The New York Times, April 1, 1915. reported that in 1914,
Baron Nathan Mayer de Rothschild went to court to suppress Ignatius
Balla's book on the grounds that the Waterloo story about his
grandfather was untrue and libelous. The court ruled that the
story was true, dismissed Rothschild's suit, and ordered him to
pay all costs. The New York Times noted in this story that
"The total Rothschild wealth has been estimated at $2 billion."
A previous story in The New York Times (May 27, 1905) noted
that Baron Alphonse de Rothschild, head of the French house of
Rothschild, possessed $60 million in American securities in his
fortune, although the Rothschilds reputedly were not active in
the American field. This explains why their agent, J.P. Morgan,
had only $19 million in securities in his estate when he died
in 1913, and securities handled by Morgan were actually owned
by his employer, Rothschild.
47. Richard Lewinsohn, The Profits of War, E.P. Dutton, 1937
47b. NOTE: In the United States, after the stockholders of the
Federal Reserve System had consolidated their power in 1934, our
government also issued orders that private citizens could not
store or hold gold.
48. David Druck, Baron Edmond de Rothschild, (Privately printed),
N.Y. 1850
49. E.M. Josephson, The Strange Death of Franklin D. Roosevelt,
pg. 39, Chedney Press, N.Y. 1948
50. Paul Emden, Behind The Throne, Hoddard Stoughton, London,
1934
51. Kent Cooper, Barriers Down, pg. 21
52. John Gunther, Inside Europe, 1936
53. Ben H. Bagdikian, The Media Monopoly, Beacon Press, Boston
1983
54. Lyndon H. LaRouche, Jr., Dope, Inc., New Benjamin Franklin
House Publishing Co., New York, 1978
Editor's notes:
E1. Nathan Mayer Rothschild died in 1836. His son Lionel N. Rothschild
was the head of the London branch of the family in 1857.
E2. Other sources report that it was a Rothschild agent in Dunkirk
who actually crossed the channel and reported the news to Nathan
in London.