By Alasdair Roberts
The
European Union is in trouble. Some governments are teetering on default, and
even German creditworthiness is questioned. Interbank lending in the euro area
is increasingly strained. The entire project of European economic integration,
wrought through six decades of delicate negotiation, seems at risk of collapse.
In the U.S., meanwhile, European leaders are being
criticized for failing to face up to their troubles. The New York Times condemns them for "gross mismanagement of the euro-zone debt
crisis." "European elites," says the Boston Globe, "have for too long deceived themselves into
believing they can have their cake and eat it too." Europe would be better
off today, says the Washington Post's David Ignatius, if its leaders "had handled their problems as
cleanly as the United States did three years ago."
But Americans with a sense of history should be wary
of the temptation to lecture. One hundred and seventy years ago, the U.S. was a
new and fragile federation, struggling with a similar crisis. And the
performance of American politicians then was little better than that of their
European counterparts today. European creditors bemoaned the country's
unwillingness to face up to hard economic realities. Eventually it did -- but
only after a decade of wrenching political struggle that offers lessons for
Europe today.
In the 1830s, European investors poured vast amounts
of money into the expansion of U.S. cotton plantations, frontier banks, canals
and railroads. This fueled a speculative boom, which the U.S. government
encouraged through reckless monetary and banking policies. Many state
governments served as intermediaries for foreign lenders, borrowing in Europe and
investing directly in banks and public works.
In 1837, a slowdown in the British economy, combined
with an increase in U.S. cotton production, caused a steep decline in the price
of cotton, and also in the price of land. The boom suddenly ended. Banks collapsed,
government revenues evaporated and the states' grandiose improvement projects
were instantly transformed into white elephants.
State governments began to default on their
obligations to foreign lenders. The first were Michigan and Indiana, which defaulted in July 1841, followed by Maryland, Illinois, Pennsylvania and Louisiana. Three southern states -- Arkansas, Mississippi and Florida -- simply repudiated their debts.
Europe was outraged. The British poet laureate, William Wordsworth, whose family had sunk its retirement savings into Pennsylvania bonds, wrote a poem condemning "degenerate" Americans. The British writer Sydney Smith, another disgruntled investor, said that Americans were "guilty of a fraud as enormous as ever disgraced the worst king of Europe." In London, Americans were assailed at dinner parties and turned away at the doors of fashionable clubs.
London's Barings Bank, which had a long history of
engagement in American finance, gave up trying to sell bonds from any U.S.
state -- including those that hadn't defaulted. Even the federal government,
which had an impeccable credit record, couldn't sell its bonds in Europe.
"Let us get rid of that blasted country,"
the London banker
Anthony de Rothschild wrote. "It is the most blasted & the most
stinking country in the world."
The Panic of 1837 had plunged the U.S. into one of the
worst depressions in its history. Development in the West largely ceased. So
did westward migration, the safety valve that had helped maintain peace in
major U.S. cities. Riots between unemployed Americans and newly arrived
immigrants broke out in cities in the Northeast. "The times are out of
joint," wrote former New York Mayor Philip Hone. "Riot and violence
stalk unchecked through the streets."
Economic troubles produced political turbulence. Voter
turnout surged to the highest levels in U.S. history, as voters cast out
incumbents in a succession of elections. The decline in federal revenue
reopened bitter disputes between the North, South and West, as understandings
on tariffs and aid to state governments came undone. Old party alliances
frayed. Foreign policy came under strain as well, partly because the country's
main rival for territory and markets, the United Kingdom, was also its major creditor.
Europeans wondered whether the U.S. would survive the
crisis. In 1842, the Times of London questioned whether "the democracy of
America will endure." A British diplomat in Washington reported that the country had become "a mass of
ungovernable & unmanageable anarchy." An agent of British bondholders
negotiating with the Illinois government complained that state legislators were
stooping to "every species of intrigue, falsehood, and baseness."
Some Americans were equally pessimistic about the
country's prospects. "When or where this will stop, God knows," wrote
a Mississippi editor. "Never has the future been shrouded in a deeper and
more portentous gloom." The diarist Sidney George Fisher wrote from
Philadelphia that the American union was becoming "one of interest merely,
a paper bond, to be torne asunder whenever interest demands it."
Eventually, though, the country worked through its
troubles. And in the process Americans reappraised their ideas about liberty
and popular sovereignty. Many states reformed their constitutions by
introducing restrictions on state borrowing. These were "shackles upon the
power of the legislature," a Kentucky politician conceded. Still, they
would protect the public against "the sudden and dangerous impulses of
passion." State governments also overcame popular resistance to establish
new mechanisms for collecting taxes so that bondholders could be repaid.
At the same time, major cities of the Northeast
established professional police forces to maintain domestic order. The hope
that "manly self-discipline" would be enough to keep the peace in
times of economic trouble was abandoned. A new police force, said Boston councilman
Peleg Whitman Chandler, would help the city to "resist the shocks of
anarchy."
Luck also played a part as the country gradually
pulled itself back together. When revolution broke out across Europe in the
late 1840s, British capitalists were prepared to take a second look at
investment opportunities in the U.S. The repeal of British tariffs on grain
helped to restart development in the American West. And the discovery of gold
in California -- only weeks before the territory was ceded to the
U.S. by Mexico in
1848 -- provided an unexpected stimulus.
The changes the country made to its constitutional and
political order in those years laid the foundation for further economic
expansion. But it wasn't easy. Millions of Americans had to adjust their
understanding of the role of government, and they had to do it while coping
with intense economic pain. Such a change couldn't happen overnight.
There are parallels to Europe's predicament today.
Like the U.S. in 1840, the European Union is a relatively young and diverse
federation, still in the early stages of building a common understanding about
how its institutions should work. It is wrestling against settled ideas about
popular sovereignty as well as the relentless forces of the market. Its
adaptation will be slow and difficult. And European leaders must do what
America's did 170 years ago: Ignore the taunts from overseas, and bear down on
the difficult task of holding their union together.
No comments:
Post a Comment