Was Abe Lincoln a Money Power Puppet?

Posted: August 3rd, 2012 by Militant Libertarian

Lincoln is overrated, says Anthony Migchels. Greenbacks were not debt-free, but backed by interest bearing bonds. Government-printed, interest-bearing currency is also a Money Power operation.

by Anthony Migchels, HenryMakow

This famous quote, a classic of the Conspiracy, has been debunked: it’s not in the Times of London archives:

“If this mischievous financial policy (the Greenback), which has its origin in North America, shall become … a fixture, then that Government will furnish its own money without cost. It will pay off debts and be without debt. It will have all the money necessary to carry on its commerce. It will become prosperous without precedent in the history of the world. The brains, and wealth of all countries will go to North America. That country must be destroyed or it will destroy every monarchy on the globe.” –Times of Londo

I thought Lincoln was a Prince of the People, until I was re-educated by Name789, the man behind the wonderful website www.yamaguchy.com.

Here’s some of what I learned.

To begin with, there is this urban legend that the Rothschilds tried to force gold at 30% upon Lincoln. This is total nonsense: anybody with good credit could borrow at 6% at the time:

“I simply wish to say to the chairman of the Committee on Finance [Mr. Fessenden] that any merchant in the United States with good securities can to-day borrow $1,000,000 at six per cent. I can, with good securities; and so can my friend from Maine.” Senator Chandler in the Senate February 13th 1862, during the Greenback debate.

The Urban Legend then continues with the story that Abe Lincoln was instructed by a Colonel Dick to print his own currency and that Abe was much relieved by this alchemy.

More nonsense: at the time the Treasury routinely circulated debt free Treasury notes. The ins and outs of this tool was common knowledge between senior politicians, of which Lincoln, who had been in Washington for 30 years certainly was one.

Furthermore, throughout his career Lincoln had been agitating for a (privately owned) ‘National i.e. Central Bank’, the Nicholas Biddle kind of operation that Andrew Jackson (despite his many faults) heroically busted.

Already in 1839 Lincoln is on record as saying in the House:

“We do not pretend, that a National Bank can establish and maintain a sound and uniform state of currency in the country, in spite of the National Government; but we do say, that it has established and maintained such a currency, and can do so again, by the aid of that Government; and we further say, that no duty is more imperative on that Government, than the duty it owes the people, of furnishing them a sound and uniform currency.”

Lincoln was a ‘national Whig’. As such he favored Central Banking and the truth is he would have signed the Federal Reserve Act any time.


The main problem with the ‘interest-free, debt-free Greenback’ was that it was….neither debt-free, nor interest-free.

What was the Greenback? There were $450million non-interest-bearing US notes, backed by $500million bonds bearing 6% interest (the 5/20s) and there were ~$1,000million Treasury notes bearing 6-7.3% interest.
Worse still: Lincoln’s hand-picked Secretary of the Treasury and the Whig crew in Congress weren’t finished; the people who gave us greenbacks intended to give us permanent national debt; so, 1,000million currency obligations were turned into 40-year gold bonds.

There you have it: the ‘debt-free’ paper they circulated as Greenbacks were backed by bonds at 6%, while they were later turned into 40 year gold bonds.


He accomplished everything the Money Power wanted: (permanent) national indebtedness, strong central government, national banking system, national currency based on this indebtedness; everything that Henry Clay in failed to do in 1841: strong central Government, ‘National’ Banking System, ‘National’ Currency.

The Money Power was behind this agenda, which destroyed classical American decentralized political power, individualism and State Rights.

Many people in the alternative media believe this is a boon: it is not, one knows a tree by its fruit and, in the hands of the Rothschilds, the American Empire has been an incredible scourge to the world.

To many Americans even today the Government seems not too bad, but just ask the dozens of nations who have been destroyed by the US Government, from Germans, to Koreans, Cambodians, Vietnamese, Iraqi’s, etc.

In all these wars, the US was the Money Power’s Golem: doing their bidding as their, dimwitted, brutish goon.

So why was Lincoln murdered? Nobody knows. Perhaps his work was finished and he did seem to have resisted certain even more extreme measures.

Name789: “Between 1866 and 1868 Senator Doolittle said many times that Lincoln would not have gone along with radical reconstruction (to “reduce States to the condition of territories and citizens[whites] to the grade of vassals”). That would have been a lot more plausible reason for wasting him.”

It’s the same with Garfield, who was also murdered and later made into a hero, while during his life he was a reliable spokesman for banker bonds and Gold.


The Money Power always owns both sides of every conflict. The war gave them everything they wanted, including eternal indebtedness, their main hallmark.

Of course the war had nothing to do with slavery, which would have ended anyway, as it did throughout the civilized world.

Lincoln declared war without consulting Congress and creating ‘facts on the ground’, which did immeasurable damage to the rights of Legislative.

The Executive has got away with this up to this day Presidents start phoney wars all over the place, unhindered by an emasculated Congress.

During the war, Lincoln had tens of thousands of people in the North arrested for opposing it. During riots throughout the country, he had the Army repress them by shooting the protesters en masse.

In short: he was a tyrant of the worst kind.


Lincoln was a Money Power Agent. He accomplished everything the Money Power wanted: permanent indebtedness, power centralization in Washington and a ‘national’ (central banking) currency plus ‘national’ (privately controlled) banking system.

Clearly this has important ramifications for how we believe the opposition and its monetary agenda should look like.
The main lesson is that centralization of power is an eternal tell-tale of the enemy.

More about false and real monetary reform:

Faux Economics
Interest-Free Economics

Anthony Migchels is an Interest-Free Currency activist and founder of the Gelre, the first Regional Currency in the Netherlands. You can read all of his articles on his blog Real Currencies


Leave a Reply