Anglo-American Monetary Policy and Rivalry in Europe and the Far East, 1919–1931
To understand or explain the Anglo-American relationship in the 1920s, the historian must examine not only political but economic relationships, specifically the political influence of the major investment banks. For the competition between international banks — for influence over their own and other government officials, and for control of investment areas — affected most of the major decisions of the 1920s. Many times the issue at stake was not a government’s interests but, rather, a particular bank’s interests. Naturally such objectives were carefully camouflaged or disguised as national interests.
KeywordsClay Economic Crisis Europe Assure Rosen
Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.
- 4.D. McLean, ‘British Banking and Government in China: The Foreign Office and the Hongkong and Shanghai Bank, 1895–1913’ (unpublished Ph.D. dissertation, Cambridge University, 1972) includes an entire chapter on Addis. Also see C. B. Davis, ‘Financing Imperialism: British and American Bankers as Vectors of Imperial Expansion in China, 1908–1920’, Business History Review, 16(1982), 236–64.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- 7.M. Moss, ‘Montagu Collet Norman, Lord Norman of St Clare (1871–1950)’, Dictionary of Business Biography (hereafter DBB), Vol. 4 (London, 1985), 447–58.Google Scholar
- 19.R. Skidelsky, John Maynard Keynes, Vol. 1 (London, 1984), 354–7.Google Scholar
- 38.The ‘Reorganization Loan’ is in J. Van Antwerp MacMurray (ed.), Treaties and Agreements With and Concerning China, 1894–1919, 2 vols (New York, 1921), Vol. 11, 1007–20.Google Scholar
- 65.K. P. Jones, ‘Alanson B. Houghton and the Ruhr Crisis: The Diplomacy of Power and Morality’, in Jones, U.S. Diplomats, 25–42; and J. M. Carroll, ‘The Paris Bankers’ Conference of 1922 and America’s Design for a Peaceful Europe’, International Review of History and Political Science, 10 (1973), 39–47.Google Scholar
- 69.F. C. Costigliola, ‘U.S. & Reconstruction of Germany in the 1920s’, Business History Review, 11(1976), 487n41Google Scholar