Gold and Freedom: The Political Economy of Reconstruction by Nicolas Barreyre (review)

The economic consequences of the Civil War cast a long shadow not only in the South but also in the Northeast and the Midwest, according to author Nicolas Barreyre, as sectionalism shifted from a North/South to an East/West axis in the postbellum era. The Northeast and the Midwest struggled to implement competing national visions of political economy during Reconstruction. Sectional disagreement about hard versus soft money developed in response to wartime debt and evolved into a larger battle about the Republican Party’s economic philosophy. The author does an excellent job of explaining the myriad positions on the “money question” that crystallized an array of interests into the basic sectional economic conflict (p. 2).

Graphs that show fluctuations in federal revenue and expenses are particularly useful, and sectional voting maps and statistics also enhance the reader’s understanding. Barreyre’s discussion of how the wartime Republican coalition transitioned to antagonistic sectional stances is insightful. For example, increased wartime tariffs were kept in place after 1865 as the motive of patriotic revenue was supplanted by full-fledged protectionism. Several over-arching themes converge in the book, including sectionalism, economic theory, and regional/spatial identity, but the author wisely maintains that each of these was shaped by Reconstruction politics. At times this superstructure of themes is overdone, particularly in the epilogue, but it can be forgiven as an admirable attempt to look at Reconstruction from different perspectives.

The author’s explanation of how the Pendleton Plan, or use of the money question in a local Ohio election, grew into a divisive sectional and national issue is outstanding. At each chronological milepost, Barreyre attempts to show the importance of sectional economic priorities amid the tangle of Reconstruction politics—some analyses are more convincing than others. For example, the author wonderfully describes the series of monetary compromises in 1869 and 1870, like the Public Credit Act, the Funding Act, the Currency Act, and the tariff acts, which postponed full-blown sectional economic conflict. The Panic of 1873 finally shattered the Republican compromise over the “money question” and actually spurred cross-party midwestern and southern votes against northeastern hard money policies. This analytical framework adds to the historiography of why the Republican coalition’s dedication to Reconstruction faltered from 1873 to 1876.

Gold and Freedom: The Political Economy of Reconstructionis a detailed account of Reconstruction politics with an overlay of contested economic policy. Barreyre’s foray into an economic analysis of Reconstruction is very useful. A major contribution of this book is that it forces readers to consider more than the typical interpretive lenses of race and party affiliation when confronting Reconstruction’s complexity.

There is much to admire in Gold and Freedom, including the depth of research, the writing style, and an apparently wonderful translation by Arthur Goldhammer. This book meticulously discusses Reconstruction events through an economic lens, but it also frames the origins of Midwest/Northeast economic rivalry that had far-reaching political implications that stretched well into the 1880s and the 1890s. Gold and Freedomis a must-read for historians of Reconstruction, and it is highly recommended for all late-nineteenth-century U.S. historians as well.