150 years ago yesterday a referendum was held in Richmond so that voters could let their state representatives know whether or not the voters supported the “maximum bill” (price controls) that was being considered by the Virginia legislature. It didn’t take long to tally the results.
From the Richmond Daily Dispatch October 23, 1863:
The vote yesterday.
–The footing up the polls yesterday evening, given below, shows that the people deliberately and by an over whelming majority rejected the mad scheme of instructing their delegates to vote for a law which, if passed, would cause, untold misery. The vote of yesterday gives us lesson which will be of value to us hereafter. It teaches us how great a noise can be made by a very small portion of the community, and how utterly without reason a handful of men may set themselves up as the representatives of the great body of their fellow citizens. The ballot-box is a much surer test of public opinion than the clamors of the hustings or the bulletins of committees. The following is the vote:
Monroe Ward.–For instructions, 161; against, 260.
Madison Ward.–For instructions, 61; against, 439.
Jefferson Ward.–For instructions, 70; against, 168.
Total majority against instructing the city delegates to vote for the maximum, 575.
An overview of increased wartime poverty in Virginia at Encyclopedia Virginia touches on the attempts to control prices:
Another possible step, which attracted great interest among the public, was price control. Confederate general John Winder attempted to control prices in Richmond under martial law in 1862. Although his efforts failed and were rescinded, the idea of price control was very popular, and a considerable public clamor for state action arose in 1863. Ultimately, the proposed step failed.
The encyclopedia entry maintains that “the greatest capacity for dealing with the crisis lay with the Confederate government.” The following article summarized the speech of a state legislator against the state “maximum bill” in which he points out that any price control scheme would only have a chance at the national level because people could move goods across state lines. Mr. Bruce thought that the state should provide relief to the poor and try to rein in speculators but should leave price-fixing alone.
From the Richmond Daily Dispatch October 21, 1863:
Sensible view of the Situation.
–Mr. Bruce, of the Charlotte district, in the course of a speech in the Senate on Monday, made the following remarks:
“But his main objection to any bill fixing prices was that it would strike a blow at production itself. When the war commenced our wealth and industry were absorbed in agriculture. With our ports blockaded we had to look within ourselves to supply a thousand wants. Enterprises for supplying these wants were undertaken at great hazard, and are liable to be swept off by the casualties of war. Men would not encounter these risks except without the hope of large profits. Our ports may soon be hermetically s[e]aled, and the enterprise and ingenuity of our people taxed to the utmost to supply the articles of necessity, such as shoes, clothing, &c.–Was this a time to discourage production by placing trammels upon enterprise? What man would embark a heavy capital in any undertaking when he must not rely for his profits upon the ordinary laws of trade, but the decision of a Board of Commissioners? He had, however, a still stronger objection to any bill fixing prices. He thought that no scheme would work well which was not perfectly uniform in its operation throughout the Confederate States. By way of illustration: If you fix the price of cotton cloth at one dollar per yard in this State, and it is worth $2.50 per yard in North Carolina, as the manufacturer in the latter State can afford to pay double the wages, you may bring about an exodus of all the operatives in our factories, and we may have to decide whether it would not be better to pay high prices for cloth than fix low prices and have none to buy. This law would likewise place an embargo upon all importations from other States not adopting the same system. If cloth is at $1 per yard and wheat at $5 per bushel here, it is not to be expected that these articles will be brought here when the same cloth is $2.50 and wheat $10 per bushel in another State. He thought it would be best to leave trade as unrestrained as the ebb and flow of the tides, and that in tampering with the laws of trade by fixing prices the Legislature would only be repeating foolish experiments, which, whenever tried, have always, in the end, brought ruin upon the producer and want upon the consumer. He thought it the duty of the Legislature to provide for the destitute families of soldiers, to extend any practical measure of relief to the overrun districts of the State, and to strike down the extortioner as they had struck down the gambler; but, in going further, it would only run the risk of adding a thousand fold to the evils which it was seeking to escape.” …
The aforementioned encyclopedia article states that Virginian yeomen did not want to rely on handouts.
I noticed that Mr. Bruce said CSA ports may soon be “hermetically sealed” – General Scott’s Anaconda continues to have its effect.
