Free Banking Theory and Theoreticians: A comment on Le Maux

Abstract

Cette reaction est suscitee par larticle de Laurent Le Maux, recemment publie dans ce Journal. Le Maux affirme que Ludwig von Mises etait le defenseur dun systeme de reserves fractionnaires et un precurseur des economistes contemporains partisans des reserves fractionnaires (tels Dowd, Selgin, White). Nous critiquons la maniere dont Le Maux utilise la litterature ancienne dans ce domaine, et nous montrons quil nest pas suffisamment au fait des travaux de Mises et des problemes qui divisent les defenseurs et les opposants du systeme de reserves fractionnaires. Les ecrits de Ludwig von Mises fournissent la preuve accablante quil etait, et il le disait lui-meme, un economiste qui developpait lapproche de la Currency School dans le domaine des problemes bancaires.This paper takes issue with an article by Laurent Le Maux that recently appeared in this journal. Le Maux claims that Ludwig von Mises was an advocate of fractional-reserve banking and a precursor of presentday economists defending fractional reserves (e.g., Dowd, Selgin, White). We criticise Le Mauxs treatment of previous literature in the field, and show that he is insufficiently acquainted with Mises work and with the problems that divide advocates and opponents of fractional reserves. Ludwig von Mises writings provide overwhelming evidence that he was, and saw himself as, an economist who developed the approach of the Currency School toward problems of banking.