Well I got the book, 1957 and all. I felt an air of history as I pulled it off the shelf and sifted through its yellow and fading pages.
From what I can tell, there is good news and bad news.
The good news is that Rothbard’s money supply statistics add up, at least according to this book. All of his Civil War totals are obtained by adding total bank deposits, state bank notes, gold coins, silver susidiaries, fractional currencies, other U.S currency, greenbacks, and national bank notes.
The bank news is that judging by this book, some of the statistics are questionable, and Rothbard should be severely criticized for his misleading interpretations. The most obvious is his 1865-1873, state and bank deposits and notes increased about 16.9% per annum. From the book, this is correct, but using highly suspect statistics. It is true that state and national bank notes and deposits increased from 1865 (roughly $869) to $1.964 in 1873, an increase of 16.9% per annum. However careful inspection reveals that according to the statistics, the number of deposits did not increase really increase 16.9% per annum, but rather 50% between last two reported years (1872-1332 and 1873-1964)! My guess is that the bank money (and to a greater extent total money supply) did not explode in one year, but rather the amount of banks voluntarily reported their deposits to the state banking authoritiy. It even says in the forward to the particular section Rothbard used that “Prior to 1896, figures shown here include all national banks and all State banks that voluntarily reported to Statebanking departments in the United States..”. My guess is that with the Panic in 1873 and more banks under distrress, they contacted the state authorities moreso than before.
Taking out 1873, and just taking the totals from 1865 to 1872 (for whatever they are worth, considering that they are probably low due to faulty reports), the annual percentage increase was much lower, roughly 4% per year! For Rothbard to report these statistics that bank money increased 17% per annum when it reality it seems to have come only from 1)the last year 2)more likely bad statistics is downright sloppy and poor research.
Regardless of the factual accuracy of the Historical Statistics (I’m extremely hesistant to see bank totals increasing by 50% in one year), even with the statistics he is using they clearly did not increase 17% per year, as Rothbard is claiming.