"Britain was at war alternately on two fronts—first with the American colonies... then with Napoleon... Money was needed... Pitt was relentless... in his demands on the Bank for loans. Though taxes were increased... the need continued. ...Bank reserves dwindled, and there were occasional runs. Finally, in 1797, under conditions of great tension... the Bank suspended the right of redemption of its notes and deposits in gold and silver. The principal immediate consequence... disappearance of gold and silver coins... People passed on the notes and kept the metal. ...The Bank hurriedly printed one- and two-pound notes, and it also redeemed from its vaults a store of plundered Spanish pieces of eight. ...The needs of the government continued... Loans and the resulting note issues continued to increase. ...so did prices and the price of gold. ...[I]n reflection of the distribution of power... the concern was focused not on the price of food but on the price of gold. In... 1810, the House of Commons impaneled a committee... The committee... found... an overissue of the still irredeemable... notes [and] proposed that, after a two year period, the Bank make its notes fully convertible into specie once again. Thus... there could be no increase in the price of metal. There followed in 1811 a famous debate on the nature of money and its management... In the debate... is a difference of opinion that continues to this day. Where does economic change originate? Does it begin with those [in the banks] who are responsible for money... who made the loans and thus caused the supply of notes... to increase. (From this... the stimulating effect of rising prices on production and trade.) Or does change begin with production? ...with consequent effect on the demand for loans and thence on the supply of money? In short, does money influence the economy or does money respond to the economy? The question is still asked."