View original document

The full text on this page is automatically extracted from the file linked above and may contain errors and inconsistencies.

G E O R G E R IC H M O N D W A L K E R
1 20 BOYLSTON

ST R E E T

B O S TO N , MASS.

December 7th, 1938
Mr. Elliott Thurston
Federal Reserve System
Washington, D.C.
Dear Mr. Thurston:
Thanks for your very kind letter of the 2nd.
Newell Garfield spoke of you last summer and I am sorry that I
could not have cane down to the island and had a chat with you.
I did not expect, of course, to persuade
to accept all at once so drastic a measure as I
forms of that kind usually come about only with
events. My fear, however, is that our political
be destroyed before our economy is reformed.

you or Mr. Eccles
recommneded. 'Re­
the pressure of
democracy will

For every dollar that the government has put to work
another dollar has quit work, so that there are more dollars
idle this year than ever before.
This is revealed by the rate
of turnover of demand deposits. With all its good,# works the
Hew Deal has made no progress whatever in solving the probelm
of investment.
I read Mr*
paragraph he says
ure to understand
cannot be made to

Eccles speech with great care.
In his last
that there is no reason, except
our own fail­
its nature, why our capitalistic democracy
work well in the future.

In order to understand we must define our social objectives
and then know the conditions upon which they can be attained. If
our purpose is to preserve the right of capitalists to invest at
a 'satisfactory' rate of return, irregardless of how much they
have to invest, then we must reduce costs by forcing down wages,
and we must allow the depreciation and obsolescence of existing
excess capacity. Since 1930 there has already been a shrinkage
in industrial equipment of about 6 billion dollars. This will
continue.
If our paafpose is to preserve the right of capitalists
to refuse to invest, then we must expect a reduced demand, idle
factories, bankruptcies, unemployment, and continued relief.
If our purpose is to preserve private enterprise and
democracy then we must deny the right to hoard money, for the
right to hoard is the right to sabotage business, to obstruct the
processes of trade, to cause and prolong depressions, and to
mock our democratic idleals of freedom, opportunity, private
initiative, and progress.




2

We must distinguish "between the right to produce goods
at a profit and the right to exact interest from industry. Profit
is the reward for useful production; interest is the tribute that
industry must pay to those who have accumulated the nation*s
medium of exchange. And if the tribute is not paid the penalty
is depression.
I am afraid that the Hew Deal, because it will not make
a direct attack upon the problem of hoarding, must fail in its
main objective of restoring prosperity.
The truth is that the
right to hoard is still valued above the right to work.
The one
is essential to capitalism, the other to private enterprise and
democracy. And since the two rights are fundamentally inconsis­
tent with each other a choice must someday be made between them.
I only hope that it will not be postponed too long.




Sincerely yours