The full text on this page is automatically extracted from the file linked above and may contain errors and inconsistencies.
542 Fifth Avenue, New York,Feb.7/45 Mr.Marriner Eccles ¿ederal Reserve Board Washington,D.C. Dear Sir: I enclose an editorial from the Wall Street Journal of February 5th.to which you may wish to reply as you will note that they consider that your views are quite totalitarian. If there is ever a "bloody revolution"in this country,as was predicted some time ago by Henry Wallace,it will be because of you and others like him trying to enforce your totalitarian views on this country. Yours truly This article is protected by copyright and has been removed. The citation for the original is: Wall Street Journal, “The Compulsory State: The Implications of the ‘Papa Knows Best’ Theory,” February 5, 1945, p. 6. 25 February 9* 19U5* M r. Howard If. S t a r r , 5U2 F i f t h Avenue, Hew York C ity * Dear Mr. S t a r r : T his i s to acknowledge y ou r l e t t e r o f F ebruary 7 e n c lo s in g th e e d i t o r i a l from the W a ll S t r e e t J o u rn al o f February 5 c r i t i c i s i n g th e speeoh I d e liv e r e d b e fo r e th e N a tio n a l I n d u s t r i a l C onference Board l a s t November 16* As y ou r l e t t e r and th e c o n c lu sio n you reach t h a t my view s a r e t o t a l i t a r i a n seem to be b a se d on t h is e d i t o r i a l r a t h e r than upon the speech i t s e l f , I am e n c lo s in g a copy o f th e t e x t o f t h a t a d d re s s . I f , a f t e r re a d in g i t , you a re s t i l l o f th e o p in io n th a t I am in fa v o r o f a t o t a l i t a r i a n s t a t e , then I can o n ly conclude t h a t my a b i l i t y to s t a t e vsy view s i s s a d ly d e f i c i e n t . The e n t ir e purpose o f th a t speeoh w as, f i r s t , to s t a t e what th e economic problem s t h a t l i e ahead o f us a r e and then t o su g ge st what seem to me the most p r a c t i c a l ways t o d e a l w it h th ose pro blem s. I would have supposed t h a t any re a s o n a b ly i n t e l l i g e n t and fa irm in d ed r e a d e r o f t h a t speeoh would be a b le t o see t h a t my approach i s , a s i t alw ays has b een , to propose measures and p o l i c i e s which w i l l p re s e rv e th e p r o fit -m o t iv e , p r i v a t e e n t e r p r is e system i n a dem ocratic form o f government w ith a minimum o f governm ental a o t io n o r , i f you p r e fe r , "in t e r fe re n c e ". The w r i t e r o f t h i s e d i t o r i a l and you, ju d ged b y y ou r l e t t e r , seem to th in k th a t th e ch o ic e today i s between having the Government assume no, o r c e r t a i n ly no m a jo r, r e s p o n s i b i li t y f o r economic c o n d itio n s and a d e gree o f r e s p o n s i b i l i t y t h a t w ould c o n s t it u t e o r le a d t o t o t a li t a r ia n i s m . I do n o t see how anyone a t a l l inform ed abou t n a t io n a l a f f a i r s to d a y , in c lu d in g the p l a t forms and programs o f both m ajor p o l i t i c a l p a r t i e s , th e s i s e o f th e p u b lio d e b t, and the e x te n t to which Congress has a lr e a d y en acted la b o r , a g r i c u l t u r a l , s o c i a l s e c u r it y and o th e r l e g i s l a t i o n d i r e c t l y a f f e c t i n g and inten ded to advance the economic w e lf a r e o f la r g e groups o f p o p u la tio n , can assume t h a t th e Government cou ld o r would r e v e r t to t h a t degree o f n o n in te rv e n tio n which e x is t e d i n th e now d i s t a n t p a s t . I t i s n o t a q u e stio n o f l i t t l e o r no in t e r v e n t io n , b u t a q u e stio n o f how much and o f what s o r t . I f a v o r a s much as seems to me n o t m erely i n e v it a b le bu t n e c e ss a ry t o g iv e broad assu ran ce th a t t h i s country w i l l n o t a g a in e x p erien c e such a d e s t r u c t iv e d e f l a t i o n as t h a t o f th e e a r l y 3O’ ® o r such an i n f l a t i o n — which would in e s c a p a b ly be fo llo w e d by a ru in ou s d e f la t i o n — «us cou ld r e s u l t from f a i l u r e to c o n t r o l the enormous i n f la t i o n a r y fo r c e s c re a te d b y th e war and c e r t a in t o extend in t o the t r a n s i t i o n p e r io d . Mr. Howard W. Starr - (2) February 9» 19U5 I have alw ays been and I s t i l l am in fa v o r o f such measures as w i l l p re s e rv e and s u p p o rt th e p r iv a t e e n t e r p r is e , p r o fit -m o t iv e dem ocratic system . F o r th a t reason I never have and do not now advocate measures t h a t would d i s courage o r d is p la c e p r iv a t e p ro d u ctio n , in d u s t ry , a g r i c u l t u r e , ban k in g, o r o th e r b u s in e s s e s . Anyone who took the t r o u b le to lo o k in t o my own reo ord would see t h a t one i n v a r i a b le c r i t e r i o n has c h a r a c t e r is e d a l l th e measures t h a t I have p ro p o se d ; namely, t h a t th ey would sup port o r , i f n e c e s s a ry , sup plem ent b u t n e v e r d is p la c e p r iv a t e e n t e r p r is e . M a n ife s t ly , i f one makes b o ld to s t a t e what th e problem s a r e and what can be done to meet them, v i t a l q u e stio n s o f judgment on which o th e rs may p r o p e r ly d is a g r e e a r e in v o lv e d . I do n o t exp ect o r d e s i r e t o a v o id se a rc h in g and c r i t i c a l d is c u s s io n . I f my judgments a r e m istaken, no one co u ld be more e a g e r, f o r e n t i r e l y s e l f i s h rea so n s, to f i n d i t o u t a t the e a r l i e s t p o s s ib le moment. I am im p a tie n t, however, w ith unreason in g o r em otional c r i t i c i s m t h a t ig n o re s th e hard f a c t s o f the w o rld as i t i s to d a y , n o t as we might l i k e to have i t . And I am lik e w is e im p atien t w ith e d i t o r i a l pronouncements such as the one you e n c lo s e , which d ism iss the problems and the answers by th e easy ex p ed ien t o f d e ro g a to ry l a b e l s — t o t a li t a r ia n i s m , reg im e n tatio n , s o c ia lis m , communism, e t c . , w ith o u t o f f e r i n g any a l t e r n a t i v e s exc ep t a vague y e a rn in g f o r a r e t u r n to c o n d it io n s , economic and p o l i t i c a l , t h a t no lo n g e r e x i s t . I am n o t u n d e rta k in g t o prophecy what w i l l happen, b u t I am not such a de f e a t i s t as t o b e l i e v e t h a t i t i s n e c e ssa ry f o r us to lo s e our l i b e r t i e s and our economic and governm ental system i f we w i l l fa c e and s o lv e o u r economio problem s i n t e l l i g e n t l y . I t so happens th a t a t the same tim e I r e c e iv e d y o u r l e t t e r I had an other one from the econom ist o f one o f the l a r g e s t and most i n f l u e n t i a l la b o r groups in the country who took me to ta s k b e c a u se , o r so he contended, my p ro p o s a ls w ere a l l d ir e c te d a t p r e s e r v in g the p r i v a t e e n t e r p r is e system in s t e a d o f a d m ittin g th a t Government should tak e i t o v e r. The e d i t o r i a l and your l e t t e r , co n c lu d in g th a t my view s a r e t o t a l i t a r i a n , and h i s l e t t e r , r e p ro ach in g me because my view s a r e n o t t o t a l i t a r i a n a t a l l , fu r n is h an i n t e r e s t in g c o n t r a s t . One o f you must b e m istaken, and I do not th in k i t i s the la b o r econom ist. V ery t r u l y y o u rs , M. S . E c o le s , Chairman. closure 542 Fifth avenue, New York,Feb.19/45 Dear Mr.Eccles. It was most polite of you to answer my letter of the 7th.instant at length in which I sent you an editorial from the Wall Street Journal appropriately entitled "Papa Knows Best^in which they criticized your "Postwar Price Problem,speech. ’ I sent you this editorial in the hope that you would write a reply to it to the Wall Street Journal.There is a very serious d44unity in this country brought about by the differences between the New Deal Economists and the orthodox economists,such as the Econo mists National Committee On Monetary Policy to which I have been contributing for a number of years »which threatens the very exis tence of this country .You believe with the New Deal Economists»un less I am greatly mistaken,that you can,wangle"the law of ¿upply and , Demand and other economic laws to produce any resikikt you may wish for the purpose of redistributing the wealth,which is still your purpose as your party is dominated by labor and you propose to remain in power by submitting to the dictates of the C.I.0.although you pay lip service to the private enterprise system which brought about the enoxmous pro duction for war,although you give most of the credit to the Government. As long as you did not reply to the “all Street Journal Editorial, ’ I would like to have your permission to send them your letter to me of the 9th.instant»which I trust you will give me,as your letter was not marked confidential.Our differences should be debated in such pub lic journals. February 1945* M r. H<>v.ard lit» S t a r r , 5 4 2 F i f t h Avenue, New York C it y . Dear Mr. S t a r r : Y»hile my l e t t e r t o you o f February 9 was not c o n f i d e n t i a l, i t was ad dressed t o you and was not inten ded as a r e p ly t o .the é d i t o r i a l in th e « » a ll S t re e t J o u rn a l. A c c o rd in g ly , I would not wish t o have my l e t t e r sent t o the '«»all S t re e t J o u rn a l, n o r would 1 c o n s id e r i t a p p r o p ria t e to undertake t o debate any d iff e r e n c e s w ith you in a _public jo u r n a l. Very t r u l y y o u rs, M. S. E c c le s , Chairman. ETîb
