|The US was taken over by Merchant Banking interests in 1913
(see below -- and also some British economic history in Couglin's
speech) who captured control of the Democratic Party. By
1935 Bernard Baruch (who also owned Winston Churchill at this time)
was controlling Roosevelt and his New Deal. The original
Jeffersonian-Jacksonian0-William Jennings Bryan traditions of the
Democrats were being carried on by two "populist" Democrats. Here
are two giants gone before -- see if their words are not beacons for
humanity today as we face criminal economic globalization and the Bush
and Blair terror-frameup and war regimes. |
For additional commentary
Ladies and Gentlemen: It has been publically announced that the White House orders of the Roosevelt administration have declared a war.
The lately lamented, pampered ex-Crown Prince, General Hugh S. Johnson, one of those satelites loaned by Wall Street to run the government, and who at the end of his control over and dismissal from the ill-fated NRA [National Recovery Administration] pronounced it as a dead dodo - this Mr. Johnson was apparently selected to make the lead-off speech in this White House charge begun on last Monday night.
The Johnson speech was followed by a fluster and flurry on behalf of the administration by spellbinders in and out of Congress. In a far-away island when a queen dies her first favorite is done the honor to be buried with her.
The funeral procession of the NRA, another of these New Deal schisms and isms, is about ready to take place. It is said that General Johnson's speech of Monday night to attack me was delivered on the eve of announcing the publication of his own obituary in the Red Book Magazine.
It seems, then, that soon this erstwhile deranged alphabet makes ready to appear at the funeral of NRA, likened to the colored lady in Mississippi who, at such a funeral, asserted, "I is the wife of these remains."
I shall undertake to cover my main subject and make answer to these gentlemen in the course of this speech. It will serve no useful purpose to our distressed people for me to call my opponents more bitter names than they called me. Even were I able, I have not the time to present my side of the argument and match them in profanity.
What is the trouble with this administration of Mr. Roosevelt and of Mr. Johnson, Mr. Farley, Mr. Aster and all their spoilers and spellbinders?
They think that Huey Long is the cause of all their worry. They go gunning for me, but am I the cuase of their misery? Well, they are like old David Crockett, who went out to hunt a possum. He saw there in the gleam of the moonlight, a possum in the top of the tree, going from limb to limb, so he shot, but he missed> He looked again and he saw the possum. He fired a second shot and missed again. Soon he discovered that it was not a possum that he saw at all in the top of the tree; it was a louse in his own eyebrow.
I do not make this illustration to do discredit to any of these distinguished gentlemen: I make it to show how often some of us imagine that we see great trouble being done to us by some one at a distance, when in reality all it may be is a fault in our own make-up. And so is this the case of Mr. Roosevelt or Mr. Farley or Mr. Johnson and of others undertaking to derange the situation today.
The trouble with the Roosevelt administration is that when their schemes and isms have failed, these things I told them not to do, and voted not to do, that they think it will help them to light out on those of us who warned them in the beginning that the tangled messes and experiments would not work.
The Roosevelt administration has had its way for two years. They have been allowed to set up or knock down anything and everybody. There was one difference between Roosevelt and Hoover. Hoover could not get the Congress to carry out the schemes he wanted to try, because we managed to lick him on a roll call in the United States Senate time after time when he had both both the Democratic leaders and the Republican leaders trying to put them over.
But it is different with Mr. Roosevelt. He got his plan through Congress, but on cold analysis, they were found to be the same things Hoover tried to bass and failed the year before.
The kitchen cabinet that sat in to advise Hoover was not different from the kitchen Cabinet which advises Roosevelt. Many of the persons are the same. Many more of those in Roosevelt's kitchen Cabinet are of the same men or set of men who furnished employees to sit in the kitchen Cabinet to advise Mr. Hoover.
Maybe you see a little change in the men waiting on the tables in the dining room, but back in the kitchen, the same set of old cooks are bak there fixing up the vittles and the grub for us that cooked up that miss under Hoover. There never has been even a change of seasoning.
Now do you think this Roosevelt plan for plowing up cotton, corn and wheat, and for pouring milk in the river and for destroying and burying hogs and cattle by the millions, all while the people starve to death and go naked, do you think these plans were the original ideas of Roosevelt administration?
If you do, you are wrong. The whole idea of that kind of thing first came from Hoover's administration. Don't you remember when Mr. Hoover proposed to plow up every fouth row of cotton? We laughed at him to scorn, and so we beat Mr. Hoover on his plan, but when Mr. Roosevelt started on his plan, it was not to plow up every fourth row of cotton, it was to plow up every third row of cotton. He went Mr. Hoover one-twelfth better.
So it has been, while millions have starved and gone naked and while babies have cried and died wanting milk; so it has been while people begged for meat and bread to eat. Mr. Roosevelt's administration has sailed merrily along, plowing under and destroying the things to eat and wear, with tear-dimmed eyes and hungry souls made to chant for this New Deal so that even their starvation dole is not taken away from them, and meanwhile the food and clothes craved by humanity for their bodies and souls go to destruction and ruin.
What do you call it? Is it government? Maybe so. It looks more like the St. Vitis dance to me.
Now since they have sallied forth with General Johnson to start this holy war on me, lut us take a look at this NRA they opened up around here about two years ago. They had parades and Fascist signs, just like Hitler and Mussolini. They started the dictatorship to regiment business and labor much more than any known in Germany and Italy.
The only difference was in the sign. Mussolini's sign for a Fascist was a black shirt. Germany's sign of the Fascist was a swastika. So in America they sidetracked the Stars and Stripes, and the sign of the Blue Eagle was used instead for the NRA.
They proceeded with the NRA. Everything from a peanut stand to a powerhouse had to have a separate book of rules and laws to regulate what they did. If the peanut stand started to sell a sack of goobers, they had to be careful to go through the rule book. One slip of the man and he went to jail.
One fellow pressed a pair of pants and went to jail because he charged 5 cents less than the price set up in the rule book. SO they wrote their NRA rule books, code laws and so forth, and got up over 900.
One would be as thick as an unabridged dictionary and as confused as the study of the stars. It would take forty lawyers to tell a shoe shine merchant how to operate and be sure he didn't go to jail. Some people come to me for advice as a lawyer on trying to run their business. I took several days and couldn't understand it myself. The only thing I could tell them was it couldn't be much worse in jail than it was out of jail with that kind of thing going on in the country, and so to go on and do the best they could.
The whole thing of Mr. Roosevelt as run under General Johnson became such a national scandal that Roosevelt had to let Johnson slide out as a scapegoat. I am told that the day the general had to go, when they had waited just as long as they would wait on him, he wanted to issue a blistering statement against Mr. Roosevelt, but they finally saddled him off because they didn't know but what Wall Street might want to lend him to some other President in the future, so he left without.
It was under the NRA and the other funny alphabetical combinations that followed it that we ran the whole country into a mare's nest. The Farleys and Johnsons combed the land with agents, inspectors, supervisors, detectives, secretaries, assistants, and so forth, all of them armed with the power to arrest anybody and send them to jail if they found them not living up to some one of the rules in these 900 catalogues they had out.
One man , whose case reached the Supreme Court of the United States, I understand, pleaded guilty because he didn't know what it was about, and when it got to the United States Supreme Court, it was turned loose because they couldn't even find a rule book he was supposed to be guided by.
Now it is with the PWA, WRA, GINS and every other flimsy combination that the country find its affairs in business where no one can recognize it. More men are now out of work than ever. The debt of the United States has gone up ten billion more dollars. There is starvation; there is homelessness; there is misery on every hand and corner. But, mind you, in the meantime, Mr. Roosevelt has had his way. He is one man that can't blame any of his troubles on Huey Long. He has had his way.
Down in my part of the country, if any man has the measles he blames that on me; but there is one man that can't blame anything on anybody but himself and that is Mr. Franklin De-La-No Roose-velt.
And now on top of that, they ordered a war on me because nearly four years ago I told Hoover's crowd, it wouldn't do, and because I told Roosevelt and his crowd, it won't do. In other words, they are in a rage at Huey Long because I have had to say, "I told you so."
It was not overstating the conditions now prevailing in this country. In the own words of these gentlemen, they have confessed all that I now say or ever have said. Mr. Roosevelt, and Mrs. Roosevelt, too, have lately bewailed the fact that food, clothes and shelter have not been provided for the people. Even as this General Hugh S. Johnson has said in his speech of this last Monday night that there are 80,000 babies in America who are badly hurt or wrecked by this depression. He, of course, includes us all in that classification of babies.
Mr. Harry Hopkins, who runs the relief work, says the dole roll has risen now to 22, 375,000 people, the highest it has ever been. And now what is there for the Roosevelt crowd to do but to admit the facts and admit furhter that they are now in their third year making matters worse instead of better.
No one is to blame except them for what is going on when they have had their way, and they couldn't change the thing in two years. IT is now worse than ever, and if they haven't been able to do any good in the way they have been going for two years, how can any one expect any good of them for the next two years to come? God saved us two more years of the disaster we have had under that gang.
When this condition of distress and suffering among so many of our people began to develop in the Hoover Administration, we knew what was the trouble, and what we would have to do to correct it.
I was one of the first men to say publically. Mr. Roosevelt followed in my track a few months later, and said the same thing - we said that all of our trouble and woe was due to the fact that too few of our people owned too much of our wealth.
We said that in our land we've too much to eat and too much to wear, and too many houses to live in; too many automobiles to be sold - that the only trouble was that the people suffered in the land of abundance because too few controlled the money and the wealth, and too many people did not have money which would buy the things they needed for life and comfort.
So I said to the people of the United States in my speeches, which I delivered in the United States Senate and over the radio in the early part of 1932, that the only way by which we could restore to reasonable life and comfort was to limit the size of the big men's fortunes and guarantee some minimum to the fortune and comfort of the little man's family.
I said then as I have said since that it was inhuman to have goods rot, cotton and wool going to waste, houses empty, and at the same time to have millions of our people starving, our people naked, our people homeless, because they could not buy the things which other men had and for which these other men had no use.
So we convinced Mr. Franklin Delano Roosevelt that it was necessary that he announce and promise to the American people that in the event he were elected President of the United States he would pull down the size of the big man's fortune and guarantee something to every family, enough to do away with all poverty, and to give employment to those who were able to work and an education to the children born into the world.
Mr. Roosevelt made those promises. He made them before he was nominated in the Chicago convention, he made them again before he was elected in November, and he went so far as to remake those promises a day or two after he was inaugurated President of the United States, and I was one authorized to say so, and I thought for a day or two after he took the oath as President that maybe he was going through with his promises.
But no heart has ever been so saddened, no person's ambition was ever so blighted as was mine when I came to the realization that the President of the United States was not goin gto undertake what he said he would do, and what I knew to be necessary if the people of America were ever saved from calamity and misery . . . .
And so we arrived, and we are still there at the place in abundant America where we have everything for which a human heart can pray. The hundreds of millions, or, as General Johnson says, the eighty millions of our people, are crying in misery for want of the things which they need for life, notwithstanding the fact that the country has had and can have , more than the entire human race can consume.
One hundred and twenty-five million people of America have seated themselves at the barbecue table to eat the products which have been given to them by their Lord and Creator. There is provided by the Almighty what it takes for all of them to eat. Yea, more.
There has been provided for the people of America who have been called to this barbecue table more than is needed for all to eat, but the financial masses of America have taken off the barbecue table 90 per cent of the food placed thereon by the Lord, even before the feast began. And there is left on that table for 125,000,000 people about what is needed for the 10,000,000. In other words, there is not enough to feed one out of twelve.
What has become of the balance of those victuals placed on the table by the Lord for the use of us all? They are in the hands of the Morgans, the Rockefellers, the Baruchs, the Mellons, the Bakers, the Asters, the Vanderbilts, 600 families at the most, wither possessing or controlling the entire 90 per cent of all that is in America.
These big men cannot eat all of the food, they cannot wear all the clothes, so they destroy it. The rot it up, they plow it up, they pour it in the river. They bring destruction to the acts of mankind to let humanity suffer, to let humanity go naked, to let humanity go homeless, so that nothing may occur that will do harm to their vanity and to their greed. Like the dog in the manger, they command a wagon load of hay which the dog would not allow the cow to eat, though he could not eat it himself.
So now, ladies and gentlemen, I introduce again, for fear that there are some who have just tuned in and do not know who is talking. This is Huey P. Long, United States Senator from Louisiana, talking over a National Broadcasting Company hookup from Washington D.C.
We come to that plan of mine, now, for which I have been so recently and roundly condemned and denounced by the Roosevelt administration and by such men as Mr. Farley and Mr. Robinson and General Hugh S. Johnson, and other spellers and speakers and spoilers.
It is for the redistribution of wealth and for guaranteeing comfort and convenience to all humanity out of this abundance in our country. I hope none will be horror-stricken when they hear me say that we must limit the size of the big man's fortunes in order to guarantee a minimum of fortune, life and comfort to the little man, but if you are horror-stricken at my mention of that fact, think first that such is the declaration on which Mr. Roosevelt rode into nomination and election to President of the United States.
While my urgings are declared by some to be the ravings of a madman and, by such men as General Johnson, as insincere bait for a pied-piper, if you will listen to me you will find that it is stating the law handed down from God to man.
You will find that it was the exact provision of the contract of law of the Pilgrim Fathers who landed at Plymouth in 1620. Now, just for the benefit of some of these gentlemen, I am going to read you from the contract of those Pilgrim Fathers who landed at Plymouth in 1620. I am reading you from the contract of those Pilgrim Fathers:
"Paragraph 5: That at the end of the seventh year, the capital and profits that the houses, lands, goods and chattels be equally divided betwixt the adventurers and planters. When done, every man shall be free from any debt or detriment concerning this adventure."
In other words, these birds who are undertaking to tell you of the bad things I have done and am advocating, they have failed to note that I not only have the Bible back of me, but that this nation was founded by the Pilgrim Fathers, not to do just what I said, but to go and do all the balance, divide up equally every seventh year and cancel out all debts, and they had the authority of the Bible for doing that. On the other hand, mine does not go near so far, but it will save this country as the Pilgrims intended it should be saved.
You will find that what I am advocating is the cornerstone on which nearly every religion since the beginning of man has been founded. You will find that it was urged by Lord Bacon, by Milton, by Shakespeare in England; by Socrates, by Plato, by Diogenes and the other wisest of the philosophers of ancient Greece; by Pote Pius XI in the Vatican; by the world's greatest inventor, Marconi, in Italy; Daniel Webster, Ralph Waldo Emerson, Abraham Lincoln, Andrew Jackson, William Jennings Bryan and Theodore Roosevelt in the United States, as well as by nearly all of the thousands of great men whose names are mentioned in history, and the only great man who ever came forth to dispute these things from the Bible down is this marvelous General Hugh S. Johnson, who labels himself a soldier and a lawyer.
He is a great soldier though he never smelt powder or heard a cap snap, and a great lawyer though he never tried a lawsuit, and I will not be willing transact business on the lines that everybody else must be forgotten whom I follow, and if I should follow in such footsteps as was arranged for the combination of an alphabetical proposition..
The principle that I am advocating, that I will give you in detail in a minute, that principle was not only the mainspring of the Roosevelt nomination and election but in the closing speech of Herbert Hoobver at Madison Square Garden in November, 1932, even Hoover said:
My conception of America is a land where men and women may work in liberty, where they may enjoy the advantages of wealth, not concentrated in the hands of the few but diffused through the lives of all."
So there you have it ladies and gentlemen; both Hoover and Roosevelt swallowed the Huey Long doctrine and never made one single complaint before the election occurred on November 8, 1932.
Now I come to give you again that plan, taken from these leaders of all times and from the Bible, for the sponsoring of which I have been labeled by American men as a madman and pied piper and demagogue, so I give you that plan of our Share Our Wealth Society.
I propose, first, that every big fortune will be cut down immediately. We will cut that down by a capital levy tax to where no one will own more than a few millions of dollars. As a matter of fact, no one can own a fortune in excess of three or four millions of dollars, just between you and me, and I think that is too much. But we figure we can allow that size of a fortune and give prosperity to all the people, even though it is done.
I propose that the surplus of all the big fortunes above a few millions to any one person, at the most, go into the United States ownership. Now, how would we get all these surplus fortunes into the United States Treasury, Mr. Johnson wants to know. Well, now, if he will listen, he won't have any trouble finding out. It is not hard to do. We would send every one a questionnaire, just like they did during the war, when they were taking us over there to make the world safe for democracy so that they might come back here and make America save for autocracy.
On that questionnaire the man to whom it was sent would list the properties he owned, lands, the houses, stocks and bonds, factories and patents; every man would place an appraisal on his property which the government would review and maybe change. On that appraisal the big fortune holder would say out of what property he would retain the few millions allowed to him, the balance to go to the United States.
Let's say that Mr. Henry Ford should show that he owned all the stock of the Ford Motor Company, and that it is worth 2,000,000,000 we will say. He would claim, say, $4,000,000 dollars of the Ford stocks, but $1,996,000,000 would go to the United States.
Say the Rockerfeller Foundation was listed at $10,000,000,000 in oil stocks, bank stocks, money and storehouses. Each Rockefeller could say whether he wanted his limit in the money, oil or bank stock, but about $9,900,000,000 would be left that would go to the United States Government.
And so in this way, this Government of the United States would come into the possession of about two-fifths of the wealth which on normal values would be worth from $165,000,000,000 to $175,000,000,000.
Then we would turn to the inventories of the 25,000,000 of America and all those showing properties and moneys clear of debt that were above $5,000 and up to the limit of a few millions. We wouldn't draw down a fortune that wasn't bigger than a few millions, and if a man had over $5,000 then he would have his guaranteed minimum. But those showing less than $5,000 for the family, free of debt, would be added to; so that every family would start life again with homestead possession of at least a home and the comfort needed for a home, including such things as a radio and an automobile.
Those things would go to every family as a homestead not to be sold either for debts or for taxes or even by consent of the owner, except the government would allow it, and then only on condition that the court hold it, that is, hold the money that was received for it, to be spent for the purpose of buying another home and the comforts thereof.
Such would mean that the $165,000,000,000 or more taken from the big fortunes would have about $100,000,000,000 of it used to provide everybody with the comforts of home. The government might have to issue warrants for claim and location, or even currency to be retired from such property as it was claimed, bu all that is a detail not impractical to get these homes into the hands of the people.
So America would start again with millionaires, but with no multi-millionaires or billionaires; we would start with some poor, but they would wouldn't be so poor that they wouldn't have the comforts of life. The lowest a man could go would not take away his home and the home comforts from him.
America, however, would still have a $65,000,000,000 balance after providing these homes. Now what do we do with that? Wait a minute and I will tell you.
Second: We propose that after homes and comforts of homes have been set up for the families of the country, that we will turn our attention to the children and the youth of the land, providing first for their education and training.
We would not have to worry about the problem of child labor, because the very first thing which we would place in front of every child would be not only a comfortable home during his early years, but the opportunity for education and training, not only through the grammar school and the high school, but through college and to include vocational and professional training for every child.
If necessary, that would include the living cost of that child while he attended college, if one should be too distant for him to live at home and conveniently attend, as would be the case with many of those living in the rural areas.
We now have an educational system, and in States like Louisiana, and it is the keystone, where school books are furnished free to every child and where transportation by bus is given to every student, however far he may live from a grammar school or high school, there is a fairly good assurance of education through grammar and high school for the child whose father and mother have enough at home to feed and clothe them.
But when it comes to a matter of college education, except in few cases, the right to a college education is determined at this day and time by the financial ability of the father and mother to pay for the cost and the expense of a college education.
It doesn't make any difference how brilliant a boy or girl may be; that doesn't give them the right to a college education in America today.
Now General Hugh S. Johnson says I am indeed a very smart demagogue, a wise and dangerous menace. But I am one of those who didn't have the opportunity to secure a college education or training.
We propose that the right to education and the extent of education will be determined and guaged not so much by the financial ability of the parents, but by the mental ability and energy of a child to absorb the learning at a college.
This should appeal to General Johnson, who says I am a smart man, since, had I enjoyed the learning and college training which my plan would provide for others, I might not have fallen into the path of the dangerous menace and demagogue that he as now found me to be.
Remember we have $65,000,000,000 to account for that would lie in the hands of the United States, even after providing home comforts for all families. We will use a large part of it immediately to expand particularly the colleges and universities of this country. You would not know the great institutions like Yale and Harvard and Louisiana State University. Get ready for a surprise.
College enrollments would multiply 1,000 per cent. We would immediately call in the architects and engineers, the idle professors and scholars of learning. We would send out a hurry call because the problem of providing college education for all the youth would start a fusilade of employment which might suddenly and immediately make it impossible for us to shorten the hours of labor, even as we contemplate in the balance of the program.
And how happy the youth of this land would be tomorrow morning if they knew instantly their right to a home and the comforts of a home and to complete college and professional training and education were assured. I know how happy they would be, because I know how happy I would have felt had such a message been delivered to my door.
I cannot deliver that promise to the youth of this land tonight, but I am doing my part. I am standing the blows; I am hearing the charges hurled at me from the four quarters of the country.
It is the same fight which was made against me in Louisiana when I was undertaking to provide the free school books, free buses, university facilities and things of that kind to educate the youth of that State as best I could.
It is the same blare which I heard when I was undertaking to provide for the sick and the afflicted.
When the yhouth of this land realizes what is meant and what is contemplated, the Billingsgate and the profanity of all the Farleys and Johnsons in America cannot prevent the light of truth from hurling itself in understandable letters against the dark canopy of the sky.
Now, when we have landed at the place where homes and comforts are provided for all families and complete education and training for all young men and women, the next problem is , what about our income to sustain our people thereafter? How shall that be arranged to guarantee all the fair share of what sould and body need to sustain them conveniently. That brings us to our next point.
We will shorten the hours of labor by law so much as may be necessary that none will be worked too long and none unemployed. We will cut hours of toil to thirty hours per week, maybe less, we may cut the working year to eleven months' work and one month vacation, maybe less.
If our great improvement programs show we need more labor than we may have, we will lengthen the hours as convenience requires. At all events, the hours for production will be gauged to meet the market for consumption.
We will need all our machinery for many years because we have much public improvement to do. And further, the more use that we may make of them the less toil will be required for all of us to survive in splendor.
Now, a minimum earning would be established for any person with a family to support. It would be such an earning, on which one, already owning a home, could maintain a family in comfort, of not less that $2,500 per year to every family ....
General Johnson says that my proposal is for $5,000 guaranteed earnings to each family, which he says would cost from four to five hundred billions of dollars per year which, he says, is four times more than our whole national income ever has been. Why make such untrue statements, General Johnson? Must you be a false witness to argue your point?
I do not propose $5,000 to each family. I propose a minimum of from $2,000 to $2,500 to each family. For 25,000,000 families that minimum per family would require from $50,000,000,000 to $60,600,000,000.
In the prosperous days we have had nearly double that for income some years, which allowed plenty for the affluent; but with the unheard prosperity we would have, if all our people could buy what they need, our national income would be double what it has ever been.
The Wall Street writer and statistician says we could have an income of at least $10,000 to every family in goods if all worked short hours and none were idle. According to him, only one-fourth the average income would carry out my plan.
And now I come to the balance of the plan. We propose:
No. 4. That agricultural production will be cared for in the manner specified in the Bible. We would plow under no crops; we would burn no corn; we would spill no milk into the river; we would shoot no hogs; we would slaughter no cattle to be rotted. What we would do is this:
We would raise all the cotton that we could raise, all the corn that we could raise and everything else that we could raise. Let us say, for example, that we raised more cotton than we could use.
But here again I wish to surprise you when I say that if every one could buy all the towels, all the sheets, all the bedding, all the clothing, all the carpets, all the window curtains, all of everything they reasonably need, America would consume 20,000,000 bales of cotton per year without have to sell a bale to foreign countries.
The same would be true of the wheat crop, and of the corn crop, and of the meat crop. Whenever every one could buy the things they desire to eat, there would be no great excess in any of those food supplies.
But for the sake of argument, let us say, however, that there would be a surplus. And I hope there will be, because it will do the country good to have a big surplus. Let us take cotton as an example.
But for the sake of argument, let us say, however, that there would be a surplus. And I hope there will be, because it will do the country good to have a big surplus. Let us take cotton as an example.
Let us say that the United States will have a market for 10,000,000 bales of cotton, and that we raise 15,000,000 bales of cotton. We will store 5,000,000 bales in warehouses provided by the government. If the next year we raise 15,000,000 bales of cotton and only need 10,000,000 we will store another 5,000,000 bales of cotton, and the government will care for that.
When we reach the year when we have enough cotton to last for twelve or eighteen months we will plant no more cotton for that next year. The people who have their certificates of the government, which they can cash in for that year for the surplus, or if necessary, the government can pay for the whole 15,000,000 bales of cotton as it is produced every year, and when the year comes that we will raise no cotton we will not have the people idle and with nothing to do.
That is the year when, in the Cotton States, we will do our public improvement work that needs to be done so badly. We will care for the flood-control problems, we will expand the electric lines into rural areas; we will widen reads and build more roads, and if we have a little time left, some of us can go back and attend a school for a few months, and not only learn some things we have forgotten, but we can learn some things that they have found out about that they didn't know anything about when we were children.
Now the example of what we would do about cotton is the same policy we would follow about all other crops. This program would necessitate the building of large storage plants, both heated and cold storage warehouses, then if there were to come a year of famine there would be enough on hand to feed and clothe the people of the nation. It would be the part of good sense to keep a year or two of stock on hand all the time to provide for an emergency, maybe to provide for war or other calamity.
I give you the next step in our program:
No. 5. We will provide for old age pensions for those who reach the age of 60, and pay it to all those who have an income of less than $1,000 per year, or less than $10,000 in property or money.
This would relieve from the ranks of labor those persons who press down the price for the use of their flesh and blood.
Now, the person who reaches the age of 60 would already have the comforts of home as well as something else guaranteed by reason of the redistribution that had been made of things. They would be given enough more to give them a reasonably comfortable existence in their declining days.
However, such would not come from a sales tax or taxes placed upon the common run of people. It would be supported from the taxes levied on those with big incomes and the yearly tax that would be levied on big fortunes so that they would always be kept down to a few million dollars to any one person.
No. 6. We propose that the obligation which this country owes to the veterans of its wars, including the soldiers' bonus, and to care for those who have been either incapacitated or disabled, would be discharged without stint or unreasonable limit.
I have always supported each and every bill that has had to do with the payment of the bonus due to the ex-service men. I have always opposed reducing the allowances which they have been granted. It is an unfair thing for the country to begin its economy while big fortunes exist, by inflicting misery on those who have borne the burden of national defense.
Now, ladies and gentlemen, such is the share our wealth movement. What I have here stated to you will be found to be approved by the law of our Divine Maker. You will find it in the Book of Deuteronomy, from the twenty-fifth to the twenty-seventh chapters. You will find in it the writings of King Solomon. You wil find it in the teachings of Christ. You will find it in the words of our great teachers and statesmen of all countries and of all times. If you care to write to me for such proof, I shall be glad to furnish it to you free of expense by mail.
Will you not organize a share our wealth society in your community tonight or tomorrow to place this plan into law? You need it; you people need it. Write me, wire to me; get into this work with us if you believe we are right. Help to save humanity. Help to save this country. If you wish a copy of this speech or a copy of any other speech I have made, write me and it will be forwarded to you. You can reach me always in Washington D.C.
Ladies and Gentlemen: I am truly indebted to the National Broadcasting System by whom this time is contributed and to General Hugh Johnson for having provided the occasion and the opportunity for me to address you.
Our concept of government so far transcends the bigotry of race, of creed, of color and of profession to such an extent that through our forefathers we refrained from writing into the Constitution of the United States any impediment to disbar any citizen from engaging in the activities of good citizenship. I am compelled to rehearse this plain truth for your consideration because a demagogic utterance, by appealing to the thoughtlessness, to religious and to professional bigotry, has questioned it.
The money changers whom the priest drove from the temple of Jerusalem both my word and by physical force have marshaled their forces behind the leadership of a chocolate soldier for the purpose of driving the priest out of public affairs.
While always a priest I address you neither as the spokesman of the Catholic Church nor as the representative of its Catholic following. I speak to you as American to American.
The economic disaster which overwhelmed our nation proved beyond question that, independent of all racial or religious differences, there was common need for Catholic, Protestant, Jew and irreligionist to solve a common problem. Together did we not enjoy a common citizenship? Together did we not rejoice in the common appellation of Americans? Together have we not worried through the dark years of this depression? Thus, when through the inevitable sequence of events, a crisis has been reached in the development of our social well-being; when it became necessary to bridge the chasm that seperates this day of our economic affliction from the tomorrow of our hoped-for benediction, some one, irrespective of his catholicity or of his protestantism, or of his Jewish faith, was required to raise his voice, if for no other reason than to condemn those who , refusing to leave the land of sorrow, obstructed our passage to the land of prosperity. While it was and always will be impossible for me to divest myself of my Catholic priesthood, nevertheless, in accepting the dignities which my religion conferred upon me I sacrificed in no respect the rights identified with my citizenship. It is still my prerogative to vote. It is still my duty as a common citizen to engage in the common efforts for the preservation of the commonwealth as chaos clamors at our doors ....
While always a priest I carry to you the fundamental doctrines of social justice which are intended both for the religionist and irreligionist, for black and white, for laborer and farmer, for everyone who shares with me the citizenship in which I rejoice.
Therefore, away with that prostituted bigotry which at one time has been the poisoned rapier of arrant cowards and at another the butcher's cleaving axe wielded to destroy a national unity.
The object of the National Union for Social Justice is secure economic liberty for our people. So well is this truth known that the concentrators of wealth are resorting to musty methods long since in disrepute to preserve America for the plutocrats and to retain its quarreling citizens for their exploitation.
Our program, which is interested in restoring America to the Americans, can be accomplished peacefully only through a naitonal solidarity. Peacefully, I say, because I believe in the Prince of Peace and dare not disregard His warning that they who use the sword shall perish by it.
In the meantime, therefore, let the Tories of high finance learn from their prototype, George III. Let the unjust aggressors who for generations have mismanaged the economic affairs of our nation assume the entire responsibility for their Tory stubbornness. The laborer has not sabotaged our factories! The farmer has not created a man-made scarcity of food! The 80,000,000 cry babies have not concentrated our wealth! These people, played upon by paid-for propaganda did not hurl us into the seething maelstrom of a bloody war.
These cry babies - 80,000,000 of them so confessed- were not responsible for the concentration of wealth in the hands of a few and for the destruction of small industry. They did not force 22,000,000 hungry men and women to stand in a bread line nor with the lash of poverty did they drive 11,000,000 laborers into idleness and insecurity.
I am characterized as a revolutionary for raising my voice against these palpable injustices, while the blind Bourbons cannot see the writing on the wall nor read the pages of history written in crimson pens which were dipped into the bleeding hearts at Concord, Lexington and Valley Forge.
In 1776 Washington and Jefferson and their compatriots had hurled at them the vile epithet of revolutionary. Their lands had been overtaxed. Their laborers and farmers, had been exploited. Their liberties had been denied. Their right to free speech and to petition had been scoffed at. They, too, were called revolutionary.
Today, when the rights to life, to liberty and to the pursuit of happiness have been obstructed by an economic system of high finance far more vicious in its implications and results than were the unjust political aggressions of a George III, they who protest against them are classified and indexed with the patriots of 1776,
This, indeed, is a high compliment inadvertently paid by the New Deal's greatest casualty, General Hugh Johnson, who never faced an enemy nor successfully faced an issue.
Today he and the Wall Streeters whom he represents become distorters of history, perverters of logic as they, the unjust aggressors garb themselves in the raiment of patriotism and cast scorn on those who have offered from their misdeeds the scarlet cloak of the rebel. ...
My dear General Johnson, I am not important nor are you. But the doctrines which I preach are important. While you were content to vomit your venom upon my person and against my character, the American public is fully cognizant that not once did you dare attack the truths which I teach. I need not condemn you before the court of public opinion. You have condemned yourself. More than that, you have appeared before a jury fo 80,000,000 people - your own figures - who through your lack of Christian charity and justice are today prejudiced against you.
Those "cry babies" whose tears have welled to their eyes because you and your kind have lashed them at the pillar of poverty; these brothers and sisters of Chris whom you and your masters have crowned with thorns of worry and insecurity; these sterling American citizens whom you first fastened to the cross of hunger and nakedness and then pierced their hearts with with spear of exploitation - these inarticulate people for whom I speak will never forget you and your Wall Streeters.
These people, so you have intimated, are rats being led by the Pied Piper. Must that be the metaphor which you employ to describe the wreckage which your kind has created?
My friends, I appeal to your charity, to your good judgement, to your sense of social justice to bear no ill will against General Johnson. Your intelligence informs you that he is but a faithful obedient servant willing to express in his own grotesque manner the thoughts which are harbored in the mind of his master.
Today he appears before us a figure to be pitied and not condemned. He has been cast out of an Administration because he and his plans were failures. Thus, as he appears before you on future occasions remember that he is regarded as a cracked gramaphone record squawking the message of his master's voice.
My dear general, if I am constrained from indicting your person, it is simply because you are the first great casualty of the New Deal experimentation. Whether you know it or not, you are but a political corpse whose gohst has returned to haunt us. Although I believe that your unique spirit will not rest in peace, nevertheless, I still believe in that ehtical axiom - Of the dead let us speak kindly.
When real soldiers come forth to fight, having facts for targets and truths for ammunition, I shall oppose them with the most forceful weapons which my wits command, but never shall I adopt dishonest tactics or dishonest warfare. I shall draw my reasons from that school of militancy presided over by Jesus Christ, who 1900 years ago, refrained not from attacking in scathing terms the scribes and pharisees. "Woe to you scribes and pharisees, hypocrits, because you devour the houses of widows, praying long prayers. For this you shall receive the greater judgement. For you bind heavy and insupportable burdens and lay them on men's shoulders; but with a finger of your own you will not move them."
Yes, General Johnson, Christ is accused of stirring class against class by the Voltaires, the Rousseaus, the Louis XVI's, and the atheists of all times. But there are times when certain classes must be forcefully reminded that there is such a thing as Christian charity which bids us love our neighbors as ourselves, and that warns us that whatsoever we do, even to the least, we do to Christ. That is what the Pharisees refused to learn. That is what their descendants in Wall Street refuse to accept as they continue to devour the houses of widows and tax our citizenry into slavery and idleness.
Remembering the method of attack employed by Christ's Precursor, John the Baptist, I will dare confront the Herods by name and by fact even though my head be served on a golden platter, even though my body be sawed in twain as was that of the prophet Isaias for having scorned into disrepute a prince named Manasses.
Today there is another Manasses, your lord and master, General Johnson. I refer to Bernard Manasses Baruch, whose full name has seldom been mentioned, but which name from this day forth shall not be forgotten. This was the name his parents gave him, the name Manasses. This is the name, General Johnson, of your price of high finance.
Him with the Rothschilds in Europe, the Lazzere in France, the Warburgs, the Kuhn-Loebs, the Morgans and the rest of that wrecking crew of internationalists whose God is gold and whose emblem is the red shiedl of exploitation - these men I shall oppose until my dying days even though the Bernard Manasses Baruch of Wall Street is successful in doing to me what the price after whom he was named accomplished doing to Isias.
I am well apprised of the fact that your own vociferous volubility, which you characterized last Monday as "howling," is but the opening gun in a well organized attack against me. I fear it not because I am protected by the moral support of the "cry babies" and the "rats" whom you have forced into the ranks of the National Union for Social Justice. Therefore, I shall doubly bend my efforts to the task of handing back America to the Americans and of rescuing our beloved country from the hands of internationalists.
There are two remaining charges which you made against me. I rejoice in this opportunity to answer them. The first respects money. You said that my plan is "to make money out of nothing, which would therefore make it worth nothing." At least you admit that I have a plan. I need not inform this audience that since 1930 and long before it I had a plan to establish social justice. Long before you or the financial puppet-masters who are expert in manipulating the strings of Punch and Judy oratory became prominent in the desperate struggle for economic independence I was associated with pioneers who were protesting against the profitless labor of our farmers and against the slavery of modern mass productionisim.
Where were you in 1930 and 1931 while we were advocating New Deal on Sundays and feeding thousands in the bread line on Mondays, made necessary by the cold-blooded individualism of an ancient economic system?
Where were you in 1932 when our same group was advocating the election of Franklin D. Roosevelt and the birth of the New Deal long before Franklin D. Roosevelt was even nominated for the Presidency.
Where were you in 1933 and 1934 when our beloved leader, consecrated to drive the money changers out of the temple, was hampered and impeded by your master, Bernard Manasses Baruch, the acting president of the United States, the uncrowned prince of Wall Street?
I say this in no disparagement because every one appreciates that you are nothing more than his man Friday. With Bernard Manasses Baruch's plan in your pocket to regiment industry, to destroy competition, to institute a wage system designated to share poverty, to create monopolies and eliminate small industries - you strutted upon the state of this depression like a comic opera general. You organized a comic opera parade on the streets of New York.
Why, General, before your name and underslung vocabulary became household words in this nation, the pioneer associates of mine had been fighting in the front trenches against the enemies of the New Deal, bearing its heaviest burdens, carrying its heaviest crosses.
And no you accuse me of planning to make money out of nothing. But let us become more specific. The man who put this thought into your mouth is nothing but a thief yelling "Stop, thief." Bear with me, General, as I refresh the memory of this audience on the nature of money and how it is manufactured out of nothing by your masters.
1 - As you confess, money i merely the medium of trade. It is not wealth; it is only the transportation system, as it were, by which wealth is carried from one person to another.
2 - For more than 100 years the people of this nation have permitted a small group of men to possess the privilege of making money and thereby of controlling the flow of wealth. Many of us began to believe that money was the real wealth instead of the trick, as it were, whose only reason for existence is to carry the precious freight of food, clothing, of shelter of human beings and their labor from one point to another - from the producer to the consumer.
There are many kinds of transportation, such as the railway, the truck, the steamboat. There are three kinds of capitalistic money, all monopolized for use by the banker - metal, paper currency and credit. In round figures, there are $9,000,000,000 of idle metal in the Treasury, $5,500,000,000 of paper currency throughout the nation and at least $250,000,000 of credit or of debt money, such as mortgages, loans, bonds, etc. Credit money or pen and ink plus checkbook money is really the major portion of all our money by 90 percent. Credit money is checkbook money.
3 - How is this checkbook money created in this nation? First, a group of wealthy men petition the government for a bank charter, or, in other words, for the right to counterfeit legally.
4 - These men deposit, for example, $100,000 with the Treasury. In return the Treasury gives them $100,000 worth of interest-baring bonds which are kept at Washington as security. But the interest accumulating on the bonds belongs to these new bankers.
5 - These men return to their home town after they have the government print for the, at scarcely no cost, $100,000 worth of paper dollars, which they deposit in their new bank.
6 - John Smith comes to these bankers for a loan of $10,000, which he obtains at 6 percent on depositing as security the deed for this $20,000 farm.
7- Then the banker gives John a checkbook - no actual cash, mind you - and immediately writes on his own books that $10,000 has been deposited, whereas in truth it was simply loaned.
8 - Fifty, eighty, one hundred John Smiths go through the same process until the bank which started with only $100,000 of printed money has loaned $1,000,000 at 6 per cent. That was their urle, to lend ten times what they actually had. Therefore, the first year in business netted the bank $60,000 interest profit on investment of $100,000 which all this time was bearing interest for them through the bonds which they deposited originally at Washington at 4 per cent.
9 - Of course, Jim Jones and 1,000 other neighbors of Jim Jones placed their savings in the town bank. They thought that this money was safe and that the bank would surrender it on demand. But Jim did not read the fine print in his bankbook. Had he done so, he would have discovered that he had actually loaned his money to the bankers; that he had become a creditor and therefore, had to take his chance of getting his money back with all the other creditors and patrons of the bank.
10 - Meanwhile, from the bankers bank, the Federal Reserve Bank, word went out that too much money had been loaned by his fellow bankers. It was time to call in the loans. It was time to cut down on credit. Thus Henry Doe, the manufacturer, John Smith the farmer, and Peter Adams, the merchant, all of whom borrowed from the bank, were ordered to pay back in currency money, mind you, what they had obtained in checkbook money. Simultaneously, this happened all over the nation. Ten, twenty, thirty billion dollares of loans were called. There were only $5,000,000,000 of currency money in existence. It was an impossible situation. Therefore a depression arose. The deeds and mortgages were claimed by the bankers and homes and farms and industries were confiscated by him because there was no currency money.
11 - Did the banker close up shop? He did not. At least the big banker did not. They liquidated the homes and farms and industries which they confiscated when the borrowers had no currency money to save them. They sold them for what they could obtain on depressed market. Then the turned around with this new fresh currency money and bought governmet bonds at 4 per cent or less.
12 - Meanwhile, bread lines were established. Unemployment was rife. Poverty stalked through the nation. Of necessity the government must obtain money to feed the poor and must undertake public works to slavage the unemployed. Therefore it borrowed $8,000,000,000 from the bankers who, playing their game even in the face of national distress, loaned the government a fat checkbook and perhaps for good measure a bottle of ink and a fountain pen. Still there were only $5,000,000,000 of actual currency in the nation. But, through a banker's magic and gambler's instinct, they loaded the $8,999,999,999 because they knew that in eighteen years hence, $6,000,000,000 in interest would be returned by the government for the privilege of using a banker's check book - $14,000,000,000 in all.
There, General is the true story of how money is made out of nothing. Can you or any Wall Streeter controvert this?
To this process of manufacturing money I have been opposed simply because our Constitution says that it is the right of Congress to coin and regulate the value of money. In the year 1694 this right still belonged to the British people and to their Parliament but, when threatened by invasions, the merchants and goldsmiths of London forced Parliament to surrender this right to them. This was the price of their patriotism. This ewas the birthday of the privately-owned bank of England.
During the days of our Civil War, when Arbaham Lincoln was engaged in realizing a dream that was born in the crib of Bethlehem, he needed gold to purchase arms and ammunition. In that day, the international bankers were willing to loan gold to Lincoln on the one condition that he would abrogate and cancel Article i, Section VIII, Clause V of our Constitution, which says Congress has the right to coin and regulate the value of money. This right they themselves coveted; this right they themselves demanded.
From that day forward until 1913, when the Federal Reserve Banking system was created - a system owned by a group of your masters and not by the people the American people, as many in this audience formerly believed - from that day forward the economic destinies of our country have been controlled by these private central bankers who extended and contracted credit at will.
Because I have, in season and out of season, demanded that we Americans go back to the Constitution and restore to Congress its right and duty to coin and regulate the value of money you have assailed me and in doing so have stultified yourself.
When did I ever propose to make money out of nothing? I have pointed to $9,000,000,000 of idle gold and silver sterilized in the vaults of our Treasury. I have questioned time after time the wisdom on the part of our government running to the Federal Reserve Bank for dollars created for public works activities, with the understanding that the bankers would be repaid either with good currency, at interest, or else the security of the United States could be confiscated by them.
I have advocated that the government employ this idle gold and silver instead of building up unpayable debts to be shouldered by the unborn children of future generations. You and your group have been the inflationists, the makers of money out of nothing. But mindful of the Federal Reserve act, which was passed in 1913, and which permits 2 ½ currency dollars to be printed against each gold dollar, mindful that we have only $5,250,000,000 paper dollars in the country and over $9,000,000,000 of gold and silver in the Treasury, I have asked and I still ask why we do not employ it for the welfare of the American people instead of utilizing the bankers' ,manufactured money for the welfare of the Warburgs, the Rothschilds, the Kuhn-Loebs, the Morgans, and your own master, Bernard Manasses Baruch? ...
The real enemies who are boring from within have been you and your group of Wall Streeters, of international bankers. Who have been the President's advisers over a period of two years? Not the farmer or the laborer, not the National Union for Social Justice, not his close and disinterested friends. Surely they were not responsible for 11,000,000,000 men who are still unemployed, for 22,000,000 persons who are still in the breadlines, for our national debt which has risen to the unscalable heights of $34,000,000,000. If our people are growing disheartened it is not because they have lost faith in Franklin D. Roosevelt, but because they are rising in their wrath against you and your group who have surrounded him.
It was Bernard Manasses Baruch and the international bankers who whispered into his perterbed ears the philosophy of destruction, the sophistry of social reforms and politics, all of which have prevented a magnificent leader from rescuing a nation still bound to the rock of depression by the chains of economic slavery. Did they not, in season and out of season, obstruct him from diriving the money changers from the temple?
My friends in this audience, I still proclaim to you that it is either Roosevelt or ruin. I support him today and will support him tomorrow, because we are neither going back to the individualism of the past nor are we going forward to the communism of the future. But I am not that type of false friend who, mangling the very meaning of the word, praise policies when criticism is required or betray millions of supporters throughout the naiton by preaching to them the prostituted slogan of "peace, meace," when there is not peace. . . .