speeches · April 6, 1941
Speech
Chester C. Davis · Governor
AMERICA ,IN A WORLD AT WAR
Address by Chester C. Davis, Member, National Defense
Advisory Commission, at the Army Day Celebration, under
the auspices of the St. Louis Chapter, Military Order
of the World War, and the St. Louis Chamber of Commerce,
Monday, April 7, 1941, at the Coronado Hotel, St. Louis,
Missouri.
I do not know what gift of foresight or understanding it was
that inspired the leaders of the Military Order of the World War who
founded Amy Day. Their action was particularly remarkable because of
v frhq t.imfts during which it was taken. The year 1928 witnessed the first
formal observance of Army Day. That year also marked the approximate
center of two decades during which the thought of the United States
was of peace, not war; when every suggestion of planning or prepara
tion for war stood hopelessly discredited.
I think that point will bear elaboration. An eminent con
temporary authority wrote: "The year 1928 saw more practical progress
toward the elimination of war as a factor in international relations
than had ever before been made." In August of that year the Kellogg-
Briand Peace Treaty calling for the renunciation of war was signed at
Paris by fifteen world powers. These high contracting parties solemn
ly declared "in the names of their respective peoples that they con
demn recourse to war for the solution of international controversies
and renounce it as an instrument of national policy in their relations
with one another." In January of the year following, the United States
Senate ratified the peace pact by a vote of 85 to 1. In July the
treaty was proclaimed at Paris with 62 nations as adherents.
Digitized for FRASER
http://fraser.stlouisfed.org/
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
-2-
So I say it is indeed remarkable that a group of men, in a
year that marked the apex of our blind trust in international good
will, successfully dramatized a gesture of respectful attention to
the Army of the United States. I pay tribute to those leaders of the
Military Order of the World Vvar through their representatives here to
night. Their instincts v/ere timer or they saw the world more clearly
than did most of us.
It is essential that we take this background into account in
attempting to appraise the position of the United States on the inter
national scene today. We meet tonight on the 24th anniversary of the
day on which the United States entered "the war to end all wars."
Twenty years ago this Nation turned its back upon Europe and its dif
ficulties in what appeared to be resolute renunciation of any re
sponsibility for what happened there in the future. We withdrew from
Europe and all her works at a time when our staying in might have al
tered the history of the world; when farsighted leadership rising above
the hatreds of the World War might have resulted in progressive adjust
ments which would have rendered Hitler impossible and might have averted
the present world catastrophe.
I do not say that this is so. What might have happened had
our course been other than it was lies in a field of speculation where
no man can be positive or dogmatic. This much, however, we now know -
those superficial gestures of peace, overlaid upon seething pressure
against the restrictions and rigidities of the post-war order, were
meaningless and non-realistic.
Digitized for FRASER
http://fraser.stlouisfed.org/
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
-3-
During those two decades we, as a people, were certain of
many things. But hindsight is an humbling teacher - we now can see
that we knew too many things that weren't true. We lived in a world
that we now realize did not exist at all.
Since then, one by one, the foundation stones of our think
ing in international affairs have crumbled. One of the last to go was
our conviction that a nation which minded its own business and respect
ed the rights of its neighbors would be left free to develop and enjoy
its own way of life unmolested.
That rule hasn’t worked in Europe or Asia. Few can be found
who are certain that it will work here. The rule of ruthless force
and power which replaced it is being exercised throughout the world.
There is no limit to the application of the new rale except the limit
imposed by fear of another and a greater force.
This then is the lesson current history teaches the United
States: wealth and resources, mountains cf gold and millions of acres
of factories are not power in the equation that is known over three-
quarters of the world today. They can be organized into power; until
then they are nothing but bait.
We can honestly disagree over the early likelihood of seri
ous war being launched against the United States at home from either
Europe or Asia; but we cannot disagree with the proposition that the
likelihood recedes as our armament advances.
This is a new concept for many of us. It calls for the ad
justment of individual lives to national effort on a scale we have
Digitized for FRASER
http://fraser.stlouisfed.org/
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
-4-
never before dreamed of. A colossal horror is astride the world com
pared with which our individual problems and troubles become petty.
Its swift growth did more than blot out the peaceful Scandinavian de
mocracies and the well-ordered life of the Low Countries. It inevi
tably has changed the pattern of our own existence now and for the
future. The stark fact stands out that we are an important part of a
world which is at war. We are holding cards in a game in which our
whole industrial and agricultural, life is involved.
The nature of war has changed. Before Napoleon, wars were
fought by relatively small and usually professional armies as a side
issue while life and business in a country at war went on pretty much
as usual. Beginning with the Napoleonic Wars this easy-going concep
tion of limited professionalized conflict began to change. Each suc
cessive war has witnessed a greater concentration of the human and
material resources of the belligerents back of the army and navy. But
it remained for Germany during the decade of the Twenties to evolve
and during the Thirties to effect the idea of total mobilization for
total war.
Let us stop for a moment and reflect on what this thing
called "total war" means. It means that no dividing line exists be
tween military operations in the field and civilian life behind the
lines. It establishes one national goal and one goal only - that of
victory. It is prepared to sacrifice everything that does not con
tribute to that objective. It assumes that the modern army is no
stronger than the industry which equips it with the complex machinery
Digitized for FRASER
http://fraser.stlouisfed.org/
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
-5-
of modern conflict, or than the farms which feed it. It places all of
these on a war footing. It subjects management, labor and farmers to
military discipline - and military rations. I suppose it is logical,
therefore, that modern war considers the civil population just as fair
game for military attack as soldiers in the trenches.
There is much in the idea of total war which Americans uncon
ditionally reject. Total war as the dictator states define it means
the complete and utter sacrifice of individual freedom and individual
rights. But the preservation of the right of the individual to think,
speak and worship as he chooses is the heart of the principle this
Nation is arming to defend. We have the same task as the dictator na
tions of welding our economy to the building of defense machinery. We
are challenged therefore to demonstrate that we can make full use of
our manpower and our material resources and at the same time preserve
the essential rights of the individual and the institutions which we
value.
I believe we can do this job and do it as a democracy. We
can organize and execute an armament program beyond anything the world
has ever seen in any country and preserve the essentials of our freedom
for posterity to enjoy. But we cannot do it without sacrifice and we
cannot do it without changing our viewpoint on many things. Let me men
tion some of them.
Industrial management must expand capacity to produce essen
tial materials for defense and civilian requirements notvrithstanding
Digitized for FRASER
http://fraser.stlouisfed.org/
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
its quite understandable apprehension over the peacetime use of the
new facilities.
Labor must supply the manpower which this effort requires,
and do it without contributing substantially to the vicious spiral of
rising wages, costs, profits and prices which could work deadly im
pairment of national efficiency in the job at hand.
Both industrial management and the leaders of organized la
bor must be prevented from taking advantage of this national crisis as
an opportunity to tiy to increase their comparative advantages one over
the other. The Nation must not and will not permit their disputes to
stop the vital floxv of production.
If we are to do this job well and to preserve the basis for
our future freedom, no participant in production can be permitted to
enrich hiraself as a result of this national effort and the expenditures
that go into it. If we make extraordinary profits, we must expect to
turn them back to the Government through taxation. We must expect to
divert our savings by whatever extent is required to the financing of
this program.
This whole subject is too vast and the time is too short to
treat it adequately. I can only hope in this talk to throw a flash
light over the scene and perhaps illuminate for a moment some of the
aspects that have interested me particularly.
In the remainder of njy time I want to talk briefly about
three things: first, the problem of the location of our defense indus
tries so as to make full use of our labor and physical resources where
Digitized for FRASER
http://fraser.stlouisfed.org/
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
-7-
they are; next, the effort that is being made to spread throughout the
country the work arising from defense contracts which in the first in
stance are concentrated in the hands of the very few; and finally, some
principles that arise in connection with financing our international
effort.
When the National Defense Advisory Commission was organized
last summer, I expressed the view that new industries required under
the defense program should not be located in areas where existing in
dustries essential to defense are now concentrated when there was any
possibility of placing them elsewhere without sacrifice of speed and
efficiency. It was clear that this was the only way in which new res
ervoirs of unemployed labor and resources would be tapped without up
rooting families and shifting them thousands of miles into coiiimunities
where ebbing of the armament effort would leave them stranded.
The plans for war production which had been made prior to the
emergency were not based on such a principle. In carrying out the pro
gram up to date some progress toward decentralization has been made but
I am afraid that on the whole we have followed the same pattern of re
gional concentration that was followed in 1917 and 1918* Then we handi
capped our effort by shortages of labor and transport and left an
aftermath of over-concentrated industiy. I am afraid that we will again
reap some of the same harvest of economic and social consequences.
New facilities and new production are now being authorized
for the United States and for aid to England. I am hopeful that the
Digitized for FRASER
http://fraser.stlouisfed.org/
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
-3-
arnied services and the defense authorities will do a better job with
these than has been done heretofore. I do not mean that the plants
and facilities that have already been located will not produce effi
ciently the materials and the implements they are designed to turn
out. a "better job" I mean that the additional units yet to come
will be located where they can tap resources of materials, facilities
and men heretofore untouched.
On the human side and to minimize the aftermath, it is im
portant that we avoid so far as possible drawing men from the moun
tains and the prairie, from farms and interior cities and towns to
crowd them into industrial centers hundreds of miles away. It is
far better to leave as many as possible on farms and in the villages
but give those with low incomes opportunities for employment in in
dustry. This would lessen the immediate need for housing and provide
a measure of security when the emergency has passed.
That the location of defense plants up to date has in many
respects been unsatisfactorily done from the standpoint of industrial
decentralization is not due to any lack of interest or sympathy on
the part of the Arngr or the Navy or the National Defense authorities.
The trouble lies in the lack of planning for this national crisis.
That is not surprising. For twenty-two years the business of the United
States has been peace, not war. Now the whip of speed has forced de
cisions which might have been avoided if this country had had an under
standing of what lay ahead, and the organization to make its survey and
its plans in advance.
Digitized for FRASER
http://fraser.stlouisfed.org/
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
-9-
My experience with plant locations on the Defense Commission
has convinced me of one thing - as a nation we had never planned for a
national job of these dimensions. The very organization of the Array,
itself, had been based upon conceptions of warfare that were shown to
be obsolete by the blitzkriegs of less than a year ago.
Modern warfare is no longer only a question of numbers of
men and numbers of guns. It is also, to an ever-increasing extent, a
question of industrial organization, of technical and scientific skill.
Private industry naturally develops on lines applicable to present-day
manufacturing and commerce that do not necessarily meet the needs of
modern armament. The Array at its arsenals has carried on limited ex
perimental work in peacetime devoted mainly to the old type of vra.rfa.re.
There is an ever-widening gap between them which needs to be filled.
Humbly, as a layman, I risk the suggestion that to direct this work the
Arri^ needs within its own organization a large number of the best men
who can be drawn from civilian life into its service, a strong and per
manent body of technically-trained men who know the problems that have
arisen in this new kind of warfare even though they haven't been trained
to direct men to march and shoot. I believe provision should be made
now and never abandoned for such a dignified career branch of the Army
with adequate rank and compensation to work in advance on problems of
this character so that the country need not again be caught with in
adequate plans.
Speaking to the Southern Governors at New Orleans a few weeks
ago I made reference to the fact that out of 11-1/2 billions of prime
Digitized for FRASER
http://fraser.stlouisfed.org/
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
-10-
contracts for war materials awarded between June 13 of last year and
February 15 of this year 80 per cent had gone to 62 companies or in-
I
terrelated groups of companies; between and 45 per cent had gone
to 6 closely interconnected groups; and between one-fifth and one-
quarter had gone to two groups of companies of closely connected own
ership.
These are the companies that were best equipped with expe
rience and management to attempt the different phases of the colossal
job we have on hand. But the defense authorities clearly recognize
that if the manpower and the facilities of the country are to be
brought fully to bear on the job of production, the corporations and
firms holding these prime contracts must spread the task of production
through subcontracts as widely as possible over the land. As most of
you know, an organization is being perfected under the direction of the
Office of Production Management through which the Army and the Navy and
the other defense authorities are going to try to do an effective job
of spreading the work covered by these contracts. This is going to re
quire a lot of attention and a lot of work from all of us. In one way
or another the end must be accomplished.
I have stressed the fact that our primary problem is the im
mediate mobilisation of our physical resources and manpower for the
maximum production of the things necessary for our own defense and to
aid the democracies that are resisting aggression. The subsidiary
problem is to mobilize our dollars to meet the huge costs of these ef
forts. I say "subsidiary" because it is easy for the financial community
Digitized for FRASER
http://fraser.stlouisfed.org/
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
-11-
to over-emphasize the financial aspects of' the program.
There need be no serious difficulty in raising the funds
that are needed and I hope there will be none. All classes of our
population are anxious and willing to bear their fair share of the
financial burden with the same spirit of sacrifice and patriotism
displayed by those who have entered the armed services.
The program will be financed partly by funds raised by tax
ation and partly by funds that are borrowed. These two methods should
be looked at together; they are parts of the same problem. In each,
from the standpoint of our general welfare, there are good ways and
there are bad ways of raising the required money.
The methods that are chosen should be such as will restrain
tendencies toward inflation now; and they should contribute toward the
continued full use of our labor and resources when the time comes that
our defense expenditures may be curtailed.
It is possible to pay much, perhaps far more than we think,
of our defense costs by taxing as we go. I believe thinking people
everywhere have applauded the announcement by the Secretary of the
Treasury that he will strive for a program that will raise through cur
rent taxation a very high proportion of our defense expenditures.
The choice of methods of additional taxation is enormously
important from the standpoint of economic consequences. If we are vail
ing to act courageously, much can still be done to increase income tax
revenue by increasing rates and by spreading the base to reach new and
numerous income groups. These changes can be made without departing from
Digitized for FRASER
http://fraser.stlouisfed.org/
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
-12-
the principle of the ability to pay. It seems to me that it is impor
tant to avoid heavy consumption and sales taxes at this time. The
country may have to come to them when it approaches a condition of
full employment, but the general sales tax is an inflexible and not a
selective way to raise money. It hits consumption that should be ex
panded as well as that which should be contracted. Another trouble,
it may be difficult to modify or get rid of consumer taxes in the post
defense period when it becomes desirable to expand rather than contract
consumption.
Notwithstanding all that may be done to meet defense costs
through taxation, a great deal of new borrowing is going to be neces
sary. The lag in tax collections would require heavy borrowing for the
immediate future even if theoretically we could levy taxes heavy enough
to pay all defense costs. Here, too, there are right ways and wrong
ways to raise money. The borrowing should be in such form as to reach
and attract savings of individuals ......... '' ' .ould discour-
age so far as possible further loa by commercial banks
The Secretary of the Treasury has announced the new program
of savings issues carefully devised to appeal to practically all levels
of income and occupation. These new securities are ideal to meet the
general objectives I have mentioned for the borrowing program. I am
sure that the country will respond whole-heartedly to these offerings
and that the people of the Eighth Federal Reserve District will be in
the forefront when the lines form.
Digitized for FRASER
http://fraser.stlouisfed.org/
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
-13-
In conclusion, I wish, with your permission, to turn to a
more personal note. I meet you tonight as one who hopes to sink his
roots in the rich soil of the Mississippi Valley and stay. While I
have never before established ray residence in what is known as the
Eighth Federal Reserve District, I have always — except ior ifljy tempo
rary sojourn in Washington - lived on the rivers whose waters flow
past your door. This is the heart of the agrarian economy ox the
United States. Almost any agricultural product can be grown and nearly
every agricultural problem can be found within its boundaries. It is
a privilege to be asked to share in the promising future which its soil,
its climate, its mineral and transportation resources, and ito splendid
people combine to guarantee.
In the critical times that are ahead of us there are tasks
which everyone of us can help to do. I am glad I aiu going to have the
- opportunity to work with you in meeting them.
Digitized for FRASER
http://fraser.stlouisfed.org/
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
Cite this document
APA
Chester C. Davis (1941, April 6). Speech. Speeches, Federal Reserve. https://whenthefedspeaks.com/doc/speech_19410407_davis
BibTeX
@misc{wtfs_speech_19410407_davis,
author = {Chester C. Davis},
title = {Speech},
year = {1941},
month = {Apr},
howpublished = {Speeches, Federal Reserve},
url = {https://whenthefedspeaks.com/doc/speech_19410407_davis},
note = {Retrieved via When the Fed Speaks corpus}
}