Correspondence

• 1916 May 16 (Creation)

2 pages

R.F. Pettigrew writes H.L. Loucks concerning Loucks' manuscripts and articles, pointing out the pros and cons of both. Pettigrew mentions his decision to vote for the Socialists as well as the idea of building up a Socialist party. Pettigrew also states that he does not wish to help Loucks start a new party but will always be available to discuss questions of further importance.

TRANSCRIPT

Cable Address:
“Auditorium.”
Auditorium Hotel
Michigan Boulevard and Congress Street
J. J. Calvey,
Manager
Chicago, May 16, 1916

Mr. H. L. Loucks,

Watertown, S. D.

My dear friend:-

Your letter of May 4 duly received and was forwarded to me. I have been away from home since the second of May and have just had time to sit down and read the manuscript that you have sent me; also your letter of May 4. I return the manuscript because you say you want to send it to Watson. I have had the article on the Unit and Standard of Value copied, because I want to study it over. I read your article on Rural Credit with very much interest. Also your article with regard to Usury, and your article about the banks consenting to be controlled.

Of course your chapter on Legislation since the Civil War and during the Civil War has been one record of infamy by which the American people have surrendered to a gang of gambling thieves-the so-called great bankers in New York, step by step the control of their money and their credit until this last currency law, which is the most infamous of all.

The remedy is not to correct abuses, but to revolutionize the whole system. The issue of money and banking is a public utility and should be controlled and operated by the Government itself, the same as the highways of a nation, but in the past and as at present these two great public concerns have been turned over to be used by the greedy and corrupt to exploit the American people. The remedy is not rural credit or reform of any sort, but absolute revolution if we would rescue the American people from being plundered of the products of their toil.

Of course the two old political parties are just alike—there is not a particle of difference between them. They are both engaged in humbugging the people and serving the interest of the financiers, the railroads and the trusts. I don’t know what the remedy is, but I know that you cannot organize a new political party and make any headway whatever, and, therefore, I am going to join the Socialists or, rather, vote the Socialist ticket. I think it might be possible to build up a socialist party so that it would have the balance of power between the two old parties, and thus be able to dictate terms or to compel the two old parties to unite publicly and stop their sham battle. I don’t care to join with you in a call for any convention to organize a new party, but, of course, I will be very glad to attend a meeting of the people anywhere to discuss these great and important questions.

I cannot furnish any money at present to publish your articles, although I want them published; but I can send you my note, due in six months, and if you can raise money on it at the Watertown Bank, all right.

I expect to be home next week early and perhaps you can find time to run down to Sioux Falls and have a talk. I wish I had time to go over your Standard of Value paper with more care, but, as I have copied it, I may get time to review it.

Yours truly,

R. F. Pettigrew

• Progressivism (United States politics)
• South Dakota -- Politics and government

• Loucks, Henry L. (Henry Langford) 1846-1928 (Subject)
• Pettigrew, Richard F. (Richard Franklin) 1848-1926 (Subject)

• Letters
• Correspondence