Evening star., 1934-06-03
BY MARK SULLIVAN.


been looking for a compact
l. y statement of the reasons for
opposing it, a declaration of
basic principles to serve as a con-
trast. something to make the issue
clear and give the people opportunity
to choose between two contrasting
PHILOSOPHERS. Scores of persons and
organizations have been grouping to-
ward some such platform. Most Of
those making the effort are in the
world of politics. or of thought about
Government and public affairs.
At a time when these have been
unsuccessfully busy, it is interesting
and significant that an adequate,
partial statement of the fundamental
principle opposed to the new deal
should come from the world of
physics, from Dr. Robert A. Millikan,
Nobel prize winner and head of the
California Institute Of Technology.
DR.. Millikan had been asked to say
something appropriate to the Century
OF Progress Exposition at Chicago,
something for q conference which
was considering "preview of indus
trial progress in the next century"
DR.. Millikan said:
The progress of civilization con-
sists merely in the multiplication and
refinement of human wants Leave
the human spirit free for the develop
ment of science and education, and
no bounds can be set to the possible
fullness of the life of the average
citizen of the United States in the
coming century. But destroy the
freedom Of that spirit either by the
blight Of another World War or by
the more invidious blight of what
Herbert Spencer called the coming
slavery-too much statism-and the
dream may be SPOILED"
Free the Human Spirit.
In that brief, compact thought from
great scholar are at least four
phrases which belong not exclusively
in the world of philosophy, but
equally in the world of present-day
politics.
DR.. Millikin's 'fullnesS Of the life
OF the average citizen" can be COM
pared with the new deal slogan "a
fuller life" sometimes expressed as
the more abundant life" Perhaps I
should say the two phrases should be
contrasted, rather than compared.
While the words are similar, the
meanings are opposed. The new deal
ers would achieve the more abund-
ant life" by repression of individual
ism; DR.. Millikan says the "fuIlness
OF the life of the average citizen" is
70 be attained by leaving the human
spirit free"
IN the same contrasting manner the
new dealers work toward a greater
statlsm,' while DR. Millikan and also
Herbert Spencer say that "statisn" is
the coming slavery" Again, the new
dealers wish to repress that indiytd-
uallSm which, through various meth
ods OF expansion, including advertis-
ing, would multiply human wants and
multiply the ways of supplying them
Dr. Mllllkan on the other hand saws
the progress of civilization consist:
precisely ''in the multiplication Of
human wants"
In short, if DR.. Mfllikan is right
then the new deal is a reversion OF
progress, perversion of civilization
| In attempting to explain some Of
the fundamental principles underiyins
The new deal philosophy, one feels like
exclalming believe it or not" The
great difficulty about making the new
deal understandable to the public is
the natural hesitancy of everybody Il
believe the incredible. Yet the incred.
ible is just what is happening.
/ In several codes of N. r. A is a pro-
vision which makes it a crime for q
new man to start in the industry GOV.
cred by the code, or for one already ir
the industry to expand his plant. How
many of the codes contain this pro.
vision do not know. There are hun.
dredS Of codes and I doubt if any one
person has carefully surveyed all o.
them-I am pretty sure that not ever
Gen. Johnson has. But am informed
| by one who has examined several o.
the codes that at least four of them
the textile code. the lumber code, thu
glass manufacturing code and tn,
carbon-black code-contain provision
to this effect; no person in the in
dustry shall enlarge his plant withou
! getting the consent of the cod
authority. which means getting th'
consent both of the Government anc
Of all those already in the industry
If a cotton manufacturer, for example
adds one additional loom to his plan
he is guilty of a misdemeanor. sub
| ject to summons to the crimina
| courts, and punishable by fine. Th'
provision applies also. of course. t.
persons not now in the industry. ANY
individual trying to break in" whit
should set up new plant or even ont
loom, would be subject to the same
provision of the code.
To Protect Business.
This idea did not come solely from
| the new dealers. 1t comes in large
part from, and is agreeable to, exist
ing business. 1t is an attempt OF
the part of existing business to pre-
serve the values of their existing
plants, to shut out competition, to dis
courage new men or new corpora
tionS from entering the industry.
Suppose this idea had been in ef
feet. Suppose we had had these code
\ in, let us say, the year 1893, which
was the time of the last great depres
sion preceding the present one. Sup
pose that at that time the buggy ant