Tag Archives: John Knott


Better Than Nothing…


John KnottUncle Sam asks his allies, France and Great Britain, to repay the United States for helping them
in World War I.

From the 1920’s to late 1930’s, the years following World War I, several European nations were indebted to the United States. This was due to the fact that the United States helped in many parts of the war and was not paid back. In World War I, the United States joined forces with Great Britain, Belgium, Russia and France to form the Allies, who worked together to defeat the Central Powers of Germany, Austria, Hungary, Bulgaria and Turkey. The allies were ultimately able to win the war and force Germany to sign the Treaty of Versailles. This Treaty contained a “war guilt clause.” By signing this clause, Germany accepted responsibility for all of the loss and damage that the war caused and agreed to pay thirty two billion dollars in war reparations (Potter).

War reparations are when a country makes amends for a transgression they have committed by paying money to the countries they wronged (Moulton and Pasvolsky). However, the years following the end of World War I were difficult for the economies of Great Britain, France and Germany not only due to the devastation, but also the expenses that came with war, such as transportation, weapons, repairs, and so forth. (“World War I Fast Facts”). Thus, the end of the WWI came with massive war reparations and war debts, which were not small sums. War debts refer to the money a country owes to another country for the resources that were borrowed to fight the war. To put it into context, even in 2014, Great Britain was still making plans to pay back what they borrowed from the United States (“First World War Debt to Be Paid off at Last”).

With their massive war reparation debts, from Germany, who had just signed the Treaty of Versailles on June 28,1919, with allied nations -Britain, France, Italy and Russia- to formally end the war, Germany struggled to pay back what was determined to be owed to Great Britain and France, according to the Treaty of Versailles. In turn, this made it quite challenging for Great Britain and France to acquire the money they needed in order to fully repay the United States (Moulton and Pasvolsky).

The political cartoon by John Knott titled, “Better Than Nothing,” published on December 30, 1931, in the Dallas Morning News, depicts the United States asking to be repaid by its allies for their help in the war. The cartoon shows Uncle Sam, who represents the United States, standing off the coast of the Gulf of Mexico and asking Great Britain and France to pay the war debts they owe. Since France and Great Britain were unable to pay their war debts, Uncle Sam points to the land that is near him—the large colonial possessions of Great Britain and France in the West Indies, Guiana and Central America—and says, “I might take some real estate on account.” Meanwhile,

Great Britain and France stare back across the Atlantic Ocean, looking quite unfazed as they share a smoke together. Knott’s illustration makes the point that if Great Britain and France could not pay the money back, then the United States did not want to go home empty-handed and would instead accept the two European powers’ colonial territories in the Americas as repayment.

The title of Knott’s cartoon, “Better Than Nothing,” coincides with an editorial that was published in the same Dallas Morning News issue. Written during the Great Depression, the editorial titled, “Reparations and War Debts,” announces that the United States Congress voted not to reduce or cancel the war debts. That meant that Great Britain and France were expected to pay back every cent of what they owed the United States. The article also explains that Great Britain and France had their hands tied because they needed Germany to pay them reparations before they could even afford to repay the United States.The editor equated this situation to Great Britain and France essentially being “bankrupt” and stuck. Something was going to have to give, or an alternative deal was going to have to be made, in order to move forward.

Senator Arthur Capper, a U.S. Representative of the state of Kansas who had a prominent hand in the ruling that no cancelations or reductions be made to the war debts, was quoted in an article in The New York Times as saying, “Uncle Sam has played Santa Claus long enough.” Senator Capper was worried that the amount of money the United States loaned to these Great Britain and France was beginning to become “too much of a load.” At that point, not only had America paid for most of the war itself, but also for the reconstruction that followed the war (“Capper Opposes Debt Revision; ‘Uncle Sam Santa Long Enough’”).

Another editorial that was featured alongside John Knott’s cartoon in the Dallas Morning News was entitled, “Buy Them Out.” In the piece, the editor explained how congressman Louis Thomas McFadden, a Republican member of the United States House of Representatives from Pennsylvania, suggested an alternative deal that would help Great Britain and France repay the war debts they owed the United States. Instead of forcing Great Britain and France to pay billions of dollars—that they did not have—McFadden proposed offering the countries a buyout deal where they would give up their colonial territories south of the United States as repayment of their debt. The article further explained that if such an agreement were to be made, “Holland only would be left of European powers having control over United States territory south of Canada, excepting the Falkland Islands in South America.” Though this deal was fair in economic terms, it was most likely not an agreement that Great Britain and France would accept.

The message in John Knott’s cartoon was that it was only fair for the United States to walk away with at least some sort of repayment for the debt that Great Britain and France owed, even if it was not in the form of cold hard cash. In the cartoon, Knott does not portray Great Britain and France as two men who are struggling financially and can barely get by. Rather, Great Britain is drawn with a belly, portraying the state of being well-fed, and both Britain and France are smoking, an act of luxury. This kept the audience from empathizing with Britain and France and helped to show the fairness of expecting the two countries to find a way to repay what they owed the U.S. in some form or fashion.

When the United States Congress voted not to cancel or reduce the war debts owed by France and Great Britain, this demonstrated that the United States was demanding repayment no matter what. The question was not if, but how the United States was going to be repaid by the two countries. John Knott illustrated a potential answer to this question through his cartoon.

Works Cited
“Buy them out.” Dallas Morning News, December 30, 1931. Editorial.
http://infoweb.newsbank.com/iw-search/we/HistArchive/?p_product=EANX&p_theme=ahnp&p_nbid=L56R4DMHMTUyNjMyNTM5NS4yODU2MDk6MToxMzoxMjguNjIuNzAuMTE5&p_docref=v2:0F99DDB671832188@EANX-104D2247C6907F01@2426706-104D22487677A470@12-104D224B65AA3163@Buy%20Them%20Out .

“Capper Opposes Debt Revision; ‘Uncle Sam Santa Long enough’.” New York Times (1923-Current file), Dec 27, 1931, pp. 1. ProQuest, http://ezproxy.lib.utexas.edu/login?url=https://search.proquest.com/docview/99200163?accountid=7118.

“First World War Debt to Be Paid off at Last.” Evening Standard, 03 Dec. 2014, p. 45. EBSCOhost, ezproxy.lib.utexas.edu/login?url=http://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&db=nfh&AN=99762662&site=ehost-live.

Knott, John. “Better Than Nothing.” Dallas Morning News, 30 Dec. 1931. Editorial.

Moulton, Harold G., and Leo Pasvolsky. World war debt settlements. The Macmillan company, 1926.

Potter, Edmund D. “World War I debts,” The 1930s in America, edited by Thomas Tandy Lewis, Salem, 2011. Salem Online.

“Reparations and War Debts.” Dallas Morning News, December 30, 1931. Editorial.


President Roosevelt points to a sign reading “EQUAL RIGHTS TO ALL SPECIAL PRIVILEGES TO NONE,” while a banker and veteran look on in anticipation of more equitable cuts in federal spending.
President Roosevelt points to a sign reading “EQUAL RIGHTS TO ALL SPECIAL PRIVILEGES TO NONE,” while a banker and veteran look on in anticipation of more equitable cuts in federal spending.


In 1933, as the United States sought to pull its struggling economy out of the Great Depression, the American people looked for guidance from newly-elected President Franklin D. Roosevelt. FDR promised to reform the damaging actions brought on by his predecessor, President Herbert Hoover, and to improve the nation’s economic state. John Knott’s political cartoon, “Regardless of Dress,” addresses one of the many reforms enacted as part of Roosevelt’s New Deal: specifically, the Economy Act of 1933. This act reduced the amount of federal aid given to banking and veteran programs to equalize treatment of struggling American citizens. Evoking parallels to Andrew Jackson’s populist slogan, “equal rights to all, special privileges to none,” Knott’s illustration underscores the importance of Roosevelt’s impact on veterans and the banks through his New Deal economic recovery programs.

The Great Depression was the period from 1929-1939, during which time the American economy took an unprecedented downturn. After the stock market crash on October 29, 1929, the nation’s economic state began a precipitous decline, as consumer spending and investment plummeted. Job scarcity became such a widespread problem that by 1932, the nation’s unemployment rate had risen to 25% (Baughman “The 1930s: Government and Politics: Overview”). Hoover’s spending approach for aiding the effects of the Great Depression was an inclination to give “indirect aid to banks or local public works projects, but he refused to use federal money for direct aid to citizens” (Hoover “The Gilder Lehrman Institute of American History”). During Hoover’s Presidency, America’s budget deficit ballooned from a $734 million surplus in 1929 to a $2.7 billion deficit in 1932 (Morgan “Deficit Spending”). To compare it to today’s standards, while the 2017 federal government’s deficit rose to $668 billion, an $82 billion increase, that remains only a 12% increase rather than the 663% rise during Hoover’s term (Niv “US Deficit Spending Reached $668 Billion in Fiscal 2017”). Roosevelt’s election in 1932 brought on a series of reforms aimed to counter Hoover’s tactics. In his approach to economic recovery, however, FDR adopted a populist approach for addressing the struggles of the common man.

When Franklin D. Roosevelt took office in 1932, his actions immediately reflected the populist ideals of assisting ordinary American citizens, and his New Deal economic recovery plans were intended to directly help the American people. The First New Deal was a procession of economic reforms as well as a series of national aid and federal programs created with the purpose of bringing the United States out of the Great Depression; furthermore, these initiatives were promised to be implemented within Roosevelt’s first 100 days in office. Because an entire quarter of the US population was unemployed, these aid programs stretched across a swath of occupational categories and social classes (Baughman “The 1930s: Government and Politics: Overview”).

Programs such as the Federal Emergency Relief Act (FERA), which provided $500 million in grants directly to states to “infuse relief agencies with the much-needed resources to help the nearly fifteen million unemployed,” were aimed at mitigating the subsidiary monetary channels that, in the past, had slowed progress of economic improvement (Lumen Learning “Franklin Roosevelt and the New Deal, 1932-1941”).

Given the nation’s poor economic state, however, Roosevelt also aimed to refrain from unnecessary excessive spending. Thus, he introduced the Economy Act of 1933 which cut around $400 million from federal payments to veterans and $100 million from the payroll of federal employees (Morgan “Economy Act of 1933, Special to The New York Times). Not only did this act recognize the unequal distribution of governmental monetary resources, it also helped equalize funding through redistribution to people via Roosevelt’s newly created programs.

Alluding to the spending cuts spurred by the Economy Act of 1933, Knotts’ cartoon highlighted the shared sacrifice that was required for economic recovery, legislated in FDR’s populist policies, and inspired by Jacksonian Democratic themes. The illustration featured three figures: a banker/civilian, a veteran, and FDR. Roosevelt points to a banner hanging above their heads. The sign, which reads, “EQUAL RIGHTS TO ALL SPECIAL PRIVILEGES TO NONE,” points to the reasoning behind the Economy Act of 1933 and FDR’s populist policies. During the Great Depression most US citizens were in need during those difficult economic times, and while FDR recognized the nation’s responsibility to those who served their country, he also stressed their equality with other citizens (The Dallas Morning News “Roosevelt at Chicago”). Drawing on that ideology, Knott suggested Roosevelts’ similarity to another populist president, Andrew Jackson. The quote boldly displayed and pointed to by President Roosevelt reads, “EQUAL RIGHTS TO ALL SPECIAL PRIVILEGES TO NONE.” It is a famous populist slogan widely attributed to Andrew Jackson.

Jacksonian Democrats not only believed in maintaining a strong Federal Union but also in following the conviction that “no one man has any more intrinsic right to official station than another,” as well as in maintaining the assurance that “the already wealthy and favored classes would not enrich themselves further by commandeering, enlarging, and then plundering public institutions” (History.com Staff “Jacksonian Democracy” and Gale “Andrew Jackson”). By cutting their previous federal funding allowances, the aid given to veterans and the banking system was equalized by FDR when compared to other assistance programs. His actions were based on his affirmation of equal treatment of citizens and are directly and were comparable to Jackson’s views. Because veterans and banks were receiving significantly more aid compared to other institutions and groups, Roosevelt cut their funding, opening more opportunities for other struggling parties to receive monetary assistance, thus equalizing government aid program fairness (Knott “Regardless of Dress”).

“Roosevelt in Chicago,” an editorial that accompanied Knott’s cartoon, spelled out the aforementioned policies regarding veterans and banks alike and described Roosevelt’s take on the need for equalizing aid (re)distribution. The editorial discussed FDR’s emphasis on “the plain duties of citizenship,” another reference to Roosevelt’s Jacksonian-inspired populist agenda for economic recovery. Roosevelt’s New Deal ushered in the dawn of a new American economic era in both its policies and reforms (The Dallas Morning News “Roosevelt at Chicago”).

The Great Depression was a devastating period of American history for all US citizens. As the economy struggled, Roosevelt was not only faced with how to bring prosperity to the nation but also how to treat all social classes under his altering reforms. His actions highlighted the repetition of history and the new takes future leaders are able to implement to adjust for the times.


Works Cited

“Andrew Jackson.” Encyclopedia of World Biography, 2nd ed., vol. 8, Gale, 2004, pp. 168-   172. Gale Virtual Reference        Libraryhttp://link.galegroup.com/apps/doc/CX3404703247/GVRL?u=txshracd2598&si    d=GVRL&xid=891df37f. Accessed 3 Apr. 2018.

Elis, Niv. “US Deficit Spending Reached $668 Billion in Fiscal 2017.” The Hill, 9 Oct. 2017, thehill.com/policy/finance/354542-us-deficit-spending-reached-668-billion-in-fiscal-2017.

History.com Staff. “Jacksonian Democracy.” History.com, A&E Television Networks, 2012, www.history.com/topics/jacksonian-democracy.

Hoover, Herbert. “The Gilder Lehrman Institute of American History.” Nat Turner’s Rebellion,1831 | Gilder Lehrman Institute of American History, www.gilderlehrman.org/content/herbert-hoover-great-depression-and-new-deal-1931–1933.

Knott, John. “Regardless of Dress” The Dallas Morning News, 4 Oct. 1933.

Lumen Learning. “Franklin Roosevelt and the New Deal, 1932-1941.” Lumen, Open SUNY Textbooks, courses.lumenlearning.com/suny-ushistory2os2xmaster/chapter/the-first-new- deal/.

Morgan, Iwan. “Deficit Spending.” Encyclopedia of the Great Depression, edited by Robert S. McElvaine, vol. 1, Macmillan Reference USA, 2004, pp. 226-228. Gale Virtual ReferenceLibraryhttp://link.galegroup.com/apps/doc/CX3404500134/GVRL?u=txshracd2598&si=GVRL&xid=6476eefb. Accessed 3 Apr. 2018.

Morgan, Iwan. “Economy Act of 1933.” Encyclopedia of the Great Depression, edited by Robert S. McElvaine, vol. 1, Macmillan Reference USA, 2004, pp. 268-269. Gale Virtual Reference        Libraryhttp://link.galegroup.com/apps/doc/CX3404500154/GVRL?u=txshracd2598&sid=GVRL&xid=b0474e7f. Accessed 3 Apr. 2018.

“Roosevelt at Chicago.” The Dallas Morning News, 4 Oct. 1933.

Special to The New York Times. (1932, Dec 08). Text of the president’s message calling on congress for a curb on spending. New York Times (1923-Current File) Retrieved from   http://ezproxy.lib.utexas.edu/login?url=https://search.proquest.com/docview/99804009?a         ccountid=7118

“The 1930s: Government and Politics: Overview.” American Decades, edited by Judith S. Baughman, et al., vol. 4: 1930-1939, Gale, 2001. Gale Virtual Reference        Libraryhttp://link.galegroup.com/apps/doc/CX3468301167/GVRL?u=txshracd2598&sid=GVRL&xid=87193b62. Accessed 3 Apr. 2018.

Disarmament: Knott’s Knot

A "Sincere Desire to Disarm" is the sword that could cut the metaphoric "Gordian Knot" binding exhausted taxpayers to the economic burdens of world armaments.
A “Sincere Desire to Disarm” is the sword that could cut the metaphoric “Gordian Knot” binding exhausted taxpayers to the economic burdens of world armaments.

At the end of World War I, a large portion of the globe was in shambles. The United States as well as other victors of the war gained immense power and enjoyed economic growth, that was very short lived. In the late 1920’s, the stock market crashed causing the United States and the world to fall into the longest economic crisis, the Great Depression (“The Great Depression”). The cartoon by John Knott, “Sword is Needed,” was published in the Dallas Morning News on October 29, 1932 to raise awareness about the political and economic problems that arose as different nations strived for a compromise on the specific terms for world disarmament as well as the high price that taxpayers paid in order to maintain national arsenals.  Accompanying the cartoon was an editorial, “Disarmament Again,” that discussed the obstacles to reaching a compromise on arms limitations at the upcoming Geneva Conference in November of 1932.

After World War I, “a general disarmament conference had first been proposed for 1925, but it did not actually meet until 1932 due to a lack of enthusiasm,” (“Disarmament”). The Geneva Conference of 1932 was about the limitation of arms, which ironically aroused diplomatic tensions across the globe. While non-attendance was one issue, once at the meeting many nations could not agree on the details requirements of arms limitations. No country would act, unless a different nation agreed to specific terms.

For example, the French Premier had prepared a plan that opposed the amount of drastic reductions on arms limitation that would be presented during the convention, while the United States and United Kingdom had held confidential negotiations on naval limitations (“Disarmament Again”). Although the United States and United Kingdom were the main superpowers to call for disarmament, the US threatened to build up the maximum amount of weaponry as a precaution because the UK was the strongest naval power. Italy had announced its willingness to cooperate on the limitations; Russia, on the other hand, had offered plans for complete disarmament (“Disarmament Again”). Meanwhile, Japan had declared itself to be compliant – but still demanded the necessity of naval defenses in order to protect its home waters against problems in the Far East. Germany, however, denounced limitations and demanded release from any limitations on arms. In short, so many different rivalries and points of friction, no one was willing to compromise, and there was no easy way to reach an agreement.

Understood against this historical backdrop, in Kott’s cartoon the large tank – labelled “World’s Armaments”—is a significant object—a point also emphasized in the editorial. The weight of the tank symbolizes the burden of armaments on each nation involved in the Geneva Conference. The utter size of the looming tank, even in the background, represents the scale and difficulties of reaching widely agreed terms for disarmament. Its massiveness represents the complex problems of national armaments and military budgets funded by the average taxpaying citizen.

In the foreground, a small man is tethered to the big tank. He is dragging the heavy burden of the “world’s armaments.” This beleaguered man represented taxpayers. As previously mentioned, this cartoon was drawn during the Great Depression. People in the United States, as well as abroad, were suffering from the stock market crash and barely had enough money to get by. The lone man representing exhausted taxpayers worldwide, slavishly drags the tank. He has no control over how his money will be spent, for arms rather than a prosperous economic future.

While dragging his burden, the taxpayer walks over an array of failed attempts at disarmament. The volume of scattered papers represents the many previous failures at compromise on numerous aspects of arms limitations (e.g., “Plan for Disarmament,” “Conference for Armament,” “Plan for Arms Limitation”).  This complex issue had been long discussed with little or no result. In Knott’s cartoon, the difficulties of previous disarmament conferences are captured in the paper titled, “Plan for Untying the Gordian Knot.”

Disarmament deals are like a metaphorical knot with different ends being pulled in different directions. This metaphor is very important to the cartoon. In the middle of the illustration, there is a giant, complex knot—a Gordian Knot—that binds the taxpayers to the tank. “Gordian Knot,” a proverbial term used to describe a complex problem that is solved through bold action (The Editors of Encyclopaedia Britannica). The origin of the term is traced back to Alexander the Great’s march through Anatolia to the city of Gordium (The Editors of Encyclopaedia Britannica). In order to conquer Asia, Alexander the Great had to untie the complicated knot. Unlike his predecessors who had failed, with a swift move of his sword, Alexander cut the knot. John Knott’s cartoon implies that similarly bold action was required to achieve disarmament at the Geneva Conference. The complicated puzzle, or knot, of trying to please every nation and honor their preferences for arms limitations could only be achieved if every country attending the conference had the “sincere desire to disarm.”


Works Cited

“Disarmament.” Europe since 1914: Encyclopedia of the Age of War and Reconstruction, edited by John Merriam and Jay Winter, vol. 2, Charles Scribner’s Sons, 2006, pp. 854-863. Gale Virtual Reference Library, http://link.galegroup.com.ezproxy.lib.utexas.edu/apps/doc/CX3447000280/GVRL?u=txshracd2598&sid=GRVL&xid=e4c44852. Accessed 27 Mar. 2018

“Disarmament Again.” Dallas Morning News, 29 Oct. 1932, p. 2. America’s Historical Newspaper, infoweb.newsbank.com/iw-search/we/HistArchive/?p_product=EANX&p_theme=ahnp&p_nbid=P75K5CDYMTUyMjA4ODk3NS4zNDQ0OTg6MToxMzoxMjguNjIuMjUuMTgy&p_docref=v2:0F99DDB671832188@EANX-10483DD48E0961E6@2427010-10483DD50169304E@17.

The Editors of Encyclopaedia Britannica. “Gordian Knot.” Encyclopedia Britannica, Encyclopedia Britannica, Inc., 2 Jan. 2018, www.britannica.com/topic/Gordian-knot

“The Great Depression.” Ushistory.org, Independence Hall Association, www.ushistory.org/us/48.asp

Knott, John. “Sword Is Needed.” Dallas Morning News, 29th ed., 29 Oct.1932, p.2.

Patch, Buel W. “World Disarmament Conference of 1932.” Editorial Research Reports 1932, vol. I, CQ Press, 1932, pp.1-20. CQ Researcher, 28 Mar. 2018 library.cqpress.com/cqresearcher/cqresrre1932010500.


Texas Taxpayers Unite

John Knott was a cartoonist from Austria-Hungary, famous for his work illustrating American political cartoons.  For decades his works were published in the Dallas Morning News (John Knott Wikipedia).  In his 1932 piece, “Arousing the Countryside,” a man is depicted riding horseback, trying to spread the word for a cause he supports.  The man symbolizes the members of the State Taxpayers Association of Texas, an organization against income taxation that only consisted of 600 members (Taxpayers Complain).  The Association’s main goals at the time were to “exempt from taxation homesteads up to a certain assessed valuation” and to shift “the tax burden from… real estate to other forms of wealth through a State income tax (The Taxpayers Meet).”  Though many citizens of Texas favored a removal or lowering of the property tax, the Association struggled in rounding up support for the idea. In his illustration, John Knott used intense patriotism, through powerful imagery and strong wording, to display the State Taxpayers Association of Texas’s disgust for their state government’s spending of the people’s taxes, in order to encourage reform and try to save the worsening economic status of the poor.

The editorial, “Taxpayers Complain,” published in the Dallas Morning News on January 29, 1932, that goes along with the cartoon, seemed to have a bias toward the cause, discussed the Association’s recent rally in Fort Worth, Texas. A day earlier an editorial titled “Drive to Slash Levies Begun By Taxpayers,” went into more detail about the rally in Fort Worth and cited the President of the Association, D.M. Jones, saying that the rally was a success and that thousands of Texas citizens were exposed to the Associations demands. The Association was mostly composed of real estate owners who looked for relief from the heavy real estate tax that existed at the time (Taxpayers Complain).  According to Jones the members of his organization were considered “economic pioneers” of their time (Drive to Slash Levies Begun By Taxpayers). This helped open the minds of people who were willing to sacrifice their time and efforts to step forward and gain momentum for their movement. The State Taxpayers Association of Texas viewed Lone Star State spending as too lavish and not focused on what its citizens needed. Even though the poor tried to vote the burden of their taxes onto the rich, because the rich had all the power at the time, they ended up evading many of the taxation responsibilities they should have born (Taxpayers Complain).  

John Knott implemented many artistic devices into his cartoon to foster awareness among his readers.  He added powerful words like “war, waste, and extravagance” to display how important the issues were to people at the time.  These words serve as an example of soft propaganda that the State Taxpayers Association of Texas used to rally support for their cause.  The words produced emotions in readers, in order rally them to the cause.

In Knott’s cartoon a man is depicted on a strong horse, pointing ahead and shouting.  He represents the members of the Taxpayers Association and their hope for a future with better tax reform.  The Paul Revere-esque image of the man is designed to spark patriotism in the reader. He is depicted riding down the street spreading the word of the organization, similar to Revere’s ride around Boston warning of Britain’s attack at the start of The Revolutionary War.

Knott’s depiction of angry looking citizens further advances the cause of the Association, and demonstrates how they were practically ready to run into battle to support their beliefs.  The cartoon was intended to imbue the readers of the Dallas Morning News with a sense of patriotism by drawing a parallel between the ragtag militia and the Revolutionary War, when the citizens demanded a change.  Knott also added more concerned looking citizens peering down on the scene from a second story window. These people represent the many citizens who were unfairly taxed, but not yet apart of the cause.  The Association is self-described as militant, and were referred to as a powerful front that was not afraid to be vocal about their beliefs.

At the time of the cartoon’s publication, the rich thought that the only way the poor should escape their poverty was through hard work, common sense, and saving.  The poor, on the other hand, looked for relief through tax reform. The State Taxpayers Association of Texas existed to help combat the upper class’s ability to avoid as much taxation as possible (Taxpayers Complain).  The Association believed the correct way to go about this was to get rid of the high real estate taxes, and instead to pay income taxes which would target the rich.

The State Taxpayers Association of Texas was determined to help bridge dramatic differences in income between the rich and the poor that existed in 1932; however, the Association was unsuccessful because of the Great Depression.  Ironically a stronger support for the cause of tax reform could have lessened the effects of the Great Depression.


Works Cited

“Drive to Slash Levies Begun By Taxpayers.” Dallas Morning News, 28 January. 1932.  Editorial. Section 1, page 1.

“John F. Knott.” Wikipedia, Wikimedia Foundation, 6 May 2018, en.wikipedia.org/wiki/John_F._Knott.

Knott, John. “Arousing the Countryside.” Cartoon. Dallas Morning News, 29 January. 1932: Section 2, page 2.

“The Taxpayers Meet.” Dallas Morning News, 28 April. 1932. Editorial. Section 2, page 2.

“Taxpayers Complain.” Dallas Morning News, 29 January. 1932. Editorial. Section 2, page 2.


Tariffs Weaken more than Trade

Right in the Middle of his Speech

In this cartoon titled Right in the Middle of His Speech (Knott) we see a man identified as President Herbert Hoover falling through a stage labeled “G.O.P. Platform”. One of the planks, titled “Tariff Plank” has given snapped in two. Hoover is holding a sheaf of papers titled “Blessings of High Tariff”. From the title of the cartoon it is evident that Hoover was delivering his speech from these papers. At the bottom of the panel a sketched crowd of people are sitting on the ground, smiling at his plight. The cartoon is dated October 15, 1932 and the associated editorial is titled Tariffs Come Home to Roost (“Tariffs Come Home to Roost” 2). The unnamed author of the editorial lists the ways that the “Blessings of High Tariff” harmed the economy of the United States and Hoover’s chances of reelection.

Although the tariffs are not named anywhere in the comic or the editorial, there is only one tariff that was infamous enough to be the tariff on everyone’s mind: the Tariff Act of 1930, commonly known as the Smoot-Hawley Tariff or Smoot-Hawley. It was passed into law over two years before this cartoon was published, but the tariff was still very much on the minds of citizens and voters.

In 1932 people were blaming President Hoover for the Great Depression. Even today economists debate whether the Smoot-Hawley Tariff turned what might have been a global economic downturn into The Great Depression (“Smoot-Hawley Tariff Act”). At the time of its inception, the Smoot-Hawley Tariff was protested by bankers, economists, and editorial writers across the nation. Over a thousand economists signed a petition to protest the Smoot-Hawley Tariff (“The Battle of Smoot-Hawley”). In 1930 the tariff on dutiable imports was 6% on average. However, at the time Knott published this cartoon in 1932 the forces of deflation raised the effective rate of tariff costs on dutiable imports by 59.1%. (“The Battle of Smoot-Hawley”).

Before Smoot-Hawley was signed into law the stock market had seen some notable recovery from its infamous 1929 crash, but the market took another nosedive as soon as it became clear that Smoot-Hawley would pass. Other nations responded quickly with tariffs of their own. For example, the editorial Tariffs Come Home to Roost mentions the Ottawa tariff, in which Canada raised the duties on American goods and lowered the duties on British goods. The results of this trade war was a significant decrease in trade globally and the movement of factories from the United States to Canada (Tariffs Come Home to Roost).

In 1932 Hoover was running for re-election. He was an extremely unpopular candidate as many people blamed him personally for the Great Depression. Despite this, the Republican party was continuing to run on a platform of economic protectionism and supported the Smoot-Hawley Tariff. The Democrats countered with a platform of lowering tariffs and “…[the Democrat’s] candidate, Franklin D Roosevelt, hammered Hoover during the campaign for signing the Smoot-Hawley bill” (Gordon).

This topic of election platforms moves directly into an analysis of Knott’s cartoon.  A political platform is the set of goals and policies for a political party. Individual portions of the platform are often called “planks”. Knott uses these terms to form a visual pun. The GOP platform here is literally unable to support Hoover as he tries to woo voters. Notably the plank that is the weakest and responsible for this disaster is called the “tariff plank”.  The implication is that it does not matter how solid the rest of the platform is, this one issue is enough to bring Hoover down.

Hoover’s literal downfall is not a private disaster either. There is a crowd gathered around, and the disaster is very apparent to the people who are watching it. The gathered crowd is dressed in casual clothing and sitting on the ground; they are not peers of the suit-wearing Herbert Hoover. The people are smiling as they watch Hoover fall. They seem amused that Hoover is finally seen suffering repercussions for the tariff that impacted them. On the stage there is a microphone, perhaps representing the rest of the country who might listen to such a speech over the radio. The entire nation is aware of what is happening.

Interestingly, it is not Hoover himself who is the cause of the failure. This is perhaps reflective of the fact that although he signed Smoot-Hawley into law, he objected to what it became after special interest groups and Congress finished drafting it. He went so far as to denounce the Smoot-Hawley Tariff, and only signed it into law under pressure from his party (Gordon). In the comic, Hoover is not failing the G.O.P. Platform of economic protectionism, the platform is failing his reelection efforts. The author of the editorial suggests that if Hoover were to “…confess in open meeting that he committed a great sin when he signed the tariff act against his better judgement” (“Tariffs Come Home to Roost” 2) it would be very successful with voters.

The wrong tariff at the wrong time can result in a trade war with global repercussions. The “Blessings of High Tariff” in the cartoon were enumerated in the accompanying editorial as “…poor business, low wages, and great unemployment” (“Tariffs Come Home to Roost” 2). Tariffs were and are a powerful tool for improving a national economy, but their deployment must be judicious. Knott chose to focus this particular cartoon on the personal, political repercussions of the tariff.


Works Cited

“The Battle of Smoot-Hawley.” The Economist, 18 Dec. 2008, www.economist.com/node/12798595. Accessed 27 Mar. 2018.

Gordon, John Steele. “Smoot-Hawley Tariff: A Bad Law, Badly Timed.” Barrons, 21 Apr. 2017, www.barrons.com/articles/smoot-hawley-tariff-a-bad-law-badly-timed-1492833567. Accessed 26 Mar. 2018.

“Herbert Clark Hoover.” Encyclopedia of World Biography, 2nd ed., vol. 7, Gale, 2004, pp. 483-485. Gale Virtual Reference Library, http://link.galegroup.com/apps/doc/CX3404703059/GVRL?u=txshracd2598&sid=GVRL&xid=71e4ab99. Accessed 22 Feb. 2018.

Knott, John Francis. Right in the Middle of his Speech. 15 Oct. 1932. America’s Historical Newspapers, infoweb.newsbank.com.ezproxy.lib.utexas.edu/iw-search/we/HistArchive/?p_product=EANX&p_theme=ahnp&p_nbid=L63Q49PFMTUyMjMzMzk1Mi42MTE4MzI6MToxMjoxMjguODMuNjMuMjA&p_action=doc&s_lastnonissuequeryname=4&d_viewref=search&p_queryname=4&p_docnum=1&p_docref=v2:0F99DDB671832188@EANX-10483D9233E8A080@2426996-10483D92A9E93CD3@17-10483D94E2A30003@.

“Smoot-Hawley Tariff Act.” Gale Encyclopedia of U.S. Economic History, edited by Thomas Carson and Mary Bonk, vol. 2, Gale, 2000, p. 933. Gale Virtual Reference Library, http://link.galegroup.com/apps/doc/CX3406400866/GVRL?u=txshracd2598&sid=GVRL&xid=370b678b. Accessed 22 Feb. 2018.

“Tariffs Come Home to Roost.” Dallas Morning News, 15 Oct. 1932, p. 2. America’s Historical Newspapers, http://infoweb.newsbank.com.ezproxy.lib.utexas.edu/iw-search/we/HistArchive/?p_product=EANX&p_theme=ahnp&p_nbid=T58A4FEJMTUyNjM1MTgwMy42MjQ1MjI6MToxMjoxMjguODMuNjMuMjA&p_action=doc&d_viewref=search&s_lastnonissuequeryname=9&p_queryname=9&p_docnum=1&p_docref=v2:0F99DDB671832188@EANX-10483D9233E8A080@2426996-10483D92A9E93CD3@17-10483D94EA6FB419@Tariffs%20Come%20Home%20to%20Roost

Advance, Work, Fight, If Necessary

Benito Mussolini addresses the world from the city of Turin, Italy on October 23, 1932
Benito Mussolini addresses the world from the city of Turin, Italy on October 23, 1932.


Telling the World by John Knott depicts the Italian dictator Benito Mussolini during his 1932 address in the city of Turin, Italy. The speech occurred in the midst of the tenth anniversary of the Fascist Party’s March on Rome in October 1922, when Mussolini was appointed as Italy’s fascist head of government by King Victor Emmanuel III (De Grand 513). The Italian dictator’s balcony, illustrated in Knott’s cartoon, evokes the baroque architectural style of Turin’s buildings. As Mussolini stated in his speech, “Turin is a Roman city,” and according to his regime, 1932 was Year X of “The New Era” in the “Third Rome” (“Benito Mussolini” 273). However, by the time of Mussolini’s visit to Turin, Europe was still reeling from the consequences of World War I. Despite fervent calls by European allies for the cancellation of German war reparations, emphasized at the Lausanne Conference in the summer of 1932, the United States refused to accept the mandatory condition that all European debts to the U.S. be cancelled as well (Bemis 55). This decision, combined with the League of Nations’ insistence that Germany was to be denied juridical parity, only served to aggravate tensions in the region. Furthermore, looming over the world and compounding the western dilemma was The Great Depression, a burdening force which would not cease for a decade.

In Knott’s cartoon, Mussolini is holding a globe before him as he asserts his position on the world’s affairs. His discontented expression and clenched fist indicate that he his making demands to resolve conflicts threatening his regime. Depicted on the globe, Africa and Europe face the audience, as North America is subjected to the Italian dictator’s scrutinous glare. This scowling expression carries a direct challenge to the United States, “. . . the ship of reparations and war debts entered the port of Lausanne. Are the great people of the star-spangled republic going to send this vessel, which was filled with sorrow and blood of so many peoples, back to the open waters?” (Mussolini 1932). In this statement he addresses the imperious nature of the U.S. pursuit of war reparations from Europe, and its significance in impacting western politics. Mussolini’s Turin speech took place only a month prior to the US Presidential Election of 1932. According to “Mussolini and the Crisis,” the Dallas Morning News editorial accompanying Knott’s cartoon, then-candidate Franklin D. Roosevelt was thought to have been more sympathetic toward the idea of debt cancellation than his opponent, Herbert Hoover. Mussolini appeared to time his appeal to the US in order to influence the vote of Italian Americans toward Roosevelt (Dallas Morning News 2). The Lausanne Conference was a pivotal point in the decision to end or continue war debts, and the United States was the eminent faction in determining the outcome. Unfortunately, The Great Depression was well entrenched in America during this time, leading the struggling nation to assert its demands for reparations to a continent likewise hindered by economic downturn.

The historically industrial city of Turin was home to many unemployed and disgruntled labor workers at the time of Mussolini’s 1932 address. As the Dallas Morning News editorial begins, “Premier Mussolini took his life in his hands when he addressed the semihostile citizens of Turin” (2). Workers throughout Italy directed their blame and animosity toward the current political institutions whose policies they believed were failing to remedy the country’s postwar ailments (Atkins 271). Adding more pressure to the desperate nation and to Mussolini’s government was The Great Depression, which had begun with the Wall Street collapse only three years prior.

Italy’s involvement in World War I came at an immense cost. Though neutral at its commencement, the Treaty of London eventually situated Italy in the conflict alongside France and Britain, with promises from the Entente powers that Italy would be compensated with sought-after territories in Austria-Hungary and Africa (Karabell 96). By the war’s conclusion, however, Italy’s military was nearly decimated; and the country was economically, politically, and socially ravaged (Atkins 270).  Further deteriorating postwar conditions in Italy, its efforts as one of the Allies against the Central Powers were minimized at the 1919 Treaty of Versailles, and Italy received meager recompense for its losses (Atkins 271). Postwar debt, high inflation and unemployment, as well as low morale resulting from enormous war casualties, left the population embittered and desperate for change (Atkins 271). Hostility and violence in the country, along with radical war-induced nationalism, instigated the formation of an aggressive political party grounded in Mussolini’s fascist ideology (“World War I” 2765).

Although he did not explicitly mention France, Mussolini certainly held a vendetta against the country, as evident in his Turin speech. As “Mussolini and the Crisis” editorial points out, Turin is located near the Italian border with France, and Mussolini appeared to choose this city for his address in order to send a provocative message (Dallas Morning News 2). Much of Italy, including its head of government, still resented France for the outcome of the Treaty of Versailles. France gained a great deal of territory while Italy received little of what it was promised in comparison. This issue was also of great concern for Mussolini when considering the state of Germany in the European scene.

The League of Nations, founded by the Treaty of Versailles, was hesitant to grant Germany juridical parity within the organization, despite that it was a member. Its most prominent and influential member, of course, was France. Mussolini feared that France sought hegemony in Europe through its recent territorial acquisitions and its refusal to treat Germany as an equal country. In his Turin speech, he emphasized the importance of German parity in the League of Nations as necessary to prevent hegemonies in Europe, and indicated that Italy was prepared to resist any attempts by France to establish hegemony over another European country. This decision to side with Germany was a prelude to the fascist alliance that would form between the two countries in the second World War.

The complexities of western political affairs in the 1930s cannot be understated. By October 1932, Europe had already begun to brew a second world war. The Allies refused to acknowledge the impact of their decisions in formulating the rise of the fascist dictators Mussolini and Hitler. Poor and desperate populations suffering from economic depression rallied behind the aggressive, nationalistic political parties that sought to take advantage of power vacuums left by World War I. At that time, Fascism was a promise to put the unemployed to work, but also an engine of resentment fueled by losses in the Great War. In time these factors would culminate in a conflict far more catastrophic than the one that caused it.


Works Cited

Atkins, William Arthur. “Strike Wave: Italy.” St. James Encyclopedia of Labor History Worldwide, edited by Neil Schlager, vol. 2, St. James Press, 2004, pp. 270-273. Gale Virtual Reference Library, http://link.galegroup.com.ezproxy.lib.utexas.edu/apps/doc/CX3408900274/GVRL?u=txshracd2598&sid=GVRL&xid=6601c1eb. Accessed 29 Apr. 2018.

Bemis, Samuel Flagg. “Lausanne Agreement.” Dictionary of American History, edited by Stanley I. Kutler, 3rd ed., vol. 5, Charles Scribner’s Sons, 2003, p. 55. Gale Virtual Reference Library, http://link.galegroup.com.ezproxy.lib.utexas.edu/apps/doc/CX3401802329/GVRL?u=txshracd2598&sid=GVRL&xid=8407df53. Accessed 27 Mar. 2018.

“Benito Mussolini.” Encyclopedia of World Biography, 2nd ed., vol. 11, Gale, 2004, pp. 272-274. Gale Virtual Reference Library, http://link.galegroup.com.ezproxy.lib.utexas.edu/apps/doc/CX3404704665/GVRL?u=txshracd2598&sid=GVRL&xid=98c7abb0. Accessed 25 Mar. 2018.

“Comparison with the League of Nations.” Worldmark Encyclopedia of the Nations, edited by Melissa Sue Hill, 14th ed., vol. 1: United Nations, Gale, 2017, pp. 7-9. Gale Virtual Reference Library, http://link.galegroup.com.ezproxy.lib.utexas.edu/apps/doc/CX3652100020/GVRL?u=txshracd2598&sid=GVRL&xid=7a09ea1b. Accessed 25 Mar. 2018.

De Grand, Alexander. “Fascism and Nazism.” Encyclopedia of European Social History, edited by Peter N. Stearns, vol. 2: Processes of Change/Population/Cities/Rural Life/State & Society, Charles Scribner’s Sons, 2001, pp. 509-517. Gale Virtual Reference Library, http://link.galegroup.com.ezproxy.lib.utexas.edu/apps/doc/CX3460500112/GVRL?u=txshracd2598&sid=GVRL&xid=5c8cbac6. Accessed 25 Mar. 2018.

“Fascism.” International Encyclopedia of the Social Sciences, edited by William A. Darity, Jr., 2nd ed., vol. 3, Macmillan Reference USA, 2008, pp. 102-105. Gale Virtual Reference Library, http://link.galegroup.com.ezproxy.lib.utexas.edu/apps/doc/CX3045300802/GVRL?u=txshracd2598&sid=GVRL&xid=f4ab522f. Accessed 29 Mar. 2018.

Karabell, Zachary. “London, Treaty of (1913).” Encyclopedia of the Modern Middle East and North Africa, edited by Philip Mattar, 2nd ed., vol. 3, Macmillan Reference USA, 2004, p. 1446. Gale Virtual Reference Library, http://link.galegroup.com.ezproxy.lib.utexas.edu/apps/doc/CX3424601697/GVRL?u=txshracd2598&sid=GVRL&xid=d1d0e452. Accessed 29 Apr. 2018.

Knott, John. Telling the World, 25 Oct. 1932.

“Mussolini and the Crisis.” Dallas Morning News, 25 Oct. 1932. Page 2.


“Mussolini’s Speech, Turin 1932.” Readable, www.allreadable.com/1267LckD.

Mussolini’s Turin Speech, 1932. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BgmcoUjHNBU.

STRANG, G. (2001). IMPERIAL DREAMS: THE MUSSOLINI–LAVAL ACCORDS OF JANUARY 1935. The Historical Journal, 44(3), 799-809.

“World War I.” Europe Since 1914: Encyclopedia of the Age of War and Reconstruction, edited by John Merriman and Jay Winter, vol. 5, Charles Scribner’s Sons, 2006, pp. 2751-2766. Gale Virtual Reference Library, http://link.galegroup.com.ezproxy.lib.utexas.edu/apps/doc/CX3447000917/GVRL?u=txshracd2598&sid=GVRL&xid=d2f9a9b5. Accessed 29 Apr. 2018.


The Shadow

A White Plague figure and its shadow loom over the door of impoverished blacks.
A White Plague figure and its shadow loom over the door of impoverished blacks.

Tuberculosis, also known as the White Plague, was a major health problem within the United States during the nineteenth century. The disease continued into the twentieth century and was the cause of many deaths. In 1936, it was estimated that one out of every twenty-one deaths was due to tuberculosis (Baughman). Among those deaths, a disproportionate number of them occurred among blacks (Ward). African-Americans had a higher death rate during the tuberculosis epidemic because they could not get the treatment they needed.

Racial segregation has a long and unfortunate history in the United States. One of the downstream consequences of racial segregation was that white people who were diagnosed with tuberculosis were likely to be treated in a residential sanatorium, a medical facility that was used during the time to treat tuberculosis; but black people, even if diagnosed early, were given few or no treatment options, which resulted in higher death rates.

In February of 1924 African-Americans led a state-wide campaign to obtain funds to build a tuberculosis hospital in Kerrville, Texas, for blacks living in the south-western states of Texas, Oklahoma, Louisiana, and Arkansas (The Austin Statesman). It wasn’t until 13 years later, however, on June 1, 1937, that such a facility was opened. Named the Kerrville State Sanatorium, it offered free and better care and amenities for blacks up until 1949. After its closing, the remaining patients were sent to another hospital in Tyler, Texas (Winkle).

In a cartoon titled, “The Shadow,” published in the Dallas Moring News on February 25,1931, cartoonist John Knott depicts the White Plague as a white robed figure entering a room labeled “Destitute Negro.” (One thing to take into account when viewing this cartoon is that while we now consider the term “Negro” to be offensive, at that time it was considered to be the appropriate term to use.) The shadow cast by the White Plague is a gloomy figure, like the Shadow of Death, looming and foreshadowing what will happen to the impoverished people behind the door.

The cartoon’s accompanying editorial titled, “The Black White Plague,” also could be misunderstood upon first reading (e.g., tuberculosis being carried by blacks constitutes a plague). However, the editorial actually promotes a progressive message. It comments on how cruel it was to refuse medical aid to people because of their skin color and explains that by doing so, race-based health inequities harm all people.

Race and segregation played a big role in who got what during the nineteenth and early twentieth centuries. If people like John Knott saw that Segregation was unjust, one would think that the matter of health inequities would have been controlled by now; but that’s far from the case. Unfortunately, 54 years after the end of segregation, health disparities continue to be a problem and people’s health and well-being are still too often determined by the color of their skin.

Works Cited

Burns, CHESTER R. “University of Texas Medical Branch At Galveston.” Texas State Historical Association, 15 June 2010, tshaonline.org/handbook/online/articles/kcu29.

Joseph, D. George. “Tuberculosis.” Dictionary of American History, edited by Stanley I. Kutler, 3rd ed., vol. 8, Charles Scribner’s Sons, 2003, pp. 235-238. Gale Virtual Reference Library, http://link.galegroup.com/apps/doc/CX3401804292/GVRL?u=txshracd2598&sid=GVRL&xid=51e75362. Accessed 2 May 2018.

Knott, John. “The shadow” Illustration. Dallas Morning News 25 Feb 1931: 18. News Bank. Web. 2 May 2018. < http://infoweb.newsbank.com.ezproxy.lib.utexas.edu/iw-search/we/HistArchive/?p_product=EANX&p_theme=ahnp&p_nbid=V50N4DWHMTUyNTc2MTEzOS4yNjA3MDU6MToxMjoxMjguODMuNjMuMjA&p_docref=v2:0F99DDB671832188@EANX-104D1FAAE39AFF33@2426398-104D1FAB9E250B09@17>.

“Negro.” International Encyclopedia of the Social Sciences, edited by William A. Darity, Jr., 2nd ed., vol. 5, Macmillan Reference USA, 2008, pp. 458-459. Gale Virtual Reference Library, http://link.galegroup.com/apps/doc/CX3045301725/GVRL?u=txshracd2598&sid=GVRL&xid=0d4d2874. Accessed 2 May 2018.

“Negros Propose to Build Tuberculosis Hospital At Kerrville.” The Austin Statesman (1921-1973), Feb 24, 1924, pp. 5. ProQuest, http://ezproxy.lib.utexas.edu/login?url=https://search-proquest-com.ezproxy.lib.utexas.edu/docview/1643861748?accountid=7118.

“The Great White Plague.” Dallas Morning News. 25 Feb., 1931, http://infoweb.newsbank.com.ezproxy.lib.utexas.edu/iw-search/we/HistArchive/?p_product=EANX&p_theme=ahnp&p_nbid=S4CE4EAIMTUyNTM5NDI1Ny42MTY5MTc6MToxMjoxMjguODMuNjMuMjA&p_docref=image%2Fv2:0F99DDB671832188@EANX-104D1FAAE39AFF33@2426398-104D1FAB9E250B09@17-104D1FAF50A85223

“‘The Great White Plague’—Tuberculosis Before the Age of Antibiotics.” American Decades, edited by Judith S. Baughman, et al., vol. 4: 1930-1939, Gale, 2001. Gale Virtual Reference Library, http://link.galegroup.com.ezproxy.lib.utexas.edu/apps/doc/CX3468301286/GVRL?u=txshracd2598&sid=GVRL&xid=eadf7701. Accessed 2 May 2018.

Ward, Thomas J., Jr. “Health Care.” The Jim Crow Encyclopedia, edited by Nikki L.M. Brown and Barry M. Stentiford, vol. 1, Greenwood Press, 2008, pp. 363-371. Greenwood Milestones in African American History. Gale Virtual Reference Library, http://link.galegroup.com.ezproxy.lib.utexas.edu/apps/doc/CX3256100137/GVRL?u=txshracd2598&sid=GVRL&xid=c6eb623d. Accessed 2 May 2018.

Winkle, Irene Van. “TB Hospital for Blacks Gave Hope to Many Who Recovered.” Wkcurrent.com, 21 Feb. 2008, wkcurrent.com/tb-hospital-for-blacks-gave-hope-to-many-who-recovered-p1416-71.htm.

Not a Woman, A Politician

A woman is pronounced victorious by knocking out her male competitor in the Illinois senatorial primary election.
A woman is pronounced victorious by knocking out her male competitor in the Illinois senatorial primary election.


John Knott depicts the Illinois senatorial primary election of 1930 in his cartoon, “It Was That Kind of Fight”, which was published in the Dallas Morning News on April 10, 1930. Just one decade prior, women had been given the right to vote, but the fight to gender equality was just beginning. The two candidates in the Illinois senatorial primary race were Ruth Hanna McCormick and Charles S. Deneen, and she came out victorious. There had never been a woman elected into the Senate, so the Illinois senatorial primary of 1930 was a major stride for women. McCormick came from a prominent political family. Her father, Mark Hanna, as well as her first husband, Joseph Medill McCormick, both served as U.S. Senators during her lifetime. The state of Illinois thought McCormick was sure to go on to win the general election because of her qualifications and experience in politics. Although she did not go on to win the general election, the victory of Ruth Hanna McCormick over Charles S. Deneen in the Illinois senatorial primary election of 1930 depicted in Knott’s cartoon, was still a tremendous stride for women in the fight for gender equality.

In 1930, the state of Illinois made history by electing the first woman in a senatorial primary election, Ruth Hanna McCormick. She came from a prominent political family centered around her father, Mark Hanna, who served as a United States Senator from the state of Ohio from 1897 to 1904 (Glass, “Ruth Hanna McCormick”). Her father worked closely on managing the presidential campaigns of William McKinley in 1896 and 1900 (“Mark Hanna in the Senate”). Her first husband, Joseph Medill McCormick, also served on the Senate for the state of Illinois but failed to be reelected in 1925. Thus, her familial political connections made her a promising contender in the 1930 senatorial primary election.

Even before women earned the right to vote in 1920, Ruth was a prominent advocate for the suffrage movement. Once women received the right to vote, she joined the Republican Party and became so influential that she was nominated as an outstanding member of the National Committee (Woolf, “Mark Hanna’s Daughter Chooses to Run”). After the death of her first husband, her work continued, and she began to create women’s clubs in order to increase voting turnout among GOP women (“McCormick, Ruth Hanna”).As a result of her tremendous influence in the Illinois Republican party, her announcement of candidacy in the Illinois senatorial primary elections left very few people surprised.

The principles of hard work and commitment that Ruth learned by working on her father’s campaign at the age of 15 became the building blocks of her campaign. She ran on the platform that “she wasn’t coming into this as a woman but instead as a politician” (Woolf, “Mark Hanna’s Daughter Chooses to Run”). The days of fighting for women’s suffrage were in the past for her now that women had the vote (Woolf, “Mark Hanna’s Daughter Chooses to Run”). She expressed the idea that she was more than qualified for this position despite her gender.

The election was a fight for Ruth as she was an unconventional candidate in a number of ways, the most prominent being her gender. However, she came into the primary election strong and challenged her competitor, Charles S. Deneen, who was a prominent public figure in Illinois. He served as governor for two terms and had been undefeated in 38 years of public service (“Ladies First”). Deneen had also defeated her late husband in the election for the senate. McCormick campaigned in all 102 counties of Illinois and when the election results were announced, she had defeated Deneen by over 200,000 votes (“McCormick, Ruth Hanna”).

This primary election was illustrated in Knott’s cartoon through the three prominent characters depicted. The main character, who is the winner, Ruth Hanna McCormick, was one of the candidates of the Illinois senatorial primary. The next character who is depicted as an older man who looks defeated and surprised represents Charles S. Deneen, McCormick’s running mate in the election. The last character is an old, plump referee who represents the state of Illinois. McCormick appears delighted and has her arm being lifted overhead in victory by the character representing the state of Illinois. The character representative of Deneen has been knocked out and looks defeated and confused. They are standing in a boxing ring that is representative of the actual election that was seemingly a fight between McCormick and Deneen with the state of Illinois announcing the victor.

The elements and results of the senatorial primary election of 1930 are further outlined in the editorial “Ladies First” published in conjunction with Knott’s cartoon in the April 10, 1930 edition of the Dallas Morning News. The author described the public’s reaction to the announcement of candidacy by McCormick did not come as a surprise (“Ladies First”). The author also described her campaign as an intense and furious campaign, which is clearly illustrated in Knott’s cartoon through the injuries sustained by Deneen. The author also highlighted that McCormick was extremely qualified for a political position such as this and that the “Illinois voter evidently believes that the lady is the better man” (“Ladies First”). The editorial made it clear that the opinion of the author was that it was time for a woman to hold such a position, and Ruth Hanna McCormick was extremely likely to win the general election, giving her a seat in the Senate. However, McCormick then went on to face defeat in the general election.

Although women have made immense progress in the fight for gender equality since the 1930’s, particularly in the area of politics, today the fight continues as we have not seen a woman elected to the office of President of the United States. In recent years, our country has come very close to seeing this goal come to completion, but it is still something that must be aimed for in the future.


Works Cited


Knott, John. “It Was That Kind of Fight.” Dallas Morning News, p. 16.

“Ladies First.” Dallas Morning News, 10 Apr. 1930, infoweb.newsbank.com/iw-search/we/HistArchive/?p_product=EANX&p_theme=ahnp&p_nbid=H5EF45CBMTUyMjI5NDgzMi4zODI4NzQ6MToxMzoxMjguNjIuMjIuMTI4&p_docref=v2:0F99DDB671832188@EANX-104D233CE309F8F9@2426077-104D233D488952B3@15.

“MARK HANNA IN THE SENATE.” New York Times (1857-1922), Feb 22, 1897, pp. 6, ProQuest, http://ezproxy.lib.utexas.edu/login?url=https://search.proquest.com/docview/95452919?accoaccou=7118.

Miller, Kristie. “McCormick, Ruth Hanna (1880–1944).” Women in World History: A Biographical Encyclopedia, edited by Anne Commire, vol. 10, Yorkin Publications, 2002, pp. 722-727. Gale Virtual Reference Library, http://link.galegroup.com/apps/doc/CX2591306400/GVRL?u=txshracd2598&sid=GVRL&xid=fe60902a. Accessed 28 Mar. 2018.

“Ruth Hanna McCormick Simms Born in Cleveland, March 27, 1880.” POLITICO, Capitol News Company, LLC, 28 Mar. 2012, advance.lexis.com/document/?pdmfid=1516831&crid=d959f33d-0db2-4e57-b4cd-d1a02e4303c3&pddocfullpath=%2Fshared%2Fdocument%2Fnews%2Furn%3AcontentItem%3A558P-HK31-F118-92RJ-00000-00&pddocid=urn%3AcontentItem%3A558P-HK31-F118-92RJ-00000-00&pdcontentcomponentid=334576&pdteaserkey=sr0&pditab=allpods&ecomp=Ly_k&earg=sr0&prid=3890bd93-a50f-4a9e-a46b-13cdefbbb7bd.

S.J. WOOLF. “MARK HANNA’S DAUGHTER CHOOSES TO RUN.” New York Times (1923-Current file), Oct 16, 1927, pp. 2, ProQuest, http://ezproxy.lib.utexas.edu/login?url=https://search.proquest.com/docview/103935821?accountid=7118.

WINIFRED MALLON Photograph, by H. “ANOTHER HANNA LOOKS TO THE SENATE.” New York Times (1923-Current file), Jun 09, 1929, pp. 2, ProQuest, http://ezproxy.lib.utexas.edu/login?url=https://search.proquest.com/docview/104966225?accountid=7118.

The Little Steel Strike of 1937 Forges Lasting Progression for the Working-Class.


Steel Workers and their employers come to fair resolution following the violent and widespread strikes of 1936-1937
Steel Workers and their employers come to a fair resolution following the violent and widespread “Little Steel Strikes” of 1936-1937.

The Star of Bethlehem and the Wise Men, a political cartoon by John Knott, depicts a seemingly “peaceful” denouement to the Little Steel Strike of 1937. This was a  progressive period in the fight for workers rights but one marked by violence and immense frustration because for more than a half-century unions were unable to protect steelworkers from exploitative labor practices. “Little Steel Corps,” the primary culprits behind the exploitation of more than a million steelworkers, were steel companies in the 1930s that were smaller than the behemoth manufacturer, U.S. Steel. Little Steel Corps maintained a stubborn and stiff fist of oppression that had detrimental effects on employees. Steelworkers were trapped by extremely low wages and excessively long work schedules, all while also being denied the ability to form unions.

Luckily, by the end of the 1930s, through the use of political and economic coercion, steelworkers finally received the fair compromise they deserved. Knott’s cartoon showcased this by depicting the working man literally holding, in his own hand, the written promise of a “40-hour week, pay increase and collective bargaining.” Knott emphasized the celebratory mood by incorporating biblical allusions, more specifically, the Christian story of the birth of Jesus, in order to reinforce a monumental event: the peaceful resolution of labor-management conflict. These allusions further add specific commentary regarding each individual actor, illuminating the admiration and joy that Knott has for the resolve to The Little Steel Strike of 1937.

The US Steel Industry began operations in the 1870s, and just six years later, the first national union to include steelworkers, the Amalgamated Association of Iron, Steel and Tin Workers, was formed (Rees 544). However, due to politico-economic conditions of the period–Gilded Age–the Amalgamated Association’s power was limited to the iron industry,  because following the Homestead Lockout of 1892, the Association lost major power in the steel industry which subsequently allowed Carnegie Steel, the largest firm in the world at that time, to sabotage competition by staging conflicts and strikes. Eventually, power imbalance between unions and management lead to one of the most infamous incidents in American labor history, the gun battle between Pinkerton guards and strikers in 1892 (Rees 544).

By 1901 the Amalgamated Association’s membership was greatly diminished as a result of crafted unrest on the part of management and the Amalgamated Association’s inability to resolve violent conflicts and its overall lack of influence in the steel industry. Just eight years later, in 1909, U.S. Steel and other major firms were practically union free, leaving unprotected steelworkers vulnerable to greedy industrialist steel firms.

John L. Lewis, an American Congressman, formed the Congress of Industrial Organizations (CIO) in 1935 to force the American Federation of Labor to accompany and protect steelworkers and others who were not protected by a Union. In 1936, Lewis appointed Philip Murray, United Mine Workers Vice President, as the head of the Steel Workers Organizing Committee (SWOC), a subcommittee that dealt specifically with issues of workers’ rights in the steel sector. This CIO became crucial for the advancement of steelworkers. (Rees 546). Despite the efforts of the SWOC, Little Steel firms did not cave to the union’s demands.

Steel strikes of that era were too often deadly in nature. Inextricable unrest was a defining characteristic of the employer-worker relationship in the steel industry, until the New Deal era in tandem with the industrial ramp-up of World War II, the U.S. Congress and Franklin Delano Roosevelt (FDR) were able to economically and politically put pressure Little Steel firms (Rees 544). Little Steel companies desperately needed workers in order to maintain operations and competitively supply steel; thus, they eventually acceded to the demands of strikers. One of those firms was Bethlehem Steel.

Although labeled a “little” steel firm, Bethlehem Steel was in fact a major corporation that dominated the American economy from the early-to mid- 20th century. Based in Pennsylvania in the city of Bethlehem,  Bethlehem Steel purchased and restructured the Lackawanna Steel Company in 1922, doubling its production capacity and becoming the second-largest steel corporation in the United States (Ferrara 38). Even to this day, it is difficult to name a famous building that was not erected using steel from the firm. Iconic examples in New York include: the Woolworth building, the Chrysler building, the Lincoln Tunnel, and Madison Square Garden. In San Francisco, the Golden Gate Bridge is a landmark structure that was built with Bethlehem steel, and in Washington, D.C., the Supreme Court building is yet another example (Ferrara 42). Understood against this backdrop, Bethlehem Steel was an influential and powerful company that was able to vigorously fight back against the SWOC until late February of 1937. At that point, war-time demands and pressures from the National Labor Relations Board finally forced the steel firm to recognize and honor the ultimatums of their workers, which included a 40 hour work week, a pay increase, and the ability to bargain collectively..

John Knott was a Dallas Morning News cartoonist from 1905 to the mid 1950s (Perez 1). He played an important role as commentator and humorist on major national and Texas-specific issues during his career. The Little Steel Strike of 1937 was one of those major issues. In the cartoon above, the most prominent and easily recognizable images are the large star in the sky, the word “peace,” the two men labeled “worker” and “employer” and the large steel mill in the background titled “Bethlehem Steel.” There are several key biblical allusions in this cartoon, allusions that were and are easily recognizable by both earlier and contemporary American readers because of the predominant cultural influence of Christianity.

One example is the “Star of Bethlehem,” which refer to both the name of the corporation and the birthplace of Jesus Christ. Knott also utilizes the idea of “wise-men” to editorially praise the men involved and affirm their compromise as not only commonsensical but wise. The mild humor of this particular political cartoon derives from the juxtaposition of the peaceful biblical allegory and the exceptional violence that characterized the Little Steel Strike.

The National Labor Relations Act of 1935, often referred to as the “workers’ bill of rights,” was pushed through Congress by the FDR Administration to protect people’s’ right to join and be represented by a union (Cooper Par.1). Labor union membership in United States peaked in the 1950s, following the post-World War II industrial boom of the American economy (Cooper Par.2). Thereafter, union membership has declined significantly, especially in the industrial sector, which includes automobile factories, steel mills, coal mines, and railroads. Globalization has encouraged American corporations to use imported materials and outsourced labor from cheaper international sources. As a result, the American steel industry has markedly declined to just one-third the production capacity of the all time high post-World War II era (Coffin 2). While the American economy has shifted from industrial to a post-industrial economy, the battle for workers’ rights continues to be a pressing issue in the 21st century.

Reagan gave dedicated union foes direct control of the federal agencies that were designed originally to protect and further the rights and interests of workers and their unions.


Works Cited:

“Bethlehem Steel Corporation.” Corporate Disasters: What Went Wrong and Why, edited by Miranda H. Ferrara and Michele P. LaMeau, Gale, 2012, pp. 42-44. Gale Virtual Reference Library, go.galegroup.com/ps/i.do?p=GVRL&sw=w&u=txshracd2598&v=2.1&id=GALE%7CCX4020500019&it=r&asid=89be82520b2ea4e993b8c33628615967. Accessed 28 Sept. 2017

Canedo, Eduardo F. “Little Steel Strike.” Encyclopedia of the Great Depression, edited by Robert S. McElvaine, vol. 2, Macmillan Reference USA, 2004, pp. 584-585. Gale Virtual Reference Library, go.galegroup.com/ps/i.do?p=GVRL&sw=w&u=txshracd2598&v=2.1&id=GALE%7CCX3404500332&it=r&asid=8b076c129bf09ed7dd11d8f66aa8a344. Accessed 28 Sept. 2017.

Stark, Louis. “Organizers Rally: ‘Encircling Movement.’” The New York Times, 04 Mar. 1937, pp. 1, ProQuest Historical Newspapers. http://ezproxy.lib.utexas.edu/login?url=https://search.proquest.com/docview/102301231?accountid=7118.

Ben, Adler. “Labor Unions and Lawmakers in California Agree on Minimum Wage Increase.” All Things Considered (NPR), 28 Mar. 2016. EBSCOhost. ezproxy.lib.utexas.edu/login?url=http://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&db=nfh&AN=6XN201603282119&site=ehost-live.

Rees, Jonathan. “Steel Strikes.” Dictionary of American History, edited by Stanley I. Kutler, 3rd ed., vol. 7, Charles Scribner’s Sons, 2003, pp. 544-546. http://go.galegroup.com/ps/retrieve.do?tabID=T003&resultListType=RESULT_LIST&searchResultsType=SingleTab&searchType=AdvancedSearchForm&currentPosition=3&docId=GALE%7CCX3401804038&docType=Topic+overview&sort=RELEVANCE&contentSegment=&prodId=GVRL&contentSet=GALE%7CCX3401804038&searchId=R1&userGroupName=txshracd2598&inPS=true

Coffin, Donald A. “The State of Steel.” The State of Steel, www.ibrc.indiana.edu/ibr/2003/spring03/spring03_art1.html.

Cooper, M. H. “Organized Labor in the 1980s.” CQ Researcher by CQ Press, 1985, library.cqpress.com/cqresearcher/document.php?id=cqresrre1985061400.


What This Congress Needs

Hoover; appropriations; balance budget
President Herbert Hoover forces Speaker of the House, John Nance Garner, to work on government expenses, the budget, and appropriations.

March 4, 1929: That was the day Herbert Hoover was elected President of the United States. It was also just seven short months before the start of the Great Depression. As unexpected as the Great Depression was, President Hoover thought he knew exactly what needed to happen. He was “confident that the economy would recover quickest without tampering with the Federal Government” (Kennedy). He believed in the traditional American values of individualism, free enterprise, and a decentralized government. Hoover was trying to kill two birds with one stone: cut taxes while also doubling spending for public works programs. Yet while Hoover was President, the country went into the deepest bankruptcy ever experienced. Critics said “he simply could not overcome his fiscal conservatism,” and that, “federal relief programs would undercut core American values with irretrievable negative consequences” (Kennedy).  Speaker of the House, John Nance Garner, attempted to help Hoover by releasing a bill of his own, which caused outrage with President Hoover. Hoover placed tariffs, started corporations, signed bills, and raised the budget significantly but it was not enough to avoid the worst economic downturn in American history.

Right after the stock market crashed on October 29, 1929, Hoover asked Congress for a $160 million tax cut while also doubling spending for the construction of public buildings, dams, highways, and harbors (Kennedy). Initially, he was praised for his efforts because they seemed to be working. While citizens were pleased with the efforts made by their President, unemployment was at its highest record levels. Ironically, Hoover was criticized for his efforts on public work projects which were formed to create jobs, but instead it caused more unemployment.

As the Depression worsened, “Hoover failed to recognize the severity of the situation or leverage the power of the federal government to squarely address it” (History). People accused Hoover of being insensitive toward the suffering of millions of Americans who had nothing. He vetoed many bills that some believe would have brought the country out of its hole. During his presidency, he “vetoed thirty-seven bills, of which twenty-one were regular vetoes and sixteen were pocket vetoes” (Senate).

In 1930, Hoover infamously signed the Smoot-Hawley Tariff which “virtually closed the [US] borders to foreign goods and ignited a vicious international trade war,” all while the Great Depression was just beginning (Reed). The Smoot-Hawley Tariff was known as President Hoover’s crowning folly during his presidency. One of Hoover’s governing philosophies was limitation of the federal government. When the Great Depression worsened, America was desperately calling for the intervention of the federal government, but Hoover refused, claiming it would be “steps towards socialism” (Hoover). Hoover believed that what the American people wanted from the federal government would help in the short-term but not long-term. Hoover’s way of running a failing nation irritated Democrats and even some in his own political party. He was under great scrutiny to keep this nation above water, but instead it was just sinking deeper and deeper.

At this point, the Dust Bowl was also occurring, a 10-year drought that caused Hoover to recommend large appropriations for loans to rehabilitate agriculture. A large number of farmers were planting crops, to top, which led soil to become too dry with aridity and erosion, which made great swaths of land unsustainable for crops. Hoover was cutting money from other government agencies in order to fulfill the agriculture loss. During this desperate time, if land would had been more sustainable for crops, farmers would have had more jobs.

Although Hoover’s efforts were noted by the general public, many viewed these actions as too little and too late. His plans for saving money failed miserably. When Hoover “took office, the federal budget was $3.1 billion” (The Washington Post). In order to balance the budget, Hoover signed the Revenue Act of 1932 which “increased American taxes greatly” and “further discourage[d] spending” (Romer and Pells). With the hope that the Revenue Act of 1932 would make a difference, the federal government continued to run a budget deficit. Hoover’s “last budget, Fiscal 1933, was $4.6 billion” which was drastic increase in just four years (The Washington Post).

Hoover’s political rival, Speaker of the House, John Nance Garner, had a different approach to balancing the budget. His plan was to enforce a national sales tax, which was not on President Hoover’s agenda. Citizens were getting so fed up with the amount of money the US had lost that they created the “Hoover flag,” which was an empty pocket turned inside out, representing citizens lack of money (Phelps).

President Hoover was a Republican while Speaker John Nance Garner was a Democrat, which automatically caused tension between the two. In the beginning of his term as Democratic Speaker of the House, Garner was known for his more “conservative and independent view of major economic questions” (Kennedy). However, as he grew into his position, he became supportive of federal intervention in economic affairs. In his first few months as Speaker, he tried to cooperate with President Hoover’s economic programs such as the Reconstruction Finance Corporation and the Glass-Steagall banking bills.
In order to bring confidence back to businesses, Hoover formed the Reconstruction Finance Corporation. It loaned public money directly to businesses that were struggling, with most of the funds allocated to banks, insurance companies, and railroads. The Glass-Steagall banking bill was an act that separated investment and commercial banking activities (Romer and Pells).

By 1932, however, Garner lost his patience with the lack of change that Hoover had made and he was determined to “repudiate Hoover’s programs” (Senate). Considering Garner’s conservative characteristics as Speaker, Garner became more assertive and offered a federal relief spending bill of his own. “Given his reluctance to offer his own proposals and his long record of opposition to increased government spending,” Garner went against Hoover, whom he had respected his whole professional career (Senate). Hoover immediately vetoed the bill calling it “the most gigantic pork barrel raid ever proposed to an American Congress!” (The Washington Post). After Garner’s efforts to increase government spending, the relationship between Hoover and Garner would never be the same. People were losing money fast and the United States was falling more and more into bankruptcy.

During this time, many cartoons and editorials were being printed in all newspapers regarding the Great Depression and President Hoover. For example, the author of an editorial regarding Hoover and his presidency, “Mr. Hoover Reproves,” in the Dallas Morning News, somewhat favored the efforts of President Hoover and agreed with the lengths to which he had gone for the US (“Mr. Hoover Reproves”). However, the editorial also had a tone of reprimanding the House of Representatives for fiscal irresponsibility: “the House of Representatives [left] undone the things which it ought to have done and in doing things which it ought not to have done” (“Mr. Hoover Reproves”) The editorial mentions the Goldsborough Bill, which initially, “Mr. Hoover paid his respects to” (“Mr. Hoover Reproves”). The Bill stated, “that the average purchasing power” as established by the Department of Labor in the wholesale markets, “shall be restored and maintained by the control of the volume of credit and currency” (Time). Once Hoover learned more about the Goldsborough Bill, however, he responded back to Congress and told them if the measures were to reach him again, he would veto it right away. The editorial primed the reader for understanding current events that were happening when the cartoon, “What This Congress Needs” by John Knott, was published (Knott).

Knott’s illustration depicts President Hoover standing over and holding onto the collar of an obviously distressed looking man who is John Nance Garner. Garner is portrayed writing on three different government papers with the titles “Reduce Government Expenses,” “Balance Budget,” and “Cut Appropriations” (Knott). Those were Hoover’s three main goals during his presidency. President Hoover is saying, “Do the job right, or else—” with a stern look on his face (Knott). He is depicted as a tall and large man compared to the small, timid Garner sitting at the table. Garner represented the House of Representatives as a whole, which explains why Hoover said, “Do the job right, or else—” because the President had lost trust in the Speaker after he a proposed a bill opposing what Hoover believed (Knott).

President Hoover is seen holding a large bottle of castor oil. During the Great Depression many citizens used castor oil as a home remedy for stomach aches. However, people avoided it at all costs because castor oil’s taste was so foul. President Hoover said, “Do the job right, or else,” because no one wanted to drink the oil, so he was threatening Garner (Knott). If Garner did not “do the job right”, according to Hoover, then he was going to make Garner drink the castor oil medicine.

Hoover’s presidency was not what he expected when coming into office. He tried fixing an economically unstable nation by raising the budget, cutting appropriations, placing tariffs, and starting financial aid programs/corporations in the hope of restoring America back to its financial stability and prosperity. Speaker Garner attempted to help the nation on his own, but that was not possible without the support of the President. The cartoon “What This Congress Needs,” and the accompanying editorial helped readers interpret the current events during Hoover’s presidency (Knott). Little did America know that nearly eighty years later, the US would experience another financial crisis, the 2008 Great Recession.

Works Cited:

History.com Staff. “Herbert Hoover.” History.com, A&E Television Networks, 2009, www.history.com/topics/us-presidents/herbert-hoover.

Hoover, Herbert. “The Gilder Lehrman Institute of American History.” Herbert Hoover on the Great Depression and New Deal, 19931-1993. Gilder Lehrman Institute of American History, https://www.gilderlehrman.org/content/herbert-hoover-great-depression-and-new-deal-1931%E2%80%931933

Knott, John. What This Congress Needs. 7 May. 1932, Dolph Briscoe Center for American History, Austin. Section 2, page 2.

Kennedy, Susan Estabrook. “Hoover, Herbert.” Encyclopedia of the Great Depression, edited by Robert S. McElvaine, vol. 1, Macmillan Reference USA, New York, 2004, pp. 458–465. Gale Virtual Reference Library, link.galegroup.com.ezproxy.lib.utexas.edu/apps/doc/CX3404500265/GVRL?u=txshracd2598&sid=GVRL&xid=6e1f97f5. Accessed 27 Mar. 2018.

“Mr. Hoover Reproves.” Dallas Morning News, 7 May. 1932. Editorial. Section 2, page 2.

Phelps, Shirelle, and Jeffrey Lehman, editors. “Hoover, Herbert Clark.” West’s Encyclopedia of American Law, 2nd ed., vol. 5, Gale, Detroit, 2005, pp. 287–289.Gale Virtual Reference Library, link.galegroup.com.ezproxy.lib.utexas.edu/apps/doc/CX3437702155/GVRL?u=txshracd2598&sid=GVRL&xid=fe1a1eff. Accessed 27 Mar. 2018.

Reed, Lawrence. “The Greatest Spending Administration in All of History.” Mackinac, 1 Jan. 1998, www.mackinac.org/4026.

Romer, Christina D., and Richard H. Pells. “Great Depression.” Encyclopædia Britannica, Encyclopædia Britannica, Inc., 2 Feb. 2018, www.britannica.com/event/Great-Depression/Sources-of-recovery#ref802198.

Senate. “John Nance Garner, 32nd Vice President (1933-1942). U.S. Senate: John Nance Garner, 32nd Vice President (1933-1941), 12 Jan. 2017, https://www.senate.gov/artandhistory/history/common/generic/VP_John_Garner.htm

Senate. “Vetoes.” U.S. Senate: Vetoes, United States Senate, 5 Apr. 2018, www.senate.gov/reference/Legislation/Vetoes/vetoCounts.htm.

Time. “National Affairs: Goldsborough Bill.” Time, Time Inc., 16 May 1932, content.time.com/time/magazine/article/0,9171,846980,00.html.

The Washington Post. “Hoover’s ‘Austerity’ Program.” Washington Post, the, Jan. 0003. EBSCOhost,ezproxy.lib.utexas.edy/login?url=http://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&db=nfh&AN=wapo.c424e6e0-8108-11e2-a671-0307392de8de&site=ehost-live