Ohio History Journal

FRANK P. VAZZANO

 

Harry Hopkins and Martin Davey:

Federal Relief and Ohio Politics

During the Great Depression

 

 

The Great Depression and its accompanying economic and social

dislocations catapulted a number of personalities to a national promi-

nence they would never have experienced in easier times. They

ranged from the eccentric to the demagogic and found ready audi-

ences among Americans eager to grasp any alternative to the despair

of the 1930s. Foremost of the new prophets were Dr. Francis Town-

send, who promised to cure America's ills by paying every citizen

over the age of sixty a government pension of 200 dollars a month; Fa-

ther Charles Coughlin, whose solutions to the depression were ulti-

mately discredited because of his virulence; and, of course, Huey

Long, Louisiana's governor, whose Share the Wealth program of-

fered a little something to almost everybody.

Nearly lost in the eccentricity and flamboyancy swirling about the

likes of Townsend, Coughlin, and Long was an Ohio politician, Mar-

tin L. Davey, whose battles against President Franklin D. Roosevelt's

New Deal commanded much of the nation's attention in the mid-

thirties. Davey, a Democrat, was a three-term mayor of Kent, Ohio, a

long-time congressman, and, from 1935-1939, governor of Ohio. In the

last capacity, controversy was his constant companion. For instance,

when the state legislature refused to vote funds to replace worn car-

peting in the governor's office, Davey solicited enough private contri-

butions to do the job. On another occasion, after the legislature

denied an appropriation for a new limousine for the governor, Davey

bought one with National Guard monies, sweeping aside criticism

by declaring he was entitled to do so because he was the state's

commander-in-chief. On still another, rather than simply fire the

warden of the Ohio penitentiary, Davey ordered the National Guard

 

 

 

 

 

Frank P. Vazzano is Professor of History at Walsh College.

• 1
 

Harry Hopkins and Martin Davey                                     125

 

to evict the man from his state-owned home and to pile his furnish-

ings in the street.¹

Davey's dramatic flair may have captivated many Ohioans, but it

failed to impress hardened politicos in Washington who were more

interested in making the New Deal work than they were in the theat-

rics of a flashy governor. Consequently, only a few weeks after his in-

auguration in January 1935, the pugnacious Davey became embroiled

in a bitter patronage dispute with the New Deal's equally combative

chief relief administrator, Harry Hopkins.² By 1935, despite encour-

aging signs that the worst of the depression had passed, 1,200,000 of

Ohio's 6,600,000 citizens remained on relief rolls.³ With so many de-

pendent on funds from the Federal Emergency Relief Administra-

tion, the threat of losing federal subsidies because of the Davey-

Hopkins feud stirred the public and New Dealers alike.

FERA director Hopkins, appointed by Roosevelt in 1933, deter-

mined the disbursement of national relief monies, and Ohio de-

pended heavily on its $8,000,000 monthly allotment. In return for

FERA assistance, Ohio had to accept federal controls, although in

the spirit of federal-state cooperation Hopkins worked through an

Ohio State Relief Commission.⁴ In addition, Hopkins had the final

say in key personnel assignments in the relief system. Armed with

these extensive powers, Hopkins fought to keep politics out of relief

by maintaining a nonpartisan organization.

The front page headlines of the March 17, 1935, Cleveland Plain

Dealer, "Roosevelt Hits Davey With U.S. Probe," signaled the onset

of still another Hopkins struggle with Democratic politicians who saw

political patronage as a welcome adjunct to New Deal reform.⁵ Ohio

 

 

 

1. Ralph J. Donaldson, "Martin L. Davey," in The Governors of Ohio (Columbus,

1954), 180.

2. The Cleveland Plain Dealer aptly described the governor: "When he contem-

plates some rank injustice his eyelids narrow. He looks like a fighter, lithe, supple, ca-

pable of turning some break to his advantage." Davey himself said, "I never went out

looking for a fight, and I never ran away from one." Undated Plain Dealer clipping in

Harold Davey to Martin L. Davey, October 15, 1934, Martin L. Davey Papers, MSS 339,

Ohio Historical Society, Columbus, Ohio.

3. New York Times, March 18, 1935.

4. David J. Maurer, "Relief Problems and Politics in Ohio," in John Braeman, Rob-

ert H. Bremner, David Brody, eds., The New Deal: The State and Local Levels (Colum-

bus, 1975), II, 81-83; Carl Wittke, ed., The History of the State of Ohio: Ohio in the

Twentieth Century, 1900-1938 (Columbus, 1942), VI, 70.

5. Democratic politicians flooded Hopkins with complaints that the best interests of

the party were ill-served through nonpartisan relief administration. See Searle F.

Charles, Minister of Relief: Harry Hopkins and the Depression (Syracuse, 1963), 74-76,

and Edwin P. Hoyt, The Tempering Years (New York, 1963), 88.

• 2
 

126                                                OHIO HISTORY

 

had already been under federal scrutiny after Cuyahoga County Re-

lief Administration chairman Marc Grossman, Cleveland business-

man Dudley Blossom, and FERA midwest liaison Charles C. Stillman

reported to Hopkins that Davey intended to turn relief administration

into political profit.⁶ A series of gubernatorial removals and appoint-

ments, although not unusual during a change of administrations,

heightened tensions on both sides.

Shortly after his inauguration, Davey fired acting state relief direc-

tor Frank Henderson and replaced him with William A. Walls, form-

er school superintendent in Kent, Davey's home town. The decision,

although unpopular in Washington, was accepted to maintain harmo-

ny with the new Ohio administration.⁷ Relations between the state

and federal relief bureaucracies began to strain, however, when Ohio

Republican legislators generated a civil service dispute with the gov-

ernor by refusing to support a renewal of the State Relief Commission.

Davey, contending that the Republicans' desire for civil service clas-

sification of relief workers would create a permanent bureaucracy,

allowed the state organization to expire. When the State Relief

Commission disbanded on March 1, Hopkins ordered Davey to ad-

minister relief in Ohio as the agent of the federal government, retain-

ing, however, his position as general overseer. Even before assuming

his new responsibilities, the governor had begun to replace some

county relief heads with his own appointees.⁸

One of Davey's administrative changes in Cuyahoga County's relief

organization provoked Hopkins' investigation of Ohio relief. The gov-

ernor's firing of Mary Irene Atkinson, who had authorized all Cuya-

hoga County Relief Administration personnel assignments before final

approval by the now defunct State Relief Commission, sparked

charges that he intended to dispense Cuyahoga County relief jobs to

his loyal supporters.⁹ The Atkinson firing was only the beginning of a

series of Davey attacks on the CCRA. Apparently convinced by what

he had seen of Cleveland relief during his 1934 campaign, the gov-

ernor assailed the "inefficiency" and "waste" of the Cuyahoga

County bureaucracy and threatened to cut its staff by a third.¹⁰

 

6. Transcripts of Telephone Conversations With State Relief Directors and Other

Officials, Ohio-South Dakota, December 11, 1934, and February 2, 1935, Container 77,

Harry Hopkins Papers, Franklin D. Roosevelt Library, Hyde Park, New York.

7. Hopkins knew of Davey's intention in early December 1934 through a telephone

conversation with Ohio's United States Senator Robert Bulkley and acquiesced in it

during a call to the governor on January 19, 1935. See Ibid., December 8, 1934, and

January 19, 1935.

8. Cleveland Plain Dealer, March 2, 1935.

9. Ibid., March 1, 1935.

10. The Plain Dealer ridiculed Davey for stating that the CCRA had 1,500 workers.

• 3
 

Harry Hopkins and Martin Davey                                    127

 

Davey's criticism of the CCRA and his general disillusionment

with the FERA in Ohio evoked an angry response in the newspaper

from CCRA chairman Marc Grossman. Defending his organization,

Grossman countercharged that the CCRA was understaffed, under-

paid, and overworked. To prove his point, Grossman cited figures

from the latest FERA monthly report, which showed that Cleveland

(the heart of Cuyahoga County) ranked third out of the nine largest

cities in the country in per-family relief costs. Operating expenses for

Cleveland relief consumed only seven percent of the budget, far bet-

ter than the national average of ten percent.11 Hopkins concurred,

describing Cleveland relief administration as "one of the best in the

country." Davey, he said, "didn't know what he's talking about."¹²

Davey's foes were not as worried about his charges of malfeasance

as much as they feared his intention of turning Ohio's relief organiza-

tion into a political machine. That apprehension and the bombast it

engendered temporarily blunted the governor's attack. Davey re-

canted his proposed CCRA staff reductions and complained that his

statements had been distorted by an unfriendly press. Davey now

maintained that he merely wanted to cut the administrative costs of

relief to make the program as efficient and humane as possible.¹³

By March 5, however, many began to wonder what the governor

actually did have in mind. In a letter to Hopkins, Davey again de-

nounced Ohio's relief setup and requested that the federal govern-

ment assume all responsibilities for relief in the state. The CCRA

typified the kind of responsibilities he no longer wanted.14

Hopkins got the letter at 5:00 P.M. and within ninety minutes called

a press conference. Clutching the letter and obviously fuming,

Hopkins flayed Davey for requesting total federal responsibility for

Ohio relief only after finding it was not politically advantageous to ad-

minister it. He further charged that the governor's sole knowledge of

Ohio relief came from his search for votes among the needy. Ohio,

 

 

 

 

The actual figure was 2,000. Moreover, the newspaper pointed out that only three days

before his election the governor had lauded the CCRA for its efficiency. See Cleve-

land Plain Dealer, March 2, 4, 1935.

11. Ibid., March 3, 1935. The starting salary for a CCRA social worker was eighty

dollars a month. Grossman, a practicing attorney, donated his services.

12. Typed copy of Hopkins' press conference, March 5, 1935, Federal Relief Agency

Papers, Confidential Political File, 1933-1938, Box 36, Hopkins Papers, F.D.R. Library.

13. Cleveland Plain Dealer, March 3, 1935.

14. Ibid., March 6, 1935; New York Times, March 17, 1935; Harry Hopkins to Mar-

tin L. Davey, March 8, 1935, Federal Relief Agency Papers, Confidential Political File,

1933-1938, Box 36, Hopkins Papers, F.D.R. Library.

• 4
 

128                                                     OHIO HISTORY

 

Hopkins insisted, remained responsible for its $2,000,000 share of the

monthly relief bill despite Davey's contentions.¹⁵

Davey once again wavered. He said he was not opposed to the

"fine, responsible people administering relief' but to the "theorists"

in Washington who now found government sanction for their experi-

ments with human misery. This accounted, Davey argued, for the

endless reports and "red tape" that prevented relief workers from ac-

tually handling cases. The governor steadfastly maintained he had

no desire to create a political machine through patronage and his

only prerequisites for appointments would be "character and abili-

ty."¹⁶

Obviously angered by Hopkins' assault on a branch of the Roose-

velt administration's Democratic family, Davey defended his position

in a statewide radio broadcast on March 9.17 In his address, the

governor emphasized that under the existing federal-state arrange-

ment he was powerless to act in any relief matters and that FERA

head Harry Hopkins should therefore accept all responsibility for

Ohio's relief problems. Among other charges, Davey accused county

relief heads of using their authority to get dates with female employ-

ees and added that "chiseling," his pet term, was endemic under

the existing relief setup. Evading claims that he wanted to create a

Davey organization through political patronage, the governor cited

sample statistics from Logan and Miami counties showing that Re-

publican relief workers there far outnumbered Democrats. To fortify

his charges of inefficiency in Ohio relief, Davey read a telegram from

the president of the Ohio Townships Trustees and Clerks, an organi-

zation of five thousand elected local officials, which said that Ohio's

relief administration indeed was ineffective and wasteful.¹⁸

 

 

15. Hopkins' Press Conference, March 5, 1935, Federal Relief Agency Papers, Conn-

dential Political File, 1933-1938, Box 36, Hopkins Papers, F.D.R. Library.

16. [Martin L. Davey] to [?], n.d., Davey Papers, MSS 339, Miscellaneous Material,

Box 6, File 6, Ohio Historical Society; Cleveland Plain Dealer, March 7, 1935.

17. Davey was an effective radio broadcaster. Before his election to the governor-

ship he had promoted the family business, the Davey Tree Company, with a weekly

radio program, Trees. After his election he continued to use the medium in his own

version of fireside chats broadcast throughout Ohio. See Maurer, "Relief Problems

and Politics in Ohio," 91.

18. The text of Davey's radio address revealed that he had received reports of beer

parties being held in relief offices and that residents of Kentucky, Michigan, and

Pennsylvania were coming to Ohio for relief handouts. In another attack on the CCRA,

the governor, perhaps purposely forgetting that large cities are especially affected by

unemployment, charged that Cleveland, with one-sixth of the state's population, ab-

sorbed one-fourth of Ohio's relief allotment. He also upbraided the FERA for filling

relief positions with young social workers who neither needed the money nor were

suited for the job. See Cleveland Plain Dealer, March 10, 1935.

• 5
 

Harry Hopkins and Martin Davey                            129

Davey's battle against relief corruption began to assume the moral fervor of a crusade. In another letter to Hopkins he said he had no intention of asking the state legislature for the funds to provide Ohio's share of relief costs for the rest of 1935. To do so, he felt, would force Ohio taxpayers to aid and perpetuate fraud in the state. Hopkins acknowledged that he had received about fifty telegrams defending Davey but announced that, aside from discontinuing fed- eral financial assistance, he was taking no action in Ohio.19 The FERA director had a month earlier sought a precedent for with- holding federal monies from a state and apparently found it in a gov- ernment memorandum entitled, "Analysis of Types of Federal-State Relationships in Relation to a Program of Economic Security."20 He knew he was on sound legal footing when he took on Davey.     19. Cleveland Plain Dealer, March 12, 1935; Hopkins to Davey, March 8, 1935, Fed- eral Relief Agency Papers, Confidential Political File, 1933-1938, Box 36, Hopkins Pa- pers, F.D.R. Library. 20. J. P. Harris to Harry Hopkins, February 9, 1935, Federal Relief Agency Papers,

• 6
 

130                                                   OHIO HISTORY

 

An immediate crisis arising from Hopkins' threat to withhold fed-

eral funds was averted when the state auditor, Joseph Tracy, trans-

ferred $1,000,000 of state sales tax proceeds to the state relief admin-

istration. The federal government then approved a $4,000,000 grant to

aid Ohio's relief population. However, the near crisis had prompted

several Ohio legislators, including some Democrats, to consider going

over the governor's head with a direct appeal to Hopkins.²¹ The

transfer of funds, a temporary measure at best, and hints of a compro-

mise between Davey and Hopkins proved enough to dissuade them.

Davey's interest in reform, although expedient, seemed genuine.

He prepared a message to the state legislature proposing a relief inves-

tigation into ten or twelve representative counties, including Cuyaho-

ga, and carried his appeal to the state in a second radio broadcast on

March 12. Again, the governor cited examples of dishonesty on the

part of relief employees and emphasized that five million dollars

could be saved for the rest of 1935 if relief administration were

carried out in business-like fashion.²²

The governor's stubborn stand against an equally unyielding Hop-

kins demonstrated the futility of compromise. While two hundred

representatives of Cleveland civic, labor, religious and welfare organi-

zations bombarded Davey with telegrams protesting his stance on re-

lief, Marc Grossman went to Washington, at Hopkins' invitation, to

confer with the FERA director and the president himself.²³

Hopkins had already informed Roosevelt of the Ohio particulars

and eagerly awaited the next round of confrontation with Davey.²⁴

During a rare pause from his whirlwind schedule, Hopkins noted in

his diary, "the evidence is complete in Ohio-the political boys went

too far this trip and I shall take great delight in giving them the

works."²⁵ Roosevelt shared Hopkins' enthusiasm for the Ohio strug-

gle, which prompted Hopkins to remark, "the president doesn't take

a week to decide things like this . . . His action will throw into the

 

 

 

 

FERA-WPA Legislative and Legal Proceedings, 1933-1939, Container 80, Hopkins Pa-

pers, F.D.R. Library.

21. Cleveland Plain Dealer, March 12, 1935.

22. Ibid., March 13, 1935.

23. Ibid., March 16, 1935; Transcripts of Telephone Conversations With State Relief

Directors and Other Officials, Ohio-South Dakota, March 14, 1935, Container 77,

Hopkins Papers, F.D.R. Library.

24. Harry Hopkins to Franklin D. Roosevelt, March 11, 1935, Federal Relief Agency

Papers, Confidential Political File, 1933-1938, Box 36, Hopkins Papers, F.D.R. Library.

25. Harry Hopkins, Diary, March 16, 1935, Personal and Financial Matters, 1933-

1945, Box 6, Hopkins Papers, F.D.R. Library.

• 7
 

Harry Hopkins and Martin Davey                               131

 

ash can a Democratic Governor and his political machine. In fact I

think the boss liked the idea of their being Democratic."²⁶

On March 16, the president asked Hopkins to draft a letter in-

structing the FERA director to take over relief in Ohio.27 That same

day Hopkins received his own letter bearing a presidential signature:

I have examined the evidence concerning corrupt political interference

with relief in the state of Ohio. Such interference cannot be tolerated for a

moment. I wish you to pursue these investigations diligently and let the chips

fall where they may. This administration will not permit the relief population

of Ohio to become innocent victims of either corruption or political chican-

ery.

You are authorized and directed forthwith to assume entire control of the

administration of Federal relief in the state of Ohio.²⁸

That the dispute had escalated was obvious when Hopkins, with

Grossman at his side, declared to the press he had "incontroverti-

ble" evidence proving that the Davey organization had virtually ex-

torted funds to defray the governor's campaign and inauguration ex-

penses. Hopkins further claimed that he had the signed confessions

of the men who had solicited the contributions and the names of

those who paid. The "shakedown," according to Hopkins, had

pumped $8,000 into Davey coffers.²⁹ Hopkins quickly linked his lat-

est revelation to Davey's earlier problems with relief when he added,

"the people of Ohio want to take care of the unemployed, only the

governor doesn't want to.^"30 Although the federal government had

previously intervened in relief matters in other states, Hopkins said

that only Ohio had provoked a special presidential order (Hopkins'

own letter, of course) to that effect. Hopkins told Davey that he was

forwarding the evidence to Ohio Attorney General John W. Bricker

and placed Charles C. Stillman, the FERA midwest liaison, in com-

plete charge of relief administration in the state.³1

The accusations from Washington fired passions in Ohio. The

Cleveland Plain Dealer reported that several faculty members of

Western Reserve University would join any "oust Davey" move-

ment.³² Among Ohio legislators, sentiment ran from Republican state

 

 

26. Ibid.

27. Ibid.

28. Franklin D. Roosevelt to Harry Hopkins, March 16, 1935, in Samuel I. Rosenman,

ed., The Public Papers and Addresses of Franklin D. Roosevelt (New York, 1938), IV,

108.

29. Cleveland Plain Dealer, March 17, 1935.

30. New York Times, March 17, 1935.

31. Ibid.

32. Cleveland Plain Dealer, March 17, 1935.

• 8
 

132                                               OHIO HISTORY

 

senator Robert Pollack's cry for the governor's impeachment to Dem-

ocratic state representative Tom Gallagher's denunciation of Hopkins'

charges as "baloney."³³ Grossman, after flying back to Cleveland,

sniggered over the telephone to Hopkins, "the whole city is yelling

for his [Davey's] impeachment."³⁴

Seemingly unconcerned about the coming investigation and eager

to continue his feud in the press, Davey accused Hopkins of simply

trying to divert attention from the real issue-the inefficiency of fed-

eral relief in Ohio. The governor denied any knowledge of campaign

fund irregularities and adroitly took the initiative by suggesting that

he knew as much about fund raising as Roosevelt did of Jim Farley's

zealous solicitations during the 1932 Democratic national campaign.³⁵

Davey's ignorance of party financial affairs was verified by Demo-

cratic state executive committee chairman Francis W. Poulson. Mo-

mentarily sharing the press spotlight with the governor, Poulson ad-

mitted that there was a $14,000 deficit after Davey's 1934 campaign

and contributions to offset it had been accepted. However, he could

see no reason for sudden concern, for political parties had always so-

licited money. In a blanket defense of the entire Democratic slate,

Poulson added that neither the governor nor congressional and judi-

cial candidates knew anything about party finances during the cam-

paign. He concluded confidently, "I accept full responsibility and

have no apologies to offer."³⁶

If anyone seemed unsure, it was Hopkins. After sending a fiery let-

ter to Davey and charging Stillman with the responsibilities of Ohio

relief, he admitted he had no idea how long federal control would

last. He conceded the possibility of dual federal-state management

but hoped the Ohio legislature would provide funds for the state's

relief share. Curiously though, perhaps as a concession to his friend-

ship with Grossman, Hopkins emphasized there would be no

changes in the Cuyahoga County Relief Administration, although

Stillman was supposedly empowered to work out his own relief setup

in the state.³⁷

 

 

 

33. Ibid.

34. Transcripts of Telephone Conversations With State Relief Directors and Other

Officials, Ohio-South Dakota, March 18, 1935, Container 77, Hopkins Papers, F.D.R.

Library.

35. New York Times, March 17, 1935.

36. Ibid. Many doubted Davey's purported ignorance of financial matters. The

Times on March 18, 1935, reported that political cognoscenti believed the governor

and Poulson were "as close as Damon and Pythias."

37. Cleveland Plain Dealer, March 17, 1935.

• 9
 

Harry Hopkins and Martin Davey                                  133

 

On March 18, Davey addressed a joint session of the state legisla-

ture and, amid occasional outbursts of applause, scored Hopkins and

relief administration in Ohio. His arguments were familiar, denounc-

ing inefficiency and waste, but he added a new twist to the dispute.

The governor told the joint session that he had sworn out a warrant

for Hopkins' arrest, charging him with criminal libel, and he dared

the FERA director to come to Ohio to stand trial.³⁸

Hopkins' challenge had been accepted. State Democrats quickly

rallied around their leader. The Ohio senate, under Democratic con-

trol, passed a joint resolution calling for a legislative investigating com-

mittee to inquire into federal relief corruption.³⁹ Davey got another

vote of confidence on March 20 when Ohio house and senate Demo-

crats, meeting in caucus, unanimously adopted a pro-Davey resolution

condemning Hopkins and calling for a public redress from Roose-

velt.⁴⁰

Meanwhile, Stillman informed Hopkins that Davey intended to

move into Ohio relief headquarters in Columbus to confiscate public

records of relief transactions.⁴¹ Hopkins sprang to action. Within min-

utes he got the Department of Justice in Washington to authorize the

use of United States marshals in Columbus and assured Stillman that

help was on the way. "If the governor throws you out," he said,

"just laugh at him."⁴²

As Hopkins had promised, that very day two marshals moved into

Ohio relief headquarters to safeguard federal property, and by the

next, three FERA agents from Washington arrived to take charge of

the disbursement of all federal funds.⁴³ On March 20, Stillman re-

ported to his boss in Washington, "things are breaking beautifully

here," and then began his "housecleaning" with a series of fir-

ings.⁴⁴ Among the first to go was George Eppley, assistant to William

 

 

38. Journal of the House of Representatives of the State of Ohio, 91st Gen. Assem.,

1935 (Columbus, 1935), CXVI, 436; Cleveland Plain Dealer, March 19, 1935.

39. Party support for Davey was evident when six Democrats, three each from the

house and senate, were chosen for the ten-member investigating committee. A Repub-

lican proposal for a committee of twelve, with an equal split between Democrats and

Republicans, was rejected. Journal of the Senate of the State of Ohio, 91st Gen.

Assem., 1935 (Columbus, 1935), CXVI, 329-30, 373; Cleveland Plain Dealer, March 19,

1935.

40. Cleveland Plain Dealer, March 21, 1935.

41. Transcripts of Telephone Conversations With State Relief Directors and Other

Officials, Ohio-South Dakota, March 18, 1935, Container 77, Hopkins Papers, F.D.R.

Library.

42. Ibid.

43. Cleveland Plain Dealer, March 19, 20, 1935.

44. Transcripts of Telephone Conversations With State Relief Directors and Other

• 10
 

134                                                   OHIO HISTORY

 

Walls, Davey's appointee as state relief director. Six more relief em-

ployees were dismissed, and others, fearful that they might be impli-

cated in some wrongdoing, also offered their resignations.⁴⁵

Stillman's investigation ultimately reached the Ohio Surplus and

Commodities Division. Several employees were released after Still-

man found that two men had been paid a total of $1,100 over a seven-

month period for guarding 75 tons of hay valued at $1,350.46 By

March 27, nine days after the relief investigation began, Stillman had

fired 73 relief workers, including his own daughter.⁴⁷ His contention

that he could save $10,000 each month in Columbus relief adminis-

tration alone and his admission of irregularities in relief administra-

tion throughout the state elated Davey.⁴⁸ The federal inquiry indeed

had found a great deal of inefficiency and waste just as he had

claimed.⁴⁹

On another front, the Ohio house defeated a resolution authoriz-

ing an investigation of the "shakedown" charges by Attorney Gener-

al Bricker's office. But the inquiry generated by Hopkins' accusations

continued through the legislative investigating committee. At one of

its hearings, Ohio Democratic party chairman Francis Poulson re-

vealed that John McCombe of Ravenna, chief fund raiser of the

party's executive committee, had collected $20,000 since the Novem-

ber election. Poulson was in Florida when the money was raised, and

when he returned McCombe gave him a safety deposit box filled

with a "considerable amount" of cash and checks. The money and

checks were deposited in the executive committee's account and

used when needed. Never, Poulson said, were state contracts

awarded to businesses in return for their contributions, although he

confessed that when prices and quality were the same, the adminis-

tration's "friends" would be remembered.⁵⁰

Hopkins, in the meantime, revealed that his incontrovertible proof

of a shakedown consisted of affidavits signed by three men associa-

ted either directly or indirectly with the Ohio Surplus Commodities

 

 

Officials, Ohio-South Dakota, March 20, 1935, Container 77, Hopkins Papers, F.D.R.

Library.

45. New York Times, March 20, 1935.

46. Ibid., March 23, 1935.

47. Cleveland Plain Dealer, March 28, 1935.

48. Ibid., March 21, 1935.

49. Stillman's investigation in Trumbull County, for instance, revealed that relief

administration workers ignored rules and regulations. A check showed that hours

worked, and sometimes even the names of employees, were falsified on payroll sheets.

Eight people were discharged. See Cleveland Plain Dealer, April 14, 1935.

50. Cleveland Plain Dealer, March 19, 20, 1935.

• 11
 

Harry Hopkins and Martin Davey                                  135

 

Division-William R. McNamara, Tom E. Jones, and Kenneth P.

Aller. McNamara, superintendent of the Surplus Commodities Divi-

sion, swore in his affidavit that McCombe had asked him to help

collect $10,000 to offset the deficit from Davey's gubernatorial cam-

paign. McNamara assigned the job to two of his assistants, Jones and

John A. Lee. Promised that fruitful fund raising efforts would secure

their jobs, Jones and Lee began to solicit contributions from firms

doing business with state relief. Initial collections of $4,250 by Jones

and $900 by Lee were turned over to McNamara and then to

McCombe.⁵¹

Jones, in his affidavit, named individuals he had solicited for con-

tributions, adding that he had been told to accept cash only. He

said that McNamara's anticipated appointment to the directorship or

assistant directorship of the Emergency Relief Administration of

Ohio depended on successful fund raising. Aller's affidavit con-

firmed Jones' solicitation of $250 from Aller's trucking firm, which

hauled meat and animal carcasses under state contract.⁵²

These affidavits constituted the heart of Hopkins' charges against

Davey. Although the Davey organization's fund raising techniques

were hardly admirable, they were likely common practice, not only in

other states but on the national level as well. Even the anti-Davey

Plain Dealer called the McNamara, Jones, and Aller affidavits "one

day sensations." After the initial furor arising from the public an-

nouncement of the federal investigation into Ohio relief, most observ-

ers concluded that the charges were not so serious as they originally

appeared. Furthermore, criminality would be difficult to prove,

thereby dashing any hopes of prosecution. By the end of March

1935, tensions eased and although the legislative investigating com-

mittee continued its inquiry for some months, the general legal con-

sensus was that the Davey organization's actions were reprehensible

but not indictable.⁵³ Unfortunately for Davey, though, charges of

corruption continued to haunt his administration.⁵⁴

 

 

51. Ibid., March 20, 1935.

52. Ibid. A partial listing of businesses solicited included the National Terminal

Warehouse Company ($1,000), Hanna Coal Company ($1,000), Fred Essex Coal Com-

pany ($250), and United Colleries ($500).

53. A Franklin County grand jury also failed to indict the Davey group.

54. Lorena Hickok, one of Hopkins' chief field agents for the Works Progress Ad-

ministration, later in 1935 claimed that Davey was destroying the Democratic party's

organization and credibility by shaking down liquor dealers and bragging about chis-

eling money from the federal government. See Lorena Hickok to Harry Hopkins, Octo-

ber 10, 1935, Lorena Hickok Reports to Harry Hopkins, 1935, Box 11, Lorena Hickok

Papers, F.D.R. Library.

• 12
 

136                                                   OHIO HISTORY

 

With the federal investigation already relegated to the back pages

of the press, Hopkins' decision to visit Cleveland on May 24 was al-

most anticlimactic. Knowing he had agreed to address the Citizens

League, Ohioans wondered if Cleveland police would serve the

Davey libel warrant. On the fourteenth, during lunch at the White

House, Roosevelt kidded Hopkins, asking him if he wanted a presi-

dential pardon.⁵⁵ While Hopkins and Roosevelt bantered, back in

Ohio Davey remained grim, refusing to comment on the matter.⁵⁶

Rumor and conjecture ended on May 22 when Davey withdrew

the charges against Hopkins. In Washington, the FERA director,

smirking over Davey's retreat, announced, "the action speaks for it-

self." The comment from Columbus was, of course, different. Ex-

plaining that he dropped the charges in the interest of party solidari-

ty, the governor contended that he had been completely vindicated

because the Stillman investigation verified his claims of inefficiency

and waste in Ohio relief.⁵⁷

The dispute, a bitterly contested personal quarrel as well as a pub-

lic issue, consequently came to an apt conclusion, with both protago-

nists claiming victory. It was for Hopkins to have the last word, how-

ever. Amid speculation that his Cleveland visit would initiate a

healing of the federal-state breach, Hopkins insisted that there had

been and would be no compromise with Davey. Addressing the Citi-

zens League, Hopkins repeated his stand on the issue, insisting that

Ohio would have to maintain its share of the relief burden. To que-

ries about his clash with Davey, he snapped that he had little re-

spect for the governor and was even more contemptuous of the

threatened libel action.⁵⁸

The stormy events of mid-March were succeeded by relative calm.

Hopkins eyed bigger game in the spring of 1935 when a new presiden-

tial bill calling for a $4,000,000,000 work relief appropriation created

the Works Progress Administration. Both he and Harold Ickes,

Roosevelt's secretary of the interior, wanted to administer the pro-

 

55. Hopkins, Diary, May 14, 1935, Hopkins Papers, F.D.R. Library.

56. Cleveland Plain Dealer, May 14, 1935.

57. Ibid., May 23, 1935.

58. Hopkins' retort to the Davey charge was appended to his Citizens League ad-

dress: "I'd be less than frank if I didn't admit that you all want to know about the li-

bel action against me. ... I have this to say, I took the administration of relief in Ohio

away from the governor and I have no intention whatever of giving it back to him."

"Since coming here I've heard a number of rumors that the governor's action in

lifting the libel action against me was the result of a political deal, but I want to say, in

just as plain a language as I can, that there was no understanding of any kind with any-

one in Washington regarding the lifting of that libel action. I was told not to come to

Ohio. I am here." Cleveland Plain Dealer, May 25, 1935.

• 13
 

Harry Hopkins and Martin Davey                                    137

 

gram, and their ensuing struggle sounded another dissonant note in

the New Deal's familial harmony. The "great resigner," Hopkins

called Ickes. "He threatens to quit anytime things don't go his way.

He bores me."⁵⁹ Perhaps Hopkins had been too quick to condemn

Davey's petulance in the Ohio dispute, for he suffered from a similar

baseness in his sometimes petty rivalry with Ickes.⁶⁰

Yet such a turnabout was not inconsistent with the character and

personality of Harry Hopkins. The chain-smoking, coffee-drinking

FERA director combined the seemingly incongruous views of both

cynic and idealist. Sardonic and quick to cut, Hopkins nevertheless

possessed a genuine sympathy for America's impoverished. His

background in New York social work had shown him firsthand the

despair and destitution of the unemployed, He brought understand-

ing and empathy to a position that could have easily turned into an-

other soft bureaucratic post miles away from the reality of the de-

pression's cold and hunger. His quick temper and frequent fusillades

against the New Deal's detractors made interesting press, but despite

personal shortcomings his concern for beleaguered Americans and

his disdain for pompous, condescending politicians were always evi-

dent.⁶¹

If nothing else, Hopkins fought to maintain an unquestioned probi-

ty in the New Deal. The obligations and duties of his office were sac-

rosanct, and he sincerely believed he could cope with patronage-

hungry politicians and either through persuasion or coercion ensure

integrity in a public dole. His threats to withhold federal funds from

errant states had forced legislatures in Illinois and Kentucky to raise

larger shares of their own relief monies, and his unwavering insis-

tence on honesty in relief administration had triggered clashes with

such notables as Louisiana's Huey Long and North Dakota's William

Langer even before his dispute with Martin Davey.⁶²

 

 

 

59. Hopkins, Diary, May 13, 1935, Hopkins Papers, F.D.R. Library.

60. Hopkins and Ickes fought over fund allotments to PWA and WPA respectively,

disagreed on other project allocations, and constantly competed for the president's fa-

vor. See Charles, Minister of Relief, 106-27, and Harold L. Ickes, The Secret Diary of

Harold L. Ickes: The First Thousand Days, 1933-1936 (New York, 1953), I, 337.

61. A sampling of Hopkins' philosophical views on relief and New Deal reform can

be found in his following articles and speeches: "Boondoggling: Boon or Bane?"

Christian Science Monitor Magazine, (August 19, 1936), 4, 14; "Employment in Ameri-

ca," Vital Speeches, III (December 1, 1936), 103-07; "The Future of Relief," New Re-

public, LXXXX, (February 10, 1937), 7-10; "Should Relief Funds be Administered

by the States?" Congressional Digest, XV (June, 1936), 189-90.

62. Robert E. Sherwood, Roosevelt and Hopkins: An Intimate History (New York,

1948), 77. The disputes were serious. For example, Governor Langer and some of his

• 14
 

138                                                   OHIO HISTORY

 

Nationally, it was politically expedient for the Democrats to prove

that they were spending the taxpayers' money discriminately. De-

spite initial successes, the decision was still out on the New Deal and

1936 was an election year. A measure of party dissension could be tol-

erated as long as a majority at the polls approved the national admin-

istration. Davey, never highly regarded by New Deal leadership,

was expendable.⁶³

Yet outwardly the break between Washington and Columbus ap-

peared to be healing. The Ohio legislature had passed the Carey

Act, which provided additional county relief funds through a one

percent tax on utilities. This bill, combined with other stopgap meas-

ures, helped meet the demands of Ohio's needy. Although the re-

turn to local relief responsibility was no panacea, by November 1935

the federal government started dismantling its administrative ma-

chinery in Ohio and began to confine its activities to indirect assis-

tance through WPA and other work relief programs.⁶⁴

If Ohio Republicans hoped strife between national and state Dem-

ocratic factions would give them the Ohio governorship by default,

they were to be sorely disappointed. Davey was reelected in 1936 af-

ter receiving Roosevelt's support during the president's campaign vis-

it to Ohio in mid-October. At every stop of the presidential train,

from Cincinnati, through Middletown, Dayton, and Springfield to

Columbus and finally to Cleveland, sharing the rear platform with

Roosevelt and his entourage was a beaming Martin L. Davey. In Co-

lumbus, the governor introduced the president to the awaiting

crowd and in Cincinnati rode triumphantly with him in Roosevelt's

touring car for seven miles through the Queen City's streets and

among its cheering citizens. Even the Plain Dealer remarked, "If

there was any presidential reluctance to link his own fortunes with

Davey's so directly, there was not the slightest sign of it."⁶⁵ Roose-

velt's tacit but undeniable endorsement came from the same man

 

 

associates received prison sentences after being found guilty of misusing public funds.

See Charles, Minister of Relief, 76.

63. Hickok to Hopkins, October 10, 1935, Lorena Hickok Reports to Harry Hopkins,

1935, Box 11, Hickok Papers, F.D.R. Library. Although Roosevelt's personal dislike of

Davey remained firm, he grumbled that a losing Democratic slate in Ohio hurt the

national ticket in the off year elections of 1938. In November the president wrote

Josephus Daniels: "In Ohio, Davey, the worst of our Governors, wrecked the whole

ticket." Elliott Roosevelt, ed., F.D.R.: His Personal Letters, 1928-1945 (New York,

1950), IV, 827. See also James Farley, Jim Farley's Story: The Roosevelt Years (New

York, 1948), 149.

64. Wittke, History of Ohio, VI, 80-82.

65. Cleveland Plain Dealer, October 17, 1936.

• 15
 

Harry Hopkins and Martin Davey                                         139

 

who had so vigorously approved Hopkins' actions in the relief

dispute. Rarely had it been better proven that politics makes strange

bedfellows. Despite scandal and controversy that still lay ahead for

the governor, the party pariah of 1935 had become, publicly at least,

one of the national administration's select in 1936.66

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

66. In his second gubernatorial term, Davey suffered through the "hot mix" scan-

dal, involving illegal bidding on a state paving contract, and from accusations that he

allowed the awarding of a trucking contract to a company that had no trucks but was

owned by a Democratic crony. His political fortunes also sank after he directed the

National Guard to preserve order during a steel strike in Youngstown in 1937, thereby

incurring the wrath of the powerful union leader, John L. Lewis. See Donaldson,

"Martin L. Davey," 181-82, and Wittke, History of Ohio, VI, 88.

After two abortive attempts at the governorship, in 1938 and 1940, Davey retired

from politics. He spent the last six years of his life running the family business in Kent,

where he died of a heart attack while playing bridge on March 31, 1946.

• 16