On September 1, 1942, Mayor Fiorello LaGuardia issued a press release appealing to New Yorkers to “avail themselves of existing recreational facilities in New York City over the Labor Day weekend.” He explained that the upcoming holiday “will be our first war-time Labor Day. Because of war conditions, transportation is difficult for everyone.” LaGuardia continued, “I, therefore, am taking this opportunity to remind all residents … that New York City offers the greatest recreational facilities to be found anywhere in the world.”
Documenting the New Deal
There has been much speculation in recent months concerning whether President Joe Biden’s infrastructure projects and related programs, if given the green light, would prove as transformative for the nation as President Franklin Delano Roosevelt’s New Deal was in the 1930s.
A life-long swimmer, Parks Commissioner Robert Moses vastly expanded access to aquatic facilities for New Yorkers. In 1936, he opened ten new swimming pools and during his long tenure he built and improved public beaches throughout the city. “Swim” original art for subway. Tempura water-color on tissue paper, 1937; artist unknown. Department of Parks General Files, 1937.
There is no question, however, that the New Deal transformed New York City. The Works Progress Administration (WPA) was the capstone of Roosevelt’s efforts to recover from the Great Depression. Established as part of the Emergency Relief Appropriations Act of 1935, the WPA was the largest jobs initiative in American history. When the federal funding for the WPA became available, Mayor Fiorello LaGuardia persuaded Roosevelt to release billions of dollars for construction projects. It was a partnership that would forever change the city.
New York received more federal funds than any other city in the nation and employed more than 700,000 people through the Depression years. They built or renovated schools, bridges, parks, hospitals, highways, airports, stadiums, swimming pools, beaches, hospitals, piers, sewers, libraries, courthouse, firehouses, markets and housing projects throughout the five boroughs. The Triborough Bridge, the Holland and Lincoln Tunnels, the FDR Drive, the Henry Hudson and Belt Parkways, and the New York Municipal (LaGuardia) Airport are just some of the WPA-funded projects that have served New Yorkers over the past eight decades.
To the eternal benefit of generations of historians and researchers, the Archives holds extensive collections essential for exploring the New Deal in New York City.
Mayor Fiorello LaGuardia to Harry Hopkins, Administrator Works Progress Administration, Postal Telegram, May 19, 1936. Fiorello LaGuardia Collection, subject files. NYC Municipal Archives.
Documenting the New Deal in the city is largely a tale of two remarkable New Yorkers: Mayor Fiorello LaGuardia and ‘master builder’ Robert Moses. Archival records showing their influence and impact on the city total more than 1,500 cubic feet.
Of particular interest to New Deal historians are Mayor LaGuardia’s subject files. There are 27 folders with content specifically labeled as relating to the WPA. In addition, there are files pertaining to all of the public works construction projects–housing, highways, parks, swimming pools, etc., as well as the Civilian Conservation Corps, and other New Deal programs such as Social Security. In addition, there is a separate series of correspondence with federal officials in Washington D.C. totaling five cubic feet. Not all of it specifically pertains to the WPA, but given the importance of the various programs and the billions of dollars flowing from Washington, information about the massive federal program is well represented in the correspondence.
Mayor Fiorello LaGuardia to Miss Sue Ann Wilson, Federal Theatre Project, November 24, 1936. Fiorello LaGuardia Collection, correspondence with federal officials. NYC Municipal Archives.
LaGuardia’s records have been available at the Municipal Archives since its founding in 1952. The Robert Moses collection is a more recent addition. In 1984, city archivists visited a Department of Parks and Recreation storage facility at the Manhattan Boat Basin under the Henry Hudson Parkway, where they discovered 800 cubic feet of material—about 400,000 items—from 1934 through the 1970s, that included an extensive record of the WPA-funded projects during Moses’s long reign as a New York power broker. LaGuardia appointed Moses as Commissioner of the Department of Parks in 1934 and he served in that capacity until 1960, during which time he also held at least a dozen city and state positions.
79th Street Boat Basin, Henry Hudson Parkway, ca. 1937. Municipal Archives Collection, NYC Municipal Archives.
The records found at the Boat Basin were in remarkably good condition, consisting of carbons or originals of Moses’s correspondence, memoranda, transcripts, reports, contracts, news clippings, maps, blueprints, plans, printed materials, press releases, invitations, and photographs. There are 121 folders specifically labeled “WPA,” in the “General Files,” series but, similar to the LaGuardia papers, Moses’ correspondence relevant to New Deal programs are evident throughout the collection.
No detail was too small or building too insignificant for Moses and his talented team of architects as illustrated by the handsome design of this concession stand and comfort station. Pelham Bay Park, October 22, 1941. Department of Parks Collection. NYC Municipal Archives.
The third trove of WPA-related materials in the Archives is the WPA Federal Writers’ Project collection. The WPA did not just improve parks and build roadways—a portion of the money was set aside for unemployed professionals in the “arts.” As WPA director Harry Hopkins explained, “they have to eat like other people.” It was called Federal Project Number One, and consisted of Art, Music, Theatre and Writers’ Projects. The Federal Writers' Project (FWP) was the only one to operate in all 48 states and the territories of Alaska, Hawaii, Puerto Rico, and the Virgin Islands, as well as New York City. At its peak, in April of 1936, there were 6,686 on the payroll nationwide; approximately 40% were women.
Triborough Bridge, December 1937. WPA Federal Writers’ Project Photograph Collection. NYC Municipal Archives.
New York City housed the largest FWP Unit, employing nearly 300 people. The writers produced the New York City Guide, New York Panorama, Almanac for New Yorkers, a number of ethnic studies, Who’s Who in the Zoo—a total of 64 proposed books. The New York City Guide proved so durable and popular that it was re-published in 1966, 1982 and again in 1992. To illustrate the books, the NYC unit acquired photographs from trade organizations, other branches of Federal Project One, and sent staff photographers to document many aspects of New York City.
Feeding the City, reference materials, brochure, ca. 1937. WPA Federal Writers’ Project Collection. NYC Municipal Archives.
Two years ago, a manuscript and research files from this collection documenting the consumption and preparation of food in the City were showcased in an exhibit Feeding the City at the Municipal Archives.
Manhattan approach to the Holland Tunnel, December 6, 1936. WPA Federal Writers’ Project Photograph Collection. NYC Municipal Archives.
Shortly after the commencement of World War II hostilities, the WPA discontinued Federal Arts programs around the country and many shipped their records to Washington, D.C. (most went to the Library of Congress). The records of the NYC Unit of the Writer’s Project did not leave the City, however. They were deposited in the Municipal Library. Although there is not extant documentation to confirm this, it seems likely that the FWP staff had been regular patrons of the Municipal Library and well known to long-time Library Director Rebecca Rankin. Perhaps she suggested that her Library would provide a good home to their records. And indeed it did; the FWP collection (eventually transferred to the Municipal Archives) has served as a rich research resource for many decades.
Bookbinder. WPA Miscellaneous Projects, Bookbinding, ca. 1937. WPA Federal Writers’ Project Photograph Collection. Photographer: Ralph DeSola (Federal Art Project). NYC Municipal Archives.
WPA instructors held classes in designing and staging puppet shows, Tompkins Square Boys Club, January 1937. WPA Federal Writers’ Project Photograph Collection, Photographer: von Urban (Federal Art Project). NYC Municipal Archives.
The photographs in the collection are of particular relevance to documenting what the WPA accomplished in New York City. The FWP staff arranged the pictures by subject, e.g. “Bridges, Triborough Bridge,” or “Transportation, Tunnels.” “WPA Activities” was another subject heading and reviewing the list of sub-headings provides an indication of the wide scope of the WPA: construction projects, music project, nursery schools and parent education project, puppet teaching project, sewing project, theatre project, etc.
It is too soon to know whether President Biden’s proposed programs will have the same transformative effect as the New Deal. But if a model is needed for a successful economic recovery with a lasting impact, one need look no further than New York City.
Portions of this article appeared in The Living New Deal an organization dedicated to research, presentation and education about the immense riches of New Deal public works.
Victory Gardens
As we pass the one-year mark of the pandemic, and head into another Spring season, our thoughts turn again to the outdoors and the natural world. For many, New York City parks are an oasis. But for some, gardens—in the backyard, or in a shared community plot—provide a refuge.
The Brooklyn Botanic Garden, Spring Courses, 1942. Mayor LaGuardia Collection, NYC Municipal Archives.
A recent New York Times article about the unexpected popularity of a British television gardening show observed that “...with restaurants, bars and theaters shut down, and socializing at home (or anywhere else) risky, gardening was one of the few leisure activities the pandemic didn’t take away. Both Britain and the United Sates experienced a garden boom last year, with sales of seeds way up and nurseries overrun on weekends.” (New York Times, “Finding Refuge in Dirty Hands and Comfort TV,” March 14, 2021.) The March 2021 issue of Gardner News similarly reported “Containers were purchased. Planting mediums were purchased. Annuals and perennials were purchased to fill the containers. Home Victory Gardens filled with vegetable, fruit, and herbs served as a successful means of easing stress and safeguarding against food shortages.” (Gardner News, “March Madness,” March 2021.)
Victory Gardens? Wasn’t that a World War II phenomenon? Were there Victory Gardens in dense, paved-over New York City? The answer is yes, and yes—during World War II, thousands of New Yorkers planted “Victory Gardens” not so much for mental health but as a food source.
Do the collections of the Municipal Archives serve to document Victory Gardens in New York? The answer is again yes, and we turn to the always rewarding Mayor Fiorello LaGuardia collection (1934-1945) to tell the story. Searching the inventory brings up results in two series, the subject files, and the civil defense volunteer office records.
The Brooklyn Botanic Garden, Spring Radio Programs, 1942. Mayor LaGuardia Collection, NYC Municipal Archives.
The New York Botanical Garden Spring Course Brochure. Mayor LaGuardia Collection, NYC Municipal Archives.
“We must be out of it for the present.”
In February 1942, two months after President Franklin D. Roosevelt declared war against the Axis powers, Mayor LaGuardia wrote Claude R. Wickard, Secretary of the United States Department of Agriculture. He asked “...whether the Department was designing a program for large cities with respect to the establishment of Victory Gardens for the purpose of raising vegetables.”
Wickhard’s reply was discouraging. He explained that fertilizer would be scarce as the chemicals would be needed for munitions. He added that the supply of vegetable seeds, often imported from Europe, would be cut off. And finally, he stated, “It is ill-advised to plant a garden on poor soil such as will be found in many city back yards.” In forwarding a copy of Wickard’s letter to other City officials, LaGuardia concluded, “…as a general city proposition, we must be out of it for the present.
Mayor LaGuardia to Secretary of Agriculture, Postal Telegraph, January 28, 1943. Mayor LaGuardia Collection, NYC Municipal Archives.
“Little do they realize the amount of labor involved.”
One year later, correspondence in the subject file tells a different story. By 1943, there had been escalating calls for a Victory Garden program in the city. LaGuardia again contacted Agriculture Secretary Wickard. The reply, from Assistant Secretary Grover B. Hill, was much more promising: “The Department recommends that everyone who has access to open sunny garden space with fertile soil should have a Victory Garden. By doing this many families will be assured of a more adequate supply of vegetables near their homes, relieving the strain on transportation and making it possible to increase the supplies for our armed forces, our allies, and the civilian population.” Hill pointed to the example of Chicago where residents had planted 12,000 gardens within the city limits. He recommended that LaGuardia form a committee of people interested in gardening in New York City and develop a program. He helpfully enclosed a copy of the Department’s brochure “The Victory Gardens Campaign.”
Victory Gardens Leaflet No. 4 Garden Care, Cooperative Extension Work in Agriculture and Home Economics, State of New York. Mayor LaGuardia Collection, NYC Municipal Archives.
LaGuardia still had reservations, however. In a letter dated February 5, 1943, Mary A. Smith, of Forest Hills, Queens, wrote to the Mayor, “...hearing rumors to the effect that Victory Gardens would be leased by the City to interested gardeners.” She added, “I live in Queens; am a good gardener; and can devote late afternoons and weekends to the task.” LaGuardia replied “…the greater percentage of city-owned property, particularly in highly developed portions of our boroughs would not be suitable for gardening.” He also took the opportunity to comment that “…a great many people get the idea that all that is required to have a garden is a piece of land, make some furrows, plant some seeds, and nature will do the rest. Little do they realize the amount of labor involved.”
Victory Gardens Leaflet No. 1, Selecting and Ordering Seed, Cooperative Extension Work in Agriculture and Home Economics, State of New York. Mayor LaGuardia Collection, NYC Municipal Archives.
Soon, LaGuardia rallied to the idea. The files include transcripts of his popular Sunday Radio Broadcasts where he spoke about the growing demand for and interest in Victory Gardens. According to the transcript of his March 19, 1943 program on radio station WEAF, LaGuardia remarked that “Planting a Victory Garden and caring for it properly requires a lot of hard work. I’m glad that there are so many New Yorkers who realize this but who are still willing, nevertheless, to devote themselves to this job.” He also announced that potential gardeners could visit designated Parks Department offices to request a soil analysis and receive advice on its suitability for gardening.
Which brings us to Parks Commissioner Robert Moses. Needless to say, he had an opinion on the Victory Garden program. His correspondence with LaGuardia made it clear that City park land would not be offered for “...conversion... [to] farm purposes.” In typical Moses fashion, he nipped the idea in the bud: “...it would just not work.”
Victory Garden Issue, Journal of the New York Botanical Garden, March 1943. Mayor LaGuardia Collection, NYC Municipal Archives.
“A splendid contribution.”
The victory garden subject files include many fine examples of LaGuardia’s legendary attention to all matters of City administration, large and small. On March 27, 1943, Hazel Mac Dougall, from the Civilian Defense Volunteer Office (CDVO) in Queens wrote to LaGuardia informing him that there were many vacant lots in her Borough suitable for Victory Gardens, but determining ownership was difficult. She asked if he would intercede with the City Register to waive fees charged to search for the name of the property owner. LaGuardia promptly contacted the City Register who agreed to reduce the fee to fifty cents, and to assign a clerk in each Borough to assist with the process. The Register also took the opportunity to lecture the mayor about how much work was involved in searching property records.
Victory Garden Leaflet No. 1, United States Department of Agriculture, Extension Service, 1942. Mayor LaGuardia Collection, NYC Municipal Archives.
Then there was Frank R. Whipple, of Chicago. He wrote to Mayor LaGuardia on September 4, 1943. He explained that he grew up on a farm and “…never lost interest in the farm or in farm products. It seemed appropriate, therefore, to have corn as a hobby and to feature it in an exhibit in my store.” He went on to explain he was expanding his exhibit to include a special section devoted to samples of corn gown in Victory Gardens, and wouldn’t Mayor LaGuardia like to ship a sample from New York City? Sure, why not. LaGuardia contacted the Commissioner of the Department of Markets who procured an ear of corn from the garden of one Mr. Brown at 5609 Clarendon Road, Brooklyn. In sending the corn to the Mayor, the Commissioner had to admit that “corn is on its way out,” and the sample was “not a very husky product,” but “the kernels are not too bad looking.” LaGuardia’s secretary duly posted the product to Chicago.
In September of 1944, five self-described teen-aged boys wrote to the Mayor and asked if they could use a vacant lot on Midwood Street, Brooklyn, “...for the purpose of a victory garden. We have had success in gardens of our own, and wish to put our experience and labors into a larger garden.” They wanted “written permission to use this land” from the Mayor. LaGuardia dispatched the letter to the Bureau of Real Estate who advised the mayor to refer the boys to their local CDVO for assistance. LaGuardia replied to the boys with that information but took the time to add “…while I know you have had fun, I also know that you are making a splendid contribution to insure Victory to our beloved Country. I might also add that the knowledge you have gained could not be learned in any classroom, and the reward for your efforts [is] something invaluable that can never be taken from you.”
Seed Annual for 1945, Victory Garden Issue, Stumpp & Walter Co. Mayor LaGuardia Collection, NYC Municipal Archives.
“An amazing job.”
By 1945, the correspondence mostly concerned measuring the success of the Victory Garden program. In a letter dated March 13, 1945, Albert Hoefer, State 4-H Club Leader boasted: “One would never suspect that the territory embraced by Manhattan, the Bronx, Kings, Queens and Richmond Counties has very much suitable land for food production purposes, yet the people of these areas somehow contrived to find sufficient space for over 400,000 Victory Gardens in 1944.” In another March 1945 letter, C. F. Wedell, Victory Garden Specialist of the Cooperative Extension in the State of New York, urged LaGuardia to “speak to your great radio audience” on behalf of continuing the Victory Garden work through the 1945 growing season. “Since you with your accustomed vigor and understanding formally opened the Victory Garden Program in 1943, the gardeners of Greater New York have done an amazing job,” he concluded.
The Victory Garden story once again vividly demonstrates Mayor LaGuardia’s devotion and attention to the people and affairs of his city. His collection is one of the most engaging, entertaining, and informative of all the mayoral series in the Municipal Archives and we look forward to welcoming back researchers to explore this unique treasure in the coming months.
How to Cook a Thanksgiving Turkey
Mayor Fiorello LaGuardia made great use of WNYC radio to educate and inform his constituents. He is probably best known for reading the comics on the radio during the newspaper deliverymen’s strike in July 1945. But later that year, in another WNYC radio broadcast, he addressed a common problem faced by New Yorkers: how to cook a large turkey in a small apartment oven.
Remarks of Mayor LaGuardia at the Annual Meeting of the Welfare Council of New York City
On May 28, 1935, Mayor Fiorello LaGuardia spoke about unemployment and economic conditions in the United States at the Annual Meeting of the Welfare Council of New York City. The following is a transcript of his remarks.
This question of relief in its present magnitude is one that seems baffling and difficult. There are some who say that it came suddenly upon us. To that I do not subscribe. Anyone with any vision or with any understanding of the economic condition of the country and the pace we were going could tell some ten years ago that a crash was inevitable and that we would have a large number of men and women unemployed in this country.
Waiting to enter the Municipal Lodging house, Department of Public Welfare East 25th Street, November 22, 1930. Photographer: Eugene de Salignac. Department of Bridges, Plant & Structures Photograph Collection, NYC Municipal Archives.
When we suggested in the peak of the so called period of prosperity that we provide a national system of unemployment insurance—and this was in Congress back in 1924, 1925, and 1926 – we were ridiculed, called radicals and destructionists and were told of the amount of gold that the American working man had in his teeth!
We are still approaching it as if it were something temporary. I suppose many of you here have stiff necks from looking around the corner for prosperity to come back. We must realize sooner or later that we will soon reach a new normal. With the revival of normal business and industry we know now or at least it should be known that all the employable men and women would not be employed. Our productivity in the factory or from the soil is such that we can produce everything which this country could consume without employing all the men and women unemployed today. That being so, what we must do sooner or later is to adopt some plan, either to create the necessary spread of employment or some means to care for the surplus man-power that we know we have.
In the meantime it becomes necessary to take care of these millions of people in the country who through no fault of their own find themselves in need.
Relief for the Unemployed, Christmas, showing distribution of food, 23rd Precinct, December 24, 1930. Photographer: Eugene de Salignac. Department of Bridges, Plant & Structures Photograph Collection, NYC Municipal Archives.
Under our form of government of course I necessarily find very often this conflict of jurisdiction or division of responsibility – the state, the national government and the municipality or county as the case may be. The person who is in need is very little concerned with the source of relief. He must have it. I remember during my days in Congress when we sought to get federal aid for the people in drought-stricken areas of Arkansas, we were told of constitutional limitations – and we have them in Congress today – that it was not the function of the federal government; that belonged to the Red Cross. Then the Red Cross came before our Commission and testified. I went down to listen to them. Instead of listening to a humanitarian, we listened to an adding machine. They told us about the families to be supported in Arkansas on $2.50 a month, told us about the cornmeal.
I repeat this because I do not think you have any idea of what some of us suffered during that period in seeking to impress upon our national government the necessity of bringing relief to those people when their state and county were unable to do so. Now we have gotten beyond that point. The federal government is furnishing relief. I always felt it was the highest function of government to preserve life. That is what the federal government is doing now. I appreciate it, first, because I lived through that period of resistance of any appropriation from the federal treasury, and second, because – having had the responsibility for nearly one and a half years, I do not know what would have happened in this city without the aid of the federal government. We have been investigated and re-investigated. That is all right. I do not object to it at all. I have started too many investigations myself as a legislator to object to anyone else’s.
Who is to do this job? That is not so important, as long as it is done well. I expect Mr. Wardell (Allen Wardell, Chairman of Governor’s Lehman Commission on Unemployment Relief) will make some very useful and constructive suggestions based upon our actual experience. In a few days we will embark on a new system and it is inevitable we should have changes from time to time because it is all so new to us.
Another system commencing July first will be to get as many people on work relief as is possible. That is sound. The question has already been raised as to the latitude to be allowed the person on home relief, whether or not he is going to take a work relief job. I do not know. We can make that as difficult or as simple as you want. How many of you have seen “Thumbs Up?” I suggest everyone here go to see it. Someone wants to order some small cards. He goes into a printing office and it is suggested that a meeting be held at Union Square, one at Madison Square, and then a march!
Now to me it is very simple. Nobody is forced to work who does not want to. If you are going to start saying, “I am very sorry” and you approach a man timidly and say – “I beg your pardon, would you care to take a job?” – he is not going to take it.
We are going to have a great many jobs – I don’t know how many. They will be offered to the recipients of relief and they will be drawn from the relief rolls and put to work. That is all there is to it. The Supreme Court of the United States reduced the standards of wages yesterday. I believe the work projects will not be run in competition with private employment. Why do we make it so difficult? It is all so very simple in England. Some of you have attended the boards of review there. I have sat with them. They came up on the charge of not genuinely seeking employment and the employment service appears and says -- “Yes, we have offered a job to this person on this date, refused; offered again, refused; offered again and refused.”
Work relief program. Track Removal on 66th Street and 2nd Avenue, looking west, January 9, 1935. Borough President Manhattan – Civil Works Administration Photograph Collection, NYC Municipal Archives.
I repeat – these projects will not be in competition with private employment. The wages have been fixed in accordance with the available funds and the number to be provided for. The city and state will have to continue to look after the unemployables. We do that now. Superannuated workers are receiving the old-age pension. Widows with children are receiving aid from the Board of Child Welfare. As I see it, if this system functions properly, we will know exactly how many unemployables we have to take care of in this city.
The present economic condition has brought many other loads and burdens to the city. We are troubled, as you all know, in caring for the sick. Our hospitals are overcrowded with the increasing load and demand upon us all the time. By reason of the economic stress, we find that private hospitals are having an increasing burden also, and it is impossible to add to this burden. I am seeking to do as much as I possibly can on preventive work. We are seeking to construct and operate a series of health stations. We want to establish clinics of contagious and infectious diseases and do more preventive work. That is not as easy as it seems, because we have to meet opposition from the profession, opposition from organizations and other associations and progress is not as rapid as some of us would like to see it.
We are going to continue to carry on this program of preventive medicine on a very large scale in the hope that thereby we can meet the hospital problem that is pressing us at this time. We have three hospitals completed, without the funds to provide equipment. An application was made to the federal government for a loan but that was not granted. We already appropriated for the equipment of Harlem Hospital last Friday and will borrow the money for it. We are pressing as rapidly as we can for the Queens Hospital and hope to be able to get funds for the construction of an additional hospital on Staten Island to take care of the charges which they now have on Randall’s Island.
As to the organization of the relief problem – as I stated, when I took office, I found it was a temporary makeshift organization and it is that now. Were it permanent, naturally it would be under civil service. In the personnel of that organization – and it is a very large personnel – any executive would find trouble in either seeking to control the appointments or refraining from doing so. There was one thing I insisted upon and that was that the organization would be non-political. I cannot tell you what tremendous pressure has been brought to bear on me from many sources for appointments. When I selected the Commissioner of Public Welfare, I gave him the responsibility of selecting his personnel. If his selection is good, the credit is his. If his is bad, the responsibility is mine and I have taken it. I do not permit any political member to control that organization and I refuse to build up a personal machine from that organization.
Sidewalk encroachment, West 16th Street, Manhattan, ca. 1935. Borough President Manhattan – Civil Works Administration Photograph Collection, NYC Municipal Archives.
I saw in the papers a few days ago, that some person said there were still some employees from the old administration there. I was very glad to hear this. I would not have made some of the selections William Hodson, Commissioner of Public Welfare, and until recently, Chairman and Executive Director of the Emergency Relief Bureau, made, but once I gave him the responsibility, it was his to make the appointments.
We are going to have more trouble and will continue to have more trouble, because everyone who does not get a job is sore, and everyone who is fired has a story to tell. You can imagine how it is with an organization of 14,000 people. We will continue to do the best we can.
My political friends downtown tell me there is one organization that is even more potent than our politicians and that is the social workers group. I never knew there was so many of you in the whole world!
The home relief work will be materially reduced as we increase the work relief. I am going to recommend to my director of relief and to the Emergency relief Bureau, who I hope will recommend to the T.E.R.A., who will recommend to Mr. Wardell, who will recommend to the Governor, that everyone on home relief will have to report at certain intervals at the employment offices to find out if there is an available job. And I do not mean private employment offices. I do not believe it is unfair to require some amount of work from everyone who are receiving relief of one kind or another, except the unemployables.
I am so tired of hearing about those chiselers. I do not know whether they are there or not. I tell you that I think every relief worker who states that there is a certain percentage of chiselers ought to be sent out in his district to find them, or be fired.
All these systems of relief are temporary. It is the job and the responsibility of the leadership and the statesmanship of the country to find a permanent solution. The permanent solution must be uniform throughout the country. We cannot establish high standards of family life, sanitary conditions, employment liability and insurance and child labor laws in the State of New York if some other state is going to operate in competition against us. You cannot have a State economy and a National economy. You cannot take the constitutional limitations and construe them in 1935 in the same light that they were construed 75 years ago. You cannot leave the destinies of the American people in the hands of any tribunal no matter how well meaning it may be. We are either going to have a representative form of government or not. If Congress does not carry out the wishes of the American people, they have the complete control in sending a new Congress two years later.
If our constitution does not permit of proper regulation of our industrial system; if it does not permit of regulating it so that the willing working men and women of this country can get a job; if it is so to be construed that we are to have 12,000 people in the country on the relief rolls all the time – then the thing to do is to amend the constitution, to meet the situation.
Mayor Fiorello LaGuardia, City Hall, n.d. Photographer: Bob Leavitt for American Magazine. Mayor LaGuardia Photograph Collection, NYC Municipal Archives.
There is the problem of providing adequate labor conditions throughout the state, particularly in the employment of children. We here so much about the tyranny of the federal government coming into the home and taking our children. I will trust the federal government. I would sooner trust the federal government to take care of my children than I would the owner of a southern mill.
We must have uniformity. We must have national uniformity in the old age pension system. We must create the spread of employment by fixing the hours of labor. Intra-state and Inter-state? Yes. When the constitution was drafted and ratified, when you had thirteen separate, distinct colonies, without railroads, when it took two or three weeks to go from Philadelphia to New York or from Philadelphia to Washington; when there was no telephone system, no telegraph system, then you had intra-state problems.
Today we find that unemployment down in Georgia affects workers in New York. Today we find if the farmer in Iowa and Kansas is not working and cannot get enough for his produce, the needle-trade worker in New York City will suffer.
The whole country has been woven into one economic fabric and the quicker we realize it and the quicker we so adjust ourselves to meet that situation, the quicker will we get out of our present problems.
Meatless Tuesdays
In somewhat of a hectoring October 11, 1942 radio address in which he addressed scrap metal collection, tin can collection, food prices and gambling, among other topics, Mayor LaGuardia officially kicked off Meatless Tuesdays.
Mayor LaGuardia Collection, NYC Municipal Archives.
“There has been a great deal of talk about a meatless day. Let’s have less talk about this and let’s do something about it.… I now officially request hotels, restaurants and all eating places to make Tuesday the meatless day, and, of course, in the homes we will follow that too and then we’ll have a real saving in meat.”
In a game attempt to ward off resistance, he tackled the notion that Friday should be the official meatless day. “Now all this talk about having Friday as a meatless day really doesn’t sound as if it were on the level. Friday is a traditional fish day and to make Friday your official meatless day sort of smacks of the slicker, doesn’t it? Now let’s do things real here in New York City. We don’t want to be hypocritical about this, let us give the example to the rest of the country.”
Mayor LaGuardia Collection, NYC Municipal Archives.
Sounds simple. Fish Fridays. Meatless Tuesdays. But quickly there were requests for clarification—what was considered meat? There were complaints. And there was pushback.
First up on October 13, 1942: Harry Spector, from the Latin Quarter “would like some clarification on the Mayor’s Sunday speech… they of course want to cooperate to the fullest extent and want to know whether the Mayor wishes to include veal, lamb, poultry, etc. since they were under the impression that the shortage was merely with beef.”
On October 14th an anonymous restaurant owner wanted to know if Meatless Tuesdays includes poultry (chicken, ducks) as well as liver?
The President of Nedicks weighed in. The hotdog purveyor wrote that the company employed 1000 New Yorkers and sold four tons of frankfurters daily in the City. He was not pleased and suggested that the Mayor must not have meant to include the humble hot dog in Meatless Tuesdays.
The October 14th New York Mirror reported that representatives from the hotel and restaurant industries met with the Secretary of Agriculture. The Herald Tribune reported that the Department of Agriculture was not sponsoring meatless days. Meatless days, such as those in New York City were considered voluntary.
To clarify, the Mayor said hot dog and hamburger stands were part of the Meatless Tuesday effort and sent letters informing business owners they could serve fish, poultry, liver, kidneys, sweetbreads and heart on Tuesdays. Sausage was not permitted.
The clarification apparently proved insufficient because the Mayor addressed the proposed meatless days in the next two radio shows. On October 18, a week after the initial announcement, LaGuardia devoted a good portion of the radio address to meat rationing. Declaiming that the Secretary of Agriculture was enthusiastic about the hotel/restaurant response, the Mayor said, “We again are setting the pace for the rest of the country.”
Mayor LaGuardia Collection, NYC Municipal Archives.
Claiming that the listening public would be happy about the splendid response to the Meatless Tuesday appeal, the Mayor offered additional clarification on the hot dog situation. He had conferred with the Quartermaster General for the Army who reported that frankfurters “are served as meat in Army messes at least three times a month.” That led to somewhat of a compromise. Nedicks would not serve hamburgers on the meatless days. Stores that only sold hamburgers would do their best to substitute foods. Delicatessens were instructed “not to serve any of the meats that are now under ration on Tuesday. There is such a variety of things, Mr. Delicatessen Store Keeper, that you can serve on Tuesday, that I’m sure you will not feel the difference.”
He went on to provide details on the quantity of meat required by the armed forces (6.5 billion pounds) and civilians (21 billion pounds) for the year compared to the estimated meat production (24 billion pounds). The 3.5 billion pound deficit in meat production needed to be addressed. “In order to do this the formula is to ration meat, but all the necessary preliminary arrangements and the printing of the coupons cannot possibly be completed before January 1st. If we permit these 10 weeks to go by without doing anything about it, then the amount originally intended to be rationed must be reduced, and therefore, our government calls upon us voluntarily to put into action now the same formula that we will be required to meet when the rationing preparations are completed. Do I make that clear? We must reduce the amount and in order to reduce the amount, the meat must be rationed, but we cannot get our ration coupons until around January 1st.
Under the wartime rationing program that began six months later, adults would be allocated 2.5 pounds of meat weekly, children over age 6 would receive 1.5 pounds while those under age 6 would receive ¾ of a pound. Concerned that New Yorkers would complain about the quantities, the Mayor said, “Please don’t get the idea that this is a great sacrifice. Our formula allows 40 ounces per week for each adult. Britain has but 30 ounces per week, Italy 3 ½ to 4 ½ ounces per week, Holland 9 ounces per week, Belgium 5 ounces per week, Germany 5 ounces per week. You see, that after all, we haven’t very much of a cut to make and if properly managed, and with the meat not included in the rationed amount it is no effort at all to comply.”
And so began the compulsory voluntary Meatless Tuesday program.
The Association of Food Shop Owners pledged to recommend to all 152 member diners “that they comply voluntarily and concienciously (sic)” with the request for the duration of the war.
There were protests, to be sure. One mother of two enlisted sons wrote from Islip to urge that Friday’s be the meatless day, noting that Catholics were making a double sacrifice, “just as so many mothers have to sacrifice their sons while others are working in defense plants and getting deferred month after month.” Never mind that as an Islip resident she was not a bound by City’s program.
Catholics complained of discrimination for being required to forego meat twice weekly—three times during Lent. Kosher butchers complained that Tuesday was among their busiest days so a voluntary prohibition on sales was problematic. They suggested meatless Saturdays and Sundays.
The Daily News queried “What’s Happening to Our Democracy” in an editorial opposing meatless Tuesdays. Noting that this was not required by any law or regulation from the nation, city or state, it complained that “the Mayor pulled the notion out of his hat.” Instead the paper suggested that this be postponed until the enactment of uniform national regulations. “National meatless day regulations would produce real meat conservation; isolated local fish-and-chips gestures cannot.” The editorial also weighed in on Friday being a better day to go meatless due to the large Catholic population who would be deprived of meat twice weekly.
A letter to the Mayor from the proprietor of Prentzel and Arne, a meat broker and self-proclaimed “meat man,” wrote “it is rather interesting to me that I now find myself defending you in a meat matter, whereas in the past I have so often been in active opposition to some of your views pertaining to meat matters, i.e. grading.” The attachment to the letter, which was intended as a response to The Daily News, discussed issues with the distribution/transportation of meat and continued, “Now getting back to the “Meat” of your editorial, New York is the largest population center in the U.S. and a start here, if successful in voluntary rationing, should have considerable influence on the rest of the country.”
Mayor LaGuardia Collection, NYC Municipal Archives.
The Department of Sanitation, which operated an employee cafeteria at its main 125 Worth Street office published a menu listing roast lamb with two vegetables for forty cents and a roast beef sandwich for twenty cents. A note at the bottom of the mimeographed menu stated, “In cooperation with the Mayor’s request—no meat will be served on Tuesdays—starting with Tuesday—October 20th, 1942. The files also contain a communique from the Commissioner of the Department of Corrections titled Dried Beans, Peas, Lentils, and Peanuts. It included recipes for bean loaf, bean soufflé, bean croquette, rice and lentil loaf. Another Corrections handout included cheese and egg recipes along with “timely suggestions” for stretching meat.
Not everyone was upset. One radio listener wrote that he thought it was “swell.”
The associate editor of The American Vegetarian sent the Mayor a copy of the paper and offered to have a staffer walk around with a sandwich board stating
Observe Meatless Days
Learn how by reading the
AMERICAN VEGETARIAN
Ask man for copy—10 cents
In his October 25 radio address, after discussing the prior week’s air raid drill, the Mayor returned to the topic of Meatless Tuesday. “Meatless Tuesday last week was most successful and attracted the admiration of the entire country. Citizens in other cities are asking why they can’t do as much. Oh, there’s been a little undercurrent around among certain individuals who are more anxious to sell meat and get big prices than they are to help the government. I’m not going to mention any names. I just want to say that the government expects full and complete cooperation.”
A letter from the Society of Restauranteurs informed the Mayor that the Governor of California designated Meatless Tuesdays for the duration of the war. A Connecticut official sent a telegram asking for information and the Mayor instructed Secretary Lester Stone to provide the full data.
Mayor LaGuardia Collection, NYC Municipal Archives.
Many people wrote the Mayor to report on stores and restaurants serving meat on Tuesdays. Someone reported the Hotel Taft restaurants were violating the ban. A note in the call folder instructs staff to call representatives from the Hotel Association. “Tell them to tell the Taft that they better obey the “Meatless Tuesdays” or else, violations, etc. Apparently the message got through because the Taft Hotel Manager wrote to assure the Mayor’s secretary of their cooperation and included menus showing the Meatless Tuesday offerings.
Mayor LaGuardia Collection, NYC Municipal Archives.
The Ladies Club of the Kingslawn United Presbyterian Church wrote the Mayor for his opinion on whether their annual dinner scheduled for a Tuesday, for which tickets had been sold and food ordered should go ahead. The Mayor granted a dispensation for the annual dinner and suggested that the attendees should “refrain from eating meat on Wednesday” to compensate.
Mayor LaGuardia Collection, NYC Municipal Archives.
The Interborough Delicatessen Dealers Association, based in Brooklyn resolved to close their Kosher Delicatessens on Tuesdays. Their attorney wrote to the Mayor that only two or three of the three hundred stores still opened on Tuesdays. This had led to picketing at one of the offending stores in Brooklyn. And, in turn, that led to the arrest of six picketers and an eventual review by The Police Commissioner of the City, Lewis Valentine.
By early November, Mayor LaGuardia’s exasperation with New Yorkers is evidenced in his reply to the proprietor of Ruppel’s Market in Elmhurst. “So many people have sent in letters suggesting different days of the week for a meatless day that were each of these letters taken into consideration, there would be no meatless day or every day would be a meatless day.”
LaGuardia’s attempt to quash demands for meatless Fridays fell flat. For the duration of the meatless days between October 1942 and September 1945, he received extensive pushback, particularly from Catholics. In 1943, the City Council enacted a bill to name either Wednesday or Friday the meatless day in order to spare Catholics from three meatless days. Each Holy Name Society in the Diocese of Brooklyn was asked to communicate with the Mayor to encourage him to sign the bill into law. The Mayor was unmoved, responding to the letter-writers that he had consulted the “highest Ecclesiastical officials” in setting meatless day on Tuesday. Despite the Council’s efforts, Meatless Tuesdays continued.
Mayor LaGuardia Collection, NYC Municipal Archives.
In March, 1943, as LaGuardia had foretold six months earlier, the shortfall in meat production led to the national rationing of meat. The federal Office of Price Administration officially began issuing ration stamps for meat. Each family was required to register its size in order to obtain the appropriate quantity of ration stamps. To purchase meat, or other rationed products, the buyer presented the required number of stamps for the item which qualified the person to pay the asking price for it. Stamps were distributed on a monthly basis and were required to be used within the month.
The federal rationing program altered the City’s enforcement approach. In response to a letter from an attorney who reported roast beef sandwiches were being served at a restaurant, the Mayor replied that after the rationing system was deployed the City no longer required restaurants to comply with meatless Tuesdays. He went on to note, ‘the better number of restaurants have voluntarily continued their program of not serving meat on this day.”
There is a gap in the Meatless Tuesday files between mid-1943 and January 1945 presumably because the rationing program was functioning. But, on January 21, 1945 the Mayor again addressed WNYC radio listeners and noted the shortage of meat because the “Army needs more and the Army is going to get all that it needs.” He announced the only way to deal with the shortage was to return to the official meatless days in the City. And this time, there were to be two meatless days—Tuesday and Friday, beginning the next week. The Mayor listed ten restaurant associations and six food chains with which he had conferred, including the Café Owners Guild that operated night clubs, and praised all of them for being helpful. He then focused on un-named steak houses, calling them chiselers who “cater to the sort of gluttons and loud mouths, and fellows who are earning the big money now, who go there and brag about eating meat, black market meat, and paying $4 and $6 for a steak.” And he promised a crackdown in cooperation of the Office of Price Administration.
Mayor LaGuardia Collection, NYC Municipal Archives.
In his radio address the next week, he tackled subjects that had bedeviled the initial roll out in 1942: hot dogs and poultry. “Tuesdays and Fridays are meatless days, and it means just that—meatless days—no meat or any meat that comes from four-legged animals. Nothing coming from a four-legged animal should be used on Tuesdays of Fridays. That means poultry, turkey, fish and game may be used… For the present we will compromise on frankfurters-dogs you know- on Tuesdays and Fridays.” The unstated compromise was that hot dogs were okay. The Mayor also ordered butcher shops to close on Mondays (Saturdays for Kosher shops) and to only operate five days a week. Enforcement was initially to be undertaken by the various restaurant and hotel associations. But, the OPA and City’s Department of Markets also were engaged in these efforts.
This go-round the Mayor’s Office forwarded all correspondence questioning what could be served to the Department of Markets. Was corn beef hash legit? Could liver be banned on Meatless Tuesdays? Could White Castle operate on the meatless days? Reporters from Room 9 (the press room) asked about the status of liverwurst. And more. New Yorkers’ reports of meat being served meatless days—Gramercy Tavern, Danbe’s Steakhouse, Tessie’s Old Vienna, Civic Square Foods (not very civic minded—all were referred to Commissioner Henry Brundage at Markets.
Reliably, the Catholics again wrote to urge Meatless Wednesdays, not Tuesdays. But that did not gain much traction.
World War II ended on September 2, 1945 as did the rationing of meat and other products. On September 16, Mayor LaGuardia went on the air to announce the end of the Meatless Days and praise the reputable hotels and restaurants for their cooperation during the crisis.