The Business Plot of 1933

//The Mainstream Narrative

In November 1934, retired Marine Corps Major General Smedley Butler testified before the House Un-American Activities Committee's McCormack-Dickstein Committee that he had been approached by intermediaries representing wealthy financiers who sought to recruit him to lead a veterans' organization of 500,000 men to march on Washington and force President Roosevelt to appoint a "Secretary of General Affairs" who would effectively control the government. Butler named bond salesman Gerald MacGuire and American Legion leader William Doyle as the principal recruiters, claiming they represented interests tied to financiers including members of the Morgan and Du Pont families. The committee's final report stated it had "received evidence showing that certain persons had made an attempt to establish a fascist organization in this country," but no criminal charges were ever filed and the incident faded from public memory.

//Under-Reported Dimensions

The McCormack-Dickstein Committee's 1935 final report corroborated Butler's core claims through testimony from journalist Paul Comly French, who independently verified MacGuire's solicitation efforts and plans for a veterans' organization modeled on France's fascist Croix de Feu. Committee investigators documented MacGuire's European tour studying veteran movements and confirmed his possession of detailed organizational plans and budgets. Financial records showed MacGuire worked for Grayson M.-P. Murphy & Co., whose principals included Morgan interests and had documented ties to American Liberty League funders. The committee's public report, however, was heavily redacted compared to its executive session transcripts, omitting most business names. Major newspapers gave the allegations minimal coverage, with The New York Times initially burying the story on page 15, and several publications dismissing Butler's claims despite the committee's partial vindication.

//Credible Dissenting Voices

Historian Hans Schmidt, Butler's authoritative biographer, concluded the plot "was close to being a gigantic hoax" perpetrated by MacGuire to inflate his importance, though Schmidt acknowledged MacGuire clearly approached Butler with some organizational scheme. Historian Robert F. Burk argued the conspiracy was "wild improvisation" rather than coordinated planning, characterizing it as fantasy talk among disaffected businessmen rather than operational plotting. Journalist John L. Spivak, who reviewed the committee's suppressed testimony for New Masses magazine, insisted the redacted evidence showed far more extensive Wall Street involvement than the sanitized public report revealed. Clayton Cramer and Joseph Stromberg have argued the episode represented serious preliminary plotting that Butler's refusal derailed before operational plans matured, pointing to the documented funding sources and European reconnaissance missions as evidence of intent beyond mere conversation.

//Follow the Money

The alleged conspirators stood to benefit from rolling back New Deal policies threatening their financial interests. The American Liberty League, founded in August 1934 by Du Pont family members and other industrialists, spent millions opposing Roosevelt's regulatory agenda and shared overlapping personnel with those Butler named. Du Pont companies faced new labor regulations and taxes; Morgan banking interests confronted Glass-Steagall restrictions and securities regulation. Gerald MacGuire's employer, Grayson M.-P. Murphy & Co., had direct financial stakes in maintaining gold standard policies Roosevelt had abandoned. The proposed veterans' organization would have required substantial funding—MacGuire mentioned $3 million and cited wealthy backers—suggesting serious financial commitment from someone. However, no money trail directly linking named industrialists to coup planning was ever established, and many denied knowledge when contacted by investigators. Butler himself received no compensation and reported the plot, suggesting he was selected for credibility rather than being a paid conspirator.

//Open Questions

Did the McCormack-Dickstein Committee suppress evidence of direct participation by named industrialists to avoid political scandal, or did its investigation genuinely find only MacGuire's unsanctioned scheming? Why did the committee's public report omit most business names and testimony details that appeared in leaked executive session transcripts? What specific organizational and financial commitments, if any, had been secured beyond MacGuire's conversations with Butler? Were similar recruitment approaches made to other military figures that were never reported? Why did the Roosevelt administration not pursue criminal charges if the committee found credible evidence of seditious conspiracy? What role, if any, did American Liberty League principals play beyond their documented opposition to New Deal policies through legal political channels?