Spencer Heath Archive

Item 3098

Grodman Correspondence – to, from, by, and about Pyrrha Gladys Grodman and J.A. Schneidman, 207 Jamaica Avenue, Bellaire, Long Island, New York

1939-1956

 

The manila envelope only has a printout of the first letter, and there is no white envelope. All this correspondence seems to be in the items of the individual letters. The original of item 3055 is missing.

 

>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>   

 

Spencer Heath Archive

Item 3055

Carbon of a letter to Dr. J. A. Schneidman,

207 Jamaica Avenue, Bellaire, Long Island, NY

June 2, 1939

 

 

Dear Doctor Schneidman:

By separate package I am sending you, as per request, one hundred copies of my little circular, “The Inspiration of Beauty,” and also one hundred copies of my printed monograph, “Private Property in Land Explained.” I shall be very happy to have these put into the hands of persons who may be able to enjoy them, and I hope you may be able to use them judiciously. “The Inspiration of Beauty” should appeal to persons who have an earnest desire to find the objective side and practical basis for a truly spiritual life. The monograph on “Private Property in Land Explained” is academic in form and very closely reasoned. It will not appeal very much to loose thinkers, but is calculated to have a profound effect upon close and accurate reasoners. I hope these copies will fall into the hands of many such.

If among your associates and acquaintances any important questions seem to arise in reference to the matters I have tried to make plain in these two little publications, please let me hear from you concerning such questions or inquiries. What I have given is very highly condensed, compact in thought and brief in statement.

/COMPLETE THIS FROM ORIGINAL/

 

_____________________________________________________________________________

Spencer Heath Archive

Item 1378

Carbon of a letter to Dr. S.A. Schneidman, 207-12 Jamaica Avenue,

Bellaire, Long Island, New York, New York

April 30, 1940

 

Dear Dr. Schneidman:

Your letter of the 26th with its two invitations is very tempting. There is nothing for me to do but accept.

I wish the two dates were not so far apart, but I don’t see how I can afford to pass up either of them without being very sorry afterwards. So, here goes; I’ll have to be there somehow. I had partly planned to come to New York tomorrow anyway. Now I think I’ll go the next day, Thursday. I’ve got a lot of odds and ends tying me to some property here and last week I had to spend three days in bed from which I got up too soon, so I’m still barking and sneezing.

I’ll call you up Thursday night or Friday morning and perhaps we can have a Friday or a Sunday date to­gether. I have to be here tonight for a St. John’s College Adult Seminar Group at the Public Library and then for some extension of this group work for which I have engaged the Room at the Library for the follow­ing Tuesday. That means I’ll have to take a late train Tuesday night, May 7, so as to arrive at Brooklyn College comfortably Wednesday noon.

That College date certainly is an attractive one — faculty and graduate students — and the philosophy of rent and the free market (true democracy) is just about the core of everything politico-economic.

Many personal regards and congratulations,

Sincerely,

_____________________________________________________________________________

 

Spencer Heath Archive

Item 1303

Extract from letter to Dr. Schneidman

June 1, 1940

 

I am profoundly convinced that the exchange relationship, practiced by contract and consent, is the fundamental basis of all social order and organization. It is, in fact, the one and only bridge over which mankind may cross from the base condition of destructive nomads dependent upon the fortuitous gifts of their natural environment which they degrade and destroy but do not improve into the condition of creative artists divinely working and recreating a world, natural and social, fit for the physical and spiritual habitation of mankind — for the eternal growth and blossoming into beauty of its essential spirit.

As to the things which men have exclusively of one another, there is a vague but insufficient recognition of their source and origin in the exchange process and relationship, but as to those things which characterize a community and which men have in common with one another there is no recognition of, or conscious attempt to practice the exchange relationship at all. This is what makes it so important that the nature and significance of rent be studied and understood, for it is only through tenancies and rents that community benefits or advantages can be transformed from special privileges maintained by force and arbitrary discrimination into social values democratically ascertained and impartially disposed.³⁰⁹⁸      ___________________________________

Spencer Heath Archive

Item 1340

Carbon of letter to Dr. S. A. Schneidman and Miss Pyrrha Gladys Grodman,

207-12 Jamaica Avenue, Bellaire, Long Island, NY

January 24, 1941

 

Dear Doctor Schneidman:

Thanks for yours of the 22nd. Sorry I did not tell you about my car being recovered the next day; very little damage.

     Have found my original notes on “Why Land Value Should Not Be Taxed,” so I can restore it if a copy does not show up.

     Regarding some get-togethers, let me suggest either January 30th, 31st or February 3rd or 4th.

     You may be interested to know that I sent a rather long letter to Mr. Beckwith recently. I forgot to ask him not to publish it. I am sorry I forgot this because he, of course, would not publish it without attacking it, and thus taking a position from which he would not very willingly recede or be easily dislodged. Mr. Kendal writes me that Mr. Beckwith published my letter in his Forum, but gives me no details as to Mr. Beckwith’s comments on it.

     I expect to arrive in New York on the 29th, in time for an 11:30 luncheon date which I have with Dr. Edwin H. Spengler at Brooklyn College. I will telephone to you on that date to find out what arrangements you have made. I expect to stay at the Woodstock, as usual.

     With many best wishes, and looking forward to the pleasure of seeing you both, I am,

Sincerely yours,

 Spencer Heath

SH:ML

 

­­­­­­­­­­­_____________________________________________________________________________________

 

Spencer Heath Archive

Item 1351

Carbon of a letter to Dr. S.A. Schneidman and Miss Pyrrha Gladys Grodman, 207-12 Jamaica Avenue, Bellaire, Long Island, New York, NY

February 18, 1941

 

Dear Doctor Schneidman:

This is to notify you that I am again about to descend upon the helpless City of New York whence I expect to arrive next Friday night or Saturday morning, February 22^nd. I am notifying several people of my descent upon them and the probable devastation of some of their cherished ideas, if they have the temerity to listen to me.

If you and Miss Grodman have anything on your minds, or are in a position to so engage yourselves, I shall be very happy to have some conference with you or with as many as may be gathered together for the purpose of heretical if not unchristian or ungodly discourse. I will make my engagements agree, so far as possible, with anything you may propose.

Wishing you the best of everything and a great deal more.

Sincerely yours,

Spencer Heath

SH:ML

 

____________________________________________________________________________________

 

Spencer Heath Archive

Item 1385

Carbon of a letter to Dr. S. A. Schneidman and Miss Pyrrha Gladys Grodman,

507-12 Jamaica Avenue, Bellaire, Long Island, New York

May 7, 1941

 

Dear Doctor Schneidman:

I expect to be in New York some part or all of the week beginning May 12th. It is sometime since I have seen or heard anything from you and Miss Grodman, and I hope I will have an opportunity of seeing you.

I still have your suggestion in mind of preparing a glossary of economic terms, but I am afraid that is the only place I do have it. However, it is pretty well formulated, and I hope with proper stimulus to be able to get it on paper before very long.

I have written Mr. Otto an acknowledgement of his very cordial letter of a month ago, speaking highly of the direction his thought seems to be taking and wishing him continued progress in it. I have also pledged myself to write him at greater length before the end of the month.

For the present I am sending you a copy of my pro­posed folder entitled, “Why the Henry George Idea Does Not Prevail.” Perhaps you recall that you and Miss Grodman suggested that I clear up my apparent implied endorsement of the proposition to tax land value. I have incorporated at the bottom of page 3 and top of page 4 three paragraphs which are intended to clear up the matter by showing that land income would voluntarily flow into the maintenance of the services from which it is derived in the degree that taxation of capital is abolished and anti-social revenue thereby destroyed. The social revenue of rent will naturally voluntarily flow into the maintenance of its source so far as that is found necessary when the anti-social revenue is abolished. I am not sure whether I have said enough on this in the paper or not. Perhaps you can enlighten me.

     I hope to see you while I am in New York.

Cordially yours,

 

 

 

_____________________________________________________________________________________

 

Spencer Heath Archive

Item 1397

Carbon of letter to Dr. J. A. Schneidman and Miss Pyrrha Gladys Grodman,

207 Jamaica Avenue, Bellaire, Long Island, NY

December 21, 1941

 

Dear Doctor and Miss:

You may not have seen my friend, Mr. Woodlock’s commentary on the philosophy of Oppenheimer and Geiger as appearing in the American Journal of Economics and Sociology, so I have clipped Mr. Woodlock’s column from the Wall Street Journal of December 17 for your delecta­tion, and for your further delectation I send also a copy of my somewhat extended comments on it in the form of a letter to the editor. After you have read, marked and inwardly digested all this wisdom and have no further immediate use for it I shall be very glad to have you return it to me either by mail or be sure that I take it from you the next time I am in New York, which probably will not be very long from now.

Here’s wishing you all the Merry Christmas that you merit, which is a whole lot more than many people in many lands are likely to have for a long time to come. Let us hope that at least a few of us will learn to turn our wishful thinking around into thinkful wishing.

 

Cherio!

 

S. H.

____________________________________________________________________________

 

Spencer Heath Archive

Item 1399

Letter from Heath to Dr. S.A. Schneidman and Miss P.G. Grodman,

Bellaire, Long Island, New York, re Woodlock exchange in the Wall Street Journal (see this under Woodlock Correspondence.docx) 

January 1, 1942

 

Dear Doctor S. and Miss G.:

And so the controversy rages.

I send you Mr. Woodlock’s rejoinder to “Doctor” Heath and also “Doctor” Heath’s rebuttal in carbon copy.

You will note the few incisive parts that were ex­cised out of my original letter and you may wonder with me how much of my second letter will appear in print.

Please return all the clippings to me pretty soon or give them to me before very long. I want to attach them to my carbon copies. You may keep the ones you have if you care to do so.

I am plodding on my magnum opus, but progress is very slow. Seems as though my unconscious is trying to dodge it. When I team up with or against somebody else it’s more fun.

Best wishes for a lot of New Years.

­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­_________________________________________________________

Spencer Heath Archive

Item 2264

Letter to Heath from Pyrrha Gladys Grodman

January 3, 1942

 

 

 

 SOCIETY FOR LONG ISLAND GEORGEISTS

TEMPORARY  HEADQUARTERS  AT

   207-12 JAMAICA AVENUE, BELLAIRE, LI  Telephone:HOLLis 5-1211

 

Dear Mr. Heath:

For the past few days I had hoped to find time to write you, but we have been short-handed in the hospital and working over-time. On Wednesday, Decem­ber 31st, Mr Lissner dropped in for a visit. He was interested “editorially” in your reply to Mr Woodlock and asked me to make copies of your letter for himself and Dr Geiger for possible publication in the April issue of The American Journal of Economics and Socio­logy. Dr Geiger advises on materials submitted for the Journal that are of a philosophic nature. You may wish to get in touch with Dr Geiger to follow up this opportunity to have your ideas published in the Journal. I am taking it upon myself to make further copies of your letter of December 31st, and sending them on to Mr Lissner. Mr Lissner’s address, for your reference, is 250-20 Thornhill Avenue, Douglaston, Long Island.

 The clumsy surgical operation on your letter of the 19th is deplorable, especially so because the most vital germs of your thesis – the very foundation of the Science of Society – have been excised. It would seem that they entirely missed the point of your acknowledgment of Professor Eddington’s realization of the need for an appropriate durational factor in demography.

 I am returning to you at this time Mr Woodlock’s article of December 17th and your first letter, but am reserving the second round for a few days. I have been meeting with Cecil Tucker and discussing your magnum opus with him. He is enthusiastic about it, and is making a copy of it for himself so that he may the better mull over it. Mr Tucker recognizes the significance of the institution of property and looks forward to seeing you when you are again in the city. His present address is 137-20 Franklin Avenue, Flushing.

 In case you do not have a subscription to Mr Walker’s Cause and Effect, I am sending you pages 5 and 6 which seem to me to have two articles that par­ticularly require your comments. Mr Walker is prob­ably not informed as to the correlation between fre­quency of reproduction and longevity, and might be interested on the new light it gives to mother Nature’s provisions in the social field.

 I wonder whether you have seen the first volume of Mr Beckwith’s “The Answer”. I think that his fight to eliminate the “evil heart” from the field of the social sciences is probably one of the most necessary and difficult tasks with which the sound Georgist propa­gandist is confronted.

 Doctor joins me in wishing you inspiration, enlightenment and success in your magnum opus and an ever-increasing and appreciative audience for the new Science of Society throughout the coming year.

Cordially yours,

/s/ P. Grodman

 

________________________________________________________________

Spencer Heath Archive

Item 2265

Carbon of letter from Heath to Cecil Tucker,

137-20 Franklin Avenue, Flushing, Long Island, New York

January 6, 1942

 

Dear Mr. Tucker:

I have been disappointed at not seeing you for such a long time. Miss Grodman now writes me giving me your address and says you continue much interested in the ideas I have developed and look for­ward to seeing me. I am very glad to hear from you, even though in­directly through her.

 I wonder very much what you are doing now. Are you in
some regular employment that you enjoy? Do you have any free time? It occurs to me that I would like to have you visit me here if circumstances permit. I am alone most of the time, trying to work along without much stimulus or inspiration. Miss Grodman says you have some enthusiasm for my “magnum opus” and are asking a copy of it for your own reference. (You, of course, understand that it is not to be made public property of or treated otherwise than confidentially in advance of my own release for publication. Only the main thesis in about a dozen pages has been copyrighted thus far.)

 All of this suggests that it would be very pleasant and

perhaps profitable to both of us to have you make me a visit. I have quite a large house and grounds here with all modern gadgets for physical comfort in addition to anything of intellectual or art­istic interest. There is also a Conscientious Objectors’ camp nearby with some seventy-odd “inmates” with whom I visit more or less and it would be nice to have you help me to entertain them at my house.

 Drop me a line as early as Thursday night if you can so I will get it Saturday. I am likely to be in New York by Sunday or Monday, at the Kings Crown Hotel — but I am not certain yet.

 With many best wishes, I am, in friendship,

Yours,

SH M                            Spencer Heath

 

________________________________________________________________

Spencer Heath Archive

Item 2267

Letter to Heath from Pyrrha Gladys Grodman

January 7, 1942

 

Dear Mr Heath:

Last night Cecil Tucker visited with us and we discussed Mr. Woodlock’s column of the 29th and your reply. Since I have made copies or your letter of the 31st and sent them to Mr. Lissner, and feel I have studied and digested the materials on the “contro­versy” adequately, I am returning the columns and carbon copy of your letter of the 31st. On careful reflection, I have not found any flaw in your state­ments; furthermore, for coherence, directness, lu­cidity and terseness, these letters rank with the most-significant and well-phrased of your writings with which I am acquainted. Mr. Tucker and I spent several hours on the new material. I think you will be pleased with his reasoned acceptance of your statements herein pre­sented, and his adherence and increasing understanding to your general and particular ideas; he is as enthusiastic about your “magnum opus” as I am.

 We are “in suspense” as to the subsequent events of the controversy, and are looking forward to the new developments.

 It will soon be common knowledge that Miss Bateman has been made Director of the School, Mr. Chodorov having been given new title and function of “Director of Research”. Mr. Peach is the new editor of “The Freeman”. From what Mr. Lissner has told us, the Trustees have considered and acted upon many of the recommendations made by the “dissidents”. Mr. Smith of “Land and Freedom” and Mr. Lissner have both spoken with us concerning the difficulty the Trustees experienced in finding suitable and available candidates for directorship of the school. Miss Bateman is selected temporarily.

 As always, we are looking forward to visiting with you.

 Yours for enlightenment in the Science of Society,

 

/s/ P G Grodman

________________________________________________________________

Spencer Heath Archive

Item 2268

Letter (second page missing) to Heath

from Pyrrha Gladys Grodman

January 13, 1942

 

            Henry George School of Social Science

CHARTERED BY THE UNIVERSITY OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK

LONG ISLAND EXTENSION HEADQUARTERS

207-12 JAMAICA AVENUE, BELLAIRE, L. I.

TELEPHONE  HOLLIS  5-1211

 

Dear Mr Heath:

As I informed you in a previous letter, I sent Mr Lissner two copies of your reply to Mr Woodlock of December 31st. I assumed Mr Lissner was a reader of The Wall Street Journal or if not, would see the issue of the 29th particularly because of the appearance of Mr Chodorov’s letter printed below yours. But it seems I was mistaken. I know you will be inter­ested in the following excerpt from Mr Lissner’s letter to me of January 10th:

“Please accept my thanks for the copies of Mr Heath’s letter of Dec. 31 to The Wall Street Journal. No, I haven’t read The Wall Street Journal of Dec. 29. All I have read is Mr Woodlock’s column of Dec. 17. I’d like very much to have a copy of the page in the issue for Dec. 29. I’d like also to compare the published version with the original text. I believe the controversy is still running; if it is, I wish you’d let me know about any other letters that are printed in connection with it…  I’m anxious to get a full picture of the course of the controversy; public philosophical discussions, you know, are rather rare these days…  You know, you ought to encourage Mr Heath to work out his new ideas in philosophy in a formal way and pub­lish it in the weekly “Journal of Philosophy”. In that way he would bring them before an audi­ence trained to pick every flaw in the development of his ideas and he would obtain criticism which, if he has avoided fundamental error, would enable him to complete his work.”

 Insofar as I did not make copies of the print­ed version of your first letter, and that of Mr Woodlock’s column of the 29th, two solutions present themselves: (1) if you mail me the clipping of the 29th, I will make the necessary copies and send them to Mr Lissner, returning the clipping to you for your files; (2) you may commu­nicate directly with Mr Lissner in this matter and the recommendation concerning publication of your ideas in the “Journal of Philosophy”. If you have not seen the letterhead of The American Journal of Economics and Sociology, I believe their “byline” will interest you; “Published Quarterly under grant from the Robert Schalkenbach Foundation in the interest of constructive syn­thesis in the social sciences”. The last ten words

_____________________________________________________________________________

Spencer Heath Archive

Item 2271

Letter to Heath from Pyrrha Gladys Grodman

February 25, 1942

 

SOCIETY FOR LONG ISLAND GEORGEISTS

TEMPORARY  HEADQUARTERS AT

    207-12 JAMAICA AVENUE,  BELLAIRE,  L I. Telephone: HOIlis 5-1211

Dear Mr. Heath:

I am mailing under separate cover Planck’s treatise. May I commend for your re-consideration pages 82-92 in which the subjects of reversible vs. irreversible processes; the statistical composite nature of irreversible laws; statistical vs. dynamic laws; the causal character of law vs. free will – are discussed, and finally your own comment on esthetic in place of ethical law. I believe these subjects pertinent for develop­ment in your manuscript, to the extent of a paragraph or so on each. The brief reference to will appearing in the “Announce­ment” is inadequate in my opinion, and the subject could be de­veloped at greater length including an elucidation of your posi­tion on determinism as opposed to the newer indeterminist stand.

     Your comment on esthetic law as more desirable, and cre­ative in contrast to moral and ethical law in penciled notation on the bottom of page 92 is well-made. I suggest this as an appropriate theme for development, particularly in view of the current acceptance of “The Good Society” version of societal amelioration. Perhaps it would help you in the extended expression of your views along these lines to scan Walter Lippmann’s book, The Good Society. Your refutation of the Golden Mean in the Woodlock correspondence can be re-stated in this connection.

     It has also occurred to me, in connection with the state­ment of the Energy Formula, that you devote a paragraph or two to illustrations of the effects of progressively increasing and progressively decreasing amounts of energy upon frequency and duration, so that instances of “time lag” and apparent “anticipation” (as we discussed Sunday evening) would be interpreted and clarified.

     I shall continue to give thought to the manuscript.

     I’ve located Mr. Bernstein’s note with comment on your work: “With all the magnificent analytical work during the past 25 years of the equilibrium economists (Bobbins, von Mises, von Hayek, Pareto, (et al.) I consider the sort of thing Beckwith and Heath are doing, a sheer waste of time. Slaying the thrice slain may be fun, but it’s futile, and I’m sure they are not the people to modernize George.”

     Did Cecil have the opportunity to look up the Reeve manu­scripts in the New York Public library? My curiosity has been aroused concerning his theories.

     I trust you will make much progress with the Energy Concept.

Best wishes.

Cordially yours,

                        P. G. Grodman

 

_____________________________________________________________________________

Spencer Heath Archive

Item 2507

Penned letter to Cecil Tucker from “Pearl” (Pyrrha Gladys Grodman), Society for Long Island Georgeists, 207-12 Jamaica Avenue, Bellaire, Long Island, NY

March 17 (year unknown)

 

Dear Cecil,

It’s good news to know about the résumé — I approve whole-heartedly! And you are quite right about the inducement it offers.

 I am interested to hear of Reeve’s ideas — particularly of the parallels and where they diverge. I note that there were 200 pages of MS., but what about the books in printed form referred to in “Land and Freedom?” They, too, should be in the N.Y. Public Library.

 My copy of the MS — the 90-page version is now in the hands of Will Lisner. Prior to that, my friend, Mr. Kennedy — the politicking minister (Mr. Heath calls him) and his wife were studying it several weeks. You may not have met Mr. Kennedy, but his comment interested me. The title, “Energy Concept etc” he thought provocative. The definition of science appearing in the announcement — too limited. I’ve met with him in discussion of this MS version. He repeatedly had questions concerning the usage and definition of words as used in the text — as “mass,” “integration,” etc. Many times he felt that the explanation came too many pages late in the text for clarity. He recognized that definition in the course of the text — to indicate, for instance, where words are used in scientific or technical sense, and where in the colloquial sense — make for clumsy reading. He thinks my suggestion of a glossary in modified form an excellent one.

 Further, he says that he had considerable difficulty following the reasoning — particularly in the theoretical sections — without re-expression in the mathematical formulae. Perhaps Mr. Heath will say that Mr. Kennedy has a mind somewhat like mine. I admit I was surprised at the extent to which his criticisms duplicated recommendations for insertions that I had offered. In addition to the mathematical expression — in footnotes corresponding to the text (was Kennedy’s idea), there should be re-expression in graphs as another vivid interpretation of relationships. Concerning the theoretical expression of the energy concept of population, Kennedy feels it too terse and left with too many implications for the reader to comprehend or be aware of. Again, he felt the Principle of Indeterminacy to be appropriate in this section. One of the points to be amplified — and here again, he and I were in agreement — is in the general expression of the energy formula — changing the arbitrary constants taken as that of cosmic energy and mass — and offering an extended statement of the corrections (apparent) with these appropriately considered as variants. This, by the way, gives a clearer interpretation for the use of the energy equation — in applications as at the present time.

 The definition of pathology as absence, insufficiency or distortion of functioning (made in the Announcement), Kennedy criticizes for “Augustinianism.”

 Another of his criticisms — is the frequent appearance of what seem to be premature statements or conclusions — not developed until several pages or paragraphs later. This he feels to be a source of confusion and promotion of an attitude of contradiction in the mind of the reader.

 Discussion of collision and conflict versus contractual and consensual techniques in their correlation with the energy equation and predictions therefrom, particularly as on page 21 — caused considerable confusion to Mr. Kennedy; wars, he considers, are as dynamic as trade — and paradoxically cause an increase in production, multiplication of exchanges and greater complexity.

  Referring back to page 20 — the statement of examination of changes other than quantitative ones taking place in the energy flow — had no significance until I compared the population to the quantum of different qualitative aspects but identical quantitative.

 Mr. Kennedy also questions the statement on p. 20 of the population-stream drawing all its energy from its environment; he puts that in the class with Weismann’s (sp?) Biological Theory.

 Back to p. 21, The paragraph on the population of long life wave and low frequency of replacement as a positively qualitative energy flow — was another one that Kennedy took exception to, to admit that later explanations made it more acceptable than at this point. Kennedy also called to my attention that sociologists speak of incidence rather than frequency.

 Another recommendation is an appendix of statistical tables and charts — obtained from census and actuarial figures. A “little” work for you, Cecil; I know Mr. Heath’s answer to such recommendations.

 Mr. Kennedy points out that when he studied Homiletics — he learned how to write everything down in black and white, and leave nothing for the reader’s imagination or poor discernment.

 You can judge from these comments — that amplification and much elaboration of the application was the principal theme of Mr. Kennedy’s criticisms. On p. 24, until I clarified the point, he felt the statement in paragraph 1, last sentence in reference to amplification of the interior free relationships etc. to contradict what was said on p. 20.

 Again to back up one of my recommendations, Mr. Kennedy said he often found it difficult in reading the MS. to keep in mind the reasoning advanced — and wishes that an outline of the theme of the argument appeared side by side with the text.

 The paragraph on integrative and disintegrative trends on p. 29 also gave Kennedy difficulty; and here he found his mathematical formula made the discussion somewhat (but not entirely) clearer.

 On p. 34, he felt that the unexampled freedom from governmental restraints required explanation; here he inferred freedom on the part of land and resources.

 P. 35. He took exception to degradation to a race of morons as not taking into consideration the remarkable advances in modern medicine — particularly vitamin therapy and endocrinology.

 Kennedy recommends an elucidation by Mr. Heath of his ideas of government and attitudes towards it; certain of the earlier references to government he thought were derogatory and calling for challenge — although he admits he was much mollified by the discussion in the section on the “Citadel.”

 P. 38 again he criticized the over-simplification of the occurrences in the market; as you also have remarked, he objects that the market here is completely whitewashed; while, in contrast, government looked like such a blackguard. Reluctantly, he admitted there was belated clarification later in the MS. One of the difficulties he had that will be common to many readers of this treatise — is in the elimination of the pathologies in order to study the physiologic; the relegation of pathology, as exemplified by Mr. Heath’s definition is comparable to a similar handling of evil in respect to good.

 A “frame of reference” is what Mr. Kennedy feels is required — to obviate challenges from readers who would take exception to the blackening of government, the whitewashing of trade, etc. too soon in the text — and then not bother to finish the book.  This frame of reference would clarify at appropriate points in the text — and more than at the present — these ideas — including that on democracy, the present war, imperialism, etc — in order not to antagonize such readers before the complete explanations have been made — as in the subsequent extended sections.

 P. 43, Mr. Kennedy questioned that the collectivist alternative to ownership and private property was wholly ignored.

 He found these pages and paragraphs most commendable — that on page 45, 58A (paragraph 2), 58B, 61, 62, 63, 70 (paragraph 3).

 P. 46. Kennedy questions the statement that there can be no exchange of services until the convention of property has arisen; and later that “all new changes of possession are by a process of peace and consent etc.” P. 46, again he questions property and service as the origin of all abundance, etc.

 P. 49 — in connection with the legitimate use of force — is the question whether this is an apology for British, or other, imperialism.

 P. 49. He questions the statement of energy flow by coercion and compulsion in the public and governmental field — as unqualified by context and improperly inclusive.

 P. 61 — paragraph 3, concerning the “survival of the fittest:”                                                         the frame of reference question occurs again — as to what constitutes “fitness?”

 P. 65 — Mr. Kennedy questions the dominance or inclusiveness of the profit motive. Evidently it is not adequately clear how profit has been so significant in all the advances of civilization.

 P. 71 — Mr. Kennedy was enthusiastic about the illustration of the economy of Saxon England. He recommends that this section be documented. He wondered whether Mr. Heath had read one of Veblen’s books that sought the explanation for German Imperialism and the action of the Junkers, particularly in World War I. The present and past situations in countries such as Germany, not ______, as England. Kennedy suggested could be elucidated and elaborated.

 P. 72, paragraph 1 also needed explanation lacking in the present text in reference to the “essentially totalitarian plan with which Rome herself was born down.” The climatological, geographic explanation developed subsequently sheds light on this statement.

 P. 73, paragraph 3 — Mr. Kennedy asked for considerable extension of the statement, “The concept of population as an organization of rhythmic energy contains implications that are wide and deep.” He would like to know some of these depths.

 And that covers much of what Mr. Kennedy and I discussed.

 I think very well of the introduction of the phrase “disjunctive symbiosis” and of the entire elaboration submitted for my opinion. It is adequately illuminating. It met with Mr. Kennedy’s approval as well; his statement was that the entire MS. would be much benefitted by such clear and effective coverage.

 (Now that I’ve arrived at page 4 of this letter, I offer my apology for not having typewritten it — but I’m often interrupted if I put a letter in a typewriter, and we have only one typewriter.)

 Did you finally get around to reading Ouspensky (sp.?) and Beckwith’s book?

 Doctor and I were interested in your progress with the girl with the expressive walk — now that she’s not yet married. Did you visit her before you returned to Maryland! And how is the young lady of the wrong side of the tracks? Or are you on the wrong side?

 You know, you can wish luck to a veterinarian without wishing bad luck to our patients. We believe, advocate and practice preventive medicine whenever we can. We also are dentists, beauticians and hotel proprietors as the occasion offers.

 I’m looking forward to receiving a copy of the 200-page version of the MS. for any further consideration and for Mr. Kennedy’s reading. He’s on pins and needles concerning the changing in the two versions.

 I’ll Let you know what comments Mr. Lissner makes — if and when.

 When you come to town perhaps we can get together with Mr. Kennedy — possibly at his house — or in the graveyard, as Mr. Heath did when once they met.

 Keep me posted on all the news. Are you meeting more of the academicians?

 With best regards from the doctor to yourself and Mr. Heath and mine too, and also to Miss Lucille.

Cordially,

Pearl

_____________________________________________________________________________

 

Spencer Heath Archive

Item 2274

Carbon of letter from Elkridge to Pyrrha Gladys Grodman (“Pearl”), presumably dictated by Heath to someone else since “Heath” is referred to in the third person and “Lucille,” referring to Heath’s daughter, is misspelled.

March 8, 1942

 

Dear Pearl:

I am enclosing some additional material that Mr. Heath has written pursuant to the suggestions in your last letter. Your comments are awaited with the greatest interest.

 In consequence of a recommendation made just before we left New York, we are now working on a resume (pronounced ray-zoo-may) of the Energy Concept in the style of those in the Reader’s Digest. We feel that such a resume can be very use­ful in inducing those whose attention may otherwise elude us to get the story in a short form.

 Mr. Heath spent about three hours in the Forty-Second Street Library with the spirit of Mr. Reeve. The manuscript is very voluminous, and Mr. Heath came away with a distinct impression that he had discovered at least one possible reason why Reeve has been neglected. The subject is treated in a very scholarly manner, and Mr. Heath found some of his own thoughts paralleled to a degree both striking and gratifying. But Reeve seems to have spent a great deal of his force in destruct­ive criticism of his contemporaries in the physical and in the social sciences. And unfortunately the manuscript was not sufficiently organized to permit a reader to find Reeve’s critical conclusions and suggestions, if any, without going carefully over the whole 2,000 (!) pages.

 Our own situation can be summed up in the statement that we are pursuing the noiseless tenor of our way. Lucille and I went to the village Saturday (Baltimore) and saw “Louisiana Purchase.” Then we went dancing free for nothing on the theater roof. Dairy products are getting more expensive every day, the lawn is coming up in green patches, and every glance over the left shoulder reveals signs of spring. Heigh ho!

 By the way, what do you know about entropy?

 How can one wish good luck to a veterinarian without wishing bad luck to some of them “dumb critters”?

Yours,

_____________________________________________________________________________

Spencer Heath Archive

Item 2284

Handwritten letter to Heath from Pyrrah Gladys (“Pearl”) Grodman, Henry George School of Social Science, Long Island Extension Headquarters, 207-12 Jamaica Avenue, Bellaire, Long Island. (Included in this Archive as a sample, since Heath credited her for getting him to write much of Citadel, Market and Altar, at this time still titled The Energy Concept of Population.)

June 19, 1942

 

Dear Mr. Heath,

I regret we were unable to make appropriate arrangements for you to visit the surgeon, Dr. Kosten, we mentioned. His schedule is quite heavy and it is normally necessary to make plans with him two to three weeks in advance; probably we can do so when next you plan a New York visit. The copy of the Ms you sent me is the one left with you by Mrs. /?/ Kennedy. If you can spare it, may I have it again for a while?

 Have you sent a copy to Mr. Lissner? I believe he may be more interested in the present form. Or better still, what about sending Dr. Geiger a copy?

 There are two things to which I should like to call your attention; the first, in the June “Freeman” are the reprint of a Wall Street Journal column of Mr. Woodlock on “The Right of Property in Land” and Mr. Lissner’s well-written but not entirely sound reply: if the “Freeman” won’t print a paper contributed by you (since C.O. Steele is editor), perhaps the Wall Street Journal may; or even Mr. Lissner’s Journal of Economics, etc.

 Second, are two articles in June’s “American Mercury” — one on “Your Life Expectancy” by Dr. Louis I. Dublin, biologist and statistician with the Metropolitan Life Insurance Co. who, according to the “Mercury” has “created a considerable literature on human longevity and population questions”. The other, and less significant an article: “Sex Comes to England” by a journalist, D.L. Solon, who in section II of the article seems unaware of the durational factor in demography. An opportunity is open for a letter to the Editor of the ”Mercury”. Also an occasion to open correspondence and arrange to talk with Dr. Dublin.

 Do let me know what follows these leads — and if I can be of assistance to you in any way. Have you written Mr. Culberson /?/ on his new book?

 What progress are you making on your ”religious” version? and the historical background that has heretofore been kept separate?

 Our regards to your family; and best wishes for enlightenment and good health to yourself.

Cordially,

                                 /s/ P G Grodman

_____________________________________________________________________________

 

Spencer Heath Archive

Item 2285

Extract from letter to Pyrrah Gladys Grodman

June 30, 1942

 

 

I had another nice visit with Miss Bateman at supper last night. She is still saying that she has not been able to get around to doing anything constructive at the School so far — just getting a bad state of affairs straightened out. She also remarks, mostly on her own, that she thinks I might be able to do some good work among the elite of the faculty of the School. She has spoken of this two or three times but nothing concrete has been proposed. She seems to understand that my disfavor was due to some of the conduct characteristic of the former Director of whom she speaks somewhat freely and without praise.

 

 Miss Bateman says she has heard not a word from Mr. Potter, one of the most able teachers, since she handed him that Foley letter of mine. I hope it hasn’t driven him away from the School. She regards Mr. McNally very highly and seems to wish she understood my ideas as well as he does.

________________________________________________________________

Spencer Heath Archive

Item 1438

Memorandum for a proposed letter to be sent to Dr. Will Durant

by Heath’s friend, Dr. S.A. Schneidman, Bellaire, Long Island, New York

September 1945

 

 

 

Dear Will Durant:

 

You may remember me . . . . . . . . (personal reminder etc.)

In your capacity as collector, critic and analyzer of philosophic thought in its bearing on social progress, I may be doing you a considerable favor in bringing to your attention the original and somewhat startling ideas that have been set up in MSS. form under the title Citadel, Market & Altar. I have known the author of this for quite a number of years, since his retirement from a successful engineering career to undertake similar re­search in the field of social phenomena. He tells me that the abstract philosophies (so brilliantly reflected in your own notable compendia) were the love of his youth, but now, upon a background of the physical and biological sciences — the sciences that have any success­ful technologies, and boldly applying their basic con­ceptions and mode of energy analysis in the new field — he seems to have come upon the matter from a wholly new and most promising angle of attack.

Mr. Heath is not a professional writer and has but little, if any, academic or other reputation, outside of the fields of engineering and law, in which latter he holds both the Bachelor’s and Master’s degree. He is therefore intellectually, as well as financially free. His present objective is to obtain such auspicious pub­lication of his methods and results as will claim the sober attention of a considerable number of enterprising and outstanding minds. He thinks this is a necessary pre­liminary towards inducing those substantial persons, who in all communities have the major ownership in the sites, resources and improvements, to some conception of the incomes (and hence enormous permanent values) they can create for themselves by combining and organizing, as owners, to give protection (against governmental pressures, primarily) and other public services to the wealth-producing populations using and inhabiting the lands (sites and resources) and other fixed properties of their com­munities.

Mr. Heath believes that, once the fundamental principle (the performing and exchanging of public services and goods, as well as private, upon the measured basis of free contract and exchange begins to be understood, the owners of communities, and eventually of nations, will, under economic motivation, automatically combine and, by extending their services as owners and receiving vol­untary incomes, they will gradually displace the politi­cal and coercive community administration. He believes that governmental revenues are not related to, measured by, or even dependent on, any services being performed, and that only those who are voluntarily and automatically recompensed for so doing — namely, the owning or proprietary authority in a community — can protect and truly serve its people, thus make and leave them free.

Your arresting volume, Philosophy and the Social Problem, is often referred to by my friend as showing how the greatest minds have strained without seeing any primary principle of social functioning (such as contrac­tual versus coercive processes) and hence no definite focus. He holds that in the social field, as in the physical, it is only by applications of new knowledge, and not by education in the old, that improvements and advancements can be made.

The manuscript (original) is now being considered by a University Press — one of the large universities. The Editor-in-Chief is very favorable, even eager, it seems. But, upon a set of ideas so arresting yet so contrary to nearly all the accepted thinking of the past, he hesitates to risk the verdict of the usual specialists in social and economic theory and tradition. It has been suggested, and to some extent verified, that historians might be able to take a wider and less confining view.

Whatever may be your final reaction, I feel sure that once you recover from the mild shock of the extreme unorthodoxy, you will be well rewarded as you extend your examination.

Mr. Heath, no less than myself, is a great admirer of your writings and work, especially your analytical skill and literary artistry in the presentation and inter­pretation not only of concrete and complex ideas but also of the simple and solvent, therefore profound. We are both eager to know how these new ideas will impress you, at least in a general way, and will await accordingly.

I hope your visit to California is for pleasure or business only and not from necessity to recover any health sacrificed to your many — and prodigious — labors.

With all best regards,

Sincerely,

_____________________________________________________________________________

 

Spencer Heath Archive

Item 2299

Carbon of letter from S.A. Schneidman, 207-12 Jamaica Avenue, Bellaire, Long Island, New York, to Will Durant, 5608 Briarcliff Road, Los Angeles, Calif.

September 26, 1945.

 

Dear Dr. Durant:

You may remember me as the veterinarian who took care of your police dog a few years back when you lived in Great Neck. Your good wife and her sisters also I knew when they held forth in Greenwich Village. I am also an old friend of our mutual friend, Hugo Pollock, the lawyer.

     I now write you on behalf of Spencer Heath, a mature, original thinker — whose light should not be hid under a bushel — a man whose original and somewhat startling ideas have been set out in manuscript form under the title, CITADEL, MARKET AND ALTAR. I have known Mr. Heath for a number of years, since his retirement from a successful engineering career to undertake similar research in the field of social phenomena.

     He tells me that the abstract philosophies (so bril­liantly reflected in your own notable compendia) were the de­light of his earlier years, but that now, upon a background of the physical and biologic sciences (the ones that have successful technologies) and by boldly applying their basic conceptions and modes of energy analysis in the field of so­cial phenomena, he has come upon the matter from a wholly new and most promising angle of attack.

     Mr. Heath is very modest and unassuming, without any axe to grind. He has independent means and is not a professional writer. His present objective is to obtain such auspicious publication of his methods and results as will command the at­tention of a goodly number of enterprising and outstanding minds.

     This, he thinks, is a necessary preliminary towards in­ducing in those substantial persons — those who in all commun­ities have the major ownership in the sites, resources and im­provements — some conception of the incomes (and hence enormous permanent values) they can create for themselves by combining and organizing, as owners, to give protection (primarily against governmental oppressions) and other public services to the wealth-producing populations using and inhabiting the lands (sites and resources) and other fixed properties of their communities.

     Mr. Heath believes that, once the fundamental principle (the performing and supplying of public services, as well as the private ones, upon the basis of free contract and measured exchange) begins to be understood, then the owners of communities — and eventually of nations — will, under economic motivation, automatically combine and by extending their ser­vices as owners creating voluntarily paid income, they will gradually displace without serious opposition the political and coercive community administration.

     Mr. Heath holds that governmental revenues are not gauged to or even dependent on any public services being performed; and that only those who are voluntarily and automatically recompensed for so doing — namely, the owning or proprietary authority in a community — as in a hotel — can protect without tyranny and thus truly serve its people — make and leave them free.

     Your arresting volume, PHILOSOPHY AND THE SOCIAL PROBLEM, is often referred to by my friend Heath as showing how the greatest minds have strained without seeing any primary principle of social functioning (such as contractual displacing coercive pro­cesses) and therefore not coming to any definite focus. He holds that in the social field, as in the physical, it is only by appli­cations of new knowledge, and not by education in the old, that improvements and advancements are made.

     The manuscript (original) is being considered by Yale University Press. The Editor-in-Chief, Eugene Davidson, is thought to be favorable — even eager, it seems. But upon a set of ideas so arresting yet so contrary to nearly all the accepted thinking of the past, he hesitates to risk the verdict of the usual spec­ialists in social and economic theory and tradition.

     It has been suggested that a historian would be likely to take the wider and less confining view. That is why I am anx­ious to have you examine this (I think epoch-making) manuscript. If you think well of it and that in these times it ought to be widely read and discussed I understand that you will be invited to report officially upon it.

     Mr. Heath, no less than myself, is a great admirer of your writings and work — of your analytical skill and literary artistry in presenting and interpreting not only complex ideas but also the simple and solvent — the profound.

     We are both eager to know how these unorthodox ideas im­press you, at least in a general way, and will await your com­ments accordingly.

     I hope your visit to California is for pleasure or bus­iness only, and not from necessity to recover any health sac­rificed to your many — and prodigious — labors.

     With all sincere regards to you and to Mrs. Durant, I remain,

Yours for Social Harmony out of present chaos,

 

                         

The manuscript will be sent to you under separate cover. Dr. Will Durant, 5608 Briarcliff Road, Los Angeles, California

________________________________________________________________

Spencer Heath Archive

Item 2300.

Carbon of letter from Heath to Will Durant,

5608 Briarcliff Road, Los Angeles, California

September 26, 1945

 

 

Dear Dr. Durant:

My good friend, Dr. S.A. Schneidman, of Bellaire, Long Island kindly offered to write requesting you to examine my manuscript en­titled, CITADEL, MARKET AND ALTAR. I was very pleased to have him do this and am, accordingly, forwarding you a copy of it by Railway Express—Air Transport.

     Among the ideas I have organized in this manuscript believing them to be novel and possibly very fruitful are the following!

1. That the successive generations of men are energy waves whose frequency period is the average life span.
2. That it is the function of the social organization continu­ously to re-build and re-create its environment — and thus, in­directly, itself.

3. That this functioning of society lengthens the average life-span and thereby lowers the frequency of re-generation of its energy waves — transforms its own energy.

4. That this transformation of energy is a qualitative

change — a durational gain — that can be rationally advanced.

5. That Coercion, Co-operation, Consecration (Citadel, Mar­ket and Altar) are the basic human techniques (and institutions).

6. That the free feudal community of reciprocal services and obligations (not its military and servile corruption) is the authentic social pattern – the proto-genic type.

7. That property in Land is the basic agency of social (i.e., contractual) distribution of community resources and advantages, potential for general public administration. — Community services, protection, for automatic recompense — revenue without rulership.
8. That the Utopian Ideal of social solidarity, abundant life, ecstatic existence, is implicit in the evolution of a state-eman­cipated system of free enterprise, contract and exchange.

     I hope you will find some of these ideas (and their implications) arresting and of possible aid in the search for a kind of knowledge that will advance Society and retard its opposite. If you feel that the ideas developed in the manuscript are worthy of being published and widely discussed I look forward to the prospective publishers requesting your professional examination and report.

Sincerely yours,

 

When you have sufficiently examined the manuscript kindly return, by air transportation if possible, all charges collect.

________________________________________________________________

Spencer Heath Archive

Item 2303

Carbon of letter from Heath to Will Durant,

Hotel Sherman, Chicago, Illinois

October 17, 1945

 

Dear Doctor Durant:

My good friend Dr. Schneidman referred to me your letter of October 9^th written from Chicago. This led me to ascertain through the Leigh Agency that the manuscript, CITADEL, MARKET AND ALTAR, that I had sent to your California address by first class air mail, had been returned here to New York and was being held by them. I am also advised by the Agency that you will be back at the Sherman House in Chicago for the 18th and 19th of October. Noting your expectation of its being forwarded to you from California, I have had the manuscript sent on, using this time the Airplane Express. I hope it will come safely to your hand and that I may have word from you that it has done so.

     I anticipate you may find in this manuscript a not-unfruitful attempt to carry the basic conceptions of the natural sciences into the social field and thereby lay ground here also for an expanding ration­al technology upon the narrow empiricism to which the imperfect func­tioning of the social organization has been historically confined.

     The emphasis is for disclosing how the technique of free enterprise for private recompense and gain is extendable into the public field, and for relying upon that dependable motivation for the development and extension of public services, as of other services, without coercion. Given the necessary new intelligence, the implication of this is profound, — an automatic non-political solution of the critical world-problem of today, namely, by what agency can either a local or a world-wide community secure services without tyranny, the protection of power without need for defense against it? (Ch. 11, 18)

     The manuscript proposes a solution believed to correspond in princi­ple with the effective procedures employed by all the natural sciences; requiring no legislation or other coercion, abrogating no liberty or prop­erty, creating great incomes and values, yet consonant with all the high­est aspirations and social ideals.

     By way of self-extenuation, if any need be, for this infliction upon you, let me say, in the manner of Emerson: “Senates and sovereigns can confer no compliments and honors like the presenting of worthy thought and presupposing its intelligent examination.

     My compliments, and my best wishes in everything that you pursue.

Sincerely,

­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­______________________________________________________________________

Spencer Heath Archive

Item 2404

Extracts from one of two letters to Pyrrha Gladys Grodman of same date

May 26, 1955

 

 

 .. I have little or nothing to complain about as to my health and not anything at all as to financial affairs, except the terrible baffling problem of how, without much sympathetic assistance, to make good use of what I have while I still live. How I do wish that you could have been as fortunate in both body and estate as I have been and that we had joined forces long ago to accomplish something rewarding and really worthwhile. …

 Your most recent letter gives me a big thrill. It is so encouraging about the state of your health and to know that you are thinking of “getting back into the swim” of my ideas that you did so much to encourage and help me to develop and set down.

 

___________________________ /Extract from second letter of same date/

Spencer Heath Archive

Item 2403

Extract from letter to Pyrrha Gladys Grodman

May 26, 1955

 

It is unhappily true that all political administration — as opposed to proprietary — is fundamentally totalitarian and inimical to private property in land. Only the Golden, and not the iron rule is divine. Text for “Christian socialists”: If God had ordained Caesar, He had not sent Christ.

_______________________________________________________________

Spencer Heath Archive

Item 820

Verbatim note by Spencer MacCallum from conversation with

Heath about Laura Jean McAdams and Pyrrha Gladys Grodman.

January 3, 1956

 

The two finest feminine minds, probably, I have ever known.

______________________________________________________________________