( 225 ) 



policy. It was deemed advisable, however, to continue the 

 old OPA policy and use the knowledge of the old-line Depart- 

 ment of Agriculture. It has the farmer's interest at heart, 

 which of course is related to the consumer's interest tomor- 

 row. This led to a division of authority over food and price 

 control between Henderson and Wickard and between Brown 

 and Davis. The price administrators wanted abundant sup- 

 plies of food today at low prices, and the war-food admin- 

 istrators wanted high prices for food today to assure an 

 abundant supply of food tomorrow. 



The AAA policy was to reduce the production of wheat 

 to raise price. OPA wanted cheap bread. OPA favored low 

 prices of wheat to prevent inflation. The War Food Admin- 

 istration wanted higher prices to increase production. One 

 arm of the government wanted a stock pile to feed distressed 

 people in Europe ; another, to grind wheat for synthetic rub- 

 ber ; and still another, to feed it to livestock. Obviously such 

 conflict of policies was not in the best interests of the nation. 



Conflict within Bureaus and with the Public 



Not only is there conflict among the new agencies; there 

 is serious conflict within them as well. Much of this arises 

 from a conflict between bureaucratic policy and public opin- 

 ion. 



Henderson was directed to keep prices down and at- 

 tempted to carry out that direction mainly by thumping the 

 table with his fist and riding roughshod over all opposition. 

 He was accused of bringing in the "slide-rule boys," the 19^5 

 name for the 19 "braintrusters." 



Since folks did not like to be pushed around and shouted 

 at, Brown replaced Henderson and was supposed to "hu- 

 manize" price-fixing. This was much easier to state than to 

 accomplish. Obviously, a policy of relaxing controls did not 

 set well with the OPA staff, nor was it correct in principle. 



