The Wall Street Putsch

Smedley Butler’s Revelation of the Business Plot

AI AUDIO OVERVIEW

Universal Newsreel: Major General Smedley Butler

Executive Summary: The Wall Street Putsch, a Verified Conspiracy

The Business Plot, alternatively referred to as the Wall Street Putsch, was a political conspiracy in 1933 aimed at a coup d’état against the U.S. government led by President Franklin D. Roosevelt. The scheme, which sought to establish a fascist dictatorship with retired Marine Major General Smedley Butler as its figurehead, was brought to light by Butler himself through sworn testimony before the U.S. House of Representatives Special Committee on Un-American Activities, known as the McCormack-Dickstein Committee, in 1934. While the plot was initially dismissed by major news media, including The New York Times, as a “gigantic hoax”, the final report of the congressional committee corroborated Butler’s allegations, finding “no question that these attempts were discussed, were planned, and might have been placed in execution”.

Major General Smedley Butler | Photo: AP News

The alleged architects of the plot—including powerful figures from the circles of J.P. Morgan and the DuPont family—were motivated by a profound ideological and financial opposition to Roosevelt’s New Deal, particularly his departure from the gold standard. Their fundamental error was in their choice of Smedley Butler, a decorated military hero who had evolved into a vocal anti-capitalist and whose patriotism was rooted in a love for the republic, not the corporate interests they represented. The failure of the plot and the subsequent lack of prosecution highlight a complex interplay of power, politics, and historical narrative, whose implications continue to be debated today.  

1. The Great Depression and the Rise of a New Political Order

1.1. America at a Crossroads: The Economic and Political Climate of 1933

The Business Plot emerged from the crucible of the Great Depression, an era marked by profound social and economic turmoil. By 1933, the nation was gripped by a financial collapse that had left millions unemployed and shaken public faith in the traditional capitalist system. This environment of widespread desperation created fertile ground for the rise of radical political movements, both on the left and the right. A key event that underscored this tension was the Bonus Army march of 1932, where thousands of World War I veterans, seeking the early payment of promised bonuses, converged on Washington, D.C., and set up temporary camps. The violent dispersal of these veterans by military forces under the command of General Douglas MacArthur served to further radicalize many, including Smedley Butler, a decorated military hero who had publicly supported the veterans’ cause. The use of military force against American citizens provided a chilling precedent for those who would later propose a similar force to achieve political ends.  

1.2. The New Deal as a Perceived Threat

Franklin D. Roosevelt’s election in 1932 represented a decisive shift in American governance, promising a new approach to the country’s economic woes. His New Deal policies, aimed at stabilizing the capitalist system through government intervention, were met with fierce opposition from a segment of the American financial and corporate elite. The primary flashpoint was FDR’s decision to abandon the gold standard in April 1933, a move that was perceived by conservative financiers as a direct threat to their fortunes and a step toward national bankruptcy through inflationary policies. This financial anxiety was compounded by a powerful ideological fear that Roosevelt’s agenda was a form of “creeping socialism” or “Communism,” designed to dismantle private enterprise and redistribute wealth to subsidize the poor. This opposition was not disorganized; it coalesced in the formation of the American Liberty League in 1934, a powerful lobbying group of industrialists and financiers dedicated to fighting what they perceived as government overreach. The Business Plot, therefore, was not an isolated act of audacity but an extreme, conspiratorial manifestation of this wider, well-documented anti-New Deal movement.  

2. The Allegation: Unveiling the Business Plot

2.1. A “High-Class Muscle Man” Turned Patriot

The central figure in the Business Plot is Major General Smedley Darlington Butler, one of the most decorated Marines in U.S. history, with two Medals of Honor and numerous other accolades. His biography is essential for understanding the plot’s dynamics. After a 33-year military career that saw him fight in nearly every U.S. overseas conflict from the Spanish-American War to the “Banana Wars,” Butler underwent a profound ideological transformation. Following his retirement in 1931, he became a vocal critic of war profiteering, U.S. military adventurism, and what he viewed as nascent fascism in the United States. In a famous speech, he referred to himself with deep cynicism as a “high-class muscle man for Wall Street, the bankers and big business,” and a “gangster for capitalism” who “helped in the raping of half a dozen Central American republics for the benefit of Wall Street”. This public shift in allegiance from the financial elite to the common people and veterans made him a celebrated populist figure, revered by the rank and file.  

2.2. The Recruitment: From a “Hoax” to a Conspiracy

The plot began to unfold in 1933 when Gerald C. MacGuire, a bond salesman with a background in the American Legion and ties to the J.P. Morgan-affiliated firm of Grayson M.P. Murphy, approached Butler. The initial pretext was to recruit Butler to run for the national presidency of the American Legion. However, the conversation soon escalated to a plan for a “peaceful march on the White House” with a 500,000-strong veterans’ army. MacGuire showed Butler bank statements amounting to over $100,000 to be used for the effort and even presented him with a speech to deliver at an American Legion convention that was more critical of FDR’s economic policies than supportive of veterans’ issues. To add legitimacy, MacGuire even traveled to Europe, sending postcards to Butler, to study fascist veteran groups in Italy and France for a potential model of a veteran-led political movement. The plan, as revealed by MacGuire in later meetings, was to install Butler as a “Secretary of General Affairs,” a dictator-like position, while Roosevelt would be relegated to a powerless figurehead, much like Mussolini’s treatment of the King of Italy. This methodical, escalating recruitment effort demonstrates that this was not a fleeting or random idea but a considered, audacious political strategy informed by international trends.  

2.3. The McCormack-Dickstein Committee

Convinced the plot was a genuine and treasonous threat, Butler reported it to Congress, leading to the formation of the McCormack-Dickstein Committee in November 1934. The committee conducted closed-door hearings, during which Butler provided his sworn testimony. The initial public reaction, largely shaped by news outlets like  

The New York Times, was one of deep skepticism, with the story being labeled a “gigantic hoax”. However, the committee’s final report, submitted on February 15, 1935, painted a different picture. It affirmed that the attempts to create a fascist organization were “discussed, were planned, and might have been placed in execution when and if the financial backers deemed it expedient”. The stark contrast between the media’s initial dismissal and the committee’s final corroborating conclusion suggests a significant disconnect between public perception and the investigation’s findings, potentially reflecting a pro-business or anti-FDR bias in segments of the press at the time.  

Table 1: Chronology of Key Events in the Business Plot

July 1, 1933

Initial Meeting

Retired General Smedley Butler is approached by Gerald C. MacGuire and Bob Doyle to discuss American Legion leadership.

July-August 1933

Subsequent Meetings

MacGuire and Doyle reveal more of the plot to Butler, including offers of significant financial backing and a plan for a veterans’ march on Washington.

Late 1933

MacGuire’s European Trip

MacGuire travels through Europe, studying fascist veterans’ movements in Italy and France as a potential model for the U.S..

August 22, 1934

American Liberty League Founded

A political organization of wealthy business elites, including the DuPont family, is officially announced to oppose the New Deal.

November 20, 1934

McCormack-Dickstein Committee Hearings Begin

Congressional investigation into the alleged plot starts with Butler as the star witness.

November 22, 1934

Media Dismissal

The New York Times publishes its first article on the story, describing it as a “gigantic hoax”.

February 15, 1935

Final Report Submitted

The McCormack-Dickstein Committee releases its final report to Congress, confirming the plot’s veracity.

March 25, 1935

Death of Gerald C. MacGuire

The central recruiter and key witness in the plot dies of pneumonia, a fact that would complicate any further investigation.

21st Century

Release of Records

The McCormack-Dickstein Committee papers are released into the public domain, providing corroborating evidence for Butler’s testimony.

3. The Alleged Architects and Their Motivation

3.1. The Financial Nexus: J.P. Morgan’s Circle

The financial engine of the alleged conspiracy was rooted in the banking and investment community’s deep-seated opposition to the New Deal. The primary recruiter, Gerald C. MacGuire, was employed by Grayson Murphy & Company, a prominent Wall Street firm with well-established ties to the J.P. Morgan banking empire. Butler’s testimony and other accounts alleged that a “royal family of financiers” had been hit hard by Roosevelt’s elimination of the gold standard and saw the New Deal as a direct threat to their wealth. MacGuire boasted of access to up to $300 million in available funds to support the coup. While prominent Morgan-affiliated figures such as Thomas W. Lamont were named in Butler’s testimony, the committee ultimately did not subpoena them, stating that the evidence against them was “mere hearsay” and thus not a basis for further inquiry.  

3.2. Corporate Power and the American Liberty League: The DuPont Family

The DuPont family was a central figure in the organized opposition to Roosevelt’s policies. They were a key source of funding for the American Liberty League, which, as Postmaster General Jim Farley famously observed, was so thoroughly a DuPont product that “you can see right through it”. The League’s stated purpose was to “combat radicalism” and protect “the rights of persons and property” from what its members viewed as an overreaching government. According to Butler’s testimony, the plot’s proposed military force would be armed by Remington Arms, a company under DuPont family control since 1932. This alleged arming of a private force aligned with their political goals is consistent with the family’s documented history of using private, paramilitary groups to enforce their will, such as the KKK-like “Black Legion,” which was reportedly funded by DuPont’s General Motors to intimidate union organizers.  

3.3. The Disputed Claim: Prescott Bush

The claim of Prescott Bush’s direct involvement in the Business Plot is a prominent yet highly debated component of its historical narrative. While some sources link his name to the conspiracy , the specific allegation that he was a direct participant in the plot to overthrow FDR has been widely debunked by historians and scholars. This claim appears to be a conflation of two separate and distinct events.  

The historical confusion stems from Prescott Bush’s documented, though entirely separate, business relationship with German industrialist Fritz Thyssen, an early financier of the Nazi Party. Through his directorship of the Union Banking Corporation (UBC), a New York investment bank, Bush was enmeshed in a financial network that transferred funds and materials to German businesses. These assets, including those of the UBC, were seized by the U.S. government in 1942 under the Trading with the Enemy Act. The documentation of these controversial dealings is often misinterpreted as evidence of his involvement in the 1933 Business Plot. To provide historical accuracy, it is imperative to distinguish between the two narratives: Prescott Bush’s documented financial ties to Thyssen are a matter of public record, while his alleged role in the Business Plot is not substantiated by any credible evidence from the McCormack-Dickstein Committee or other primary sources.

Table 2: Key Figures and Alleged Roles in the Business Plot

Smedley D. Butler

Target of recruitment; whistleblower

Retired, decorated Marine Major General and populist critic of Wall Street and war profiteering. Chosen for his popularity and perceived manipulatability, but his patriotism led him to expose the plot.  

Gerald C. MacGuire

Primary recruiter;
front man

Wall Street broker with ties to J.P. Morgan’s circle. He served as the emissary for the conspirators, studying foreign fascist movements and directly pitching the coup to Butler.  

J.P. Morgan & Co. Circle

Alleged financial backers

Represented by financiers like Grayson M.P. Murphy and others. Their opposition was rooted in financial self-interest, specifically the desire to preserve the gold standard and their fortunes against the perceived threat of the New Deal.  

The DuPont Family

Alleged key organizers; financiers

Key financiers of the anti-New Deal American Liberty League. They allegedly promised to provide weapons from Remington Arms for the coup, motivated by a fundamental resistance to government regulation and labor unions.  

Prescott Bush

Alleged conspirator (disputed)

While his name was implicated in some narratives, there is no credible evidence to support his direct involvement in the plot itself. The claim is often confused with his separate, documented business dealings with German companies that financed the Nazi Party.

4. The Paradoxical Choice of Smedley Butler

4.1. The Miscalculation

The plotters’ most significant error was not a tactical one, but a profound misjudgment of Smedley Butler’s character. From their perspective, the choice of Butler was strategically sound. He was a national hero, a two-time Medal of Honor recipient with an impeccable reputation. His popularity was immense, particularly among veterans, who represented a large and politically powerful bloc. The conspirators believed that his status would legitimize a coup and provide a respected face for a movement that they planned to control from behind the scenes. They viewed him as a “high-class muscle man,” a proven loyalist to the military-industrial complex, and someone who would be “easier to manipulate than others”. The grand, peaceful march on Washington, they believed, required a man with his undeniable stature to prevent a violent counter-reaction. The plotters were blinded by their own worldview, which assumed that a person’s public utility was their only valuable trait, leading them to see only a tool for their agenda.  

4.2. A “Racketeer for Capitalism” Who Said “No”

The plotters failed to comprehend Butler’s deep ideological transformation. While they saw his military career as a sign of obedience and a tool for their agenda, Butler himself had come to view his years of service with profound cynicism, a sentiment he famously expressed by calling himself a “racketeer for capitalism”. His experience with the Bonus Army—a group of veterans he openly supported—which had been violently attacked by the very military establishment the plotters wanted him to command, was a pivotal moment in his anti-establishment evolution. His anti-capitalist worldview and his authorship of the book “War Is a Racket” were clear and public repudiations of the very forces trying to recruit him. Butler’s patriotism was to the U.S. Constitution and its democratic principles, not to a plutocratic takeover. The conspirators’ mistake was their failure to recognize that a man’s convictions can outweigh the allure of power. They chose the perfect man to legitimize their plot, but his moral compass was the fatal flaw in their design, leading him to expose it.  

5. Legacy and Historical Analysis

5.1. The Absence of Prosecution and the Death of MacGuire

Despite the McCormack-Dickstein Committee’s findings that the plot was discussed and planned, no one was ever prosecuted. This lack of legal action remains a central point of historical inquiry. A confluence of factors contributed to this outcome. The committee itself had a limited budget and jurisdiction, and its refusal to subpoena key figures like Thomas Lamont based on “hearsay” meant that a full investigation was never completed. Furthermore, the primary witness and recruiter, Gerald C. MacGuire, died suddenly on March 25, 1935, of pneumonia, just after the hearings concluded. MacGuire’s death removed a key source of information that might have led to further evidence. Some historians and commentators speculate that President Roosevelt may have made a political calculation, opting not to pursue prosecution against the country’s most powerful financiers for fear of further destabilizing the fragile economy and inciting public outrage. As Butler himself lamented, the committee had “slaughtered the little and allowed the big to escape,” never calling “the big shots” to testify.  

5.2. A Genuine Threat or a “Gigantic Hoax”?

The historical debate over the plot’s credibility continues, with a few remaining dissenters. The primary argument against the plot’s credibility is that it rested solely on Butler’s word, and that MacGuire was a low-level individual who may have been involved in an “elaborate failed con to obtain funding from millionaires”. This viewpoint, initially championed by the media, dismisses the plot as a fantasy. However, the most compelling evidence for the plot’s veracity is the official conclusion of the McCormack-Dickstein Committee. The committee, in its final report, affirmed that a serious “wild scheme” had been contemplated and discussed. While a full-scale, imminent coup was not necessarily close to execution, the fact that a group of powerful interests had progressed far enough in their discussions to plan a fascist organization, identify a leader, and discuss funding, moves the narrative beyond mere speculation. The release of the committee’s previously redacted papers in the 21st century provides further corroboration for Butler’s claims and solidifies the plot’s place as a genuine event in American history.  

5.3. The Enduring Significance of the Business Plot

The Business Plot, despite its obscurity for decades, remains a potent symbol and a cautionary tale. Its significance is found in how it is used to discuss contemporary political issues, serving as a reminder of the fragility of democratic institutions and the potential for anti-democratic movements to arise from the wealthiest and most powerful segments of society. The plot underscores the enduring questions about the influence of money and power on American politics and the importance of a vigilant and patriotic citizenry. The fact that the story was largely forgotten until recently is, in itself, a historical phenomenon that speaks volumes about whose version of history has prevailed. It demonstrates that when powerful interests are implicated, the narrative can be deliberately obscured to prevent accountability. The Business Plot, therefore, stands as a testament to the fact that even the most well-documented acts of dissent and subversion can be erased from the collective memory, only to resurface later as a warning from the past.

Works cited