Front Page Titles (by Subject) Chapter 25: A Scholar's Life - The Goodriches: An American Family
The Online Library of Liberty
A project of Liberty Fund, Inc.
Search this Title:
Chapter 25: A Scholar’s Life - Dane Starbuck, The Goodriches: An American Family 
The Goodriches: An American Family (Indianapolis: Liberty Fund, 2001).
About Liberty Fund:
Liberty Fund, Inc. is a private, educational foundation established to encourage the study of the ideal of a society of free and responsible individuals.
The copyright to this edition, in both print and electronic forms, is held by Liberty Fund, Inc.
Fair use statement:
This material is put online to further the educational goals of Liberty Fund, Inc. Unless otherwise stated in the Copyright Information section above, this material may be used freely for educational and academic purposes. It may not be used in any way for profit.
A Scholar’s Life
. . . intellectual curiosity is the lifeblood of real civilization.
george macaulay trevelyan, English Social History
As a result of his friendships with Friedrich Hayek, Roscoe Pound, Ludwig von Mises, Milton Friedman, and other great modern-day thinkers, Pierre Goodrich was influenced by some of the greatest scholars of the twentieth century. Although Hayek was slightly younger than Goodrich, the Austrian economist served as an important mentor to the Hoosier businessman. Pound had been one of Goodrich’s professors at Harvard. Their earlier student-teacher relationship developed into a personal friendship. The many other influential scholars that befriended Goodrich numbered in the dozens.
Friedrich A. Hayek was probably the most prodigious classical liberal scholar of the twentieth century. Hayek’s writings were overwhelming not only in sheer number (he published some 18 books, 15 pamphlets, and 142 articles), but in breadth of subject matter as well. Although he began his career as a technical economist, his lectures and writings in later life extended to political philosophy, legal anthropology, the philosophy of science, and the history of ideas. Hayek was clearly one of the greatest and most wide-ranging scholars of the human sciences in modern times. For his considerable contributions, Hayek was awarded the Nobel Prize for Economics in 1974.1
Hayek had a tremendous influence on Goodrich, and Goodrich highly valued their intellectual exchanges and friendship. Hayek also respected Goodrich’s erudition. Pierre not only showed a deep interest in the Austrian’s ideas, but also provided Hayek with both an American’s and a businessman’s perspective that grew out of a long working familiarity with economic, business, and political concerns from a nonacademic background.
The two men first met when Goodrich was invited to attend the September 1951 meeting of the Mont Pelerin Society at Beauvallon, France.2 At that time, Hayek had left the London School of Economics to teach at the University of Chicago’s Committee on Social Thought. By the late 1950s, Goodrich had become an important member of the Mont Pelerin Society. Goodrich also knew Hayek from their mutual association with the Foundation for Economic Education (FEE). Goodrich had become a trustee in 1952, and Hayek lectured occasionally at trustee meetings. Also, in 1955 and 1960, Hayek lectured at Wabash College on the relationship of economic institutions to the problem of human freedom. Another personal meeting of note occurred when Hayek attended a March 1968 meeting of Liberty Fund, where he addressed the board on the concept of power. Goodrich also funded Hayek’s lecture before the Philadelphia Society later that month.3
Goodrich and Hayek met occasionally in the 1950s and 1960s in Chicago and at Mont Pelerin Society meetings, but Goodrich’s intellectual exchange with the noted scholar developed primarily through frequent correspondence that took place between them during a span of twenty years. Goodrich’s letters to Hayek tended to be lengthy, rambling, and didactic. But Hayek seemed favorably inclined toward Goodrich’s thoughts and historical discussions about law, business practices, politics, ethics, and other subjects. The Austrian also shared with Goodrich some of his writings at the draft stage, encouraging and appreciating Goodrich’s observations.4
Before the publication of Hayek’s The Constitution of Liberty in 1960, Goodrich read the entire manuscript, took voluminous notes, and responded to particular draft chapters by writing several lengthy letters to Hayek. The Constitution of Liberty is considered to be one of Hayek’s two masterpieces, along with his better-known book The Road to Serfdom.5 Milton Friedman’s observation that Goodrich “loved to get into a vigorous intellectual argument, especially with people who were fundamentally in agreement with his basic philosophy,” seems especially accurate with regard to Goodrich’s communications with Hayek.6 Clearly, Goodrich and Hayek were kindred spirits in terms of philosophical outlook, yet Pierre seemed to relish the opportunity to analyze, dispute, and embellish Hayek’s ideas. In response to Hayek’s draft of The Constitution of Liberty, Goodrich made the following comments:
On preserving and expanding freedom—
I think that if you really wish to preserve freedom and to see more of it rather than less of it, convincing thought and determination must develop in churches, schools, and public concern and conversation. . . . Some of the things we have accomplished by the power of the state could have been accomplished, and still [can] be if the people had the fortitude that goes with determined ideals, without state intervention if the state would just keep out of it and if the community would assume its local responsibility.
About the misdirected efforts of churches and clergy—
The social gospel of American Protestantism was so exciting a thing to most ministers in their churches as it developed into a program of state action that perhaps they ceased to perform any service with individuals. Had they, however, performed their proper example and teaching to individuals, they might have given some hope of a responsible community through individuals and not through the state.
About the proper assumption of responsibility by corporate boards—
I have had years of experience on corporate boards. One of the most difficult things to achieve is a corporate board that works and assumes its responsibility. . . . One important thing to notice is that the board and management in a great many cases are not risking their own capital.
Whether the capital be large or small, if that capital is proportionately a substantial amount of the individual’s assets he operates differently as an individual than if he had no capital. His mind functions differently and his actions are different. (Would this also be true of the employee?)7
Hayek’s importance to the classical liberal cause and to the American conservative movement can hardly be overestimated. George Nash, in his book The Conservative Intellectual Movement: Since 1945, credits Hayek’s The Road to Serfdom (1944) with being the single most important factor in furthering conservatism after World War II.8The Road to Serfdom and Hayek’s other writings provided the intellectual arsenal to combat the still-popular appeal of central planning that academics, particularly American ones, had adopted. The intellectual currency that the book generated for the conservative cause, along with Hayek’s own stature on the world intellectual scene, gave great impetus to the conservative movement.
Subsequently, a number of conservative organizations and magazines appeared that classical liberal thinkers such as Goodrich supported: Human Events (1944), the Foundation for Economic Education (1946), The Freeman (1950), the Intercollegiate Studies Institute (1953), William Buckley’s National Review (1955), and the Institute for Humane Studies (1960). These organizations and periodicals gave conservatives intellectual respectability and affirmed that their beliefs could withstand the criticisms of modern liberal and socialist attacks.9 Thus, it is understandable, given Goodrich’s growing preoccupation with the idea of liberty, that he sought out Hayek more than any other leading thinker with whom to exchange ideas and to further his own education.
Goodrich’s associations with eminent scholars spanned at least the last three decades of his life. In his desire to have a greater understanding of myriad subjects, he sought these intellectual trysts and nurtured the resulting relationships with great care. His friendship with Roscoe Pound, America’s most prominent modern legal scholar, is one example.
Pound’s importance as a legal scholar has long been recognized. His Harvard colleague, Samuel Williston, remarked that Pound’s proposition that law should be treated as a social science was “probably the greatest contribution that has been made in the twentieth century to American legal thought.”10 Pound taught law for fifty-four years (mostly at Harvard), wrote dozens of books and articles on jurisprudence, and became a scholar of Chinese law. Moreover, Pound also had a distinguished career as a botanist, holding a Ph.D. in botany and publishing widely on botanical subjects.11
Goodrich was Pound’s student at Harvard during the 1916–17 school year. Pound had been on the Harvard faculty for six years, but 1916 marked the first year that he also served as dean of the law school, an influential position that he would hold for the next twenty years. His appointment gave him a preeminence unrivaled in American legal education at the time. During Pound’s brilliant career, he was a Nebraska appellate court judge at the age of thirty, dean of the Nebraska College of Law at the age of thirty-three, and president of the Académie Internationale de Droit Comparé (International Academy of Comparative Law).12
There is no indication that Goodrich and Pound crossed paths from the time Pierre graduated from Harvard in 1920 until the mid 1940s, when both men attended a breakfast meeting at Indianapolis attorney Clair McTurnan’s residence on North Meridian Street.13 McTurnan, also a Wabash and Harvard Law School graduate, had been a longtime trustee of Wabash College. At that meeting, Pound discussed with Goodrich an interest he had in exploring the history of the legal and constitutional guarantees of freedom. Goodrich immediately proposed that his former law school professor give a series of lectures on the topic at Wabash College.14 Pound subsequently delivered four extensive lectures at Wabash, on February 26, 27, and 28, and March 1, 1945.
Pound’s lectures traced the history of the protection of individual liberty from the time of medieval England, through the era of the Tudors and Stuarts (1485–1714), up to the time of the founding of the American colonies and the adoption of the United States Constitution and the Bill of Rights.15 Goodrich maintained regular contact with Pound after Pound spoke at Wabash. In fact, in the fall of 1945, Goodrich, Frank Sparks (then Wabash College’s president), and several other Wabash graduates unsuccessfully tried to persuade Pound to come to Wabash to head the proposed Roscoe Pound Institute of Government.16 Moreover, from 1946 to 1956, Goodrich and Pound exchanged more than thirty letters, and Goodrich visited Pound on at least three occasions in Boston and Cambridge, Massachusetts.17 During this extended time, Goodrich sought Pound’s insights on a variety of topics.18
In 1946, the Chinese Ministry of Justice and several of Pound’s former Chinese students at Harvard sought Pound’s input as an adviser on drafting a new Chinese constitution.19 In the summer of 1946, Pound traveled to China for that purpose, and within a short time he learned the rudiments of the Chinese language. Pound returned to Harvard in the fall of 1946. In January 1947, Goodrich met with Pound in Boston. Goodrich had already expressed a deep interest in Chinese philosophy. Apparently, the meeting between the two men sparked in Goodrich an interest in Chinese law. Goodrich subsequently obtained an English translation of the newly adopted Chinese constitution. In February 1947, Goodrich wrote to Pound offering unsolicited and detailed comments on what he believed were the strengths and weaknesses of the new Constitution and how it might be improved.20
It is pure speculation that Goodrich’s interest in serving as a trustee of the China Institute of America may have derived from his association with Pound, but it was in 1948 that Pierre first contributed financially to the China Institute. One year later, Goodrich became a trustee. In May 1949, Goodrich made arrangements for Pound to address members of the China Institute.21
After Pound retired from Harvard in 1947, he spent the next three years in China as an adviser to the Ministry of Justice. In that position, Pound helped establish a court system and reestablish law schools that had been disbanded as a result of eight years of Japanese occupation. When the Communists took over the Chinese government in 1949, Pound returned to the United States to teach and to help establish the law school at the University of California at Los Angeles. He remained there until 1953, when he left to teach in India.22
In 1954, at the age of eighty-four, Pound returned to Boston, where he worked for the West Publishing Company as an editor until June 1955. As Pound explained to Goodrich in a letter, he was forced to take teaching and editing positions because it was impossible for him to live on a retired Harvard professor’s salary.23 Goodrich visited Pound in May 1955 during the thirty-fifth reunion of Goodrich’s graduating class. At that time, Goodrich proposed that the four lectures that Pound had given more than a decade earlier at Wabash be published. Pound eagerly accepted the offer. Goodrich subsequently arranged for the Yale University Press to publish the lectures in book form on behalf of Wabash College.
Goodrich took a tremendous interest in arranging the publication of The Development of Constitutional Guarantees of Liberty. He did everything from commenting on the galley proofs to handling the negotiations between Pound and the Yale University Press for the publication. Goodrich even traveled to Boston in 1956 to meet with Pound to ensure that his former professor was pleased with the final product.24 The book was successfully received in academic circles. By 1979, The Development of Constitutional Guarantees of Liberty had been translated into several foreign languages, including Portuguese, Vietnamese, Arabic, Spanish, and Hindi.25
Despite Pound’s international prominence as a legal scholar and teacher, he was forced to work at editing.26 In certain academic circles, his reputation had been slightly tarnished because of his outspoken support for the Nationalist Party in China. It was a political view that was not widely shared by his Harvard faculty colleagues.27 Although the Harvard Law School provided Pound with an office when he returned to Cambridge in June 1955, the arrangement did not provide any extra stipend.
Goodrich saw that Pound was well compensated for the publication of the Constitutional Guarantees of Liberty.28 Moreover, Goodrich helped support Pound financially in the mid and late 1950s so that Pound was able to finish in 1959 his long-awaited work Jurisprudence. Pound had begun the monumental five-volume treatise nearly a half century before. Characteristically, all this was done by Goodrich anonymously.29
Throughout his lifetime, Goodrich established friendships with many other great scholars. He was a great admirer of Ludwig von Mises, the Austrian economist who spent the last thirty years of his long and productive life in the United States, much of it teaching at New York University. Mises and Hayek were integral proponents of the Austrian School of economics. The Austrian School is composed of economists who believe that individual behavior in a free market, not class interest or governmental monetary policy, is the appropriate baseline for economic analysis.30 Goodrich became familiar with Mises through the Foundation for Economic Education and the Mont Pelerin Society. From 1946 to 1973, Mises was closely associated with FEE as an adviser and gave regular seminars to the trustees.
After Mises’s magnum opus Human Action was published in 1949, Goodrich attempted several times to read this monumental work. He became bogged down, however, because of Mises’s eclectic vocabulary. After a dictionary of Mises’s terminology was produced, one autumn in the mid 1960s Goodrich traveled with his wife Enid and his top assistant Helen Schultz to Montauk, Long Island. There, the three spent nearly a month reading the book in an apartment overlooking the Atlantic Ocean.31 Goodrich was extremely impressed with Human Action, gave it as a gift, and quoted from it widely both in everyday conversation and in letters and other writings. The 890-page book attempts to explain economic and social processes and the need for reform.32 At a time when economic analysis was becoming increasingly fragmented, analyzing only one aspect of economic life at a time (business cycles, role of inflation, monetary policy, and so forth), Human Action was a serious attempt to provide a general praxeology of human behavior from an economic perspective.33
In June 1954, Wabash College hosted Mises for a conference on economics and freedom at French Lick, Indiana.34 Moreover, on March 7, 1956, and October 17, 1961, Goodrich attended dinners in New York City honoring Mises for, respectively, the fiftieth anniversary of Mises’s earning his doctorate degree and his eightieth birthday.35 Pierre and Enid developed a personal friendship with Mises and his wife Margit. In the late 1950s, Goodrich also briefly employed Mises to advise the board of directors of the Ayrshire Collieries Corporation on the dangers of inflation to the coal industry.36 Goodrich and Mises corresponded sporadically because Mises was much less charitable with his time than Hayek was. Nonetheless, Goodrich was a willing devotee of Mises, constantly championing the great scholar’s views.37
Another great German-speaking thinker that Goodrich admired was Ludwig Erhard. In general, Goodrich loved everything German, from philosophy and economics to wines, colognes, and automobiles (he often drove a Mercedes-Benz). Goodrich also believed that German technology was superior to any other.38 No doubt his great admiration for Germany made Pierre especially proud to host Ludwig Erhard, a former West German chancellor, on two separate occasions in Indiana. Goodrich had become acquainted with Erhard at an annual Mont Pelerin Society meeting in St. Moritz, Switzerland, in September 1957. Shortly afterward, he invited the then German vice-chancellor and minister of economic affairs to speak at Wabash College.39 After more than a year of negotiating a date and a topic, Erhard traveled to the United States and gave two lectures at Wabash on the European Common Market.40
Erhard attended Wabash’s 1959 commencement, at which time he received his first honorary degree from an American college or university.41 During the same visit, Erhard addressed more than a thousand members of the Indiana Academy of Social Sciences at Wabash. He stressed, at the height of the Cold War, the importance of a free economy in establishing and maintaining a free society.42 At Goodrich’s invitation and expense, Erhard returned nine years later, in 1968, to speak at the Columbia Club in Indianapolis on the evils of inflation.43
Goodrich established friendships with other scholars. These included Bertrand de Jouvenel of France and Henry Hazlitt, a former New York Times and Newsweek economics reporter and a founding member of FEE, as well as other top minds already mentioned: Milton Friedman, Russell Kirk, Leonard Read, D. Elton Trueblood, Benjamin Rogge, and F. A. Harper of the Institute for Humane Studies. A younger group of academics also established friendships with Goodrich, including Stephen Tonsor, an emeritus professor of history at the University of Michigan; George Roche, former staff member of FEE and a longtime president of Hillsdale College; Henry Manne, former dean of the George Mason University School of Law in Virginia; and Gottfried Dietze, an emeritus professor of political science at Johns Hopkins University. In 1968, Dietze dedicated his book America’s Political Dilemma to Goodrich.44 Pierre Goodrich continued to learn by exchanging ideas with these top minds.
[1. ]See Peter J. Boettke, “Friedrich A. Hayek (1899–1992),” The Freeman (August 1992), pp. 300–303. Hayek was born in Vienna in 1899 and earned doctorates from the University of Vienna in law (1921) and in economics (1923). One of his early mentors was Ludwig von Mises. Hayek briefly attended Mises’s lectures at the University of Vienna and worked closely with Mises in the late 1920s and early 1930s at the Institute for Business Cycle Research in Vienna. Building on Mises’s work, Hayek published two important books, Monetary Theory and the Trade Cycle (1929) and Prices and Production (1931). These works, combined with an invitation to serve as guest lecturer at the London School of Economics in 1930, caused Hayek to be named Tooke Professor of Economic Science and Statistics at the University of London.
[2. ]Goodrich was invited by John Van Sickle of Wabash College through Hayek and Albert Hunold, founding members of the Mont Pelerin Society. See Pierre F. Goodrich, “Why Liberty?” p. 5. Goodrich had paid for Van Sickle to attend both the 1950 Mont Pelerin Society meeting at Bloemendaal, Holland, and the 1951 Beauvallon meeting.
[3. ]Hayek spoke in 1955 at a conference sponsored by the Volker Fund. Two other well-known speakers gave addresses at the week-long conference: Professor Bertil Ohlin, economist and then official leader of the Liberal Party of Sweden; and John Jewkes, professor of economics at Merton College, Oxford. The conference ran from June 22 to June 30, 1955. See Wabash Bulletin 51 (May 1955): 17. Hayek spoke on May 12, 1960, before the Wabash Conservative Economics Club (for which Goodrich provided financial support). Hayek attended the March 27, 1968, meeting of the Liberty Fund board and the Philadelphia Society’s national meeting in Chicago on March 28, 1968. Liberty Fund contributed $650 to have Hayek deliver his lecture before the Philadelphia Society meeting in Chicago. See “Minutes of the Meeting of the Board of Directors of the Liberty Fund, Inc.,” January 24, 1968, p. 149, and March 27, 1968, p. 153 (in the possession of Liberty Fund).
[4. ]Hayek’s collected papers are located at the Hoover Institution Archives. Correspondence between Hayek and Goodrich is found in box 22, folder 6; box 34, folder 17 (Liberty Fund); and box 43, folder 22 (Philadelphia Society).
[5. ]Nasar, “Friedrich von Hayek Dies at 92; an Early Free-Market Economist.”
[6. ]Letter from Milton Friedman to author, December 19, 1991.
[7. ]These quotations all come from the same letter from Goodrich to Hayek, March 31, 1959, F. A. Hayek Collection, box 43, folder ID 22, Archives, Hoover Institution.
[8. ]The Road to Serfdom (New York: Basic Books, 1979), p. 5. Originally published, with a foreword by John Chamberlain, by the University of Chicago Press, 1944, The Road to Serfdom was extremely significant because it challenged with clarity and brilliance John Maynard Keynes’s popular views about the alleged necessary intervention of the state in economic and social affairs; moreover, unlike other treatises that warned of the dangers of a growing state (such as Mises’s Socialism), The Road to Serfdom reached a wide audience. In the United States, it obtained great recognition primarily as a result of Henry Hazlitt’s review of the book in the New York Times literary supplement and an extract published in the April 1945 Reader’s Digest. See Henry Hazlitt, “An Economist’s View of ‘Planning,’” New York Times Book Review, September 24, 1944, p. 1, col. 1; see also Hans Kohn, “World Challenge,” Saturday Review of Literature, October 21, 1944, pp. 26–27; “Freedom and Planning: Case for the Individualist,” Times (London) Literary Supplement, April 1, 1944, p. 165, col. 1. The Road to Serfdom soon became a best-seller and was one of the most widely read and debated books in the postwar era.
[9. ]During World War II and immediately afterward, Hayek was the main advocate of that view. Other spokesmen who were able to make cogent and sustained arguments for conservative values were Richard Weaver (Ideas Have Consequences, 1948), Russell Kirk (The Conservative Mind, 1953), and William Buckley (God and Man at Yale, 1951). Still, it was Hayek who was most articulate in explaining the important role that freedom—in all its facets—played in saving the world from even greater destruction.
[10. ]Quote taken from Samuel Williston’s book review of J. H. Landman’s The Case Method of Studying Law (1930), in Harvard Law Review 43 (April 1930): 972. For a comprehensive analysis of Pound’s legal thought and contributions, see Edward B. McLean, Law and Civilization: The Legal Thought of Roscoe Pound (Lanham, Md.: University Press of America, 1992).
[11. ]Pound also taught law at the University of Nebraska, Northwestern University, the University of Chicago, and UCLA, as well as at schools in China and India. Two full-scale biographies of Pound have been written: Paul Sayre, The Life of Roscoe Pound (Iowa City: College of Law Committee, 1948); and David Wigdor, Roscoe Pound: Philosopher of Law (Westport, Conn.: Greenwood Press, 1974). See also Edward B. McLean, Law and Civilization: The Legal Thought of Roscoe Pound.
[12. ]See Wigdor, Roscoe Pound: Philosopher of Law, pp. 49–131.
[13. ]Sometime in 1944, both Pound and Goodrich attended a breakfast at Clair and Inez McTurnan’s house, located at the intersection of Fifty-second and North Meridian streets. McTurnan was a sought-after litigator. Lawrence McTurnan (nephew to Clair), telephone interview, May 17, 1993. See letter from Goodrich to Pound (referring to the meeting), January 7, 1955, Roscoe Pound Papers, Archives, Harvard Law School.
[15. ]Pound had intended to return to Wabash to complete a set of lectures detailing the constitutional guarantees of freedom up to modern times, but his commitment to completing his five-volume collection Jurisprudence and the fact that he was in his mid eighties at the time prevented him from undertaking the arduous task. See letter from Goodrich to Pound, November 9, 1955, Roscoe Pound Papers, Archives, Harvard Law School.
[16. ]See letter from J. W. Fesler to Pierre F. Goodrich, September 1, 1945; letter from J. W. Fesler to Roscoe Pound, September 4, 1945; and letter from Roscoe Pound to J. W. Fesler, September 8, 1945. Roscoe Pound Collection, Archives, Wabash College.
[17. ]Goodrich visited Pound in January 1947, in May 1955, and again in 1956. The letters that were exchanged between the two men, from June 5, 1946, to April 13, 1956, are located in the Roscoe Pound Collection, Archives, Harvard Law School. References to the three meetings of Goodrich and Pound can be found in Goodrich’s letter to Pound, February 3, 1947; Pound’s letter to Goodrich, May 3, 1955; and Goodrich’s letter to Pound, November 9, 1956.
[18. ]In the spring of 1946, for instance, Goodrich read Pound’s An Introduction to the Philosophy of Law, which was published in 1921. Goodrich, in typical fashion, wrote to Pound and inquired whether Pound had changed his views about whether law was a mechanism much like government, which continually tried to recognize and satisfy a person’s “wants or claims or desires through social control.” Goodrich believed that any such legal recognition resulted in the “corresponding loss of [man’s] own control of his individual actions and destiny.” Goodrich to Pound, June 5, 1946, Roscoe Pound Papers, Archives, Harvard Law School. The two men also exchanged lengthy letters on the importance of Luther, Calvin, Hus, and Wycliffe on the Puritan revolution and the importance of the Puritan revolution in influencing American political and constitutional history. Letter from Pound to Goodrich, May 9, 1949; letter from Goodrich to Pound, April 7, 1952. Roscoe Pound Papers, Archives, Harvard Law School.
[19. ]Pound’s experiences in China are briefly described in Wigdor’s Roscoe Pound: Philosopher of Law, pp. 276–78.
[20. ]Letter from Goodrich to Pound, February 3, 1947, Roscoe Pound Papers, Archives, Harvard Law School. The Chinese constitution was adopted by the National People’s Congress in the fall of 1946 and became effective on December 25, 1946. Pound’s response to Goodrich explained how difficult it had been to draft a constitution that all would be satisfied with given the diverse cultural and legal backgrounds of the advisers—British, French, American, and, of course, Chinese. Letter from Pound to Goodrich, February 14, 1947, Roscoe Pound Papers, Archives, Harvard Law School; see also Roscoe Pound, “The Chinese Constitution,” New York University Law Quarterly Review 22 (April 1947), p. 194.
[21. ]Letter from Pound to Goodrich, April 12, 1949; letter from Goodrich to Pound, May 1, 1949; letter from Pound to Goodrich, May 9, 1949. Roscoe Pound Papers, Archives, Harvard Law School.
[22. ]Pound explains his activities from 1947 to 1955, when he had reached the age of eighty-five, in a letter to Goodrich dated November 22, 1955, Roscoe Pound Papers, Archives, Harvard Law School.
[24. ]Goodrich spent an extraordinary amount of time working on the publication of Pound’s lectures. Approximately twenty-five pieces of correspondence were sent between Goodrich, Pound, and the Yale University Press in 1956 in regard to the preparation and publishing of the lectures. See letters between Goodrich and Pound, Roscoe Pound Collection, Archives, Harvard Law School.
[25. ]See letter from Ann S. Bujalsk, Rights Department, Yale University Press, to President, Wabash College, Roscoe Pound Collection, Archives, Wabash College, October 2, 1979.
[26. ]Apparently, Pound’s political views were one reason that his meager pension was never increased by Harvard in his retirement years. (Hayek was treated in much the same way, being forced to leave the University of Chicago in 1962 for Freiburg University in Germany because Chicago refused to pay him a pension.) See Murray N. Rothbard, Ludwig von Mises: Scholar, Creator, Hero (Ludwig von Mises Institute: Auburn University, 1988), p. 81, n. 54.
[27. ]“[Pound] found Chiang Kaie-shek an exceptional leader—wise, tenacious, and democratic. He insisted that there was little corruption and no censorship in China, and he compared the exclusion of liberal political parties to the fate of Republicanism during the New Deal.” Wigdor, Roscoe Pound: Philosopher of Law, p. 277. See also Roscoe Pound, “Other News of China,” American Affairs 10 (July 1948); letter from Pound to Goodrich, April 12, 1949, Roscoe Pound Papers, Archives, Harvard Law School; “Roscoe Pound’s Analysis of Chinese-American Affairs—Hits United States Aims for Compromise, Misconception of Red Role,” 81st Cong., 1st sess., Congressional Record (April 2, 1949), 95, pt. 3:3765–67. According to Edward McLean, a professor at Wabash College and the author of a book on Pound, Pound was not appreciated by the Harvard faculty or administration, because of his strong political support of the Nationalist government in China. Subsequently, Pound’s retirement emolument was never increased from the time he retired in 1947. Consequently, Pound had to teach and take on other jobs, such as the editing position with West Publishing, until Goodrich’s financial support in 1955 enabled Pound to return to legal scholarship. Edward McLean, interview, May 8, 1992. Pound alludes to this as well in the preface to The Development of Constitutional Guarantees of Liberty (p. vi) and in his preface to Jurisprudence.
[28. ]At Yale University Press’s request, Goodrich helped to subsidize the book’s publishing, because Goodrich was convinced that the source materials on which Pound’s lectures were based should be included in the book. See letter from Eugene Davidson, Editor, Yale University Press, to Goodrich, February 28, 1956; letter from Goodrich to Davidson, March 3, 1956. Roscoe Pound Collection, Archives, Harvard Law School. Pound asked for no financial compensation for the book, because he said he had been paid well (five hundred dollars) for the lectures he gave at Wabash College in 1945. Goodrich, however, saw that Pound was paid fifteen hundred dollars for an advance on the book. See letter from B. K. Trippet to Pound, April 3, 1957; Pound to Goodrich, April 8, 1957. Roscoe Pound Collection, Archives, Harvard Law School. While these amounts may seem paltry by today’s standards, Pound’s response indicates that he was pleased by the payment for such a scholarly book.
[29. ]Roscoe Pound, Jurisprudence (St. Paul, Minn.: West Publishing, 1959). Goodrich subsidized Pound’s writing of his treatise through grants from the Winchester Foundation.
[30. ]For an excellent overview of Austrian economics, see The Foundations of Modern Austrian Economics, ed. Edwin G. Dolan (Kansas City: Sheed and Ward, 1976).
[31. ]Letter from Helen Fletcher to author, June 18, 1996; Ruth Connolly, interview, October 25, 1991.
[32. ]William F. Campbell, now professor of economics at Louisiana State University, wrote: “I thank [Pierre Goodrich] most for my high school graduation gift which was a select library of books including von Mises’s Human Action which more than any other book interested me in economics and rational thought” (letter to author, May 15, 1993). Human Action was originally published by Yale University Press in 1949. Yale published a second edition in 1963 in which many mistakes were made. As a result, the rights to the book were reassigned, and the work was published by Henry Regnery in 1966.
[33. ]No doubt Goodrich thought so highly of Mises and of Human Action in particular because in the book Mises attempts to give a complete theory of how economics interacts with the individual as he makes choices in the real world. See Murray N. Rothbard, The Essential von Mises (Lansing, Mich.: Bramble Minibooks, 1973), pp. 35–47.
[34. ]John Van Sickle, a Wabash economics professor and a former student of Mises’s, arranged the conference. The conference was held on June 15, 1954, and was partially sponsored by the Volker Foundation. Mises’s topic was “The Market and the Role of Saving.” Other presenters were Professor Friedrich August Lutz of the University of Zurich and Professor George William Keeton of the University of London. See Wabash Bulletin 51 (May 1955): 17; Margit von Mises, My Years with Ludwig von Mises (New Rochelle, N.Y.: Arlington House, 1976), p. 152.
[35. ]Both dinners honoring Mises were held at the New York University Club. Enid Goodrich accompanied Pierre at the dinner honoring Mises on his eightieth birthday.
[36. ]Evidence of Goodrich’s friendship with the Miseses can be found in a letter from Margit von Mises to Pierre and Enid, inviting them to dinner one Friday in November 1963. Margit prepared Wiener schnitzel for the Goodriches. See letter from Margit von Mises to Pierre F. Goodrich, October 25, 1963, Pierre F. Goodrich Collection, box 1, Ludwig von Mises folder, Archives, Hoover Institution. Mises’s eleven-page memorandum on inflation was given to the Ayrshire Board of Directors on February 21, 1958.
[37. ]According to Bettina Bien Greaves, a friend of Mises who has made the study of his writings and teachings her life’s work, Mises was neither so cordial as Hayek nor so willing to spend time with students. “He often would say to a question asked by someone, go read it in my book on page so and so.” Hayek, on the other hand, was not only a brilliant thinker but also a very gracious and accommodating person. Bettina Bien Greaves, interview, October 19, 1992. An example of Goodrich’s admiration for Mises is the fact that Pierre was one of only two people who purchased a bronze bust of Mises (for $175). The bust was made shortly after the dinner honoring Mises on the fiftieth anniversary of his earning his doctorate. See letters between Goodrich and George Koether (automotive editor of Look magazine): Koether to Goodrich, December 7, 1956; Goodrich to Koether, February 15, 1957; Koether to Goodrich, April 9, 1957. Pierre F. Goodrich Collection, box 1, Ludwig von Mises folder, Archives, Hoover Institution.
[38. ]Ruth Connolly, interview, October 25, 1991.
[39. ]Ludwig Erhard (1897–1977) was the West German minister of economic affairs from 1949 to 1963, when he succeeded Konrad Adenauer as chancellor of the Federal Republic.
[40. ]Erhard had been West Germany’s top economic minister after World War II. He served as West Germany’s chancellor from 1963 to 1966. Erhard is credited with being the father of West Germany’s “economic miracle,” that period of time after World War II when West Germany’s economy strongly recovered because of Erhard’s bold decision to eliminate wage and price controls. For a brief account of this episode and its importance, see Peter G. Klein, ed., The Collected Works of F. A. Hayek: The Fortunes of Liberalism (Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1992), pp. 13–14, 193–94; “Ludwig Erhard,” New Encyclopaedia Britannica, vol. 6 (Chicago: Encyclopaedia Britannica, 1991), p. 540.
[41. ]See “Wabash to Hear Top Adenauer Aide,” Indianapolis News, May 25, 1959, p. 11, col. 2; “Erhard Hopes Progress by His Germany Justifies Aid,” Crawfordsville (Ind.) Journal and Review, June 8, 1959, p. 1, col. 1; Lester M. Hunt, “Visiting German Stakes Peace on West’s Willingness to Fight,” June 8, 1959, p. 1, col. 3; Pat Redmond, “Erhard Warns of World Inflation,” Indianapolis News, June 8, 1959, p. 17, col. 2 (picture on p. 14); “Ludwig Erhard Spoke at Wabash in 1959,” Indianapolis Star, October 16, 1963, p. 3, col. 1. Although Wabash College was the first American college or university to award Erhard an honorary degree, both Columbia and Harvard universities later proclaimed that they were first. See “Wabash First to Award Erhard Honor,” Indianapolis News, June 3, 1965, p. 19, col. 1.
[42. ]Erhard said: You can’t take two systems exactly opposite in nature and try to strike an average. You can’t combine a collectivized, compulsory economy with a free market economy. You can’t combine dictatorship with democracy or slavery with human dignity and somehow try to reconcile them and find a combination. . . . The whole free world must be interested [in the unification of Germany] on the basis of freedom. (Lester M. Hunt, “Visiting German Stakes Peace on West’s Willingness to Fight,” Indianapolis Star, June 8, 1959, p. 1, col. 3)
[43. ]The former West German chancellor spoke about another economic evil that both he and Goodrich believed threatened any free society: inflation. See “Erhard Warns of World Inflation,” Indianapolis News, February 20, 1968, p. 2, col. 6; Columbian, April 1968, p. 2.
[44. ]The full title of Dietze’s book is America’s Political Dilemma: From Limited to Unlimited Democracy (Baltimore: Johns Hopkins University Press, 1968).