Michael E. Parrish, Securities Regulation and the New Deal (Yale University Press, 1970, 270 pp.).
Reviewed by Hugh Hughes Georgia State University
The New Deal, broadly perceived as a reform movement, has been the subject of previous comprehensive studies. As Parrish notes in his introduction, he is concerned with illuminating “a portion of the larger debate: the relationship between American businessmen and reform.” He attempts to identify the reformers, their motivations, and the consequences of reform.
To accomplish his goals, he concentrates on the issue of securities regulation—primarily through an analysis of the Securities Act of 1933, the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, and the Public Utility Holding Company Act of 1935. The analysis begins with a discussion of “blue-sky” laws and the efforts of the then recently formed Investment Bankers Association to promote uniformity of state and federal securities regulation laws before and during the twenties. The major portion of the book is then devoted to an in-depth study of the evolution of pertinent provisions of each of the three acts mentioned above, including an analysis of other competitive and ultimately unsuccessful bills.
A large number of individuals and groups played a part in developing, inhibiting, and modifying this legislation both before its passage and upon its subsequent administration by the Securities and Exchange Commission. From historical studies, government documents, etc., and more importantly from personal diaries, correspondence, and papers of individuals important to the outcome of securities legislation, Parrish assembles a virtual panoramic cast of characters including senators, representatives, Wall Street lawyers, bankers, the Roosevelt administration and attendant New Dealers, the New York Stock Exchange, stockbrokers, the Federal Reserve Board, scholars, the Federal Trade Commission, several Congressional committees, pressure groups and accountants.
This is no Cinderella tale which Parrish relates—it is a study of legislation incessantly attacked by detractors who in some instances do manage to dilute or eliminate what appear to have been worth¬while reforms. The personal papers are particularly helpful here in shedding light on the feelings and frustrations of both advocates and foes of these measures and of the philosophies motivating them.
An important feature of the book is that it is not primarily concerned with the accounting profession or accounting practices. Accountants, as the list above notes, are but one of a number of parties whom Parrish attempts to place in perspective, and it is this perspective that today’s accounting practitioner or professor should find of most benefit. The development of the SEC’s philosophy to¬ward accountants, for example, is seen against a larger background of its relationship to the business community generally.
To the accounting historian, the book is significant for this same perspective, for the evolutionary study of a government institution of primary importance to accountants, and for its methodology. In conclusion, I feel the author readily accomplished his objective. Parrish’s Securities Regulation and the New Deal is a pat hand.
(Vol. 1, No. 4, p. 4, 1974)
