Categories
Economists Gender Harvard NBER Radcliffe Smith Vassar

Radcliffe.Economics Ph.D. Alumna, Dorothy Carolin Bacon, 1928

 

This post began after I noticed that it has been some time since I posted biographical and career information for a economics Ph.D. alumna. I figured it would be good to search for a candidate that Economics in the Rear-view Mirror has already caught in an earlier archival trawling expedition but for whom the details of post-doc life had not been added. Dorothy Carolin Bacon was awarded her Radcliffe economics Ph.D. in 1928 and the following item was what I had to start with.

Dorothy Carolin Bacon.

General Examination in Economics, Thursday, May 26, 1927.
Committee: Professors Persons (chairman), Carver, Crum, Gay and Holcombe.
Academic History: Simmons College, 1918-19; Radcliffe College, 1919-22, 1923-24, 1926-. A.B., Radcliffe, 1922; A.M., ibid., 1924. Assistant in Economics, Vassar College, 1924-25. Instructor in Economics, ibid., 1925-26.
General Subjects: 1. Economic Theory. 2. Sociology. 3. History of Political Theory. 4. Statistics. 5. Economic History. 6., Money, Banking and Crises.
Special Subject: Money, Banking and Crises.
Thesis Subject: A Study of the Dispersion of Wholesale Commodity Prices, 1890-1896.  (With Professor Persons.)

Source: Harvard University Archives. Harvard University, Examinations for the Ph.D. (HUC 7000.70), Folder “Examinations for the Ph.D., 1926-1927”.

________________________

One of the items that came up after searching for a Google search was an advertisement for her handwritten Radcliffe student journal notes from her Physics course in 1922. Besides being surprised to see a list price of $750.00 for this notebook, I was intrigued by the relatively detailed information provided about Dorothy Bacon. While everything about the text struck me as fully plausible, I thought it worth some due diligence to confirm what I could from the bookseller’s bio-blurb. I have added links wherever possible to sources that confirm the details below. It would appear that information from the above item in Economics in the Rear-view Mirror as well as from the Dzuback chapters in Madden and Dimand (eds.)  and Margaret A. Nash (ed.) have provided some (or even much) of what was included in the D. Anthem advertisement that follows.

The section on Smith College in Mary Ann Dzuback’s chapter “Women economists in the academy: struggles and strategies, 1900-1940” in the Routledge Handbook of the History of Women’s Economic Thought, Kirsten Madden and Robert W. Dimand (eds.) provides information on Dorothy Bacon from the faculty files of the Smith College Archives [Office of President William Allan Neilson Files, Box 364, Folder 34]:

Bacon came to Smith a year before finishing her Ph.D. at Radcliffe in 1928. She took research and service sabbatical leaves to work for the Works Progress Administration and the Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation in the 1930s. She focused her research on money flows during the 1930s, cost price problems, and the development of federal level credit institutions. By the 1940s, she was working with the federal Office of Price Administration. By the 1950s, she was consulting with the Brookings Institution, had been a research associate of the National Bureau of Economic Research, and received grants from the SSRC. She published a monograph on the recent economic history of five towns around Northampton, Massachusetts, in the late 1930s, and was completing a book on the development of Philippine credit institutions by 1970.

________________________

Another paragraph by Mary Ann Dzuback

From: Mary Ann Dzuback. Chapter 7. Research at Women’s Colleges, 1890-1940. Women’s Higher Education in the United States (Historical Studies in Education), edited by Margaret A. Nash. Palgrave Macmillan, 2018.

Dorothy Bacon (1927–54) arrived in 1928, eventually taking an endowed chair. She investigated the flows of currency during the Depression, cost price problems, and the growth of credit institutions, and was in great demand by private research agencies and the federal government. A sometime consultant with the National Bureau of Economic Research, in the 1920s and 1930s she worked with a range of government and research agencies. She was awarded grants by the Social Science Research Council and published regularly. Bacon’s record of research and service, and her sabbaticals, suggest that women social science scholars at Smith were encouraged to use their research to inform policy at the federal and international levels.

________________________

From: Advertisement for “Economist Dorothy Bacon’s 1922 Physics 2 Journal from Radcliffe College (1922)

Dorothy Carolin Bacon was born in 1902 to George Preston Bacon, a professor of Physics and Dean of both the Tufts Engineering School and the Bromfield-Pearson School, and Hannah Churchill Bacon, a trained nurse. Her sister, Ruth Bacon, also attended Radcliffe College and later became the first female officer of a State Department geographical bureau (Bureau of Eastern Affairs). Bacon attended Simmons College from 1918-19 before transferring to Radcliffe, the former women’s liberal arts college that fully merged with Harvard in 1999. She earned her B.A. (1922), M.A. (1924) and Ph.D (1927) [sic, 1928] there with her dissertation concerning A Study of the Dispersion of Wholesale Commodity Prices, 1890-1896. While at Radcliffe she also worked for the Federal Reserve Board’s Division of Research and Analysis [as a Statistical Clerk starting 1 July 1922earning an annual salary of $1600 before resigning [May 10] in 1923.

She was hired as an assistant professor [sic, “Assistant” is a lower rank than “Assistant Professor”] in economics at Vassar in 1924 [cf. AER, Vol. 14, No. 4 (Dec. 1924), p. 829 “Miss Dorothy C. Bacon is assistant in economics at Vassar College.”], but was recruited by Esther Lowenthal, Dean of the Faculty and chair of the economics department at Smith, to join Smith’s faculty in 1927. At Smith she focused her research on money flows during the 1930s, cost price problems, and the development of credit institutions at the federal level. In 1930, she was one of three research associates selected for the National Bureau of Economic Research where she studied the relation of current stock prices to earnings per share from the twenty corporations comprising the Index of Industrial Stock Prices of the Harvard Economic Service. Her monograph, Recent Economic History of the Five Towns (1937) was published by the Works Progress Administration. In 1942, Bacon left her post at Smith [sic, only temporary leave] to work under Leon Henderson at the Office of Price Administration. It was there that she wrote a study of the scrap metal market in Syracuse, NY. By the 1950s, she was consulting with the Brookings Institution and was publishing her research in the Review of Economic Statistics, the Journal of the American Statistical Association and the National Encyclopedia. She appears to have never married [she wasn’t]  and when she died in 1998 she was buried at Shawsheen Cemetery in Bedford, MA, alongside her parents and sister.

Source: D. Anthem, Bookseller advertisement for “Economist Dorothy Bacon’s 1922 Physics 2 Journal from Radcliffe College (1922) [posted price: $750.00!]

________________________

A.E.A. Biographical Listing, 1969

BACON, Dorothy Carolin, academic; b. Beloit, Wis., 1902; student Simmons Coll., 1918-19; A.B., Radcliffe Coll., 1922, A.M., 1924, Ph.D., 1928. FIELDS 2c, 5e, 4a. Research asso., Nat. Bur. Econ. Research, 1930-31; formerly sr. research asso., Fed. Deposit Ins. Corp.; fed. Dir. Research project, Work Progress Adm., 1935-36; asst. div. economist, food price div., OPA [Office of Price Administration], 1943-47, OPS [Office of Price Stabilization], 1951; Fulbright prof., U. Philippines, 1956-57; mem. Faculty, Smith Coll. Since 1927, prof. since 1938, Robert A. Woods prof. since 1956. ADDRESS Smith Coll., 115 Elm St., Northampton, MA 01060.

Note. Fields: 2c (Economic Development Studies); 5e (General International Economics); 4a (Monetary and Financial Theory and Institutions).

SourceThe American Economic Review, Vol. 59, No. 6, 1969. Handbook of the American Economic Association (January 1970), p. 17.

________________________

Bachelor of Arts, Radcliffe (1922)

With Distinction in Special Subjects
Cum Laude

Dorothy Carolin Bacon [of] Medford. In Mathematics.

Source: Report of the Dean in Annual Report of Radcliffe College for 1920-1923, p. 43.

________________________

Master of Arts, Radcliffe (1924)

Dorothy Carolin Bacon, A.B.

Source: Report of the Dean in Annual Report of Radcliffe College for 1923-1924, p. 31.

________________________

Doctor of Philosophy, Radcliffe (1928)

Dorothy Carolin Bacon A.M.

Subject, Economics. Special Field, Money and Banking. Dissertation, “Maladjustment of Prices with Special Reference to the Wholesale Prices of Commodities in the United States; 1890-1896”

Source:  Report of the Dean in Annual Reports of Radcliffe College for 1927-1928, p. 23.

________________________

Publications of Dorothy C. Bacon

A Monthly Index of Commodity Prices, 1890-1900. Review of Economics and Statistics, Vol. 8, No. 4 (October 1926), pp. 177-83.

The Significance of Fixed-base and Link Relatives in Studies of Price Stability: A Comment on the Behavior of Prices. Journal of the American Statistical Association, Vol. 23 (September 1928), pp. 274-81.

Maladjustment of Prices with Special Reference to the Wholesale Prices of Commodities in the United States, 1890-1896. Ph.D. thesis, Radcliffe College.

Encyclopedia articles in the National Encyclopedia.

Recent Economic History of Five Towns. Northampton, Mass.: Smith College, 1937.

________________________

Vital Dates and Miscellaneous Information

Born:  25 February 1902 in Beloit, Wisconsin.

Last Residence: Niceville, Okaloosa, Florida [Socal Security death index].

Died: 8 November in Meriden, New Haven County, Connecticut. [Apparently visiting: the Connecticut Death Index notes her address 2475 Virginia, Residence Andover, District of Columbia].

________________________

Image Source: Senior year picture of Dorothy Carolin Bacon in the  Radcliffe Year Book 1922, p. 23.

 

 

 

Categories
Chicago Exam Questions Suggested Reading Syllabus

Chicago. Monetary International Economics, readings and exam. Metzler, 1967

 

Lloyd Metzler provided a token Keynesian voice with a Harvard accent at post-WWII Chicago. Once the Cowles Commission moved to Yale, Metzler found himself vastly outnumbered. And yet he persisted.

__________________________

Syllabus and readings for Economics 370 in 1950.

Exam for Economics 370 in 1953.

All Economics in the Rear-view Mirror blog-posts with Lloyd Metzler content.

__________________________

Biographical Note

Lloyd Appleton Metzler was born on April 3, 1913 in Lost Springs, Kansas. He attended the University of Kansas, where he studied economics under John Ise and earned a Bachelor’s degree in 1935 and an MBA in 1938. Metzler then entered Harvard University. He served as an instructor and tutor at Harvard and completed a Ph.D. in economics in 1942. His dissertation, “Interregional Income Generation,” earned him the Wells Prize. That same year, Metzler was the recipient of a Guggenheim fellowship.

From Harvard, Metzler went on to Washington, D.C., where worked for the Office of Strategic Services and several economic policy and planning commissions between 1943 and 1946. Metzler joined the research staff of the Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System in 1944. In 1946 he returned to academia when he accepted a teaching position at Yale University. He soon left Yale for the University of Chicago in 1947, where he remained for the rest of his career.

Dr. Metzler survived surgery for a brain tumor in 1952, and with the help of his wife Edith, managed to continue teaching and writing for the next twenty years. He served as Editor of the Journal of Political Economy from 1966 until his retirement in 1971. Metzler made numerous contributions to business cycle literature, macro-monetary theory, tariff theory, mathematical economics, and the field of international trade. The Metzler paradox, Laursen-Metzler effect, and Metzler matrix, all bear his name. He died on October 26, 1980.

Source: University of Chicago Library. Guide to the Lloyd A. Metzler Papers 1941-48. Note: the interesting archival papers containing the following material are found in the Economists’ Papers Archive at Duke University.

__________________________

ECONOMICS 370
MONETARY ASPECTS OF INTERNATIONAL TRADE
Major Topics and Reading List

Winter 1967
Lloyd A. Metzler

  1. Mechanism of the Foreign Exchange Market
    1. P. T. Ellsworth, The International Economy, third edition, New York: Macmillan Company, 1964, Chapter 17.
    2. Alan R. Holmes and Francis Schott, The New York Foreign Exchange Market, New York: The Federal Reserve Bank of New York, 1965, Chapters 1-6.
    3. Frank A. Southard, Jr., Foreign Exchange Practice and Policy, New York: The McGraw-Hill Book Company, 1940.
    4. N. Crump, The ABC of the Foreign Exchanges, London: Macmillan and Company, Ltd., 1951.
    5. James E. Meade, Studies in the Theory of International Economic Policy, Vol. I, The Balance of Payments, London: Oxford University Press, 1951, Chapter 1.
  2. The Quantity of Money, the Rate of Interest, and the Price Level
    1. Sub-Committee on General Credit Control and Debt Management of the Joint Committee on the Economic Report, Hearings on the Question, What Should our Monetary and Debt Management Policy Be? 82ndCongress of the United States, 1952, pp. 688-7111, 691-698. (These pages include the testimony of Milton Friedman and Paul Samuelson.)
    2. James Tobin, “Monetary Policy and the Management of the Public Debt. The Patman Inquiry,” Review of Economics and Statistics, Vol. XXXV, No. 2, May 1953, pp. 118-127.
    3. Robert V. Roosa, “Interest Rates and the Central Bank” in Money, Trade and Economic Growth, in honor of John Henry Williams, New York: The Macmillan Company, 1951.
    4. Lloyd A. Metzler, “Wealth, Saving, and the Rate of Interest,” Journal of Political Economy, Vol. LIX, No. 2, April, 1951, pp. 93-116.
    5. Robert A. Mundell, “The Public Debt, Corporate Income Taxes, and the Rate of Interest,” Journal of Political Economy, Vol. LXVIII, No. 6, December 1960, pp. 622-626.
    6. George Horwich, “Real Assets and the Theory of Interest,” Journal of Political Economy, Vol. LXX, No. 2, April 1962, pp. 158-169.
    7. Don Patinkin, Money, Interest, and Prices, first edition, Evanston: Row, Peterson and Co., 1956, Part. II.
  3. The Role of Money in International Adjustment: Full Employment and Under-Employment
    1. J. M. Keynes, Treatise on Money, Vol. I, The Pure Theory of Money, London: Macmillan and Company, 1935, Chapter 21.
    2. Lloyd A. Metzler, “The Theory of International Trade,” From A Survey of Contemporary Economics, Howard S. Ellis, editor Homewood, Illinois: R. D. Irwin, Inc., 1948.
  4. Free Market Exchange Rates
    1. A. J. Brown, “The Foreign Exchanges” in Oxford Studies in the Price Mechanism, Edited by T. Wilson and P.W. S. Andrews, Oxford at the Clarendon Press, 1951, Chapters I (i) and II (ii).
    2. S. Alexander, “Effects of A Devaluation on a Trade Balance,” International Monetary Fund Staff Papers, Vol. II, No. 2, April 1952.
    3. Milton Friedman, “The Case for Flexible Exchange Rates,” in Essays in Positive Economics, Chicago, University of Chicago Press, 1953, pp. 157-203.
    4. Joan Robinson, Essays in the Theory of Employment, Oxford: Basil Blackwell, 1947, Part III, “The Foreign Exchanges.”
    5. Lloyd A. Metzler, “Exchange Rates and the International Monetary Fund,” in International Monetary Policies, Postwar Economic Studies No. 7, Washington, D.C.: Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System, September, 1947.
    6. Rudolph R. Rhomberg, “A Model of the Canadian Economy under Fixed and Fluctuating Exchange Rates,” Journal of Political Economy, Vol. LXXII, No. 1, February 1964, pp. 1-31.
  5. Forward Exchange Rates
    1. Paul Einzig, The Theory of Forward Exchange, London: Macmillan and Co., Ltd., 1937.
    2. Paul Einzig, A Dynamic Theory of Forward Exchange, London, Macmillan and Co., New York, St. Martin’s Press, 1961.
    3. Alan R. Holmes and Francis Schott, The New York Foreign Exchange Market, New York: The Federal Reserve Bank of New York, 1965, Chapters 7-8.
    4. Paul Einzig, “Some Recent Development in Official Forward Exchange Operations,” Economic Journal, Vol. LXXIII, No. 290, June 1963, pp. 241-53.
    5. Paul Einzig, “Some Recent Changes in Forward Exchange Practices,” Economic Journal, Vol. LXX, No. 279, September, 1960, pp. 485-95.
  6. The Balance of Payments and the Concepts of Income
    1. R. F. Bennett, “Significance of International Transactions in National Income”, in Studies in Income and Wealth, Vol. VI, New York: National Bureau of Economic Research, 1943.
    2. U. S. Department of Commerce, Income and Output, 1958 supplement to the Survey of Current Business.
  7. The Theory of Income Transfers
    1. J. M. Keynes, “The Transfer Problem,” Economic Journal, XXXIX, No. 153, March 1929, pp. 1-7.
    2. B. Ohlin, “The Reparation Problem: A Discussion, I. Transfer Difficulties, Real and Imagined,” Economic Journal, Vol. XXXIX, No. 154, June 1929, pp. 172-78.
    3. J. M. Keynes, “The Reparation Problem: A Discussion. II. A Rejoinder” Economic Journal, Vol. XXXIX, no. 154, June 1929, pp. 179-82.
    4. J. Rueff, “Mr. Keynes’ Views on the Transfer Problem, Economic Journal, Vol. XXXIX, No. 155, September 1929, pp. 388-99.
    5. B. Ohlin, “Rejoinder to J. Rueff,” Economic Journal, Vol. XXXIX, No. 155, September 1929, pp. 400-4.
    6. J. M. Keynes, “Reply to J. Rueff,” Economic Journal, Vol. XXXIX, No. 155, September 1929, pp. 404-8.
    7. L. A. Metzler, “The Transfer Problem Re-considered,” Journal of Political Economy, Vol. L, No. 2, June 1942.
    8. H. G. Johnson, “The Transfer Problem and Exchange Stability,” Journal of Political Economy, Vol. LXIV, No. 3, June 1956, pp. 212-25.
  8. Postwar Monetary Conditions and the Position of the U.S. Dollar
    1. R. Hinshaw, Toward Currency Convertibility, Princeton University, Essays in International Finance, No. 31, 1958.
    2. R. Triffin, Europe and the Money Muddle, New Haven: Yale University Press, 1957.
    3. C. P. Kindleberger, The Dollar Shortage, Cambridge: Massachusetts [Institute of ] Technology Press, New York: John Wiley and Sons, Inc., 1950.
    4. R. Triffin, “The International Monetary Position of the United States,” in The Dollar in Crisis, S.E. Harris, editor, New York: Harcourt, Brace and World, Inc., 1961.
    5. P. T. Ellsworth, The International Economy, third edition, New York: The Macmillan Company, Part VI.
    6. H. B. Lary, Problems of the United States as World Trader and Banker, Princeton University Press for the National Bureau of Economic Research, 1963.
    7. Triffin, The Evolution of the International Monetary System: Historical Reappraisal and Future Perspectives, Princeton Studies in International Finance, No. 12, International Finance Section, Princeton University, 1964.
    8. International Financial Arrangements: The Problem of Choice, Report on the deliberations of an international study group of 32 economists, International Finance Section, Department of Economics, Princeton University 1964.
    9. New Approach to United States International Economic Policy. Hearing before the subcommittee on international exchange and payments of the joint economic committee, Eighty-ninth Congress of the United States, second session, September 9, 1966.
    10. Ministerial Statement of the Group of Ten and Annex Prepared by Deputies, Statement of M. Valery Giscard d’Estaing, Chairman of the group, August 10, 1964.
    11. American Enterprise Institute, International Payments Problems, a symposium sponsored by the American Enterprise Institute for Public Policy Research, Washington, D.C. 1966.

*  *  *  *  *  *  *  *  *  *  *  *  *

Lloyd A. Metzler

ECONOMICS 370
Course Examination
Winter, 1967

Answer all questions.

  1. Define two concepts of income which arise when one country (A) makes an annual income transfer to another country (B) and indicate the significance of each concept.
  2. Use the concepts above to show why, in a two-country economy, a presumption exists that the transfer will be more difficult if both countries require imported raw materials to produce than if both are self-sufficient in production. Without going into technical details, indicate why the theory for self-sufficient economies is correct despite this presumption.
  3. (a) Derive the conditions of balance in a full-employment open economy for the following markets: (i) the market for goods and services; (ii) the market for newly-issued securities (iii) the market for foreign exchange.
    (b) Show that if the first two markets are in balance, the country has neither a surplus nor a deficit in its balance of payments.
    (c) Show that if there is an excess supply (or deflationary gap) in both new securities and goods and services the country necessarily has a deficit in its balance of payments. Discuss the market mechanism which may eliminate this deficit, assuming full employment and flexible prices.
  4. The table below gives interest rates for 3-months U.S. treasury bills adjusted to an annual basis, as well as the spot rate and the 3-month forward rate on Canadian currency, each rate being defined as the U.S. dollar price of the Canadian dollar:

 

Period 3-month U.S. bills 3-month forward rate Spot Rate
(1) .05 $1.0025 $1.0000
(2) .04 $0.9975 $1.0000
(3) .03 $0.9950 $1.0000
(4) .04 $0.9900 $1.0000
(5) .07 $2.0050 $2.0000

On the basis of this information you are asked to compute, for all periods, the interest rate for Canadian 3-months bills on the assumption that all data lie on the Interest Rate Parity line. Show your computations.

Source:  Duke University. David M. Rubenstein Rare Book and Manuscript Library. Economists’ Papers Archives. Lloyd Appleton Metzler Papers, Box 3, Folder “Econ 370- Course Exams”.

Source Image: Posting by Margie Metzler on the Metzler Family Tree at the genealogical website, ancestry.com.

 

Categories
Exam Questions Harvard Suggested Reading Syllabus

Harvard. Economic Analysis and Public Policy, Readings and Exams. Smithies and Baldwin, 1956-57

While Harvard archive’s collection of old course syllabi and reading lists offers a treasure chest of material, there still are plenty of “missing observations” and lost pages between us and a complete record. Fortunately there is often significant inertia in the actual syllabi so that interpolation is less hazardous than one might expect in filling the gaps. As noted below, the reading list for the Spring term was not found in the corresponding folder for Harvard economics course syllabi in the Harvard archives.

*  *  *  *  *  *  *  *  *  *

Arthur Smithies’ syllabus for this course as taught in 1949-50 has been transcribed and posted.

Robert Baldwin’s reading lists and exams for 1955-56 have been likewise transcribed and posted.

________________________

Course Enrollment

[Economics] 206. Economic Analysis and Public Policy. Professor Smithies and Assistant Professor Baldwin. Full course.

(F) Total 49: 9 Graduates, 36 Other Graduates, 1 Senior, 1 Radcliffe, 2 Others.
(S) Total 51: 10 Graduates, 37 Other Graduates, 1 Senior, 1 Radcliffe, 2 Others.

Source: Harvard University. Report of the President of Harvard College 1956-57, p. 70.

________________________

HARVARD UNIVERSITY
Department of Economics

Economics 206
Reading List, Fall 1956

  1. Economic Analysis and Public Policy

F. H. Knight, “Economic Objectives in a Changing World,” Economics and Public Policy, The Brookings Institution, 1955.

A. Smithies, “Economic Welfare and Policy,” Ibid.

  1. The Ricardian System

David Ricardo, Principles of Political Economy, Chs. 2-6, 21.

W. J. Baumol, Economic Dynamics, Ch. 2.

Suggested:

Ricardo, Chs. 1, 31

G. J. Stigler, “The Ricardian Theory of Value and Distribution,” The Journal of Political Economy, LX, 3 (June 1952).

J. S. Mill, Principles of Political Economy, Bk. 3, Ch. 6 and 14;

Mimeographed paper on Smith and Ricardo*

  1. Marxian Dynamics

Karl Marx, A Contribution to the Critique of Political Economy, Preface.

M. M. Bober, Karl Marx’s Interpretation of History, Chs. 1-3, 9-13.

Suggested:

Joan Robinson, An Essay on Marxian Economics.

P. Sweezy, The Theory of Capitalist Development, Chs. 4-6, 8, 9,

J. A. Schumpeter, Capitalism, Socialism, and Democracy, Part I.

Mimeographed paper on Marx*

  1. The Neo-classical System

L. Walras, Elements of Pure Economics, Part I.

G. Cassel, The Theory of Social Economy, Ch. 4

W. S. Jevons, The Theory of Political Economy, Introduction.

Suggested:

E. Phelps Brown, Framework of the Pricing System

  1. The Schumpeterian System

J. A. Schumpeter, Business Cycles, Vol. I, Chs. 3, 4.

J. A. Schumpeter, Capitalism, Socialism, and Democracy, Part II

Suggested:

J. A. Schumpeter, The Theory of Economic Development.

Mimeographed paper on Schumpeter*.

  1. Keynesian Economics

J. M. Keynes, The General Theory of Employment, Interest, and Money, Ch. 19.

D. Dillard, The Economics of J. M. Keynes, Chs. 2, 3.

A. Hansen, Business Cycles and National Income, Part II

Suggested:

A. Hansen, A Guide to Keynes

J. M. Keynes, The General Theory of Employment, Interest, and Money.

  1. Post-Keynesian Growth Theorists

E. Domar, “Expansion and Employment,” American Economic Review, March 1947.

W. Baumol, op. cit., Ch. 4

Suggested:

R. Harrod, Towards a Dynamic Economics, Ch. 3.

D. Hamberg, Economic Growth and Instability, Ch. 2, 3

*Available in Lamont and Littauer Libraries.

Source: Harvard University Archives. Syllabi, course outlines and reading lists in Economics, 1895-2003. Box 6, Folder: “Economics, 1956-1957 (1 of 2).

________________________

1956-57
HARVARD UNIVERSITY

Economics 206
Fall 1956
Final Examination

Answer FIVE of the following seven questions.

  1. What conclusions can be drawn concerning the optimization of resource allocation in a competitive versus a monopolistic economy? Consider the problem under both static and dynamic conditions.
  2. Analyze the possible employment effects of an increase in the money supply in the Keynesian and the neo-classical aggregate models.
  3. Both Ricardo and Marx assert that real wages tend to be driven to a subsistence level in the long-run. Contrast the reasoning of these two writers in reaching this conclusion.
  4. Contrast the reasons why the classical writers were pessimistic about development prospects under capitalism whereas the neo-classical economists were quite optimistic about growth possibilities.
  5. Neo-classical writers claim that long-run equilibrium at a less than full employment level is impossible. Keynesians, on the other hand, assert that less than full employment equilibrium is possible. Carefully explain the reasons why these two groups differ on this point.
  6. What were the major policy recommendations of Ricardo? Analyze how, according to Ricardo, the adoption of these measures would postpone the arrival of the stationary state.
  7. Contrast the role of the interest rate as a determinant of investment in the Schumpeterian, neo-classical, and Keynesian models.

Source: Harvard University Archives. Final examinations, 1853-2001. Box 25, Volume: Papers Printed for Final Examinations [in] History, History of Religions, …, Economics, …, Naval Science, Air Science, January 1957.

________________________

Note: The reading list for Economics 206, Spring Term 1957 was not found in the Harvard archives with the other filed course syllabi from 1956-57.

________________________

HARVARD UNIVERSITY
Economics 206

Spring Examination, 1957

Answer FOUR of SEVEN.

  1. a) Under what conditions could the U.S. economy achieve uninterrupted growth? Do you think these conditions are likely to prevail?
    b) What sort of obstacles to steady growth would you expect to find in the U.S. economy? Are they self-correcting or would you recommend specific policies to overcome them?
  2. Is an equal or unequal distribution of income more compatible with the achievement of steady growth? What are the chief determinants of income distribution in the United States? Would you expect a shift in distribution as the economy grows?
  3. Analyze the causes of inflationary pressure. With our present institutional arrangements, what policy measures would you advocate to alleviate an inflation? Discuss any changes in present institutions that you feel would be desirable for combating inflation. Would your policy measures change if you were operating under changed legal or institutional arrangements? (i.e. Would you use the same instruments in a different way?)
  4. What is the meaning of balance of payments disequilibrium? How would you deal with such a disequilibrium in a country that had a goal of maximizing economic growth?
  5. Do you think there was a fundamental change in the U.S. economy between the prosperous ‘20’s and the depressed ‘30’s or between the ‘30’s and the post World War II era? If so, what were these changes and how do they contribute to an explanation of the behavior of the economy in these periods? If not, how would you explain the mixed performance of the economy?
  6. How can the traditional theory of the firm be used to explain the distribution of income? Would the theory lead you to expect a different distribution in an imperfectly competitive economy than in a purely competitive one?
  7. Are large budgets consistent with equilibrium growth? What effect on growth would an increase in government expenditure have if (a) it is deficit financed, (b) it is tax financed?

Source: Harvard University Archives. Final examinations, 1853-2001. Volume 113 (HUC 7000.28) Final Exams—Social Sciences—June 1957: Papers Printed for Final Examinations [in] History, History of Religions, …, Economics, …, Naval Science, Air Science, June 1957.

Image Sources:  (Left) John Simon Guggenheim Memorial Foundation website. Arthur Smithies (1955 Fellow); (Right) Robert Baldwin from Selection from photograph (ca. 1975) of Robert E. Baldwin from the University of Wisconsin Archives/The University of Wisconsin Collection/The UW-Madison Collection/UW-Madison Archives Images.

Categories
Economics Programs M.I.T.

M.I.T. Economics and Political Science, excerpt from President’s Report, 1961

 

M.I.T.’s department of economics has done historically well in attracting graduate students who have received third-party funding, e.g. National Science Foundation Graduate Fellowships. Besides offering a top-down report of the position of the economics department at M.I.T., the excerpt from the President’s 1961 Centennial Year Report transcribed below offers the factual nugget: “This year, too, M.I.T. was selected as first choice by more Woodrow Wilson Fellows in economics — eighteen out of eighty — than any other school in the country”.

_____________________

Also from 1961

M.I.T. Graduate Economics Brochure of 1961.

General Examinations in Economic Theory at M.I.T. from 1961: Microeconomics; Macroeconomics.

Fun antique video. Round table discussion with Jerome Wiesner, Jerrold Zacharias, and John Burchard of MIT with Raymond Aron of the Université de Paris-Sorbonne, Isidor Rabi of Columbia University, and Sir Eric Ashby of Cambridge University was filmed as part of the Tomorrow television series produced by CBS Television Network for MIT on occasion of MIT’s Centennial in 1961.

_____________________

From the President’s Report 1961, M.I.T.

The Social Sciences In the light of the concerns of the Centennial for the larger influences of science upon society, I think it appropriate to review this year the state of the social sciences at the Institute. That we should have become occupied with these areas was inevitable, and the Institute has a clear obligation to cultivate especially those that relate most directly to modern developments in engineering, science, and mathematics. M.I.T. has recognized this responsibility and has responded with strong and growing support to work in the social sciences in the School of Humanities and Social Science and elsewhere. These activities are giving to the Institute an entirely new dimension that few not associated intimately with M.I.T. yet appreciate.

It is a simple truth that the interests of the great physical and social sciences were never more interwoven than today. The overriding practical problems of our time — defense; disarmament; the economics of change; the politics of peace; the relationships among industry, science, and government — require joint technical and social analysis. The very progress of science is influenced by the broader social context, and the advances of engineering affect all our human institutions.

In our decision to encourage the growth of certain key social sciences at M.I.T., we determined not only to build on strength, but also to exploit particularly those that have special relevance to our central concerns with science and engineering. We hope to create more points of contact between the social and physical sciences and to foster more fruitful collaboration between them. In this way, in spite of enormous pressures for growth, we can delimit the domain of our interests and the way in which we allocate our resources to them.

We have given special attention to those fields in which mathematics and statistical techniques are playing an increasingly important role. This is, of course, completely compatible with our M.I.T. style, with our desire to be governed in our approach to problems by a sense of the quantitative, the analytical, the mathematical. But by no means are we seeking to build our social sciences in the image of the physical. We recognize full well the many differences in set and attitude that distinguish them. An exaggerated insistence on emphases that are too narrow or criteria that are too rigid will only defeat our long-range objective of making the social sciences an integral part of the modern scientific university. Each field must be free to develop in its own way, to follow with complete freedom its own professional instincts.

From this point of view, the flowering of the social sciences at M.I.T. represents a new experience for us. Accustomed as we are to the demonstrable factual data of the physical sciences, we must accept the larger subjective element of judgment that enters into the social sciences in their present state. Since developments in many of these areas are open to a variety of interpretations, we must foster, within the limits of our aims and resources, a range of views and interests. The ultimate safeguard, however, lies not in seeking an impossible balance among modes of thought, but in recruiting a faculty of the highest intellectual power and integrity. This we have done.

In my report of a year ago I touched on a faculty survey of the social sciences which gave highest priority for development to fields of economics and economic history, political science, and psychology. I want now to comment briefly on the current status of these fields at the Institute and to examine in passing our commitments and our hopes in these areas.

ECONOMICS The oldest social science at M.I.T., economics is still by a sizable margin the largest. The teaching of economics goes back to 1881 and Francis Amasa Walker. General Walker, the Institute’s third president and one of its great builders, was an authority on political economy — as economics was then called — and his understanding of the processes in American industrial development notably influenced his views on the education of engineers. He gave an outstanding lecture course on political economy and was the author of a distinguished text in the field. He also brought other economists to the Institute.

Yet, until well into the modern era of M.I.T., economics remained largely a service department for the School of Engineering. Only since World War II has the department matured and assumed a truly professional character. Today it is universally conceded to be among the most distinguished. Indeed, by any of the usual measures — the stature of its teachers, the quality of its research, the achievements of its graduates — it ranks in the small handful of leaders. This year the president of the American Economic Association [Paul Samuelson] and the presidents-elect of the Econometric Society [Franco Modigliani] and of the Industrial Relations Research Association [Charles A. Myers] are members of this department. This year, too, M.I.T. was selected as first choice by more Woodrow Wilson Fellows in economics — eighteen out of eighty — than any other school in the country. The strengths which have won this kind of recognition within the profession are substantial indeed. They were achieved, essentially, by encouraging economics at M.I.T. to chart its own professional course; by the development of a distinguished graduate curriculum and of a major research program; and by insistence on the same standards of excellence we demand of our scientific and engineering departments. As a consequence, we have accomplished in economics the same kind of comprehensive renovation of purpose that Karl Compton undertook at an earlier date for the School of Science.

Economics at M.I.T. is also an important resource for other areas of teaching and research, and for the School of Industrial Management in particular. Management education at M.I.T. grew out of our teaching in economics, and today the teaching and research of the Department and the School reinforce one another more strongly than ever. Much of the research of the Department bears directly on the interests of the School — research on the economics of particular technologies; on the problems of measurement of productivity and output; on the contribution of technical progress to economic growth; on the origin and growth of new enterprises. Through this close relationship between the Department and the School, we also enjoy a fruitful interchange of theoretical and practical points of view.

The history and current role of economics at M.I.T. is the model for our development of other social sciences. We have now established sections of political science and of psychology within the Department of Economics and Social Science. Both are fields in which student and faculty interest is keen and in which we have unusual opportunities to make important contributions.

POLITICAL SCIENCE Because of the interweaving of technology with all the affairs of the modern world, and especially with those of government, we have set high priority on the development of political science. It is an area in which we have been moving rapidly ahead. This June we awarded our first Ph.D. degrees in this field, and there are now about thirty doctoral candidates within the Section. In addition, some five hundred undergraduates take elective courses in political science each year.

The Section now offers courses in six fields of political science, all of which are related to other interests of the Institute: international relations and foreign policy, political communication, defense policy, government and science, political and economic development, and political theory and comparative politics. Besides providing opportunities for combining work in political science with a scientific or engineering field, the faculty of the Section maintain close ties with their colleagues in economics, psychology, industrial management, and city and regional planning.

In the past two years, we have developed superlative strength in the field of comparative politics of developing areas, and through the association of the Section with the Center for International Studies we probably have as strong a faculty as is to be found anywhere in the politics of development. In support of this work, the Institute received two notable gifts this year. One, the donation of $500,000 from Dr. Arthur W. Sloan and Dr. Ruth C. Sloan of Washington, D.C., establishes a professorship in political science with emphasis on African studies. Not only does this gift provide an important new endowed professorship, but it also recognizes in a most dramatic way the growing stature of political science at the Institute.

The second grant is one of $475,000 from the Carnegie Corporation for research in training on the politics of transitional societies. The grant will make possible expansion of our research on the problems of nation-building in transition countries such as the newly emerged African and Asian nations. It, too, gives substantial recognition to the quality of our program. The Carnegie grant, among other benefits, establishes graduate fellowships both for course work at M.I.T. and for field work towards the doctoral thesis. We are enthusiastic about the values to be derived from this aspect of the grant which will permit us to send our students overseas for on-the-spot research in developing areas.

We have enjoyed magnificent opportunities for field studies in other areas of our political science activities through the generous support of the Maurice and Laura Falk Foundation, the Ford Foundation, and the Rockefeller Foundation. The Ford Foundation has also underwritten much of our work on government and science, and the Rockefeller Foundation this year supported a new seminar on arms control. This seminar brought together some thirty individuals in the Cambridge academic community with strong interests in both the technological and political aspects of this subject. We very much hope that this may prove to be the beginning of a substantial new research program on defense policy.

This brief sampling of our progress in political science is intended only to suggest the vitality of this field at the Institute. It has grown quickly, but without over- stretching itself. It has set high standards in research, and it has developed both its undergraduate and graduate courses in a most creative and constructive spirit. This new venture for M.I.T., in sum, has met with outstanding success.

[Reports on Psychology and Linguistics complete this  section of the President’s Report]

 

Source: Massachusetts Institute of Technology. The President’s Report 1961. pp. 11-16.

Image Source: The M.I.T. mascot beaver on the cover of its yearbook, Technique 1949.

Categories
Exam Questions M.I.T.

M.I.T. Comprehensive Theory Exams in Macroeconomics, 1961

 

The Microeconomics examination questions for the economic theory general examinations of May and September at M.I.T. have also been transcribed and posted.

__________________

From the 1961 Economics Graduate Program Broschure
[boldface emphasis added]

Major Program and General Examinations

Work taken in the Department of Economics and Social Science for the doctorate in economics is divided—broadly speaking—into two separate options: economics and industrial relations. But there is considerable overlap between the two.

All students in both options are examined five fields. Among the fields presently available are the following: economic theory, advanced economic theory, monetary and fiscal economics, industrial organization, economic development, international economics, economics of innovation, labor economics and labor relations, personnel administration, human relations in industry, statistical theory and method, and economic history. Each student selects one field as having primary importance for this professional career; ordinarily this is the field in which he writes his dissertation, though exceptions may be made. The remaining four fields are designated secondary fields. One of the five fields must be economic theory.

Students are also required to have at least a minimum knowledge of statistics and economic history. This minimum is presently interpreted to mean one semester of work in each at the graduate level. Candidates who present statistics or economic history as a primary or secondary field normally take two or three semester subjects in the field and automatically satisfy the requirements in that area.

Students may qualify in one of the secondary fields through course work only, provided that they receive a mark of B or better in two subjects. Students are examined in writing in the remaining four fields during an eight-day period (Monday, Wednesday, Friday, and Monday). The theory examination is four hours long (divided roughly between microeconomics and macroeconomics), while the other three are each three hours long.

Following these written examinations, the student takes a two-hour oral examination which covers theory, his primary field, and one secondary field.

Source: Excerpt from Graduate Economics Program Brochure, 1961. MIT Archives, Department of Economics Records, Box 2, Folder “Department Brochures”.

____________________

GENERAL EXAMINATION IN ECONOMIC THEORY
Macroeconomics—Two Hours
[May 22, 1961]

Answer THREE questions, at least ONE from each part. (Course XV students answer ONE question from each part only.)
USE A SEPARATE EXAMINATION BOOK FOR EACH QUESTION.

Part I.

  1. Write a comprehensive essay on the subject of “The Measurement of Economic Growth”. Include in it the description of existing methods, their rationale (the most important part) and your suggestions for improvement.
  2. Write an essay on “The General Theory after Twenty-Five Years”.
  3. (a) Explain the nature and the rationale of the definition of the concept of money in “Price Flexibility and Employment” problems.”
    (b) “If the ‘Balanced-Budget Multiplier’ is correct, isn’t Say’s Law also correct?” Comment fully.

Part II.

  1. “By making existing capital assets obsolete, technological progress is alleged to create new investment opportunities and thus raise the level of income and employment. But to the extent that such obsolescence was foreseen, the assets were depreciated over a shorter period and thus gave rise to larger gross savings. Therefore, expected technological progress fails to stimulate the economy.” Comment fully.
  2. Present your favorite (traditional, eclectic, or original) business cycle theory. Indicate the empirical tests to which it will be subjected.
  3. “In order to prevent a cost-push inflation, wage rates in each firm or industry should not increase faster than its labor productivity price increases will thus be avoided.”
    Comment fully and critically; indicate and justify your wage and price policy.

____________________

GENERAL EXAMINATION IN ECONOMIC THEORY
Macroeconomics—Two Hours
[September 18, 1961]

Answer FOUR questions, TWO from each part. USE A SEPARATE EXAMINATION BOOK FOR EACH QUESTION.

Part I.

  1. State, explain and justify the treatment of government expenditures (Federal, state and local) in the computation of national product and its components. Why is government treated differently from other sectors? What is the logical foundation for such treatment?
  2. Compare and contrast the Keynesian and the so-called Classical systems.
  3. Contrast the investment criteria applicable to (a) an individual firm, (b) the U.S. government, (c) the government of an undeveloped country. Explain clearly your reasons for such differences, if any.
  4. Write an essay on “The History of the Consumption Function.” Indicate and evaluate the major contributions. How significant are they? Which one do you prefer and why?

Part II.

  1. Describe fully the “economic indicator” approach to economic forecasting. Evaluate its performance. Compare it with the use of projected models of GNP.
  2. Describe the long-term trends in (a) population, (b) output, (c) capital, (d) real wage rates, (e) interest, (f) relative shares, (g) capital-output and other important ratios. What constancies have people claimed to observe? What behavior is explicable by a simple neoclassical model? What points to technological change or to various non-neoclassical growth theories? Mention authors as well as theories.
  3. Summarize briefly the historical facts on business cycles or fluctuations here and abroad. What theories have been suggested? Besides naming names, give your own best way of cataloguing the different theories (e.g. non-linear, etc.).
  4. Give the basic facts on “growth” here and abroad, recently and in history. How could America increase its sustained growth rate? Be analytical and specific.

Source: Duke University. David M. Rubenstein Rare Book and Manuscript Library. Evsey D. Domar Papers, Box 16, Folder “Ph.D. Examinations, Macroeconomics”.

Image Source: Boston Public Library, Tichnor Brothers Postcard Collection. Massachusetts Institute of Technology, Cambridge, MassTichnor Bros. Inc., Boston, Mass., 1930.

 

Categories
Exam Questions M.I.T.

M.I.T. Comprehensive Theory Exams in Microeconomics, 1961

 

The Macroeconomics examination questions for the economic theory general examinations of May and September at M.I.T. have also been transcribed and posted.

Note:  S.I.M. = School of Industrial Management

__________________

From the 1961 Economics Graduate Program Broschure
[boldface emphasis added]

Major Program and General Examinations

Work taken in the Department of Economics and Social Science for the doctorate in economics is divided—broadly speaking—into two separate options: economics and industrial relations. But there is considerable overlap between the two.

All students in both options are examined five fields. Among the fields presently available are the following: economic theory, advanced economic theory, monetary and fiscal economics, industrial organization, economic development, international economics, economics of innovation, labor economics and labor relations, personnel administration, human relations in industry, statistical theory and method, and economic history. Each student selects one field as having primary importance for this professional career; ordinarily this is the field in which he writes his dissertation, though exceptions may be made. The remaining four fields are designated secondary fields. One of the five fields must be economic theory.

Students are also required to have at least a minimum knowledge of statistics and economic history. This minimum is presently interpreted to mean one semester of work in each at the graduate level. Candidates who present statistics or economic history as a primary or secondary field normally take two or three semester subjects in the field and automatically satisfy the requirements in that area.

Students may qualify in one of the secondary fields through course work only, provided that they receive a mark of B or better in two subjects. Students are examined in writing in the remaining four fields during an eight-day period (Monday, Wednesday, Friday, and Monday). The theory examination is four hours long (divided roughly between microeconomics and macroeconomics), while the other three are each three hours long.

Following these written examinations, the student takes a two-hour oral examination which covers theory, his primary field, and one secondary field.

Source: Excerpt from Graduate Economics Program Brochure, 1961. MIT Archives, Department of Economics Records, Box 2, Folder “Department Brochures”.

__________________

GENERAL EXAMINATION IN ECONOMIC THEORY
Part I—Microeconomics—Two Hours
[May 22, 1961]

Economics Candidates: Answer any FOUR questions (thirty minutes each).
S.I.M. Candidates: Answer any TWO questions (thirty minutes each).

  1. Within the framework of static, partial-equilibrium theory, indicate under what circumstances advertising will reduce product prices in the long run, (a) if the advertiser is a simple monopolist, (b) if the advertisers are members of a large, perfectly symmetrical, Chamberlinian group of suppliers of differentiated products (the number of firms being large enough to rule out oligopolistic relationships, and variable in accordance with a long-run-equilibrium condition of zero profit for all firms).
  2. How is a firm’s demand schedule for a particular factor of production derived (a) when that factor is the only variable one, and (b) when the quantities of all factors are variable? Show which of these demands is, if anything, the more elastic.
  3. The demands for two products are: q1 = q2 = 54 – p1 -p2. How would you characterize their relationship? If they are produced by separate sellers at constant average costs of c1 = 12 and c2 = 6, respectively, calculate each man’s equilibrium price, quantity, and profit under each of the following conditions:
    1. Each seller assumes that the other’s price is a constant;
    2. The second seller behaves that way and the first seller realizes that he does;
    3. Both sellers maximize their joint profit and share it equally.
  4. Two countries can produce food (F) and clothing (C) with labor (L) as the only factor of production. Country A has 20 billion units of L, each of which can produce either 5 units of F or 2 units of C. Country B has 10 billion units of L, each of which can produce either 8 units of F or 6 units of C. Everyone always spends half of his income on F and the other half on C. In a purely competitive equilibrium with balanced trade between the two countries (and no transportation costs), what is the effect on the quantities of F and C produced and consumed in each country? Could either country benefit by imposing a tariff on the imported good?
  5. What are the various reasons why a free-private-enterprise economy may fail to allocate its resources in an optimally efficient way? Explain.
  6. Discuss the roles of “real” and “monetary” elements in a satisfactory theory of interest. Is it logically possible to fashion an interest theory exclusively in terms of one or the other of those elements? Explain.

__________________

GENERAL EXAMINATION IN ECONOMIC THEORY
Part I—Microeconomics—Two Hours
[September 18, 1961]

A. Answer any TWO of the three questions (40 minutes each).

A.1. Choose one theory of oligopoly. State its principal assumptions and conclusions and criticize them.

A.2. “The fact that a position on the contract curve is always better than one off it implies that we should move toward a situation of perfect competition.” Discuss.

A.3. What changes must be introduced into the conventional theory of the household to take account of the fact of capital?

B. Answer all three questions.*

B.1 Suppose that the coal industry is perfectly competitive. A certain coal-mining machine uses coal for fuel physically identical to that which it mines. What is the numerical value in equilibrium of the marginal product of the coal burned in the mining of more coal? Why? Are there any difficulties with the answer if explicit account is taken of the fact that coal production takes time?

B.2 Are demand curves faced by monopolists generally inelastic? Why or why not? How about their supply curves?

B.3 “In long-run equilibrium, a perfectly competitive firm which gives each unit of each factor that factor’s marginal physical product will precisely exhaust its own output.” Comment.

*Hint about the examiner’s preferences: Two carefully thought-out, good answers are better than three hurried, incomplete and sloppy answers. If you give good answers to any two of the three questions in Part B, don’t worry (about Part B).

Source: Duke University. David M. Rubenstein Rare Book and Manuscript Library. Evsey D. Domar Papers, Box 16, Folder “Ph.D. Examinations, Microeconomics”.

Categories
Exam Questions Harvard

Harvard. Comparative Land Tenure Systems, Final Exam. Laughlin, 1884

 

1883-84 brought a significant expansion in economics course offerings at Harvard. Cf. Report published in the Harvard Crimson and the report published in the New York Evening Post.

    1. Mill’s Principles of Political Economy. – Lectures on Banking and the Financial Legislation of the United States. Mon., Wed., Fri., at 9. Prof. Dunbar and Asst. Prof. Laughlin.
    1. History of Economic Theory and a Critical Examination of Leading Writers. – Lectures. Mon., Wed. at 2 and (at the pleasure of the instructor) Fri. at 2. Prof. Dunbar.
    1. Discussion of Practical Economic Questions. – Theses, Tu., Th., at 3, and a third hour to be appointed by the instructor. Assistant Professor Laughlin.
    1. Economic History of Europe and America since the Seven Years’ War. – Lectures. Mon., Wed., Fri., at 11. Professor Dunbar.
      Course 4 requires no previous study of Political Economy.
    1. Economic Effects of Land Tenures in England, Ireland, France and Germany. – Theses. Once a week, counting as a half course. Asst. Professor Laughlin.
    1. History of Tariff Legislation in the United States. – Once a week, counting as a half course. Mr. Taussig.
    1. Comparison of the Financial Systems of France, England, Germany and the United States. – Tu., at 2, counting as a half course. Professor Dunbar.

Note-to-self: still need to find the mid-year exam for this course.

___________________________

Course Enrollment

[Political Economy] 5. Prof. Laughlin. Economic Effects of Land Tenures in England, Ireland, France, and Germany.— Lectures and Theses.

Total 5: 1 Graduate, 3 Seniors, 1 Junior.

Source: Harvard University. Report of the President of Harvard College, 1883-84, p. 72.

 

POLITICAL ECONOMY 5
[Final Examination, June 1884]

  1. What are your conclusions as to the effect of land tenures in England and France upon (1) production, and (2) distribution?
  2. Compare the increase of population in England, France, and Ireland, and indicate what you think to be the chief causes controlling such increase in each country.
  3. How far does the Agricultural Holdings Act of 1883 interfere with freedom of contract? What is the present position of English legislation in regard to entailed estates?
  4. It has been stated that the abolition of the Corn Laws by Great Britain would not injure the farmer, but would lower the rent of the landlord. Has this proved true? What are the facts as to changes in agriculture and the amount of rent?
  5. It is said that capital Is more equally distributed in France than in Great Britain. How would you account for it?
  6. Which classes in England and France are the greatest buyers of land? What differences do these facts create in respect to production from land?
  7. Contrast briefly the processes by which out of past conditions France, Germany, and Ireland have reached their present systems of holdings.
  8. Compare the security of tenure to the tenant in England and Ireland. Is it possible to extend the comparison to France?
  9. Discuss the origin and workings of Tenant Right in Ireland. What legislation has been passed affecting it?
  10. Compare the class of agricultural laborers in England and Ireland with the corresponding class in France.

Source: Harvard University Archives. Harvard University, Examination Papers, 1873-1915. Box 2, Bound volume “Examination Papers, 1883-86”. Papers Set for Final Examinations in Rhetoric, Philosophy, Political Economy, History, Roman Law, Fine Arts, and Music in Harvard College (June, 1884), pp. 11-12.

Image Source: Portrait (1885-88) of James Lawrence Laughlin. Harvard Art Museums/Fogg Museum, Transfer from the Carpenter Center for the Visual Arts.

Categories
Exam Questions Harvard

Harvard. Comparative Fiscal Systems. Final examination, Dunbar, 1884.

 

 

1883-84 brought a significant expansion in economics course offerings at Harvard. Cf. Report published in the Harvard Crimson and the report published in the New York Evening Post.

    1. Mill’s Principles of Political Economy. – Lectures on Banking and the Financial Legislation of the United States. Mon., Wed., Fri., at 9. Prof. Dunbar and Asst. Prof. Laughlin.
    1. History of Economic Theory and a Critical Examination of Leading Writers. – Lectures. Mon., Wed. at 2 and (at the pleasure of the instructor) Fri. at 2. Prof. Dunbar.
    1. Discussion of Practical Economic Questions. – Theses, Tu., Th., at 3, and a third hour to be appointed by the instructor. Assistant Professor Laughlin.
    1. Economic History of Europe and America since the Seven Years’ War. – Lectures. Mon., Wed., Fri., at 11. Professor Dunbar.
      Course 4 requires no previous study of Political Economy.
    1. Economic Effects of Land Tenures in England, Ireland, France and Germany. – Theses. Once a week, counting as a half course. Asst. Professor Laughlin.
    1. History of Tariff Legislation in the United States. – Once a week, counting as a half course. Mr. Taussig.
    1. Comparison of the Financial Systems of France, England, Germany and the United States. – Tu., at 2, counting as a half course. Professor Dunbar.

Note-to-self: still need to find the mid-year exam for this course.

___________________________

Course Enrollment

[Political Economy] 7. Prof. Dunbar. Comparison of the Financial Systems of France, England, Germany, and the United States.— Lectures.

Total 23: 2 Graduates, 19 Seniors, 2 Juniors.

Source: Harvard University. Report of the President of Harvard College, 1883-84, p. 72.

 

POLITICAL ECONOMY 7.
[Final examination, June 1884]

  1. Describe the customary methods of issuing loans in England, France, and the United States.
  2. State the conditions under which loans will sell higher or lower by reason of
    1. annual drawings by lot for payment;
    2. reserved right to pay at pleasure;
    3. agreement to pay at or after some distant dates;
    4. arrangement like that of the “Five-twenties.”
  3. Explain the English method of using terminable annuities for the reduction of the public debt, as in 1867 and 1883.
  4. The comparative advantages and disadvantages of the course of the English government in borrowing upon 3 per cents during the war with Napoleon.
  5. How was it that the Sinking Fund during the same war was not only useless but wasteful?
  6. Legal authority for the Sinking Fund of the United States, its establishment and the failure to comply with its strict obligations.
  7. What has been the practice of England, France, and the United States respectively in regard to taxation of the public debt.
  8. Describe the resumption of specie payments by Italy.
  9. Describe the system on which the German banks of issue are arranged.

Source: Harvard University Archives. Harvard University, Examination Papers, 1873-1915. Box 2, Bound volume “Examination Papers, 1883-86”. Papers Set for Final Examinations in Rhetoric, Philosophy, Political Economy, History, Roman Law, Fine Arts, and Music in Harvard College (June, 1884), p. 13.

Image Source: Charles F. Dunbar in E. H. Jackson and R. W. Hunter (eds.), Portraits of the Harvard Faculty (Boston, 1892).

Categories
Economic History Exam Questions Harvard

Harvard. Economic History of Europe and America, final exam. Dunbar, 1884

 

1883-84 brought a significant expansion in economics course offerings at Harvard. Cf. Report published in the Harvard Crimson and the report published in the New York Evening Post.

    1. Mill’s Principles of Political Economy. – Lectures on Banking and the Financial Legislation of the United States. Mon., Wed., Fri., at 9. Prof. Dunbar and Asst. Prof. Laughlin.
    1. History of Economic Theory and a Critical Examination of Leading Writers. – Lectures. Mon., Wed. at 2 and (at the pleasure of the instructor) Fri. at 2. Prof. Dunbar.
    1. Discussion of Practical Economic Questions. – Theses, Tu., Th., at 3, and a third hour to be appointed by the instructor. Assistant Professor Laughlin.
    1. Economic History of Europe and America since the Seven Years’ War. – Lectures. Mon., Wed., Fri., at 11. Professor Dunbar.
      Course 4 requires no previous study of Political Economy.
    1. Economic Effects of Land Tenures in England, Ireland, France and Germany. – Theses. Once a week, counting as a half course. Asst. Professor Laughlin.
    1. History of Tariff Legislation in the United States. – Once a week, counting as a half course. Mr. Taussig.
    1. Comparison of the Financial Systems of France, England, Germany and the United States. – Tu., at 2, counting as a half course. Professor Dunbar.

Note-to-self: still need to find the mid-year exam for this course.

___________________________

Course Enrollment

[Political Economy] 4. Prof. Dunbar. Economic History of Europe and America since the Seven Years’ War.— Lectures.

Total 40: 17 Seniors, 19 Juniors, 4 Others.

Source: Harvard University. Report of the President of Harvard College, 1883-84, p. 72.

 

 

POLITICAL ECONOMY 4.
[Final Examination, June 1884]

I.

  1. The plan on which the Zollverein was established and the reasons for its beneficial effects.
  2. Devices by which Napoleon III. stimulated the material development of France.
  3. How far the adoption of Free Trade by England would have been affected, had the refusal of other countries to follow her example been foreseen.
  4. Reasons for the grants of land to railway companies in this country, as illustrated by the cases of the Illinois Central and the Union Pacific.
  5. Effects of the Suez Canal.
    Either of the following may be substituted for 1, 4, and 5.

    1. Reasons for the rise and decline of American Navigation, 1840-84.
    2. Sketch of the history and effects of the Zollverein.

II.

  1. The absorption of silver by India and reasons for its recent irregularity.
  2. The causes which prevented the disastrous fall of gold predicted by some writers after 1850.
  3. The heavy demands for gold 1871-83 and their failure to produce financial disturbance.
  4. The circumstances which enabled the United States to accumulate gold with special case after the passage of the Resumption Act.
    The following may be substituted for 8 and 9.

    1. Connection between the revulsion of 1873 and the resumption of specie payments by the United States.

III.

  1. What form of wealth France paid out in settlement of the Indemnity of 1871, and what Germany actually received.
  2. The connection between the Indemnity and the revulsion of 1873.
  3. The concentration of bank reserves in New York and its effect in the fall of 1873.
    The following may be substituted for 10 and 11.

    1. Method by which France effected the payment of the Indemnity to Germany.

 

Source: Harvard University Archives. Harvard University, Examination Papers, 1873-1915. Box 2, Bound volume “Examination Papers, 1883-86”. Papers Set for Final Examinations in Rhetoric, Philosophy, Political Economy, History, Roman Law, Fine Arts, and Music in Harvard College (June, 1884), pp. 10-11.

Image Source: Charles F. Dunbar in E. H. Jackson and R. W. Hunter (eds.), Portraits of the Harvard Faculty (Boston, 1892).

Categories
Brown Chicago Columbia Cornell Dartmouth Economics Programs Harvard Illinois Kansas M.I.T. Michigan Michigan State Minnesota Ohio State Pennsylvania Princeton Purdue Rochester Swarthmore Vanderbilt Vassar Virginia Washington University Wellesley Williams Wisconsin Yale

United States. Courses of Study of Political Economy. 1876 and 1892-93.

 

The first article in the inaugural issue of The Journal of Political Economy, “Courses of Study in Political Economy in the United States in 1876 and in 1892-93,” was written by the founding head of the University of Chicago’s department of political economy, J. Laurence Laughlin. This post provides Laughlin’s appendix that provided information about economics courses taught in 65 colleges/universities in the United States during the last quarter of the 19th century. The bottom line of the table is that “aggregate hours of instruction in 1892-3 [were] more than six times the hours of instruction given in 1876”.

__________________________

How little Political Economy and Finance were taught only fifteen years ago, as compared with the teaching of to-day, must be surprising even to those who have lived and taught in the subject during that period…. At the close of the war courses of economic study had practically no existence in the university curriculum; in short, the studious pursuit of economics in our universities is scarcely twenty years old. These considerations alone might be reasons why economic teaching has not yet been able to color the thinking of our more than sixty millions of people. But about the close of the first century of our national existence it may be said that the study of Political Economy entered upon a new and striking development. This is certainly the marked characteristic of the study of Political Economy in the last fifteen years. How great this has been may be seen from the tables giving the courses of study, respectively, in about 60 institutions in the year 1876 and in 1892-3. (See Appendix I.) The aggregate hours of instruction in 1892-3 are more than six times the hours of instruction given in 1876.” [Laughlin, p. 4]

__________________________

Courses of Study in Political Economy in the United States in 1876 and in 1892-93.

Note: Returns could not be obtained from Johns Hopkins University, Amherst College, and some other institutions.

Institution.

Description of Courses.

1876.

1892-3.

No. hours per week.

No. weeks in year. No. hours per week.

No. weeks in year.

University of Alabama.

Text Book and Lectures, Senior Year

Finance and Taxation

4

2

36

36

[Total hours of instruction per year] 216
Boston University. Principles of Political Economy 3 20
[Total hours of instruction per year] 60
Bowdoin College, Brunswick, Maine.

Elementary (Required)

Advanced (Elective)

5

14

4

4

12

10

[Total hours of instruction per year] 70 88
Brown University, Providence, R. I.

Elementary

History of Econ. Thought

Advanced Course

[2nd] Advanced Course

Seminary of History, Pol. Sci., and Pol. Econ.

16-17

3

3

3

3

2

33-34

11-12

11

11

23

[Total hours of instruction per year] 40-42½ 242-250
University of Chicago, Chicago, Ill. 1.     Introductory Political Economy

2.     Descriptive Political Economy

3.     Advanced Political Economy

4.     Industrial and Economic History

5.     Scope and Method

6.     History of Political Economy

7.     Unsettled Problems

8.     Socialism

9.     Social Economics

10.   Practical Economics

11.   Statistics

12.   Railway Transportation

13.   Tariff History of U.S.

14.   Financial History of U.S.

15.   Taxation

16.   Public Debts

17.   Seminary

5

4

5

4

4

5

4

4

4

4

4

4

4

4

4

4

4

12

12

12

24

12

12

12

12

12

12

12

12

12

12

12

12

36

[Total hours of instruction per year] 996
Colby University, Waterville, Maine.

Elementary [1st]

Elementary [2nd]

Theoretical

Historical

5

7

2

2

4

4

13

10

13

10

[Total hours of instruction per year] 35 138
Columbia College (School of Political Science, New York City. 1.     Principles of Political Economy (Element.)

2.     Historical Practical Political Economy (Advanced)

3.     History of Economic Theory (Advanced)

4.     Public Finance (Adv.)

5.     Railroad Problems (Adv.)

6.     Finan. History of U.S. (Adv.)

7.     Tariff History of U.S. (Adv.)

8.     Science of Statistics (Adv.)

9.     Communism and Socialism (Adv.)

10.   Taxation and Distribution (Adv.)

11.   Seminarium in Political Economy (Element.)

12.   Seminarium in Public Finance and Economy (Adv.)

13.   Law of Taxation (Adv.)

3 and 5, 6 and 7, 8 and 9
given in alternate years.

2

 

 

 

17

 

 

 

2

 

3

2

 

2

2

2

2

2

2

2

 

 

2

2

17

 

34

34

 

34

25

34

17

34

34

17

34

 

34

17

[Total hours of instruction per year] 34 764
Columbian University, Washington, D.C. Elements of Political Economy 5 8
[Total hours of instruction per year] 40
Cornell University, Ithaca, N. Y. 1.     Elementary Political Economy

2.     Advanced Political Economy

3.     Finance

4.     Financial History

5.     Railroad Problems

6.     Currency and Banking

7.     Economic History

8.     Statistics

2

11

3

2

2

2

2

2

2

1

34

34

34

13

11

10

34

34

[Total hours of instruction per year] 22 408
Dartmouth College, Hanover, N.H. 1.     Elementary

2.     Advanced

3.     Advanced Finance and Tariff

6

6

6

6

6

6 2/3

4 1/6

3 1/3

[Total hours of instruction per year] 36 85
University of Denver, Col. 1.     Ely’s Introduction

2.     Ingram’s History

3.     Gilman’s Profit-Sharing

4.     Ely, Labor Movement in America

5.     Kirkup’s and Rae’s Socialism

6.     Finance and Taxation

7.     International Commerce

2

1

1

2

2

4

2

15

5

5

5

5

5

5

[Total hours of instruction per year] 90
DePauw University, Greencastle, Ind.

Economics (Elementary)

Seminarium (Advanced)

4

12

4

2

18

36

[Total hours of instruction per year] 48 144
Drury College, Springfield, Mo. Elementary Course 5 6 5 12
[Total hours of instruction per year] 30 60
Emory College, Oxford, Ga. Jevons’ Text, and Lectures. 5 12
[Total hours of instruction per year] 60
Franklin and Marshall College. Political Economy, (Walker’s) 2 15 2 20
[Total hours of instruction per year] 30 40
Georgetown College, Ky. 1.     General Economics

2.     Special Topics

5

15

3

3

20

20

[Total hours of instruction per year] 75 120
Harvard University, Cambridge, Mass. 1.     Introductory

2.     Theory (Advanced)

3.     Economic History from 1763

4.     Railway Transportation

5.     Tariff History of U.S.

6.     Taxation and Public Debts

7.     Financial Hist. of U.S.

8.     Condition of Workingmen

9.     Economic Hist. to 1763

10.   History of Theory to Adam Smith

Seminary

3

3

30

30

3

3

3

3

2

3

2

3

3

2

2

30

30

30

15

15

30

15

30

30

15

30

[Total hours of instruction per year] 180 735
Haverford College, Pa. Economic Theory 2 40
[Total hours of instruction per year] 80
Howard University, Washington, D. C. Elementary 5 10 5 10
[Total hours of instruction per year] 50 50
Illinois College and Whipple Academy, Jacksonville, Ill. Newcomb’s Polit. Economy, Seniors 5 15
[Total hours of instruction per year] 75
University of Illinois, Champaign, Ill. Senior Class 5 11 5 11
[Total hours of instruction per year] 55 55
Iowa College, Grinnell, Iowa.

Political Economy

Taxation

Railroad Problems

Socialism

5

10

3

3

3

3

37

14

12

11

[Total hours of instruction per year] 50 222
State University of Iowa, Iowa City, Iowa.

Elements of Economics

Currency and Banking

Industrial Revolutions of 18th Century

Recent Econ. History and Theory

Railroads, Pub. Regulation of

Seminary in Polit. Econ.

5

 

14

 

5

5

2

 

2

2

1

14

11

14

 

11

10

35

[Total hours of instruction per year] 70 230
Kansas State Agricultural College, Manhattan, Kan. Elementary, 4th year 5 8 5 11
[Total hours of instruction per year] 40 55
Kansas State University, Lawrence, Kansas. 1.     Elements of Political Economy

2.     Applied Economics

3.     Statistics

4.     Land Tenures

5.     Finance

5

19

5

3

2

2

2

19

19

19

19

19

[Total hours of instruction per year] 95 266
Lake Forest University, Lake Forest, Ill. 1.     Elementary

2.     Advanced

3

11

3

3

16

13

[Total hours of instruction per year] 33 87
Massachusetts Institute of Technology, Boston, Mass. 1.     Political Economy, Elem., Junior Year

2.     Financial Hist. of U.S., Jun. and Sen. Year

3.     Taxation, Junior and Senior Year

4.     History of Commerce

5.     History of Industry, Junior and Senior Year.

6.     Socialism, etc. (Option), Jun. and Sen. Year

7.     History of Economic Theory (Opt.), Senior

8.     Statistics and Graphic Methods, Junior

9.     Statistics and Sociology (Option) Senior

2

 

 

 

15

 

 

 

3

3

 

3

3

 

3

2

 

2

3

15

15

 

15

15

 

15

15

 

15

15

[Total hours of instruction per year] 30 375
Michigan Agricultural College. Primary Course 5 12
[Total hours of instruction per year] 60
University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, Mich. 1.     Elements of Political Economy

2.     Elements of Political Economy

3.     Hist. Devel. of Industr. Society

4.     Finance

5.     Problems in Pol. Econ

6.     Transportation Problem

7.     Land Tenure and Agrarian Movements

8.     Socialism and Communism

9.     Currency and Banking

10.   Tariff History of U.S.

11.   Indust. and Comm. Develop. of U.S.

12.   History of Pol. Econ.

13.   Statistics

15.   Economic Thought

16.   Labor and Monopoly Problems

17.   Seminary in Finance

18.   Seminary in Economics

20.   Social Philosophy with Economic Relations

21.   Current Econ. Legislation and Literature

 

18

 

3

4

3

4

4

2

2

2

2

2

2

2

1

1

1

2

2

1

 

2

18

18

18

18

18

18

18

18

18

18

18

18

18

18

18

18

18

18

 

18

[Total hours of instruction per year] 45 756
Middlebury College, Middlebury, Vermont. 1.     Elementary (Junior Class)

2.     Advanced (Senior Class)

3.     Finance (Senior Class)

4.     Seminary

4

4

10

10

3

2

2

1

35

21

14

21

[Total hours of instruction per year] 80 196
University of Minnesota. 1.     Elementary

2.     Advanced

3.     Am. Pub. Economy

4.     Undergraduate Seminary

5.     Graduate Seminary

5

13

4

4

4

2

1

13

13

10

23

36

[Total hours of instruction per year] 65 226
University of Mississippi, University, Miss. Advanced 5 30
[Total hours of instruction per year] 150
Mt. Holyoke College, South Hadley, Mass.

Polit. Econ. (General)

Polit. Econ. Seminary

4

2

12

12

[Total hours of instruction per year] 72
College of New Jersey at Princeton.

Pol. Econ. (Elem., Elective)

Pol. Econ. (Elem., Required)

Finance (Elective)

Historics—Econ. Semin.

2

13

2

2

2

16

16

15

[Total hours of instruction per year] 26 94
College of the City of New York. 16
[Total hours of instruction per year] 48*
New Hampshire College of Agriculture and Mechanic Arts, Hanover, N. H. Elementary—Perry or Walker 4 10-12 5 10
[Total hours of instruction per year] 48 50
Oberlin College, Oberlin, Ohio. 1.     Elementary Polit. Econ.

2.     Advanced Polit. Econ.

3.     Finance

4.     History Econ. Thought

5.     Economic and Social Problems

6.     “Money,” etc.

5

12

5

5

3

3

3

2

11

12

25

13

12

36

[Total hours of instruction per year] 60 337
Ohio State University.

Elementary

Advanced

Finance

Seminary (Indust. History)

2

2

2

2

38

26

12

38

[Total hours of instruction per year] 228
Ohio Wesleyan University, Delaware, Ohio. 4 12 4 12
[Total hours of instruction per year] 48 48
Penn. Military Academy, Chester, Penn. Elementary 5 13
[Total hours of instruction per year] 65
University of Pennsylvania, Wharton, School of Finance and Economy, Philadelphia, Penn. 1.     Grad. Course in Finance

2.     Grad. Course in Theoretical Polit. Econ.

3.     Grad. Course in Statistics

4.     Elem. Course in Finance

5.     Elem. Course in Theoret. Polit. Econ.

6.     Elem. Course in Statistics

7.     Elem. Course in Practical Polit. Econ.

8.     Course in Money

9.     Course in Banking

10.   Advanced Course in Political Economy

11.   Economic History of Europe

12.   Grad. Course in Practical Polit. Econ.

13.   Econ. and Fin. History of U.S.

14.   Grad. Econ. History of the U.S.

15.   Grad. English Econ. History from 13th to 17th century

16.   Modern Econ. History.

 

 

1

2

3

3

2

2

2

2

1

2

3

2

2

4

 

3

3

30

30

30

30

30

15

15

15

30

30

30

30

30

30

 

30

30

[Total hours of instruction per year] 1020
Purdue University, Lafayette, Ind. Elementary Course 3 19
[Total hours of instruction per year] 57
Randolph Macon College, Ashland, Va. Elementary 2 32 2 32
[Total hours of instruction per year] 64 64
University of Rochester, Rochester, N.Y.

Elementary

Econ. Polit. History U.S.

5

14

5

1

14

20

[Total hours of instruction per year] 70 90
Rutger’s College. Polit. Econ. (Elementary) 3 12 4 22
[Total hours of instruction per year] 36 88
Smith College, Northampton, Mass.

Elementary Course

Adv. Course in Theory

Seminarium

Practical Studies

3

12

3

3

2

2

14

14

10

12

[Total hours of instruction per year] 36 128
South Carolina College, Columbia, S.C.

Polit. Econ. Senior Class

Applied Polit. Econ.

2

2

40

20

[Total hours of instruction per year] 120
Swarthmore College, Swarthmore, Penn.

Polit. Econ. (Walker)

Finance

Protection and Free Trade

Money and Banking

History of Econ. Theories

4

4

4

4

4

20

10

10

10

10

[Total hours of instruction per year] 240
Syracuse University, Syracuse, N.Y.

Elementary

Finance

Industrial Development since 1850

Seminary

3

2

2

2

14

10

12

38

[Total hours of instruction per year] 162
University of Tennessee, Knoxville, Tenn.

Elementary

Advanced (Post-Graduate)

3

2

20

Varies

[Total hours of instruction per year] 100?
University of Texas, Austin, Texas. General 3 36
[Total hours of instruction per year] 108
Trinity College, Hartford, Connecticut.

Elementary

Advanced

Finance

4

13

3

4

2

17

17

17

[Total hours of instruction per year] 52 153
Vanderbilt University, Nashville, Tennessee.

Political Economy, Elementary

Political Economy, Advanced

3

36

3

3

36

36

[Total hours of instruction per year] 108 216
Vassar College, Poughkeepsie, New York.

Principles of Economics

Economic History

Railroads, Trusts, and Relation of State to Monopolies

Labor Problem and Socialism

Seminary

 

 

3

3

2

 

2

2

18

18

18

 

18

18

[Total hours of instruction per year] 216
University of Vermont, Burlington, Vermont.

Elementary

Advanced

3

2

20

20

[Total hours of instruction per year] 100
University of Virginia, Charlottesville, Va.

Theory of Economics

Science of Society

3

26

3

16

16

[Total hours of instruction per year] 78 88
Washington and Jefferson College, Washington, Pa. Political Economy 3 11 3 16
[Total hours of instruction per year] 33 48
Washington and Lee University, Lexington, Va.

Elementary

Advanced

3

3

14

26

[Total hours of instruction per year] 120
Washington University, St. Louis. Prescribed Course 3 20 3 20
[Total hours of instruction per year] 60 60
Wellesley College, Wellesley, Mass.

Industrial History

Economic Theory

Statistics (Seminary)

Socialism (Seminary)

3

3

3

3

18

18

18

18

[Total hours of instruction per year] 216
Wesleyan University, Middletown, Connecticut.

General Introductory (Sen.)

General Introductory (Jun.)

Economic Problems

36

2

3

2

36

18

36

[Total hours of instruction per year] 54 198
West Virginia University, Morgantown, West Virginia.

Elementary Pol. Economy

Advanced Pol. Economy

2

2

14

36

[Total hours of instruction per year] 100
Williams College, Williamstown, Mass. Political Economy 6 14 3 15
[Total hours of instruction per year] 84 45
University of Wisconsin, Madison, Wis.

Econ. Seminary

Distribution of Wealth

History of Pol. Econ.

Money

Public Finance

Statistics

Recent Econ. Theories

Synoptical Lectures

Outlines of Economics

2

5

5

5

3

3

3

1

4

37

14½

12

10½

37

12

14½

15

37

[Total hours of instruction per year] 612½
Yale University, New Haven, Conn.

Pol. Econ.**—Elem. (2)

Pol. Econ.—Adv. (3)

Economic History (2)

Finance, Public (2)

Finance, Corporate (2)

Mathematical Theory (1)

Seminary Instruction (2)

3

2

 

36

36

36

4

3

4

2

3

1

1

36

36

36

36

36

36

36

[Total hours of instruction per year] 180 648

* [College of the City of New York] A few hours additional are given in the work of the Department of Philosophy; the whole number amounting to some 52 or 53.

** [Yale University] Figures in brackets represent numbers of courses under each head.

SourceAppendix I to “The Study of Political Economy in the United States” by J. Laurence Laughlin, The Journal of Political Economy, vol. 1, no. 1 (December, 1892), pp. 143-151.

Image Source:  J. Laurence Laughlin drawn in the University of Chicago yearbook Cap and Gown (1907), p. 208.