Categories
Cornell Dartmouth Economists Harvard Michigan Teaching Undergraduate

Harvard. Recitation section work described. Day, 1914

About 110 years ago the structure of a common lecture and smaller recitation sections for large college courses was novel enough to warrant a description with explanation. The assistant professor of economics and statistician, Edmund Ezra Day (Harvard Ph.D., 1909) penned a two page article for the Harvard Illustrated Magazine that is transcribed following a brief overview of Day’s career. 

Day went on to professorships at Harvard and the University of Michigan followed by a detour through the Rockefeller Foundation that took him to the Presidency of Cornell University. Economics in the Rear-view Mirror begins this post with a chronology of Edmund Ezra Day’s life.

___________________________

Biographical Timeline

1883. Born December 7 to Ezra Alonzo and Louise Moulton (Nelson) Day at Manchester, New Hampshire.

1905. B.S., Dartmouth College (Phi Beta Kappa).

1906. A.M., Dartmouth College.

1906-10. Instructor of economics, Dartmouth College.

1909. Ph.D., Harvard University. Thesis: “The History of the General Property Tax in Massachusetts.”

1910-20. Assistant professor of economics, Harvard University.

1912. Married June 5 to Emily Sophia Emerson (daughter of Dean Charles F. Emerson of Dartmouth College). Two sons and two daughters.

1915. Questions on the Principles of Economics (with Joseph Stancliffe Davis). New York: Macmillan.

1918. Seven months as statistician of the division of planning and statistics of the U. S. shipping board. Director, in 1919.

1918. September to December 1918 as statistician of the central bureau of planning and statistics of the war industries board.

1920-23. Professor of economics, Harvard University.

1920. “An Index of the Physical Volume of Production”. The Review of Economic Statistics (September 1920—January 1921).

1922. Revised edition of Questions on the Principles of Economics (with Joseph Stancliffe Davis). New York: Macmillan.

1920-23. Chairman of the department of economics.

1923-27. Professor of economics, University of Michigan. Beginning second semester of 1922-23 academic year)

1923-24. Chairman department of economics, University of Michigan.

1925. Statistical Analysis. New York: Macmillan.

1924-28. Founding dean of the school of business administration, University of Michigan. (leave of absence during 1927-28).

1927. Dean of Administration, University of Michigan.

1927. President of the American Statistical Association.

1927-28. Leave of absence to act as administrative head of Laura Spelman Rockefeller Memorial for the promotion of social sciences in New York City.

1928. The Growth of Manufactures, 1899 to 1923. A Study of Indexes of Increase in the Volume of Manufactured Products (with Woodlief Thomas). Census Monographs VIII. Washington, D.C.: USGPO.

1928-37. Director for the social sciences of the Rockefeller Foundation.

1930-37. Director for general education and for the social sciences with the General Education Board.

1932-33. U.S. representative on the preparatory commission of experts for the economic conference, held in London in 1933.

1937-49. President of Cornell University.

1941. The Defense of Freedom: Four Addresses on the Present Crisis in American Democracy. Ithaca, N.Y.: Cornell University Press.

1941 or 1942. Oncoming Changes in the Organization of American Public Education.  By Edmund E. Day, Chairman of the Committee on Teacher Education of the Association of Colleges and Universities of the State of New York.

1949-50. Chancellor, Cornell University.

1951. March 23. Died from a heart attack.

*  *  *  *  *  *  *  *  *  *  *  *  *  *

Other misc. facts: Edmund Ezra Day was president of the New York State Citizens Council, the Association of Land-Grant Colleges and Universities, the World Student Service Fund; he was chairman of the American Council on Education, director of the National Bureau of Economic Research, director of the Federal Reserve Bank of New York (appointed January 1937), Councillor of the National Industrial Conference Board, and a trustee of Tuskegee institute beginning 1939. He held fifteen honorary degrees.

Sources:

  • Memorial minute. Cornell, 1951.
  • Ithaca Journal, March 23, 1951. p. 1. “Dr. Day, President Emeritus of Cornell, Dies at 67 of heart Attack in his Car.”
  • The National Cyclopedia of American Biography, 1942.

___________________________

Section Work in Economics

EDMUND E. DAY, ’09, Assistant Professor in Economics.

Among the methods of undergraduate instruction, the section-meeting is of large importance. By the section-meeting is meant an exercise attended by only a fraction of the men enrolled in the course. Usually it stands combined in varying proportions with the lecture. Usually, too, it is not in charge of the instructor “giving the course” (sic), but rather of an assistant. But neither of these common features is essential to the section idea.

The most important single question raised by the section method is: What is its purpose? Undoubtedly the section may, and does, serve many ends. It clearly is valuable in the grading of undergraduate work. It is in this rôle that, in many courses, the section is really significant. Such are the cases in which one-half of the only section-hour each week is devoted to a written test, and the balance of the hour to remarks by the assistant. But the section may certainly be made more than an adjunct to the College Office. Obviously, the section-meeting fosters that familiarity between student and instructor which should invariably exert a wholesome influence; serving the same purpose in undergraduate instruction that publicity does in politics.

Furthermore, in many courses the section-meeting offers the only opportunity for open discussion, for a free give and take between instructor and instructed. Such discussion is the sine qua non of effective teaching in many, if not in most, subjects. It develops clear thinking, power in logical analysis, and effective speech. It stimulates that interest which encourages faithful work from day to day, instead of hasty cramming at examinations. In general, it makes for permanent intellectual power as against temporary mental acquisition.

Such being the opportunities of the section-meeting, by what organization and methods may they best be seized? The immediate interest of the student might seem to demand that the instructor in charge of the course should conduct its sections. But this would violate every rule of good economy. Professors of scholarly and scientific experience and reputation, while they would probably give section instruction better than most assistants, have a vastly greater advantage in the work they are at present doing. In the long run they best advance undergraduate instruction by delegating section work to the younger men. Nor is this so generally to the disadvantage of the section as is commonly supposed. As a rule, the young instructor of promise brings to his task a zest, a sympathetic knowledge of college ways and ideals, an appreciation of the difficulties of the beginner which the older man has long since lost. And after all, teaching ability is in large measure a gift which needs little polishing by experience, good teachers are just as rare among older men as among the younger.

Section instructors and students should be, as we have noted, on terms of familiarity. Therefore assistants should be selected with great care. Appointments in the past have perhaps too little emphasized the need of certain human qualities not weighted in the Ph.D. examination. The leaven of a little sympathy, of more good humor, and of still more downright fairness and good sense works wonders in raising the level of section instruction.

Grading seems an essential element in section work, but it should be reduced to a minimum. This does not mean that it should be confined to a written test. Some grading had best accompany work in discussion. This seems necessary to compel intelligent discussion. Too often discussion degenerates into what the undergraduate expressively calls “drool.” Upon the other hand, so-called discussion sometimes is narrowed into mere drill upon the text. The assistant must steer the difficult course between the two extremes. In this endeavor a reasonable amount of inconspicuous “policing” is desirable.

Spirited and stimulated discussion is, after all, the most significant aim of the section-meeting. This imposes responsibilities upon instructor and student alike. The instructor must be able to direct and control discussion, the student must contribute his share of thought and interest; together they coöperate to make section work a success. The test of the section work in any course lies in the quality of the discussion provoked.

The weaknesses of the section are such as to call for improvement, rather than abolition, of the method. Improvement is in large measure a question of money cost. Adequate outlay would probably guarantee section instructors satisfactory alike to students and department staffs. Sufficient outlay to secure assistants with a firm grasp of their subjects is absolutely essential. But some improvements probably are within reach without much additional cost. Thus, by careful provision for standardizing grading, we may reduce the risks involved in the assignment of different students to assistants in the same course but of different experience and temperament. The value of section work may be more generally recognized and upheld. Greater emphasis may be laid on teaching ability in selecting assistants. And finally, possibly in coöperation with the Education Department, assistants may be helped to acquire the gentle art of section work.

Other improvements of the section method will undoubtedly be suggested. But to give it up entirely seems unwise; the section has probably come to stay. It seems, for the present, an advisable concession to large-scale education.

Source: The Harvard Illustrated Magazine, Vol. 15, No. 6 (March 1914), 295-296.

Image Source: Edmund Ezra Day in Harvard Class Album 1915.

Categories
Berkeley Columbia Cornell Economists Harvard Illinois Johns Hopkins Wisconsin

USA. Joseph Schumpeter’s Roadshow. 1st Quarter, 1914

Joseph Schumpeter spent the 1913-14 academic year as Austria’s first exchange professor at Columbia University. But before heading home, he went on a whirlwind tour of American universities as documented in the following collection of news reports. Cornell, George Washington, Johns Hopkins, the Universities of Illinois, Wisconsin, and California, and apparently culminating with lectures in Taussig’s Ec 11 course at Harvard. All this between mid-January and mid-March 1914.

I have not seen the above portrait of Schumpeter before. He looks much less like Nosferatu’s twin and one could say has even leading-man material if only his ears were pinned back a notch.

_____________________________

Dr. Schumpeter Near End of Course as Austrian Exchange Professor at Columbia University

Professor Joseph A. Schumpeter, who was sent to this country by the Austrian Government as an exchange professor, will soon complete his course of lectures on economic theory and on the problem of social classes, at Columbia University, where he has been since last October, and will visit a number of other leading universities in this country.

Professor Schumpeter was born in 1883, in Triesch in the Austrian Province of Moravia, and was educated at the “Theresianum” in Vienna. Then he entered the University of Vienna where he took his degree of Doctor in Law and Political Science in 1906, and gained locally some representation within the little circle of students of economic theory called the Austrian School. After spending some years in travel, he began lecturing on economies at the same university from which he was, at the age of 26, called to the chair of Political Economy in the University of Gernowitz. In 1911 he accepted a call to the University of Graz in Styria. When the Austrian Government, following the example given by the German Government, concluded an agreement with Columbia University for the exchange of professors, Schumpeter was selected to be the first visiting professor in this country.

Source: The Brooklyn Daily Eagle. January 14, 1914, p. 12.

_____________________________

Predicts More War in Balkan Frontier

“Conditions as they exist in the Balkans now cannot last, I am sorry to say that the sad story of crime and suffering that we have been witnessing we shall have to see over again before long,” said Prof. Joseph Schumpeter in his lecture last night on “Austria’s Balkan Policy.”

“The Balkan situation awakens in us a multitude of passions,” said Dr. Schumpeter. “We see burning and murdered villages, and conditions growing worse and worse. Austria is very little known.

“A lot of false notions have arisen concerning Austria. It is a country of 50,000,000 inhabitants composed of a combination of different races and therefore gives statesmanship tasks of a peculiar kind. It is impossible to appeal to national patriotism in Austria for it is composed of several races apathetic to each other. The majority of the people are Slavs, but there are a great many Germans, Romanians, Italians and Servians. It is very difficult to adjust their claims for national supremacy.

“To keep the Turkish frontier is still Austria’s main care.

“What Austria wanted, and wants still, is to have a group of states on national lines so arranged that they will last for some time and not be under the influence of Russia. The Albanians held their own against Turkey for some time and finally Austria made a treaty with Italy that, no matter what happened to Turkey, they should combine to save the Albanian state.”

Source: The Ithaca Journal. January 17, 1915, p. 5.

_____________________________

Admires Quick Wit Found in America

Professor Joseph Schumpeter of the University of Graz, Austria, expresses himself as delighted with Cornell University and everything he has seen here. Professor Schumpeter, who gave the lecture on “The Balkan Policies of Austria,” is now Exchange Professor at Columbia University. He has gained the reputation of being one of the most promising economists of Europe.

“You have a wonderful University here, splendidly equipped,” he declared. “The situation is ideal. I have been very much interested in my work at Columbia and feel that we Europeans can learn a lot from you. My work at Columbia has been mostly with the graduate students and I have not been able to get into as close touch with the undergraduates as I would have liked to. I have been especially struck by the quick-wittedness and energy of the American undergraduates. They also have an aptitude for intelligent discussion which is lacking in Europe. The whole spirit of fellowship is so splendid.

“The social life in America is remarkably pleasant. In other countries you take much longer to make friends. In my short stay here I have already made scores of excellent friends. American audiences are also so pleasant to talk to. I feel less intellectual sympathy while talking before a German audience than I do here. Unlike Europe all classes of society seem equally interested, the workingmen as much so as the richest families.”

Source: The Ithaca Journal, Jan 19, 1914, p. 9.

_____________________________

Talk on the Balkans by Prof. Schumpeter
University of Gratz Educator Entertains Audience at National Museum

Prof. Joseph Schumpeter delivered a lecture on the present and prospective situation in the Balkans at the New National Museum last night, to which the general public was invited, the audience including students of the eastern question and a number of diplomats. Dr. Schumpeter is exchange professor between the University of Gratz, where he is professor of political science and economics, and Columbia University, New York, where he has just completed his series of lectures.

Last night’s address was delivered under the auspices of George Washington University, and Dr. Schumpeter was introduced by Rear Admiral Charles Herbert Stockton, U. S.N., retired, president of George Washington.

Dr. Schumpeter gave an historical account of the development of the Ottoman empire from the conquest of Constantinople in 1453 up to the present time. He declared that outside of Greece, where the situation has been practically clarified, the Balkan troubles have not been set at rest, and that further trouble may be expected in the Balkan countries at any time.

Real Root of Troubles.

He pointed out that the real root of many of the troubles of those countries has been differences because of race, the clash between Mohammedan and Christian, which he said is likely to continue to the end of the world. He offered, for example, the experiences of Great Britain, in charge of the largest number of Mohammedans in the world, in India.

Dr. Schumpeter devoted considerable attention to the part that Austria-Hungary is playing in the Balkan situation. Since 1908 the Balkan provinces of Bosnia and Herzegovina have been recognized as a part of Austria, and it is around the possession of these provinces that considerable interest lies. Austria-Hungary was permitted by the congress of Berlin in 1878 to occupy and administer these two Balkan provinces, but it was not until 1908 that they were formally annexed.

Source: Evening Star (Washington, D.C.), February 5, 1914, p. 9.

_____________________________

Balkan War Policy of Austria Defended
Prof. Schumpeter Says Nation Must Control of Principalities Along the Danube.
Great Britain is Criticised.

John Bull was said to have in his charge the greatest Mohammedan power in the world by Prof. Joseph Schumpeter, professor of political science and economics at the University of Gratz, Austria, in an Interesting lecture last night at the National Museum.

“No less than 90,000,000 Mohammedans are under British rule, yet England has seen fit to attack the right of Austria to establish a mere legal pact by taking over Herzegovina and Boris and assuring to these two countries safety and security,” said Prof. Schumpeter.

Rear Admiral Stockton, president of Georgetown University, under the auspices of which institution the lecture was given, presided.

Prof. Schumpeter gave a comprehensive historical account of the development of the Ottoman empire since the conquest of Constantinople, in 1453, up to the present day.

In closing, Prof. Schumpeter asserted that in his opinion, outside of Greece, where he said the situation has been pretty well clarified, the Balkan troubles have not been definitely put at rest. He made it clear that he looked for further trouble.

Source: The Washington Herald, February 5, 1914, p. 3.

_____________________________

Predicts Third Balkan War.
Prof. Schumpeter of Austria, Is Pessimistic in Lecture.

Under the auspices of George Washington University, Prof. Joseph Schumpeter, dean of political science and economics at the University of Gratz, Austria, and exchange professor between his university and Columbia, spoke Wednesday in the auditorium of the new National Museum on “The Balkan Situation from the Austrian Viewpoint.” Among those present were Konstantin von Masirevich, first secretary, and the Baron Freudenthal, attache of the Austrian embassy; Rear Admiral C. H. Stockton, president of George Washington, Prof. Richard Cobb, secretary of the university; Dean Charles E. Munroe, Dean Charles Noble Gregory and L. Cleveland McNemar, assistant professor of international law.

Prof. Schumpeter claimed that the Austrian annexation of Bosnia and Herzogovina in 1910 was warranted by circumstances. He said that Balkan peace is merely transitory; that another war is sure to come.

Source: The Washington Post, February 8, 1914, p. 2.

_____________________________

Johns Hopkins University.

Two foreign educators lectured at the Johns Hopkins university last week. Dr. Joseph Schumpeter, of the University of Gratz, and first Austrian exchange professor at Columbia, delivered five lectures before the department of political economy….

Source: The Oregon Daily Journal. February 15, 1914, p. 48.

_____________________________

Vienna Man at Madison.
Exchange Professor Studies Wisconsin Industrial Laws.

(Special to The Northwestern.) Madison, Wis., Feb. 10. — Dr. J. A. Schumpeter, exchange professor from Vienna to Columbia university, spent today here investigating the work of the state industrial commission. He will leave tonight for St. Paul, where he intends to make a similar investigation. Dr. Schumpeter is a recognized expert on labor legislation, and in addition to investigating the work of the commission held a conference with Prof. John R. Commons.

Source: The Oshkosh Northwestern, February 10, 1914, p. 9.

_____________________________

Professor Schumpeter has very busy two days here.
Austrian makes four addresses and attends several affairs.

Four addresses were given by Prof. Josef Schumpeter during his stay here from last Saturday morning until Sunday night, when he left for the University of California via Chicago. All of his addresses were along the line of the social sciences in which he enjoys wide fame for his great ability.

Professor Schumpeter’s first talk was given Saturday noon to the University Club where he took lunch. There he gave a talk on smoke. His second, and most important address, was to the combined seminars of the social science departments. It was given in room 304 of Lincoln Hall to an audience which contained almost every faculty and student member of the two seminars. His discussion was upon the theory of economic development. The lecturer paid especial attention to the place of interest and economic crises in static and dynamic states. Although he is an Austrian. and from the University of Graz, his lecture was delivered in perfect English, and was of profound interest to those who were privileged to attend.

With some eighteen University people, Professor Schumpeter took dinner at the Beardsley Saturday evening. Here again he spoke, this time giving an address on “The Austrian Attitude to the Balkan Situation.” He was followed by Professors E. B. Greene, A. H. Lybyer, L. M. Larson and W. F. Dodd, each of whom spoke on some aspect of world politics.

A reception was given the Professor at the home of Dean Kinley on Sunday afternoon. Here he addressed those present on “The Aspects of Austrian Social and Political Life in University Government.” Sunday night, Professor Schumpeter took the train for Chicago.

Source: The Daily Illi (Urbana, Illinois). February 17, 1914. Page 4.

_____________________________

Talks of Marx’ Economy

University of California, Feb. 25. — Dr. J. A. Schumpeter, eminent Austrian economist, addressed an audience at California hall yesterday on “The Economy of Karl Marx.” Among the points he made were that one could believe in Marx’ doctrines without being a Socialist; his theories of value and exploitation of the working class were receiving more and more general acceptance; he was a “flaming propagandist whose followers regarded him as little less than inspired.”

He addressed also during the day classes in economics on interest rates and classical and modern economic theories.

Source: Oakland Tribune. February 25, 1914, p. 4.

_____________________________

Brings Austria’s Message to Both Columbia and Harvard

The first Austrian exchange professor at Columbia will deliver a series of lectures on economic theory at Harvard in March. His lectures will be in connection with some of the courses given by Professor Taussig on economic theory.

Professor Schumpeter was born in Triesch, Moravia, in 1883, and received his early education in Vienna, where he also attended the University. He was awarded the degree of doctor of law and political science in 1906 and after spending several years in travel, established himself as a docent at the University of Vienna in 1909. A few months later, he was appointed professor of political economy in the University of Czernowitz, and in 1911 he was appointed professor of political economy in the University of Graz.

Professor Schumpeter’s own system of economic theory is developed in two books, “Wesen und Hauptinhalt der Theoretischen Nationalökonomie” and “Theorie der Wirtschaftlichen Entwicklung.” In addition, he has published a number of important papers. He has also contributed a history of economic theory to Schönberg’s “Handbuch der Politischen Oekonomie,” which is to appear shortly, and has furthermore prepared a treatise on banking law for a manual of mercantile law to be published in the near future.

In recent years Professor Schumpeter’s interest has been largely in the field of sociology, but he has not yet published anything in this department. As an economist, Professor Schumpeter is a member of the Austrian school — the brilliant group of writers headed by Böhm-Bawerk and Wieser of the University of Vienna, who have rescued economic theory from the eclipse with which it was for a time threatened by the able but exaggerated criticisms of the leaders of the German historical school. Though agreeing with his Viennese colleagues in many of their theories, he has shown great independence and originality in his treatment of the phases of economics, such as the interest problem, to which he has given particular attention. Thus, in spite of his comparative youth, he has won a place in the very front rank of contemporary European economists. His fluent command of spoken English and his intimate knowledge of American economic literature make him a most attractive lecturer.

Source: Boston Evening Transcript. February 4, 1914.

_____________________________

“The Theory of Crises”at 4.30
March 16, 1914

Professor Josef Schumpeter, an Austrian economist of the University of Vienna, will lecture upon “The Theory of Crises” before the Seminary of Economics in Upper Dane this afternoon at 4.30 o’clock. Professor Schumpeter has written two books upon Economic. Theory which are of high quality, and have attracted a great deal of attention.

Source: The Harvard Crimson. March 16, 1914.

_____________________________

Noted Economist’s Last Lecture

All members of the University interested in economics are invited to hear Professor Josef Schumpeter, of the University of Vienna, lecture upon “Economic Theory” in Professor Taussig’s course, Economics 11, this afternoon at 2.30 o’clock. This will be the last of a series of lectures given by Professor Schumpeter, who is this year conducting courses at Columbia University. The lecture will take place in Emerson H.

Source: The Harvard Crimson. March 18, 1914.

_____________________________

Prof. Schumpeter Sails.
Says That America Made a Deep Impression on Him.

Professor Joseph Schumpeter, the first Austrian exchange professor in America, who is returning to his home University of Graz, Austria, sailed on the Martha Washington yesterday. The professor has lectured on social problems, money systems, democracy and other branches of science, has been with Columbia University until the end of January, when he left for a tour through all of the leading universities of this country, the tour extending to San Francisco. Mr. Schumpeter said that he was sorry to leave America, which had made a deep impression upon him.

“The big American universities,” the professor stated, “are far better than the average Austrian and even European university. America has a bigger and better body of scientists at each university, and the student’s material is of a much higher type than that of European schools. The American student wants to learn. He has the earnest desire to go to the bottom of science. He wants to make headway in the world, whereas the Austrian student visits a university for reasons of tradition, social standing and title.”

Asked what he thought the greatest American achievement, the professor answered that the “one-man management” was most appealing to him. It was far better, he claimed to have one man run a business, a university, and even a political party, than to have the European system of sharing power and responsibilities.

Four pretty young sisters, all of whom are ardent suffragists, left on board the big Austrian liner for Italy, France and Germany. The fair travelers are Misses Catherine, Ella S., Grace and Margaret Switzer of Manhattan. Their purpose is to show their European sisters how superfluous man really is, for never during their trip will they tolerate or accept the services of any man nor will they speak to any man or stand for being addressed by a man.

Source: The Brooklyn Daily Eagle. March 22, 1914, p.74

Image Source: Boston Evening Transcript. February 4, 1914. Colorized by Economics in the Rear-view Mirror.

Categories
Cornell Exam Questions Harvard Industrial Organization Labor

Harvard. Exams for labor economics and industrial organization. Durand, 1902

This post adds to the growing collection of transcribed course examinations from the Harvard economics department. The “labor question” and “problems of industrial organization” courses were taught during the second semester of 1901-1902 by a visiting instructor hired by the department, E. Dana Durand. In the Harvard Archive’s collection of course syllabi and reading lists I found a four page printed leaflet, “Systems of Agreements and Arbitration”, from Durand’s labor course. It is added to this post.

Archival Tip: 5 manuscript boxes for Edward Dana Durand (1885-1959) are found at the Herbert Hoover Presidential Library and Museum in West Branch, Iowa.

__________________________________

Backstory

Following the resignation of Edward Cummings in the summer of 1900, William Franklin Willoughby was hired for the year (1900-1901). The exams for Willoughby’s Economics 9 courses for 1900-01 have been transcribed earlier. 

William Franklin Willoughby, Instructor in Economics, resigned, effective September 1, 1901.

Source. Report of the President of Harvard College, 1900-1901, p. 290.

Temporarily taking the Cummings/Willoughby courses next was Edward Dana Durand who was appointed Instructor in Economics, December 2, 1901.

Source. Report of the President of Harvard College, 1901-1902, p. 319.

Durand was also appointed for the first term of 1902-1903.

Source. Report of the President of Harvard College, 1901-1902, p. 321.

Along with material for his first semester course taught 1902-03 on taxation, you will find some additional information about Durand’s life and career in this earlier post

__________________________________

Short Biography
from U.S. Census Bureau

Edward Dana Durand (Director, 1909-1913): Durand was born, in 1871, in Romeo, Michigan. When he was still a child, however, his parents moved to a homestead in South Dakota. Durand attended Yankton College for one year before transferring to Oberlin College. He received a Ph.D. from Cornell University in 1896. After receiving his doctorate, Durand moved between several government and academic positions until 1909, when he became deputy commissioner of corporations. Later that year, President Taft appointed him the new director of the census. He replaced Samuel North, who had left after repeated clashes with the secretary of commerce and labor, and took over the Census Bureau well into the planning process for the 1910 census.

Durand concentrated much of his energy on improving the preparation of census reports. He pioneered several lasting innovations in the presentation of data at the Census Bureau. For example, Durand introduced the publication of state-level reports and the early release in press releases of statistics for which there was the greatest demand (such as the total population of individual cities, states, and the United States population). These releases were be followed by bulletins, abstracts, and final reports with greater detail.

After leaving the Census Bureau in 1913, Durand eventually took a place on the U.S. Tariff Commission, where he served from 1935 until his retirement in 1952. He died in 1960.

Source: United States Census Bureau website. Webpage Directors 1909-1921.

__________________________________

Course Enrollment
for Economics 9

For Undergraduates and Graduates:—

[Economics] 9 2hf. Dr. Durand. — The Labor Question in Europe and the United States.

Total 116: 5 Graduates, 20 Seniors, 46 Juniors, 32 Sophomores, 1 Freshman, 12 Others.

Source: Harvard University. Report of the President of Harvard College, 1901-1902, p. 77.

__________________________________

Course Description
Economics 9

[Economics] 92 hf. The Labor Question in Europe and the United States. Half-course (second half-year). Tu., Th., Sat., at 10. Mr. [William Franklin] Willoughby.

Course 9 is chiefly concerned with problems growing out of the relations of labor and capital in the United States and European countries. There is careful study of the methods of industrial remuneration — the wages system, profit sharing, sliding scales and collective bargaining; of the various forms of coöperation; of labor organizations; of factory legislation and the legal status of laborers and labor organizations; of state and private efforts for the prevention and adjustment of industrial disputes; of employer’s liability and compulsory compensation acts; of the insurance of workingmen against accidents, sickness, old age, and invalidity; of provident institutions, such as savings banks, friendly societies and fraternal benefit orders; of the problem of the unemployed.

While the treatment will necessarily be descriptive to a considerable extent, the emphasis will be laid on the interpretation of the movements considered with a view to determining their causes and consequences, and the merits, defects, and possibilities of existing reform movements.

A systematic course of reading will be required, and topics will be assigned for special investigation.

The course is open not only to students who have taken Course 1, but to Juniors and Seniors who are taking Course 1

Source: Harvard University Archives. Official Register of Harvard University 1901-1902, Box 1. Bound volume: Univ. Pub. N.S. 16. History, etc. Faculty of Arts and Sciences, Division of History and Political Science comprising the Departments of History and Government and Economics (June 21, 1901), p. 40.

__________________________________

ECONOMICS 9
SYSTEMS OF AGREEMENTS AND ARBITRATION.

Agreements at present existing between the Stove Founders’ National Defense Association and the Iron Moulders’ Union of North America.

Conference, 1891. — Whereas there has heretofore existed a sentiment that the members of the Stove Founders’ National Defense Association and the members of the Iron Moulders’ Union of North America were necessary enemies, and in consequence a mutual dislike and distrust of each other and of their respective organizations has arisen, provoking and stimulating strife and ill-will, resulting in severe pecuniary loss to both parties; now this conference is held for the purpose of cultivating a more intimate knowledge of each other’s persons, methods, aims, and objects, believing that thereby friendly regard and respect may be engendered, and such agreements reached as will dispel all inimical sentiments, prevent further strife, and promote the material and moral interests of all parties concerned.

Clause 1, conference 1891.Resolved, That this meeting adopt the principle of arbitration in the settlement of any dispute between the members of the I. M. U. of N. A. and the members of the S. F. N. D. A.

Clause 2, conference 1891. — That a conference committee be formed, consisting of six members, three of whom shall be stove moulders appointed by the Iron Moulders’ Union of North America and three persons appointed by the S. F. N. D. A., all to hold their offices from May 1 to April 30 of each year.

Clause 3, conference 1891. — Whenever there is a dispute between a member of the S. F. N. D. A. and the moulders in his employ (when a majority of the latter are members of the I. M. U.), and it can not be settled amicably between them, it shall be referred to the presidents of the two associations before named, who shall themselves or by delegates give it due consideration. If they can not decide it satisfactorily to themselves, they may, by mutual agreement, summon the conference committee, to whom the dispute shall be referred, and whose decision by a majority vote shall be final and binding upon each party for the term of twelve months.

Pending adjudication by the presidents and conference committee, neither party to the dispute shall discontinue operations, but shall proceed with business in the ordinary manner. In case of a vacancy in the committee of conference it shall be filled by the association originally nominating. No vote shall be taken except by a full committee or by an even number of each party.

Clause 4, conference 1892. — Apprentices should be given every opportunity to learn all the details in the trade thoroughly, and should be required to serve four years. Any apprentice leaving his employer before the termination of his apprenticeship should not be permitted to work in any foundry under the jurisdiction of the I. M. U. of N. A., but should be required to return to his employer. An apprentice should not be admitted to membership in the I. M. U. of N. A until he has served his apprenticeship and is competent to command the average wages. Each apprentice in the last year of his apprenticeship should be given a floor between two journeymen moulders, and they, with the foreman, should pay special attention to his mechanical education in all classes of work.

Clause 5, conference 1892. — The general rate of moulders’ wages should be established for each year without change.

Clause 6, conference 1892. — When the members of the Defense Association shall desire a general reduction in the rate of wages or the Iron Moulders’ Union an advance, they shall each give the other notice at least thirty days before the end of each year, which shall commence on the first day of April. If no such notice be given, the rate of wages current during the year shall be the rate in force for the succeeding year.

Clause 7, conference 1892. — The present established price of work in any shop should be the basis for the determination of the price of new work of similar character and grade.

Clause 8, conference 1892. — Any existing inequality in present prices of molding in a foundry or between two or more foundries should be adjusted as soon as practicable upon the basis set forth in the foregoing paragraphs, by mutual agreement or by the decision of the adjustment committee provided by the conference of March, 1891.

Clause 9, conference 1896. — Firms composing the membership of the S. F. N. D. A. should furnish in their respective foundries a book containing the piece prices for moulding, the same to be placed in the hands of a responsible person.

Clause 10, conference 1896. — New work should always be priced within a reasonable time, and under ordinary circumstances two weeks is considered a reasonable time, and such prices, when decided upon, should be paid from the date the work was put in the sand.

Clause 11, conference 1896. — The members of the S. F. N. D. A. shall furnish to their molders: Shovels, riddles, rammers, brushes, facing bags, and strike-off; provided, however, that they charge actual cost of tools so furnished, and collect for the same, adopting some method of identification; and when a moulder abandons the shop, or requires a new tool in place of one so furnished, he shall, upon the return of the old tools, be allowed the full price charged, without deducting for ordinary wear; any damage beyond ordinary wear to be deducted from amount to be refunded.

Clause 12, conference 1896. — When there is a bad heat, causing dull iron, the foreman’s attention shall be called to it, and payment shall be made for work that is lost from this cause only when poured by foreman’s order, or person next in authority.

If sufficient iron is not furnished the moulder to pour off his work, and such work has to remain over, he shall be paid for such work remaining over at one half the regular price.

These rules shall apply excepting in case of break down of machinery or other unavoidable accident, when no allowance shall be made.

Clause 13, conference 1898. — Whenever a difficulty arises between a member of the S. F. N. D. A. (whose foundry does not come under the provisions of clause 3, 1891 conference) and the moulders employed by him, and said difficulty can not be amicably settled between the member and his employees, it shall be submitted for adjudication to the presidents of the two organizations, or their representatives, without prejudice to the employees presenting said grievance.

Clause 14, conference 1898. — In pricing moulding on new stoves, when there are no comparative stoves made in the shop, the prices shall be based upon competitive stores made in the district, thorough comparison and proper consideration being given to the merits of the work according to labor involved.

Form of agreement adopted and recommended by the National Association of Builders to secure the establishment of arbitration committees, with plan of organization of the same, for the use of associations of employers and associations of workmen in all branches of the building trade.

Agreement.

For the purpose of establishing a method of peacefully settling all questions of mutual concern [name of organization of employers] and [name of organization of employees] severally and jointly agree that no such question shall be conclusively acted upon by either body independently, but shall be referred for settlement to a joint committee, which committee shall consist of an equal number of representatives from each association; and also agree that all such questions shall be settled by our own trade, without intervention of any other trade whatsoever.

The parties hereto agree to abide by the findings of this committee on all matters of mutual concern referred to it by either party. It is understood and agreed by both parties that in no event shall strikes and lockouts be permitted, but all differences shall be submitted to the joint committee, and work shall proceed without stoppage or embarrassment.

The parties hereto also agree that they will incorporate with their respective constitutions and by-laws such clauses as will make recognition of this joint agreement a part of the organic law of their respective associations. The joint committee above referred to is hereby created and established, and the following rules adopted for its guidance:—

Organization or joint and rules for its government.

  1. This committee shall consist of not less than six members, equally divided between the associations represented, and an umpire, to be chosen by the committee at their annual meeting, and as the first item of their business after organization. This umpire must be neither a journeyman craftsman nor an employer of journey-men. He shall preside at meetings of the committee when necessary.
  2. The members of this committee shall be elected annually by their respective associations at their regular meetings for the election of officers.
  3. The duty of this committee shall be to consider such matters of mutual interest and concern to the employers and the workmen as may be regularly referred to it by either of the parties to this agreement, transmitting its conclusions thereon to each association for its government.
  4. A regular annual meeting of the committee shall be held during the month of January, at which meeting the special business shall be the establishment of “working rules” for the ensuing year; these rules to guide and govern employers and workmen, and to comprehend such particulars as rate or wages per hour, number of hours to he worked, payment for overtime, payment for Sunday work, government of apprentices, and similar questions of joint concern.
  5. Special meetings shall be held when either of the parties hereto desire to submit any question to the committee for settlement.
  6. For the proper conduct of business, a chairman shall be chosen at each meeting, but he shall preside only for the meeting at which he is so chosen. The duty of the chairman shall be that usually incumbent on a presiding officer.
  7. A clerk shall be chosen at the annual meeting to serve during the year. His duty shall be to call all regular meetings, and to call special meetings when officially requested so to do by either body party hereto. He shall keep true and accurate record of the meetings, transmit all findings to the association interested, and attend to the usual duties of the office.
  8. A majority vote shall decide all questions. In case of the absence of any member, the president of the association by which he was appointed shall have the right to vote for him. The umpire shall have casting vote in case of tie.

Clauses to be incorporated with by-laws of parties to joint agreement.

A. All members of this association do by virtue of their membership recognize and assent to the establishment of a joint committee of arbitration (under a regular form of agreement and governing rules), by and between this body and the ______, for the peaceful settlement of all matters of mutual concern to the two bodies and the members thereof.

B. This organization shall elect at its annual meeting ______ delegates to the said joint committee, of which the president of this association shall be one, officially notifying within three days thereafter the said ______ of the said action and of the names of the delegates elected.

C. The duty of the delegates thus elected shall be to attend all meetings the said joint committee, and they must be governed in this action by the rules jointly adopted by this association and the said ______.

D. No amendments shall be made to these special claims, A, B, C, and D, of these by-laws, except by concurrent vote of this association with the said ______, and only atter six months’ notice of proposal to so amend.

Rules for the Year 1900

Boston, February 8, 1900.

The Mason Builders’ Association of Boston and vicinity has, through the joint committee on arbitration, made the following agreement with Bricklayers’ Unions Nos. 3 and 27 of Boston and vicinity, as follows:—

  1. Hours of labor. — During the year not more than eight (8) hours’ labor shall be required in the limits of the day, except it be as overtime, with payment of same as provided for.
  2. Working hours. — The working hours shall be from 8 A.M. to 12 M. (one hour for dinner during February, March, April, May, June, July, August, September, and October). During November, December, and January it shall be optional with the men on jobs whether they work half hour at noon and quit at 4.30 p.m.
  3. Night gangs. — Eight hours shall constitute a night’s labor. When two gangs are employed, working hours to be from 8 p.m. to 12 m. and from 1 a.m. to 5 a.m. Where regular night gangs are employed, from 1 a.m. to 5 a.m. Sunday morning, the minimum rate shall be paid.
  4. Overtime. — Except in cases of emergency no work shall be done between the hours of 5 and 8 a.m. and 5 and 6 p.m. Overtime to be paid for as time and one half, except the hour between 5 and 6 p.m. which shall be paid for as double time, but this section as to double time is not to be taken advantage of to secure a practical operation of a 9-hour day.
  5. Holiday time. — Sundays, Fourth of July, Labor Day, and Christmas Day are to be considered as holidays, and work done on either of these days is to be paid for as double time.
  6. Wages. — The minimum rate of wages shall be forty-five (45) cents per hour.
  7. That the bricklayers shall be paid their wages on or before 5 p.m. on the regular pay day.
  8. If an employee is laid off on account of a lack of material, or for other causes, or is discharged, and if said employee demands his wages, intending to seek other employment, he shall receive his money.
  9. The business agent of the Bricklayers’ Union shall be allowed to visit all jobs during working hours to interview the steward of the job.
  10. In the opinion of the joint committee the best interests of the employing masons demand that all journeymen bricklayers shall belong to the Bricklayers’ Union. Therefore preference of employment shall be given to union bricklayers by the members of the Mason Builders’ Association.

Issued by order of the joint committee on arbitration.

John T. Healy, Secretary of Committee.

Source: Harvard University Archives. Syllabi, course outlines and reading lists in Economics, 1895-2003. Box 1. Folder “Economics, 1901-1902”.

__________________________________

ECONOMICS 9
Final Examination
(1902)

  1. Discuss the charge that labor organizations, by fixing a standard rate of wages, injure both the most efficient and the least efficient workmen.
  2. How far do labor organizations enforce restrictions upon the number of apprentices? Give fully one reason for and one against the justice of this policy of restriction.
  3. Describe fully but in general terms the more systematic process of collective bargaining, as practiced, for example, by the coal miners or the glass workers.
  4. Distinguish the two chief classes of boycotts. What do you think of their justice and legality, and why?
  5. What in a broad war has been the movement of nominal and real wages in the United States since 1870, and since 1890? Name three leading sources of information as to wage statistics.
  6. State briefly four causes which contribute to the evils of the “sweating system.” Discuss one thoroughly.
  7. Give briefly three arguments in favor of the eight hour day, and criticise one fully.
  8. Describe the existing legislation regarding child labor, in the United States and England.
  9. Has the employment of women in gainful occupations increased in the United States, or not, and why? Give three reasons why the wages of women average less than those of men.
  10. What is the doctrine of the common law in the United States regarding the liability of employers for injuries to employees by their fellow servants? What do you think of this doctrine, and why?
  11. Distinguish three main forms of coöperation. What degree of success has each attained in the United States, and England (statistics unnecessary)?
  12. State the leading arguments in favor of further restriction of immigration.

Source: Harvard University Archives. Harvard University, Examination Papers, 1873-1915. Box 6, Bound volume: Examination Papers, 1902-03. Papers Set for Final Examinations in History, Government, Economics, Philosophy, Education, Fine Arts, Architecture, Landscape Architecture, Music in Harvard College (June, 1902), pp. 28-29.

__________________________________

Course Enrollment
for Economics 9a

For Undergraduates and Graduates:—

[Economics] 9a 2hf. Dr. Durand. — Problems of Industrial Organization

Total 45: 5 Graduates, 19 Seniors, 12 Juniors, 7 Sophomores, 2 Others.

Source: Harvard University. Report of the President of Harvard College, 1901-1902, p. 77.

__________________________________

Course Description
Economics 9a

9a2 hf. Problems of Industrial Organization. Half-course (second half-year). Mon., Wed., Fri., at 9. Mr. [William Franklin] Willoughby.

This course will give a critical study of modern industry with special reference to the efficiency of production and the relations existing between employers and employees. The actual organization of industrial enterprises will first be considered. Under this head will be treated such subjects as corporations, the factory system, the concentration and integration of industry, and the trust problem in all its phases. Following this, or in connection with it, will be studied the effect of the modern organization of industry, and changes now taking place, upon efficiency of production, stability of employment, and industrial depressions. Careful attention will be given to the relations existing between employers and employees, and the functions of organizations of both classes. Finally will be considered the position of the individual under the present system, – his preparation for a trade through apprenticeship, technical education, or otherwise; his opportunities for advancement: his economic independence. Conditions in Europe as well as in the United States will be shown.

Topics will be assigned for special investigation, and the results of such inquiries will be considered in class.

This course is open to students who have taken Course 1, and it is desirable that they shall have taken Course 9 as well.

Source: Harvard University Archives. Official Register of Harvard University 1901-1902, Box 1. Bound volume: Univ. Pub. N.S. 16. History, etc. Faculty of Arts and Sciences, Division of History and Political Science comprising the Departments of History and Government and Economics (June 21, 1901), pp. 40-41.

__________________________________

ECONOMICS 9a
Final Examination
(1902)

  1. Discuss methods by which corporation stockholders may be defrauded by officers, directors, and other stockholders.
  2. What form and degree of publicity would you think desirable to require from great corporations, and why?
  3. Describe a typical case of the methods of promoting, capitalizing, and floating the securities of a modern industrial combination.
  4. Describe the trust form of combination and contrast it with two leading forms of combination in single corporations.
  5. Discuss the relation of the principle of increasing returns to monopoly, distinguishing between possible meanings of the phrase.
  6. Discuss economies from the integration of plants performing different processes into a single corporation. How far do such economies tend toward monopoly?
  7. Define four unfair advantages or unfair methods of competition which may strengthen a combination, and discuss one fully.
  8. What do you think of reduction of the tariff as a remedy for abuses by industrial combinations, and why?
  9. and 10. Discuss fully the character and scope of such Federal legislation regarding corporations and combinations as seems to you desirable.

Source: Harvard University Archives. Harvard University, Examination Papers, 1873-1915. Box 6, Bound volume: Examination Papers, 1902-03. Papers Set for Final Examinations in History, Government, Economics, Philosophy, Education, Fine Arts, Architecture, Landscape Architecture, Music in Harvard College (June, 1902), p. 29.

Image Source: E. Dana Durand. Library of Congress, Prints and Photographs Division. Washington, D.C. 20540.

Categories
Cornell Exam Questions Harvard Public Finance Williams Wisconsin

Harvard. Public Finance Exams. Charles Jesse Bullock visiting from Williams College, 1901-02

Courses in public finance were not offered in the academic year 1900-01 at Harvard. Those courses had last been taught by Charles F. Dunbar and Frank W. Taussig in 1899-1900. Following Dunbar’s death (January, 29 1900) and Taussig’s leave to recover from a nervous breakdown (1901-03), it was necessary to bring in an outsider to cover the public finance offerings. Charles Jesse Bullock was first appointed as an instructor in economics for the 1901-1902 academic year to fill that gap. He was later to return at the rank of assistant professor beginning with the 1903-04 academic year.

_____________________

From the Williams College Yearbook

CHARLES JESSE BULLOCK, Ph.D.,
Assistant Professor of Political Science.

Graduated from Boston University, 1889, with Commencement appointment, and received the degree of Ph.D. from the University of Wisconsin, in 1895. He taught in high schools from 1889 to 1893 and was traveling fellow in Boston University in 1891. In 1895 he was fellow and assistant at the University of Wisconsin and from 1895 to 1899 was instructor in Economics at Cornell University. Dr. Bullock has written: “The Finance of the United States, 1775-1789,” (1895), “Introduction to the Study of Economics,” (1897), and “Essays on the Monetary History of the United States” (in press [1900]). He also edited William Douglass’s “Discourse Concerning the Currencies of the British Plantations in America,” and has contributed various articles to the economic and statistical magazines. He is a member of the American Economic Association and of the American Statistical Association, an associate member of the National Institute of Art, Science and Letters, and a Fellow of the Royal Statistical Society. Dr. Bullock is a member of the ΦΔΧ Fraternity.

Source: Williams College, The Gulielmensian MCMI, Vol 44 (Williamstown, MA: 1900), p. 23.

_____________________

Course Announcements

For Undergraduates and Graduates.

[open to students who have passed satisfactorily in Course 1. Outlines of Economics]

7a1 hf. Financial Administration and Public Debts. Half-course (first half-year). Mon., Wed., Fri. at 9. Professor Bullock (Williams College).

7b1 hf. The Theory and Methods of Taxation, with special reference to local taxation in the United States. Half-course (first half-year). Tu., Th., Sat. at 10. Professor Bullock (Williams College).

Source: Harvard University. Announcement of the Courses of Instruction Provided by the Faculty of Arts and Sciences for the Academic Year, 1901-02 (Second ed., 25 June 1901), p.44.

_____________________

Course Enrollments

7a 1hf. Professor Bullock (Williams College). — Financial Administration and Public Debts.

Total 26: 2 Graduates, 16 Seniors, 5 Juniors, 1 Sophomore, 2 Others.

7b 1hf. Professor Bullock (Williams College). — The Theory and Methods of Taxation with special reference to local taxation, in the United States.

Total 26: 2 Graduates, 13 Seniors, 9 Juniors, 2 Others.

Source: Harvard University. Report of the President of Harvard College, 1901-1902, p. 78.

_____________________

Course Descriptions

7a1 hf. Financial Administration. Half-course (first half-year). Mon., Wed., Fri. at 9. Professor Bullock (Williams College).

This course will deal with the methods by which governments have attempted to adjust expenditures to revenue, and will study the problems arising from the effort to secure popular control over this process. The budget systems of England, France, and Germany will first receive attention; and study will then be concentrated upon the budgetary methods of our federal government. So far as practicable, also, some consideration will be given to State and local budgets in the United States. The history and present form of our federal budget will offer a large field for investigation, and supply subjects for written reports. Students will be encouraged, furthermore, to gather information concerning the methods followed by State and local governments with which they may happen to be familiar. Candidates for Honors in Political Science or for the higher degrees may advantageously use reports thus prepared by them as material for theses.

Course 7a is open to students who have taken Economics 1

7b1 hf. The Theory and Methods of Taxation, with special reference to local taxation in the United States. Half-course (first half-year). Tu., Th., Sat. at 10. Professor Bullock (Williams College).

In this course both the theory and practice of taxation will be studied. Attention will be given at the outset to the tax systems of England, France, and Germany; and the so-called direct taxes employed in those countries will receive special consideration. After this, the principles of taxation will be examined. This will lead to a study of the position of taxation in the system of economic science, and of such subjects as the classification, the just distribution, and the incidence of taxes. Finally, the existing methods of taxation in the United States will be studied, each tax being treated with reference to its proper place in a rational system of federal, state, and local revenues.

Written work will be required of all students, as well as a systematic course of prescribed reading. Candidates for Honors in Political Science and for the higher degrees will be given the opportunity of preparing theses in substitution for the required written work.

Course 7b is open to students who have taken Economics 1.

Source: Harvard University Archives. Official Register of Harvard University 1901-1902, Box 1. Bound volume: Univ. Pub. N.S. 16. History, etc. Faculty of Arts and Sciences, Division of History and Political Science comprising the Departments of History and Government and Economics (June 21, 1901), pp. 43-44.

_____________________

Final Examinations

ECONOMICS 7a
FINANCIAL ADMINISTRATION

  1. How is budgetary legislation prepared in France, in England and in the United States? In which country are the best results attained?
  2. At what time of the year is the budget prepared and enacted in France, England, Germany, Italy, Belgium, Prussia, and the United States? Why is the time of preparation and adoption an important consideration?
  3. Compare methods of budgetary legislation in England with those prevailing in France.
  4. Describe and criticize federal budgetary procedure in the United States?
  5. What part do supplementary, or deficiency, appropriations play in France, in England, and in the United States?
  6. Compare the English and French methods of accounting. What method is followed in the United States?
  7. What are the methods of collecting and issuing public money in England?
  8. What methods of collection and issue are followed in the United States?
  9. Compare the auditing methods of England, France, and the United States?
  10. Why are unity and universality important elements in any good budget system?

Source: Harvard University Archives. Mid-year examinations, 1852-1943. Box 6. Bound Volume: Examination Papers, Mid-years 1901-1902.
Also included in: Examination Papers, 1873-1915. Box 6, Bound volume Examination Papers, 1902-03Papers Set for Final Examinations in History, Government, Economics, Philosophy,… in Harvard College(June, 1902), pp. 26-27.

ECONOMICS 7b
TAXATION

  1. Describe the land taxes of France, Prussia, and Great Britain.
  2. Compare the French and the Prussian business taxes.
  3. Discuss the British income tax, giving special consideration to methods of administration and to financial results.
  4. In a similar manner discuss the Prussian income tax.
  5. Discuss briefly the customs taxes of Great Britain, France, and Germany.
  6. Describe the excise taxes of the same countries.
  7. What reasons are there for thinking that a tax on rent can not be shifted? Discuss the incidence of an excise tax on each unit of the product of an industry.
  8. What arguments are advanced for and against progressive taxation?
  9. Discuss the shortcomings of the property tax in the United States: (a) with reference to the taxation of realty; (b) with reference to the taxation of personalty.
  10. Describe the corporation taxes of Massachusetts.

Source:  Harvard University Archives. Mid-year examinations, 1852-1943. Box 6. Bound Volume: Examination Papers, Mid-years 1901-1902.
Also included in: Examination Papers, 1873-1915. Box 6, Bound volume Examination Papers, 1902-03Papers Set for Final Examinations in History, Government, Economics, Philosophy,… in Harvard College(June, 1902), pp. 26-27.

Image Source: Williams College, The Gulielmensian 1902, Vol. 45, p. 26. Colorized by Economics in the Rear-view Mirror.

Categories
Columbia Cornell Economics Programs Harvard Michigan Popular Economics Yale

“Political Economy and the Civil War” by Laughlin that provoked an Economist-Bashing editorial, 1885

Before becoming the founding father of the department of political economy at the University of Chicago, the 35 year old Harvard assistant professor J. Laurence Laughlin (Harvard Ph.D. 1876) published an essay, transcribed below, arguing that liberal college education needed to be expanded beyond Greek, Latin, mathematics, and philosophy to include courses dealing with economic theory and its policy applications. He provides us a table of the limited course offerings in political economy at five major colleges/universities at the time. I stumbled upon an unsigned editorial written in response to Laughlin that I have also transcribed and which is placed at the end of this post. The editorial provides us with historical evidence that ill-tempered economics-bashing is hardly a creation of the Twitternet Age. No siree Bob! The editor was not amused by Laughlin’s presumption, calling him and his college professor colleagues who taught political economy to boys…”vealy milksops”. I dare any or all visitors to sneak that expression into a footnote.

________________________________

POLITICAL ECONOMY AND THE CIVIL WAR.
By J. Laurence Laughlin.

Atlantic Monthly, v. 55 (April, 1885) no. 330, pp. 444-450.

In some parts of our country there is a current maxim among the old-fashioned gardeners to the effect that “a wind-shaken tree will bear much fruit.” There is some subtle force in it. In fact, it is an expression which may be regarded as finding its parallel in individual and social life. As individuals, we know that there is no real growth of character except by a conquest over opposing difficulties; the doing right when it is against our inclinations and prejudices. And in a social organism we seem to see a moral law of conservation of energy by which a sacrifice is the parent of some gain,— a thing which evidently underlies the movements attending many great convulsions in political life. We saw armies go out of our sight during the civil war, only to come back thinned, injured by disease, with half their number left dead on the field. Death meant bitter, indescribable sorrow in all our homes. The experiences of the war were felt to be pitiless, inexplicable, and hard. And yet, perhaps, a subtle suggestion may have come into our minds that it was not simply by dying, or in living, that the best law of our being was enforced; that there was, in truth, some Power behind it all; that some purpose was being worked out through each one of us, just as each leaf on the tree, for example, is necessary to the completed organism of the whole tree, and ceases to be when it is separated from the stem. Now, perhaps, even at this short distance from the struggle, we can begin to see some of the effects of that social and political upheaval, the greatest since the foundation of our government. It is worth while to examine whether the wind shaken tree has borne much fruit.

The process by which citizens from the secluded districts and remote towns were sent through new cities to opposite parts of the Union, exchanging ideas with men of different habits of thought, was a marked feature of the war period, and leavened the mental life of the American people in a way hither to little suspected. It was something like sending a country boy to college, only the effect was multiplied a million times. The rural population came into a knowledge of our cities, while the urban classes were carried out into new climates and into unvisited parts of our vast domain. New sights, new methods of cultivation, different habits of living, stimulated the dull and fired the active and enterprising men in the ranks. The life of the farm and the village was widened to an interest in the nation. About the same time, moreover, came a vast increase in easy means of communication by railways and a greater extension of the use of the newspaper and telegraph, by which provincial towns were brought into direct connection with the outside world. Even oddities of customs and dress began to disappear, in the process of comparison with the more attractive ways of the dwellers in the great cities and towns. In this fashion, the thinking horizon was extended. Dull intellects learned the presence of complicated problems, and brighter minds found new spurs to ambition in the questions of larger interest. On all sides men felt themselves coming daily into contact with new difficulties, under a dim consciousness of their bigness, but with a strong belief that the knowledge how to deal with them was inadequate. In short, the tremendous crisis through which we passed, apart from its effect on the preservation of the Union, has been subtly at work in moral and intellectual directions. The working of these new forces on a quick and susceptible race can easily be imagined. They have, in fact, under somewhat similar conditions, had a distinct influence on a more phlegmatic people than ours. Old students at Göttingen, who have returned to the university since the late wars in which Germany has been engaged, have been amazed to find the old-fashioned spot — where the customs, habits, and naive simplicity of one hundred years ago had prevailed until quite recently — now wholly changed. The commercial spirit has seized the formerly simple-minded peasants, and the quiet town now hears the heavy march of cosmopolitanism in its streets.

Like Germany, the United States had new problems to solve. While the conflict closed the long slavery struggle, it brought with it intricate questions, but of a character very different from those which had gone before. Without warning, and consequently without the ability to get due preparation or acquire proper training, our public men were confronted, as the war progressed, with matters of vital importance in international and constitutional law, in taxation, and in every form of administration and finance. The demand for men who had given themselves more particularly to the province of governmental science was an imperative one; but it was, generally speaking, met in a way which showed that there existed in the community a class from whom these necessary men could be recruited. That class was the legal profession of the country. The questions of reconstruction, the relation of the general government to the States, the civil rights of the negro, our relations with foreign powers during the blockade of Southern ports, were not abandoned to men who had never habituated themselves to discussions such as were involved in their settlement. There were differences of opinion, of course; but inasmuch as these differences of opinion were produced by different political theories, this proved that attention had been given to such subjects to the extent that a crystallized system of thought, formulated in dogmas, had been created by the various parties.

But, as has been suggested, new considerations arose. The magnitude of the military operations involved an enormous expenditure of money by the state, and made a demand upon our statesmen for financial skill of an almost unparalleled kind. To meet these extended questions of taxation, finance, and currency, what body of men could be called upon? To this, answer must be made that the war overtook us without a supply — or even a few — of trained economists and financiers. The economic part in the equipment of a public official had been wholly neglected. In fact, political economy and finance had never been seriously studied in the schools; but, if studied, they were classed in the old-fashioned required curriculum with Butler’s Analogy and the Evidences of Christianity. Although Adam Smith wrote his Wealth of Nations in 1776, political economy was an unknown science to the American people before 1860. It is an interesting study to examine the manner in which our people went under the burdens and tasks of our great civil conflict. There was the quick adaptability of Americans to start with; there was plenty of patriotism and good will, and no lack of those high qualities of self-sacrifice and heroism which are still fragrant to us; but lawyers, such as Chase and Fessenden, were practically our only financiers. Early in the war they were required to consider a scheme — for the right settlement of which a vast experience is necessary — of raising loans, and adjusting a plan of taxation corresponding to the extraordinary war expenses. Without considering alternatives, in a few years they created a debt as great as that incurred by old despotisms of Europe in centuries; without foresight, they drifted into a ruinous issue of irredeemable paper money; without intending it as the object of a definite policy, but through a desire simply to gain a war revenue, they established an extended system of “protection to home industries” by levying duties on imports, which has brought into existence business interests largely dependent on the continuance of these temporary war measures. When it is realized that principles of taxation are to-day probably less understood than any other branch of economics, it is not surprising to find that in 1864 Congress was occupied only five days in passing the most gigantic taxation measure of the war. The National Bank Act, which has given us the best system of banking ever enjoyed by the country, was, however, in reality passed as an act to facilitate the sale of our bonds and aid our tottering credit. We blundered egregiously, but we were capable of learning by experience. Yet it was from these very blunders, from this revelation of inexperience made evident by the demands of a great emergency period, that the community received an impetus toward the study of economic questions which was certain to result in good fruit.

In fact, it is now clear that a new interest in economics and finance has already arisen. The civil war was, so to speak, the creation of economic study in the United States. The war did for this country — in a different way, of course — even more than the corn-law agitation did for England. It actually gave birth to new motives for study. There never was a time in our history when there was so evident a desire to get light on the economic problems of the day as now. There is a new stir among the ranks of the young men at college; and the printing-press sends forth an increasing stream of new books upon subjects which are constantly discussed in the daily newspapers. There is unquestionably a new-born, slowly growing attention by the younger men of our land to the necessity (as well as the duty) of fitting themselves properly for the responsibilities of citizenship. If the war has given us this, — the absence of which used to be so often lamented a few years ago, — then may some of our sacrifices not have been in vain. The wind-shaking has resulted in abundant fruit.

In the present awakening in educational discussion, one phase of which has been called the “Greek Question,” it is worth while to notice the influence of the war period on the college curriculum. In most of our schools and universities, on the breaking out of the war (and even to the present day), the pecuniary resources and endowments had been tied down, under the force of old traditions, to supply instruction in the customary Greek, Latin, mathematics, and philosophy, which were then considered the only essentials of a liberal education. But when the rude shock of the war awakened us to our ignorance, and we looked around for the schools where the new studies could best be followed, it was discovered that the college curriculum made practically no provision for such instruction. In the old days when sailing vessels alone entered Boston harbor, only one channel was practicable, and all the fortifications were placed in a way to command it: but when steam took the place of sails, another channel was adopted, but it is now wholly undefended. The old ship channel must be defended, but so must the new one. So, in the collegiate studies, the old subjects are necessary, of course, but they are not the only necessary ones. The new demands, due to the progress of the age, must also be met. In fact, the response of the schools to these new demands is at once the evidence and result of the quickening and stimulating forces so briefly sketched in these pages. A comparison of the amount of instruction in political economy given by the principal institutions of the land in the years 1860, 1870, and 1884 will furnish us new proof that the wind-shaken tree is yielding full fruit.

Nothing could show more distinctly than the accompanying table how young any real systematic study of political economy is in this country, and it accounts for the lack of any number of trained economists among us. But the younger generation are happily recruiting their ranks, now that these better opportunities are open to them.

At no time, however, have public affairs demanded unpartisan study in economics more than to-day. In past centuries governments were supposed to labor, in an unsettled state of society, for the protection of life and property. Now that the general progress of civilization and Christianity has made life and liberty more secure, legislation in later years has concerned itself rather with property than life. In the Middle Ages trade was considered plebeian; to fight or to oppress was regarded as more noble. Now the chief solicitude of the modern state is the increase of wealth: the castles have become mills; retainers, productive laborers; and arms, the hammers and tools of the artisan.

1860.

1870.

1884.

Yale College. One third of Senior year One third of Senior Year 1.  Elementary Course. — Fawcett. — Discussions on currency, banking, and taxation. 3 hours a week for 13 weeks.
2.  Elementary Course. — Mill. — Currency, banking, and taxation. 2 hours a week for a year.
3.  Advanced Course. — Discussion of economic problems and fallacies, with selections from leading treatises. 2 hours a week for 20 weeks.
4.  Graduate Course. — Finance and the Art of Politics, as illustrated in the History of the United States. 2 hours a week for 2 years.
5.  Graduate Course (in alternate years.) — In 1883-4, Sociology. In 1884-5, Industrial History, History of Political Economy, Finance and Theory of Rights. 1 hour a week for each year.
6.  History, business methods, and social problems, of Railroads. 2 hours a week for a year.
[A course about equal to Courses 1 and 2 is given in the Sheffield Scientific School.]

Cornell University.

[Institution not founded]

One third of Junior Year

1. Elementary Course. — Lectures and Recitations. 2 hours a week 2/3 of a year.
2. Lectures on Political Economy.5 hours a week for 1/3 of a year.
3. Lectures on Finance.

University of Michigan.

Not in the Course of Study.

One Term of Senior Year.

1. Elementary Course. — Lectures. 3 hours a week ½ of a year.
2.  Advanced Course. — Competition, Free Trade and Protection, Commercial Depressions, Transportation, etc. 3 hours a week ½ of a year.
3.  Principles and Methods of Finance. — Banking, National Debts, etc. 2 hours a week ½ of a year.
4.  History of Industrial Society [not given in 1883-4]. 2 hours a week ½ of a year.
5.  Financial Seminary.— History of American Finance. 2 hours a week ½ of a year. [Not given 1883-4.]

Columbia College.

Elective in one part of Senior Year.

One Term of Senior Year.

1.  Principles of Political Economy.— Elementary Course. Rogers’ Manual. 2 hours a week ½ of a year.
2. History of Politico-Economic Institutions. 2 hours a week ½ of a year.
3.  Finance and Taxation. 2 hours a week ½ of a year.
4.  Statistical Science, Methods and Results. 2 hours a week ½ a year.
5.  Communistic and Socialistic Theories. 2 hours a week ½ a year.
6.   [Topics like railways, banks etc., are placed under Administrative Law.]

Harvard University.

One half of Senior Year.

1. Rogers’ Manual One half of Junior Year 1. Elementary Course.— Mill’s Political Economy. Lectures on Banking and the Financial Legislation of the United States. 3 hours a week for a year.
2. Elective Course for Seniors: Adam Smith, Mill, Bowen. 3 hours a week for a year. 2. Advanced Course.— History of Political Economy. Cairnes, Carey, George, and recent literature. 3 hours a week for a year.
3. Investigation of Practical Questions of the Day.— Banking, Money, Bimetallism, American Shipping, Note Issues, etc. 3 hours a week for a year.
4. Economic History since the Seven Years’ War.— 3 hours a week for a year.
5. Land Tenures in England, Ireland, France, and Germany.— 1 hour a week for a year.
6. History of Tariff Legislation in the United States.— 1 hour a week for a year.
7. Comparison of the Financial Systems of France, England, Germany, and the United States.— 1 hour a week for a year. [Omitted 1884-5.]
8. History of Financial Legislation in the United States. 1 hour a week for a year.

Consider the character of the questions at this time pressing upon Congress for immediate attention. If we omit the administrative and political legislation on the civil service, the succession to the presidency, and a national bankruptcy law, the remaining questions before Congress to-day are almost entirely economic. (1.) There is, in the first place, the false silver dollar, masquerading in sheep’s clothing, and waiting to catch the unwary business world napping, when it will suddenly assume its true depreciated character, and devour fifteen or eighteen per cent of all creditor’s dues estimated at present prices. What is Congress doing here? Just what it did in the last months of 1861, when it let the country drift on to the shoals of depreciated paper. Monometallists and bimetallists, business men and bankers, are assaulting the dangerous silver legislation, and yet Congress is a very Gibraltar in which the silver owners are intrenched. (2.) Next, there is the banking question. Nothing can be more delicate and sensitive than the machinery of credit and banking in a great commercial country such as this; and yet men, to satisfy the prejudices of constituents, handle this mechanism with about the same air of cheerful indifference as that of a child who drags a rag doll round by the heels. The present national bank notes give a stability to trade in separate parts of the Union, by means of a currency equally good in Maine and Texas, never reached in the days of the vicious and changing state banks; and yet the present system is gradually vanishing before our very eyes, as calls are made for government bonds. (3.) Again, Congress is struggling with the most difficult of all problems, – national taxation. It means a reëxamination of our whole scheme of taxation, the retention of internal taxes on distilled spirits and tobacco, the management of our surplus revenue, the whole sub-treasury system; while the situation inevitably requires a readjustment of our customs duties. Duties needed in order to procure a large revenue in time of war are no longer necessary when the war is ended, and the national debt is reduced one half. (4.) There are the barbarous and mediaeval navigation laws, to which we cling with a curious indifference to the influence of all progress and liberal ideas. The problem of our shipping and merchant marine needs the touchstone of some wider training than is furnished by selfish individual interests. (5.) Our public lands and the settlement of our vast Western domain are important matters of land tenures, and yet they are abandoned to accident, while the possibilities of good disappear under the cloud of accomplished facts, where nothing can be done. It will not be long before all the public lands will be gone, and yet no notice is taken of existing evils. (6.) Then, again, one has but to mention the word “railway,” and there arises to the mind a congeries of difficult questions dealing with Western “grangers,” the ability of the state to regulate freight and passenger charges, and in fact the whole vexed discussion of state interference. Here is a field by itself, to which a man may well give his whole life-work. (7.) It would be wearisome to more than mention the topics of Postal Telegraph, Chinese Labor, Strikes, Trades Unions, and Communism, which attract our instant attention. (8.) Then again the unfortunate legal-tender decision of Judge Gray has brought back to us all the troublesome and intricate discussions on the currency which we once thought had been forever settled. As matters now stand, power is given to Congress, if it chooses, to repeat all the errors of Continental currency policy, and we are put back a century in our paper money teaching. (9.) To pass from merely internal matters, so long as we were the only civilized people on the western continent, our relations with our neighbors gave us little thought. The growth of commerce, the expansion of populous areas north and south of us, the discovery of mineral wealth outside our own limits, which invites our capital, has forced on us the consideration of reciprocity with Canada and Mexico. We have refused reciprocity to Canada; but to-day we are considering the desirability of granting closer commercial relations with Mexico, while Cuba and Porto Rico have asked the same advantages by a new treaty.

Such, in brief, are some of the subjects which must be made matter of instruction in our schools and universities. It will be observed how overwhelming a proportion of public measures at present are economic, and what a heavy responsibility lies upon our institutions of learning, if they are to meet the new demands in a fitting manner. But there is a still stronger reason for strengthening our educational forces on the economic side. This is to be found in what may be called the “economic portents.” To the present time we have been properly called a “young country,” which to the economist means an abundance of unoccupied land, a scanty population, large returns to capital, and high wages. A full knowledge of our resources has not practically been reached as yet, and will not be, probably, for a considerable time to come. These resources and the lusty health of our young country have made it possible heretofore for legislators to blunder with impunity. Constantly receiving large returns, labor and capital would not naturally be over-critical and hostile to each other. The young-country theory has also led to the encouragement of unlimited immigration, with which to settle our prairies and build up our towns. These new-comers do not, in fact, all go upon the land; but, arriving on our seaboard, instead of being drawn off entirely, they remain in the cities, like dirty pools of water in the streets. Indeed, the importation of uneducated, un-American, un-republican workmen from foreign lands is a problem in itself, and makes a strong demand upon all who can possibly do so to educate these masses, both economically and politically. Lawless communism, it is said advisedly, feeds on bad workmen. A saving mechanic is never a communist. To-day these men mean little to us; but when, by an increasing population and a denser settlement of the country, land becomes more scarce and valuable, profits on capital lower, and wages less, then even honest men, finding themselves pinched by a barrier of their own creation, brought into operation by natural laws, unless economically trained, will not know what is happening, and may in entire ignorance fly in the face of the law, and do in the United States somewhat of the things they are now doing in Europe. The day is more or less distant when this may happen, but it is coming nearer in proportion as the methods of men accustomed to conditions in old and crowded countries are brought here by a never ending stream of immigration.

The war has plunged us into the consideration of gigantic questions of an economic character, and the growth of our country in numbers and wealth is making a true understanding of them more necessary than ever to the prosperity of the nation, and a rising tide of interest in such studies is unmistakably evident. But these new and increasing demands are met by meagre and inadequate means in the great schools. It is a surprising fact that in some of the most important institutions there is no separate provision for such studies, and not even one settled instructor. Above all, we must educate in an intelligent manner, by stimulating investigation into home problems, and by encouraging the preparations of monographs on some out of the multitude of our economic questions. The best of the men in the university cannot now find a career in economic teaching, because few positions exist in this country as an object for honorable and ambitious students. Men find a profession in teaching Greek and Latin, but not Political Economy. When the community wakes up to a realization of this gap in the instruction of the land, and the importance of filling it, we may hope to see a more correct relation between means and needs than now exists.

________________________________

COLLEGE PROFESSORS AS ECONOMISTS.

Mr. J. Laurence Laughlin, in the Atlantic Monthly for April, appends his name to one of those egotistical screeds which serve to make those who teach political economy to boys contemptible in the sight of those who have occasion to practice legislative economies as practical statesman. Its fundamental assumption is that for want of the wisdom with such boys as Laughlin and Sumner possess nearly all that Hamilton, Gallatin, Chase, and Fessenden have done in America and quite all that Colbert, Napoleon, Pitt, Turgot, and Bismarck have done in Europe in an economic and financial way has been sad botchwork. Why do magazines like the Atlantic Monthly publish such ridiculous rant?

Instead of Chase and Fessenden having been in need of going to school to such vealy milksops as J. Laurence Laughlin, this college tutor shows on every page that he writes how greatly he needs the practical information which he could have got by attending for two or three years on the sessions of the Ways and Means Committee at Washington. Indeed, it is not legislators that need to be educated in economics by college professors, but college professors who need some means of picking up a few grains of sense by being brought into contact with actual legislation.

It is a singular fact that no man who has ever accepted a chair in a college as a teacher of political economy to boys has ever yet rendered any demonstrable service either to the cause of economic science or of legislation. Laughlin has the impertinence to say that, though Adam Smith wrote his “Wealth of Nations” in 1776, political economy was an unknown science to the American people before 1860. Does Mr. Laughlin mean to assert that Franklin, the intimate personal friend of Adam Smith and suggestor of some of his views, or that Hamilton, Madison, Jefferson, Clay, or Webster, Chase, Fessenden, Garfield, or “Pig Iron” Kelly are any less familiar with Adam Smith’s crudities, blunders, wisdom, and garrulous mud than Laughlin himself is? Adam Smith fell so far below Alexander Hamilton, and in many respects below Madison and Chase, in economic insight that while every commentator on Smith points out errors of fact and of theory, stupidities of ignorance and obliquities of vision on every page of the old scotch dullard and mugwump, we challenge Laughlin to point out with equal ease the ignorances and blunders in Hamilton’s economic papers or financial reports.

Adam Smith had the merit, however, of only styling his work as an “Inquiry.” It is the men who come after him who arrogate for his utterly unscientific, undefined meandering, inconsequential and self-contradictory fog-banks the quality of a science. Still Smith is helpful matter to a sensible legislator, because the latter can generally see on the face of Smith’s statements wherein the good Scotch plodder was wool-gathering, and could rectify Smith’s errors out of his own more modern and ample reading. The notion however, that Cairnes, Mill, Jevons, McLeod, Say, Lavelaye, or any other boy teachers have ever been helpful in matters of practical legislation is not warranted by facts. Ricardo was listened to with great respect by practical legislators, but he was a practical businessman like Franklin, the Careys, and Greeley, who had never undertaken the egotism of a pedagogue. The only economists America has yet produced are those who have either never or hardly ever sat in a professor’s chair. There seems to be something in the air of a school room which, if the professor remains in it until it conquers him, unfits him absolutely to mingle as a man among men in the affairs of men. It causes a cranky adoption of the most impracticable and erratic notions on the most inadequate basis of observation and fact, and at the same time inflates with a lofty and unapproachable egotism which precludes its possessor from meeting the views of an opponent with anything but epithets, however superior his opponent may be to himself in learning, experience, or sagacity. A precipitancy that has no nerves left for investigation and patience at criticism marks his every act and word. Laughlin shows this demoralizing precipitancy, so fatal to level-headed usefulness, by speaking of the silver coin, whose equal dignity with gold coin in all legal respects is irrevocably fixed in the letter of the Constitution of the United States, “as the false silver dollar,” thereby implying, of course that from 1853 to 1870, when silver happened to be worth more than gold, we must have been under a “false gold dollar.”

Laughlin also calls those navigation laws which have never existed either among barbarous or medieval nations, but which began in England under Cromwell, “barbarous and medieval.” He might as well call steam or the art of printing “barbarous and medieval.” Sensible man weary of these impudent epithets flung at them by young and graceless upstarts who have still their spurs to win in everything that distinguishes useful men from snobs.

SourceThe Inter Ocean (Chicago, Illinois) April 15, 1885, p. 4.

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

Categories
Cambridge Columbia Cornell Curriculum Economics Programs Germany Harvard Oxford Teaching

United Kingdom and other countries. Methods of Economic Training. Cunningham Committee Report, 1894

 

The Cunningham Committee report on methods of economic training in the United Kingdom and other European and North American countries from 1894 provides a wonderful overview of the (Western) state of economics education.

Previous posts with information for U.S. economics courses taught in the 1890s can be found in the previous posts:

Chicago, Columbia, Harvard 1893-94

United States. Economics Courses in 23 universities, 1898-99

____________________________

Methods of Economic Training in this and other Countries.

Report of the Committee, consisting of Professor W. CUNNINGHAM (Chairman), Professor E. C. K. GONNER (Secretary), Professor F. Y. EDGEWORTH, Professor H. S. FOXWELL, Mr H. HIGGS, Mr. L. L. PRICE, and Professor J. SHIELD NICHOLSON.

APPENDIX

I.— On the Methods of Economic Training adopted in Foreign Countries, by E. C. K. Gonner, pp. 2 ff.

      1. Austria
      2. Hungary
      3. Germany
      4. Holland
      5. Belgium
      6. Italy
      7. Russia
      8. United States of America

II.— On Economic Studies in France, by H. Higgs, pp. 20 ff.

III.—On the Condition of Economic Studies in the United Kingdom, by E. C. K. Gonner, pp. 23 ff.

      1. England
      2. Scotland
      3. Ireland

IN furtherance of the above purpose three reports have been drawn up after due inquiry and laid before your Committee.

These reports, which are appended, bring out very clearly some features of difference between the position of such studies in this and in foreign countries, and, with other information before your Committee, seem to them to call for the following observations. Before proceeding to the consideration of certain particular points they would remark that the growth of economic studies, and in particular the development among them of the scientific study of the actual phenomena of life (both in the past and in the present), have important effects, so far as the organisation of the study and its suitability for professional curricula are concerned. It may be hoped, indeed, that when the empirical side is more adequately represented, the importance of the careful study of economics as a preparation for administrative life will be more fully recognised both by Government and the public.

(a) The Organisation of the Study of Economics. — While fully recognising the great energy with which individual teachers in this country have sought to develop the study of this subject, your Committee cannot but regard the condition of economic studies at the universities and colleges as unsatisfactory. As contrasted with Continental countries and also with the United States, the United Kingdom possesses no regular system. In one place economics is taught in one way, and in connection with some one subject, not infrequently by the teacher of that subject ; in another place in another way, and with another subject. Very often it is taught, or at any rate learnt, as little as possible. In most places this lack of organisation is due to the weariness of introducing elaborate schemes for the benefit of problematic students.. At Cambridge the pass examination which has recently been devised only attracts a few. With regard to the higher study of economics, Professor Marshall, among others, has written strongly of the comparatively small inducements offered by economics as compared with other subjects. He adds: “Those who do study it have generally a strong interest in it; from a pecuniary point of view they would generally find a better account in the study of something else.” Some considerations bearing on this point are offered below, but here it may be observed that the attempts to introduce more system into the teaching of economics, and to secure for it as a subject of study fuller public recognition, should, so far as possible, be made together.

In the opinion of your Committee economics should be introduced into the honour courses and examinations of the universities in such a manner as to allow students to engage in its thorough and systematic study without necessarily going outside the range of degree subjects.

(b) The Position of Economics with regard to Professional and other Curricula. — In most Continental countries economics occupies a place more or less prominent in the courses of training and in the examinations through which candidates for the legal profession or the civil service have to pass. In Austria, Hungary, and the three southern States of Germany this connection is very real, and the nature of the study involved very thorough. The same cannot be said with regard to the northern States of the latter empire, where the importance attached to this subject is so slight as to make its inclusion almost nominal. To some extent or in some form it is regarded as a subject obligatory on those preparing for those callings, or, to speak more accurately, for the legal calling and for certain branches of the civil service in Italy, Spain, Sweden, Norway, Denmark, and Switzerland. In Holland and Belgium, while a certain general knowledge only is required for a few posts or branches of the civil service, a very thorough study is incumbent on those qualifying for the higher branch of the legal profession. In both France and Russia it is an integral and necessary portion of the legal curriculum.

The two studies are cognate, and according to the view of your Committee not only would the institution of an examination in economics at some stage of legal degrees and qualifications be advantageous professionally, but the work of those who had enjoyed a legal training would react favourably on the advance of the science. In addition, economics should receive a much more important place in the Civil Service Examinations.

_______________________

APPENDIX I.
On the Methods of Economic Training
adopted in Foreign Countries
.
By E. C. K. Gonner.

The comparative study of the continental and other foreign systems of Economic Education brings out in clear relief certain features of either difference or coincidence which relate respectively to the impulses or circumstances giving this particular study its importance, to the method of study, and, lastly, to its organisation and the degree of success attained in the various countries.

(1) Putting on one side the purely scientific impulse to learn for learning’s sake, which can, after all, affect comparatively few, the inducement to a large or considerable number of students to interest themselves in any particular study must consist in its recognition, either positive or tacit, as a necessary preliminary to some professions or to certain positions. This may, as has been suggested, be either direct and positive, or indirect and tacit; direct and positive, that is, in the case of economics when in either one or more branches they are made part of the examinations admitting to the legal profession and the higher civil service; indirect and tacit when public opinion demands economic knowledge as necessary in those holding prominent positions as citizens or anxious to direct and control their fellows, either by the pen as journalists, or by act or word as statesmen or politicians. The importance of both these motives is, of course, largely increased when they exist in close connection with the purely scientific impulse. By itself this is not sufficient. The exclusion of one study, as economics, from professional or technical curricula, unless counteracted by the existence of a very powerful popular sentiment in its favour, practically removes it from the reach of students who have to make themselves ready to earn their living. Of the two influences, described above, the former, or the actual and positive recognition is given, in some shape or other, in Austria and Hungary, the southern states of the German empire, France, Belgium, Italy, Spain, Switzerland, Sweden, Norway, Denmark, Russia, and Holland. In America, and to some extent in Canada, popular sentiment and interest supply the needful impetus by making economics a tacit requisite for those exercising particular callings. In both Germany and Austria there are signs of the growth of economics in popular appreciation. In Austria, indeed, the circumstances are peculiarly fortunate. Economic instruction is recognised as a matter of serious importance, while, on the other hand, economic knowledge is one of the subjects of the State examinations for the legal and administrative service. In addition, its careful and scientific study is pursued by a fair number of advanced students. In this way Austria occupies a central position among the various nations which range themselves with America at one extreme, where there is no positive or direct obligation in favour of economic study, and at the other extreme, the Scandinavian and lesser Latin countries where all recognition that exists is positive, but where this positive recognition is largely nominal.

It has been urged that the ill-success of economic studies in these latter countries is largely an argument against their inclusion in obligatory curricula—a proposition which probably those who make it would hardly apply to the cases of other subjects. But from the evidence furnished by the countries before us this ill-success can be traced to other causes. It is due, firstly, to differences in the methods of study, and, secondly, to the differences in the thing made obligatory. In South Germany, Austria, and Hungary, economics is obligatory on certain classes of students, and the study of economics is making rapid and satisfactory progress, but then in South Germany, Austria, and Hungary, the method of study is one which commends itself to advanced students and educational critics, and the knowledge required in the examinations is thorough. In the lesser Latin countries, as Spain and Italy, the knowledge which the candidate is expected to show is elementary in itself, largely confined to elementary theory, and a marked unreality is imparted to the whole study, an unreality recognised alike by examiners, teachers, and students. On the other hand, the advantages which economics may receive from its public and positive recognition are borne witness to by those best acquainted with the condition of the study in Germany, where the usages of the north and south differ. Broadly speaking they consist in the removal of economics from the category of unnecessary to the category of necessary acquirements. Many of those who begin the study from compulsion continue it from choice. In America, indeed, the strength of popular sentiment and the ever present interest of politics together with the action of the universities, where nearly all studies, and not economics alone, are put on a voluntary footing, give it an adequate position; but failing the combination of conditions such as these, its absence, both from all professional curricula and from the earlier stages of education, cannot but be regarded as disastrous and unjust.

(2) The method of economic studies is of a certain importance with regard to the subject last discussed. Though it would be unfair to estimate the work, or to judge of the scope of schools of economic teaching from their extreme tendencies, these afford not unsatisfactory means of distinction. Speaking broadly, they may be placed in two groups—those in which the dominant influence is empirical; those in which it is theoretical or abstract. Very few economists, whether teachers or writers, are wholly empirical or wholly theoretical. Some bias, however, they nearly all have, and it is by that they may be ranked for the present purpose. Nor must it be supposed that the distinctions drawn in one country, with regard to these opposing lines of study, at all correspond with those existing in another. In Germany, for instance, the attitude of Professor Wagner is attacked by the members of the historical school— one branch of the empirical—but judged by the standards of France and England he would rank in the main as an empiricist. The theorists of Germany and Austria do little more than assert that theoretical study has its due place and is a necessary part of the equipment of an economist.

When discussing the assertion that compulsory economics, however enforced, tended to issue in perfunctory attendances and poor results so far as interest was concerned, it was urged that these consequences depended largely on the method and nature of study. This is remarkably llustrated by the fact that the countries where such evils are regretted or anticipated are those where the study of economics is mainly theoretic, or where economics is distinctly and openly subordinated to other subjects. Lessons of this latter kind are never thrown away upon students. But with regard to the former, it is not from the southern states of the German empire, or from Austria, that we hear these complaints. There economic study is obligatory, and the economic study involved is two thirds of it empirical in character. In the Latin countries the state of things is very different. The basis of study is, if I may say so, text-book theory, and the position of economics, so far as progress is concerned, is unsatisfactory in the extreme. This has been particularly dealt with in the paragraphs relating to Italy.

In two of the great nations the mode of study practised is largely empirical. In Germany, despite the contrast between different leaders of thought, the importance of this method is well illustrated by the position which the study of Practical or Applied Economics invariably occupies. In America, the study of economic history and of modern economic fact grows into greater prominence year by year.

(3) Turning to the question of success, the question arises at once as to the tests whereby such may be measured. Of these, many, varying from popularity to eclecticism, have been suggested, but possibly the one most suitable is the ability of a system to produce a high general level amongst a good number of students. Something more is required of a system than that it should bring together large audiences for elementary courses, while as for the production of a few very good students, a few will always press to the front through all difficulties, despite systems good or bad, or in the absence of any system at all. But a system that is to be deemed good must place within the reach of all industrious and apt students the means of a good general economic training, while stimulating him to prosecute original and independent work. Further, it should provide these advantages regularly and not intermittently. The way in which these two needs are met in practice can be stated briefly. General training is provided by a systematic series of courses which should include at least Theory of Economics, Applied Economics, and Finance. The seminar, or classes organised like the seminar, offer opportunities for guiding a student into the ways of original work.

Seminar instruction is given regularly in Germany, Austria, Hungary, in the better equipped universities of America, Switzerland, and to some extent in both Sweden and Holland. In Russia the professors may and sometimes do organise seminars or discussion classes. In Belgium classes are held in connection with some of the courses.

With regard to the systems of providing for a good ground knowledge of the leading branches of Economics, classification is rendered difficult by the different methods adopted in the various countries. Some are more, some less thorough. Among the former we may put without hesitation the countries already singled out for notice—Germany, America, Austria, and Hungary.

From the accounts given in detail below it is clear that in these countries the study of economics is advancing. The training is systematic. A fair proportion of students pass from the more general into the more special or advanced courses. The production of work, not necessarily of the first order, for with that we are not dealing, but of the second, or third, or fourth order, is great and still increases.

AUSTRIA.

The position of Economics in Austria is largely determined by its relation to legal studies, by the place, that is, which its various branches hold in the examinations qualifying for the legal profession and for the juridical and higher administrative services. According to the system till recently in force, but now somewhat modified, candidates intending to enter these had to attend certain courses at the universities, and to pass certain examinations varying according to the positions sought. Those entering the legal profession had to pass the first State examination in addition to the three political rigorosa of the university, success in which latter conferred the degree of Doctor. Other candidates only needed to pass the three State examinations. These latter were as follows:— The first (Rechtshistorische Staatsprüfung) was held at the end of the second year of study, and comprised the following subjects: Roman Law, Canon Law, and German Law in its historical aspect. The second (Judizielle Staatsprüfung) was held towards the end of the eighth semester, in the following subjects: Austrian Law, civil, commercial, and penal; Austrian civil and criminal Procedure. At the end of the four years came the third and final examination (Staatswissenschaftliche Staatsprüfung), which alone is of importance so far as the legal recognition of Economics is concerned. The subjects examined in were Austrian Law, International Law, Economics (including Economics, the Science of Administration, Finance and Statistics). The political rigorosa, while they correspond in outline to the State examinations, have some few points of difference both with regard to method and subjects. They, too, are three in number, and may be described as the Austrian rigorosum, corresponding to the second State examination, the Romanist, corresponding to the first State, and the Staatswissenschaftlich, which closely resembles the third State examination, though not including Statistics or Administration. There is no regulation as to the order in which they are to be passed, but that indicated above is customary. Their greater severity may be judged from both the additional length of preparation prescribed and the manner in which they are conducted. The earliest date at which a candidate may pass his first rigorosum is at the end of the fourth in place of the second year. The second and third may follow at respective intervals of two months. The Staatsprüfung is an examination taken by groups of four students, each group being under examination for two hours; but in the rigorosa each candidate is under examination for two hours, spending half-an-hour with each examiner. Both State and university examina tions are oral, and the latter are said to impose a severe strain on both examiner and candidate. In the latter the examiners are the university professors, while in the State examinations these are variously composed of professors, functionaries of the State, and barristers of good standing.

By the law of April 28, 1893, which came into effect in October, the system sketched above underwent certain alterations. A complete separation will be effected between the university examinations or rigorosa, and those qualifying for the legal profession and State services, the former no longer serving as a possible substitute for the second and third of the latter. In addition, some slight change has been introduced into the curriculum and examinations imposed upon students designing to enter these. They will have to attend courses and to be examined in— (a) The Science of Administration (Verwaltungslehre), and with special reference to Austrian Law; (b) Economics, theoretical and practical; (c) Public Finance, and especially Austrian Finance. In addition they must attend lectures (without subsequent examination) on Comparative and Austrian Statistics. These alterations will leave the number of students in the more elementary subjects unaffected, and so far from operating in discouragement of economic and political studies, will, it is hoped, lead to their more thorough prosecution, by raising the degree to a more scholarly position.

The marked recognition of Economics by the State, and the large number of students whose prospects are involved in its successful study, naturally affect the teaching organisation provided by the universities and other bodies.

This is fairly uniform throughout Austria, as apart from Hungary, though the extent to which the subject is pursued, and the variety of its forms, depend mainly on the enthusiasm of particular teachers and the greater opportunities offered by particular universities or other institutions. At the universities the ground plan of work may be described as identical, Economics being taught in the faculty of law. There are certain courses which must be delivered, and at which attendance is obligatory for certain classes of students. These are on National Economy, Finance, Statistics, and the Science of Administration (Verwaltungslehre), which includes instruction in practical economics, public health, army, matters of policy, justice, &c. But in addition to these the teachers, whether professors or privat-docents may, and often do, deliver special courses dealing with more particular subjects. These are not necessarily or usually the same from year to year; and may be described as instruction of an unusually high order, inasmuch as each teacher is accustomed to select for treatment such branch of science in which his own activities and studies lie. The large2 voluntary attendance at such lectures is a testimony to the regard in which economic studies are held among a large body of students.

1Vienna—Prag (German), Prag (Bohemian), Graz, Innsbruck, Krakau (Polish), Lemburg (Polish).
2At Vienna the attendants at special courses varies from 50 to 100.

Seminar instruction is customary, as in Germany. At Vienna there are two seminars, one for Economics, one for Statistics and Political Science (Staatswissenschaft), while in addition there is an Institute of Political Science, attached to all of which are libraries and places for the members to carry on their work in close contact with their professor or his deputy. The members consist in part of young doctors of the university who have recently graduated, in part of those preparing for the examinations of the university, and include, as a rule, several foreigners who have come to Vienna to pursue their studies. The arrangements at the other universities are similar, though in some they lack the completeness displayed at Vienna.

Students who, having passed their examinations with credit, or other wise performed their work to the satisfaction of their teachers, wish to carry on their studies in other countries are eligible for Reisestipendia (travelling scholarships). These are rewarded to encourage study in foreign universities, or to enable their holders to carry out investigations which necessitate a journey. Unfortunately they are but few in number, and as they are open to students of all faculties, few economists can hope to obtain them. Among the more recent holders in Vienna are Professors Böhm-Bawerk, Robert Meyer, Von Phillipovich, and Dr. Stephen Bauer, the two latter of whom published reports on matters studied abroad.

In this way a method of economic instruction has been developed in the Austrian universities which not only provides a large number with a carefully systematised series of courses, but offers to those disposed to more thorough or more special study ample opportunity. The more eager and energetic pass through the courses compulsory for the law degree, in themselves a fitting preliminary to more detailed work, to attendance at the special courses and membership of the seminar; from these they may, if fortunate, advance into the position of travelling or research scholars of their university. Though most of the students at the Economic Lectures are jurists, the attendance frequently includes members qualifying in other faculties, or even more general ‘hearers.’ At Krakau, students of the philosophical faculty form some 20 to 25 per cent of the total. All these students are entirely free so far as their choice of Economic courses is concerned. It is not possible to give the exact numbers of the students to be described respectively as elementary and advanced. The particulars, however, furnished by the various universities permit a rough general estimate. Not fewer than one thousand students undergo the more general courses, thus attaining to a fair systematic acquaintance with the main branches of economic study, while out of that number more than two hundred take special courses and enter the various seminars. This account rather under than over estimates the extent to which economic studies extend. As to the character of the advanced work there is no doubt. As has been pointed out, it is of a high order. But some question has been raised as to the value of the knowledge likely to be attained by the more general student. The variety of subjects required in the examinations either of the university (political rigorosa) or of the State, and the number of courses obligatory on the students, do not allow of an early specialisation.1 But a glance at the nature of the examination, and at the syllabus of the various courses, forbids the inference that the instruction given is of a purely rudimentary nature.

1This, as Professor von Milewski contends, interferes with the scientific character of the various studies required for the degree. As each has to take up several subjects, and to pass examinations in these, he cannot give very special attention to Economics or any other branch of social science in which he may happen to be interested.

Much, it is true, depends upon the personal enthusiasm and force of the teacher, for, despite the obligation of attendance, a dull and unininteresting lecture will rarely obtain the audiences registered to him, many students preferring to buy copies of the course hectographed from the notes of their predecessors in the lecture room, and only troubling themselves to appear at the beginning and end of the semester.

In the University of Krakau, Economics are obligatory, both in study and examination, for the students of agriculture who attend special lectures, apart, that is, from the law students. Instruction in Economics (Political Economy, Finance, and Statistics) is given also at all the Technical High Schools (Technischen Hochschulen) in Austria,1 while attendance at the courses (though without examination) is obligatory at the schools of agriculture, where similar conditions prevail. At the Commercial Academies (Handelsakademien of Vienna and Prague) a course of lectures is given with particular reference to the Economic branches which throw most light on commercial facts and features, and on the relations existing between the various classes engaged in industry and trade. To obtain the diploma of these institutions the lectures are followed by an examination. Courses are provided for the consular service at the Oriental Akademie in Vienna, and for the service of the administration of the army.2 There is also a Fortbildungschule for officials of the railway, where political economy is taught and examined in. Members of these courses are considered specially fitted for the attainment of the higher posts in their service.

1Of these there are six:-Vienna, Brünn, Graz, Prag (German), Prag (Bohemian), Lemburg (Polish). After examination diplomas are granted, which are necessary for those becoming teachers in agricultural schools, and are, it is said, a strong recommendation in the eyes of landlords when engaging their officials, agents, &c.
2An Intendanz-Class for officers willing to serve as Intendanten for the provision of the army.

A knowledge of Economics, duly and doubly certified by registered lecture courses and by examination, is a necessary preliminary to certain careers. Attendance at the university lectures and the attainment of the juridical degree are the qualification for the higher branches of the legal profession (advocate, &c.), and like attendance and degree, or, in the place of the latter, the diploma of public service, are required for all branches of the legal profession and for the whole civil service. Entrance into the consular and diplomatic services may also be obtained through the courses of the Oriental Academy. Further, as has been pointed out above, a certain acquaintance, or supposed acquaintance, with economic studies is considered necessary in some other vocations.

At the present time very considerable importance is attached to economic studies in Austria. Their scientific character is a general matter of care, and an extension of the sphere in which they are obligatory, or at least advisable on the part of those who seek success in their particular calling or profession, is earnestly advocated by some. In the first direction the reforms in the juridical studies at the universities will operate. As Dr. Mataja writes:— ‘Economics will have greater and not less weight.’ On the other hand, and in the other direction, different suggestions have been made. Some advocate the extension of compulsory study to engineers who will become officials and directors in factories, to the employés of the fiscal service, to those attending the more elementary technical schools. Others would like to see schools of political and social science (including Economics) founded in the great industrial centres. Whether these suggestions be carried out or not, they serve to illustrate the feeling which exists, at least on the part of some, with regard to the value of Economics both as a special and as a branch of general study.

HUNGARY.

Economics holds a position somewhat similar to that in Austria. It is obligatory on all students in the faculty of law and political science at the two universities,1 and in the Rechtsakademien (legal faculties, as at Kassa), who must take courses in Economics and Finance before the end of their second year, when they have to pass an examination, among the subjects of which these are included. After the second year their studies bifurcate, according to the degree which they seek (Dr. Juris, or Dr. Cameralium). In order to obtain the former, they must pass an examination in financial law. But if they wish to take the latter degree (Dr. Cameralium), they must pass two rigorosa, among the subjects of which are Economics (theoretical and practical), Finance, Finance Law, and Statistics. The knowledge required in this case is exceedingly thorough, and the degree is of high value in the public service. There are also state examinations which serve as qualifications, though to a lesser extent, for the legal and administrative services. Though easier, they correspond closely with the above. In the universities the system of economic study in its general features resembles that in vogue in Austria, the chief courses being those on Economics and Finance; but both at Budapest and Klausenburg, as, for instance, at Strassburg to take a parallel, these studies belong not to a sole legal faculty, but to a legal and political faculty (Rechts- und Staatswissenschaftliche Fakultät). In addition to successful examinations the candidates have to present a thesis. The possession of the degree of Dr. Cameralium implies a very sound economic training, and it was till lately the chief means of entering the higher civil service both of the kingdom and of the states. Considerable attention is paid to Economics, the seminars being well frequented, and the interest and activity of students great. This is particularly true of Budapest, where the lectures are varied and delivered by a numerous and able staff.

1Budapest, Klausenburg (Kalorsvar).

GERMANY.

The differences in the history and regulations of the various states composing the German empire have led, not unnaturally, to considerable differences in the positions which economic studies occupy. On the one hand, they are affected by the diversity of usage existing as to their connection with the course of study required for the legal profession and the civil service. On the other hand, the particular faculty in which they are included has been determined by reasons possessing little but historical validity.

  1. Prussia.—At the Prussian universities Economics belongs to the faculty of philosophy, and, speaking generally, to that section of this faculty known as the Sciences of the State. A student takes his degree in Economics entirely apart from law, the position of which as a separate faculty unfortunately precludes a student who presents a thesis in one of these two subjects from selecting the other as one of the two collateral subjects which he is bound by regulation to offer himself for examination in. Further, it must be noticed that the degree of doctor in this country, and, indeed, in Germany generally, is not a qualification, as was till recently the case in Austria and still is in certain of the Latin countries. Some assistance it may be in a judicial career, but even then the degree of Doctor Juris has naturally much more value than that of Doctor of Philosophy in the State Sciences.

Nor does Economics occupy an important place in the State examinations which qualify for the legal and administrative services. To enter these a candidate must pass examinations, the first of which is common to both services (referendar Examen). This consists of two parts, the first written and dealing with law, the second oral, which includes, among other matters, the elements of Economics. So subordinate is this subject that, in the opinion of many critics, it hardly counts in the decision as to the eligibility of candidates. The course of examination then bifurcates, some taking that for Justiz-Assessor, others for that of Regierungs Assessor, for neither of which is Economics required. At the latter of these (Reg. Assessor) some knowledge of Economics in its applied branches is said to be highly desirable, but inasmuch as the examination takes place some five years after the conclusion of the university course, the demands it makes are chiefly met by knowledge supplied from books. With regard to the constitution of the examining boards it should be noticed that, even at the referendar Examen, it is not in accordance with common practice to include professors of Economics.

  1. Saxony. —The system recently adopted in Saxony is, in so far as the subordination of Economics is concerned, nearly identical with that of Prussia. In one point it is more favourable to the interests of this subject, the professoriate being invariably represented on the board of examiners.
  2. Reichsland.—In the Reichsland Economics is of no more importance than it is in Prussia.
  3. Saxe Weimar.—In Saxe Weimar, too, it is of but nominal importance in the juridical examinations. There, too, the board of examiners is constituted irrespective of economic requirements, and, as has been caustically said, it is rare to find the examiners academically qualified in the subjects in which they are supposed to examine. The position, in the main, is very similar to that prevailing in Prussia.
  4. Bavaria.— In the chief southern and south-western states Economics holds a more important position in the legal and civil service curricula. Thus, in Bavaria, all students of law, administration, and forest (Landwirth) have to pass an examination in which it forms one of the subjects. The time of the examination is at the conclusion of the four years devoted to legal or other studies respectively, and the presence of the Professor of National Economy among the professorial examiners necessitates due attendance at lectures and thorough study. The second examination for the civil service is technical in character, and only requires economic knowledge in its connection with practical developments and issues.
  5. rtemburg.—In Würtemburg, though Economics forms no part of the strictly legal examinations, in the other State examinations for administrative students it is of very great importance. For these there are two examinations, the first of which, more general in character than the other, takes place at Tübingen, and involves a very considerable acquaintance with Economics.
  6. Baden.—Every legal student, as well as every candidate seeking entrance into the higher employments in the State departments of revenue and administration, must, in his time, attend lectures on, and pass examinations in, the economic and financial sciences.

The varying positions which Economics holds in the examinations qualifying for State and legal employment in the different German states affect a large number of university students who have to pass these examinations, but do not of necessity take a degree. To them the connection of Economics with one faculty or the other in the university cannot be a matter of much importance, but with others the case is different. Students reading for the degree are, as has been already said, restricted now on one side, now on another, as to their choice of collateral subjects for examination. Sometimes they can offer Economics in connection with law, sometimes they cannot. In addition, the influence which kindred studies taught in one faculty may bring to bear on the methods of instruction may, in some instances, prove of not inconsiderable importance even in the case of the students studying for the doctorate. Professor Brentano, however, whose personal experience extends from Leipzig to Strassburg, from Vienna to Breslau and Munich, contends that the varieties of combination matter less than might seem probable. The facultative position of Economics varies considerably. In Prussia and Saxony they find place among the many heterogeneous subjects grouped together in the faculty of philosophy, though in certain places, as at Berlin, they fall into a distinct subdivision. At Berlin they belong to the Staats- Cameral-und Gewerbewissenschaften. At Strassburg (Reichsland) they combine with law to form a Rechts- und Staatswissenschaftliche Facultät. At Tübingen (Würtemburg) a Staatswissenschaftliche Facultät exists independent of the law, a practice identical with that current at Munich (Bavaria). At some universities, as for instance at Jena, economic lectures are largely attended by the students of Landwirthschaft.

A comparison of the studies preliminary to the doctorate in Germany with those in Austria reveals two chief points of difference. At German universities there is little prescription of the course of study, or, indeed, of the methods to be adopted by the student, who within certain wide limits has a perfectly free choice of subjects. But this comparative freedom from restraint is closely connected with the great importance attached to the thesis, a custom which, its critics urge, leads to premature specialisation. In both countries candidates for the civil and legal services are much more closely restricted to definite courses.

In their practical working the systems of the different universities bear a close resemblance, at any rate in their earlier stages. There are three main courses, delivered annually, on pure Economics, Applied Economics, and Finance, all of which, even the first, involve a careful study of economic fact as distinct from hypothesised theory. The extent to which the method adopted in the first course is empirical depends, of course, on the position of the teacher as an adherent of one or other of the opposing schools of economic thought; but, speaking generally, even the least empirical among them would be deemed empirical by those accustomed to English methods. But, in addition to these three annual courses, lectures are delivered on special subjects. At Freiburg (in Baden), in the summer semester of 1891, these were:

    • History of National Economy and Socialism.
    • Agrarian and Industrial Policy, including the Labour Question.
    • History of Statistics.

The list of special lectures at Berlin, to take the most completely equipped of the universities, shows more clearly the wide range of subjects dealt with under the term Economics. In the summer term, 1892, besides the ordinary annual courses, there were courses of lectures on the following subjects:

    • Theory of Statistics.
    • History of Statistics.
    • Statistics of the German Empire.
    • The Economic and Social History of Germany from the end of the Middle Ages to the Peace of Westphalia.
    • History and Modes of Industrial Undertakings.
    • Money and Banking.
    • Early Commercial and Colonial Policy (till 1800).
    • Industrial and Commercial Policy.
    • The Social Question.
    • Forms of Public Credit.

In addition to lectures, necessarily more or less formal, opportunities are afforded for systematic instruction in classes and in the seminar. The latter institution varies considerably, according to the character of the students frequenting particular universities, for its efficiency, and accord ing to the position of the professor undertaking it, for the direction of its studies. Each teacher collects around himself a group of students who follow his method, adopt his attitude, and frequently devote themselves to those branches of economic research which have occupied his attention. Thus, at Strassburg, Professor Knapp’s seminar deals chiefly with agrarian questions; at Berlin, Professor Wagner’s influence is seen in the predominance of finance and financial topics among the subjects discussed. At Munich, to pass to the question of organisation and method, the two professors join in holding a seminar in which “there are about twenty-four young men taking part. Each of them has to undertake some work: the younger ones get a book to read, and have to report on it; the more advanced have to treat a subject after reading several books on the subject; the most advanced have to make a work themselves, the professors aiding them in furnishing material and giving assistance.’ At some universities there are two seminars, at others one. It is a matter for regret that, with all these opportunities, a comparatively small number of students are ranked as advanced. The explanations offered are many, but probably a very adverse effect on the study is produced by the paucity of the positions to which a thorough economic study can serve as an introduction. Teaching posts are few, and the requirements in the State examinations for the legal and administrative services are, if not as in many cases nominal, strictly limited to an elementary knowledge.

In some of the technical schools, and in all the schools of commerce, instruction in some branch of economics forms part of the regular course, and, in these latter, an examination is held. In the former, however, the subjects thus taught are distinctly subordinated to the technical sciences which occupy the chief attention of the students, while in the schools of commerce only those branches receive adequate treatment which bear or appear likely to bear upon commerce in its practical aspects.

HOLLAND.

The connection between the universities and the legal profession is close in Holland, none but doctors of jurisprudence being qualified to practise as advocates. This is a circumstance which has a material effect upon the study of economics, inasmuch as this, in its more elementary branches, forms one of the obligatory subjects of the first examination for the degree. Thus, so far as this one profession is concerned, a certain knowledge of economics is necessitated.

In the higher administrative service no such knowledge is obligatory, but it is considered that officials who possess the degree of doctor of political science have better chances of promotion. For this degree a thorough study of economics is required. In certain other government services demand is made for acquaintance with certain branches of the subject. In the examinations for the consular service the ‘general principles of economics’ and the ‘elements of statistics,’ chiefly with regard to trade and shipping, form subjects of examination. A similar knowledge is required for the diplomatic service. In none of these cases, it should be noted, is attendance at specified courses compulsory. The subject forms part of the examination.

The requirements indicated above explain to some extent the position which economics occupies in the four Dutch universities. It is a necessary subject for two degrees—the doctorate in laws and the doctorate in political science. But the nature of the knowledge required differs greatly. In the former it is elementary, not going beyond the first principles of the theory, while in the latter case the examination necessitates a really careful and detailed study. In addition to the general course of lectures taken by all, candidates for this latter distinction usually attend two other courses, one in capita selecta (taxation, finance, socialism, &c.), and another in statistics. These courses, unlike those at German universities, extend throughout the academic year, i.e. from September to July. For advanced students discussion classes are held, where the students, after a previous study of a chosen subject, meet to discuss it among themselves and with the professor. Before proceeding to the degree of doctor a candidate has to write, and afterwards to defend, a dissertation on some branch of the general science which he has taken up. Thus, in the case of political science, the thesis may be on some economic question. Outside the universities the chief study of economics takes place in the intermediate schools, where, during the fourth and fifth years of the five years’ curriculum, it is taught for two hours weekly by a doctor of political science, or by another teacher duly qualified by a special examination. At the Polytechnic at Delft there is a chair of economics, but neither is attendance at the course obligatory, nor does it form one of the subjects of examination.

BELGIUM.

By the law of 1890, which provides the regulation for higher instruction, political economy is made obligatory for the attainment of the degree of doctor of laws, a distinction proving a professional qualification, and for the grade of engineer, the course for the former involving some forty-five lectures, that for the latter some fifteen. In both cases the subject is taken in the earlier years of study. Students training for these professions would appear to form the great bulk of those attending economic lectures at the universities. In neither case can the course be said to furnish more than elementary instruction.

The universities have made provision outside these State requirements for more advanced students. The candidates for the degree of doctor of political science have to show a more thorough acquaintance with economic subjects. At the University of Ghent the course which is provided for them is considerably longer; still more stringent regulations prevail at the University of Louvain, for the degree of  ‘docteur en sciences politiques et sociales.’ The important regulations are as follows :—

ART. 5.

Pour être admis à l’épreuve du doctorat il faut:

    1. Avoir acquis depuis une année au moins le grade de docteur en droit.
    2. Avoir pris une inscription générale aux cours du doctorat en sciences politiques et sociales et avoir suivi les cours sur lesquels porte l’épreuve.
    3. Présenter, sous l’approbation du président de l’École, un travail imprimé sur un sujet rentrant dans le cadre du doctorat.

ART. 7.

L’épreuve comprend un examen oral d’une heure et demie. Cet examen porte:—

    1. Sur six branches portées comme principales au programme de l’École.
    2. Sur deux branches au moins choisies parmi celles qui sont portées comme branches libres au programme de l’École ou—avec l’autorisation du président de l’École—parmi celles qui sont portées au programme de l’université.
    3. Sur le travail présenté par le récipiendaire.

The list of lectures for the two years’ curriculum, 1892-3, 1893-4, is as follows :-

For the first year—Histoire parlementaire de la Belgique depuis 1830, la législation ouvrière comparée ; le droit public comparé; de la neutralité de la Belgique et de la Suisse; du régime légal des sociétés commerciales en droit comparé.

For the second year—Histoire diplomatique de l’Europe depuis le Congrès de Vienne; l’Evolution économique au XIXe siècle; les institutions de la France et de l’Allemagne; lé régime colonial et la législation du Congo; les associations en droit comparé.

Seminar or class instruction is given at the universities, though the particular form it takes varies with the other organisation provided, and the character of the students. At the University of Ghent a class supplementary to the lectures is formed, where discussion takes place; at Louvain Professor Brants directs a ‘cours pratique,’1 the members of which (some dozen in number) write treatises, discuss economic movements, and make excursions to centres presenting features of economic interest.

1Conférence d’Économie Sociale. Rapport sur ses travaux, 1891-92. Louvain.

ITALY.

Outside the universities there are in Italy but few institutions which give much instruction in economics. Though courses are delivered at the superior schools of commerce, as, for instance, at Genoa, Venice, and Bari, and the Polytechnic School of Milan, which compare in their nature with those existing at similar places in Austria and Germany, the main aim of such schools, and the limited extent to which they are frequented, prevent them from obtaining any control over the development of economic teaching in the country. It is, then, to the universities that we must look for information as to the methods chiefly employed. At them economics is studied as a subsidiary subject to law, being taken by students in their second year. There are three courses at which attendance, or, to speak more accurately, inscription is obligatory on legal students. In the case of the three obligatory courses the attendance is fairly regular, owing, it is said, to the combined effect of the latitude allowed in the teaching of the subject and the position of the professor as examiner. Without passing the economic examinations students cannot attain to legal degrees. The courses are those in Economic Theory and Administration, Finance, and Statistics. According to the condition of the university these are taught by the same or different teachers, in most cases by the professors who are appointed and paid by the State. In addition to these courses others are given at the option of the teachers, either professors or docents. The attendance at these is not good, though in many cases a large number of students enter themselves as a mark of courtesy towards the lecturer. It costs them nothing, as they pay a compound fee, and it benefits him considerably if a docent, as he receives from the State a payment proportionate to the number of students registered for his courses. In addition to the examination, a candidate for the legal degrees presents a thesis which may, and not infrequently does, deal with some economic subject.1 The study of economics is, moreover, obligatory on students seeking the higher official careers. Many complaints are made as to the position occupied by economic studies in Italy. Their connection with law creates no doubt a certain and a large audience in the lecture room; but, as one Italian professor points out, students do not remain there long enough to acquire anything like a sufficient knowledge of the subject. They come from the schools wholly unprepared, and they leave the university without having undergone a training thorough enough to counterbalance the loose economic notions gathered from their more diligent study of the newspapers. The study of economic facts does not seem to have had sufficient place in the universities of Italy. Attempts are now being made to remedy this defect by the formation of discussion societies among the students of economics, and the encouragement of research into statistical and similar questions.

1Professor Tullio Martello calculates that at the University of Bologna some 15 per cent of those graduating in law present a thesis dealing with economics.

At the minor technical schools lectures are delivered on elementary economics, finance, and statistics.

RUSSIA.

The conditions under which Economics is taught in Russia bear a superficial resemblance to those prevalent in the Latin countries, where it is annexed to the study of law, and pursued very much as a subject of secondary importance. Here, too, it forms part of the regular training through which a jurist must pass in his four years’ curriculum. There are three economic courses which he must attend, and in the subject-matter of which he must display sufficient knowledge in the May State examinations. These are on Economic Theory, Statistics, &c., and Finance. In addition to formal lectures, the professors in charge of the subject may, and sometimes do, organise classes, discussion societies, or seminars, though attendance at these is not obligatory.

The provision for further and more detailed study is considerable. A student who has finished his law studies with a diploma of the first degree can remain in the university, if he wishes, for more special research in one or other subject (Roman law, political economy, private law, financial law, &c.), under the supervision of the special professor or professors. Such a student is examined, and, if successful, obtains the title of magistrandus of the subject in question. Then he must present a dissertation and defend it, after which he obtains the degree of magister. After a second dissertation and disputation he attains the higher degree of doctor of his special subject.

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA.

The conditions under which the study of Economics is carried on in the United States of America are widely different from those which prevail in the countries of continental Europe. On the one hand, there is no inducement held out to students by its inclusion among the subjects of state or professional examinations. On the other, there is evidence in the importance which such subjects have assumed at the universities and colleges of a strong public sentiment in favour of their careful study far exceeding that in existence either in these countries or in the United Kingdom. In one respect the regulations of the colleges have had an important effect, independent of the action which they have taken in respect of the strong public demand. Owing to the freedom of the students in most of these institutions from prescribed and compulsory courses of study in most stages of their career, Economics has escaped being relegated, as, for instance, in England, to the position of a subject outside the usual curriculum, and optional only in some one or, perhaps, two stages. Where such prescription does exist it is not deemed a subject necessarily unfit to form part of a compulsory general course. Its inclusion, to some extent, would probably be demanded by the strong public opinion which has grown up during the past twenty years.

The causes of the popularity of Economics are stated with fair unanimity by various writers, though their respective importance is very differently estimated. In the first place, the very novelty of economic studies is itself in favour of their ardent prosecution. Till comparatively recently, it has been said till between 1870 and 1880, they were disregarded because unknown. Now they are seized, studied, and followed because they offer, or seem to offer, an explanation of the vast and complex economic condition which is in process of rapid evolution in this country at once so great and so new. So, too, in England some half century back or more the theories of the economists of that time were received by large numbers as an intellectual gospel. But in the next place the circumstances attending this ‘novelty’ of study have considerable consequences. That the study of Economics is a novel study is important, but it is of equal importance that it is novel at the present time and under present conditions. The American economists have not to shake off the half-uttered, half-silent opprobrium attached to their subject through the action of the more numerous though less conspicuous of their predecessors in their rigid adherence to incomplete or ill-founded theories. They are fortunate in entering upon their teaching at a time when the need of inductive inquiry and training is more fully recognised. This gives a more systematic aspect to the economic instruction demanded from them than was the case in England. In the third place, the campaign in favour of civil service and tariff reform has drawn a great deal of attention to those departments which deal with finance and the more prominent aspects of political life. Lastly, it is urged that the political eagerness which so largely affects the younger generation of Americans combines with the foregoing to crowd the economic lecture rooms with anxious and willing students. Economics is needed by politicians, and ‘we are all politicians,’ writes one professor; it is needed by journalists both because they are keen for political knowledge themselves and because they write for politicians.

The same causes which stimulate economic students have often led to its connection with political science, with history, and in some instances with general sociology.

Returns from several of the universities show the large number of students who attend economic lectures, and the comparatively large number who pass into advanced courses. The universities differ so much among themselves that no common standard of teaching exists. In some the elementary courses are very elementary, in others more thorough than might be concluded from the name. Thus at Harvard these include a study of Mill’s ‘Principles of Political Economy,’ lectures on general theory, or on what is termed descriptive economics, including a survey of financial legislation, while in addition a course is provided on the Economic History of England and America since the Seven Years’ War. In some cases a great part of the junior work consists in the use of text-books, and proceeds rather by class instruction and interrogation than by lecture. Turning to the consideration of the courses organised for the more advanced students, it is highly satisfactory to note the very considerable proportion which these form of the total number engaged in economic study. According to the information collected from various quarters, at Harvard they amount to some 38 per cent; at Columbia College to 41 per cent; at Cornell to 26 per cent. At some others they do not present so favourable an appearance, though at Michigan I am informed that the twenty returned as ‘advanced’ consists entirely of very advanced students, all the others being included under the heading of elementary. No doubt students described as advanced at one institution may not be so regarded at others, for, as has been already suggested, these vary very greatly as regards both their courses and the attainments of their students. With regard to the former, those provided at some of the better known and more highly developed and equipped universities afford a description of the nature of the training offered in the United States. At Harvard the advanced courses for the year 1892–93 are as follows:—

Full courses

    • Economy Theory—Examination of Selections from leading writers.
    • The Principles of Sociology—Development of the Modern State and its Social Functions.
    • The Social and Economic Condition of Working Men in the United States and in other Countries.
    • The Economic History of Europe and America, to 1763.

Half-courses

    • History of Tariff Legislation in the United States.
    • Railway Transportation.
    • The Theory and Methods of Taxation.
    • History of Economic Theory down to Adam Smith.
    • History of Financial Legislation in the United States.

At Columbia College the courses are as follows:—

    • Elements of Political Economy.
    • Historical and Practical Economics.
    • History of Economic Theories.
    • Science of Finance.
    • Science of Statistics.
    • Railway Problems.
    • Financial History of the United States.
    • Tariff and Industrial History of the United States.
    • Communism and Socialism.
    • Taxation and Distribution.
    • Sociology.

At Cornell the lectures which succeed the purely elementary ones are not quite so full, but consist of courses on—

    • Economic Reforms.
    • Finance.
    • Economic Legislation.
    • Statistics.
    • Economic History.
    • Financial History of the United States.

There are few universities which do not offer some courses beyond these on elementary theory and history. As a rule, finance and some other branch of applied economics are added. Where graduate schools have been established, as, for instance, at Harvard and at Michigan, the study proceeds very much on the lines indicated above, so far as the former is concerned. At Michigan, the advanced courses are distinguished into intermediate and graduate. Intermediate courses treat of the following:—The Transportation Problem. Principles of the Science of Finance. Theory of Statistics. History and Principles of Currency and Banking. History of the Tariff in the United States. History and Theory of Land Tenure and Agrarian Movements. Industrial and Commercial Development of the United States. History and Theory of Socialism and Communism. History of Political Economy. Graduate courses:–Critical Analysis of Economic Thought. Critical Examination of the Labour Problem and the Monopoly Problem.

Most universities have, in addition, established seminars, where study proceeds on the lines with which continental students are familiar. Individual members, in most instances graduates, and all advanced students, undertake particular subjects on which they prepare reports or treatises to be read and discussed at the weekly meeting. During their researches they are more or less under the direction of the professor or teacher who undertakes the courses in connection with the department of economics under which their subject falls. At Yale there are two seminaries and one discussion society; at Columbia College there is one for students who have studied only one year, two (in Economics and Finance) for those who are more advanced. The value of the work produced differs, of course, with the character of the university. At Harvard and the other more highly developed universities it is naturally very high.

In certain other countries the attention given to the subject of Economics demands for different reasons less detailed notice. In some instances the resemblance to countries already described renders further description superfluous; in others the geographical limitations of the country, or the comparative absence of opportunities for such special branches of the higher education, necessitate a much slighter notice than that given to the foregoing countries.

In Spain the connection between economic and legal studies is very similar to that existing in Italy. Students of the first and second year attend courses in Economics and Finance, Statistics being apparently nowhere insisted upon. At some of the universities an attempt is made to supplement these elementary courses by conferences and by visits, both to industrial undertakings, as factories, mines, &c., and to financial establishments, as banks; while the introduction of sociological institutes or seminars is looked for at others, as, for instance, at Oviedo.

In Sweden ‘there are two professors of political economy, one at the University of Upsala, one at the University of Lund, both belonging to the Faculty of Law, and teaching in addition to Political Economy some purely juridical subjects. There are also two professors in Politics and Statistics, one at Upsala, one at Lund, both belonging to the Faculty of Arts, and teaching at their discretion, Public Law, either Swedish or foreign, and Statistics.’ ‘The two professors of Political Economy in the Faculty of Law have to prepare and examine all the students who go in for the State examinations for entrance to the different branches of the civil service. But as Political Economy possesses very little importance in any of the three forms of these examinations, as compared with Jurisprudence, little stress is laid on its study in this faculty. Of the two other professors, one (at Upsala) lectures chiefly on Politics, the other on Statistics, both these studies being optional for the two arts degrees. The theory of Political Economy is not taught. Seminar instruction is arranged to supplement that given in the lecture courses.

In Norway, at the University of Christiania, the system is nearly identical with that of Sweden. There, too, it is found that, owing to the complete subordination of Economics to Law, the knowledge required is elementary in character.

The same impulses which direct the attention of young Americans to the study of Economics are felt in Canada. At the University of Toronto the importance attached to such studies is adequately shown by the large attendances present at the several courses. These courses are carefully arranged and graduated so as to furnish the student with a sound knowledge of the various branches of the subject, and to fit him to undertake, as he is expected to do in his latter years, research into some branch of economic fact.

In Switzerland, the position held by economic studies is, on the whole, at least as favourable as that in the southern countries of Germany. A knowledge of Economics is obligatory on those entering the legal profession, while, owing to the arrangements made, the duty of examining the candidates may, and in practice, I believe, does fall largely on the university professors. Moreover, in the university curricula, the place of economics, so far as Berne is concerned, is very fortunate. True, the subject is optional, as indeed are all subjects for the doctorate, but it may be taken for either the legal or the philosophical doctorate (Dr. Juris, or Dr. Phil.). At the Zürich Polytechnicon it is taught, being obligatory in some form or other for the diplomas of forestry and agriculture. In addition there is a fair voluntary attendance at these lectures. The system of instruction presents no features requiring particular notice. The chief courses are on National Economy and Finance, with the frequent addition of Practical Economics. These are supplemented by special courses at the option of the teacher, and by the seminar.

 

APPENDIX II.

On Economic Studies in France.
By Henry Higgs.

Economic teaching in France, so far as it consists of lectures regularly delivered at the same place by the same person, is to be looked for in—

(i.) The Collège de France, Paris;

(ii.) The Conservatoire des Arts et Métiers, Paris;

(iii.) The Université de France, consisting of the aggregate of local ‘universities,’ or faculties officially recognised, in Paris and the provinces;

(iv.) The free or unofficial faculties and schools in Paris and the provinces, including all the Catholic ‘universities’ (which cannot come to terms with the State on the question of the faculty of theology), the École Libre des Sciences Politiques, Paris, and others.

A certain amount of economic instruction is also imparted in the Écoles supérieures du Commerce, generally endowed by the municipalities of commercial towns. Elementary notions of Economics are officially prescribed as part of the programme of elementary schools.

(i.) It is at the Collège de France that one expects to find leading teachers of Economics in France. The traditions of its chair (which was founded in 1830), and the authority vested in its occupants, added to the attractions of a scientific post in Paris, have been a sufficient inducement for the most eminent economists to offer themselves for appointment here. The stimulus of contact with growing, vigorous, and inquiring minds is not, however, afforded to the professors, and they have to fight against a tendency to fall into prosy sermons and easy repetitions of old theory. No fees are charged to the students, nor is any record kept of their names unless they wish to obtain certificates. The lectures are delivered twice a week (two on Economics by M. Leroy-Beaulieu, and two on Statistics by M. Levasseur), in the afternoons. The auditors are for the most part a casual collection of shifting persons, of whom many are foreigners passing through Paris, who attend once or twice out of curiosity to see the lecturer. There is no discussion either during or after the lectures. The professors are paid a fixed stipend by the State. They appear to regard their lectures in the main as vehicles for the dissemination of generally received economic theory. So far, however, as they employ their leisure in prosecuting original research, their stipends may be regarded as an endowment for the advancement of Economics. Their personal examples are stimulating. It would be difficult to mention two more active economists in Europe. But in their lectures they are perhaps too dogmatic to supply students with the zest of grappling with ‘unsettled questions,’ or with the incentive to enlarge, however little, the bounds of knowledge by pointing out to their hearers the frontiers of ignorance which are often in sight.

(ii.) The oldest chair of Political Economy is in the Conservatoire des Arts et Métiers, and was first filled, in 1819, by J. B. Say. The instruction now given here is of a more popular character, consisting of lectures addressed to the working classes at a late hour of the evening. M. Levasseur delivers a five-year cycle of about fifty lectures a year on Economics, and M. de Foville a four-year cycle on Industry and Statistics. There are on the average from 300 to 400 auditors. They pay no fees. The professors are appointed and paid by the Government.

(iii.) By a law passed in 1877 Economics was for the first time officially incorporated into the organisation of higher education in France, by being made an obligatory subject in the second year’s studies of the faculties of law. Economics in France has, it is said, laboured under the disadvantage of offering no opening for a career. On the other hand, the youth of the country flock to the schools of law, for to lawyers all careers are open— politics, journalism, literature, education, legal practice, and many official appointments. The professor of law is overworked, and the professor of Economics underworked. The faculty of law, therefore, generally expects of its professor of Economics that he shall be able to help in legal instruction and examinations; and there has been a tendency to select a lawyer rather than an economist for these chairs. This reproach, however, is rapidly being removed, and the new professors of Economics are in many cases vigorous and promising in their proper spheres. Economics has recently been transferred from the second to the first year’s programme. The law students are said to show a better intelligence of law now that they also study Economics. It can hardly yet be stated what effect this organisation will produce on Economics itself.

In addition to this obligatory study, Economics may be taken as one of the eight optional courses at a later period of preparation in the law faculties. For this purpose there is generally a special course of lectures on Finance, in which financial legislation is a prominent topic; but the option in favour of Economics is not much exercised.

The professors and lecturers in Economics and (in italics) in Finance in the official faculties of law are as follows:—

Paris. MM. Beauregard, Alglave and Ducrocq; Fernand Faure (Statistics); Planiol (Industrial Legislation); Maroussem (Monographs).
Aix: M. Perreau.
Bordeaux: MM. St. Marc, de Boech.
Caen: MM. Willey, Lebret.
Dijon: MM. Mongin, Lucas.
Grenoble: MM. Rambaud, Wahl.
Lille: MM. Deschamps, Artus.
Lyons: MM. Rougier, Berthélémy.
Montpellier: MM. Gide, Glaise.
Nancy: M. Garnier.
Poitiers: MM. Bussonnet, Petit.
Rennes: MM. Turgeon, Charveau.
Toulouse: M. Arnault.

There are also at Montpellier lectures on industrial legislation by M. Laborde.

(iv.) The position of the Catholic ‘universities’ has already been referred to. While following the lead of the State in associating economics with law, they have the advantage of recruiting among their students a large number of those who desire to enter the Church with a training in economic science as an aid to the study of social problems. The respective professors are MM. Jannet (Paris), Baugas (Angers), Béchaud (Lille), Rambaud (Lyons), and Peyron (Marseilles).

The École Libre des Sciences Politiques, Paris, directed by M. Boutmy, is perhaps the most hopeful academic institution in France for the promotion of economic study. Lectures are given by MM. Cheysson (Economics); Stourm, Dubois de Lestang, Plaffin, Courtin (Finance); Levasseur (Statistics); Dunoyer (History of Economics since Adam Smith); Arnauné Foreign Trade and Customs Laws); Lévy (Banking); P. Leroy-Beaulieu (Colonial Systems); Paulet (Industrial Legislation); and Guieysse (Industrial Problems). In addition to these lectures, which are well attended by paying students, there are discussions and classes for original work on the seminar plan. Travelling scholarships are also given, and excellent work is done, to which the general scheme of instruction largely contributes. The primary function of the school is the thorough intellectual equipment of young officials for the State. Foreign languages, travel, and comparative study of laws and social institutions are encouraged, together with an intelligent interest in history and politics. The personal assistance rendered to individual students by the professors, the seminar, and the scholarships, the comprehensive breadth of view, and the rigid impar. tiality of this school are, as yet, unique in France.

Other economic lectures in Paris which require mention are those of M. Colson, at the École Nationale des Ponts et Chaussées (where the Government non-military engineers and road surveyors are trained), of M. Cheysson at the École Nationale des Mines (also under Government), of M. F. Passy at the École des Hautes Études Commerciales (endowed by the municipality), of M. Émile Chevallier, &c. Lectures (by M. Guérin) are organised by the Société dEconomie Sociale, founded by Le Play. M. Demolins, the leader of a secession from this school, also delivers a course of lectures. There is, on the whole, too much diffusion of separate economic lectures in Paris.

An impressive plea has lately been published by M. Chailley-Bert for the recognition of distinct economic faculties, and for such endowments as will spare professors from the need of spending their time and brains upon accessory sources of income.

APPENDIX III.

On the Condition of Economic Studies
in the United Kingdom.
By E.C.K. Gonner.

Though the full extent of the disadvantages under which economic study in this country suffers can only be realised from a fairly detailed account of its position in the various universities and with relation to certain professions, it will not be out of place to preface this report with a few words as to their nature.

(a) In the first place it is a matter of serious concern that economics is not regarded as a necessary part of any professional curriculum. This particular hardship, however, might be faced with comparative equanimity were there existent in this country, as for instance in the United States of America, a strong body of popular feeling in support of its study and its efficient teaching. But, despite frequent assertions to the contrary, I believe, and in this I shall have the concurrence of many colleagues engaged in teaching, that there is no such body of feeling. Its absence has been variously accounted for. To a great extent it is no doubt part of the legacy of distrust and misunderstanding due to the false view of Economics placed before a former generation, and it will probably be a long time before the popular conception of an economist as a compound of text-book theory and ignorance of fact can be entirely dispelled.

(b) Owing largely to the early prominence of the abstract school of economic thought in England the position which the subject holds in the University curricula is far from satisfactory. It is treated as a subject narrow in scope and subordinate—necessarily and naturally subordinate— to other subjects. But this is by no means the position which it should hold, and now that the importance of the studies of economic fact and administration is more clearly seen, the impossibility of effective teaching within the prescribed lines has become glaringly apparent. At present indeed English economic teaching is without a regular system. It is usually supposed that prescribed University courses should offer a means of systematic training in the various subjects, the pass courses of ordinary training, the honours courses of advanced and thorough training. So far as Economics is concerned, this is precisely what the Universities do not provide. With one possible exception they offer at the present time little more than isolated opportunities of showing economic knowledge in examinations primarily devoted to other subjects.

In the United Kingdom the encouragement of the study of Economics rests entirely with educational bodies. So far as professional examinations and curricula are concerned it meets with almost universal neglect. This is wholly so with regard to the examinations qualifying for the practice of law, either as barrister or solicitor, and partly so in the case of the Civil Service Examinations. For these latter Economics may be taken up, as may almost any other subject included in the Sciences and Arts. It is not recognised, that is to say, as more cognate to the administrative callings for which these examinations qualify, than is Chemistry, for instance; indeed, in comparison with many of these other subjects it is at a discount owing to the smaller maximum of marks assigned to it. In other words, it is excluded from the legal curriculum; in the Civil Service Examinations it is an optional but not an important subject. Elementary Political Economy is one of the optional subjects in the examination for chartered accountants, and is obligatory on candidates for the voluntary examination recently instituted by the Institute of Bankers.

At the Universities it receives an insufficient recognition in the degree courses, but as its position varies a great deal a brief summary of the usages of the various Universities with regard to it may be given. Degrees are granted in England by the five Universities of Oxford, Cambridge, Durham, London, and Victoria; in Scotland by the Universities of Edinburgh, Glasgow, Aberdeen, and St. Andrews; in Ireland by Trinity College and the Royal University of Ireland.

ENGLAND.

At Oxford it is an optional subject which may be taken up as one of the three selected subjects for the pass B.A. degree. As studied for this examination it is mainly elementary and largely theoretical, many of the questions relating to certain prescribed portions of the works of Adam Smith and Walker. To pass this examination, for which the yearly number of candidates presents an average of two hundred, demands common sense and a fair general acquaintance with leading Economic topics. A paper on Economics is included among those set in the Honour School of Modern History.

At Cambridge the position occupied by Economics in the University curricula is far more satisfactory. In some shape or other it forms part of three degree examinations. All candidates for the ordinary pass B.A., after passing the general examination, have to take up a special subject for their concluding study. Of these, sixteen in all, there are seven arts special subjects, one of which is Economics. The special examination in Economics (Political Economy) consists of two parts, which may be taken at separate times:—

Part I.—Three papers.

    • Two in General Economic Theory.
    • One in Economic History.

Part II.—Three papers.

    • Two in Taxation and Economic Functions of Government, with History of Trade and Finance, 1760–1860.
    • One in General Theory of Law and Government.

In the Moral Science Tripos (Honour B.A.) there are six obligatory papers, two being assigned to Political Economy (i.e. Theory), while in addition advanced Political Economy ranks as one of the optional subjects, two of which must be passed in by a candidate desirous of being classed. Lastly, in the Historical Tripos (Honour B.A.), one paper is in Economic History, the paper on general History of England also being supposed to require some Economic knowledge. Further, candidates who desire it may take Political Economy and theory of Government with International Law as an alternative to the study of a second special subject. Of these three examinations the one which seems most satisfactory, so far as Economics is concerned, is the special for the pass B.A., which embraces at once the four important branches of administrative, theoretical, historical, and financial Economics, and it is to be regretted that it has not yet been possible to organise an Honour examination on corresponding lines, but wider and more advanced. Were such in existence it would furnish English students with similar encouragement to systematic study and similar opportunities to those provided in the better developed Continental schools.

In the University of Durham, in addition to the obligatory subjects, two optional subjects have to be chosen by candidates for the degree. These are selected out of a number of subjects, of which Economics is one. The knowledge required is not of an advanced nature.

In the University of London Economics holds no position but the somewhat unfortunate one of an optional subject for candidates proceeding from the B.A. to the M.A. degree in Moral Science, a position which at once restricts the number of students likely to study it, and prevents its study from extending beyond the knowledge of general theory. It is not a subject, either optional or obligatory, at any other examination.

In the Victoria University Economics, comprising Political Economy and Economic History, forms one of the twelve optional subjects, of which two have to be selected for the final year of study by candidates for the pass B.A. degree, the two other subjects being more or less restricted. Economic Theory or History may also be taken in conjunction with Modern History as one subject by candidates who wish, for instance, to take Modern History but not Ancient History. As, however, nearly all the other subjects are, with some difference of standard or period, subjects at the Intermediate or Second-year Examination, in some instances compulsory, and again in certain cases subjects at the final examination, the study of Economics, involving as it does the entry of the student upon a wholly new subject during his final year, is naturally discouraged. Further, Economic Theory (Political Economy), like any other arts or science subject, may, by permission, be substituted for one of the two selected general subjects, Ethics or Modern History, at the intermediate stage of the Law degree (LL.B.). A course of lectures in Political Economy has to be attended by candidates for the Honours degree in History. It is not a subject in the examination.

SCOTLAND.

By the regulations of the Commission applicable to all Scotch Universities Economics holds a two-fold position.

(a) With regard to the ordinary M.A. examination, it is one of the three optional subjects which have to be selected out of the usual arts and science subjects. In all, seven subjects must be taken, but of these four are more or less prescribed. The course which must be attended consists of at least 100 lectures.

(b) It is further a compulsory subject for the first examination for the Agricultural B.Sc. In this case the knowledge required is much slighter, and naturally much more closely related to rural economy.

IRELAND.

At Trinity College Economics is part of one of the seven groups in which the Honour degree may be taken, the other subjects in this group being History and Law. All candidates for the law degree must be graduates in Arts, but not necessarily graduates in honours, or if in honours, in this particular group. It is also included among the options for the pass degree.

In the Royal University of Ireland Economics (Political Economy) is an alternative with Ethics in one of the three groups, one of which must be passed by candidates for the ordinary pass B.A. In the examinations for the Honour degree (B.A.) it, with Civil and Constitutional History and General Jurisprudence, constitutes one of the six groups open to the student. It holds a very similar position in the examination for the M.A. degree.

—————————

The foregoing account shows clearly how little opportunity is given for the systematic study of Economics as a preliminary to degree examination, and especially in the case of honours. It is certainly very unfortunate that an able student anxious to graduate in honours is almost precluded from devoting a large amount of attention to the study of Economics.

In face of this tacit discouragement, so far as examinations are concerned, the provision for teaching made in many places by colleges and universities is almost a matter for surprise. At both Cambridge and Oxford it is satisfactory in all but one respect. It is varied, copious and comprehensive, but—and this is a matter of regret—it is not systematic. At each of these universities there is a professor engaged in active teaching, while other lecture courses are provided by college lecturers. At the universities and colleges in the rest of England the provision for teaching is of necessity less complete. At those best equipped, instruction in Economics depends on the energy and vigour of a single teacher, supplemented, perhaps, by an occasional course of lectures by some other Economist, while at the rest, if taught at all, it is attached to the duties of a teacher principally engaged in, and probably principally interested in, teaching some other subject, for, as a general rule, the teaching of Economics in conjunction with some other subject has meant little more than that the teacher of some other subject has had to give a course of lectures on General Economics. At two of the three colleges of the Victoria University Economics has separate teachers, at Liverpool one holding the rank of professor, at Manchester one holding that of a lecturer. At Leeds, on the other hand, there is no teacher of Economics. At the other university colleges in England the two London colleges possess each a professor, though the professor at King’s College delivers Economic lectures only during the six winter months. At the University College, Nottingham, Economic lectures are delivered by a professor at the same time engaged in teaching history and literature. The other colleges (Birmingham, Bristol, Sheffield, and Newcastle) at present make no provision for teaching a subject which they find so discounted as a subject for examination.

In Wales two of the University Colleges (Aberystwith and Cardiff) have made some sort of provision for Economic teaching by the appoint. ment of lecturers in History and Political Economy, while at Bangor Economics is tacked on to the duties of the Professor of Moral Philosophy.

In Scotland there is a fully instituted chair of Political Economy at the University of Edinburgh, and measures are in progress for the endowment of a Professorship at Glasgow, where the Economic work has recently been performed by a lecturer acting as assistant to the Professor of Moral Philosophy. At St. Andrews a yearly course of lectures is delivered by the Professor of Moral Philosophy.

In Ireland, at Trinity College, Dublin, there is a Professorship of Economics. At the Queen’s Colleges of Belfast, Cork, and Galway this teaching is combined with that of Jurisprudence, and limited to a very short portion of the year. Owing to the great differences existing between the courses delivered at the various institutions, and the entirely diverse character of the respective audiences, it is impossible to give any satisfactory statistics of attendance. From most quarters come complaints. Indeed, with the two possible exceptions of Oxford and Cambridge, it is difficult to imagine a more complete indifference to the scientific study of Economics than that displayed at the present time.

In addition to lectures, more informal instruction is often imparted to more advanced students, but the formation of a seminar in Economics has been undertaken but seldom, if at all. That this is due not to lack of will on the part of the teachers in those colleges where Economic teaching is entrusted to a separate teacher, but mainly to the singular deficiency in advanced or even moderately advanced students, is shown by the readiness with which individual instruction, often involving much sacrifice of time, is given to such students when they do present themselves. Such an institution can be successfully introduced only when Economic studies are so recognised as to be able to attract the abler students in a university or college.

Attempts to develop popular Economic instruction by means of evening classes, and separate courses of lectures, have been made by the University Colleges and other institutions, and by the Societies for the Extension of University Teaching; and at some of the former particular attention has been paid to the Economic teaching, noticeably at Owens College, Manchester, and University College, Liverpool. The class of students attracted to these lectures may be spoken of very favourably. From the reports and information supplied by the Societies, it would seem that though the attendance at Economic courses, when given, is good, the demand for them is not very great. The interest shown in the subject in some one or other of its branches is said to be reviving—certainly to be greater than it was some few years ago. There has been a decided increase in the demand for lectures on Economics, and subjects partially economic, during the last two years.

Economic studies in England require at the present time organisation and encouragement. As to the ability of English Economists and the quality of their contributions there can be no doubt; but, when compared with continental countries, England is sadly lacking in the number of Economic students. Where they have many, she has few. As has been said, this is largely due to the unfortunate positions to which Economics has been relegated in many Universities, and its neglect so far as professional callings are concerned. On the other hand, the revival of interest in Economic matters, so abundantly manifested, makes it more than ever desirable to provide means and opportunities for sound scientific training.

Source: Methods of Economic Training in this and other Countries. Report of the Cunningham Committee, Report of the Sixty-Fourth Meeting of the British Association for the Advancement of Science held at Oxford in August 1894, pp. 365-391.

Also: at the Biodiversity Heritage Library Website; and at Harvard College Library, Gift of the Overseers Committee to visit the Department of Economics.

Image Source: William Cunningham page at the Trinity College Chapel website.

 

Categories
Cornell Economist Market Economists Michigan

Michigan. Henry Carter Adams’ Plea on Own Behalf, 1887

 

The dirtiest my hands have ever become from archival work was during my exploration of Columbia University’s collection of John Maurice Clark’s papers. Now having the luxury of digital images to scroll through, I can work without forsaking the pleasures of biting my finger nails, rubbing my eyes and scratching my nose. The younger Clark was quite a paper hoarder so it pays to return to my folders with the images of  his documents.

This post builds on notes Clark took after a talk given by his colleague Joseph Dorfman on the economist Henry Carter Adams. Clark was struck by a phrase used by Adams, “all power carries responsibility,” that was a recurring theme in Clark’s own “preaching”. Attached to his brief note was a typed copy of a transcribed letter that Henry Carter Adams had written to the President of the University of Michigan to plead the case that he wished to be judged for a professorial appointment for the right reasons, i.e. not for any particular policy positions he might be thought not to hold but for exhibiting high scholarly virtues in his research and teaching.

Adams had earlier managed to attract the ire of a Cornell trustee, businessman Henry Williams Sage, much in the way Paul Samuelson was to attract the ire of the former member of the M.I.T. corporation, Lamott Dupont II, some 60 years later. Clearly not wanting his Cornell history to repeat itself, Henry Carter Adams successfully went pro-active with the University of Michigan in lobbying on his own behalf. He did get the appointment.

_________________________

Socialist Tease?

Henry C. Adams along with Richard T. Ely was attacked for “Coquetting with Anarchy” in The Nation (September 9, 1886), pp. 209-210. In that article Adams was incorrectly identified as President [C. K.] Adams of Cornell. The correction was immediately forthcoming in the following issue, September 16, 1886 issue, p. 234. The essay by Henry Carter Adams being attacked was “Principles that Should Control the Interference of the States in Industries” that was read before the “Constitution Club”of New York City.

_________________________

Several biographical accounts of Adams

Joseph Dorfman. The Economic Mind in American Civilization, vol. 3. Pp. 164-174.

S. Lawrence Bigelow, I. Leo Sharfman, and R. M. Wenley, “Henry Carter Adams,” The Journal of Political Economy, April 1922, pp. 201-11 (includes a selected bibliography);

Memorial to Former President Henry C. Adams,” The American Economic Review, September 1922, pp. 401-16.

Mark Perlman’s review of the 1954 publication of Henry Carter Adams’ Relation of the State to Industrial Action (1887) and his American Economic Association Presidential Address (1896) edited by Joseph Dorfman with introductory essay. [Note: this re-publication of two of Adams’ essays includes the letter transcribed from Dorfman’s copy in J. M. Clark’s papers.]

A. W. Coats. Henry Carter Adams: A Case Study in the Emergence of the Social Sciences in the United States, 1850-1900. Journal of American Studies, Vol. 2, No. 2 (October 1968), pp. 177-197.

Nancy Cohen. The Reconstruction of American Liberalism, 1865-1914. University of North Carolina Press, 2002. (Especially Chapter 5 “The American Scholar Revisited”, pp. 154-158, 162-164, 169-174)

_________________________

Henry C. Adams, some early publications

The Position of Socialism in the Historical Development of Political Economy. Penn Monthly, April 1870, pp. 285-94.

Outline of Lectures upon Political Economy (Baltimore: privately printed, 1881); (second edition, Ann Arbor: privately printed, 1886).

The Labor Problem,” Sibley College Lectures.—XI. Scientific American Supplement, August 21, 1886.

Adams’ statement in The Labor Problem, edited by William E. Barns (New York: Harper, 1886), pp. 62-63.

Principles that Should Control the Interference of the States in Industries” read before the “Constitution Club” of the City of New York. [Fun Fact: Frank Taussig’s copy]

Relation of the State to Industrial Action. Publications of the American Economic Association, 1887. Pp. 471-549.

Public Debts: An Essay in the Science of Finance (New York: D. Appleton and Company, 1887).

_________________________

Note by John Maurice Clark attached to transcribed copy of Henry Carter Adams’ letter

Letter of Henry Carter Adams (1851-1921)
to President James B. Angell, March 15, 1887.

J.M.C. Nov. 27, 1951, Comment, from memory of Dorfman’s remarks yesterday.

President Angell appointed Adams professor after receipt of this letter, and Thomas Cooley (father of Charles Horton Cooley?) who was on the original Interstate Commerce Commission, got Adams the job of chief statistician of the Commission, where he created the system of control of accounts of railroads aiming at enough uniformity to make financial and operating reports comparable, so totals for the country and comparisons of companies would mean something.

Adams had already commented on Jevon’s “The State in Relation to Labor[”] and Adams’ original paper on this theme was later (later than Mar 15, 1887) worked over and enlarged, and came to be regarded as a classic by economists between Adams’ generation and mine.

_______________

[Clark’s note] This is the letter of a man 36 years old who had earned his academic freedom by a sober and responsible attitude. From my standpoint, it is especially interesting because Adams gives such central importance to the principle that all power carries responsibility (presumably inner responsibility plus subjection to checks and controls where appropriate). This is the principle I’ve been preaching (or announcing factually) as the only alternative to regimentation or chaos.

*  *  *  *  *  *  *  *  *  *  *  *  *  *

COPY

Ithaca, N.Y. March 15, 1887.

Dear Dr. Angell:

I don’t think there is any danger of my misunderstanding your letter or the spirit in which it was written. Last year, your questions came to me with the shock of a complete surprise, but I am coming to be pretty well accustomed to such expressions now.

You ask if I can help you any more so you can see your way clear on my nomination. I don’t see as I can, except it be to suggest that, in my opinion, your point of view in this matter is not the right one. If you make a man’s opinions the basis of his election to a professorship, you do, whether you intend it or not, place bonds upon the free movement of his intellect. It seems to me that a board has two things to hold in view. First, is a man a scholar? Can he teach in a scholarly manner? Is he fair to all parties in the controverted questions which come before him? Second, is he intellectually honest? If these two questions are answered in the affirmative, his influence upon young men cannot be detrimental.

Upon these points, certainly, nothing new can be said. I have served for five years as an apprentice and you have had opportunity to know. Or, with regard to the fairness in which topics are presented in the classroom, you have the outline of (the) lectures. My conscious purpose in teaching is two-fold. To portray social problems to men as they will find them to be when they leave the University and to lead men to recognize that morality is an every day affair.

But all this, you will say, is by the point. You say you do not know what my views are on capital and labor. I am not surprised at that for I have intentionally withheld them. No one knows them and I had madeup my mind to keep them to myself until I had worked through my study of the industrial society. My reason for such a decision was, that, in my study of social questions I had found myself on all sides of the question, I started as an individualist of the most pronounced type. But my advocacy of it led me to perceive its errors, and my criticisms were formulated before I read any literature of socialism. But when, upon coming into contact with socialistic writers I found their criticisms were the same as my own I was for a while carried away by their scheme. But upon further study, I found their plans to be, not only as I though impracticable, but contrary to the fundamental principles of English political philosophy, in which I still believed. You can imagine that was not a pleasant condition for one appreciative of logical symmetry. You said a year ago that my views were not logical, that is, that some of my expressions were contradictory to each other. I don’t doubt that they appeared so, it seems bad logic to admit the purpose of individualism and the criticism of socialists at the same time. You say now in your letter that I have not worked out my ideas into clear and definite shape. That is true, but I am doing it as fast as I can and in my own way. My book upon Pub. Debts is one stage in this direction.

But to go back to the development of this subject in my own mind. The illogical position into which my mind had drifted as the result of the first five years of study, was the occasion of keen intellectual pain: but the sense of the necessity of harmony led me finally to discover a principle, which I thought, and still think, adequate to bridge over the chasm between the purpose of individualism and the criticisms of socialism. This principle is the principle of personal responsibility in the administration of all social power, no matter in what shape that power may exist. This principle has given form to our political society: I wish it to be brought over into industrial relations. Its realization will cure the ills of which socialists complain, without curbing or crushing that which is the highest in the individual. I thought, at first, this principle to be so simple that its statement must gain for it quick recognition. But when I tried to make that statement, and work the theory out, I was at once surprised and chagrined to see what a task lay before me. It is useless to deny that the interests of the privileged classes in our civilization is against responsible administration of industrial power. I worked at it for a year, and then came to the conclusion that I did not yet know enough, nor was I sure enough of my position, to make public the thought which had assumed direction of my studies. It was then that I took up the study of finance and went to work upon Pub. Debts. This is the most simple of any of the topics which must be treated as the subject of constructive economics opened before me: it was also furthest removed from the points likely to cause controversy. I thought I might, perhaps, gain the reputation of a sound thinker so that expressions of views more unusual might attract a candid reading from scholarly men. It has taken a year and a half longer than I had anticipated, and now that it is done seems to have dwarfed in importance.

I do not think this narration will relieve you from embarrassment. I do not see that anything can do that, except a promise on my part to give expression only to orthodox views of social relations. But it has relieved me somewhat and I trust you will consider that an adequate apology. I have of course full confidence in your personal friendship: I only wish you might have equal confidence in my scholarly purposes.

Very truly yours,
H.C. ADAMS.

P.S.

May I add a postscript, for I am sure it is an unjustifiable pride which kept me from inserting it in the body of the letter. I presume the expression(s) of my views which have given you the greatest solicitude are to be found in the Sibley address of last year, and in the syndicate article which I wrote on the Knights of Labor. I do not wish to recall anything said, but I am willing to say that these expressions were as unwise as they were unpremeditated. In justice to myself I should say: that the Sibley address was on Friday afternoon and my invitation was on the Wednesday previous. Professor [R. H.] Thurston said he had been disappointed in his lecturer for the afternoon, that he did not like to postpone the meeting, and that he would like me to open a discussion on the labor problem. He told me, who besides myself would speak, and they were all decidedly opposed to any expression of sympathy with the struggle of the Knights then going on. After my opening address, the man against whom I talked, who, it was said, would reply to me, took his hat and left. Others spoke, among them President [Charles Kendal] Adams, Mr. Smith [sic, perhaps Mr. Frank B. Sanborn?] and Henry [W.] Sage. The President was not dogmatical but did not understand what I tried to say. The others were. My part in the discussion has cost me a professorship, for I do not see how, with the views of Mr. Sage to the functions of a teacher, he can vote for me. It was after the address was made that the talk began, and I thought it then cowardly not to let it be printed, and dishonest to change it. So it went in, as nearly as I could remember as it was given. I think it unfair to judge of my classroom work on this address.

With regard to the syndicate article [“What Do These Strikes Mean?”, a copy attached to Adams’ letter to James B. Angell dated March 25, 1887], I confess myself to have been deceived by the attitude of the Knights of Labor during their strike on the Gould system or I should not have written it. In their articles of complaint, they said certain things which I believed to be true, and I thought the men who drew them up had thought the labor problem through to its end, and had made a stand on a principle in harmony with English Liberties. If so, it was time for men of standing to declare themselves. But it turns out that the Knights hit the mark by a chance shot. They did not know what they were about and got whipped as they deserved. The result of this unfortunate venture is, that I believe more strongly than ever in the necessity of scholarship as one element in the solution of this terrible question that is upon us.

Have you seen “The Ind. Revolution” by Arnold Toynbee? His death is a loss. The scraps of his lectures and letters show him to have had much the same purpose as myself in his studies.

Respectfully
H.C.A.

Source: Columbia University Archives. John M. Clark Collection, Economic Theory and Methodology, Box 28. Folder “Group Power carries moral responsibility”.

Image Source: Johns Hopkins University Sheridan Libraries, graphic and pictorial collection. Henry Carter Adams (Ph.D., Johns Hopkins, 1878). Photograph by Sam B. Revenaugh (1847-1893), Ann Arbor, Mich.

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.

 

 

Categories
AEA Berkeley Chicago Cornell Economist Market Economists Johns Hopkins M.I.T. Princeton Stanford Yale

M.I.T. Memo regarding potential hires to interview at AEA Dec meeting, 1965

 

This artifact provides us a glimpse into the demand side of the market for assistant professors of economics in the United States as seen from one of the mid-1960’s peak departments. The chairperson of the M.I.T. economics department at the time, E. Cary Brown, apparently conducted a quick survey of fellow department heads and packed his results into a memo for his colleagues who in one capacity or the other would be attending the annual meeting of the American Economic Association held in New York City in the days following the Christmas holidays of December 1965. The absence of Harvard names in the memo probably only indicates that Brown presumed his colleagues were well aware of any potential candidates coming from farther up the Charles River.

From Brown’s memo, Duncan Foley (Yale) and Miguel Sidrauski (Chicago) ended up on the M.I.T. faculty as assistant professors for the 1966-67 academic year. John Williamson was a visiting assistant professor that year too.

_____________________________

Dating the Memo

The folder label in the M.I.T. archives incorrectly gives the date Dec. 28-30, 1969, where the 1969 has been added in pencil.

Two keys for dating the memo.  Brown’s comment to John Williamson (York): “Wants a semester here, Jan.-June 1967″.  “Solow is hearing paper at meetings” (Conlisk of Stanford) who presented in the invited doctoral dissertation session “The Analysis and Testing of the Asymptotic Behavior of Aggregate Growth Models” (affiliation given as Rice University (Ph.D., Stanford University) where Solow was listed as a discussant. AEA’s 78th Annual Meeting was held in New York City at the end of December 1965.

_____________________________

Memo from E. Cary Brown to M.I.T. faculty going to Dec. 1965 AEA meeting

[Pencil note: “Put in beginning of 1966-7”]

Memorandum Regarding Personnel Interviews in New York

To: Department Members Attending AEA Convention
From: E. C. Brown

University of Chicago

Sidrauski, Miguel (26). International Trade, Monetary Theory, Economic Growth, Mathematical Economics

Thesis—“Studies in the Theory of Growth and Inflation” under Uzawa
References: Harberger, Johnson, Lewis

[He came here a year ago to ask about a short-term appointment before he returned to Argentina. Griliches believes him to be tops. Had him in class myself and he was first rate. Called him on phone last week and he still wants to be had.]

 

Thornber, Edgar H. (24). [H. = Hodson] Econometrics, Mathematical Methods, Computers

Thesis—“A Distributed Lag Model: Bayes vs. Sampling Theory Analyses” under Telser
References: Griliches, Zellner

[Supposed to be equal of Sidrauski. Heavily computer oriented. Doesn’t sound interesting for us, but we should talk to him.]

 

Treadway, Arthur. Mathematical Economist

Thesis on the investment function

[A younger man who, according to Svi [sic], regards himself as the equal of the above. Stronger in mathematics, and very high grades. Wasn’t on market because thesis didn’t appear as completable. Now it seems that it will be and he wants consideration.]

 

Evenson, Robert E. (31). Agricultural Economics and Economic Growth, Public Finance

Thesis—“Contribution of Agricultural Experiment Station Research to Agricultural Production” under Schultz
References: Gale Johnson, Berg

[He is just slightly below the others. Mature and very solid and combines agriculture and economic growth where we need strength.]

 

Gould, John (26).

(Ph.D. in Business School)

[Bud Fackler mentioned him as their best. Uzawa and Griliches are trying to get the Econ. Dept. to hire him. Franco knows him and is after him.]

 

Princeton

Klevorick, Alvin (22). Mathematical Economics, Econometrics, Economic Theory

Thesis: “Mathematical Programming and the Problem of Capital Budgeting under Uncertainty” (Quandt)
References: Baumol, Kuhn

[Apparently the best they have had for some time. Young and very brash.]

 

Monsma, George N. (24). Labor Economics, Economics of Medical Care, Public Finance

Thesis: Supply and Demand for Medical Personnel” (Harbison)
References: Patterson, Machlup

[Dick Lester was high on him. While not a traditional labor economist, he works that field.]

Silber, William L. (23). Monetary Economics, Public Finance, Econometrics

Thesis: “Structure of Interest Rates” (Chandler)
References: Goldfeld, Musgrave, Quandt

[One of their best four. Not sure he sounds like what we want in fields, however.]

 

Grabowski, Henry G. (25). Research and Development, Econometrics, Mathematical Economics

Thesis: “Determinants and Profitability of Industrial Research and Development” (Quandt)
References: Morgenstern, Baumol

[Lester says he is good all around man. His field makes him especially interesting.]

 

Stanford

Conlisk [John]— Economic growth and development

[Arrow has written about him, recommending him highly. His field should be interesting. Solow is hearing paper at meetings.]

 

Bradford [David Frantz]— Public finance

[Has been interviewed up here, but more should see him who wish to.]

 

Yale

Foley [Duncan Karl] (Probably not at meetings. Best Tobin’s had.]

Bryant [Ralph Clement] (Now at Federal Reserve Board. Number 2 for Tobin]

 

York

Williamson, John

[Wants a semester here, Jan.-June 1967. Alan Peacock at meetings.]

 

Johns Hopkins

[Ask Bill Oakland]

 

University of California, Berkeley

[Ask Aaron Gordon or Tibor Scitovsky.]

 

Cornell

Bridge [John L.] — Econometrics, Foreign Trade

Lindert [Peter]— International Economics

[Their two best as indicated in their letter to Department Chairman.]

 

Buffalo

Mathis, E.J. [Ask Mitch Horwitz if it’s worth pursuing.]

 

Columbia U.

[Ask Bill Vickrey]

 

Pittsburgh

Miller, Norman C. (26). International Economics; Money, Macro, Micro and Math Economics

Thesis: “Capital Flows and International Trade Theory” (Whitman)
References: Marina Whitman, Jacob Cohen, Peter Kenen, Graeme Dorrance

[Letter to Evsey Domar from Mark Perlman (Chm.) recommending him to us for further training.]

 

Source: Massachusetts Institute of Technology. Institute Archives and Special Collections. MIT Department of Economics records, Box 1, Folder “AEA Chairmen MEETING—Dec. 28-30, 1969 (sic)”.

Image Sources:  Duncan Foley (left) from his home page. Miguel Sidrauski (right) from the History of Economic Thought website.

Categories
Chicago Cornell Economists Germany Harvard

Chicago. Economics Ph.D. alumnus, later Cornell professor, Newman Arnold Tolles, 1932

 

Tracking the careers of Ph.D. trained economists at Economics in the Rear-view Mirror has not been limited to the handful of tournament winning, prize economists of past times or even the prominent gatekeepers of orthodoxy. Our series “Meet an economics Ph.D. alumna/us” includes both those who have moved and shaken their local academic communities without leaving much of a footprint in the sands of the history of economics and those who have constituted the vast majority of economists who have survived the demands of the graduate economics programs of their times and then modestly contributed to the pool of our collective economic knowledge during the course of their professional careers.

Today’s economics Ph.D. alumnus, Newman Arnold Tolles (University of Chicago, 1932), achieved considerable professional success during his lifetime, though he is unlikely to ever be found in the syllabi of present and future histories of economics. Tolles is however worthy of nomination as one of a myriad poster-children representing mid-20th century U.S. economics. 

_______________________

Newman Arnold Tolles

Sept. 21, 1903. Born in New York City.

1923. B. Phil in economics, School of Commerce, University of Chicago.

1924. M.S.,University  of Chicago.

1925. Recent Literature on British Unemployment Insurance. Quarterly Journal of Economics. Vol. 39, No. 4 (Aug., 1925), pp. 651-662.

1926. A.M.,  Harvard.

1925-27. Study at the London School of Economics.

1929-35. Assistant Professor Mount Holyoke and part-time at Smith College in 1931-33.

1932, Autumn. Ph.D. U of Chicago (diss: Economic Aspects of Unemployment Insurance in Great Britain, 1911-31. Published Chicago: University of Chicago libraries, 1935).

1935-1945. Government service (1935-38 as economist with the Bureau of Labor Statistics, 1938-40 as assistant director and director of research in the US Dept of Labor’s new Wage-Hour Division., 1940-45 chief of the Working Conditions Branch at BLS).

(with Louis M. Solomon) Earnings in Eastern and Midwestern Airframe Plants, 1942 : Bulletin of the United States Bureau of Labor Statistics, No. 728.

(with Robert Julius Myers) Income From Wages and Salaries in the Postwar Period : Bulletin of the United States Bureau of Labor Statistics, No. 845.

Spendable Earnings of Factory Workers, 1941-43 : Bulletin of the United States Bureau of Labor Statistics, No. 769.

(with Louis M. Solomon) Wage Rates in the California Airframe Industry, 1941 : Bulletin of the United States Bureau of Labor Statistics, No. 704.

(with Theodor Winter Reedy) Wage Stabilization in California Airframe Industry, 1943 : Bulletin of the United States Bureau of Labor Statistics, No. 746.

1945-47. Professor and chairman of the graduate department of economics, American University.

1947. appointed Professor at Cornell’s newly-established New York State School of Industrial and Labor Relations to retirement July 1969.

1951. (with Earl Brooks and Richard F. Dean) Providing Facts and Figures for Collective Bargaining—The Controller’s Role. Ithaca: New York State School of Industrial and Labor Relations, Cornell University.

1952. (with Robert L. Raimon) Sources of Wage Information: Employer Associations. Ithaca: Cornell Studies in Industrial and Labor Relations, no. 3.

1953-54. Fulbright guest professorship in Munich and Kiel.

1957. New York State Department of Labor. Chairman of the minimum wage board for the cleaning and dyeing industry.

1959. American Minimum Wage Laws: Their Purposes and Results. Ithaca: New York State School of Industrial and Labor Relations at Cornell University, no. 95.

1960. The Purposes and Results of U.S. Minimum Wage Laws. Monthly Labor Review, Vol. 83, No. 3 (March 1960), pp. 238-242.

1961. (assisted by Betti C. Goldwasser) Labor Costs and International Trade (Washington, D.C.: Committee for a National Trade Policy).

1964. Origins of Modern Wage Theories (Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall).

1965 study of salaries of professional economists for the American Economic Association [published AER Vol. 58, No. 5, Dec. 1968, Supplement, Part 2. Studies of the Structure of Economists’ Salaries and Income.]

1966. Weathering Layoffs in a Small Community: Case Studies of Displaced Pottery and Carpet-Mill Workers. Washington, D.C.: Bulletin of the Bureau of Labor Statistics, 1516.

1965-1969. Two terms as Ithaca city alderman as a Democrat.

1969. Lost race for mayor of Ithaca.

Two years after retirement part-time teaching at Cornell also teaching at State University College at Geneseo (economics department).

July 1971. Becomes emeritus professor at Cornell.

Apr. 10, 1973. Died from a heart attack while teaching his class at Geneseo State Teachers College.

Sources:

Cornell University Faculty Memorial Statement by Robert H. Ferguson, Vernon H. Jensen, Robert L. Aronson.

“Arnold Tolles Dead; Served County, City with ‘Compassion’”, The Ithaca Journal, April 11, 1973, p. 3.

Guide to the N. Arnold Tolles Papers. Kheel Center for Labor-Management Documentation and Archives, Cornell University Library

Image Source: From Tolles’ obituary printed in The Ithaca Journal, April 11, 1973, p. 3.

_______________________

All the World’s a Stage
Tolles @ Center Stage

Photograph of a scene from the 1932 faculty show. Verso reads: A Scene from Faculty Show, presented once every four years at Mount Holyoke College by members of the Administration and Faculty. They present ‘A Hard Struggle’ by Westland Marston, Esq., as a curtainraisser. Left to right: Miss Ruth Douglass of the department of Music, Leslie Burgeivin of the department of English Literature, Miss Dorothy Graves of the department of Art; N. Arnold Tolles of the department of economics; Miss Elizabeth Doane of the department of French; and Bernard Bloch of the department of English.

Source:  https://compass.fivecolleges.edu/object/mtholyoke:24371