Category: Dartmouth

Williams College. Political Economy and Law 1794-1894. Bullock, 1904

Post author By Irwin Collier
Post date 2023-09-15

Before he accepted an appointment to assistant professorship at Harvard in 1903, Charles Jesse Bullock was Orrin Sage professor of history and political science at Williams College. He published a short history of the first hundred years of course offerings in political economy, political philosophy/theory, constitutional law and international law at Williams in 1904.

Bonus material: links have been added to the key texts identified by Bullock.

___________________________

The History of Economic and Political Studies
in Williams College

C. J. Bullock, Assistant Professor of Political Economy, Harvard University; late Orrin Sage Professor of Political Economy in Williams College

Historical and political studies seem to have been almost wholly neglected in the American colleges of the colonial epoch. In this direction the first serious impulse came from the stirring discussions of the Revolutionary period and of the years that witnessed the adoption of the Federal Constitution. In 1784 the first law school was established at Litchfield, Connecticut; and during the next twenty years lectureships or professorships of law were created in various institutions. Before this movement had spent its force, political philosophy, political economy, and, in some cases, history had benefited by the interest thus aroused, so that one or more of these subjects found a place in the curricula of many colleges.

The “Free School” at Williamstown was transformed into Williams College in 1793, at the very time when our institutions of higher education were beginning to recognize the importance of training young men for the legal profession, the service of the State, or the common duties of citizenship. In the first invoice of books purchased for the college library, political and historical works were well represented; and upon October 20, 1794, Hon. Theodore Sedgwick, at that time a member of Congress, was appointed Professor of Law and Civil Polity. It does not appear that Mr. Sedgwick ever entered upon the work of his professorship — a fact which may be readily explained by his absorption in the duties of public life or by the meagre resources of the college; but it is interesting to note that this was the first professorship which the trustees attempted to establish.

In 1795 the first laws for the government of the college were adopted. From these we learn that the studies of the fourth year were “metaphysics, ethics, history, the law of nature and nations, civil polity, and theology.” Thomas Robbins, a member of the class of 1796, writes in his diary, under the date of January 1st of his senior year, “Reciting now Paley’s Moral Philosophy”; and under the date of March 22d, “Began to recite Vattel.” Instruction in these subjects was given by President Fitch, as we learn from a letter* written by a member of the class of 1802 who says, “Those students who were instructed by him during their senior year will never forget the ability and interest with which he explained and illustrated the writings of Locke, Paley, and Vattel.”

* [Calvin] Durfee, History of Williams College, p. 77.

The facts just mentioned are sufficient to establish the character of the instruction given in political philosophy and international law; concerning the study of history, however, no evidence is now available. Paley’s Principles of Moral and Political Philosophy, published in England in 1785 and republished in Boston ten years later, devotes one entire book — the sixth — to the philosophy of the State, and treats of such subjects as forms of government, civil liberty, and the administration of justice. This book was used for many years at Williams, as elsewhere. Its author was a conservative by temperament, and a friend of the established social and political order; and these qualities would naturally commend his writings to such an ardent Federalist as President Fitch, who was greatly disturbed over the revolutionary movement in France and the rise of Jeffersonian democracy in the United States.† In his baccalaureate sermon of 1799, Dr. Fitch warned the graduating class that “every civil and religious institution is threatened with ruin,” that “the principles of deism, atheism, and disorganizing politics have of late years made rapid strides,” and he urged his hearers to oppose manfully the progress of these destructive tendencies.

† Cf. [Arthur Latham] Perry, Williamstown and Williams College, pp. 230-233.

This arrangement of studies probably remained unchanged for many years. The College Laws of 1805 repeated the provisions of those adopted in 1795; the Laws of 1815 are more general in their terms, but prescribe that history and the law of nations shall be included in the curriculum. These subjects, undoubtedly, fell to the charge of the president. In 1812 Hon. Daniel Dewey was appointed Professor of Law and Civil Polity, but it is not known that he ever gave regular instruction in the college, although his name appeared in the catalogue until his death in 1815. The laws of the latter year state merely that “the Professor of Law shall occasionally deliver lectures to the senior sophisters or to all the students.”

In 1822 the catalogue of the college contains for the first time a statement of the courses of instruction. From it we learn that history was one of three subjects studied during the third term of the sophomore year, and that Tytler’s Elements of History was used as a text-book. In the senior year Paley’s [Moral and] Political Philosophy was studied during the second term, and Vattel’s Law of Nations during the third. Altogether, one third of the instruction for three terms, or about one twelfth of the college course, was devoted to these three subjects. History was probably taught by one of the two tutors who had charge at this time of most of the studies of the lower classes; the senior courses were conducted chiefly by the president.

In 1827 William Porter [Rev. William Augustus Porter, b. 1798; d. 1830] was called to a newly established chair of Moral Philosophy and Rhetoric, and he appears to have relieved President Griffin of most of the instruction of the senior year.* Paley’s Moral and Political Philosophy was now replaced by Say’s [Treatise on] Political Economy, of which an American translation had appeared in 1821; Vattel’s Law of Nations, however, was retained several years longer. History held its place in the third term of the sophomore year.

*Memoir of W. A. Porter, p. 41.

In 1828 a Manual of Political Economy, by Willard Phillips, was published at Boston, and this work was immediately introduced in the place of Say’s treatise. When we recall that in this year the passage of the “Tariff of Abominations” stimulated excited discussions of the tariff question, and that Phillips was an advocate of protectionism, we may venture upon the conjecture that Professor Porter was dissatisfied with the teachings of Say concerning freedom of trade. At any rate Phillips’ Manual continued to be used in the college for a number of years. When Mark Hopkins was called to the chair of Moral Philosophy in 1830, Paley’s work was reintroduced, but only to supplement and not to displace Phillips and Vattel.

In 1835 Joseph Alden was called to a new professorship of Rhetoric and Political Economy, and more adequate provision was made for instruction in political and economic science. In his inaugural address in 1836, President Hopkins alluded to the recent introduction of the study of political economy, and expressed the hope that means could be provided for instruction in constitutional law. For this a place was found in the same year, when Professor Alden discarded Vattel and introduced [Joseph] Story on the Constitution [Commentaries on the Constitution of the United States, Abridged by the author for the use of Colleges and High Schools, 1833)]. The sophomore course in history remained as before, and, after a time at least, came under the charge of Professor Alden. In 1837 the course in political economy was shifted to the first term of the junior year, and in 1840 Wayland’s well-known treatise [Francis Wayland, The Elements of Political Economy (1837)]was introduced as a text-book. Professor Alden was a Jeffersonian Democrat and a free trader, but seems to have made more of his lectures upon the United States Constitution* than of his work in history and political economy. In 1843 a course in American history was introduced in the second term of the junior year, and in 1844 this was placed among the studies prescribed for sophomores. Two years later, however, this subject dropped out of the curriculum.

* Cf. A. L. Perry, Miscellanies, p. 142. Williamstown, 1902.

At this point it will prove interesting to compare the development of political and economic studies at Williams with their history at a sister institution, Dartmouth College.†

† See J. F. Colby, Legal and Political Studies in Dartmouth College, Hanover, 1896.

At Hanover these studies were first introduced in 1796, under the stimulus of the same influences that were felt at Williams in the previous year. In Dartmouth the juniors were given instruction in Paley’s Moral and Political Philosophy by the professor who had general charge of that class; while the seniors, under the guidance of President Wheelock, studied Burlamaqui’s Principles of Natural and Politic Law [1792], of which an American edition had been published at Boston in 1793. In 1804 the course in political philosophy was transferred to the charge of the Professor of Divinity, and in 1823 to the Professor of Moral and Intellectual Philosophy. In 1822 instruction in constitutional law was given to the seniors, and in 1828 a chair of Moral Philosophy and Political Economy was created. Professor Roswell Shurtleff, the incumbent of this chair, introduced Say’s Political Economy in the place of Burlamaqui’s [Principles of] Natural and Politic Law; and continued for a decade the use of Paley’s Political Philosophy and the Federalist. In 1838 Paley was replaced by Wayland’s Moral Philosophy [The Elements of Moral Science, 5^th ed. (1837)], and in 1842 a course in Kent’s Commentaries on American Law [2^nd ed., 1832: Vol. I ; Vol. II ; Vol. III ; Vol. IV] was offered to seniors. Some years later the latter work was displaced by Story’s well-known treatise. The general similarity of development in the two institutions is emphasized by the fact that Dartmouth, in 1808, made unsuccessful efforts to establish a professorship of law.

At Williams the next important event was the resignation of Professor Alden in 1852. After an interval of a year, Arthur Latham Perry was called to a professorship of History and Political Economy; and commenced those studies, especially in the field of political economy, which soon brought him a national reputation and secured distinguished recognition in France and England. Although compelled by the poverty of the college to give instruction in German and in Christian Evidences for many years, he soon built up a strong department of history and political economy. To the sophomores he gave instruction in history, at first for one and later for two terms, introducing newer and better text-books, as they appeared, in place of the wretched treatise by Tytler. To the juniors he offered a course in political economy for which he published, in 1865, the first of his well-known books, Elements of Political Economy. In addition, Professor Perry continued the work in constitutional law which had been begun by his predecessor. This study was, in 1859, transferred to the junior year, where it long remained; at the outset Story’s work was used as a text, but in time the instruction came to be given by lectures. Upon an average, during the period from 1857 to 1887, the three subjects above mentioned occupied about one-eighth of the entire college course, and until the latter year they were required of all students.*

* Cf. A. L. Perry, Miscellanies, pp. 141-148.

In 1871 Orrin Sage, a Massachusetts manufacturer, gave the college $50,000 as an endowment for Professor Perry’s chair. In part, at least, this action was the result of the attacks which had been made from time to time upon Professor Perry’s views concerning the injustice and inexpediency of the protective tariff. The trustees of the college had at all times upheld the independence of the department of political economy, but the gift was prompted by a desire to place the chair upon the most secure foundation possible. So far as freedom of teaching is concerned, few, if any, American colleges can boast of better traditions.

In 1882, with the coming of the elective system, there was established an elective course in European history, conducted by a new instructor. This marked the beginning of the separation of the departments of history and political economy, which became complete when, in 1890, an endowment was received for a chair of American History. In the following year Professor Perry closed his long term of faithful service to the college, and John Bascom was made acting professor upon the Orrin Sage foundation, which was thereafter devoted to the department of political economy. Thus at the close of the first century of its existence, Williams College had created two independent departments for the studies in which, at the outset, the president had instructed the seniors during the last half of the collegiate year.

With the history of the last decade it is not the purpose of this paper to deal. Suffice it to say that the establishment of new chairs of Political Science and of European History has enabled the college to extend and to specialize instruction in these subjects, so that now four professors are cultivating the field where Professor Perry labored so long and so successfully as Professor of History and Political Economy. In all this the college is but meeting the demands of the times for more extensive instruction in political and economic studies. To-day, as in 1794, it is attempting, so far as its resources permit, to prepare young men for the intelligent exercise of the rights and duties of citizenship; and now, as formerly, it seeks to prescribe, for students or teachers, no tests of political or economic orthodoxy. With such a record of honorable achievement, the college faces hopefully the educational demands of the twentieth century.

Source: Charles Jesse Bullock, “History of economic and political studies in Williams College.” Education, Vol. XXIV (May, 1904), pp. 532-537.

Image Source: From the title page of A History of Williams College by Calvin Durfee (1860).

Tags AldenJ, Bascom, Bullock, PerryAL, PhillipsW, PorterWA, Shurtleff, Wayland

Cornell Dartmouth Economists Harvard Michigan Teaching Undergraduate

Harvard. Recitation section work described. Day, 1914

Post author By Irwin Collier
Post date 2023-09-05

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.

Tags Day

Dartmouth Undergraduate

Dartmouth. 19th century instruction in History, Law, Politics, & Political Economy. Colby, 1796-1896.

Post author By Irwin Collier
Post date 2022-09-08

Throughout the nineteenth century political economy taught in American colleges was just one ingredient in a hearty moral philosophical stew served to students. Economics as its own course in a social scientific menu appears relatively late in the century.

I stumbled upon an article in the Boston Evening Transcript (January 13, 1897, p. 9) that reported on a pamphlet written by Dartmouth professor James Fairbanks Colby on the history of Dartmouth instruction on constitutional law, politics, and political economy. I found the pamphlet at the hathitrust.org archive and it was interesting enough for me to prepare this post with links to all the course text books that Colby mentioned.

Fun fact (if true): “William and Mary appears to have led by prescribing the use of Adam Smith’s Wealth of Nations as early as 1807. Most of the other Colleges followed within a few years of each other: Harvard in 1820; Yale in 1824; Columbia in 1827; Dartmouth in 1828; Princeton in 1830; Williams in 1835.” Nonetheless, the text book of choice for much of the 19th century was the English translation of Say’s Political Economy.

————————————————-

Biography

James Fairbanks Colby was born November 18, 1850, in St. Johnsbury, Vermont, the son of James K. and Sarah (Pierce) Colby. After graduating from St. Johnsbury Academy. Colby attended Dartmouth College, graduating in 1872. He received his AM from Yale in 1877 and his LL. B. from George Washington University in 1875. Colby died in Hanover, New Hampshire, October 21, 1939.

Colby was an instructor of economics and history at the Sheffield Scientific School at Yale University from 1879 until 1881 and taught international law at Yale Law School from 1883 until 1885. At Dartmouth College he was an instructor of history from 1885 until 1893, a professor of political economics from 1885 until 1898, and Joel Parker professor of law and political science from 1885 until 1916. He also taught constitutional and international law at Amos Tuck School of Business Administration from 1900 until 1908, and lectured in jurisprudence and international law at Boston University Law School from 1905 until 1922.

In 1902, he was a delegate to the New Hampshire Constitutional Convention; he compiled and edited the Manual of the Constitution of the State of New Hampshire, 1902, as well as the revised 2nd edition in 1912. Never a candidate for public office himself, Colby exerted influence on political reform and the Progressive Movement in New Hampshire.

Source: Dartmouth Library, Archives & Manuscripts. Colby, James Fairbanks, 1850-1939.

————————————————-

LEGAL AND POLITICAL STUDIES IN DARTMOUTH COLLEGE, 1796-1896.

by James Fairbanks Colby,
Parker Professor of Law and Political Science

Hanover, N.H.: The Dartmouth Press, 1896.

The studies of Law and Government have been pursued at Dartmouth for one hundred years. Meager records and their vague language leave it doubtful whether any American college except William and Mary, Philadelphia (University of Pennsylvania), and Princeton made earlier and continuous offer of instruction in both these branches. Since their first introduction into its curriculum, Dartmouth has given both these studies constant recognition in all its plans for a liberal education. This was made possible by the broad purpose of its Founder; it became practicable through the wise resolves of its Trustees and the liberal benefaction of one of its most distinguished graduates, Chief Justice Joel Parker.

The royal charter of the College of 1769 created a corporation empowered to give instruction in “all liberal arts and sciences.” Despite this ample grant no positive evidence has been found that regular instruction was offered by the College in the particular sciences of Law and Government during the first twenty-five years after its foundation. The reasons for this delay are not hard to find. They were the original mission of Wheelock to Christianize the Indians, the scanty resources at his disposal, and the traditional limitation of the curriculum of his Alma Mater — Yale — to the Sacred and Classical Languages, Mathematics and Divinity. But the location of the College on the frontier and the stirring events which followed its founding, the Revolution, the framing of new constitutions, State and Federal, the long struggle over the New Hampshire Grants, and the rise of American political parties, aroused liveliest interest in Law and Government throughout all the region where dwelt the natural constituency of the new College, and made increasing demand upon it for legal and political training.

Evidence of effort to satisfy this demand may be found in the first formal curriculum of the College, which was adopted by its trustees in 1796. This, under the head of “Public and Classical Exercises,” enumerates among the subjects of study for Juniors “Natural and Moral Philosophy,” and among those for Seniors “Natural and Politic Law.” Since Moral Philosophy, as then defined, treated of the State — the subject matter of Political Science — the first formal curriculum of the College appears to have included both the studies of Law and Government. Neither search in the official records of the College, nor wide gleaning among the biographies and letters of graduates of that period, yields much information about the conduct of these courses from 1796 to 1822. Instruction in Natural and Politic Law apparently fell with the general care of the Senior class to the President, and so was given by John Wheelock from 1796 to 1815, by Francis Brown from 1815 to 1820, and by Daniel Dana from 1820 to 1821. The instruction in Moral Philosophy (including Political Philosophy) apparently was assigned with the general care of the Junior class to Rev. John Smith, Professor of the Latin and Greek Languages from 1796 to 1804, and to Rev. Roswell Shurtleff, Phillips Professor of Divinity,¹ from 1804 to 1823. Probably the earliest text books in each of these subjects were those known to have been in use in 1816². These were the two famous works, Burlamaqui’s Principles of Natural and Politic Law, first published in Geneva in 1747 and republished in Boston as early as 1793, and Paley’s Moral and Political Philosophy, first published in England in 1785 and republished in Boston as early as 1795. The sixth book of Paley is devoted to what is now called Political Science — the State, its origin, forms of government, civil liberty, and the administration of justice. Both these books were then coming into use in America and the former was prescribed as a text in the College as late as 1828, and the latter as late as 1838.

* * * * * * * * * * *

¹ In 1796 it was voted by the trustees “that it be the duty of the Professor of Divinity to teach Theology, to preach and instruct the students in Logic and Moral Philosophy.” This chair was not filled till 1804.

² “Documents relating to Dartmouth College, published by order of the Legislature of 1816,” page 32. The included report shows the amendments made to the curriculum from 1796 to 1816.

* * * * * * * * * * *

Before 1810 a marked tendency among Dartmouth graduates toward the profession of law was noticeable. The records showed that the proportion of graduates entering that profession was increasing from decade to decade. The proportion of lawyers to graduates, which from 1770 to 1780 had been only 4½% per cent., increased from 1780 to 1790 to 17½% per cent., from 1790 to 1800 to 36 ¹/3% per cent., and from 1800 to 1810 to 46¼% per cent. Before this time attempts had been made by the University of Pennsylvania, William and Mary, Columbia, Princetown [sic], and Yale, all founded before Dartmouth, to promote good citizenship by academic training in law, but such instruction apparently had not been continuous in all these Colleges. The need of other legal training for the bar than that which could be had in the office of active practitioners was coming to be more and more felt, but the only law school then existing in New England was the famous Litchfield (Conn.) Law School, which was founded in 1784 and enrolled 1024 students before it was closed in 1823.

Under these circumstances the Trustees of Dartmouth College deemed it wise to plan for the establishment of a collegiate professorship of law, as is shown by the following extract from the records of their meeting³ held Jan. 7, 1808:

“Whereas, An establishment of professorships in different branches of education at universities facilitates improvement; and as a more general acquaintance with the important science of law would be greatly conducive to the welfare and prosperity of the citizens of our country; and as in promoting that end the establishment of a professorship of Law at this university is highly desirable; Therefore,

Resolved, Unanimously that this board will proceed to establish a professorship of Law and appoint a suitable person to the office so soon as adequate means shall be furnished. And as all, the present funds are necessarily applied to other objects of education the liberal and patriotic are earnestly solicited to favor and promote by their munificence the early accomplishment of this design.

Voted, that the secretary be requested to cause a suitable number of subscription papers to be printed for the purpose of aiding the object contemplated in the foregoing resolution.” Trustees‘ Records, vol. 1, p. 321.

* * * * * * * * * * *

³Those present at this meeting were President Wheelock, Rev. Eden Burroughs, Rev. J. Smith, Hon. Peter Olcott, John A. Freeman, Nathaniel Niles, John S. Gilman, S. W. Thompson, Stephen Jacobs, Timothy Farrar Elijah Paine. Five of these trustees were eminent lawyers in their own generation in Northern New England.

* * * * * * * * * * *

It does not appear whether the Secretary prepared subscription papers nor whether the aid of the liberal and patriotic was solicited, but the serious dissensions which arose in the Board of Trustees the following year and which were to issue in 1819 in the cause célèbre, indefinitely postponed the establishment of the proposed professorship. The spread of these dissensions from 1809 to 1815 and the controversy between the College and the State which filled the years from 1815 to 1819 prevented any enlargement of the courses in Law and Government until 1822.

The circumstances of that controversy and especially the forensic triumph of Webster as the filial champion of the “small College” before the Supreme Court of the United States in 1819 seem to have awakened fresh interest in the study of American Constitutional Law and to have been the immediate occasion of its addition to the curriculum. There is no authentic record at least of such a course before 1822. The catalogue of that year, the first published by the College, enumerates among the studies for Juniors Moral and Political Philosophy, (Paley), and for Seniors Natural and Politic Law (Burlamaqui), Moral and Political Philosophy (Paley), the Federalist. No change in these three courses was made till 1828, but the appointment in 1823 of Daniel Oliver (Harvard, 1809) as Professor of Moral and Intellectual Philosophy probably made him the instructor in Political Philosophy for the next five years.

In 1828 Prof. Roswell Shurtleff (D. C., 1799) was transferred to the newly established chair of Moral Philosophy and Political Economy, and the Trustees having voted, “that the Senior class be instructed in Say’s Political Economy so far as can be by leaving out Burlamaqui,” his Natural and Politic Law disappeared from the curriculum.

The establishment of this chair and the almost simultaneous introduction of the study of Political Economy by other American Colleges is noteworthy.⁴Probably this was due to the industrial revolution which the inventions of Arkwright, Hargreaves and Fulton had wrought, the expansion of commerce which followed the close of the Napoleonic wars, and the rise of new political issues in the United States — the tariff, the bank, slavery, and internal improvements. The addition of Political Economy to the curriculum of Dartmouth as well as other Colleges undoubtedly was facilitated by the appearance as early as 1821 of an American edition of Say’s Political Economy which presented the subject in clear, orderly and attractive form.

* * * * * * * * * * *

⁴William and Mary appears to have led by prescribing the use of Adam Smith’s Wealth of Nations as early as 1807. Most of the other Colleges followed within a few years of each other: Harvard in 1820; Yale in 1824; Columbia in 1827; Dartmouth in 1828; Princeton in 1830; Williams in 1835.

* * * * * * * * * * *

The three courses prescribed in 1828 in Political Economy, Moral and Political Philosophy (transferred from Senior to Junior year in 1833), and the Federalist, underwent no modification until the resignation of Professor Shurtleff in 1838. Throughout his long service Prof. Shurtleff was a popular and respected instructor. The marginal notes in his own handwriting in his copies of Paley and the Federalist reveal his acuteness, skill in argument and abounding humor.

His successor, though the name of the chair was changed to that of Intellectual Philosophy and Political Economy, was Professor Charles B. Haddock (D. C., 1816). He continued the three courses previously described during his term of office and extended the instruction. In 1838 he substituted Wayland’s Moral Philosophy [Elements of Moral Science, 1835] for Paley’s, and in 1842 added a course in Kent’s Commentaries, Vol. 1, for Seniors in the second term. In 1845-6 this course, probably to enable students to work by themselves to advantage during the long winter vacation, was opened to Juniors as well as Seniors. In the catalogue of 1851-2 Story on the Constitution [1833: Volume 1; Volume 2; Volume 3], open to Juniors and Seniors, took the place of Kent’s Commentaries, Vol. 1, which probably had been used continuously since 1842, though it is not named in the catalogues of 1846-7, 1848-9. In 1852-3 the study of Guizot’s Lectures on Civilization was added to the courses previously prescribed for Seniors. In 1854 Prof. Haddock, who three years earlier had accepted the position of Charge d’ Affaires of the United States at the court of Lisbon, resigned his chair. A nephew of Daniel Webster, Prof. Haddock resembled his distinguished relative in graceful diction, luminous statement and, capacity for logical argument. These qualities, though best displayed in his brief service in the New Hampshire Legislature and his public addresses, made his class room instruction memorable and the tradition of its large value is uniform.

His successor was Rev. Clement Long (D. C., 1828), who had served as Lecturer on Intellectual and Moral Philosophy since 1851. The courses in Law, Government and Economics when he assumed his chair were the four previously named: Political Economy, (Say), History (Guizot), Constitutional Law (Story [1833: Volume 1; Volume 2; Volume 3],), open to both Seniors and Juniors — and the Federalist. No change was made by him in these courses during his term of office, except that in 1860-61 Story on the Constitution was withdrawn and Woolsey’s International Law was offered to Juniors though it does not appear during the years immediately following. Prof. Long, like all the other incumbents of this chair, occasionally supplemented the prescribed textbooks by formal lectures. Two of his are the only ones that an extended search has discovered. One is entitled “The Justice and Expendiency of Laws Regulating Trade.” The other treats of “The Importance of the Study of Human Nature in Relation to Politics,” and discusses first, the actual interest of Americans in politics; second, urgent reasons why their political opinions should be correct; third, the certainty that there must be somewhere a basis of fact for some political theories; fourth, some principles in human nature which a political theorist should recognize, and fifth, certain errors which have sprung from a disregard of these principles. Prof. Long was a trained logician who had a scrupulous regard for facts and unusual power to stimulate thought. His professional training led him to give large place to the ethical aspect of whatever subject he taught, and his success as a teacher of Political Science and Economics and his moulding power upon his students was marked.

Upon the death of Prof. Long in 1861 he was succeeded by Prof. Samuel Gilman Brown (D. C., 1831). During his occupancy of this chair the three courses in Political Economy (Say), History (Guizot), and the Federalist were offered in each year, and in addition the following: in 1862 Lieber’s Civil Liberty and Self Government; in 1864 May’s Constitutional History of England [1878: Volume 1; Volume 2 ; Volume 3]; in 1865 Pomeroy’s Municipal Law. Prof. Brown resigned in 1867. Widely known to American lawyers as the graceful biographer of Rufus Choate, Prof. Brown in the class room emphasized the historical phase of his work and impressed all who came under his instruction by his varied culture, exact thought, and judicial temper.

His successor was Prof. Daniel J. Noyes (D. C., 1838), during whose term the instruction in Law and Government was greatly strengthened. He substituted Pomeroy’s Constitutional Law for the Federalist which had been used continuously in the class room at least since 1822, and Bowen’s National Economy and later Perry’s Political Economy for Say’s which had been used by successive classes since 1828. In 1867-8 International Law was offered to Juniors for whom it continued to be prescribed till 1876 when it became a Senior study.

From 1869 to 1875 Joel Parker (D.C. 1811), Chief Justice of New Hampshire from 1838 to 1848, and Royall Professor of Law in the Harvard Law School from 1847 to 1868, Trustee of the College from 1843 to 1860, annually delivered a course of lectures on law before its officers and students. Unfortunately only three of these lectures, those delivered in 1869, were published. These may be found in the volume entitled Addresses of Joel Parker, under the titles of: 1, “The Three Powers of Government;” 2, “The Origin of the United States and the Status of the Southern States on the Suppression of the Rebellion;” 3, “The Three Dangers of the Republic.” These were clear, logical and masterly discussions of some of the questions in American Constitutional Law which were then agitating the public mind. The events of the recent Rebellion which suggested these subjects, the clear and interesting exposition of the National Theory of the Constitution by Pomeroy in the class room by Professor Noyes, and the legal acumen and powerful logic with which that theory as applied by the party then dominant in the government was criticised in the lecture room by Judge Parker, gave special interest during this period to the course in Constitutional Law.

In 1871 Benjamin Labaree (D. C., 1828), ex-President of Middlebury College, was added to the faculty as special Lecturer on International Law, and continued to instruct Juniors in this subject until his retirement in 1876, when it was transferred to the Senior year. His lectures, with illustrations drawn from our recent diplomatic history, worthily supplemented those just described on Constitutional Law.

In 1883 Professor Noyes resigned. Of him no discriminating pupil could say less than that he had “the beauty of accuracy in his understanding and the beauty of righteousness in his character.” In the class-room he always showed thorough command of the material of his text books and constantly “aimed to secure the thorough mastery of these, as being for most students the best preparation for broad and thorough supplementary study of other authors, and other aspects of each subject.”

During the two following years the regular courses in Political Economy, in Constitutional Law, and in International Law were conducted by Samuel G. Brown, Professor of Intellectual Philosophy and Political Economy, 1863–7 and ex-President of Hamilton College, and Henry A. Folsom, Esq., (D.C., 1871), a member of the Suffolk Bar of Massachusetts.

In 1882 the study of American Political History was added to the curriculum for Seniors, and during the collegiate years 1882-5, there being no chair of history, instruction in this subject was generously given by Charles F. Richardson, Winkley Professor of the English Language and Literature. The manual used as a basis in this course was Johnston’s American Politics.

In 1885 a legacy to the College from Chief Justice Parker, whose death occurred ten years earlier, became available for the establishment of such a collegiate professorship of law as had been planned by the Trustees in 1808. This distinguished jurist, whose many and unrequited services to his Alma Mater were not limited to or measured by his faithful discharge of the duties of Trustee and Lecturer on Law during a whole generation, intended to found a Law Department in Dartmouth College. The inadequacy of the realized endowment for that purpose and the difficulties that were anticipated in the attempt to conduct an additional law school in New England, apart from any populous center and remote from courts, led the Trustees, when duly authorized thereto, in 1885, to apply this legacy to the establishment of the Joel Parker Professorship of Law and Political Science. In the same year the present incumbent of this chair was elected and also was made Instructor in History. The courses offered under his tuition during the next ten years, 1885-95 (except when transferred to his colleagues as below specified), included the following:

Constitutional Law (Required for Seniors). Text, Cooley’s Principles of Constitutional Law.
Elementary Law (Elective for Seniors). Text, Hadley’s Roman Law and Markby’s Elements of Law, or Holland’s Jurisprudence.
International Law (Elective for Seniors). Text, Woolsey’s or Davis’ International Law.
Elementary Political Economy (Required for Seniors). Text, Walker’s Political Economy. This course was transfered to the Professor of Social Science in 1893.
Advanced Political Economy (Elective for Seniors). An historical and critical study of some present economic problems, such as Taxation, Tariff History of the United States Banking, Bimetallism. Among the texts used in different years were Cossa’s Principles and Methods of Taxation, Taussig’s Tariff History of the United States, Dunbar’s Theory and History of Banking, Hadley’s Railroad Transportation, and the Annual Reports of the Secretary of the Treasury and the Comptroller of the Currency. This course was introduced in 1888 and a part of its work was transferred to the Professor of Social Science in 1893.
Advanced Political Economy (Elective for Seniors). Economic History. Lectures with use of Rand’s Economic History since 1763 and Wells’ (D. A.) Recent Economic Changes. This course was introduced in 1888 and was transferred to the Professor of Social Science in 1893.
Mediaeval and Modern History (Required for Sophomores). Text, Freeman’s General Sketch of European History or Myers’ Mediaeval and Modern History. In 1888 this course was transferred to Librarian Marvin D. Bisbee to give place to course 9 below described.
American Political History (Elective for Seniors), Lectures on the Physical Geography of the United States, the Planting of the English Colonies, the Formation of the Union, and a study of the period 1783-1860. Manuals used were Fiske’s Critical Period of American History, Johnston’s American Politics. This course was transferred to the Professor of History in 1893, though taught during that year by Prof. D. Collin Wells.
English Constitutional History (Elective for Seniors), Texts, Taswell-Langmead’s or May’s Constitutional History of England [1878: Volume 1; Volume 2 ; Volume 3].

During these years, 1885–95, while many new electives were being added to the curriculum the number of students pursuing the studies above described is shown in the following table:

Class	Constitutional Law (Required)	Elementary Law (Elective)	International Law (Elective)	American Political History (Elective)	English Constitutional History (Elective)	Elementary Economics (Required)	Advanced Economics (Required)	Economic History (Elective)
1886	55	17	47	45		55
1887	63	9	26	38		63
1888	48	23	24	30		48	10
1889	52	8	21	27	8	52	4	7
1890	53	12	25	38	8	53	23	4
1891	46	21	29	43	4	46	25	20
1892	55	13	20	43	11	55	31	24
1893	56	18	20	42	18	56	26	9
1894	65	18	7	15	13	65	33	15

In 1893 a notable enlargement and marked improvement in the work of the College was made possible by the establishment of chairs of Social Science and of History. The resulting division of the labor of the Parker Professor of Law and Political Science, the addition of numerous courses⁵ in Social Science and History, and the mutual helpfulness of each of these departments whose subject matters are interdependent, have united to give Dartmouth exceptional means among smaller colleges for the pursuit of those studies which directly promote good citizenship.

* * * * * * * * * * *

⁵ See “Study of Sociology at Dartmouth,” by Prof. D. C. Wells, in The Dartmouth, June 14, 1895, and “Teaching of History at Dartmouth,” by Prof. H. D. Foster in The Dartmouth, May 22, 1896.

* * * * * * * * * * *

In Law and Political Science the courses offered during the current year, 1895–96, the object proposed and the method used are as follows:

American Constitutional Law (Prescribed for Seniors, First Term). This course is designed to give students a knowledge of the general principles of the Constitutional Law of the United States, both federal and statal. Such knowledge is exacted of all students because it is deemed essential to intelligent citizenship. The historical aspect of the subject is emphasized and particular attention is given to the origin and development of American political institutions, to the merits of written and unwritten constitutions, and to the immediate causes of the adoption of the federal constitution and to the most important parts of its text. The system of State and Federal courts is also described, frequent reference is made to reports, and students are urged to read leading cases and those of present practical interest. Recitations, supplemented by lectures and examination. Forty-two exercises, three hours weekly. (Cooley’s Principles of Constitutional Law).
English Constitutional History and Law (Elective for Seniors, Second Term). This course is planned with special reference to the needs of students who expect to enter the profession of law. It traces the growth of English political and legal institutions from the earliest times to the present. Forty-eight exercises, four hours weekly. (Taswell-Langmead’s English Constitutional History, or Anson’s Law and Custom of the Constitution [1886: Part 1 Parliament ; 1896 Part 2 The Crown], with use of the Statutes of the Realm, and Select Charters).
The State (Elements of Politics). (Elective for Seniors, Second Term). This course is historical as well as comparative and critical. It treats of the origin and development of the state, its forms, functions, and ends. It includes a brief study of the governments of Greece and Rome, the Teutonic (Mediaeval) Polity, and comparison of the present constitutions of England, France, Germany and the United States. Recitations and lectures. Twenty-four exercises, two hours weekly. Manual, Wilson’s The State.
Elementary Law. (Elective for Seniors, Third Term), This course is intended for students who expect to enter the profession of law, and is planned to give a general view of the whole field of the law and an introduction to its terminology and its fundamental ideas. It consists of (a) an historical survey of the Roman Law and of the English Common Law and (b) a critical examination of the fundamental ideas in both these systems of law. Recitations and lectures with reports on assigned topics in the history of law. Forty exercises, four hours weekly. Texts, Hadley’s Introduction to Roman Law, Markby’s Elements of Law.
International Law. (Elective for Seniors, Third Term). This course is historical and explanatory of present international relations. It treats of the origin and development of the rules that generally govern the intercourse of modern civilized states, the most important European treaties since 1648, and some subjects of recent interest in American Diplomacy such as the Northeast Fisheries, Asylum on American Merchant Vessels in Foreign Waters, Jurisdiction over Behring Sea, Recognition of Cuban Belligerency. Lectures and readings. Twenty exercises, two hours weekly. Manual, Lawrence’s Principles of International Law.
Graduate Course. This is an extension of courses 1, 2, 3 and 4. The work includes American Constitutional History, 1789-1865, English Constitutional History, 1760-1870, the History of the Common Law, and Comparative Constitutional Law.

In all these six courses the method of instruction is a combination of recitation upon text book and of lectures. The proportionate use of each varies both with the subject matter and with the class or division and its adjudged requirements; but in all cases a text-book with set lessons, followed by examination, both oral and written, is prescribed as a basis for the class or division work.

In 1894, through the liberality of Gardiner G. Hubbard, Esq., (D. C. 1841), a Lectureship on United States History during and since the Civil War was established which has been filled for the past three years by ex-Senator Henry L. Dawes. His large ability, long experience in both branches of Congress and ripe judgment have made these lectures authoritative expositions of constitutional law, economic policy and recent political history, and greatly strengthened the regular work of the College. The subjects of these lectures were as follows:

In 1894: The Dual Character of Our Government; The Respective Powers of the Legislative, Executive, and Judicial Branches of the Government; The Executive Department; The Battle Before the War; The Reconstruction and Rehabilitation of the Seceding States; The History of Tariff Legislation.

In 1895: The Amendments of the Constitution, Their History and Character; The Origin and Basis of Nullification and Secession; The History and Character of Our Territorial Acquisitions; The Presidency in Court (Impeachment and Counting the Electoral Vote); Thaddeus Stevens and His Leadership in the War and Reconstruction; The United States and the Indian.

In 1896: Politics in Appointments; The Constitution and Interstate Commerce; Inter-Oceanic Commerce; The History and Scope of the Monroe Doctrine; England During and After Our Civil War; Fifty Years of Development and Expansion in a Written Constitution.

No account of instruction in Law and Economics in Dartmouth College would be complete which failed to mention the work which has been done in its Associated Institutions. In the Chandler Scientific School at different times between 1853 and its closer union with the College in 1893, brief elective courses were offered in Municipal, Constitutional and International Law, and Political Economy. Instruction in these subjects commonly was given by the same person who taught them in the College, but in Municipal Law, from 1883–6, by Henry A. Folsom, Esq., and in Political Economy from 1884–92 by Charles P. Chase (D. C. 1869), the present Treasurer of the College.

In the Medical School lectures on Medical Jurisprudence were given as early as 1838 and a professorship of Medical Jurisprudence was established as early as 1847. This chair has been held in succession by three eminent graduates of the College whose contributions to legal literature and whose services as teachers of law have added to their high reputation, Chief Justice Joel Parker, Chief Justice Isaac F. Redfield and Prof. John Ordronaux.

The Law Library of the College numbers by recent count 2700 volumes, made up of statutes, histories of law, treatises, English and American reports, and numerous works on Roman Civil Law. A large part of the treatises and reports were received from Chief Justice Parker. The more recent additions are due to the liberality of some of the Alumni of New York. There is need of constant though small additions to this library for which there is no permanent fund.

Such have been the civic studies offered by Dartmouth for one hundred years. With what measure of success they have been taught by the different instructors named must be judged by the Historian of the College. But it is permissible, so plain is the record, for any one to affirm that all of them, Shurtleff, Haddock, Long, Brown, and Noyes, and the special Lecturers have been faithful to their high trust of training American youth for good citizenship. This implies, since Dartmouth has constantly insisted that all candidates for its degrees should have some knowledge of Political Science and the fundamental laws of their country, that none of its graduates have gone forth wholly unprepared for the intelligent discharge of their duties as citizens. The circumstance that a large proportion of these graduates have entered the profession of law and the subordinate place commonly given to the topics of Political Science, Public and International Law in Law Offices and Law Schools also have contributed to make these collegiate instructors important though silent forces in the Commonwealth. The extent of the influence of a college upon public affairs is not susceptible of exact statement, but an unmistakable sign that that of Dartmouth has been large is found not only in the number of its distinguished graduates whose names are part of our legal and political history, among whom are Webster, Choate, Chase, Parker, and Redfield, but also in the marked tendency of its graduates toward the profession of law. This tendency, challenging attention in the early years of the century and continuing to its close, is shown in the following table compiled from the General Catalogue:

Years	Total Graduates	Lawyers	Per cent
1771-1780	89	4	4 ½
1780-1790	165	29	17 ½+
1790-1800	363	132	36 1/3 +
1800-1810	337	156	46 ¼ +
1810-1820	400	109	27 ½ +
1820-1830	335	101	30 +
1830-1840	388	104	26 ¾
1840-1850	588	163	27 ¾ +
1850-1860	565	178	31 ½ +
1860-1870	495	143	29 –
1870-1880	616	184	30 –
1880-1890	538	130	24 +
	4879	1433	29 +

Whatever Dartmouth College has been able to accomplish during the long period under review by the offer of political, legal, and economic studies in promoting good citizenship and in contributing to the broad training of lawyers has been due in no small degree to two causes. One is the strong character of the youth who have formed its constituency and who have come to its portals mainly from New England where township government already had awakened their political instincts and made them unusually receptive of the ideas of political philosophers and eager for a practical knowledge of law. The other is the wise refusal of its Founder to prescribe any such test of political orthodoxy for its teachers as was set up by Jefferson in the University of Virginia or Wharton in the School of Finance and Economy in the University of Pennsylvania, and its trustful commission to them to teach untrammelled and without regard to sect or party what they believed to be the truth.

Source: James Fairbanks Colby, Legal and Political Studies in Dartmouth College, 1796-1896.

Tags ColbyJF

Berkeley Columbia Dartmouth Economist Market Economists Germany Iowa Northwestern

Columbia. Economics Ph.D. alumnus who killed his Dean and self at Syracuse. Beckwith, 1913

Post author By Irwin Collier
Post date 2020-12-05

Imagine what can possibly go wrong when a narcissist finds himself (herself) terminated from nine jobs over the course of a decade. The worst case scenario of murder-suicide as the culmination of professional decline and fall for the 1913 Columbia Ph.D. alumnus, Holmes Beckwith, is documented below using a few contemporary press accounts. His story was sensational and reported widely across the country.

For this post I have added a chronology along with a pair of genealogical tables to help readers distinguish among the members of the Beckwith and the Holmes families mentioned. Warning: I have encountered numerous errors in the contemporary newspaper accounts.

The final entry included in the post paints a much more sympathetic portrait of Holmes Beckwith, reminding us all of the tragedy of mental illness.

The annual reports of the Hawaiian Mission Children’s Society served as a sort of “Alumni notes” with contact information as well as personal and professional news that were useful in keeping track of Holmes Beckwith’s movements over his brief professional career.

Useful genealogical information found at a roots.web Beckwith page.

Note: Holmes Beckwith does not appear to have been closely related (if at all) to William Erastus Beckwith, husband of 1925 Radcliffe Ph.D. Ethelwynn Rice).

_________________________

Chronology

1884. Born October 5 in Haiku, Maui of the Hawaiian Kingdom. Parents: Frank Armstrong Beckwith (1854-1885) and Ellen Warren Holmes.

1900. Lived with his mother (Ellen), sister (Ruth), and aunt (Mary G. Holmes) in Los Angeles.

Holmes went to high school in Los Angeles.

Attended Pacific Theological School at Berkeley, CA, completing about half the course, transferred to University of California.

1906. Address: 2231 Dana St., Berkeley, CA. (Source: Hawaiian Mission Children’s Society)

1907. Address: 2231 Dana St., Berkeley, CA. (Source: Hawaiian Mission Children’s Society)

1908. B.L. from University of California, Berkeley.

Address: 2223 Atherton St., Berkeley, CA. (Source: Hawaiian Mission Children’s Society)

1909. M.L. from University of California, Berkeley.

Address: 2223 Atherton St., Berkeley, CA. (Source: Hawaiian Mission Children’s Society)

1909. June 22. Marriage to Helen Frances Robinson in Berkeley, CA. (Source: Hawaiian Mission Children’s Society)

1910. Address: Columbia University, New York City. (Source: Hawaiian Mission Children’s Society)

1911. Address: Columbia University, New York City. (Source: Hawaiian Mission Children’s Society)

1911. Summer. Research trip to Germany for dissertation.

“To learn at first hand from German experiences, I spent the summer of 1911 investigating industrial education in Germany. The cities visited were selected with a view to their importance industrially and include a number of the chief industrial centers in various lines of manufacture. The following cities were visited: The city State of Hamburg; Leipzig, Dresden, Chemnitz, and Plauen in Saxony; Munich in Bavaria; Mannheim, in Baden; and Berlin, Magdeburg, Frankfort on Main, Coblenz, Cologne, Dusseldorf, Elberfeld, Barmen, Dortmund, Essen, Duisburg, Crefeld, Munchen-Gladbach, Rheydt, and Aachen, in Prussia.” From the Preface of his dissertation.

1911-12. Dartmouth College. Instructor in economics.

Entered Federal service, Children’s Bureau (the Bureau of Education published his dissertation). The Children’s Bureau was established April 9, 1912 by President William Howard Taft. Initially part of the Department of Commerce and Labor. After 1913 it became part of the Department of Labor.

1913. Ph.D. from Columbia University.

German Industrial Education and its Lessons for the United States. Printed in the U.S. Bureau of Education [Department of the Interior], Bulletin No. 19, 1913. [Professor Henry R. Seager acknowledged in the preface]

1913-14. University of California. Assistant in economics and political economy.

“The Rev. F. H. Robinson of 2809 Russell street, Berkeley, his former father-in-law, states that his severity toward the students at that time caused them to demand his resignation.” The San Francisco Examiner. 3 April 1921, p. 8.
“According to colleagues in the department of economics in the university, he was ‘very eccentric.’” Oakland Tribune, Apr. 2, 1921, p. 1.

1914. Address: 3008 Benvenue Ave., Berkeley, CA. “Mr. Holmes Beckwith is a professor in the State University at Berkeley, Calif., and has recently received the degree of Ph.D.” (Source: Hawaiian Mission Children’s Society)

1914. August-December as bank examiner with the California State Banking Commission.

“Officials of the commission said the bankers complained he ‘lectured them like students’ on the theories of their own business instead of confining himself to the actual examination work”. New York Herald, April 3, 1921, p. 17.

1915. Address: Department of Labor, Washington, D.C. (Source: Hawaiian Mission Children’s Society)

1915-16. Officers’ training camp at Plattsburgh. [according to NYT: discharged for physical disability.] First Lieutenant of artillery (?), U.S. Army. [Note: I have not been able to confirm the reported military service claims yet.]

1916-17. Grinnell College.

“Several years ago a Holmes Beckwith was an assistant professor in the department of business administration at Grinnell college. He was here about a year and was never popular with the students. He left Grinnell about the middle of 1917.” The Gazette (Ceder Rapids, Iowa), April 2, 1921, p. 1.

1917. Address: Department of Labor, Washington, D.C. (Source: Hawaiian Mission Children’s Society)

1918. Address: Department of Labor, Washington, D.C. (Source: Hawaiian Mission Children’s Society)

1919. Address: 1724 Chicago Ave., Evanston, Ill. (Source: Hawaiian Mission Children’s Society)

1918-19. Northwestern University, Assistant Professor of Banking.

“…where he was described as being nervous and erratic.” New-York Tribune April 4, 1921, p. 5.

1919-20. Colorado College, College Springs, CO.

“He had a penchant for telling stories that were considered risqué for a Christian college.” New York Herald, April 3, 1921, p. 17.

1920. Address: 817 N. Tejon St., Colorado Springs, Col. (Source: Hawaiian Mission Children’s Society)

1920-21. Syracuse University, College of Business Administration. Instructor in Insurance.

1921. April 2. Suicide (+Murder). See below.

_________________________

Cast of relatives
[boldface denotes persons mentioned in the newspaper accounts]

Holmes Beckwith: Father’s side

(Grandparents)
Edward Griffin Beckwith (1826-1909)

(Granduncle)
George Ely Beckwith (1828-1898)
m. Harriet

(father)
Frank Armstrong Beckwith (1854-1885)

m. Ellen Warren Holmes in Montclair NJ

(Aunt)
Martha Warren Beckwith
(1871-1959)

(Aunt)
Mary E. Beckwith (1867-) teacher, artist

Holmes Beckwith
(1884-1921)
m. Helen Frances Robinson in 1909.

(sister)
Ruth Beckwith
(1882-1968)
m. Amasa Archibald Bullock

Note: (Professor) Aunt Martha Beckwith in Poughkeepsie, N.Y. had been a protégé of Columbia anthropologist Franz Boas. She became chair of the Vassar folklore department.

Holmes Beckwith: Mother’s side

(maternal grandparents) Samuel Holmes (1824-1897) and Mary Howe Goodale (1829-1899)
(mother) Ellen Warren Holmes (1857-1902) m. Frank Armstrong Beckwith in 1881	(uncle) David Goodale Holmes (1865-1944) m. Elizabeth Ann Bates (1862-1940) in 1886	(aunt) Mary Goodale Holmes (1862-1960)	(uncle) George Day Holmes (1867-1953) m. Julia Georgiana Rogers Baird, (1868-1928) in 1896.

Note: Uncle David Goodale Holmes of East Orange, N.J. was President of the Utility Company, 636 West Forty-fourth Street, New York City according to the report of New York Times, April 4, 1921, p. 17. Uncle George Day Holmes lived with his wife Julia in Montclair, N.J. Since she died in 1928, we can presume she was the ill aunt (presumably Aunt “Hattie”) who was not to be told of Holmes’ death.

_________________________

Professor Slays Dean, and Himself
Former U.C. Instructor Ends His Life After Fatal Shooting At Syracuse University; Note Tells of Plans
Dr. Holmes Beckwith, Once Employed As Examiner for State Banking Commission, Well Known in Berkeley

Oakland Tribune
02 Apr 1921, Page 1

By Associated Press.

SYRACUSE, N. Y., April 2. — J. Herman Wharton, dean of the College of Business Administration, Syracuse University, was shot and killed by Holmes Beckwith, professor of financial and insurance subjects, in the college this morning. Beckwith then turned the gun on himself and committed suicide. The shooting occurred in. the office of the School of Administration, in the College of Agriculture building. Professor Beckwith had been unpopular with the students, it was said, and petitions had been circulated among the student body asking for his removal.

Note tells of plan to commit suicide

In a statement issued soon after the shooting, Chancellor Day declared that it was his belief that Dean Wharton died trying to prevent Professor Beckwith from committing suicide. [Later reports note this is incorrect.] This was indicated in a note left for Dean Wharton by Prof. Beckwith, the chancellor said, in which he intimated that he was going to kill himself and referred to alleged unjust treatment of himself based on the fact that he had been dismissed, the dismissal to take effect at the end of the year. Dean Wharton’s chair, a stout one, was broken. He evidently leaped from it when Beckwith tried to kill himself, the gun was turned on him and the dean was shot through the head. Beckwith was shot in the chest. He also stabbed himself to make death certain. [This is apparently incorrect, though he was found to have had knife with him.]

Suicide was once artillery lieutenant

Dr. Beckwith was a first lieutenant, field artillery, in the world war. He joined the Syracuse University Faculty last September [1920]. He was head of the department of finance and insurance. Dean Wharton was a graduate of Syracuse university and has been an instructor there for the last few years. Two years ago he conceived the idea of a college of business administration and he was appointed to carry out the plan.

San Francisco, April 2. — Dr. Holmes Beckwith was an examiner for the State Banking Commission from August to December, 1914, and was dismissed upon complaint of the banks that he was not a proper person for the position, according to the commission’s records. These records show that he obtained the highest marks of those who participated in the test for examiner.

Beckwith was well known on U. C. campus Berkeley, April 2. — Holmes Beckwith was well known in Berkeley. At the University of California, where he was both a student and an instructor, he bore a reputation for being somewhat peculiar. According to colleagues in the department of economics in the. university, he was very eccentric.

Beckwith was a graduate of the State University of the class of 1908 and took his master’s degree a year later. Going East to study, he was granted a doctor of philosophy degree in Columbia in 1913. After receiving the Columbia degree he came to the University of California from Los Angeles to occupy a place on the college faculty. For the college year 1913-14 he was an assistant in economics at the university. He was reappointed for the following year of 1914-15, but did not serve.

_________________________

The Philadelphia Inquirer
April 3, 1921, pp. 1, 10.

“Beckwith failed to attend a meeting of the college faculty yesterday afternoon [April 1] and instead sent a letter to Dean Wharton, intended to be read at the meeting. The letter was found on Professor Wharton’s desk today after the murder.”

_________________________

Fires Five Bullets into Victim’s Body; Commits Suicide
John Herman Wharton of Syracuse University Slain by Prof. Beckwith in Revenge for Dismissal of Latter — Apparently Crazed by An Obsession of Persecution, as He Had Written of Impending Tragedy.

The Buffalo Times
April 3, 1921 [pp. 21-2.]

By Associated Press.

SYRACUSE, N. Y., April 2. — Dr. Holmes Beckwith, a former United States army lieutenant and California bank examiner, shot and killed his superior, Dean John Herman Wharton at Syracuse University, this morning, before commiting suicide himself, was probably insane as a result of chagrin over losing his position here, according to statements made by the authorities and Chancellor James R. Day of the University late tonight.

That Beckwith had premeditated suicide had not been clearly established, the instructor having left several letters showing his intention in that respect.

At first it was believed that Dr. Wharton had been killed in an unsuccessful attempt to prevent Beckwith’s suicide but this theory has now been cast aside.

Shot After Quarrel.

Coroner C. Ellis Crane, District Attorney Frank Malpass and Chancellor James R. Day are all agreed in the belief that Dr. Wharton was shot following an argument when Beckwith presented a letter in answer to Wharton’s notification that the university would have no need of Beckwith’s services after the close of college in June.

Five bullets were found in Dr. Wharton’s body indicating that Beck with had made sure his superior was dead before he turned his revolver upon himself and committed suicide.

Dean Wharton was in his 32d year and had been an instructor at Syracuse University since his graduation from that institution eight years ago. He was made dean of the College of Business Administration two years ago and Beckwith was one of the instructors under him.

Beckwith had been the butt of several jokes by the college student body during the last year. He had established the practice of locking the doors of the class room at the exact minute passes were due to begin and he would not admit tardy pupils.

He was strict in discipline and in the matter of time devoted to his classes and he had some peculiarities which made him more or less of a victim for students’ pranks and he was decidedly unpopular with them. It is claimed they circulated a petition for his discharge last fall.

University authorities had convinced themselves that Beckwith was a liability rather than an asset and last Monday he received his notification to look elsewhere for a teaching assignment next fall.

He protested but his arguments were without avail.

“Cornered Rat Will Fight.”

Friday night, it has been established, he spent hours in his room writing letters, one of which was addressed to Dean Wharton. It was lengthy document saying among other things, a “cornered rat will fight.”

His uncle Holmes of Montclair, N. J., be notified and that his action be kept from an aunt who is ill.

He wrote two aunts, Dr. Martha Beckwith and Miss Mary Beckwith of No. 50 Market Street, Poughkeepsie. N. Y., and to “Aunt Hattie,” believed to reside in Montclair. The letters thanked the relatives for their love and care assuring them that he loved them.

That he had a rather turbulent career and regarded at least two persons, outside of Syracuse, who had figured in his troubles in the educational world, as being worthy subjects for murder is shown in the story of his life, written under date of March 30, and turned over, according to his written wishes, to Prof. John O. Simmons, a faculty member here.

Discussing his discharge at Colorado College, Dr. Beckwith speaks of a Mr. Howbert, a bank president, apparently one of the board of governors, and writes:

“Mr. Howbert’s anger knew no bounds, I have never met him. I think a man to take the action he did is so unjust he should be shot.”

In his written story of his life he discusses troubles he had at Grinnell College in Iowa, which evidently culminated while he was serving in the army. He wrote:

“I would have murdered Mr. Main who certainly deserves this end in having treacherously betrayed one in his country’s service. Then I would have shot my self.”

Born in Hawaii.

The story of Beckwith’s life shows he was born October 5, 1884, in Kaiku, Island of Maui, then one of the Hawaiian kingdom. His father and grandfather were Congregational ministers and his one sister, Ruth Beckwith Bullock, is a missionary in Siang-Tan, China. He attended the Pacific Theological School at Berkeley, Calif., but did not complete the course. In 1911 he was graduated from Columbia, to which university he transferred in 1908. He married Helen Frances Robinson in California before entering Columbia. They had separated some time ago.

After graduation he spent a short time in Germany and returned to America as a teacher at Dartmouth. He condemned Dartmouth “as the toughest college In America, all men, the dominant element of whom delights in toughness.” He had trouble there, blaming his trouble on Prof. George R. Wicker, of whom he says “this humane cur, Wicker, has since died.”

His story tells of engagements in California, Colorado and Iowa, finally reverting to Syracuse.

Dismissed as Bank Examiner.

SAN FRANCISCO, Calif., April 2. — Dr. Holmes Beckwith was an examiner for the State Banking Commission from August to December, 1914, and was dismissed upon complaint of the banks that he was not a proper person for the position, according to the commission’s records.

The records show that he obtained the highest marks of those who participated in the test for examiner but was unable to meet the standards of the position in the financial field. Officials of the commission said that the bankers complained that he “lectured them like students” on the theories of their own business instead of confining himself to the actual examination work. He went to the banking commission from the University of California, where he was an instructor in economics and political economy.

Letter Beckwith Wrote Shows He Resented Wharton’s Act

SYRACUSE, April 2. — The following letter, written to Dean Wharton by Professor Beckwith, was found on Dean Wharton’s desk. In it the professor claims that he was in difficulties with the students only because he refused to permit them to run his classes.

“My attitude toward the students is that of seeking their best good,” Professor Beckwith wrote, protesting against his dismissal.

His letter follows:

The School of Business Administration.
John Herman Wharton, Director.
Department of Banking and Finance.

Holmes Beckwith,
Early Childs.
April 1, 1921.

To Dean John Herman Wharton and to whom it may concern:

I received last Saturday morning a letter from you stating that you did not care for further services on this faculty after this year. This was a great surprise to me, despite several conferences we have had in which some friction with students was discussed. I thought the matter was solving itself. I visited you at your home on Monday afternoon, and we discussed the matter, and I protested to you against the injustice done me. This was in vain.

Your only statement of causes was that certain disciplinary troubles and friction had arisen in my classes, and that I was not popular with my students. Now popularity Is NOT always easy to explain, or the lack of it, but certainly a man’s right to his position should not be dependent on such a fickle force. I believe that it is evident in the present case that this unpopularity is due primarily to my maintenance of relatively high scholastic standings, and to my suppressing certain tendencies toward running of the class by students.

The chief trouble was in money and banking class in the first semester. There was a very large registration, yet the whole number only filtered into class days late. This delayed the process of dividing into sections and started a spirit of unrest. Then the students objected to assignments averaging about two hours’ preparation per hour of recitation or lecture, which is I believe a proper standard for bona fide institutions. They walked out in a body on the day of any important game. The net result was, in one direction, that their grades suffered severely, and I had, after very careful consideration, to mark 33 out of 50 as failed. Those who failed, or many of them, I am told, objected seriously to this, and called me unfair.

I deny the charge, and assert that I have tried to be entirely fair throughout, and believe I have been so. I have no motive to be otherwise; and justice means much to me, not only toward myself, but towards others. These facts stated above explain any opposition on the part of any students, I believe sufficiently.

The dean says that other instructors have not had similar trouble. I know positively that some others have had. Though not so much as I. He says “force has its limitations in controlling students, and personality” must be used. I recognize this, and neither used force nor authority exclusively, nor failed to use personality.

Here inconsistency is shown by his suggesting at one time greater strictness, at another time less. My attitude toward my students is that of always seeking their best good. But that best good is not to be sought by slipshodness and making things too easy. I may say, without pressing the point, that a number of the faculty on the hill are too lax in standards, both of scholarship and discipline, seeking and obtaining popularity in degree thereby. These men constitute unfair competition to those of us who try to bring the students to higher levels in these respects. I am not naturally strong as a disciplinarian but with any proper students and any proper administration or support do well.

My subjects are technical and my students find them hard. This explains some of their reasons. They are not as a group, willing to pay the price for this knowledge and ability. Among them, I am glad to say, are some, whose earnestness is excellent and a few quite capable students. The student attitude in my classes, and I believe toward me personally, has been bettering. Dean Wharton did not care to consider this. Syracuse University is notably low in scholarship and low in discipline, honesty and general student morale. These facts are notorious, every faculty man knows and deplores them; many students also.

The dean’s action follows the line of least resistance, and shows little or no principle. It is easier to suit a number of disaffected students than one professor; to do injustice to one and to support that one in maintaining or securing some one higher standard. And certainly as to scholarship, who knows better or as well what is a requisite standard than the specialist in charge?

Such treatment is not new to me. This may seem to excuse the treatment but does not, I leave this point to ethical students. My rights are independent of the misconduct of others, as in the present instance, students or certain students. Unfortunately, by consent of the general student body, or of all in a class, the tone is often given more by the poorer or less desirable student than by the better element. It is the psychology of the mob in a degree. This matter at present is slowly improving in the college, due to student co-operation action.

I have a right to earn my living, to serve and be served. The world owes me a living — provided I can earn it. This right, is independent of whether I am given an opportunity to earn it or not. I am entitled to that opportunity in proportion to my ability. My physical qualifications are admittedly high and there is no criticism, expressed or implied as to them, or as to my technical conduct of teaching, or ability to impart. My recommendations on file in the dean’s office bear sufficient testimony to my ability.

[New York Herald, Apr 3, 1921, p. 17 reported the previous paragraph followed by the following two paragraphs.]

Even a cornered rat will fight. With others primarily, as I believe, at fault, should I alone bear the burden? I have written a general statement of my earlier experiences, which will aid in interpreting me for any who so desires.”

(This paragraph reported in other accounts as the end of Beckwith’s longer, autobiographical letter) “I shall cease to exist. My consciousness, a function or product, in some sense of my whole organic life, will cease and will remain a memory only. I trust I have bettered the world rather than the reverse. Om mane padne om! (The dew droops slips into the shining sea).”]

What did I mean by claiming right? The cynic denies that there is such a thing. The political scientist sometimes says there are no rights in society, organized as a State, has not formally granted by law.

Unfortunately the right to earn a living is not one of those thus far recognized by law. I believe it is a right notwithstanding. I am not embracing the so-called rights fallacy — or not the fallacious part of it. This fallacy consists in thinking that there are any rights, always and anywhere valid, not dependent on circumstances. Yet the heart of the doctrine is true that right exist, whether men recognize them or not. I consider that rights in the best sense, that is expedient or rational rights, are claims which are within accord with social or public expediency — mine for continuous employment in accord with my abilities and recognition of such abilities? Social interest in this case requires, I believe, administrative support, continuous support, and pressure, to raise the student standard, rather than the ousting of me. I have only asked reasonable standards of them and even compromised to the extent of raising every student 10 per cent, in most classes, who would thereby pass.

The present situation is intolerable to me, in the strict sense. This isn’t largely due to the repetition here of similar treatment elsewhere received. Despite similar injunctions I have arisen, by inherent ability and hard work. I have had so many changes of location, also so many different courses, and developed them so much, by mimeographed notes and otherwise, that I have not had time to write for publication yet. My rise has been due to my ability; the obstacles and injustices due to conditions not primarily my fault.

I have been bruised for others’ iniquities.

I informed the dean that he had made the situation intolerable to me and presented my case, asking for justice. He refused, and said his action was final. I cannot continue thus — subject to lack of confidence of those in authority, worry, depression often-times as now marked, lack of incentive and of hope. Some students and others simply do not like my type of man, or the standards which I represent; though I think and many friends think (I believe) that the type is a high one, of much potentialities of good for the world.

Dean Wharton and some others in authority have given way to this pressure, taking “the easiest way” for them, and in doing so repeatedly confirmed my suspicions that the world, as a whole, as indicated by the attitude of those who control the situation, is unfriendly to me. I cannot be hardly accused of ingratitude if I do not accept this opinion and consider that the world has not even given me a semblance of justice. The dean is fully responsible, as he accepted this proposition. He could support me, and should but refuses. Collectively the students who oppose me (I am glad that that does not include all my students, and I believe the dean underestimates the extent of their loyalty to me) have the main responsibility.

[New York Times, p. 14 includes the following:
“They started this and are about to see their handiwork come to fruition. Perhaps they may earn something from this that will benefit themselves and others. The tyranny of the mob over the individual is here very evident, and the individual is not strong enough to permanently stand against the mob.
I do not believe I have been appreciated. I have not done injustice to anyone. I have fought the good fight and my conscience is clear. I am too idealistical ethically, not philosophically, for my own good. I realize that principle means too much to me. Even a cornered rat will fight. With others, I believe, primarily at fault, should I alone bear the burden.
The law was established to settle quarrels, not to establish justice, which is incidental only. I quote from a prominent New York attorney. Since the world has so greatly failed to give me justice, why would not I, as fully as my power permits, attempt to secure a modicum of justice?
If society would have it otherwise, let them establish it.”]

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

Beckwith Butt Of Jokes from First Class Day

SYRACUSE, N. Y., April 2. — Professor Beckwith was the butt of jokes by the students from the first day that he took a class. When he was registering a class in banking and finance, some jokester wrote a fake registration in the name of “Makiswash Blivitz” and turned it in. The professor failed to realize that the name was false, and he put it in his registration book, and never failed to call it out when taking the attendance or calling the roll.

The name of “Blivitz” always drew a laugh from the students. To make their joke more certain, they occasionally imported a law school student, a stranger to Professor Beckwith, who answered to the call of “Blivitz.”

The joke was too good to be retained within the student body. The faculty heard of it, and of course, some of the professors laughed about it, too. Then it reached the ears of Chancellor Day, and he instructed Professor Beckwith to take the name of Blivitz from his lists.

Professor Beckwith refused to do this, however, thinking that some day he would catch the student who sometimes answered to the name and make an object lesson of him. One result was that the newspapers heard of it, and one printed a series of “Blivitz” stories, which annoyed the professor tremendously.

Another thing for which the professor became noted was that he operated his classes under lock and key. As soon as the bell rang for a class he locked the door, and if a student came late he was admitted by the professor himself.

It was also noticed by the students that if Professor Beckwith’s class concluded its work a few minutes ahead of time he always held them in the class room until the exact minute scheduled for closing of classes.

_________________________

Murder and Suicide Verdict Given in Syracuse Tragedy
Dr. Wharton, Victim of Radical Professor’s Bullet,
Was About to Marry a Rich Woman, Friends Say

New York Tribune
April 4, 1921 [p. 5]

SYRACUSE, N. Y., April 3. “Murder and suicide” was the coroner’s verdict to-day in the double tragedy at Syracuse University yesterday when Professor Holmes Beckwith shot and killed Dean John Herman Wharton, of the College of Business Administration, and then, reloading the gun, fired two bullets into his own body, killing himself.

Beckwith fired five bullets into the body of the dean as it lay on the floor turned the revolver on himself and fell ten feet away.

Professor Wharton’s body was removed to his home in Clarendon Street where funeral services will be held. Beckwith’s body has been claimed by David G. Holmes, of East Orange, N.J., an uncle.

Authorities are still delving into the mass of letters, papers, essays and other documents left by the murderer in his home and sent, to various friends and college associates, most of them; written after he had been asked to resign from the Syracuse faculty at the end of the college year. It was learned to-day that Dr. Wharton was about to be married. So far as can be learned he had not given out the name of his prospective bride even among his intimate friends. The woman is understood to have been of independent means. Beckwith’s last literary effort, his life story, given to the public by Professor J. O. Simmons, reveals the entire philosophy of the assassin, American-born in Hawaii, intellectual apostate Christian, athletic dilettante, reader of strange tongues, sociologist, egoist, professed lover of humanity, army officer, dabbler in Far East religions, radical, atheist, murderer and self-slayer.

Among his effects was found a snap-shot photograph of his father and former President Taft as classmates at Yale, where they wore contestants for the presidency of the class.

That the crime was premeditated shown by Beckwith’s own writings. Desperate because of repeated failures to hold a place in the teaching profession, having been dismissed in disgrace from all of the nine places he had he since graduation from the University of California ten years ago, he determined to leave a world in which could not succeed and to take the man he held responsible for his latest failure along with him.

On several other occasions, when he had been dismissed from college faculties, he had planned murder, sometimes suicide in addition. Once was at Northwestern University at Evanston, Ill., where he was described as being nervous and erratic.

_________________________

Suicide and Deathwished in Biography
Slayer in Syracuse Tragedy Was Obsessed With Belief of Persecution at Hands of University Executives
Had Murder of His Employees [sic] in Mind Frequently and Brooded Over Trouble With Wife, His Writings Reveal

Oakland Tribune (California). April 3, 1921, p. 33.

By Universal Service. Leased Wire to Tribune.

Syracuse, N.Y., April 2. —

That death and suicide ran continuously through the mind of Dr. Holmes Beckwith of the college of business administration of Syracuse University, who today shot and killed Dean John Herman Wharton, and then committed suicide, is shown in his farewell biography.

That document shows:

First, that Dr. Beckwith had in his mind the murder of President John Hanson Thomas Main of Grinell College.

Second, that Dr. Beckwith thought that President Irving Howbert, of the First National Bank of Colorado Springs “should be shot.”

Third, that Dr. Beckwith considered the late Dr. George Ray Wicker, his superior at Dartmouth, a “human cur” and a man “who would stab his best friend in the back if he saw an advantage in it.”

Suicide Obsessed by Idea of Persecution

Dr. Beckwith finally was crazed by the obsession that he was the target for persecution at nearly every college where he taught, and this was aggravated by mourning for his wife, who had divorced him and whom, he believed, had married again.

Dr. Wharton had advised Dr. Beckwith that his services would be no longer required at Syracuse after June.

Dr. Beckwith, a native of the Hawaiian Islands, was a former bank examiner in California and expert in finance and statistics. Before coming to Syracuse Dr. Beckwith was professor of similar subjects at Colorado college, Colorado springs. Also he was formerly with Iowa State University [sic, Grinell college] and the school of commerce at Northwestern University, Evanston, Ill. He had degrees of bachelor of law and master of law at the University of California and doctor of philosophy from, Columbia University.

In his farewell biography Dr. Beckwith says:

“In 1909, before going to Columbia I had married Helen Frances Robinson of Berkeley a fellow philosophical student. We also went to Germany together. On return from Germany we settled at Hanover, N.H., where I had a position as instructor in economics in Dartmouth college.

“The start here was extremely unfortunate, as Dartmouth is the toughest college in the country. I had some disciplinary trouble with my students. Another element was the personality of the professor in charge of the beginning course, in which all my work lay. He, Professor George Ray Wicker, is a bright man, an idealist in the abstract, but as my office mate stated, he would “stab his best friend in the back if he saw an advantage in it. He sought my discharge and evidently demanding it from his chief, I was left to shift for myself.”

Wife Finances Him When Out of Work

Later, the Beckwiths landed in New York, “broke.” Beckwith details:

“Karl and his wife, Sadie Robinson, my wife’s first cousin, took us in and got Helen a position as his secretary in a war relief organization. She financed us in the main, all that year, aided by the proceeds or sale of my share and by realty dividends. My wife deserves all credit for this aid, aptly given to a hard-pressed husband.

“In August, 1916, I went to Plattsburgh officers’ training camp at infantry. I then left to take a position as assistant professor of business administration in Grinnell college, Grinnell, Iowa. An affair had developed between Karl Robinson and my wife. She later ceased to love me and the upshot prolonged over a number of heart-rending years (for we had been for years very well and thoroughly married) was that my former wife is now Mrs. Karl Davis Robinson of New York City; the former Mrs. Robinson is now alone with two children; and I am alone. In this matter I may say that the guilty pair have, I believe, the sympathy of no one who knows the case, though their families can not fail to regard them as still blood relations and friends. I am, I am glad to say, still enrapport with my wife’s family and especially, good friends with her mother.”

Then came a period of military service. Discharged for disability, Beckwith went back to Grinnell. The instructor was met with a refusal of his old berth on the faculty. Beckwith held President Main responsible.

“I would have murdered Mr. Main, who certainly deserves this end in thus treacherously betraying one in his country’s service,” he writes.

Colorado College Afford Trouble

Next came his connection with Colorado college. He styles President Diniway as “a weak, unscrupulous man, the tool of the trustees.” He claims President Irving Hawbert, of the Colorado Springs First National bank, demanded his discharge because Beckwith used another bank than his.

An atheistical religious lecture also was involved in the controversy, Beckwith says: “Mr, Judson M. Bemis, self millionaire and founder of the department in which I taught, learned of the religious lecture, took violent opposition thereto and had his private detectives look up all the incumbents of the department chair.”

In conclusion, Beckwith says:

“The world as a whole has not given me justice, or anything like justice. I am comforted in a measure by the loyalty and appreciation of some friends. But it seems that the employing class, the executives who hold my fate in their hands, have been notably unfriendly as a class. Injustice rankles; it cuts like a knife. The worry, the fears, the uncertainty, the depression due to the injustice and lack of appreciation, the constant moves, the lack of incentive to good work, are not permanently endurable. They must end—in some way.”

_________________________

Beckwith Leaves Estate To Aunt; Gives Sister Only $10

Buffalo Courier, April 9, 1921 p. 2

Syracuse, April 8. – Prof. Holmes Beckwith, who shot and killed Dean Wharton and himself at Syracuse university last Saturday, leaves practically his entire estate, valued at $4,500, to an aunt, Mrs. Mary G. Holmes of Los Angeles. The will was filed for probate by David G. Holmes of East Orange, N. J., an uncle, today. A sister, Ruth B. Bullock, doing missionary work in China, is cut off with $10 because, “in my years of severe trouble she, unsister-like, gave me no economic aid and only scant sympathy.”

_________________________

Report from the Hawaiian Children’s Society, 1922

Holmes Beckwith.–The tragic circumstances attending the death of Holmes Beckwith may lead those who did not personally know him to misunderstand his life and character. It was perhaps to the completely feminine control under which he grew up that he owed a sensitiveness almost woman-like. His exacting Puritan ancestry gave him his habit of introspection and his dependence upon an absolute justice which never allowed him the relief of compromise. Intellectually he was as honest and open as the sun. He loved to be out of doors, had disciplined his body to long tramps and his mind to the love of solitude in the open. Yet he was the most social of beings. He was a quick and accurate observer; as a boy of eleven he knew the rigging of every craft in New York harbor. His habit of systematic thinking made him able, without practical experience, to grasp difficult technical subjects with astonishing readiness and clearness and to delight in such acquisition. He collected and sorted knowledge as other men collect objects of value. He was gentle with women. Children adored him. A fellow-boarder who knew him during his last year at Syracuse writes of “his fidelity to intellectual honesty and industry, with an eye single to the welfare of humanity which was his guide and passion in all he said and did,” of “his character sound to the core, the high aspirations, the honesty, simplicity and courage, together with a warm heart, zeal for service and brilliant intellect.” She says, “He cared more for religion even in these last years, than for anything else in the world.”

A friend and fellow-student in his university days writes, “No man held in reverence a higher standard of right in private and in public. He was not like other men, nor did he know men well enough to make allowances for their weaknesses. He applied to them the same rigid exactness he did to himself. His fine strong life and adherence at all costs to what he felt right and true will leave a lasting impression on all students he has studied with. He was always so genuinely interested in every detail of life, and without a cantakerous feeling in the world, was so frank and open and free, I shall always be his debtor. I can see him now as he swung along fast, yet firm down a street, every nerve and both eyes intent on his present plan I can hear his hearty greeting: ‘Hello, Arch, how do you function in your philosophic soul?’ He never lost one whit of his direct boyish appeal and immediate contact with everyone. He took every one straight into his thought just as he tried to get straight into theirs.” Those who knew and appreciated his brilliant capacities and un swerving honesty of life and purpose, and who watched his brave struggle with those inherent difficulties of temperament which blocked his progress among men, can say with confidence that his life was at no moment an unworthy one; and the tragedy of his death was such that those who best knew the circumstances and who suffered most directly from them, have attached to him no blame.

Source: The Seventieth Annual Report of the Hawaiian Mission Children’s Society, 1922, pp. 68-69.

_________________________

Image Source: Pittsburgh Press (April 6, 1921), p. 36.

Tags Beckwith, Seager

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.

Post author By Irwin Collier
Post date 2020-11-22

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 [2^nd] Advanced Course Seminary of History, Pol. Sci., and Pol. Econ.	2½ — — — —	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 [1^st] Elementary [2^nd] 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 18^thCentury 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, 4^th 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	2½ — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —	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 13^th to 17^th 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 2½	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	1½ — —	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.}

Source: Appendix 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.

Tags Laughlin

Amherst Barnard Berkeley Brown Chicago Colorado Columbia Cornell Dartmouth Duke Harvard Illinois Indiana Iowa Johns Hopkins Kansas M.I.T. Michigan Michigan State Minnesota Missouri Nebraska North Carolina Northwestern NYU Ohio State Pennsylvania Princeton Radcliffe Rochester Stanford Swarthmore Texas Tufts UCLA Vassar Virginia Washington University Wellesley Williams Wisconsin Yale

U.S. Bureau of Education. Contributions to American Educational History, Herbert B. Adams (ed.), 1887-1903

Post author By Irwin Collier
Post date 2020-02-22

I stumbled across this series while I was preparing the previous post on the political economy questions for the Harvard Examination for Women (1874). I figured it would be handy for me to keep a list of links to the monographs on the history of higher education in 35 of the United States at the end of the nineteenth century. Maybe this collection will help you too.

Contributions to American Educational History, edited by Herbert B. Adams

The College of William and Mary. Herbert B. Adams (1887)
Thomas Jefferson and the University of Virginia. Herbert B. Adams (1888)
History of Education in North Carolina. Charles L. Smith (1888)
History of Higher Education in South Carolina. C. Meriwether (1889)
Education in Georgia. Charles Edgeworth Jones (1889)
Education in Florida. George Gary Bush (1889)
Higher Education in Wisconsin. William F. Allen and David E. Spencer (1889)
History of Education in Alabama. Willis G. Clark (1890).
History of Federal and State Aid to Higher Education. Frank W. Blackmar (1890)
Higher Education in Indiana. James Albert Woodburn (1891).
Higher Education in Michigan. Andrew C. McLaughlin. (1891)
History of Higher Education in Ohio. George W. Knight and John R. Commons (1891)
History of Higher Education in Massachusetts. George Gary Bush (1891)
The History of Education in Connecticut. Bernard C. Steiner (1893)
The History of Education in Delaware. Lyman P. Powell (1893)
Higher Education in Tennessee. Lucius Salisbury Merriam (1893)
Higher Education in Iowa. Leonard F. Parker (1893)
History of Higher Education in Rhode Island. William Howe Tolman (1894)
History of Education in Maryland. Bernard C. Steiner (1894).
History of Education in Lousiana. Edwin Whitfield Fay (1898).
Higher Education in Missouri. Marshall S. Snow (1898)
History of Education in New Hampshire. George Gary Bush (1898)
History of Education in New Jersey. David Murray (1899).
History of Education in Mississippi. Edward Mayes (1899)
History of Higher Education in Kentucky. Alvin Fayette Lewis (1899)
History of Education in Arkansas. Josiah H. Shinn (1900)
Higher Education in Kansas. Frank W. Blackmar (1900)
The University of the State of New York. History of Higher Education in the State of New York. Sidney Sherwood (1900)
History of Education in Vermont. George Gary Bush (1900)
History of Education in West Virginia. A. R. Whitehill (1902)
The History of Education in Minnesota. John N. Greer (1902)
Education in Nebraska. Howard W. Caldwell (1902)
A History of Higher Education in Pennsylvania. Charles H. Haskins and William I. Hull (1902)
History of Higher Education in Colorado. James Edward Le Rossignol (1903)
History of Higher Education in Texas. J. J. Lane (1903)
History of Higher Education in Maine. Edward W. Hall (1903)

Image Source: Cropped from portrait of Herbert Baxter Adams ca. 1890s. Johns Hopkins University graphic and pictorial collection.

Dartmouth Economists Germany Michigan Princeton Suggested Reading Syllabus

Princeton. Course readings for “Government and Business”. Frank Haigh Dixon, 1924-25

Post author By Irwin Collier
Post date 2019-09-23

According to the Princeton catalogue for 1922/23, the undergraduate course Economics 407 “Corporations: Finance and Regulation” was taught by Professor Frank Haigh Dixon. The course was designated as a senior course that graduate students could attend with supplementary work and a weekly conference. Frank W. Fetter took Economics 407 (that appears to have had the title “Government and Business” during the first semester of the academic year 1924-25. In his papers at the Economists’ Papers Archive at Duke University, one finds 47 pages of lecture notes for this course taken by Fetter (in which clear references to Dixon as the lecturer are found) plus about 40 pages of notes he took on his reading assignments.

This post is limited to providing links to the texts and the weekly reading assignments of Dixon’s course. The course outline is followed by a memorial faculty minute for Professor Frank Haigh Dixon that provides career and biographical information.

__________________

Princeton University, 1924-1925

Government and Business
Economics 407

Links to Course Texts

Gerstenberg, Charles W. Financial Organization and Management. New York: Prentice-Hall, 1924. [Revised in 1923, Second revised edition 1939, Fourth Revised Edition, 1959]

Jones, Eliot. The Trust Problem in the United States. New York: Macmillan, 1921.

Ripley, William Z. (ed.). Trusts, Pools and Corporations, rev. ed. Boston: Ginn and Company, 1916. [1905 edition]

Morgan, Charles Stillman. Regulation and the Management of Public Utilities. Boston and New York: Houghton Mifflin Company, Riverside Press Cambridge, 1923. [Awarded second prize in Class A of the Hart, Schaffner & Marx competition]

Assignments

Sept. 26	Gerstenberg	Ch. 4-7
Sept. 30	Gerstenberg	Ch. 8-12
Oct. 6	Gerstenberg	Ch. 13, 18, 19, 22
Oct. 13	Gerstenberg	Ch. 27, 28, 29
Oct. 20	Gerstenberg	Ch. 30, 31, 32
Oct. 27	Gerstenberg	Finish book
Nov. 3	Jones Ripley	Ch. 1, 2, 3, 4, 19 old ed. pp. 244-249 rev. ed. pp. 465-470
Nov. 10	Jones Ripley	Ch. 13, 14 Ch. 1 and 2
Nov. 17	Jones Ripley	Ch. 5, 7 Ch 4 (rev.) or 5 (old) 8 (rev. only)
Nov. 24	Jones	Ch. 6, 9, 10.
Dec. 1	Jones	Ch. 17 & 18
Dec. 8	Jones Ripley	Ch. 8 Ch 18 (rev ed.) & pp. 545-549 (rev. ed)
Dec. 15	Jones Ripley Morgan	Ch. 15 Ch 19 (rev. ed.) Ch. 1 & 2
Jan. 12	Morgan	Ch. 3, 5
Jan. 19	Morgan	Ch. 6, 7

Source: Duke University. David M. Rubenstein Rare Book & Manuscript Library. Economists’ Papers Archive. Frank Whitson Fetter Papers, Box: 49, Folder: “Student Papers, Graduate Courses (Princeton University) EC 407 Government and Business Notes 1924-1925”.

__________________

Faculty Minute adopted March 6, 1944

FRANK HAIGH DIXON

The death, on January 27, 1944, of Frank Haigh Dixon, professor of economics, emeritus, closed a scholarly career of national distinction in his special field of transportation and public utilities. Professor Dixon was born in Winona, Minn., on October 8, 1869, the son of Alfred C. and Caroline A. D. Dixon. He pursued his collegiate studies at the University of Michigan until his attainment of the doctorate in 1895. This was followed by a year of study at the University of Berlin. Returning to Michigan, he served one year as an instructor in history before becoming an assistant professor of economics. At the University of Michigan he had the good fortune to have as his teacher and later as colleague that able economist and remarkable man, Henry Carter Adams, who at that time was organizing the uniform accountancy system of all the American railroads under the jurisdiction of the Interstate Commerce Commission. As a young economist Dixon was thus attracted to the subject of transportation, in which he wrote his doctoral thesis. Declining an invitation to go to Cornell University, he in 1898 accepted a call to an assistant professorship at Dartmouth College.

Professor Dixon’s record of academic and public services is outstanding. Following a visit to England in 1900 to get information, he largely prepared the plans for the establishment at Dartmouth of a graduate school of commerce and business, the Amos Tuck School of Administration and Finance, of which he became the first director. In 1903 he attained full professorial rank. Giving up the Tuck School position, he retained the chairmanship of the department of economics and at the time of his resignation to come to Princeton was recognized as one of the most influential leaders in the Dartmouth faculty.

Professor Dixon came to Princeton in 1919 with ripe scholarship, broad experience and outstanding ability as a lecturer and teacher of college classes, as was further evidenced at once by the large enrollments in his Princeton courses. His coming put Princeton in the first rank of American universities for the distinction of its graduate work in this field. His Alma Mater, Michigan, tried in vain to lure him away from us. His services as chairman of the department of economics and social institutions from 1922 to 1927, on various faculty committees, and particularly in the building up of the Pliny Fisk Collection of research material in the fields of railroad and corporation finance, were marked by clear vision, practical judgment, and unwavering loyalty to the best interests of the University as a whole. In 1938, having reached the age for retirement, he became professor emeritus.

From the first of his career Professor Dixon was very active professionally outside the classroom. In 1907-1908 he served as a consulting expert for the Interstate Commerce Commission and in the following year in a similar capacity for the National Waterways Commission. During the first world war he was a special expert for the U.S. Shipping Board and he was a member of the executive board of the New Hampshire Commission on Public Safety. From 1910 to 1918, without giving up his college work, he was chief statistician of the Bureau of Railway Economics at Washington. For a full half century he was a member of the American Economic Association, serving repeatedly on its executive committee, and in 1927 he was vice-president of the Association. His writings, which with few exceptions were on transportation, are too numerous to be listed here. One of the most notable items in his bibliography was his authoritative text published after his coming to Princeton, “Railroads and Government: their Relations in the United States, 1910-1921.”

In 1900 Professor Dixon married Alice L. Tucker, daughter of the Rev. William J. Tucker, then president of Dartmouth College. In coming to Princeton Professor and Mrs. Dixon left in Hanover many close professional and personal friends. In turn they quickly won in Princeton many others whose number and regard have grown with the passing years. We rejoice that Mrs. Dixon is keeping the family residence among us. To her and to her three children, William Tucker, Roger Colt, and Caroline Moorhouse Dixon, the faculty of Princeton University wishes to express its deep sympathy as well as the high appreciation of the large contributions which Frank Haigh Dixon made to this University community.

Frank A. Fetter
William S. Carpenter
Stanley E. Howard, Chairman

Source: Princeton Alumni Weekly, Vol. 44 (April 28, 1922), p. 25.

Image Source: Frank Haigh Dixon faculty portrait Tuck School, Dartmouth College. Rauner Special Collections Library.

Tags AdamsHC, Carpenter, Dixon, FetterFA, FetterFW, Howard

Berkeley Chicago Dartmouth Economists

Berkeley and Dartmouth. Frank Knight’s economist brothers Melvin M. Knight and Bruce Winton Knight

Post author By Irwin Collier
Post date 2019-06-13

Pairs of siblings becoming professors of economics are infrequent but hardly rare. A trio of siblings becoming professors of economics becomes easier to imagine when one considers families with nine children as was the case for Frank H. Knight and his brothers Melvin Moses Knight and Bruce Winton Knight. This post provides images and official university obituaries for Melvin and Bruce.

Seeing “salty individualist” in the first line of an obituary tells us something about Melvin, perhaps that he was not an easy-going, cheery colleague?

The previous post unearthed a ballad (The Ballad of Right Price) from the early 1920’s written by Bruce Knight who was a graduate-student quizmaster for University of Michigan professor Fred M. Taylor at the time.

The only photo I could find of the eldest of the three, Melvin, is cropped from the image of his passport application of June 1917. At the online archive of the Dartmouth Alumni Magazine one can find a few different pictures of the youngest, Bruce.

_________________________

__________________

Melvin Moses Knight, Economics: Berkeley
1887-1981
Professor Emeritus

The University of California has numbered many salty individualists among its faculty. M.M. (Melvin Moses) Knight must figure high among them. Born April 29, 1887 on a farm near Bloomington, Illinois, he was one of nine children. Three were to be distinguished economists, M.M. at Berkeley, Frank at the University of Chicago, and Bruce at Dartmouth. Life on the farm was not always easy. At age 13, M.M. found himself responsible for running the farm. A self-taught man, he never attended high school. For a time he worked as a locksmith and bicycle mechanic. He later showed skills as plumber and musician. At age 23 he managed to qualify for entrance into Milligan College, Tennessee. After two years, he transferred to the University of Tennessee, where he studied physics and economics. He took an A.B. at Texas Christian University in English in 1913, followed the next year by an M.A. in history. He studied for a while at the University of Chicago and finally earned a Ph.D. in sociology at Clark University in sociology, with a thesis, Taboo and Genetics. His studies continued at other institutions, including the New School for Social Research and the University of Paris in such fields as geology, geography, genetics, mathematics, and theology. Later his wide interdisciplinary interests showed up in his teaching and writing.

He was no stranger to war. During World War I he served as a volunteer ambulance driver with the French army and later with the intelligence section of the Air Service of the American Expeditionary Force. In 1919 he served as a volunteer with the Romanian Field Hospital, Regina Maria, in Transylvania and Hungary. He was discharged as a captain and decorated with the Romanian Cross of Merit. During World War II, by then too old for active duty, he served as Assistant Chief, Division of Economic Studies, Department of State.

M.M.’s academic career began in 1920 at Hunter College, followed by brief periods at the Universities of Utah and California. From 1923 to 1926 he was in the Department of History at Columbia University. In 1926 an Amherst Memorial Fellowship took him to Europe and North Africa to examine the French colonial system. In 1928 he joined the Department of Economics of the University of California, Berkeley, where he remained until his retirement in 1954.

In teaching, writing, and dealings with colleagues, M.M. displayed the keenly interdisciplinary character of his studies and a probing curiosity. His first publication was a Dictionnaire Pratique d’Aeronautique, prepared for the U.S. Air Service in 1918. After that came a number of articles on the contemporary economy and the political problems of eastern Europe, economic history, and colonial questions. His “Water and the Course of Empire in French North Africa” (Quarterly Journal of Economics, 1925) is a masterly exposition of the millennial relation between physical changes in man’s environment and the structure of economic organization. By the mid-1920s he entered upon a spate of publication: Economic History of Europe to the End of the Middle Ages (1926), later translated into French; co-authorship of Economic History of Europe to Modern Times(1928); The Americans in Santo Domingo(1928), a condensation of a much larger manuscript, published as well in a number of Spanish editions; an English translation of Sée’s Economic Interpretation of History (1929); Introduction to Modern Economic History (1940); and numerous articles in the Encyclopaedia of the Social Sciences.

M.M. Knight’s concerns in economics are best summarized in the tribute to him written by Giulio Pontecorvo and Charles F. Stewart in 1979 (Exploration in Economic History, 16:243-245):

The theoretical apparatus of contemporary economics is focused on general equilibrium analysis and the solution of welfare problems within that static framework. In the simplest sense, Knight departs from today’s emphasis and this line of inquiry by his deep fundamental concern with the problem of the nature of economic scarcity and society’s response to scarcity through time rather than with the determinants of real income and the social implications of alternative income distributions.

He transcends Veblen and especially Galbraith and Rostow by his concern with the evolution and the full extent of economic structures. While Veblen was concerned with the industrial economy and its linkages to other elements, e.g., finance, etc., Knight’s view is both more holistic and more focused on the evolutionary and disequilibrium properties of economic systems.

Unlike the American institutional position, as it is typically presented, Knight adds a strong sense of geography, of place, and the ecology of place. In this particular way, he reveals his links both with his rural origins and with the traditions of French economic history…

Each society is constrained by its own geographic and resource endowments. Each therefore responds to the problem of scarcity in its own way and creates its own institutions or transforms those it borrows. Regardless of the form of the response, the process of expansion works over time to use up the opportunity… Once an opportunity is used up, it requires both technological development and a reordering of social institutions to create a new set of human opportunities and this is a formidable social task of the true long run… unlike the essentially optimistic cast of Marxian inevitability, Knight has a strong sense that systems run down and because they are located in space as well as in time, systems that have exhausted themselves do not necessarily get transformed and revived but tend to be replaced, as were Egypt and Rome and North Africa.

While in Paris, Knight married Eleanor Gehmann in what proved to be a long, happy companionship in his years of active service and after his retirement in 1954. She died in February, he on June 12, 1981.

W.W. Borah M.M. Davisson C.A. Mosk

Source: Melvin Moses Knight, 1887-1981. Economics: Berkeley. University of California (System) Academic Senate. 1988, University of California: In Memoriam, pp. 76-78.

__________________

Obituary, Bruce Winton Knight

Bruce Winton Knight, for 36 years a member of the Dartmouth economics faculty, died on May 28 at Mary Hitchcock Memorial Hospital in Hanover after a long illness. He would have been 88 on June 27.

Knight, who retired in 1960, was a vigorous opponent of what he called “pseudo-liberalism” and “state paternalism” in government. He was introduced to the conservative concepts he taught in courses on economic principles and the economics of international peace by his elder brother, the late Frank Knight, widely honored as the founder of the “Chicago school of economics.”

A native of Colfax County, Ill., Knight attended Texas Christian University and earned a B.A. from the University of Utah in 1920 and an M.A. from the University of Michigan in 1923.

He taught economics at the University of Michigan and the University of Wisconsin, where he met his wife, the former Myrtle Eickelberg. He joined the Dartmouth faculty as an instructor in economics in 1924 and became a professor in 1934. He was also a member of Sigma Chi fraternity and had served for a number of years on the Dartmouth College Athletic Council.

Knight wrote three books on economics and a book on peace, entitled How to Run a War, published by Alfred Knopf in 1936. Despite his authorship of these four books and a solid record of writing for scholarly journals, he opposed the academic doctrine of “publish or perish.” He felt that faculty members should only write when they wished, not simply to gain recognition and status. He was cited by the Freedom Foundation of Valley Forge, Pa., for an article he wrote in the Dartmouth Alumni Magazinein December 1949 entitled “Our Greatest Issue,” which he identified as “pseudo-liberalism.”

During World War I, he served with the U.S. Army infantry for two-and-a-half years, including more than a year in the Philippines.

Knight had also been an avid baseball fan ever since his days as a pitcher in college, and he rarely missed a Dartmouth varsity baseball game.

He is survived by his wife, a son, a daughter, three brothers,aand two sisters.

Source: Dartmouth Alumni Magazine June 1980, p. 93.

Image Sources:

Die Drei von der Tankstelle, classic German film from 1930.

Melvin Moses Knight from National Archives and Records Administration (NARA); Washington D.C.; Roll #: 366; Volume #: Roll 0366 – Certificates: 54301-54700, 31 May 1917-06 Jun 1917.

Bruce Winton Knight from Dartmouth Alumni Magazine, February 1954, p. 18.

Tags Knight, KnightBW, KnightMM

Berkeley Dartmouth Funny Business Illinois Michigan

Three Ballads on price theory, macroeconomics, and political economy by Bruce W. Knight, Kenneth Boulding, and David Felix

Post author By Irwin Collier
Post date 2019-06-12

I stumbled across the following three ballads by accident. My search began with an obituary search for Frank Knight’s elder brother Melvin Moses Knight and his younger brother Bruce Winton Knight, both of whom were professors of economics, at Berkeley and Dartmouth, respectively. I came across a few lines quoted from the first of the three ballads below (on price theory) and was able to locate a copy of what turned out to be a pair of ballads, the second (on macroeconomics) by Kenneth Boulding. One damn thing led to another and I next discovered a third ballad (on political economy more generally) explicitly inspired by the first two. The least well known of the three balladeers was David Felix, a Berkeley economics Ph.D. and later professor at the University of Washington in St. Louis. I include his university obituary in this post.

Incidentally, the University of Michigan undergraduate textbook that is referred throughout to was written by Fred Manville Taylor, e.g., Principles of Economics. 8th edition, 1921. In a nice essay about the life of Fred M. Taylor written by Z. Clark Dickinson and published in 1952 (Quarterly Review: A Journal of University Perspectives, Autumn, pp. 48-61), I discovered that Bruce Knight’s contribution (The Ballad of “Right Price”) was written in the early 1920s when he was a graduate-student quizmaster for Taylor’s course at the University of Michigan.

__________________

Obituary:
Felix, professor emeritus of economics, 91
By Melody Walker August 12, 2009

David Felix, Ph.D., professor emeritus of development economics and economic history in the Department of Economics in Arts & Sciences, died June 13, 2009, in Bangor, Maine. He was 91.

Born in New York City, Felix graduated magna cum laude, Phi Beta Kappa, from the University of California, Berkeley, in 1942 before enlisting in the U.S. Navy. He served as a lieutenant in the Pacific during World War II.

After the war, he returned to Berkeley, where he earned a master’s degree in history and a doctorate in economics. Before joining the faculty at Washington University in 1964, he was an economics professor at Wayne State University from 1954-1964.

Felix retired from Washington University in 1988. His research interests included economic development, history and international trade and finance.

Felix served as an economic consultant to the United Nations and the International Monetary Fund. He had research appointments at Harvard University, the University of Sussex, England, and the London School of Economics. He received fellowships from the Fulbright, Rockefeller, Ford and other foundations for research in Latin America.

Steve Fazzari, Ph.D., professor of economics and a member of the department since 1982, has fond memories of Felix.

“I respected him for his intellectual integrity,” Fazzari said. “I admired him for his strong work ethic and professional accomplishments. And I will miss him as a teacher, colleague and friend.”

Felix is survived by his wife of 63 years, Gretchen (Schafer) Felix of Orono, Maine; two daughters; and two grandsons.

Donations may be made to the ACLU, 125 Broad St., 18th Floor, New York, NY 10004 and to The Chamber Music Society, University of Maine, 5746 Collins Center for the Arts, Orono, ME 04469.

Source: Washington University in St. Louis. theSource website, August 2o09.

__________________

Economics in Two Lessons

I. The Ballad of “Right Price” [early 1920s]

by Bruce Knight
Professor of Economics,
Dartmouth College

Great Whoopla, King of Hoomhomho,
In Privy Council deeply swore,
Some nineteen hundred years ago,
That Profiteering made him sore.
“Egad, it gets my goat,” he said:
“Two bits is too darn much for bread!

“Not only that my Kingdom cracks
Beneath these Robber Barons’ tolls:
The Lord perceives their heartless tax
And marks for Doom their greedy souls.
What think ye, Gents of High Renown —
Shall we revise this tariff down?”

The Council thought: “To buck a king
At best were misdirected gall:
Those prone to such a silly thing
Were never Councilmen at all.”
Their verdict was unanimous:
“What, ho! that sounds like sense to us.”

East and West and North and South
The heralds rode throughout the land,
With simple speech and ample mouth,
That Profiteers might understand:
“Hear ye!” they roared, with voice intense:
“The Price of Bread is Thirteen Cents!

“His Royal Nibs doth eke proclaim
That whoso charges more for Bread,
To brand his economic shame
Shall lose his ears from off his head:
Beware the Most Imperial Shears —
Charge Thirteen Cents, and keep your ears!”

The bakers, just a bit abashed,
So hearing, reasoned somewhat thus:
“Though wheat is scarce, and we’ll be dashed
If this won’t mean a loss to us,
We loathe to run the risk of Hell
And jeopardize our ears as well.”

The price was Thus in every town;
And South and North and West and East
The proletariat swarmed down
Like locusts to th’ Egyptian Feast:
The price of wheat dropped half a plunk,
And farmers would not plant the junk.

The days took flight, and fortnights sped:
Vox Populi exclaimed, “Immense!”
“Sic semper Profiteers!” they said,
And praised their Monarch’s Common Sense.
One dinner-time, along with roast
Whoop ordered up his usual Toast.

The Waiter blushed a crimson hue
Quite unbecoming such a lout,
And stammered forth: “Would Crackers do?
The Bread Supply has plumb run out!”
Roared Whoop: “Hast tried the nearest store?”
“Yea,” wept the knave: “There ain’t no more!”

Then waxed the King exceeding wroth,
As hungry kings are wont to do,
And, swearing by his doubtful Troth,
Ordered his land searched through and through.
This was the net result that night:
The stock of Bread had vanished quite.

Quick summoned Whoopla to his side
His meek Comptroller of Supplies:
“WHEAT! and AT ONCE!” the Monarch cried;
The wretch rejoined, with gusty sighs:
“There ain’t no wheat! And, worse, I fear,
There’s none been planted for next year.”

Last, to his Minister of State,
Sage Laran Gitis, Whoopla flew:
“Larry, thy brain, at least, hath weight:
What in the Heck are we to do?”
The latter, ex cathedra, spoke:
“Give heed, thou thick and regal Bloke:

“Next time your Cabinet and You
Contemplate fixing price, please look
At Sub-Head Three, page Fifty-two
Of Freddy Taylor’s well-known book:
You got yourselves in all this fix
By being Economic Hicks.

“Why, any college Soph would know,
Who took Ec One, and pulled a “D,”
That prices, if you let them go,
Will guide our conduct prop-er-lee —
Increase supply, curtail demand
When Wheat is scanty — understand?

“When every Jehu stocks his shelf
With Bread that’s cheap, but should be dear,
Important Persons, like Yourself,
May go without it, do you hear?
And Competition, don’t forget,
Will fix a Price that’s Right— you bet!

“Then, — there’s the Farmer — don’t you see?
The only Wheat that he will grow
Will be what he can eat; and he
Acts sensibly in doing so.
The Long Run, Whoopla — there’s the rub!
And, Broadly Speaking, you’re a dub.”

And thus and thus, and so and so
Into the regal ears was dinned,
Till Whoopla rose at length to go,
Quite vanquished by superior wind.
The chances are, when he withdrew,
He knew as much as Soph’mores do.

At any rate, he styled himself
A Proselyte of Lay-Say Fare.
Forthwith, his Empire, as to Pelf,
Beheld no equal anywhere.
And this became his proudest boast:
“I never fail to get my Toast!”

MORAL:— (Heh, heh!)

If you would see your land wax fat,
Don’t Meddle with the Thermostat!

II. The Busted Thermostat [early 1950s]

Kenneth Boulding
Professor of Economics,
University of Michigan

Protected by the hidden hand
Of moderate laissez-faire
King Whoopla’s happy little land
Lay prospering many a year,
As prices, neither low nor high,
Equate demand with its supply,

And Butcher, Baker, Soldier, Sailor,
Rich Man, Poor Man, Beggerman, Thief,
Rejoiced in Truth as taught by Taylor,
And no misfortune brought them grief,
(Knowing that evils only come
From price disequilibrium).

But now alas a cloud arose
As you will often find,
For lo! although production grows,
Consumption lags behind:
The consequent Accumulation,
Producing signs of sharp deflation.

So while King Whoopla takes his ease,
(The crops are good, the weather fine)
As smitten by a strange disease
Down creeps the trend-of-business line,
And round the factory corners lurk
Long lines of people wanting work.

At first the monarch flat denied
That anything could be amiss,
For was not laissez-faire the guide
To every economic bliss?
No need to call the system busted —
It’s just a little maladjusted!

But as distress and trouble grew
The king called in his learned sages
(Those dignified professors who
Transmit the wisdom of the ages)
And asked them all to diagnose
These quite unprecedented woes.

They talked of costs, they talked of prices,
Of disproportions and of lags,
And various economic vices
That make for turns and dips and sags,
But all agree, the answers come
In Long-Run Equilibrium.

But then a rash youth spoke — Who gains
From this poor status quo upholding?
I learned my¹Ec from Maynard Keynes,
Interpreted by Kenneth Boulding.
Silence more eloquent than words
Fell on those shocked and learned birds.

Mistaking silence for consent
(As intellectuals often do)
As if on self-destruction bent
The youth went on to air his view,
Maintaining, with an unbowed head,
That in the long run all are dead!

With pert remark and airy stance
He then proceeded to expound
The charms of deficit finance
In words more flippant than profound,
In Daniel Webster’s words professing
How Public Debt is Private Blessing.

It’s wrong to save too much, he said,
(Turning the theme in all its facets)
Income is from expenses bred
And public debt is private assets
And so (I hope you catch the drift)
Extravagance is really thrift!

Said Whoopla — if I feel the urges
To spend as freely as I like,
“Then²my extravagance, or splurges,
Will other money incomes hike?
Why! said the youth — Great ball of fire,
You Understand the Multiplier!

Fine, said the king, start public works,
Build me a large expensive palace!
In such extravagance there lurks
No hint of wickedness or malice,
For from my tendency to sin comes
A rise in other people’s incomes!

On every side the buildings reared,
Harems sprang up throughout the nation;
Soon unemployment disappeared,
Succeeded by a wild inflation,
And pretty soon our poor King Whoop
Was in a different kind of soup.

People of every rank and sort
Complain about the rising prices;
The country finds its dollars short
And has an economic crisis,
And through the miserable nation
Rises the talk of abdication!

A brief revolt among the scholars,
Forced the unhappy king to flee;
He, having kept his funds in dollars,
Became a prosperous refugee,
Enjoying the succeeding era
In basking on the Riviera.

The moral of this sorry tale
Is much too obvious to mention
Don’t trim your craft to every gale
Of intellectual invention,
And think, no matter what you try
In every ointment there’s a fly.

____________

¹”by” in original, corrected by hand to “my” in University of Michigan library copy.
²”That” in original, corrected by hand to “Then” in University of Michigan library copy.

Source: Economics in Two Lessons, Michigan Business Review, Vol. IV, No. 6 (November 1952), pp. 24-26.

__________________

[III.] The Ballad of the Sad Economist, or
Who’s the Fairest Model of Them All? [1952]

David Felix
Lecturer, School of Business Administration
University of California, Berkeley

A Regency Council was quickly appointed,
With praise from the propertied classes anointed,
To govern the hapless country pro tem,
Unrest and inflation to ruthlessly stem.
“Right men and right thoughts,” the Regency vowed,
“Will guide back Hoomhomho to normalcy proud.”

But what is this normalcy, if one may ask?
And how will the Council proceed with its task?
With Keynesian cries hushed in prison captivity,
Committed for Un-Hoomhomhonian activity,
Along with yet more Un-Hoomhoms of the trade,
The answer would have to be Taylor-made.

“Balance the Budget! Turn off the Pumps!
All must be willing to absorb their lumps.
Out with the Parities! The Wage-price Ratchets!
Tariffs, Pork Barrels, and similar gadgets!
Up with the Bank Rate! With will there are ways.
Come all aboard for the Happy Old Days!”

“But hold!” cried the Farm Bloc, “You’re going too far!
Surely Ag Parities are not on a par
With unwarranted aids and the dishonest pleas
Of Gold-grasping Business Monopolies!
And what of our low supply elasticity?
And industrial prices with scanty plasticity?”

But Business replied, “Such Populist impudence!
When National Unity most needs forbearance,
And an end to such rabble-rousin’ and scorchin’.
Have ye not even glanced at Life, Time, and Fortune?
The Invisible Hand in its moribund hour
Has passed on the torch to Countervailing Power.”

Then a chorus of voices was heard through the land.
“You fellows can laugh, but if over our strand
Passed foreigner’s goods un-tariff blockaded,
We’d never survive such a contest unaided.”
From the Tower, “The long-run adjustment . . .” “Absurd!
In the long run we’re dead. Or hadn’t you heard?”

From the depths of the Dungeon a thin voice arose,
“Let planning and subsidies cushion the blows.”
The voice died away . . . the impersonal force
Of the Price Mechanism rolled over the source.
But then from the Workers the querulous phrase,
“What’s all this talk of the Happy Old Days?”

And a crisp, booming voice was heard to sound off,
“Our appropriations are barely enough.
We could hardly survive any budget incisions,
And still keep intact a full hundred Divisions.
With no might in sight, oh, dismal our plight!
In our fight ‘gainst the Doctrine that Might Makes the Right.”

Approbational noises applauded these facts,
Most loudly from those with Armed Forces contracts,
And from those who remembered the lack of enjoyment
In the bitter old days of Mass Unemployment.
So for various reasons ’twas widely agreed
A Defense Budget cut could scarce be decreed.

“But what shall we do?” the Council now shouted.
“All our specifics are brutally flouted.
Tell us, oh, Taylor, what means to be had?
Or is there no balm in all Gilead?
If citizens dare not to forego their coddling,
It’s no help at all to show them your modeling.”

Then Taylorites answered, “Gaze ye at the World.
The Price Mechanism lies rusted and spurled.
There stalks o’er the earth a Great Disequilibrium
That keeps us from reaching our Mobile Millenium.
Check it! Or else all our plans are disasters,
And buried the rules of our Laissez-Faire Masters.”

”We’ll call a world meet,” the Council orated.
“Immutable Laws we will get reinstated.
Call Statesmen, Advisers, and Academicians.
We’ll get to the roots of our present conditions.”
“Normalcy’s indivisible,” said Taylorites, beaming.
“How true,” said the Council, and pondered its meaning.

So from East and from West the Experts all came,
From countries too numerous to mention by name.
All ideas were free to be talked of in forum,
Provided they met current rules of decorum —
Ricardo’s, and Smith’s, and the elder John Clark’s,
Though one had to be careful in making his Marx.

As befitted the host of this glittering Cabal,
The Hoomhomhos played with their Free Market Model.
But to their surprise this gambit was spurned
By others with backgrounds equally learned.
“Technical errors,” “too static,” “unreal,”
“Class bias,” “unstable,” “no sex appeal.”

“The problem is structural,” said Abdul Al Mism.
“We’ve starved long enough with your Price Mechanism.
Send us more funds and we might try your scheme.”
“But that will just make our inflation extreme,”
Was the Taylored reply, “Attempt first our scheme.”
Said Abdul, “That’d just make our poorness extreme.”

“What I cannot swallow,” said Viscount D’Abords,
Up from the Dockers to Chamber of Lords,
“Is bread at this twenty-five pennies a loaf,
Merely to nourish some kingly old oaf.
That’s scarcely fair shares and, dash it, not cricket!
This unequal right to a bread ration ticket.”

“But come now, M’Lord, you forget the supply.
You won’t get the wheat.” “In the pig’s eye!”
Retorted the Lord, “With proper control,
The supply will come forth, I’ll wager my soul!
Haven’t you heard that most income is rent?
It’s not hard to keep the supply curve unbent.”

“But Walras has shown the result’s a delight
When unknowns and equations total up right.”
Then forth came the haughty Econometricians,
“You fail to consider stability conditions.
Equational counting is hardly enough.
In dynamic relations things can get rough.

Inflation is only a manifestation
Of some inconsistent structuralization.”
Spake Senor Garbanzo of southernmost Chile,
“To bow to the world market forces is silly.
What our countries need is Diversification,
Or else we continue as low-income nations.

Political Strength means Industrialization
To cushion the impact of Boom and Deflation.”
The Historian spake, “You Laissez-Faire Boys
Are much too enchanted with outmoded toys.
Your model concerns but a brief passing phase,
Of which, by the way, it just points up the glaze.”

And so they continued in whisper and scream,
Shifting assumptions in the midst of the stream,
Till a Child, the one who with infantile crudity
Had shown up the emperor stark in his nudity,
Piped up with “But all your polemical flair
Conceals not the fact that you’re knowledge-wise bare.

Your Curves and Equations, your scholarly canting,
Do not give the Council the answers they’re wanting.”
Then all rose indignant at this Child’s presumption.
As one they rejected the youngster’s assumption. ”
Of course we have knowledge, profound and pervasive.
There’s really no reason to be so derisive.

But to say what it is, if that’s your suggestion,
Is in general form a nonsensical question.”
But now some declared that Truth’s praxiologic,
And were quickly denounced for illogic hodge-podgic.
And so Unity broke with a suddenness tragical
On serious issues and points methodological.

Despairing, the Council cried, “Give us a policy!
How do we wend our way back unto normalcy?”
With patience one uses for children sub-normal,
The theorists explained that their knowledge was formal.
“Give us your goals, arranged in a scale,
And we’ll give you the points toward which you must sail.

And if you can tell what it is that you’ll find,
That is different from that which you’re leaving behind,
We can give you the rules couched in language most terse
For finding out which is the better or worse.”
With this, all adjourned — it was getting much later,
And each went his own way to gather more data.

Said the Child to the Councilmen, still in a coma,
Having been overcome by the learned aroma,
“The Truth is an elephant; they each hold a part,
But to piece all together is still quite an art.”
Then up woke the Council and looked round the hall,
“But that doesn’t solve our dilemma at all!”

Said the Child, “When I’m older and go off to college,
I’ll explore sociologic roots of our knowledge,
And political aspects of modern economy,
And what is the source of society’s anomy.”
Soft from up high in the empty hall’s rafters
Sounded the echo of something like laughter.

Moral

Graduate students and hair-splitting profs
Can expound the moral to credulous sophs.
It carries at least the following sting:
A little model is a dangerous thing.

Source: Current Economic Comment, University of Illinois, Bureau of Economic and Business Research, 1952, pp. 51-54.

Image Sources: From left to right…
Bruce W. Knight in Eleven Professors to Retire. Dartmouth Alumni Magazine, June 1960, p. 19.
Kenneth Boulding at the University of Michigan Faculty History Project.
David Felix from Tourist Card for Brazil, dated 17 December 1962, copy at the ancestry.com website.

Tags Boulding, Felix, KnightMM

Business School Columbia Dartmouth Harvard Pennsylvania

Columbia School of Business Opens. Seligman’s Thoughts, 1916

Post author By Irwin Collier
Post date 2018-03-11

Columbia University economist provides “the history of the movement which has culmination in the adoption of this project”, i.e. the founding of Columbia School of Business. The earlier resistence of the economics department to a School of Business is explained as well as the flip-flop to its support of opening of the School of Business in the autumn term of 1916.

_______________

A UNIVERSITY SCHOOL OF BUSINESS
by Edwin R. A. Seligman

[I]

THE opening of the Columbia School of Business in the autumn of 1916 marks another milestone in university education. The history of the movement which has culminated in the adoption of this project is highly interesting.

Less than a generation ago the only opportunities offered in education for business were the classes in single and double bookkeeping, usually conducted both here and abroad under the high- sounding title of “Business Institutes.” All they did was to give a smattering of ordinary bookkeeping with occasionally some slight instruction in English or a foreign language thrown in. One or two farsighted men already at that early period appreciated the need of a more systematic preparation for business life; but theirs were voices crying in the wilderness. It was the time when any kind of institutional education, except for the ministry, counted but little, the time when the lawyer was supposed to prepare himself for his work by serving an apprenticeship in a law office, and when the college graduate desirous of entering business life was at a disadvantage in the estimation of the employer as compared with the youth who had started from the bottom and who had enjoyed a few years of business experience. One of the broad-minded exceptions was Mr. Joseph Wharton of Philadelphia, through whose liberality the Wharton School was created at the University of Pennsylvania in the early eighties. This school, however, had at first only a moderate success, as did the similar schools started from time to time by other colleges and universities. The time was not yet ripe. When Columbia came to consider the problem, it preferred to devote its energies to political science rather than to business, and to purely University or graduate rather than to undergraduate work. As a consequence there was initiated the School of Political Science, which on its pedagogical side became a training school for teachers of the social sciences and for governmental administrators.

In the meantime, the economic development of the United States as well as of Europe led to a constant broadening of the scale on which business enterprises were carried on, and the demand for really adequate commercial training became more and more insistent. Toward the end of the last century the interest thus awakened became so strong that the Chamber of Commerce of New York was ready to grant an annual subvention to Columbia if it should be decided to develop courses of the desired character. The situation was canvassed by a small committee; but it was finally decided not to accept the overtures made by the committee of the Chamber of Commerce for several reasons. In the first place, it was felt that the demand had not yet become sufficiently great to justify the expectation of a student body satisfactory in either quantity or quality. Secondly, we were convinced that a successful school of the character desired would have to be conducted along academic lines of a modified kind, and that the best results could be hoped for only by securing academic teachers with a business experience rather than business men without academic experience. It was, however, at the time impossible to find a sufficient number of qualified instructors. Moreover, the literature of the subject was as yet embryonic, and the proper curriculum of such a School had nowhere been thoroughly worked out. In the third place, it was realized that the most important consideration at the time in American educational development, and especially at Columbia, was to emphasize the purely scientific or graduate work in political science; and the Department of Economics feared lest there might be danger in diverting its energies from the scientific field to work of a technical or professional character, such as would be necessitated by a new School of the kind contemplated. Finally, the movement for the creation of commercial high schools had come to a head, and it was deemed wiser to ascertain how far the gap might be filled by the secondary schools before deciding as to what should be done by Columbia. For these reasons the project was postponed, and the entire energy of the Department of Economics was directed to the rounding out of the University courses in political science and to the improving and broadening of the tender of the undergraduate or college course in economics.

During the last fifteen years, however, an instructive development has occurred. In the first place, there was a growing recognition of the need for a broader and more adequate training for business. Chambers of Commerce and other commercial bodies both here and abroad began to grow more restless and more insistent in their demands. The old feeling of prejudice on the part of the successful business man toward the college graduate diminished, although he still maintained that the college curriculum might profitably be modified in some respects to give a better preparation for business. This demand, which emanated primarily from the commercial community, now found expression in the new commercial schools in England and even more in Germany, and a rich fund of knowledge was being accumulated from the experience of these foreign schools. In the United States, moreover, it was gradually recognized that the commercial high schools, however excellently managed, were not quite adequate to solve the problem.

In the course of time professional schools of the desired kind were initiated, although along widely varying lines, by several American universities, the most notable examples being those of New York University and of Harvard. In New York City the demand for the inception of courses of some kind at Columbia soon became so urgent that a modest beginning was made three or four years ago with a few evening courses. Owing to the high standards which were observed from the outset, these courses met with immediate success. They were conservatively increased from year to year, until during the past year the number of students and the character of the instructors became such as to justify the demand for their merger into a new and independent school, which should possess an identity of its own and which should become a regularly accredited part of the University.

There were several reasons which led the Department of Economics now to welcome the movement to which it had been lukewarm a decade or two before. In the first place, the number of men qualified to serve as instructors in the new schools had become so numerous as to make it reasonably certain that the faculty could be filled by men of the first rank. Secondly, the literature of the subject had become so abundant as to make it possible to put academic teaching in business on a par with that of the other occupations or professions. Thirdly, experience with various types of schools had become so rich as to permit of what seemed to be a sound conclusion. Finally, the University work under the Faculty of Political Science had become so thoroughly established that there was no danger to be anticipated in any diversion of energy to the new institution. It was felt, therefore, that we were now quite ready to develop the technical or professional, rather than the purely scientific, sides of instruction in Economics.

It was for these reasons that the Department of Economics as well as the entire Faculty of Political Science cordially welcomed the project for the new School and that the report of the special committee appointed to consider the subject met with the unanimous approval of the University Council and was speedily adopted by the Board of Trustees.

II

In determining upon the character of the School, the committee considered with some care the different types in existence. There are in the United States at present three chief types: (1) the Wharton School, which has a curriculum of four years parallel to that of the college and which is essentially an undergraduate school; (2) the Harvard School of Business Administration, which has a two- years’ curriculum of a frankly graduate character; and (3) the Amos Tuck School at Dartmouth, which admits students at the end of the junior year and carries them through a two-years course. No one of these types approved itself to the committee.

The Wharton School plan seemed to be open to criticism from several points of view. As a purely undergraduate school it necessarily becomes a rival to the college and to the extent that it succeeds, it is likely to weaken the college. In the second place, it begins professional or technical work at too early a period, whereas the whole tendency of recent development in the United States is to relegate the professional or technical education to a somewhat later stage. The change that has been going on during the last few years in the Engineering Schools and other Schools of Applied Science affords ample evidence of this tendency. What is needed in this country is a broad foundation for the technical or professional class, and the School of Business needs as broad a foundation as we are coming to demand for other professional schools. Thirdly, a purely undergraduate school of business excludes the possibility of any pronounced extension of the graduate or research courses, which are coming to be as important in applied economics as they are in pure economics. A four-years’ undergraduate curriculum in business courses virtually exhausts the subject and leaves practically nothing for the research student. It was largely for these reasons that the Wharton School type was discarded as a model.

On the other hand the Harvard type seemed to be open to criticism for opposite reasons. In the first place, the requirement of a college degree for entrance renders such a school impotent to serve the public which is clamoring for admission in large centers like New York. Comparatively few men who intend to go into business can afford, whether from the material or from any other point of view, to wait until they are twenty-four or twenty-five years of age before entering upon a practical business career. And it is questionable whether even a few captains of industry will be recruited from this class. A purely graduate school which can never expect more than a handful of students is thus abandoning its opportunity to serve the public in the largest measure. In the second place, not only must such a school from the very nature of the case be numerically insignificant, but it seems to be based upon an erroneous pedagogical principle. It is now rather widely recognized that the movement inaugurated by President Eliot a generation ago went too far for the best interests of American education. In attempting to convert the American college into a university, he ignored the fact that the principles of academic freedom—freedom of the student as well as freedom of the teacher—are applicable in full measure only to a real university doing advanced or research work. Moreover, although by pulling up, as he thought, the American college, to a higher or university level, he advanced the age of graduation to about twenty-two, he at the same time made the attainment of the college degree a prerequisite to professional or research work. The college thus came to occupy the contradictory position of a university and of something less than a university. The consequences soon disclosed themselves. As soon as the demands of the public for a better medical and legal preparation became imperious, the complications began; for the medical school course was gradually lengthened to five years, and the law school course to three years, with a possibility of soon becoming four years. To make, as was now done, entrance to the professional schools conditional upon a college degree therefore meant that the young lawyer could not begin his life’s work before the age of twenty-five or twenty-six and the young doctor before the age of twenty-seven or twenty-eight.

This is an intolerable situation, which exists nowhere else in the civilized world and which it is out of the question to think will permanently continue in the United States. The first step away from this difficulty was taken by Columbia some twenty years ago when it introduced the so-called combined course into the professional schools, permitting the saving of at least one year. This combined-course idea rapidly spread throughout the country and is now adopted by most of the leading universities, barring a few conservative institutions in the East. A slight modification of this system was later introduced at Columbia in the Schools of Engineering, Mining, and Chemistry, which were put upon a basis of advanced standing requiring three years of college work for entrance, thus making possible a combined course of six years from entrance into the college up to the acquirement of the professional degree. Even this, however, was gradually found to be inadequate; and before long not only the School of Medicine but the School of Architecture, and the School of Journalism opened professional courses to students who had completed two years of college work.

By many it was recognized that here is the proper dividing line between the ordinary cultural and preparatory courses on the one hand, and the technical or professional courses on the other. To those who hold to this opinion, it seems entirely probable that sooner or later the combined or Columbia plan, which has now spread throughout the country, will be replaced by the newer or still more distinctive Columbia plan, which is in harmony not only with the educational practice of the rest of the world, but with sound educational theory. The Harvard School of Business Administration, therefore, appeared to the committee to embody the same erroneous principle which had been applied to the law and medical schools. The country has broken away from the Harvard plan in legal and medical education. It seems unlikely that it will follow Harvard in the new form of business education. At all events, the system seemed to be quite inapplicable to conditions at Columbia.

The third type of business school is represented by the Amos Tuck School, which does, indeed, accept the principle of a dividing line below the close of the college curriculum. The Amos Tuck School, however, has turned out to be distinctly restricted in scope and attracts few students outside of Dartmouth itself. What it does is to provide an alternate year for Dartmouth seniors, with an opportunity of proceeding for an additional year. It does not succeed in drawing from other colleges students who have completed three years of college work. Moreover, it suffers from the same defect as the Harvard School in that it offers an inadequate curriculum of only two years in length.

Since therefore none of the existing types seemed to be either suitable to Columbia conditions or in harmony with sound pedagogical principles, it was decided to put the dividing line between college and professional work at the end of the second year, largely for the reasons mentioned above. Students will therefore be admitted to the Columbia School who have completed two years of college work or its equivalent, and the School of Business will be put on the same basis as the Medical School, the School of Architecture, and the School of Journalism. This arrangement makes possible the attainment of several results. In the first place, every student who enters the Business School as a candidate for a degree will be sure of having pursued those general cultural and disciplinary college courses which are considered obligatory upon every cultivated man in Europe as in America. In the second place, on this broad basis there will be erected a carefully devised professional or technical curriculum after the completion of which the graduate can enter upon his business career at the age of twenty-two or twenty-three,—about the ordinary age abroad. In the third place, the three-year course, which is midway between the exaggerated four-year Wharton course and the inadequate two-year Harvard and Amos Tuck courses, will permit a comprehensive and well-rounded sequence of studies. The type of school finally adopted thus seems to combine a maximum of advantages with a minimum of defects. It will moreover enable the School to serve much more varied classes of students than can be found in any other type.

Among these classes are, first, students who have spent two years in Columbia College or in some other college of equivalent rank and who are candidates for a degree. It is expected that not a few college students, both at Columbia and elsewhere, who have decided by the end of the second year to pursue a distinctively business career, will enter the new School and thus secure a better preparation for their life work than if they were to continue in a more or less desultory fashion through the remainder of their college career.

In the second place, the School will afford abundant opportunity in its upper reaches for graduate students who desire to prepare themselves for the teaching profession or who are inclined to devote time to purely research courses. Such students will be able to combine a more technical or professional course in the School of Business with graduate courses given in the School of Political Science, and there will therefore be offered for the first time in the United States a unique combination of pure and of applied science, or of theoretical and of practical economics, which will doubtless turn out to be fruitful of results.

In the third place, the School will afford an opportunity to graduates of high schools, who for some reason do not desire to go to college, to take courses in the Department of Extension Teaching at Columbia, in either day or evening courses, and to complete work equivalent to that offered by Columbia College in its first two years.

In the fourth place, there are in New York City many men and some women actively engaged in business who are eager to learn more about the real foundation of their business life. Students of this character, if over twenty-one years of age, who have shown their qualifications to undertake certain courses may be admitted as special students in particular subjects, but will, of course, not be candidates for a degree.

It is therefore believed that the type of school finally adopted is the one which will minister most successfully to the needs of the New York public, and which will, at the same time, provide on the broadest possible basis a curriculum which will attract students from all parts of the country.

III

Before we proceed to discuss the curriculum a word must be said about the name of the new institution. Most of the existing institutions are called Schools of Commerce or of Commercial Science. Such an appellation seemed, however, unsatisfactory. For in the first place what is taught in such a school is not primarily science at all, but art; or even if the purely scientific problems may be taken up in the later years of the School, the earlier years must naturally devote themselves primarily to the practical applications. But, more important than this, the term commerce seems to be ill-chosen. There are many problems of business management which have only a slight relation to commerce as such; and the Supreme Court of the United States has told us in a leading decision that insurance is not commerce at all. As in every School of this kind the problems connected with insurance must occupy a prominent place, it seems objectionable to apply a generic name in connection with a particular division to which the generic name is, as we are instructed, wholly inapplicable. On the other hand, some schools call themselves Schools of Business Administration. This title, however, is equally open to criticism. If we object to the term commercial science on the ground that a great part of the work is not science at all, we can equally object to the term business administration on the ground that a great part of the work far transcends purely administrative problems. What such a School has to deal with is the principles underlying business practice, as well as the best method of putting those principles into operation. It is partly science and partly administration; it is more than science and more than administration. Since, therefore, the real object of such a School is to deal with business problems in their varied and comprehensive aspects, it seemed wise to take the simple and obvious name of School of Business. In the Law School we study law; in the Medical School we study medicine; in the School of Architecture we study architecture; in the School of Engineering we study engineering; and consequently the obvious place in which to study business is the School of Business. The name is simple, inclusive, and comprehensive.

When we come to discuss the curriculum of the new School, several points are to be noted. In the first place, an attempt is made to steer between the rigid and fixed curriculum found in some of the American professional schools and the very elastic schemes that are found in the ordinary university courses here and abroad. It was attempted to strike a happy medium by requiring in the first year from all candidates for a degree a certain number of courses aggregating one-half or two-thirds of the whole. Every student who intends to go into business should know something about general economics, accounting, finance and business organization, and should also have a command of some of the foreign languages. When, however, the foundation has been laid in this way, students are allowed a free choice, subject to the condition, however, that their course be approved by the Director. The Director of the School is presumed to have a personal acquaintance with each of the students, and to be able in person or through delegation to give to each proper advice. Students who desire to have a general business course will find such a curriculum mapped out for them. Others who may prefer to specialize will find a sequence of courses in a variety of subjects: accounting, banking, finance, transportation, commerce and trade, business organization and management, manufactures, advertising and salesmanship, and the like. At the end of the second year, the degree of Bachelor of Science will be awarded so that those who do not care to defer their entrance into a practical business career may start in at the age of the ordinary college graduate. It is expected, however, that a large proportion of the students will continue for a third year, at the end of which the Master’s degree will be conferred.

This third year, it is hoped, will be the most valuable, as it will be the most unique, year in the School. It will correspond approximately to the clinical year which is now being added to our best medical schools. It goes without saying that in the City of New York, the centre of American wealth, the business problems are on a particularly gigantic scale and of a specially intricate character. It is proposed to make the courses in this third year not alone research courses in the more refined and difficult principles underlying business practice, but also practical courses where each student will have an opportunity of intimate personal contact with business life. Arrangements have already been made with the National City Bank whereby a certain number of students will be afforded an opportunity to prepare themselves for the service of the Bank in foreign fields. It is proposed to broaden and generalize these opportunities so that ultimately every student will be enabled and expected to do some field work in that particular department of business life in which he is especially interested. In almost every phase of “big business” in New York today the need is experienced for more expert and thorough training; and it is hoped in the advanced courses of the School to bring about a close cooperation between the corps of instructors on the one hand and the business community on the other. It is here that the School of Business will find an unexampled opportunity and perform an unexampled service. Just as the finest medical schools can exist only where there are the greatest hospitals, that is, in the large centres of population, so the most successful schools of business in the future may be expected to be found in the great centres of business life.

In order to accomplish these results and to realize the expectations which have been formed, it goes without saying that the new School of Business must be put on the highest possible standard of educational efficiency. So far as the students are concerned, this result has been guaranteed by the determination to make the scholastic standard as high as it is in the other departments of Columbia. We are fortunate in having in Dr. Egbert, as Director of the School, a man who is not only one of the great administrators in the country, but who has shown in both the Summer Session and the Extension work his adherence to these high standards. The continually growing reputation of those phases of the work to which Dr. Egbert has hitherto addressed himself are the surest guarantee of success in this new field.

High standards, however, depend not only upon the student body, but upon the corps of instructors. In order to avoid the difficulty which has unfortunately been experienced by so many American institutions, it is proposed that a professor must have one at least of two qualifications. If he is recruited from the academic ranks, he must possess the degree of Ph.D., to show that he has attained the highest academic honors, together with a reasonable business experience or an acquaintance with actual business problems. If, on the other hand, he is selected from the ranks of those who have devoted themselves primarily to business, he must not only have written a book which is an acknowledged authority in its field, but must give evidence of ability successfully to present the subject to the professional student. Although the corps of instructors is by no means entirely complete, it will be found that the selection has in every case been in accordance with the above considerations. The numerous additions to the teaching staff which are being planned for in the near future are confidently expected to conform to the same high principles.

Thus from every point of view, we feel that the problem has been carefully considered and solved with a reasonable hope of success. In the character of the student body, in the selection of the present and future teaching force, in the rounded sequence of courses, in the judicious union of practical and research work, in the rich possibilities of cooperation with the other departments of the University and the business life of the community, and last but not least, in the tried administrative experience of the Director, we have reason to believe that we possess a unique combination of factors which cannot fail to put the Columbia School of Business in the front rank of similar institutions here and abroad.

Source: Columbia University Quarterly, Volume XVIII, June 1916, pp. 241-252.

Image Source: From American Economic Review, 1943.

Tags Seligman

Other Williams College Related Posts

The History of Economic and Political Studies in Williams College

Biographical Timeline

Section Work in Economics

Biography

LEGAL AND POLITICAL STUDIES IN DARTMOUTH COLLEGE, 1796-1896.

by James Fairbanks Colby, Parker Professor of Law and Political Science

Chronology

Cast of relatives [boldface denotes persons mentioned in the newspaper accounts]

Holmes Beckwith: Father’s side

Holmes Beckwith: Mother’s side

Professor Slays Dean, and Himself Former U.C. Instructor Ends His Life After Fatal Shooting At Syracuse University; Note Tells of Plans Dr. Holmes Beckwith, Once Employed As Examiner for State Banking Commission, Well Known in Berkeley

Oakland Tribune 02 Apr 1921, Page 1

The Philadelphia Inquirer April 3, 1921, pp. 1, 10.

Fires Five Bullets into Victim’s Body; Commits Suicide John Herman Wharton of Syracuse University Slain by Prof. Beckwith in Revenge for Dismissal of Latter — Apparently Crazed by An Obsession of Persecution, as He Had Written of Impending Tragedy.

The Buffalo Times April 3, 1921 [pp. 21-2.]

Beckwith Butt Of Jokes from First Class Day

Murder and Suicide Verdict Given in Syracuse Tragedy Dr. Wharton, Victim of Radical Professor’s Bullet, Was About to Marry a Rich Woman, Friends Say

New York Tribune April 4, 1921 [p. 5]

Suicide and Deathwished in Biography Slayer in Syracuse Tragedy Was Obsessed With Belief of Persecution at Hands of University Executives Had Murder of His Employees [sic] in Mind Frequently and Brooded Over Trouble With Wife, His Writings Reveal

Oakland Tribune (California). April 3, 1921, p. 33.

Beckwith Leaves Estate To Aunt; Gives Sister Only $10

Buffalo Courier, April 9, 1921 p. 2

Report from the Hawaiian Children’s Society, 1922

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

Contributions to American Educational History, edited by Herbert B. Adams

Princeton University, 1924-1925

Government and Business Economics 407

Links to Course Texts

Assignments

Faculty Minute adopted March 6, 1944

FRANK HAIGH DIXON

Melvin Moses Knight, Economics: Berkeley 1887-1981 Professor Emeritus

Obituary, Bruce Winton Knight

Obituary: Felix, professor emeritus of economics, 91 By Melody Walker August 12, 2009

Economics in Two Lessons

I. The Ballad of “Right Price” [early 1920s]

II. The Busted Thermostat [early 1950s]

[III.] The Ballad of the Sad Economist, or Who’s the Fairest Model of Them All? [1952]

A UNIVERSITY SCHOOL OF BUSINESS by Edwin R. A. Seligman

[I]

II

III

Other Williams College
Related Posts

The History of Economic and Political Studies
in Williams College

by James Fairbanks Colby,
Parker Professor of Law and Political Science

Cast of relatives
[boldface denotes persons mentioned in the newspaper accounts]

Professor Slays Dean, and Himself
Former U.C. Instructor Ends His Life After Fatal Shooting At Syracuse University; Note Tells of Plans
Dr. Holmes Beckwith, Once Employed As Examiner for State Banking Commission, Well Known in Berkeley

Oakland Tribune
02 Apr 1921, Page 1

The Philadelphia Inquirer
April 3, 1921, pp. 1, 10.

Fires Five Bullets into Victim’s Body; Commits Suicide
John Herman Wharton of Syracuse University Slain by Prof. Beckwith in Revenge for Dismissal of Latter — Apparently Crazed by An Obsession of Persecution, as He Had Written of Impending Tragedy.

The Buffalo Times
April 3, 1921 [pp. 21-2.]

Murder and Suicide Verdict Given in Syracuse Tragedy
Dr. Wharton, Victim of Radical Professor’s Bullet,
Was About to Marry a Rich Woman, Friends Say

New York Tribune
April 4, 1921 [p. 5]

Suicide and Deathwished in Biography
Slayer in Syracuse Tragedy Was Obsessed With Belief of Persecution at Hands of University Executives
Had Murder of His Employees [sic] in Mind Frequently and Brooded Over Trouble With Wife, His Writings Reveal

Government and Business
Economics 407

Melvin Moses Knight, Economics: Berkeley
1887-1981
Professor Emeritus

Obituary:
Felix, professor emeritus of economics, 91
By Melody Walker August 12, 2009

[III.] The Ballad of the Sad Economist, or
Who’s the Fairest Model of Them All? [1952]

A UNIVERSITY SCHOOL OF BUSINESS
by Edwin R. A. Seligman