Categories
Cambridge Harvard Oxford Princeton Regulations Undergraduate

Harvard. Tutorial System and Divisional General Final Examinations, 1920

 

The Division of History, Government and Economics played a pioneering role in implementing the curricular reforms at Harvard College initiated by President A. Lawrence Lowell around the time of the First World War. The Department of Economics was to play a leading role in the administration of the divisional tutors in history, government and economics.

President Lowell wanted to get away from the extreme laissez-faire implicit in the system of electives left by his predecessor, Charles W. Eliot, to combine elements of concentration with distributional requirements that would leave students a guided sovereignty to elect their courses. Divisional General Examinations and Tutors to provide individually tailored instruction and counseling were institutional means seen as necessary to escape “the mere scoring of a given number of courses which might be wholly unrelated”.

“…the individual student must be considered the unit in any plan of college education which allows some range of choice, but which requires also proof of a well-ordered body of knowledge as a condition of graduation…”

In the opinion of the faculty Committee on Instruction the tutorial system should be established to support the best and brightest students to achieve their individual potentials rather than as a support system to provide remedial instructional services for the “mediocre and lazy”. 

“…there is some danger in college work today that we shall give more consideration to the mediocre and lazy student than to the upper third of the class which contains the men who deserve the best training that can be given them and who are to provide the leaders of their time.”

__________________________

The General Final Examination and the Tutorial System

       The most important educational change, however, in Harvard College during recent years has been the establishment, as a requirement for the bachelor’s degree, of a general final examination on the student’s field of concentration; the problems which arise in connection with this plan are interesting and complex.

       When the Faculty of Arts and Sciences in 1909-10 voted to require each student to concentrate at least six courses in some single field or in related fields of knowledge, it thereby indicated its belief that knowledge of a subject is of more importance than the mere scoring of a given number of courses which might be wholly unrelated and which were often soon forgotten. Provision was made, at the same time, against undue concentration by a system of distribution, which, however, need not be considered here. Yet the requirement of concentration proved not to secure, in all cases, the choice of courses well related, and least of all did it require, or sufficiently encourage, the student to articulate and complete his knowledge of his field, by himself, through work outside the classroom. The next logical step, therefore, was taken in the autumn of 1912-13 when the Faculty passed the following vote:

  1. That the Division of History, Government, and Economics be authorized to require of all students whose field of concentration lies in this Division, in addition to the present requirements stated in terms of courses for the bachelor’s degree, a special final examination upon each student’s field of concentration; and that the passing of this examination shall be necessary in order to fulfill the requirements for concentration in this Division.
  2. That students who pass this special examination may be excused from the regular final examinations in such courses of their last year as fall within the Division of History, Government, and Economics, in the same way that candidates for distinction who pass a public test may now be excused under the rules of the Faculty.
  3. That this requirement go into effect with the class entering in 1913.
  4. That the Division of History, Government, and Economics submit for the sanction of the Faculty the detailed rules for the final examinations and such a detailed scheme of tutorial assistance as may be adopted before these are put into effect by the Division.

       The examinations thus established were first given at the close of 1915-16. Between that date and the end of the year 1919-20, these general examinations had been given to 444 men, of whom 26 (5.8+%) failed and therefore did not receive their degrees unless they passed the general examinations in some subsequent year; of the 418 who passed, 73 (17.4+%) won distinction and 345 (82.5+%) obtained a pass degree.

       General examinations had been used in the Medical School since 1911-12, and in the Divinity School since 1912-13, so that considerable knowledge of the actual working of such examinations was available by the opening of the academic year 1918-19. Accordingly on December 3, 1918, the Faculty passed the following vote under which a committee of nine was established:

       That a Committee be appointed to investigate the working of the general final examinations for degrees now used in various Departments of the University, and to consider the advisability of employing general final examinations on the fields of concentration in all Departments of Harvard College.

       After studying the subject for some months the Committee came to the conclusion that the advantages of the general final examination, particularly as employed in the Division of History, Government, and Economics, might be stated as follows:

    1. The examination has secured “concentration” in related subjects.
    2. It has encouraged the mastery of subjects or fields rather than of courses.
    3. It has given the Division a survey of the student’s capacity at the end of his college course.
    4. It has provided a more satisfactory method of awarding the degree with distinction than the plan formerly in use.

       The Committee therefore made the following recommendations, which the Faculty adopted April 1, 1919:

  1. That general final examinations be established for all students concentrating in Divisions or under Committees which signify their willingness to try such examinations, and that adequate means be provided to enable such Divisions and Committees to administer these examinations; it being understood that the control of the general final examinations shall rest with the several Divisions and Committees in the same manner as the control of the examinations for honors and distinction now given by them.
  2. That the new general final examinations be first employed for the members of the present freshman class.
  3. That, so far as possible, the adviser to whom each student is assigned, be a teacher in the student’s field of concentration.

       All Divisions had previously indicated their desire or willingness to employ such examinations except the Divisions of Mathematics and of the Natural Sciences. The chief reason for the attitude of the Divisions declining appears to lie in the nature of the subjects which they represent, for Mathematics and the Natural Sciences have, by and large, fairly fixed paths of advancement for the undergraduate, so that an examination in an advanced course is, at the same time, an examination on all the work which has preceded, as may very well not be the case in Literary, Historical, and Philosophical subjects.

       Beginning then, with the year 1921-22, general final examinations on the fields of concentration will be required of all candidates for the bachelor’s degree, save in the Divisions named above. The plan is an experiment, and the experience of at least ten years may be needed before its virtues and defects can be fully estimated; but in the meantime, the successful working of such examinations in the Medical School, the Divinity School, and especially in the Division of History, Government, and Economics under this Faculty, the welcome given the plan by the more serious part of the student body, and the interest in the experiment shown by other colleges, give grounds for entertaining much hope.

       The very plan of a general final examination, however, requires that the student shall select his courses wisely, do work outside his formal courses, and by reading and reflection coordinate the details he has learned into a body of ordered knowledge of his subject, so far as this can be done in undergraduate years. In all this he requires guidance and stimulus. The Division of History, Government, and Economics, therefore, from the first, has employed Tutors whose business it is to guide and assist students, individually, in their preparation for the general final examination. Tutoring for this purpose was, on the whole, a new problem in American education, although Princeton University had made some important experiments with its Preceptorial system, and “advisers” for undergraduates had long existed here and elsewhere; moreover, the Oxford and Cambridge system of Tutors obviously could not be transplanted without change to this country because of the differences in secondary and college education. Therefore it was, and still is, necessary to experiment in methods and to develop men for the work. At first tutorial duties were superimposed on other teaching, thus increasing the total amount of instruction given by those who were appointed Tutors, but this plan proved unwise for reasons which now seem fairly clear, but which were not so easily seen in advance. More recently many Tutors have given all their time to tutorial duties, and in some cases this may always be a wise plan; but it appears probable that in many cases it will be unwise for a Tutor to be excluded wholly from giving some formal instruction in his subject by means of a “lecture” course or otherwise, for it is important that every teacher should grow in depth as well as in breadth of knowledge, and such growth can probably usually be best assured him by having him give a course in the subject which he is making especially his own. At present, then, the arrangement which seems most promising is to provide that, so far as possible, each Tutor who desires it shall use a certain proportion of his time in giving formal instruction with the usual classroom methods, the rest, usually the major part of his teaching, being given in the less formal but equally important work of a Tutor.

       Tutorial work means work with the individual student. General suggestions and directions can be given to small groups about as effectively as to single students; yet since the individual student must be considered the unit in any plan of college education which allows some range of choice, but which requires also proof of a well-ordered body of knowledge as a condition of graduation, the Tutors must generally deal with individual students; and this is the regular method employed at the present time. The Tutor meets the students under his charge every week to discuss with them the reading which they have done, to help them solve their difficulties, and to give them suggestions for their future guidance. The good Tutor is in no sense a coach, but a friendly counselor whose knowledge and wisdom are put at the disposal of his students. Unquestionably the total amount of work now required of each student has been somewhat increased over that formerly exacted, but the amount is not so excessive as to call in itself for any remission of the present requirements of courses. The most important purpose, however, of this work done by the student outside his courses under the direction of the Tutor is to teach him how to learn and how to assimilate his knowledge. Ambitious and able students realize the value of such training and give themselves much of it, becoming candidates for distinction in their fields of concentration; the indolent and slow are content with a bare degree. When more experience has been gained the Faculty may well consider relaxing somewhat the requirements of four courses in the Senior year for candidates for distinction, whose previous records give promise of success; but the pass man deserves no increased opportunities for self-discipline since he will ordinarily have proved that he cannot or will not use them.

       In this connection the question may well be raised whether all men should receive equal attention from the Tutors. That there should be equal opportunities for all until some have shown themselves indifferent or unequal to them is beyond doubt; but when the wills and abilities of men have been well tested, as should ordinarily be the case by the end of the sophomore year, it seems only justice to the willing and able to give them more attention than is bestowed on the men who are content with a pass degree. Of course a chance must be given the repentant laggard to climb into the more deserving, and therefore more favored, group during his last two years. But there is some danger in college work today that we shall give more consideration to the mediocre and lazy student than to the upper third of the class which contains the men who deserve the best training that can be given them and who are to provide the leaders of their time.

       In the vote of April, 1919, the Faculty wisely left each Department or Division free to determine the nature of the assistance to be given students concentrating under it and the means by which such assistance shall be given. The Divisions of Philosophy and of Fine Arts propose to use Tutors, as the Division of History, Government and Economics has done from the beginning of the experiment; the several Departments of Languages and Literatures, ancient and modern, will employ advisory committees. But whatever names and methods are employed, the aim will always be to give the individual student assistance and encouragement in acquiring a body of well-organized knowledge in his field. In this direction apparently lies the next advance in the improvement of instruction in Harvard College.

CLIFFORD H. MOORE, Chairman.

Source: Harvard University. Report of the President of Harvard College 1919-1920, pp. 100-104.

__________________________

Related previous posts

Harvard. First Undergraduate General and Specific Exams in History, Government and Economics Division, 1916.

Harvard. Economics degree requirements, A.B./A.M./Ph.D., 1921-1922

 

Categories
Berkeley Economists Gender Oxford Radcliffe Smith

Radcliffe/Oxford. An economics major who got away (to history of art). 1919

Ruth Doggett was on the start of a promising academic career as an economist until she completely switched her focus to Italian art history, having (presumably happily) worked together with her art historian husband, Clarence Kennedy, in Florence. As the record shows, economics’ loss turned out to be art history’s gain. 

Something in me hopes that I find a case of an art historian who turns to economics. What are the odds?

_____________________________

Ruth Wedgewood Doggett Kennedy
c.v.

Ruth Wedgewood Doggett was born August 19, 1896 in Greenville, Rhode Island. Her father was the President of Springfield College.

Ruth Doggett began her undergraduate studies 1915-16 at the University of California, Berkeley. In 1919  she graduated with an A.B. (Phi Beta Kappa) from Radcliffe College, receiving a magna cum laude in Economics.

Her obituaries report that she was an instructor in Economics at Smith College 1919–20, but I have not been able to confirm any economics and sociology course for her other than “Principles of Sociology” (e.g. Smith Catalogue 1921-22, p. 69).

Ruth Doggett spent a year (1921) at Lady Margaret Hall, University of Oxford where she was awarded a Diploma in Economics with first class honors. In London she married the young art historian/photographer Clarence Kennedy in 1921. They had previously met at Smith College.

The young couple returned to Smith College, Ruth Doggett Kennedy  as an instructor in Economics (1921–23) and Clarence was appointed assistant professor of art history.

In 1923 the Kennedys moved to Florence to teach in the Art Department’s Division of Graduate Study program. Ruth Kennedy served as assistant to the Director of Graduate Study in Art, 1925–26, 1927–28. She was a special lecturer in History of Italian Art, 1928–29, Smith College.

Ruth Kennedy was awarded a John Simon Guggenheim Foundation fellowship to complete a study of the Florentine painter, Alesso Baldovinetti and of his associates, in Italy; tenure, six months from March 10, 1930.

From that time on she lectured on art at Smith, Springfield College and Wellesley. Her major publications were:

  • Alesso Baldovinetti, a critical & historical study. New Haven: Yale University Press, 1938.
  • The Renaissance painter’s garden. New York: Oxford University Press, 1948.
  • The Italian Renaissance. New York: Art Treasures of the World, 1954.

1960-61. Ruth and Clarence Kennedy were invited to serve as Resident Art Historians at the American Academy in Rome.

1961 Ruth Kennedy officially retires as emeritus professor of art at Smith College..

  • Novelty and tradition in Titan’s art. Katharine Asher Engel lectures. Northampton, Mass., Smith College, 1963.

Ruth Wedgewood Kennedy died November 30, 1968 in Boston.

_____________________________

Obituaries.

Lee, R. W. (1969). Ruth Wedgwood Kennedy. Renaissance Quarterly, 22(2), 206–208.

The Boston Globe, December 1, 1968, p. 110.

_____________________________

From the Finding Aid for Kennedy Family papers, Smith College Archives.

Clarence Kennedy was born in Philadelphia in 1892. He received his bachelor’s degree in architecture and a master’s degree in art history from the University of Pennsylvania, and studied at the American School of Classical Studies in Athens, Greece, as a Charles Eliot Norton Fellow of Harvard University. While working on his Ph.D. at Harvard, he joined the Smith College Art Department faculty. Kennedy received his doctorate from Harvard in 1924. His dissertation was titled The Effect of Lighting on Greek Sculpture.

Ruth Wedgewood Doggett was born in Greenville, Rhode Island in 1896, and was raised in Springfield, MA, where her father was President of Springfield College. She attended the University of California at Berkeley for two years and completed her undergraduate education at Radcliffe College with a degree in Economics, magna cum laude. She taught at Smith College in the Economics Department for a year after her graduation and then spent a year at Lady Margaret Hall of Oxford University furthering her study of economics.

Clarence Kennedy and Ruth Wedgewood (Doggett) Kennedy were married in England in 1921. At the time Clarence was traveling in Italy and Greece, photographing classical sculpture. The next fall they returned to Northampton, where both had held positions in the Art and Economics departments, respectively. In 1923 the Kennedys moved to Florence to teach in the Art Department’s Division of Graduate Study program. By this time Ruth had begun to establish herself as a Renaissance scholar, while Clarence continued his photographic and academic work. Their collaboration was continuous and they were among the pioneers of modern techniques in the study of art history. Among their innovations was the teaching of art history in situ instead of in the classroom. During this time the Kennedys had two children, Melinda, born in 1924, and Robert, called Bobby, born in 1928.

Ruth Kennedy was a member of the Art Department from 1941 to 1961. She taught courses on Italian Renaissance artists and on the cultures and cities that informed their art. During her time at Smith she undertook research on Alesso Baldovinetti, Fra Bartolomeo, Francesco Laurana, as well as projects on flowers in Renaissance art. She also was active nationally and internationally in her field of Renaissance art; her articles and reviews appeared often in art journals and she served on the editorial board of Art in America, Renaissance Quarterly, and the Art Bulletin. During her career Ruth received fellowships from the Guggenheim Foundation and the American Philosophical Society. She also lectured at other institutions, including Springfield College and Wellesley College.

From 1928 to 1932, Clarence Kennedy and Smith College published Studies in the History and Criticism of Sculpture, a seven-part series of volumes, issued in editions of 100, containing over three hundred black and white gelatin photographs of Ancient and Renaissance sculpture.

After Clarence and Ruth’s return to Northampton from Italy in 1933, Clarence continued to teach art history and photography; he soon added typography to his courses when he and Ruth set up the Cantina Press in their home at 44 Pomeroy Terrace in 1936-37. Cantina Press published little under its own imprint, but the Kennedys helped to establish the tradition of typography and printing at Smith College and produced much ephemeral work, such as invitations, broadsides, and programs.

Clarence Kennedy collaborated with scientist and inventor Edwin H. Land, co-founder of the Polaroid Corporation, on a system for the projection of stereoscopic lantern slides using Land’s invention of Polaroid filters over the lenses of a double projector. Viewing the projected images through special glasses with Polaroid filters identical to those on the projectors, the audience could see the image in three dimensions. Clarence also worked with Land during World War II on development of a Vectograph system using polarized stereographic images for three-dimensional maps. He was a member of the Monuments and Fine Arts Commission, established by the United States government to minimize the destruction of works of art within enemy-held territory during World War II. Clarence was also a consultant to the Eastman Kodak Company on photographic matters.

Together, Ruth and Clarence were invited to serve as Resident Art Historians at the American Academy in Rome for 1960-61.

Ruth Kennedy became a Professor Emeritus at Smith in 1961, but continued to lecture, research, and work on potential publications until her sudden death after a short illness on November 30, 1968 in Boston.

Clarence Kennedy retired from Smith in 1960, and died on July 29, 1972 in Northampton.

Melinda Kennedy (1924-2002) was the first child and only daughter of Clarence and Ruth Kennedy. Melinda attended Smith College and graduated with the class of 1945. Melinda was married for several years to Alfred Lester Talkington, who was known as Hank. Melinda and Hank had two daughters, Sylvia and Amy. Hank also had a daughter, Jo Lynn, from a previous marriage. Melinda was a poet and translator, and taught English for many years at Choate Rosemary Hall in Wallingford, CT.

Image Source:  The Radcliffe College Yearbook 1919, p. 31.

Categories
Cambridge Columbia Cornell Curriculum Economics Programs Germany Harvard Oxford Teaching

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

 

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

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

Chicago, Columbia, Harvard 1893-94

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

____________________________

Methods of Economic Training in this and other Countries.

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

APPENDIX

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

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

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

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

      1. England
      2. Scotland
      3. Ireland

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

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

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

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

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

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

_______________________

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

AUSTRIA.

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

HUNGARY.

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

1Budapest, Klausenburg (Kalorsvar).

GERMANY.

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

HOLLAND.

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

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

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

BELGIUM.

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

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

ART. 5.

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

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

ART. 7.

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

ITALY.

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

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

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

RUSSIA.

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

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

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA.

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

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

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

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

Full courses

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

Half-courses

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

At Columbia College the courses are as follows:—

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

 

APPENDIX II.

On Economic Studies in France.
By Henry Higgs.

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

(i.) The Collège de France, Paris;

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

APPENDIX III.

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

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

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

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

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

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

ENGLAND.

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

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

Part I.—Three papers.

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

Part II.—Three papers.

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

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

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

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

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

SCOTLAND.

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

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

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

IRELAND.

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

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

—————————

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

 

Categories
Berkeley Chicago Columbia Economists Fields Oxford Socialism

Chicago. Nutter ranks Soviet economy experts in reply to Friedman, 1962

 

From the January 1962 exchange of letters between Milton Friedman and G. Warren Nutter transcribed below, we learn that the University of Chicago was interested in potentially hiring some academic expert on the Soviet economy. Friedman asked Nutter to rank three possible candidates of interest. Nutter did just that and threw in a fourth name.

Long before turning to the history of economics as my major research interest, I entered academic economics in the field of comparative economic systems. One of the candidates mentioned in the correspondence, Francis Seton, wrote a signed [!] positive referee report for my 1986 article in the Journal of Comparative Economics, “On Marxian value, exploitation, and the transformation problem: A geometric approach“, that I honestly regard as one of my pedagogical high-water marks. Another one of the 1962 candidates, Gregory Grossman, was one of the distinguished outside referees to whom I owe a debt of gratitude for helping me clear the tenure hurdle at the University of Houston. It is a real pleasure to be able to add his Berkeley memorial and picture to this post.

___________________

Gregory Grossman (1921-2014)
IN MEMORIAM by Gerard Roland

Gregory Grossman, born in July 1921 in Kyiv, Ukraine, passed away on August 14, 2014. Grossman was one of the world’s most highly reputed scholars of the Soviet economic system. He was considered a towering figure in the study of the Soviet economy. His scholarly work shaped the thinking of generations of scholars in the US and throughout the world.

In early 1923 his family fled post-Russian Revolution chaos and famine and took a month-long journey on the Trans-Siberian Railway to Harbin, Manchuria. After completing high school in 1937 in Tientsin, China, he boarded a Japanese ocean liner en route to attend UC Berkeley where he completed his B.S. and M.A., respectively in 1941 and 1943. During World War II, Grossman served as artillery observer with the 731st Field Artillery Battalion during the Battle of the Bulge and completed his war duty in Czechoslovakia. He received a PhD in economics from Harvard University in 1953. He was a faculty member of the Department of Economics at Berkeley from 1953 until his retirement in 1992.

Grossman was the author of several books and many highly influential articles. He made key contributions to the understanding of the Soviet economic system. In a classic article, “Notes for a Theory of the Command Economy” (Soviet Studies, 1963), he coined the concept of the “command economy” to characterize the central planning system, where production and investment were guided by the commands of the communist party elite and where managers at all levels of the planning system strove to implement the commands embodied in the plan targets. In such a system, prices and money play no active role and serve only as accounting units. In such a system, autonomy of agents must be curbed to favor the implementation of plan commands. As his former student, Pennsylvania State University professor Barry Ickes, has noted: “His formulation of the command economy hypothesis provided the framework used by scholars of several generations.”

In an equally famous article “The ‘Second Economy of the USSR” (Problems of Communism, 1977), he also coined the complementary concept of the “second economy.” Because of the imbalances and shortages inherent in a necessarily imperfect planning system, decentralized forms of market exchange, though illegal, were necessary to correct the allocative mistakes of the command system. Grossman worked with professor Vladimir Treml of Duke University and others to conduct more than a decade of research on all aspects of this second economy, gathering massive amounts of evidence based on interviews with emigres from the Soviet Union. He had garnered detailed evidence on the extent of the second economy and on prices of goods and services in various locations of the USSR.

Grossman’s analysis of the Soviet economic system proved extraordinarily prescient. Over time, as the economic system became more complex, the second economy tended to expand and corrode the command system, which eventually collapsed while managers of state-owned enterprises appropriated the assets they controlled in a process of spontaneous privatization. This was the starting point of the transition to the market economy that was studied by the next generation of scholars.

Grossman was awarded in 1991 a lifetime achievement award from the American Association for the Advancement of Slavic Studies. Citing Grossman’s works on the “command economy” and the “second economy,” the award also noted his earlier, path-breaking book, Soviet Statistics of Physical Output of Industrial Commodities (1960), saying that the book “provided the profession with basic rules for working with distorted Soviet economic statistics and avoiding the many pitfalls of that enterprise.”

A colleague at Berkeley, Benjamin Ward, said there was a period in the Cold War of maybe 20 years in which Grossman “was the most knowledgeable person in the world about the Soviet economy.”

Grossman was an appreciated teacher. For decades, he taught the main undergraduate course on the Soviet economic system. He also supervised throughout his career a great number of graduate students who later became themselves well-known scholars of Eastern European economies.

Grossman was a polymath who had a deep understanding of the political, ideological, social and cultural underpinnings of economic life in the Soviet Union. As a result, he was widely sought out by his peers for comments on their scholarship. He was also known to be a consummate gentleman. He remained calm and composed in all circumstances and was known for his great sense of humor and generosity.

Family members said that, while he traveled widely, he had a particular love for Berkeley and the Bay Area’s lifestyle, culture, beautiful vistas and good weather.

In 1952 he married Cynthia Green and they had two children, Joel Grossman of Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia, and Amy Di Costanzo of Berkeley, California. In 1972, he married Joan Delaney, a UC Berkeley professor of Slavic Studies who stayed by his side until his death. He is survived by her; by his two children, six grandchildren and one great granddaughter.

Source: Senate of the University of California, Berkeley.

___________________

Francis Seton (Guardian obituary)

Francis Seton
An economist of ideal prices
By Maurice Scott

He was born Franz Szedo in Vienna, in the wake of the collapse of the Austro-Hungarian empire after the first world war. He was an only child; his parents had been born in Hungary, and were then citizens of Austria and had converted from Judaism to Christianity. His father ran a paper processing business in central Vienna, and Francis was educated there until 1938, when the Nazis were moving to annex Austria.

His interests lay in music and foreign languages, the latter taking him on visits to France and Britain. His parents, concerned at the Nazi threat, thought he should complete his studies abroad, and Francis contacted Balliol College, Oxford, when visiting England in 1937.

In March 1938, Germany invaded Austria. His father managed to arrange for Francis to go at once to London. Soon after, his parents also left Austria and Francis lost touch with them, fearing that they could be dead. But this story has a happy ending. In 1946 he learned that they had survived in Hungary.

From 1938 Francis read politics, philosophy and economics at Balliol, but by summer 1940 paranoia was widespread and he was classified as an enemy alien, albeit in category C, for those considered to pose the least danger. He was shipped to Canada in dreadful conditions.

By 1941 he was given the choice of freedom in Canada or return to Britain. As he wanted to fight the Nazis, he volunteered for His Majesty’s forces. Being still classed an enemy alien, he was allowed to join only the dogsbody Pioneer Corps. He met other aliens, including Arthur Koestler, Robert Maxwell and, most notably, a Russian soldier, who fired his interest in the language and the country.

By 1942, Francis was able to transfer to the Somerset Light Infantry, on detachment to Bicester. There, in spare moments he studied for an Oxford degree in Russian language and literature, helped by a refugee from the Bolshevik revolution who was at St Hugh’s, and this led, in 1946, to first class honours. In 1942, having been rejected on medical grounds as a glider pilot, his flair for languages led to a transfer to the Intelligence Corps.

In 1948, back at Balliol, Francis finally graduated with a first in PPE and became a British subject, having changed his name earlier. He was awarded a state studentship, to study the Soviet economy, the subject of his doctoral thesis. In 1950, he was elected to a Nuffield College research fellowship, followed by an official fellowship in 1953. He moved on from his interest in the Soviet Union to other countries in the developing world, and travelled widely. Eventually he became senior fellow, and took the lead in the election of two of Nuffield’s wardens.

Francis was immensely talented. His English literary style was a delight. He was multilingual, poetic, musical, and could play the piano with brilliance. For all this, and above all for his humour and friendship, he will be remembered.

He is survived by his wife, three children and nine grandchildren.

Francis Seton (Franz Szedo), economist, born January 29 1920; died January 7 2002.

Source:  The Guardian, March 21, 2002.

___________________

BIOGRAPHICAL NOTE: Alexander Erlich

Alexander Erlich was born in St. Petersburg, Russia, in 1912. In 1918, shortly after the outbreak of the Bolshevik Revolution, his family immigrated to Poland where his father, Henryk, became a leader of the Jewish Labor Fund. After the execution of his father in 1941, Erlich and his family fled to the United States. Influenced by his father’s work and the political atmosphere of his youth, Erlich began his study of economics at Friedrich-Wilhelm University in Berlin and the Free Polish University in Warsaw. He completed these studies after moving to the US, earning his PhD from the New School for Social Research in New York City in 1953. His doctoral dissertation, The Soviet Industrialization Controversy, was the basis for his best known work, The Soviet Industrial Debate, 1924-1928, published in 1960. His lifelong devotion to the study of Soviet economic conditions and policies found Erlich a home at Columbia University. Beginning as a visiting lecturer in 1955, he received a tenured position as professor in 1959. He retired in 1981 only to return as a part-time lecturer and professor at Columbia University and Barnard College in 1982. Erlich died of a heart attack in January 1985 at the age of 72.

Source: Columbia University Archival Collections. Alexander Erlich papers, 1953-1985.

___________________

Obituary of Eugène Zaleski (1918-2001)

Slavic Review 61, no. 3 (Fall 2002), 681-682.

___________________

Arcadius Kahan (1920-1982)

After his arrival in the United States he earned a Masters in 1954 and Ph.D. in 1958 in Economics from Rutgers University.

He joined the Economics faculty at the University of Chicago in 1955. As a member of the Economics Department at the University of Chicago, Kahan straddled a fine line between the principles which he brought from his socialist youth and the neoclassical school of economic thought associated with the Department. He won the confidence of Milton Friedman with his work on the economic effects of the persecution of Jews in 19th century Russia. Kahan concluded that this had a significant impact on Russia’s economic backwardness, particularly as compared with western Europe. He argued that this was an example of dysfunctional governmental interference in the economy, which drew on the methodology of the neoliberals in the Chicago school.

Source: Arcadius Kahan, Wikipedia.

___________________

Carbon Copy of Letter
from Friedman to Nutter

January 16, 1962

Professor G. Warren Nutter
Department of Economics
University of Virginia
Charlottesville, Virginia

Dear Warren:

There is again some talk around here of getting a Russian expert and various names have come up in the discussion. Three names that seem to stand out are Seton, Grossman, and Alex Ehrlich [sic]. I wonder if I could impose on you to send me a brief and frank note on these three people in terms of their scientific capacities in general as well as their special competence in the Russian field.

As you may know, what is involved here is part of a broader program than one that the Department alone is involved in. I have no special responsibility for this and am just writing as a member of the Department.

I do not know what has happened with respect to Kahan. I know that the College here has proposed making him a permanent tenure offer. The Department while expressing concurrence in this has not been willing to make this a joint appointment. I know neither whether the appointment has been approved by central administration nor whether Kahan has accepted it. Needless to say, this is all highly confidential.

Trust things are looking up for the Center. Best regard and wishes.

Sincerely yours,

Milton Friedman

MF:mp

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

Nutter’s Reply to Friedman

University of Virginia
James Wilson Department of Economics
University Station
Charlottesville, Virginia

January 24, 1962

Professor Milton Friedman
Department of Economics
University of Chicago
Chicago 37, Illinois

Dear Milton:

I am glad to give my opinion on Seton, Grossman, and Erlich if it can be of help in the current deliberations of your department. I can indicate at the start that I consider Grossman to be the best of the three alternatives for reasons that will emerge from my comments.

I know Seton from his work, from listening to papers he read in England, and from various personal contacts with him. Seton writes with a lucid and interesting style as so many scholars trained in England do, but as is so often also the case the content does not measure up to the form. Most of his work, both analytical and empirical, seems to me to be quite superficial. As far as I know, he has not yet done a single piece of really serious research on an important problem. His one effort in the field of measuring industrial production has, in my opinion, received far mor attention than it deserves, aside from being wrong and misleading. In brief, I believe Seton still has to prove himself an original scholar of depth.

This cannot be said of Alex Erlich, whose work I know firsthand from his participation in the early stages in the N.B.E.R. project. Erlich has done some very creditable research, resulting in one book (his doctoral dissertation) and joint authorship of several other research papers of varying length. His major weakness on the empirical side is that he is somewhat slow and lazy, requiring continuous prodding to get work done. It is for this reason that most of his work has been done under somebody’s supervision. He has considerable difficulty in expressing himself orally, speaking very slowly and haltingly, but this does not carry over at all into his written work, which is generally clear and precise. Finally, he is weak and poorly trained on the theoretical side.

Grossman is clearly the most able economist in this group, and in addition he expresses himself extremely well. If anything, like Seton, he writes too well, being tempted to substitute pen and paper for thorough research. The only solid piece of research that he has done so far is the book that he wrote for us in the N.B.E.R. project. At the same time, he must be recognized as an able technician, thoroughly versed in economic theory and capable of making important contributions in the field of Soviet studies. The only problem to date is that he has not fully lived up to promise.

I should say that all three men are highly knowledgeable as far as detailed workings of the Soviet system are concerned, Erlich and Grossman probably more so than Seton. They are all three very agreeable and cooperative persons and would fit in well with any group of first-rate economists.

There is one person, less well known that the three you are considering but in my opinion very able, whom you should consider for this position. He is Eugene Zaleski, a Pole by birth but now a French citizen. While not an outstanding theoretical economist, he is the soundest person I know among Soviet specialists in interpretations of the working of the Soviet system. He is currently working on a long-range project on the Soviet planning mechanism and the relation between plan and outcome, the first volume of his work being scheduled to appear shortly. Unfortunately, he has been caught up in the French research apparatus with all the inevitable handicaps on successful individual research. Given the right opportunity, I feel that Zaleski could develop into an outstanding scholar in the field of Soviet studies. Among other things, he has a very quick and receptive mind, and he is a pleasure to work with.

I hope these brief comments will be of some use to you. To repeat, I think Grossman would be the best bet of the three persons you mentioned.

As to the Center, things are definitely looking up. We have already received since the conference $25,000 in essentially unrestricted grants, and the Lilly Endowment was most cordial and receptive to my pleadings and probably will contribute something.

Cordially,
[signed] Warren
G. Warren Nutter

GWN:jas

 

Source: The Hoover Institution Archives. Papers of Milton Friedman, Box 31, Folder 16 “Nutter, G. Warren.”

Image Source:  Gregory Grossman, Authority on Soviet Economy, Gregory Grossman, Passes Away, UC Berkeley News. August 25, 2014.

Categories
Cambridge Chicago Columbia Economists Germany Harvard History of Economics Johns Hopkins LSE Oxford Teaching Undergraduate Wisconsin Yale

Survey of Economics Education. Colleges and Universities (Seligman), Schools (Sullivan), 1911

 

In V. Orval Watt’s papers at the Hoover Institution archives (Box 8) one finds notes from his Harvard graduate economics courses (early 1920s). There I found the bibliographic reference to the article transcribed below. The first two parts of this encyclopedia entry were written by Columbia’s E.R.A. Seligman who briefly sketched the history of economics and then presented a survey of the development of economics education at  colleges and universities in Europe and the United States. Appended to Seligman’s contribution was a much shorter discussion of economics education in the high schools of the United States by the high-school principal,  James Sullivan, Ph.D.

_________________________

 

ECONOMICS
History 

Edwin R. A. Seligman, Ph.D., LL.D.
Professor of Political Economy, Columbia University

The science now known as Economics was for a long time called Political Economy. This term is due to a Frenchman — Montchrétien, Sieur de Watteville — who wrote in 1615 a book with that title, employing a term which had been used in a slightly different sense by Aristotle. During the Middle Ages economic questions were regarded very largely from the moral and theological point of view, so that the discussions of the day were directed rather to a consideration of what ought to be, than of what is.

The revolution of prices in the sixteenth century and the growth of capital led to great economic changes, which brought into the foreground, as of fundamental importance, questions of commerce and industry. Above all, the breakdown of the feudal system and the formation of national states emphasized the considerations of national wealth and laid stress on the possibility of governmental action in furthering national interests. This led to a discussion of economic problems on a somewhat broader scale, — a discussion now carried on, not by theologians and canonists, but by practical business men and by philosophers interested in the newer political and social questions. The emphasis laid upon the action of the State also explains the name Political Economy. Most of the discussions, however, turned on the analysis of particular problems, and what was slowly built up was a body of practical precepts rather than of theoretic principles, although, of course, both the rules of action and the legislation which embodied them rested at bottom on theories which were not yet adequately formulated.

The origin of the modern science of economics, which may be traced back to the third quarter of the eighteenth century, is due to three fundamental causes. In the first place, the development of capitalistic enterprise and the differentiation between the laborer and the capitalist brought into prominence the various shares in distribution, notably the wages of the laborer, the profits of the capitalist, and the rent of the landowner. The attempt to analyze the meaning of these different shares and their relation to national wealth was the chief concern of the body of thinkers in France known as Physiocrats, who also called themselves Philosophes-Économistes, or simply Économistes, of whom the court physician of Louis XVI, Quesnay, was the head, and who published their books in 1757-1780.

The second step in the evolution of economic science was taken by Adam Smith (q.v.). In the chair of philosophy at the University of Glasgow, to which Adam Smith was appointed in 1754, and in which he succeeded Hutcheson, it was customary to lecture on natural law in some of its applications to politics. Gradually, with the emergence of the more important economic problems, the same attempt to find an underlying natural explanation for existing phenomena was extended to the sphere of industry and trade; and during the early sixties Adam Smith discussed these problems before his classes under the head of “police.” Finally, after a sojourn in France and an acquaintance with the French ideas, Adam Smith developed his general doctrines in his immortal work. The Wealth of Nations, published in 1776. When the industrial revolution, which was just beginning as Adam Smith wrote, had made its influence felt in the early decades of the nineteenth century, Ricardo attempted to give the first thorough analysis of our modern factory system of industrial life, and this completed the framework of the structure of economic science which is now being gradually filled out.

The third element in the formation of modern economics was the need of elaborating an administrative system in managing the government property of the smaller German and Italian rulers, toward the end of the eighteenth century. This was the period of the so-called police state when the government conducted many enterprises which are now left in private hands. In some of the German principalities, for instance, the management of the government lands, mines, industries, etc., was assigned to groups of officials known as chambers. In their endeavor to elaborate proper methods of administration these chamber officials and their advisors gradually worked out a system of principles to explain the administrative rules. The books written, as well as the teaching chairs founded, to expound these principles came under the designation of the Chamber sciences (Camiralia or Cameral-Wissenschaften) — a term still employed to-day at the University of Heidelberg. As Adam Smith’s work became known in Germany and Italy by translations, the chamber sciences gradually merged into the science of political economy.

Finally, with the development of the last few decades, which has relegated to the background the administrative and political side of the discipline, and has brought forward the purely scientific character of the subject, the term Political Economy has gradually given way to Economics.

Development of Economic Teaching

Edwin R. A. Seligman, Ph.D., LL.D.
Professor of Political Economy, Columbia University

Europe —

As has been intimated in the preceding section, the first attempts to teach what we to-day would call economics were found in the European universities which taught natural law, and in some of the Continental countries where the chamber sciences were pursued. The first independent chairs of political economy were those of Naples in 1753, of which the first incumbent was (Genovesi, and the professorship of cameral science at Vienna in 1763, of which the first incumbent was Sonnenfels. It was not, however, until the nineteenth century that political economy was generally introduced as a university discipline. When the new University of Berlin was created in 1810, provision was made for teaching in economics, and this gradually spread to the other German universities. In France a chair of economics was established in 1830 in the Collège de France, and later on in some of the technical schools; but economics did not become a part of the regular university curriculum until the close of the seventies, when chairs of political economy were created in the faculties of law, and not, as was customary in the other Continental countries, in the faculties of philosophy. In England the first professorship of political economy was that instituted in 1805 at Haileybury College, which trained the students for the East India service. The first incumbent of this chair was Malthus. At University College, London, a chair of economics was established in 1828, with McCulloch as the first incumbent; and at Dublin a chair was founded in Trinity College in 1832 by Archbishop Whately; at Oxford a professorship was established in 1825, with Nassau W. Senior as the first incumbent. His successors were Richard Whately (1830), W. F. Lloyd (1836), H. Merivale (1838), Travers Twiss (1842), Senior (1847), G. K. Richards (1852), Charles Neate (1857), Thorold Rogers (1862), Bonamy Price (1868), Thorold Rogers (1888). and F. Y. Edgeworth (1891). At Cambridge the professorship dates from 1863, the first incumbent being Henry Fawcett, who was followed by Alfred Marshall in 1884 and by A. C. Pigou in 1908. In all these places, however, comparatively little attention was paid at first to the teaching of economics, and it was not until the close of the nineteenth century and the beginning of the twentieth that any marked progress was made, although the professorship at King’s College, London, dates back to 1859, and that at the University of Edinburgh to 1871. Toward the close of the nineteenth century, chairs in economics were created in the provincial universities, especially at Birmingham, Manchester, Liverpool, Sheffield, Bristol, Durham, and the like, as well as in Scotland and Wales; and a great impetus to the teaching of economics was given by the foundation, in 1895, of the London School of Economics, which has recently been made a part of the University of London.

— United States 

Economics was taught at first in the United States, as in England, by incumbents of the chair of philosophy; but no especial attention was paid to the study, and no differentiation of the subject matter was made. The first professorship in the title of which the subject is distinctively mentioned was that instituted at Columbia College, New York, where John McVickar, who had previously lectured on the subject under the head of philosophy, was made professor of moral philosophy and political economy in 1819. In order to commemorate this fact, Columbia University established some years ago the McVickar professorship of political economy. The second professorship in the United States was instituted at South Carolina College, Columbia, S. C, where Thomas Cooper, professor of chemistry, had the subject of political economy added to the title of his chair in 1826. A professorship of similar sectional influence was that in political economy, history, and metaphysics filled in the College of William and Mary in 1827, by Thomas Roderick Dew (1802-1846). The separate professorships of political economy, however, did not come until after the Civil War. Harvard established a professorship of political economy in 1871; Yale in 1872; and Johns Hopkins in 1876.

The real development of economic teaching on a large scale began at the close of the seventies and during the early eighties. The newer problems bequeathed to the country by the Civil War were primarily economic in character. The rapid growth of industrial capitalism brought to the front a multitude of questions, whereas before the war well-nigh the only economic problems had been those of free trade and of banking, which were treated primarily from the point of view of partisan politics. The newer problems that confronted the country led to the exodus of a number of young men to Germany, and with their return at the end of the seventies and beginning of the eighties, chairs were rapidly multiplied in all the larger universities. Among these younger men were Patten and James, who went to the University of Pennsylvania; Clark, of Amherst and later of Columbia; Farnam and Hadley of Yale; Taussig of Harvard; H. C. Adams of Michigan; Mayo-Smith and Seligman of Columbia; and Ely of Johns Hopkins. The teaching of economics on a university basis at Johns Hopkins under General Francis A. Walker helped to create a group of younger scholars who soon filled the chairs of economics throughout the country. In 1879 the School of Political Science at Columbia was inaugurated on a university basis, and did its share in training the future teachers of the country. Gradually the teaching force was increased in all the larger universities, and chairs were started in the colleges throughout the length and breadth of the land.

At the present time, most of the several hundred colleges in the United States offer instruction in the subject, and each of the larger institutions has a staff of instructors devoted to it. At institutions like Columbia, Harvard, Yale, Chicago, and Wisconsin there are from six to ten professors of economics and social science, together with a corps of lecturers, instructors, and tutors.

Teaching of Economics in the American Universities. — The present-day problems of the teaching of economics in higher institutions of learning are seriously affected by the transition stage through which these institutions are passing. In the old American college, when economics was introduced it was taught as a part of the curriculum designed to instill general culture. As the graduate courses were added, the more distinctly professional and technical phases of the subject were naturally emphasized. As a consequence, both the content of the course and the method employed tended to differentiate. But the unequal development of our various institutions has brought great unclearness into the whole pedagogical problem. Even the nomenclature is uncertain. In one sense graduate courses may be opposed to undergraduate courses; and if the undergraduate courses are called the college courses, then the graduate courses should be called the university courses. The term “university,” however, is coming more and more, in America at least, to be applied to the entire complex of the institutional activities, and the college proper or undergraduate department is considered a part of the university. Furthermore, if by university courses as opposed to college courses we mean advanced, professional, or technical courses, a difficulty arises from the fact that the latter year or years of the college course are tending to become advanced or professional in character. Some institutions have introduced the combined course, that is, a combination of so-called college and professional courses; other institutions permit students to secure their baccalaureate degree at the end of three or even two and a half years. In both cases, the last year of the college will then cover advanced work, although in the one case it may be called undergraduate, and in the other graduate, work.

The confusion consequent upon this unequal development has had a deleterious influence on the teaching of economics, as it has in many other subjects. In all our institutions we find a preliminary or beginners’ course in economics, and in our largest institutions we find some courses reserved expressly for advanced or graduate students. In between these, however, there is a broad field, which, in some institutions, is cultivated primarily from the point of view of graduates, in others from the point of view of undergraduates, and in most cases is declared to be open to both graduates and undergraduates. This is manifestly unfortunate. For, if the courses, are treated according to advanced or graduate methods, they do not fulfill their proper function as college studies. On the other hand, if they are treated as undergraduate courses, they are more or less unsuitable for advanced or graduate students. In almost all of the American institutions the same professors conduct both kinds of courses. In only one institution, namely, at Columbia University, is the distinction between graduate and undergraduate courses in economics at all clearly drawn, although even there not with precision. At Columbia University, of the ten professors who are conducting courses in economics and social science, one half have seats only in the graduate faculties, and do no work at all in the college or undergraduate department; but even there, these professors give a few courses, which, while frequented to an overwhelming extent by graduate students, are open to such undergraduates as may be declared to be advanced students.

It is necessary, therefore, to distinguish, in principle at least, between the undergraduate or college courses properly so-called, and the university or graduate courses. For it is everywhere conceded that at the extremes, at least, different pedagogical methods are appropriate.

The College or Undergraduate Instruction. — Almost everywhere in the American colleges there is a general or preliminary or foundation course in economics. This ordinarily occupies three hours a week for the entire year, or five hours a week for the semester, or half year, although the three-hour course in the fundamental principles occasionally continues only for a semester. The foundation of such a course is everywhere textbook work, with oral discussion, or quizzes, and frequent tests. Where the number of students is small, this method can be effectively employed; but where, as in our larger institutions, the students attending this preliminary course are numbered by the hundreds, the difficulties multiply. Various methods are employed to solve these difficulties. In some cases the class attends as a whole at a lecture which is given once a week by the professor, while at the other two weekly sessions the class is divided into small sections of from twenty to thirty, each of them in charge of an instructor who carries on the drill work. In a few instances, these sections are conducted in part by the same professor who gives the lecture, in part by other professors of equal grade. In other cases where this forms too great a drain upon the strength of the faculty, the sections are put in the hands of younger instructors or drill masters. In other cases, again, the whole class meets for lecture purposes twice a week, and the sections meet for quiz work only once a week. Finally, the instruction is sometime carried on entirely by lectures to the whole class, supplemented by numerous written tests.

While it cannot be said that any fixed method has yet been determined, there is a growing consensus of opinion that the best results can be reached by the combination of one general lecture and two quiz hours in sections. The object of the general lecture is to present a point of view from which the problems may be taken up, and to awaken a general interest in the subject among the students. The object of the section work is to drill the students thoroughly in the principles of the science; and for this purpose it is important in a subject like economics to put the sections as far as possible in the hands of skilled instructors rather than of recent graduates.

Where additional courses are offered to the Undergraduates, they deal with special subjects in the domain of economic history, statistics, and practical economics. In many such courses good textbooks are now available, and especially in the last class of subject is an attempt is being made here and there to introduce the case system as utilized in the law schools. This method is, however, attended by some difficulties, arising from the fact that the materials used so quickly become antiquated and do not have the compelling force of precedent, as is the case in law. In the ordinary college course, therefore, chief reliance must still be put upon the independent work and the fresh illustrations that are brought to the classroom by the instructor.

In some American colleges the mistake has been made of introducing into the college curriculum methods that are suitable only to the university. Prominent among these are the exclusive use of the lecture system, and the employment of the so-called seminar. This, however, only tends to confusion. On the other hand, in some of the larger colleges the classroom work is advantageously supplemented by discussions and debates in the economics club, and by practical exercises in dealing with the current economic problems as they are presented in the daily press.

In most institutions the study of economics is not begun until the sophomore or the junior year, it being deemed desirable to have a certain maturity of judgment and a certain preparation in history and logic. In some instances, however, the study of economics is undertaken at the very beginning of the college course, with the resulting difficulty of inadequately distinguishing between graduate and undergraduate work.

Another pedagogical question which has given rise to some difficulty is the sequence of courses. Since the historical method in economics became prominent, it is everywhere recognized that some training in the historical development of economic institutions is necessary to a comprehension of existing facts. We can know what is very much better by grasping what has been and how it has come to be. The point of difference, however, is as to whether the elementary course in the principles should come first and be supplemented by a course in economic history, or whether, on the contrary, the course in economic history should precede that in the principles. Some institutions follow one method, others the second; and there are good arguments on both sides. It is the belief of the writer, founded on a long experience, that on the whole the best results can be reached by giving as introductory to the study of economic principles a short survey of the leading points of economic history. In a few of the modem textbooks this plan is intentionally followed. Taking it all in all, it may be said that college instruction in economics is now not only exceedingly widespread in the United States, but continually improving in character and methods.

University or Graduate Instruction. — The university courses in economics are designed primarily for those who either wish to prepare themselves for the teaching of economics or who desire such technical training in methods or such an intimate acquaintance with the more developed matter as is usually required by advanced or professional students in any discipline. The university courses in the larger American institutions which now take up every important subject in the discipline, and which are conducted by a corps of professors, comprise three elements: first, the lectures of the professor; second, the seminar or periodical meeting between the professor and a group of advanced students; third, the economics club, or meeting of the students without the professor.

(1) The Lectures: In the university lectures the method is different from that in the college courses. The object is not to discipline the student, but to give him an opportunity of coming into contact with the leaders of thought and with the latest results of scientific advance on the subject. Thus no roll of attendance is called, and no quizzes are enforced and no periodical tests of scholarship are expected. In the case of candidates for the Ph.D. degree, for instance, there is usually no examination until the final oral examination, when the student is expected to display a proper acquaintance with the whole subject. The lectures, moreover, do not attempt to present the subject in a dogmatic way, as is more or less necessary in the college courses, but, on the contrary, are designed to present primarily the unsettled problems and to stimulate the students to independent thinking. The university lecture, in short, is expected to give to the student what cannot be found in the books on the subject.

(2) The Seminar: Even with the best of will, however, the necessary limitations prevent the lecturer from going into the minute details of the subject. In order to provide opportunity for this, as well as for a systematic training of the advanced students in the method of attacking this problem, periodical meetings between the professor and the students have now become customary under the name of the seminar, introduced from Germany. In most of our advanced universities the seminar is restricted to those students who are candidates for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy, although in some cases a preliminary seminar is arranged for graduate students who are candidates for the degree of Master of Arts. Almost everywhere a reading knowledge of French and German is required. In the United States, as on the European continent generally, there are minor variations in the conduct of the seminar. Some professors restrict the attendance to a small group of most advanced students, of from fifteen to twenty-five; others virtually take in all those who apply. Manifestly the personal contact and the “give and take,” which are so important a feature of the seminar, become more difficult as the numbers increase. Again, in some institutions each professor has a seminar of his own; but this is possible only where the number of graduate students is large. In other cases the seminar consists of the students meeting with a whole group of professors. While this has a certain advantage of its own, it labors under the serious difficulty that the individual professor is not able to impress his own ideas and his own personality so effectively on the students; and in our modern universities students are coming more and more to attend the institution for the sake of some one man with whom they wish to study. Finally, the method of conducting the seminar differs in that in some cases only one general subject is assigned to the members for the whole term, each session being taken up by discussion of a different phase of the general subject. In other cases a new subject is taken up at every meeting of the seminar. The advantage of the latter method is to permit a greater range of topics, and to enable each student to report on the topic in which he is especially interested, and which, perhaps, he may be taking up for his doctor’s dissertation. The advantage of the former method is that it enables the seminar to enter into the more minute details of the general subject, and thus to emphasize with more precision the methods of work. The best plan would seem to be to devote half the year to the former method, and half the year to the latter method.

In certain branches of the subject, as, for instance, statistics, the seminar becomes a laboratory exercise. In the largest universities the statistical laboratory is equipped with all manner of mechanical devices, and the practical exercises take up a considerable part of the time. The statistical laboratories are especially designed to train the advanced student in the methods of handling statistical material.

(3) The Economics Club: The lecture work and the seminar are now frequently supplemented by the economics club, a more informal meeting of the advanced students, where they are free from the constraint that is necessarily present in the seminar, and where they have a chance to debate, perhaps more unreservedly, some of the topics taken up in the lectures and in the seminar, and especially the points where some of the students dissent from the lecturer. Reports on the latest periodical literature are sometimes made in the seminar and sometimes in the economics club; and the club also provides an opportunity for inviting distinguished outsiders in the various subjects. In one way or another, the economics club serves as a useful supplement to the lectures and the seminar, and is now found in almost all the leading universities.

In reviewing the whole subject we may say that the teaching of economics in American institutions has never been in so satisfactory condition as at present. Both the instructors and the students are everywhere increasing in numbers; and the growing recognition of the fact that law and politics are so closely interrelated with, and so largely based on, economics, has led to a remarkable increase in the interest taken in the subject and in the facilities for instruction.


Economics
— In the Schools 

James Sullivan, Ph.D., Principal of Boys’ High School, Brooklyn, N.Y.

This subject has been defined as the study of that which pertains to the satisfaction of man’s material needs, — the production, preservation, and distribution of wealth. As such it would seem fundamental that the study of economics should find a place in those institutions which prepare children to become citizens, — the elementary and high schools. Some of the truths of economics are so simple that even the youngest of school children may be taught to understand them. As a school study, however, economics up to the present time has made far less headway than civics (q.v.). Its introduction as a study even in the colleges was so gradual and so retarded that it could scarcely be expected that educators would favor its introduction in the high schools.

Previous to the appearance, in 1894, of the Report of the Committee of Ten of the National Educational Association on Secondary Education, there had been much discussion on the educational value of the study of economics. In that year Professor Patten had written a paper on Economics in Elementary Schools, not as a plea for its study there, but as an attempt to show how the ethical value of the subject could be made use of by teachers. The Report, however, came out emphatically against formal instruction in political economy in the secondary school, and recommended “that, in connection particularly with United States history, civil government, and commercial geography instruction be given in those economic topics, a knowledge of which is essential to the understanding of our economic life and development” (pp. 181-183). This view met with the disapproval of many teachers. In 1895 President Thwing of Western Reserve University, in an address before the National Educational Association on The Teaching of Political Economy in the Secondary Schools, maintained that the subject could easily be made intelligible to the young. Articles or addresses of similar import followed by Commons (1895), James (1897), Haynes (1897), Stewart (1898), and Taussig (1899). Occasionally a voice was raised against its formal study in the high schools. In the School Review for January, 1898, Professor Dixon of Dartmouth said that its teaching in the secondary schools was “unsatisfactory and unwise.” On the other hand, Professor Stewart of the Central Manual Training School of Philadelphia, in an address in April, 1898, declared the Report of the Committee of Ten “decidedly reactionary,” and prophesied that political economy as a study would he put to the front in the high school. In 1899 Professor Clow of the Oshkosh State Normal School published an exhaustive study of the subject of Economics as a School Study, going into the questions of its educational value, its place in the schools, the forms of the study, and the methods of teaching. His researches serve to show that the subject was more commonly taught in the high schools of the Middle West than in the East. (Compare with the article on Civics.)

Since the publication of his work the subject of economics has gradually made its appearance in the curricula of many Eastern high schools. It has been made an elective subject of examination for graduation from high schools by the Regents of New York State, and for admission to college by Harvard University. Its position as an elective study, however, has not led many students to take it except in commercial high schools, because in general it may not be used for admission to the colleges.

Its great educational value, its close touch with the pupils’ everyday life, and the possibility of teaching it to pupils of high school age are now generally recognized. A series of articles in the National Educational Association’s Proceedings for 1901, by Spiers, Gunton, Halleck, and Vincent bear witness to this. The October, 1910, meeting of the New England History Teachers’ Association was entirely devoted to a discussion of the Teaching of Economics in Secondary Schools, and Professors Taussig and Haynes reiterated views already expressed. Representatives of the recently developed commercial and trade schools expressed themselves in its favor.

Suitable textbooks in the subject for secondary schools have not kept pace with its spread in the schools. Laughlin, Macvane, and Walker published books somewhat simply expressed; but later texts have been too collegiate in character. There is still needed a text written with the secondary school student constantly in mind, and preferably by an author who has been dealing with students of secondary school age. The methods of teaching, mutatis mutandis, have been much the same as those pursued in civics (q.v.). The mere cramming of the text found in the poorest schools gives way in the best schools to a study and observation of actual conditions in the world of to-day. In the latter schools the teacher has been well trained in the subject, whereas in the former it is given over only too frequently to teachers who know little more about it than that which is in the text.

See also Commercial Education.

 

References: —

In Colleges and Universities: —

A Symposium on the Teaching of Elementary Economics. Jour. of Pol. Econ., Vol. XVIIl, June, 1910.

Cossa, L. Introduction to the Study of Political Economy: tr. by L. Dyer. (London, 1893.)

Mussey, H. R. Economies in the College Course. Educ. Rev. Vol. XL, 1910, pp. 239-249.

Second Conference on the Teaching of Economics, Proceedings. (Chicago, 1911.)

Seligman, E. R. A. The Seminarium — Its Advantages and Limitations. Convocation of the University of the State of New York, Proceedings. (1892.)

In Schools: —

Clow, F. R. Economics as a School Study, in the Economic Studies of the American Economic Association for 1899. An excellent bibliography is given. It may be supplemented by articles or addresses since 1899 which have been mentioned above. (New York, 1899.)

Haynes, John. Economics in Secondary Schools. Education, February, 1897.

 

Source: Paul Monroe (ed.), A Cyclopedia of Education, Vol. II. New York: Macmillan, pp. 387-392.

Source: E.R.A. Seligman in Universities and their Sons, Vol. 2 (1899), pp. 484-6.

 

Categories
Exam Questions Oxford

Oxford. Five Economics Exams. Intro, Intermediate, History, International, Money & Banking, 1902

 

Something I find particularly interesting in the following five exams is that the second course in political economy at Oxford in 1902 was based upon the American textbook, Political Economy, by Francis A. Walker.

________________

SECOND PUBLIC EXAMINATION.
Pass School. Group B. 3.
Political Economy. I.

Adam Smith’s Wealth of Nations.

Time allowed—3 Hours.

  1. “Why have gold and silver been commonly chosen as the material of money?
  2. How far did Adam Smith anticipate (a) the Malthusian theory of population, (b) the law of diminishing returns?
  3. Explain why the earnings of labour are different in different occupations.
  4. Give an account of the Mercantile System and describe the chief methods adopted under its influence.
  5. In what ways have the results of free trade in England differed from those suggested as probable by Adam Smith?
  6. Compare Greek, Roman, and modern colonies as to (a) the motives which led to their foundation, and (b) the conditions of their prosperity.
  7. In what ways, besides taxation, may a state raise revenue? Are any of them important in England at the present time?
  8. What information is given by Adam Smith as to the condition of Hindostan, China, Holland, and Scotland?
  9. Give Adam Smith’s views on—

(a) the importance of the carrying trade;
(b) the expediency of usury laws;
(c) hearth money;
(d) taxes on ale-houses;
(e) land taxes.

  1. Explain and examine the following:—

(a) ‘Labour is the real measure of the exchangeable value of all commodities.’
(b) ‘The whole price of any commodity must finally resolve itself into some one or other or all of three parts.’

[T. T. 1902.]

 

SECOND PUBLIC EXAMINATION.
Pass School. Group B. 3.
Political Economy. II.

Walker’s Political Economy.

Time allowed—3 Hours.

  1. Explain the law of diminishing returns. What is its bearing on the theory of Rent?
  2. To what extent is the condition of the working-classes affected by the absence of perfect competition?
  3. What are the conditions which favour the growth of capital in a country?
  4. What is the connexion between Cost of Production and the Price of a Commodity?
  5. Under what circumstances is it expedient for a country to import goods although it could produce them more cheaply than the country from which they are imported?
  6. Why are the total exports from a country and the total imports into it not usually equal in value?
  7. Describe the chief functions of a modern bank.
  8. What is Bimetallism? What claims are made on its behalf, and how far are they valid?
  9. What is a protective duty? Under what circumstances, if any, is such a duty expedient?
  10. Explain the following phrases: — economic man, territorial division of labour, debasement of coin, depreciation, tabular standard, Gresham’s law, the theory of the diffusion of taxes.

[T. T. 1902.]

Source: Oxford University Examination Papers, Second Public Examination, Pass School, Group B.3. Trinity Term, 1902, pp. 29-30.

________________

 

SCHOOL OF MODERN HISTORY.
Political Economy and Economic History.

[Candidates must answer questions from both sections of the paper.]

I.

  1. What circumstances, in Mill’s opinion, make (a) Wages high, (b) Profits low, (c) Interest vary, (d) Rents fall?
  2. Enumerate, explain, and, if necessary, criticize Mill’s four fundamental propositions respecting Capital.
  3. Explain, with examples, the operation, advantage, and danger of the Credit system, as it exists in England.
  4. Distinguish the forces by which value is determined from the means by which it is measured, and give a careful discussion of the latter.
  5. Discuss Mill’s views upon any one of the following:—

(a) Unproductive Labour.
(b) Competition.
(c) Equality of Taxation.
(d) An inconvertible paper currency.

  1. Comment on the following passages from Mill:—

(a) Hardly anything worse can be said of the worst laws on the subject of industry and its remuneration than that they place the energetic and the idle, the skillful and the incompetent, on a level: and this, in so far as it is in itself possible, it is the direct tendency of the regulations of these unions to do.
(b) The exchange value of a thing may fall short, to any amount, of its value in use; but that it can ever exceed the value in use, implies a contradiction.
(c) A thing may sometimes be sold cheapest, by being produced in some other place than that at which it can be produced with the smallest amount of labour and abstinence.
(d) It must be remembered, too, that general high prices, even supposing them to exist, can be of no use to a producer or dealer, considered as such; [sic]

  1. Define Free Trade. How far do (a) countervailing duties, (b) the recent Tax on imported corn, run counter to the principles contained in your definition?

II.

  1. Do you consider that the economic prosperity of England has been attained by means of, or in spite of, Legislation?
  2. What were the advantages and disadvantages of the Manor System to the peasant?
  3. Do you think that Economic History can be profitably studied apart from the study of Political Economy?
  4. Explain any of the following:—Staple Towns; Convertible Husbandry; Drawbacks; Gresham’s Law; Navigation Acts; Truck Acts; Sinking Fund; Libelle of English Polycye.
  5. Compare the debt which England owes to wool with that which she owes to iron.
  6. Explain and comment upon the following:—
    (a) Therefore, to speak of the abolishing of usury is idle. All states have ever had it, in one kind or rate, or other. So as that opinion must be sent to Utopia. (Bacon’s Essays.)
    (b) In agriculture, too, Nature labours along with man; and though her labour costs no expense, its produce has its value, as well as that of the most expensive workmen. (Adam Smith.)
    (c) To found a great Empire for the sole purpose of raising up a people of customers, may at first sight appear a project fit only for a nation of shopkeepers. It is, however, a project altogether unfit for a nation of shopkeepers. (Adam Smith.)
  7. How far did the agricultural improvements of the eighteenth century make the Industrial Revolution possible?

[T. T. 1902.]

 

SCHOOL OF MODERN HISTORY.
Political Economy. A.
Foreign Trade.

  1. ‘The one condition at once essential to, and also sufficient for, the existence of international trade is a difference in the comparative as distinguished from the absolute cost of producing the commodities exchanged.’ Cairnes, cited by Bastable.
    Explain the principle referred to; and give examples from the commercial history of the nineteenth century of mistakes in policy which may be traced to want of acquaintance with this principle.
  2. ‘Tiefgreifende Umwälzungen der Vermögensverhältnisse, wie sie unter Ricardo’s Voraussetzungen zu erwarten sind, können nicht nur für die Kapitalisten, sondern auch für die Masse der Arbeiterbevölkerung so grosse Uebel erzeugen, dass man häufig vorziehen muss, auf eine an sich zweckmässigere internationale Verteilung der Production zu verzichten…. Es ist vorsichtig, darauf zu achten, dass die Wegräumung der schützenden Schranken keine gemeinschädliche Erschütterung des Wirtschaftslebens verursacht.’
    ‘Sogenannte Erziehungszölle haben…für die auf der normalen Höhe der Entwicklung stehenden Kulturstaaten keinen Sinn und Zweck mehr.’ (Lexis.)
    Translate and comment on these passages.
  3. Trace the history of the Corn Trade from 1815 to Referring to Canning’s speech on the Corn Law in the latter year, criticize the measure then proposed by him.
  4. What were the advantages claimed by Macaulay, Peel, and Cobden, for a free trade in corn; and to what extent were these advantages realized by the abolition of the Corn Laws?
  5. Give some account of the Merchant’s Petition in 1820; and trace through the next six years the reforms in commercial policy of which it was the harbinger.
  6. ‘To re-establish duties upon the import of foreign produce, to be regulated by the principle of reciprocity, would be accompanied with insuperable difficulties.’ (Peel.)
    Give instances of the principle of reciprocity being employed by statesmen of the Free Trade persuasion with success.
  7. ‘The Budget of 1860 completed the work of freeing the Statute Book of the United Kingdom from the vast series of tolls which for many hundreds of years had cumbered its pages.’ (Report on the Customs Tariffs, 1897.)
    Review the simplifications of the tariff effected between 1840 and 1860; mentioning instances in which the remission of taxation was attended with an increase of revenue.
  8. Point out some of the difficulties attending the use of import and export statistics. Why is the money value of exports, both (a) absolutely and (b) relatively to that of imports, an imperfect measure of a country’s industrial prosperity?

[T. T. 1902.]

 

SCHOOL OF MODERN HISTORY.
Political Economy. B.
Currency and Banking.

  1. Mention and criticize some of the doctrines combated by Horner and Canning in their defence of the Report of the Bullion Committee.
  2. By what arguments did Ricardo defend the Resumption of Cash Payments against Mr. Western in 1822? Comment upon the ‘opinion which he (Mr. Ricardo) had given of the effect which had been produced on the value of gold by the purchases [of gold] made by the Bank.’
  3. ‘No currency can be good of which the permanent average value does not conform to the permanent average value of a metallic currency; but I do not admit the inference that in order to enable it to do this, its fluctuations in value must conform to the fluctuations in the value of a metallic currency.’ (J. S. Mill.)
    Compare Mill’s doctrine as to the regulation of a convertible currency with that which is embodied in the Bank Act of 1844.
  4. ‘The value of money is settled like that of all other Commodities by supply and demand and only the form is essentially different.’ (Bagehot.)
    Apply this statement to variations in the rate of discount on the London money-market.
    Is there any connexion between fluctuations of discount and permanent changes in the level of general prices?
  5. ‘The question what is the relation between the amount of money in a country and the general scale of prices existing therein’ is ‘perhaps the one upon which the most contradictory opinions have been expressed by economists of reputation.’ (Walker.)
    Express your opinion on this question; referring to the views of leading economists, in particular those of Professor Marshall.
  6. ‘A joint supply of gold and silver will probably be more stable than a supply of either metal separately.’ (Foxwell.)
    Does the principle involved in this statement—the tendency of independent variations to compensate each other—form a strong argument in favour of Bimetallism?
    With what success could the principle be applied to the use of a ‘tabular standard’—based on the variation in the prices of several commodities—for deferred payments?
  7. ‘It is agreed on all sides that violent fluctuations of prices are an evil in the long run; but the difference of opinion is as to whether it is the sudden rise of prices, or the subsequent fall which is mainly responsible for the evil.’ (Marshall.)
    ‘An appreciation of gold will upon the whole tend to put a drag upon production.’ (Foxwell.)
    Compare and comment on the views of Professors Marshall and Foxwell as to the detriment caused by a change in the level of prices.
  8. How would you measure a variation in the value of money with respect to commodities in general between two epochs?

[T. T. 1902.]

Source: Oxford University Examination Papers, Second Public Examination, Honour School of Modern History. Trinity Term, 1902, pp. 32-34

Image Source: Convocation House, looking S.E. 1634–36. ‘Plate 56: Bodleian Library, Convocation House and Schools Quadrangle’, in An Inventory of the Historical Monuments in the City of Oxford (London, 1939), p. 56. British History Online http://www.british-history.ac.uk/rchme/oxon/plate-56  [accessed 13 May 2018].

 

 

Categories
Chicago Cowles Duke Economist Market Economists Germany Oxford

Chicago. Jacob Marschak seeks job application advice, his c.v. and list of publications, 1939

 

The economic historian Earl J. Hamilton met Jacob Marschak in Santander, Spain in 1933  and the two remained in touch. In Earl J. Hamilton’s papers at Duke University’s Economists’ Papers Archives I found the following 1939 letter from Marschak that is immediately followed by a copy of his c.v. and publications list. Since Marschak was asking for advice for applying for a job at the University of Chicago, it is not unlikely that his letter included the c.v. and publication list, though perhaps those copies were given to Hamilton earlier at the meeting at a drugstore in Detroit that is mentioned in the letter. Maybe all the stations of Marschak’s career listed in his 1938-39 c.v. and the publications from his list are all long known to Marschak scholars. But it is faster for me to include the artifacts here than to double check what is already known from other sources. It is interesting to see that his self-advertisement includes the fact that he studied economics and statistics under Eugen Slutsky in Kiev.

___________________

Jacob Marschak’s New Year’s Greeting for 1939 to Earl J. Hamilton

422 Fredonia Avenue
Peoria, Illinois

January 4, 1939

My dear Hamilton,

It was good to see you and have a chat with you—although it was much too short. I hope we shall continue, either in Durham or in Colorado Springs—I am looking forward very much to either.

You have somewhat embarrassed me by making your suggestion about the Chicago post. On thinking it over, I become more and more positive although I don’t know whether there is the slightest chance. If you would now repeat your question “Would you like to be considered by the Faculty” I should reply less hesitatingly than I did in that Drug Store in Detroit. If you still think I shall not make myself ridiculous by following up this suggestion, what steps (active or passive) would you advise me to take? I feel rather lost, and should be grateful for any advice. My present position is Reader in Statistics, and Director of the Institute of Statistics, University of Oxford. My actual interests are centered in Economic Statistics, and in Economics.

I have been staying here with my sister and her family who arrived from Vienna in Summer and have settled here—my brother-in-law specializes in the smelting[?] industry and owned a big factory in Europe. He has to do quite heavy work here, but both he and my sister are very happy. As it is the first time I have been living in a private home in America, and as (according to psychoanalysts and other clever people) it is the childhood associations which count most and are the true pivot of our inner life, I begin to feel myself less of a stranger and am enjoying a good rest. This is a beautifully situated and tastefully built prosperous town (140,000 inhabitants) it looks as if it contains large reserves of happiness and peace.

I am going to Chicago to-morrow—to collect my sister’s children shipped by train from New York, and then to remain in Chicago for the rest of January, c/o International House, University of Chicago. The Rockefeller Foundation will also forward all my letters.

I hope you arrived home happily and made a good start in 1939, studying the Mississippi bubble, the Dutch language and hundred other things and teaching your men real economics. Please remember me to Oliver, and Caltwright[?] I don’t yet know her, to Mrs. Hamilton. Good health for 1939 even in spite of French, or Swiss, cuisine!

Yours J. Marschak

___________________

Curriculum Vitae
[Jacob Marschak]

Born in Kiev (Russia) on July 23, 1898. High school graduation (gold medal), 1915[?]. Studied mathematics and engineering at the Department of Mechanics, Polytechnical Institute Alexander II, from 1915 to December, 1918; also belonged to the School of Military Engineeering Crown Prince Alexis in summer 1917, and attended courses in economics and statistics (E. Slutsky) at the School of Economics in 1918).

Emigrated to Germany in January, 1919. Studied economics and statistics (L. von Bortkievicz) and philosophy in Berlin later in Heidelberg. Deprived of Russian nationality, 1920. Graduated for Doctor of Philosophy (summa cum laude) with a dissertation on the Equation of Exchange (Publication No. 1.) in Heidelberg, 1922. In Italy, January-June, 1924 (Publication No. 40). On the economic staff of the Frankfurter Zeitung, 1924-26. In England on a research fellowship of the Heidelberg University, 1926. At the Forschungsstelle fuer Wirtschaft, Berlin, 1926-28. At the Institut fuer Weltwirtschaft, University of Kiel, supervising a staff of fifteen research workers on behalf of the Economic Enquiry Committee of the Reichstag (Enquête-Ausschuss) and teaching (Repetent); also attached as a “permanent expert” (Staendiger Sachverstaendiger) to the Committee at its meetings in Berlin, 1928-30.

Acquired German nationality, 1928. Appointed assistant professor (Privatdozent mit Staatlichem Lehrauftrag) of the University of Heidelberg, 1930, teaching economic theory and economic statistics, and conducting research (until 1933). Delegated by the German branch of the International Association for Social Progress to the Liège Conference in 1930 (Theory of Wages). Lectured on the invitation of the Spanish branch in 1931. Lectured again in Spain at Santander in 1933.

Elected Chichele lecturer in Economics, All Souls College, University of Oxford, 1933. Deprived of German nationality, 1935. Elected Fellow of the Econometric Society, 1935. Elected Reader in Statistics and Director of the Institute of Statistics, University of Oxford, 1935. Attended the Research Conference on Economics and Statistics at Colorado Springs, 1937, on the invitation of the Cowles Commission for Research in Economics. Lectured at the University of Amsterdam, Holland, 1938. Joint editor of the Oxford Studies in Economics and of the Oxford Economic Papers.

 

Publications

I. Economic Theory and Econometrics

  1. Verkehrsgleichung. Archiv für Sozialwissenschaft. Bd. 52. 1924.
  2. Wirtschaftsrechnung und Gemeinwirtschaft. Archiv f. Sozialw. Bd. 51. 1924.
  3. Die rebellische Konjunkturkurve (zu Karstens Hypothese). Magazin d. Wirtschaft. 1927.
  4. Consumption (Measurement). in: Encyclopaedia of Social Sciences.
  5. Elastizität der Nachfrage. Tübingen 1931 (Beiträge zur ökonomischen Theorie, herausgeg. von E. Lederer u. J. Schumpeter, Bd. 2).
  6. Thesen zur Krisenpolitik. Wirtschaftsdienst 1931.
  7. Der deutsche Volkswirt 1931.
  8. “Substanzverluste” (und: Berichtigte Schätzungen dazu) Archiv f. Sozialw. Bd. 67. 1932.
  9. Zur Rundfrage über “Substanzverluste”. Archiv f. Sozialw. Bd. 67. 1932.
  10. (with Walter Lederer) Grössenordnungen des deutschen Geldsystems. Archiv f. Sozialw. Bd. 67. 1932.
  11. Volksvermögen und Kassenbedarf. Archiv f. Sozialw. Bd. 68. 1933.
  12. Economic Parameters in a Closed Stationary Society with Monetary Circulation, Econometrica, 1934, Vol. II.
  13. Vom Grössensystem der Geldwirtschaft. Archiv für Sozialwissenschaft, 1933.
  14. Wages (Theory) in: Encyclopaedia of Social Sciences.
  15. On the Length of the Period of Production. Economic Journal, 1934.
  16. “Pitfalls in the Determinations of Demand Curves” (with Frisch and Leontief). Quarterly Journal of Economics, 1934.
  17. Kapitalbildung (with W. Lederer). Published by W. Hodge & Co., London, 1936.
  18. On Investment (mimeographed). 1935.
  19. Empirical Analysis of the Laws of Distribution. Economica, 1935.
  20. Measurements in the Capital Market. Proceedings of the Manchester Statistical Society, 1936.
  21. Limitations of Frisch’s “Consumption Surface” (reported in), Econometrica, 1937, p. 96.
  22. Influence of Interest and Income on Savings. Cowles Commission for Research in Economics, Third Annual Conference, 1937.
  23. Probabilities and Utilities in Human Choice (Published with No. 22).
  24. Assets, Prices and Monetary Theory (with H. Makower) Economica 1938.
  25. Money and the Theory of Assets. Econometrica 1938.
  26. Studies in Mobility of Labour: A tentative statistical measure (with H. Makower and H. W. Robinson). Oxford Economic Papers, No. 1, October, 1938.
  27. Studies in Mobility of Labour: Analysis for Great Britain (same author). In print for Oxford Economic Papers, No. 2.

 

II. Industrial Policy

  1. Die deutsche und die englische Elektrizitätswirtschaft. Der deutsche Volkswirt. 1926.
  2. Hohe Löhne und die Volkswirtschaft. Die Arbeit. 1927.
  3. Die Ferngas-Denkschrift. Der deutsche Volkswirt. 1927.
  4. Supervision of the Reports of the Investigations of the Economic Inquiry Commission of the Reichstag, 1928-1930, concerning the following industries: vegetable oils, margarine, gold and silver ware, watches, glass, china, other pottery, cosmetics, toys, leather, shoes, gloves. (Published Berlin 1930-1).
  5. Die Lohndiskussion. Tübingen 1930.
  6. Löhne und Ersparnisse. Die Arbeit. 1930.
  7. Das Kaufkraftsargument. Magazin der Wirtschaft. 1930.

34a. Problemas des salario (Sociedad para el progreso social. Grupo nacional español), Madrid 1931 (Nos. 32, 33, 34)

  1. Le problème des hauts salaires. (Additif au questionnaire de l’Association Internationale pour le Progres social. Les documents du travail, 1930 Paris).
  2. Lohntheorie und Lohnpolitik in: Internationales Gewerkschaftslexikon, herausgeg. von Professor L. Heyde. Berlin 1930.
  3. Zollpolitik und Gewerkschaften. Magazin der Wirtschaft 1930.
  4. Lohnsatz, Lohnsumme, Lohnquote und Arbeitslosigkeit, Soziale Praxis vom 14., 21., 28. April 1932.
  5. Sozialversicherung und Konsum, in: Volkswirtschaftliche Funktionen der Sozialversicherung. Berlin 1932.
  6. Der korporative und Hierarchische Gedanke im Fascismus. Archiv f. Sozialw. B. 51 u. 52 1924.
  7. (with Prof. E. Lederer) Die Klassen auf dem Arbeitsmarkt und ihre Organisationen. Arbeiterschutz. Grundriss d. Sozialökonomik IX, 2. Tübingen.
  8. (with Prof. E. Lederer) Der neue Mittelstand. Grundriss der Sozialökonomik IX, 1.
  9. Zur modernen Interessendifferenzierung. In: Soziologische Studien zur Politik, Wirtschaft und Kultur der Gegenwart. (Festschrift für Prof. Alfred Weber). Potsdam 1930.
  10. Zur Politik und Theorie der Verteilung. Archiv f. Sozialw. Bd. 85, 1930.

 

Source:   Duke University. David M. Rubenstein Rare Book and Manuscript Library, Economists’ Papers Archive. Earl J. Hamilton Papers, Box 2, Folder “Correspondence-Misc. 1930’s-1940’s and n.d.”.

Image Source: Carl F. Christ. History of the Cowles Commission, 1932-1952

Categories
Economists Oxford

Oxford. “Another Shot at Welfare Economics,” Two lectures by Hicks, ca. 1954

 

In Harold Hotelling’s papers I came across a typed manuscript for two lectures held by John Hicks on Welfare Economics that can be dated to ca. 1954.    That manuscript is located at Duke University, David M. Rubenstein Rare Book & Manuscript Library. Economists’ Papers Archives. Papers of Harold Hotelling, Box 46, Folder “Lectures (2)”.

It turns out the same manuscript was found by Tatsuro Kanai in the Hicks Papers maintained by the Library and Academic Information Centre, Kobe Gakuentoshi Campus at the University of Hyogo. Kanai published transcriptions in the journal History of Economic Thought   of  the Japanese Society for the History of Economic Thought. But for all of us, it can’t hurt to link to the lectures here.

____________________

Tatsuro Kanai [Nagano National College of Technology], J. R. Hicks’ Unpublished Lecture Notes: Another Shot at Welfare Economics, Lecture I, The History of Economic Thought, Vol. 48, Issue 2 (2006) pp. 84-97.

Tatsuro Kanai, J. R. Hicks’ Unpublished Lecture Notes: Another Shot at Welfare Economics, Lecture II, The History of Economic Thought, Vol. 49, Issue 2 (2007), pp. 63-78.

Image Source: From Portrait of John Richard Hicks (1953). National Portrait Gallery.

Categories
Exam Questions Oxford

Oxford. Exams for Philosophy, Politics, and Economics (PPE), 1931

During the winter of 1931-32 Wesley Clair Mitchell of Columbia University taught as Eastman Professor at Balliol College, Oxford. In Mitchell’s papers in the Columbia University archives is a complete collection of the examinations for the Honour School of Philosophy, Politics, and Economics from Trinity term 1931 provided him by his  Oxford colleague Robert Hall. I have even transcribed the French/German/Italian texts for the “Unseen translation paper” (at least two of the three languages). Would be interested to know how a Google translation would have scored. I am following the ordering of the exams found in the Mitchell papers, reflecting Hall’s grouping of the examinations  (III, IV, VIII, IX required political economy topics; VII choice of one of three further topics in political economy; I, II, X, V, VI all the non-political-economy topics)

 

  1. HISTORY OF PHILOSOPHY
  2. BRITISH CONSTITUTIONAL AND POLITICAL HISTORY
  3. POLITICAL ECONOMY
  4. POLITICAL AND ECONOMIC ORGANIZATION
  5. PRESCRIBED BOOKS: POLITICAL PHILOSOPHY
  6. UNSEEN TRANSLATION PAPER
  7. FURTHER SUBJECT IN POLITICAL ECONOMY

ADVANCED ECONOMIC THEORY
CURRENCY AND CREDIT
LABOUR MOVEMENTS SINCE 1815

 

  1. BRITISH SOCIAL AND ECONOMIC HISTORY
  2. PRESCRIBED BOOKS: POLITICAL ECONOMY
  3. MORAL AND POLITICAL PHILOSOPHY

_____________________

“By 1930, however, the total number of PPE candidates had risen to 102, thus necessitating an additional examiner in economics. In 1931, the total number of candidates increased by one-third again, to 132. …Between 1931 and 1939, there were always two Oxford-based economists on the Committee [of examiners]. In 1931, Hall joined Hargreaves, and they both also served as examiners in 1932. “

Source:   W. Young and F. Lee, Oxford Economics and Oxford Economists, p. 82

______________________

Cover letter from Robert Hall to Wesley Clair Mitchell

Trinity College,
Oxford.

13.XI.31

Dear Mitchell,

Here are the papers set last year. I have divided them into three groups which will explain them: everyone takes ten papers of which seven are common to all.

I have seen practically everyone about the matter we discussed on Monday and they all feel that the course you suggested should be followed. Hargreaves has written to MacGregor inviting him to come next Tuesday.

If you have not already been invited to the Political Economy Club dinner on Saturday the 21st would you come with me? Harrod is speaking on the balance of trade between gold-standard countries.

Yours very sincerely,

Robert Hall

______________________

SECOND PUBLIC EXAMINATION
Honour School of Philosophy, Politics, and Economics

III
POLITICAL ECONOMY

  1. ‘To show that both under-population and over-population are possible is not the same thing as showing that either of these things exists now or has ever existed.’ Consider this statement.
  2. What importance do you attach to the distinction between long and short periods in an analysis of cost of production?
  3. What do you understand by the principle of charging ‘what the traffic will bear’? How far is it applicable outside the sphere of transport charges?
  4. Can the phenomenon of a rate of interest be adequately explained as the result of a preference for present over future income?
  5. ‘It is an illusion to suppose that the general level of wages can be appreciably and permanently raised by Trade Union action except in so far as it increases the efficiency of the workers, or incidentally stimulates the efficiency of the employers.’ Examine this assertion.
  6. What costs does the presence of risk and uncertainty entail? How is the burden of these costs actually borne and distributed?
  7. ‘Any formula which may be used to demonstrate that rent is a surplus may equally well be used to demonstrate that wages and interest are surpluses.’ Discuss this view.
  8. Is the aggregate volume of employment likely to be diminished by the introduction of new mechanical processes?
  9. What are the necessary conditions for the maintenance and effective operation of an international gold standard? Are these conditions realized to-day?
  10. What are the advantages and disadvantages of a policy of State control of foreign investment?
  11. What effects may different forms of protective tariffs be expected to produce upon the distribution of income within a community?
  12. In what different senses my the term ‘taxable capacity’ be used? How far is it possible to attach a precise meaning to the term in any of these uses?

[T.T. 1931.]

SECOND PUBLIC EXAMINATION
Honour School of Philosophy, Politics, and Economics

IV
POLITICAL AND ECONOMIC ORGANIZATION

[Questions should be attempted from each section]
A

  1. Discuss the view that to rely, for the preservation of peace, on the use of military and economic sanctions by the League of Nations, is to defeat the purpose of the League.
  2. Examine the effect of the separation of executive and legislative powers on American politics.
  3. ‘In spite of outward appearances the multi-party system of Germany and France provides more stable, more efficient, and more representative government than the English system.’ Discuss this statement.
  4. Discuss the merits of direct and indirect election as a means of choosing a second chamber.
  5. ‘No branch of government more immediately and more deeply affects the lives of ordinary citizens than the currency and banking policy of the State, and yet there is no branch of government which is less suitable for popular control.’ Do you see any solution to this difficulty?
  6. Discuss the view that substantial economies ought to be effected in this country by reducing the number of government servants.

B

  1. How far do you consider that control by the workers engaged in an industry is compatible with industrial efficiency.
  2. Discuss the effects of the increased burden of fixed interest charges caused by the recent fall in prices.
  3. ‘In view of the disparity between wholesale and retail prices, marketing rather than production is the most suitable sphere for state control.’ Examine this statement.
  4. Is the future development of British industry more likely to come from a revival of the exporting industries or from the expansion of new types of production?
  5. Discuss the view that expenditure on social services is a better investment for the community than the increase of private savings.
  6. Is the Stock Exchange necessary for the direction of capital into industry?

[T.T. 1931.]

SECOND PUBLIC EXAMINATION
Honour School of Philosophy, Politics, and Economics

VIII
BRITISH SOCIAL AND ECONOMIC HISTORY

  1. ‘The agrarian Revolution took place earlier, and without its results the industrial Revolution would have been impossible’ (Brentano). Consider this judgment.
  2. Describe the changes which occurred in the localization of industries between 1760 and 1830.
  3. Did the British fiscal system during the first half of the nineteenth century seriously restrict industrial development?
  4. Examine the distribution and the effect of immigration into Great Britain.
  5. Describe and account for the changes in Trade Union policy between 1825 and 1870.
  6. ‘A more miserable history can hardly be found than that of the attempts of the Bank to keep a reserve and to manage a foreign drain between the year 1819 and the year 1857.’ Was Bagehot’s criticism of the policy of the Bank of England justified?
  7. What measures were taken to improve the living conditions of the working classes in the period 1836-90?
  8. ‘High farming the best substitute for Protection.’ How far were the methods and organization of British agriculture successfully adapted to the situation following upon the repeal of the Corn Laws?
  9. ‘The basis of taxation is extremely narrow (Goschen). To what extent was this true of the tax system in the period 1860-90?
  10. What changes did the University of Oxford undergo in the nineteenth century?
  11. What attempts has Parliament made to secure effective control over the development of mechanical transport?
  12. What part has the principle of the workhouse test played in the administration of the English poor law?

[T.T. 1931]

SECOND PUBLIC EXAMINATION
Honour School of Philosophy, Politics, and Economics

IX
PRESCRIBED BOOKS: POLITICAL ECONOMY

  1. ‘Every improvement in the circumstances of the society tends either directly or indirectly to raise the real rent of land.’ Discuss the manner in which Adam Smith reaches this conclusion.
  2. ‘The number of productive labourers can never be much increased but in consequence of an increase of capital.’ Does Adam Smith give a coherent account of the nature of capital?
  3. Can a clear account of the causes and effects of inflation be derived from Adam Smith and Ricardo?
  4. Compare the theories of Adam Smith and Ricardo on the mechanism of foreign trade.
  5. What is the importance of normal costs of production in Ricardo’s system?
  6. Can Ricardo’s views on the incidence of taxation be reconciled with modern theories on the subject?
  7. Is it fair to say that false hypotheses about the laws of population vitiate the accounts given by Ricardo and Marx of the relations between the profits of capital and the wages of labour?
  8. In what sense, if any, can commodities be said to contain ‘congealed labour-time’?
  9. ‘The starting-point of the development that gave rise to the wage labourer as well as to the capitalist was the servitude of the labourer.’ Discuss this statement.
  10. Discuss the views of the three writers on the place of competition in economic life.

[T. T. 1931]

_________________________________

Note by Hall:

“One of these 3. The best people do the first: the worst the last. (Economists only)”

SECOND PUBLIC EXAMINATION
Honour School of Philosophy, Politics, and Economics

VII
FURTHER SUBJECT IN POLITICAL ECONOMY
ADVANCED ECONOMIC THEORY

  1. ‘But if quantitative analysis can give us empirically valid demand curves…shall we not have a better theory of demand than qualitative analysis can supply?’ Discuss this view of economic method.
  2. Consider the problem of the attribution of portions of the product to units of productive factors.
  3. In what circumstances can it be said that a price is indeterminate?
  4. Consider the relation between enterprise and saving.
  5. Is it possible to construct a tax system on the principle of equal sacrifice?
  6. Discuss the problem of weighting in connexion with the construction of some type of index number.
  7. Consider the difficulties of economic forecasting.
  8. Give an account of the principal formulae connecting money and prices, with reference to the availability of statistical evidence.
  9. Can trade depressions be attributed either to under-consumption or to under-investment?
  10. How would you expect the price system of a Socialist economy to differ from that of a competitive one?

[T.T. 1931]

SECOND PUBLIC EXAMINATION
Honour School of Philosophy, Politics, and Economics

VII
FURTHER SUBJECT IN POLITICAL ECONOMY
CURRENCY AND CREDIT

  1. ‘The equations of the Quantity Theory of Money are truisms which tell us nothing in themselves.’ Discuss this view.
  2. Can the purchasing power of money be satisfactorily expressed in terms of a ‘general level of prices’?
  3. What types of legal regulation prevail to-day with regard to the cash reserves of central banks? To what extent may these regulations be regarded as obsolete?
  4. What grounds are there for assuming that the world’s annual supplies of gold are likely to prove inadequate to future monetary requirements?
  5. How far can the control of credit be effectively secured through the purchase and sale of securities by a central bank?
  6. Describe the chief features of British monetary policy between 1914 and 1925.
  7. ‘Booms and slumps are simply the expression of the results of an oscillation of the terms of credit about their equilibrium position.’ Consider this statement.
  8. How would you proceed to measure the purchasing power parity between two currencies?
  9. How far does experience indicate the practicability of a discrimination on the part of bankers between the different purposes to which credit may be applied?
  10. What are the main considerations which should govern the policy of a super-national bank?
  11. Give an account of the operation of the Indian Gold Exchange Standard between 1898 and 1914.
  12. ‘Banks can only lend what the public has entrusted to them.’ Examine this view.

[T. T. 1931]

SECOND PUBLIC EXAMINATION
Honour School of Philosophy, Politics, and Economics

VII
FURTHER SUBJECT IN POLITICAL ECONOMY
LABOUR MOVEMENTS SINCE 1815

  1. What were the principles of Owenism, and what attempts were made to apply them?
  2. Describe and account for the attitude of the Chartists towards the movement for the repeal of the Corn Laws.
  3. ‘The creation of a normal working day is the product of a protracted civil war, more or less dissembled, between the capitalist class and the working class’ (Marx). Does the history of factory legislation support this view?
  4. What changes in the legal status of Trade Unions were effected by the legislation of the years 1868-76?
  5. To what extent were trade unionists influenced by the wage theories of orthodox political economists during the latter half of the nineteenth century?
  6. To what influences was the emergence of the New Unionism of 1889-90 due?
  7. What have been the causes of the success of the Consumers’ Co-operative Movement in Great Britain?
  8. Examine and compare the various educational experiments which have been associated with working-class movements in Great Britain.
  9. ‘Of real Syndicalism there is in England probably none.’ How far was this statement true of the period 1906-14?
  10. What attempts have been made to deal with the special problems connected with casual labour?
  11. Discuss the attitude of the British Labour leaders to the Second and Third Internationals.

[T.T. 1931]

_________________________________

Note by Hall:

“These are the non-economic papers taken—a paper in Kant can be substituted for No. V. (Prescribed Books) but this is the usual one.”

SECOND PUBLIC EXAMINATION
Honour School of Philosophy, Politics, and Economics

I
HISTORY OF PHILOSOPHY

  1. Explain and criticize Descartes’ view of the method of mathematics.
  2. Does either Spinoza or Leibniz give a coherent account of the apparent multiplicity of objects in the world?
  3. What reasons led Leibniz to his conception of the monad?
  4. Is Locke’s account of the origination of ideas satisfactory?
  5. Give an account of Berkeley’s theory of perception.
  6. Examine the grounds for the distinction between primary and secondary qualities.
  7. Discuss Hume’s criticism of the notion of the self.
  8. What is meant by apperception?
  9. On what grounds can a distinction be drawn between understanding and reason?
  10. ‘Its religious character is an essential feature of English Idealism, and the guiding principle of its development.’ Discuss this statement in regard to any one British Idealist.
  11. Examine any modern account of the nature and origin of belief.
  12. Is any satisfactory account known to you of the place of evil in the world?
  13. Explain, and estimate the success of, the attempt of any one philosopher to refute materialism.
  14. What is the function of philosophy according to any one modern philosopher?
  15. Discuss the account given by any one modern philosopher of the relation between the human mind and its body.

[T.T. 1931]

SECOND PUBLIC EXAMINATION
Honour School of Philosophy, Politics, and Economics

II
BRITISH CONSTITUTIONAL AND POLITICAL HISTORY

[Candidates are expected to answer questions from both sections of the paper.]

A

  1. To what extent were Parliamentary elections in the boroughs under the control of the Crown and of private individuals at the beginning of the reign of George III?
  2. What different ideas in political thought are represented in the careers of Burke and Fox?
  3. Discuss the problems raised by cases involving the privileges of the House of Commons between 1760 and 1860.
  4. ‘The Commons were right in accusing him; the Lords were right in acquitting him.’ Discuss this verdict on the impeachment of Warren Hastings.
  5. Discuss the view that Britain has never been in greater danger than at the time of the Treaty of Tilsit.
  6. How far does the history of England between 1822 and 1830 prove that good government without representative government is not enough?
  7. What problems were left unsolved by the Union with Ireland in 1801?
  8. What truth is there in the view that the Whig governments in the decade after the Reform Bill proved themselves to be as incompetent in financial questions as they were competent in political questions?
  9. Compare the extent of the personal influence of the monarch under George III and under Queen Victoria.

B

  1. ‘But then you have been Prime Minister in a sense in which no other man has been it since Mr. Pitt’s time’ (Gladstone, 1846). Discuss this estimate of Peel as a Prime Minister.
  2. How far were any British interests served by the Crimean War?
  3. ‘The real struggle in nineteenth-century England was not between Conservatives and Liberals but between rationalists and romantics in politics.’ Discuss.
  4. Discuss the view that the pre-war system of rigidly organized parties really dates from 1868.
  5. Discuss the claims of Disraeli’s administration from 1874 to 1880 to be considered more truly democratic than the administration of Gladstone which precede it.
  6. How far is it true to say that the South African War was due to the alternation between a policy of authority and a policy of conciliation?
  7. Estimate the effect on the Conservative Party of the adhesion of Joseph Chamberlain.
  8. Discuss the chief conflicts between the Commons and the Lords between 1860 and 1911.
  9. ‘A party without a policy and without philosophy.’ How far do you agree with this dictum of The Times on the Liberal party in 1906?

[T. T. 1931.]

SECOND PUBLIC EXAMINATION
Honour School of Philosophy, Politics, and Economics

X
MORAL AND POLITICAL PHILOSOPHY

  1. Of what value is the distinction between means and ends in moral inquiry?
  2. Can I ever do what I do not want to do?
  3. Is determinism compatible with belief in real values?
  4. ‘To know all is to pardon all.’ Is this true?
  5. Criticize the view that the will is identical with practical reason.
  6. ‘I ought to do what I believe to be right, even though my belief may be false.’ Is this view tenable?
  7. Can adequate grounds be given for asserting either that it is always wrong or that it is nearly always wrong to lie?
  8. ‘Every one to count as one, and no one to count as more than one.’ Is this a moral axiom?
  9. What is meant by obedience?
  10. Is the state the guardian of morality?
  11. Does the doctrine of the General Will imply the existence of a Group Mind?
  12. On what principles should a man who owes allegiance to more than one association decide which he is to obey?
  13. On what grounds can democracy be defended?

[T. T.  1931.]

SECOND PUBLIC EXAMINATION
Honour School of Philosophy, Politics, and Economics

V
PRESCRIBED BOOKS: POLITICAL PHILOSOPHY

  1. Discuss the view that Burke’s advocacy of the claims of expediency rather than right in dealing with the American colonies was a shallow and temporizing approach to a fundamental problem of politics.
  2. ‘But nothing in progression can rest on its original plan.’ How far did Burke apply this doctrine consistently in his political thinking?
  3. How far was Durham’s recommendation of union for Canada influenced by economic considerations?
  4. ‘We have not succeeded in making education practical.’ Do you consider that this statement in the India Report uncovers the main cause of discontent, and at the same time points to the most important remedy?
  5. How far are Mill’s proposed limitations of universal suffrage consistent with his general political principles?
  6. Comment on the view that Mill’s observations on Second Chambers are more sensible than those of Esmein and more profound than those of Bryce.
  7. Examine Bryce’s view of the special defects and dangers in the political systems of Australia and New Zealand.
  8. Assuming that the presumption of argument is in favour of the accurate representations of opinion, in what situations would you hold Proportional Representation to be undesirable?
  9. To what extent does Bryce’s treatise on democracy suffer from the omission of the United Kingdom from the countries he presents for examination?
  10. ‘Ce qui constitue en droit une nation, c’est l’existence, dans cette société d’hommes, d’une autorité supérieure aux volontés individuelles.’ Is it necessary for the preservation of this authority to formulate a theory of sovereignty in such terms as Esmein uses?
  11. ‘Dicey’s vindication of the rule of law holds good with regard to personal liberty but not with regard to security of property.’ Discuss this view.
  12. How far would you agree with the statement that the conventions of a constitution may become more rigid than its laws?

[T. T. 1931.]

SECOND PUBLIC EXAMINATION
Honour School of Philosophy, Politics, and Economics

VI
UNSEEN TRANSLATION PAPER

[Candidates are required to complete at least ONE of the following passages from each of two languages]

Translate into English:—

(a) De ce chef, la question prend une ampleur angoissante. L’utilisation de l’aviation dans la vie contemporaine est déjà telle, les perspectives qu’ouvre son développement ultérieur certain sont si larges, les services qu’elle doit rendre s’annoncent comme si étendus, qu’on voit mal comment l’humanité pourrait y renoncer. L’aviation est entrée dans notre existence quotidienne, et la part qu’elle  prendra dans la vie internationale, spécialement dans la vie économique, ne peut que grandir: le monde des affaire n’abandonnerait pas volontiers les possibilités énormes que lui donne dès aujourd’hui l’aviation, les espérances plus grandes encore qu’elle lui fait concevoir pour demain. On en revient à la fable d’Ésope: l’aviation, comme la langue, est la meilleure et la pire des choses. Puissant facteur du développement des relations internationales dans tous les domaines, elle est en même temps—ou elle peut être, suivant les intentions de ceux qui l’emploient, — un puissant facteur de destruction internationale. N’est-ce pas, dira-t-on, la rançon de tout ce qui représente un progrès matériel? Les chemins de fer, l’automobile, ne participent-ils pas aussi à la fois du bien de du mal? Les transports par voie ferrée ou par camions routiers n’ont-ils pas joué un rôle considérable dans les opérations de la guerre mondiale? C’est vrai. Mais l’aviation représente un danger d’un ordre particulier.

(b) Mais les gens qui vivaient alors, qui étaient attachés au gouvernement républicain par tradition et par souvenir, qui se rappelaient les grandes choses qu’il avait faites, qui lui devaient leurs dignités, leur position et leur renommée, pouvaient-ils penser comme nous et prendre aussi facilement leur parti de sa chute? D’abord ce gouvernement existait. On était familiarisé avec ses défauts depuis si longtemps qu’on vivait avec eux. On en souffrait moins par l’habitude qu’on avait de les supporter. Au contraire on ne savait pas ce que serait ce pouvoir nouveau qui voulait remplacer la république. La royauté inspirait une répugnance instinctive aux Romains, surtout depuis qu’ils avaient conquis l’Orient. Ils avaient trouvé là, sous ce nom, le plus odieux des régimes, l’asservissement le plus complet au milieu de la civilisation la plus raffinée, tous les plaisirs du luxe et des arts, le plus bel épanouissement de l’intelligence avec la tyrannie la plus lourde et la plus basse, des princes accoutumés à se jouer de la fortune, de l’honneur, de la vie des hommes, sortes d’enfants gâtés cruels comme on n’en rencontre plus que dans les déserts de l’Afrique. Ce tableau n’était pas fait pour les séduire, et quelques inconvénients qu’eût la république, ils se demandaient s’il valait la peine de les échanger contre ceux que pouvait avoir la royauté.

(c) Kants Vater war ein Mann von offenem, geradem Verstande, der Arbeitsamkeit und Ehrlichkeit als höchste Tugenden ansah, zu denen er auch seine Kinder erzog. Tieferen Einfluß auf den Sohn hatte die Mutter, die er schildert al seine Frau von großem natürlichen Verstand, einem edlen Herzen und einer echten, durchaus nicht schwärmerischen Religiosität. Sie ging oft mit dem Jungen ins Freie, machte ihn auf Gegenstände und Vorgänge in der Natur aufmerksam, lehrte ihn nützliche Kräuter kennen, erzählte ihm vom Bau des Himmels und pries ihm die Allmacht, Weisheit und Güte Gottes. Noch als Greis gestand Kant: ‚Ich werde meine Mutte [sic] nie vergessen; denn sie pflanzte und nährte den ersten Keim des Guten in mir, sie öffnete mein Herz den Eindrücken der Natur; sie weckte und erweiterte meine Begriffe, und ihre Lehren haben einen immerwährenden heilsamen Einfluß auf mein Leben gehabt.’ Er war auch der Meinung, seine Gesichtszüge und seine körperliche Konstitution, bis auf die eingebogene Brust, habe er von der Mutter geerbt. Tief hat er es stets bedauert, daß er sie bereits als Dreizehnjähriger verlor. Am Bette einer an typhösen Fieber enkrankten [sic] Freundin holte sie sich dieselbe Krankheit und starb in ihrem vierzigsten Lebensjahr bereits 1737. Fünf Jahre vorher war Kant als Achtjähriger in die beste Schule seiner Vaterstadt, das Collegium Fridericianum (ein heute noch bestehendes Gymnasium), aufgenommen worden.

(d) Es geht bei der Philosophie fast wie bei der Politik. Wenn hier auch nicht jeder des Aristoteles acht Bücher vom Staate, Spinozas Tractatus theologico-politicus oder Montesquieus ‘Geist der Gesetze’ liest, so halt er doch seine Zeitung, sucht sich die Geschehnisse zurecht zu legen und bekennt sich zu gewissen Prinzipien und Parteien. Ähnlich in der Philosophie. Gar manchen, der wenig von all den Systemen weiß, die, seit Thales die Welt aus dem Wasser entstehen ließ, aus den wogenden Gedanken hervorragender Geister auftauchten, haben doch die philosophischen Probleme nicht ganz unberührt gelassen. Auch ihn haben die großen Rätsel des Menschenlebens und Weltzusammenhangs beunruhigt gelassen. Auch ihn haben die großen Rätsel des Menschenlebens und Weltzusammenhangs beunruhigt und, nach der Lösung suchend, hat er sich Meinungen gebildet, die dann lange Zeit gehegt, vielleicht auch von anderen in seiner Umgebung geteilt, sich schließlich für ihn mit der ganzen Macht der Gewohnheit und des Gefühls umkleideten und wie etwas selbstverständlich Evidentes in seinem Kopfe festgesetzt haben. Was ist denn nun aber die Philosophie, für die sich so viele interessieren, wenn sie auch ihre Schwierigkeit und das Erfordernis sorgsamer Vorbereitung nicht immer genügend würdigen? Wir sprachen eben davon, wie auf diesem Gebiete fast jeder leichthin und kühnlich zu urteilen wage. Seltsam darum, wenigstens für den Augenblick, daß doch die scheinbar einfache und elementare Frage, was die Philosophie sei, die Leute gemeiniglich in eine nicht geringe Verlegenheit bringt. Wenden wir uns aber damit statt an die philosophischen Dilettanten an die Berufsphilosophen, so hat von diesen zwar gewiß jeder eine Antwort bereit, aber fast jeder eine andere.

(e) La ricchezza e la prosperità inglese aumentavano dunque in questo tempo, ma tendevano ancora ad un timido piede di casa, e trovando nell’agricoltura larghe possibilità di investimento, cercavano di ripiegarsi su di essa, come nell’impiego più sicuro, ed era questo un fenomeno che non solo riguardava l’aristocrazia campagnola e gli affittuari di terre, ma anche i borghesi manifatturieri di città che consideravano le loro industrie come un mezzo di far denaro, considerando l’agricoltura un mezzo per impiegarlo. Quindi il capitale inglese, rapidamente crescente, aveva la pacifica tendenza a ripiegarsi sui più sicuri impieghi terrieri o, tutt’ al più, sulle industrie cittadine largamente protette; certo nella sua gran massa, se si eccettuano gli avventurosi armatori di navi corsare come quelle di Drake o i monopolisti del commercio internazionale, mal volentieri si avventurava ad imprese marinare e si investiva in navi, anzi sentiva così poco la necessità economica di una florida marina mercantile che perfino rifiutava di contribuire alla creazione di una marina reale che lo proteggesse e alla difesa della costa e dei porti sui quali neppur mancavano le incursioni barbaresche e lasciava affittare agli olandesi per un misero canone la pesca sulle sue coste.

(f) Nasce da questo una disputa: ‘S’egli è meglio essere amato che temuto, o temuto che amato.’ Rispondesi, che si vorrebbe essere l’uno e l’altro; ma perché gli è difficile che gli stiano insieme, è molto più securo l’esser temuto che amato, quando s’abbi a mancare dell’un de’duoi. Perchè degli uomini si può dir questo generalmente, che sieno ingrati, volubili, simulatori, fuggitori de’pericoli, cupidi di guadagno: e mentre fai lor bene, sono tutti tuoi, ti offeriscono il sangue, la roba, la vita, ed i figli, come di sopra dissi, quando il bisogno è discosto; ma quando ti si appressa, si rivoltano. E quel principe che si è tutto fondato in su le parole loro, trovandosi nudo d’altri preparamenti, rovina: perchè l’amicizie che si acquistano con il prezzo, e non con grandezza e nobiltà d’animo, si meritano, ma le non s’hanno, ed a’tempi non si possono spendere. E gli uomini hanno men rispetto d’offendere uno che si facci amare, che uno che si facci temere: perché l’amore è tenuto da un vinculo d’obbligo, il quale, per esser gli uomini tristi, da ogni occasione di propria utilità è rotto; ma il timore è tenuto da una paura di pena, che non abbandona mai.

[T. T. 1931.]

Source:  Columbia University Libraries Manuscript Collections. Mitchell, W. C. Collection, Box 10, Folder “Hall Robert, 13 Nov 1931”.

Image Source:  Robert Lowell Hall  .

Categories
Economists Oxford

Oxford. Travers Twiss, Lectures. 1847

While checking the titles of references in Henry Carter Adams’ Outline of Lectures upon Political Economy Prepared for the Use of Students at the Johns Hopkins University, Baltimore, MD., and the University of Michigan (Baltimore, 1881), I came across “Travers Twiss, Lectures I, II, III, IV” in Adams’ Part I Historical/§1 Introduction: Thought before the 16th century/A. Rise of the System.

The exact reference should read:

Twiss, Travers. View of the Progress of Political Economy in Europe since the Sixteenth Century. London: Longman, Brown, Green, and Longmans, 1847.

This I have just added to the collection at my “Rare Book Reading Room” page.

Having never heard of this particular Drummond professor of political economy at Oxford nor his lectures for that matter, I looked him up. Below you have the safe-for-work version of his biography from the 11th edition of the Encyclopaedia Britannica. I’ve linked to the blog entry in the “Victorian Calendar” that provides a few of the juicy details of the scandal that led to his early retirement.

______________________

TWISS, SIR TRAVERS (1809-1897), English jurist, eldest son of the Rev. Robert Twiss, was born in London on the 19th of March 1809. At University College, Oxford, he obtained a first-class in mathematics and a second in classics in 1830, and was elected a fellow of his college, of which he was afterwards successively bursar, dean and tutor. During his connexion with Oxford he was, inter alia, a public examiner in classics and mathematics, Drummond professor of political economy (1842), and regius professor of civil law (1855). After he had forfeited his fellowship by marriage, he was elected to an honorary fellowship of University College. He published while at Oxford an epitome of Niebuhr’s History of Rome, an annotated edition of Livy and other works, but his studies mainly lay in the direction of political economy, law, chiefly international law, and international politics. In 1840 he was called to the bar at Lincoln’s Inn, and became an advocate at Doctors’ Commons. In the ecclesiastical courts he enjoyed a large practice, and filled many of the appointments incidental thereto, such as commissary-general of the city and diocese of Canterbury (1849), vicar-general to the archbishop (1852) and chancellor of the diocese of London (1858). He was professor of international law at King’s College, London (1852-1855). In 1858, when the Probate and Divorce Acts of 1857 came into force, and the ecclesiastical jurisdiction of Doctors’ Commons had passed away, Twiss, like many other leading advocates of Doctors’ Commons, became a Q.C., and in the same year he was also elected a bencher of his Inn. His successful career continued in the civil courts, and in addition to his large practice he was appointed in 1862 advocate-general to the admiralty, and in 1867 queen’s advocate-general. In 1867 he was also knighted. He served during his legal career upon a great number of royal commissions, such as the Maynooth commission in 1854, and others dealing with marriage law, neutrality, naturalization and allegiance. His reputation abroad led to his being invited by the king of the Belgians in 1884 to draw up the constitution of the Congo Free State. In 1871 Twiss became involved in an unpleasant scandal, occasioned by allegations against the ante-nuptial conduct of his wife, whom he had married in 1862; and he threw up all his appointments and lived in retirement in London until his death on the 14th of January 1897, devoting himself to the study of international law and kindred topics. Among his more notable publications of this period were The Law of Nations in Peace and The Law of Nations in War, two works by which his reputation as a jurist will chiefly endure.

Source: Encyclopaedia Britannica (11th ed). Vol. 27, p.493.

Image Source: The Victorian Calendar (March 13, 1872).