Tag: WilliamsJH

Categories
Columbia Economist Market Economists Harvard

Harvard and Columbia. President of Harvard headhunting conversation regarding economists. Mitchell and Mills, 1936

The following typed notes were based on a conversation that took place on February 21, 1936 regarding possible future hires for the Harvard economics department. President James B. Conant (or someone on his behalf) met with Columbia university professors Wesley C. Mitchell and his NBER sidekick, Frederick C. Mills. This artifact comes from President Conant’s administrative records in the Harvard Archives.

In the memo we find a few frank impressions of members of the Harvard economics departments together with head-hunting tips for established and up-and-coming economists of the day.

An observation that jumps from the paper is the identification pinned to the name Arthur F. Burns, namely, “(Jew)”. Interestingly enough this was not added to Arthur William Marget (see the earlier post Harvard Alumnus. A.W. Marget. Too Jewish for Chicago? 1927.) nor to Seymour Harris.  

________________________

[stamp] FEB 25, 1936

ECONOMICS

Confidential Memorandum of a Conversation on Friday, February 21, with Wesley [Clair] Mitchell and his colleague, Professor [Frederick Cecil] Mills (?) of Columbia

General impression is that the Department of Economics at Harvard is in a better state today than these gentlemen would have thought possible a few years ago. The group from 35-50 which now faces the future is about as good as any in the country. [Edward Hastings] Chamberlin, [John Henry] Williams,[Gottfried] Haberler and Schlichter [sic, [Sumner Slichter] are certainly quite outstanding. Very little known about [Edward Sagendorph] Mason;  he seems to have made a favorable impression but no writings. [Seymour Edwin] Harris slightly known, favorable but not exciting.

[John Ulric] Neff admitted to be the best man in economic history if we could get him. Names of other people in this country mentioned included:

[Robert Alexander] Brady — University of California, now working on Carnegie grant on bureaucracy; under 40.

Arthur [F.] Burns at Rutgers (Jew) now working with the Bureau of Economic Research and not available for 3 or 4 years. Said by them to be excellent.

Henry Schultz of Chicago, about in Chamberlin’s class and age, or perhaps a little better.

[Arthur William] Marget of Minnesota, Harvard Ph.D., I believe; well known, perhaps better than Chamberlin. Flashy and perhaps unsound. (Mitchell and Mills disagree to some extent on their estimate of his permanent value but agree on his present high visibility).

Winfield Riffler [sic, Winfield William Riefler], recently called to the Institute of Advanced Study at Princeton, probably one of the most if not the most outstanding of the younger men.

Morris [Albert] Copeland of Washington; good man but not so good as Chamberlin.

Giddons [sic, Harry David Gideonse?] of Chicago, very highly thought of by Chicago people but has not written a great deal; supposed to be an excellent organizer.

C. E. [Clarence Edwin] Ayres, University of Texas, about 40; in N.R.A. at Washington. Mitchell thinks very highly of him.

England

[Theodore Emmanuel Gugenheim] Gregory, at London School of Economics, about 50, same field as Williams but not so good. Mills more favorable than Mitchell.

Other outstanding young Englishmen:

[Richard F.] Kahn, Kings College, Cambridge

F. Colin [sic, Colin Grant] Clark, of Cambridge

Lionel Robins [sic, Lionel Charles Robbins] of London, age 35, rated very highly by both Mills and Mitchell

F. A. Hayek, another Viennese now in London; spoken of very highly by both Mills and Mitchell.

Source: Harvard University Archives. Records of President James B. Conant, Box 54, Folder Economics, “1935-1936”.

Image Sources: Wesley Clair Mitchell (left) from the “Original Founders” page at the website of the Foundation for the Study of Business Cycles; Frederick C. Mills (right) from the Columbia Daily Spectator, Vol. CVIII, No. 68, 11 February 1964.

Categories
Economics Programs Harvard Undergraduate

Harvard. Economics Department Reports to the Dean, 1946-47 to 1949-50

 

This post adds the Chair’s annual reports on the Harvard Economics Department for the early post-WW II years to previously posted reports for 1932-33 through 1945-46. 

Reports to the Dean of Harvard
from the Department of Economics.
1932-1941
1941-1946

___________________________

1946-1947

September 29, 1947

Dear Dean Buck:

You have requested a brief report on the work of the Department of Economies for the academic year 1946-47.

This report necessarily follows much the same pattern as the report for last year. Again our work has been dominated by the number of students, undergraduate and graduate, and the lack of a trained junior staff.

The number of undergraduates of course is entirely so beyond our control. In Economies A and in most of our “middle group” courses, the elections taxed our capacity for effective instruction. Under the most propitious conditions the crowded classrooms would have presented many problems but with a dearth of trained teaching fellows and annual instructors the load carried by the senior staff was unduly heavy. Foreseeing this range of problems, the Department voted on February 19, 1946 [sic, 1947 probably correct. In December 1946 departments wereallowed to withdraw from offering tutorials] to suspend tutorial instruction for a period of two years. It may be stated here that this was probably a wise decision. Concentration in Economics appears to have resumed the trend apparent before the war. In the current year the number of concentrators will approach, or perhaps exceed 800. Even should no consideration be given to the expenditure involved, the possibility of finding and training effective tutors even for honors candidates seems somewhat remote.

On the graduate level the problems of instruction were even more difficult. During the year the number of graduate students receiving instruction was approximately 286. Our course offering on this level is large. Nevertheless, the principal graduate courses were crowded to a point where the maintenance of standards was difficult. After the graduate student has completed his preliminary program and has been accepted as a candidate for the Ph.D, degree, the instruction is largely individual. In the last year we were just coming into the situation where a considerable proportion of the students were receiving such instruction. The full impact of this situation will be felt in the current year. Most members of the senior staff will be directing the theses of some 10 to 15 students. Some officers will be responsible for even larger numbers. With the numbers we are attempting to handle on the graduate level the single task of examining candidates in the general and special examinations becomes a major consideration. During the last academic year the staff conducted general and special examinations. Such an amount of examining and of individual instruction on the graduate level has its bearing on tutorial instruction for undergraduates.

The Department voted to accept the large number of graduate students now on our rolls only after considerable investigation and discussion. It is my own personal opinion that we have set our limit altogether too high. However, the pressure upon us for admission has been very strong and our obligations to the Littauer School, where the pressure is hardly less, just be observed.

This matter of the size of the Graduate School in the immediate future is one of our most difficult problems. It will receive our attention in the current year.

In the last two or three years these reports have noted certain experiments in instruction, especially in connection with Economics A. Such experiments are dependent upon the presence of a considerable number of able and mature young men with adequate teaching experience, as well as upon a margin of free time. Both of these factors are lacking to such a degree that substantial and outstanding progress could not be expected but the plans were active and some progress was made.

If full tutorial instruction is not resumed by the Department, experimentation in undergraduate courses is imperative and this we have planned. It is our expectation that a good deal in the way of individual guidance can be accomplished in connection with Economics A and some of our middle group courses. We believe that we can make our instruction more efficient with a much smaller personnel and at much less expense than the tutorial system would involve. However, a definitive decision has not been reached on all of these matters.

It is hardly necessary to emphasize that the heavy instructional demands discussed above affected our research projects. Furthermore, the officers of this Department are severely handicapped by the lack of research funds. This dearth of research funds is a question which has been placed before our Visiting Committee.

In spite of the difficulties involved, the contributions of the members of the Department were substantial. The following books were published:

Teoria de la Competencie Monopolica, by E. H. Chamberlin, Mexico, 1946. (Spanish translation of The Theory of Monopolistic Competition)

Economic Policy and Full Employment, by A. H. Hansen. McGraw-Hill. 1947.

The New Economics, S. B. Harris, editor and contributor Knopf. 1947.

The National Debt and the New Economics, by S. E. Harris. 1947.

Income and Employment, by T. Morgan. Prentice-Hall. 1947.

New enlarged edition of Capitalism, Socialism, and Democracy, by J. A. Schumpeter.

The Challenge of Industrial Relations, by S. H. Slichter, Cornell University Press, 1947.

Postwar Monetary Plans and other Essays, by J. Williams. Knopf, 3rd edition. 1947.

articles were published.

Although we are able to record only one new volume and one republication of an older volume in the Harvard Economic Series for the past year, four other volumes are in the hands of the printer and will appear in the current year.

In the area of distinctions or honors, I believe the only items to be noted concern Dean Edward S. Mason. Last spring he was appointed Economic Advisor to Secretary of State Marshall at the Moscow Conference. In July he was appointed a member of President Truman’s Committee on Foreign Aid.

Sincerely yours,
H. H. Burbank

Dean Paul H. Buck

Source: Harvard University Archives. Department of Economics, Correspondence and Papers (UAV 349.11), Box 2, Folder “Provost Buck—Annual Report of Dept.”

___________________________

1947-1948

September 30, 1948

Dear Provost Buck:

You have requested a brief report on the work of the Department of Economics for the academic year 1947-48.

The report on the work of the Department for the last year can be given in part in the same terms that have been employed in the last three reports. Our major problems have been quantitative and have presented the same difficulties that were emphasized in the other post-war reports. However, we believe that the last year did reach the peak of the load and that the pressure of numbers will abate steadily. The problem of building and maintaining an effective junior staff was hardly less than in the preceding years. Crowded classrooms and insufficiently trained assistants imposed unduly severe burdens upon the senior teachers responsible for course instruction. Some improvement, especially in the middle group courses, is in prospect for the coming year but it is probable that two to three years more will be necessary before these courses will be adequately staffed. In the introductory course which relies heavily upon a large number of young instructors and teaching fellows, the situation is still serious but latterly we have been able to utilize young men with more satisfactory preparation and training. Because of the heavy demands for the services of these young men by other institutions, the turnover is large leaving us each year with a relatively inexperienced staff.

Graduate instruction continues to make unusual demands upon the time and energy of the senior staff. During the past year we conducted 109 general examinations and 26 special examinations. Examining and the related task of directing the research of candidates for the higher degrees undoubtedly have an incidence upon undergraduate instruction which raises questions of fundamental importance. It is encouraging that the number of graduate students is, through the action of the Department, declining.

In spite of the difficulties presented by the numbers of undergraduates and graduates, the Department, perhaps belatedly, has given particular consideration to its commitments in the Areas and in General Education. A report on General Education is enclosed.

Also, the Department has considered at length and in detail various problems of instruction, particularly undergraduate instruction. These considerations will be continued in the current year. By completely revising the content of our basic courses it may be possible to increase the effectiveness of our instruction and reduce somewhat the number of courses offered. A preliminary report on this aspect of our work is included.

A year ago I noted that many of our senior officers were handicapped severely by the lack of research funds. As you know, it can now be recorded with sincere satisfaction that a grant from the Rockefeller Foundation and that several projects under the auspices of the Research Marketing Act, U.S. Department of Agriculture, the Charles H. Hood Dairy Foundation, the Ferguson Foundation Fund, and the Carnegie Corporation Fund, meet the situation effectively for some of our officers. The set-up of these projects promises not only to be of great value to the professors in charge of the research but it contributes heavily to the training of our most promising graduate students and younger officers.

The following books were published by members of the Department:

How Shall We Pay for Education? by Seymour Harris. Harpers.

Stabilization Subsidies by Seymour Harris. Historical Report Series, U.S. Gov’t.

Price Control of International Commodities by Seymour Harris. Archives Volume, Historical Records Office.

International Monetary Policies, by Gottfried Haberler (with Lloyd Metzler and Robert Triffin). Postwar Economic Series, Federal Reserve System Board of Governors.

Problemas de Conjuntura e de Politica Economica, by Gottfried Haberler. Fundacao Getulio Vargas, Rio de Janiero.

Production in the United States, 1866-1914, by Edwin Frickey. Harvard University Press.

Seventy-eight articles have been published. Three books were published in the Harvard Economic Series during the past year. Five volumes are in the hands of the Press to be published later this year.

Professor Edward H. Chamberlin has been appointed to succeed Dr. Arthur B. Monroe as Managing Editor of the Quarterly Journal of Economics. Both the Quarterly Journal of Economies and the Review of Economic Statistics are well established intellectually and financially. With the demands of instruction and research, the editing of the Quarterly Journal of Economics and the Review of Economics and Statistics, as well as the direction of the Harvard Economic Series, raises questions regarding the adequacy of the manpower within the Department.

 In the area of distinctions or honors, Professor Joseph A. Schumpeter was chosen to be President of the American Economic Association for 1948. Dean Edward S. Mason was awarded an honorary degree, D. Litt, from Williams College, June, 1948.

Very sincerely,
H. H. Burbank

Provost Paul H. Buck
5 University Hall

Source: Harvard University Archives. Department of Economics, Correspondence and Papers (UAV 349.11), Box 2, Folder “Provost Buck—Annual Report of Dept.”

___________________________

1948-1949

September 28, 1949

Dear Provost Buck:

The pattern of the report of the Department of Economics on the work of the last year is essentially the same as the other reports for the post-war years. Indeed, not a little of the introduction to the report of a year ago could be utilized in the current report. The quantitative side of our work has been among our major problems. I think I was correct in predicting that the peak of the load would be passed in 1948-49. For the year 1949-50, numbers, particularly on the graduate level, will be approximately less although the total is still beyond the capacities of our senior staff.

Again I can repeat that the problem of building and maintaining a junior staff presents great difficulties. We have strengthened our position on the level of the assistant professor but we are unable to hold our most promising young Ph.D’s for appointment at the instructor level. All of our undergraduate instruction suffers because of this factor, but Economics 1 (the introductory course) is affected particularly. The demand for these young men by other institutions continues at a high level resulting in a high rate of turnover and leaving us sech year with a relatively inexperienced staff. [end of p. 1]

[Note: need to replace unfocussed image of page 2]

[p. 3 begins ] …expectation that we will be able to revise our general examination effectively.

In the post-war years the Department has been striving to meet its obligations to General Education and to the areas. We believe that we have made an excellent beginning in both General Education and in the Russian Area. We are still actively engaged in the attempt to strengthen our position in the Chinese Area. This is exceedingly difficult but I believe that some progress is being made.

Last year we were able to record with great satisfaction that some research projects were being established satisfactorily. These projects under the auspices of the Rockefeller Foundation and under the auspices of various groups interested in agriculture and marketing are now going forward successfully and up proving to be important for us not only as research projects but also because of their general effect upon a relatively large group of our graduate students. We can now give a type of training to our most promising men which would have been impossible without such projects. It should be emphasized at this point that other areas of interest need research funds.

The following books were published:

Collective Bargaining: Principles and Cases, Richard D. Irwin, Inc., 1949, by John I. Dunlop.

Labor in Norway by Walter Galenson. Harvard University Press, 1949.

Monetary Theory and Fiscal Policy, by Alvin Hansen McGraw-Hill, 1949.

The European Recovery Program, by Seymour E. Harris. Harvard University Press.

Foreign Economic Policy for the U.S., edited by Seymour E. Harris, Harvard University Press.

Price Control of International Commodities, by Seymour E. Harris. Archives Volume for Historical Records Office.

Saving American Capitalism, edited by Seymour E. Harris. Knopf.

Economic Planning, by Seymour E. Harris. Knopf.

Post-war Monetary Plans and Other Essays, by John H. Williams. Oxford, Basil Blackwell.

The American Economy, Its Problems and Prospects, by Sumner H. Slichter. Knopf.

There were 62 articles published by members of the Department during the past year. Five books were published in the Harvard Economic Studies and two volumes are in the hands of the Press to be published later this year. There has been a total of 86 books published in the Harvard Economic Studies to this date.

It should be recorded that both the Quarterly Journal of Economics under the editorship of Professor Chamberlin and the Review of Economics and Statistics have prospered during the year. Again I do feel it necessary to refer to the fact that editing the Quarterly Journal of Economics and the Review of Economics and Statistics and the carrying forward of the Harvard Economic Studies continues to raise questions regarding the adequacy of the manpower within the Department.

In the area of distinctions and honors, Professor Slichter was awarded honorary degrees (LL.D.) from the following universities: Lehigh University, Harvard University, University of Rochester, University of Wisconsin and Northwestern University. Professor

Haberler was awarded an honorary degree of Doctor of Economics (“Doktor der Wirtschaftswissenschaft honoris causa”) from Handelshochschule, St. Gallen, Switzerland. Dr. Galbraith was awarded the President’s Certificate of Merit, Medal of Merit Board, for services in Price Control and Economic Stabilization during the war.

Sincerely
[Harold H. Burbank]

Source: Harvard University Archives. Department of Economics, Correspondence and Papers (UAV 349.11), Box 2, Folder “Departmental Annual Reports to the Dean 1948-54”.

___________________________

1949-1950

[Draft] Report to Dean, October 2, 1950
Professor Burbank

In each of the reports for the last three years, emphasis has been placed upon two matters; our efforts to handle the increased numbers incident to the war, particularly on the graduate level, and our attempts to revise and improve our instruction, particularly on the undergraduate level.

With a good deal of satisfaction we are able to report that for the last year substantial progress has been made in each of these areas. Immediately after the war the number of our graduate students increased from approximately 100 to nearly 300. By raising the standards of admission and giving the most careful scrutiny to applications, the numbers on the graduate level are now well under 200, and will be reduced somewhat more for 1950-51.

The work of supervising and directing graduate students falls very unevenly upon the various members of the senior staff. Even with not over 150 graduate students some members of the staff will carry an inordinate part of individual instruction and of examining for the higher degrees. Further, large graduate classes tend to dilute the instruction.

On the undergraduate level the Department has revised its requirements for concentration, including the content of many of our key courses. This plan has been accepted by the Faculty and is now in operation. It is an ambitious scheme that involves not only a change in the content and coverage of our key courses but it also involves the strengthening the staff in these courses and an integration of course work with tutorial work. Undoubtedly it will take some years to complete this plan. Much depends upon our ability to build a strong junior staff, especially on the annual instructor level. When this reorganized instruction is in full operation it is expected that a number of courses now offered for undergraduates may be deleted.

Also it is with a good deal of satisfaction that after a period of suspension tutorial instruction has been reestablished and is developing steadily. The period of suspension was unfortunate but probably inevitable. We are now approaching a position with respect to both graduate and undergraduate instruction that at least approximates a normal situation, with a possibility of a carefully planned and well integrated system of undergraduate instruction. As a part of this plan increased attention has been given to reestablishing the General Examinations on something approximating the level of earlier years. Since we are lacking experienced tutors the establishment of tutorial instruction is a very real task but it is believed it can be done successfully.

We have been fortunate to have been able to attract to the Graduate School a group of unusually able young men. The very top of this group represents ability of the very highest order. Unfortunately only rarely can we retain the services of these young men even on the assistant professor level. However, the Department is keenly aware of the difficulties it faces in recruitment and every effort is being made to follow the progress of the product of other schools as well as the progress of our own young scholars.

Source: Harvard University Archives. Department of Economics, Correspondence and Papers (UAV 349.11), Box 2, Folder “Provost Buck—Annual Report of Dept.”

___________________________

1949-1950

January 5, 1951

Provost Paul H. Buck
5 University Hall
Cambridge, Massachusetts

Dear Provost Buck:

I am now somewhat belatedly submitting the report of the Department of Economics for 1949-50.

I. Undergraduate Instruction

Four hundred eighty-two Harvard and Radcliffe students concentrated in economics in 1949-50 as compared with 608 in the previous year. The enrolment in Economics 1 was 402 as compared with 546 in the previous year. Seventy-seven students graduated with honors; 20 obtaining magna cum laude and 57 cum laude.

The entire senior staff gave courses at the undergraduate level— a practice that distinguishes Harvard sharply from institutions such as Columbia and Chicago which restrict the activities of some of the most talented members of the staff to graduate instruction. Nevertheless, the strength of our undergraduate teaching has depended very largely on the unusually fine group of assistant professors we now have on our staff.

During the past couple of years the Department has been gradually moving toward restoration of the tutorial system and last spring it decided finally to give tutorial instruction to all honors students in their junior and senior years,

II. Graduate Instruction

Two hundred graduate students in economics were in residence last year as compared with 234 the previous year. The Department gave 58 general examinations for the Ph.D. and 47 special examinations.

The number of graduate students is still too large to handle effectively with the present staff. The students themselves justifiably complain that they cannot see enough of the members of the faculty. However if they did see as much of the faculty as they wanted to, the faculty would have little time for reading and research and the quality of instruction would decline. We are planning to deal with this problem as far as possible by making sure that more graduate students attend reasonably small seminars and do have an opportunity to get to know at least one faculty member reasonably well.

I believe that the quality of our graduate work has suffered through overemphasis on course work and preoccupation with grades. We tend to make graduate instruction too much of a prolongation of undergraduate instruction. We also tend too much in the direction of specialization and provide too little encouragement for students to become coordinated in the whole economic field. The remedy for this state of affairs depends more upon the general attitude of the Department rather than any specific measures of reorganization. We shall do whatever is possible to encourage students in the feeling that their main function here is to acquire the maturity that is essential for scholarship rather than to accumulate a collection of pieces of isolated information.

III. Research

Professors Mason, Leontief, Black, Galbraith and Dunlop are all conducting organized research projects within the Department. Apart from their substantive value, these projects give a considerable number of graduate students an opportunity to take part in organized research activity. I believe these projects have an important part to play in the future of the Department as a whole rather than as special interests of individual members. However, I do not share the view that most of our intellectual activities should be directed towards organized research. There is danger that we may become a research bureaucracy and that the merits of individual scholarship may achieve less recognition than they deserve. While the research project is invaluable in training the students in specialized activity, it does little to cultivate the maturity that should be one of the most important products of our graduate training.

IV. The Staff of the Department

Professor Schumpeter’s death has meant a loss to the Department that cannot be covered by any individual that we now have on the staff or could get from the outside. The only way to make up for his absence is for the present members of the faculty to direct part of their attention to the aspects of economic thought in which Schumpeter was particularly interested. This has in part been done. I think it is true to say that since Schumpeter’s death his own work has received more attention in Harvard classrooms than it received while he was alive.

The only new additions to the to the staff at the professorial level in 1949-50 were assistant professors Orcutt and Sawyer. Orcutt is giving a course at the graduate level and the undergraduate level on empirical economies in which he stresses the quantitative aspects of economic theory. He is also a first-class statistician. Since the resignation of Professor Crum we have had only one professional statistician in the Department, and it seems highly desirable to have at least two. Sawyer will add considerable strength to the Department’s work in economic history although he will spend half of his time in the General Education program.

VI. [sic] Distinctions

Members of the Department received the following distinctions:

Professor Edward Chamberlin — An honorary degree (Dr.) awarded by the Universita Catholica del Sacro Cuore, Milan, Italy. December 1949.

Professor Sumner Slichter — President, Industrial Relations Research Association.

Professor Gottfried Haberler — President, International Economic Association for 1950 (held by Professor Schumpeter at the time of his death).

I am attaching a bibliography of the writings of the members of the Department. [not included in this folder]

Sincerely yours,
Arthur Smithies

Source: Harvard University Archives. Department of Economics, Correspondence and Papers (UAV 349.11), Box 2, Folder “Departmental Annual Reports to the Dean 1948-54”.

Images Source: Burbank (left) from the Harvard Class Album 1946, Smithies (right) from the Harvard Class Album 1952.

Categories
Economist Market Economists Harvard

Harvard. Memo to Provost supporting Galbraith appointment. Black, 1947

 

As surprising as it might sound, the Harvard economics department couldn’t always get whom they wanted (Theodore Schultz). As a consequence we are able to observe an aggressive strategy employed by a member of one side in the departmental hiring dispute.  Professor John D. Black attempted to play the rebound in re-pleading his case for John Kenneth Galbraith’s appointment to a newly established professorship. Indeed by writing directly to the Provost, Black could have been charged with at least an additional count of “working the ref”. The episode is well summarized in Richard Parker’s biography of Galbraith (John Kenneth Galbraith: his life, his politics, his economics, pp. 226-227). Still, there is nothing quite like the pleasure of watching sharp elbows at work in the service of intradepartmental politics as revealed in the complete letter posted below.  Black was not afraid to push nativist buttons in referring to anti-Galbrathians among his colleagues: “European clique” (cf. Haberler in 1948 on Galbraith vs Samuelson), “the monetary-fiscal policy axis” and “gaudy Keynesian trappings”.

A cynical nose can detect more than a whiff of a self-serving plea to strengthen the prospects of Black’s own field and style of research. 

Archival note: Parker refers to a copy of the letter in Black’s papers with the Wisconsin Historical Society, this post is based on a copy of the letter I found in Galbraith’s papers at the JFK Presidential Library.

Economics in the Rear-view Mirror provides the outlines and exams for Black’s courses on the marketing of agricultural commodities from 1947-48).

____________________

December 22, 1947

Provost Paul Buck
University Hall
Cambridge, Massachusetts

Dear Provost Buck:

As you are no doubt aware, it was I who last year nominated Galbraith for the joint professorship to the School of Public Administration and in the Department of Economics. It was my judgment at that time that in view of his experience in public affairs and acknowledged great ability he surely should be considered for this position. The voting last year confirmed my judgment surprisingly. Excluding Schultz, to whom the appointment was offered, and Tinbergen from the Netherlands, he ran neck and neck with Yntema for top place in all of the balloting, with Samuelson next, and Smithies in seventh place. Tinbergen owed his strength to the European clique in the Department of Economics (by no means all European born), who have a European idea of the function of a university, und would have been a misfit in this appointment.

The voting of course reflected in large measure the conceptions of the voting members as to the needs of the appointment. A majority of my colleagues in the Department of Economics thought of it in terms simply of getting another high-grade technical economist, with little thought for the needs of the School of Public Administration. To meet this situation, I prepared and read at one of last year’s joint meetings on the appointment, the following statement, which I now I now submit anew, as still describing the conditions of the appointment:

The decision as to an appointment in economics at this time raises the whole question of the future of the Graduate School of Public Administration and its meaning for the Departments of Economics and Government.

The first point to make under this head is that the two departments named, without the Graduate School of Public Administration, are destined to become conventional departments in these fields, not distinguishable from similar departments in other universities, except for probably having better faculties than most of them. Even the latter distinction could easily fade in the next decade or two. With the Graduate School of Public Administration working with them, they both have possibilities of becoming super-graduate departments, by building on top of the usual graduate offerings in these fields a type of advanced graduate instruction that deals with problems of the sort that arise in the higher levels of policy-making in government. The seminars now given are well worth while from this point of view, but they fell much sort of realizing their possibilities. The two departments therefore very much need the Graduate School of Public Administration. It offers them a real opportunity to achieve greatness and become important influences in our national life. On the other hand, the School can get nowhere without the regular graduate work of the two departments as a foundation. The School and the two departments should therefore work closely together, each helping the others at each step in their advancement.

This means looking at a problem, such as that of the new appointment, as a common problem, and asking the question what kind of an appointment now will promote best the progress of the departments and the School?

Before answering this question, we need to go back and consider the basis on which the School was conceived. Those who formulated the program for the School finally settled down on training in policy-making as the great opportunity for a school of public administration at a university like Harvard. They exhibited a kind of prescience and inner wisdom in so doing that would almost seem like a miracle except for the fact that it did grow almost inevitably out of the situation.

In the two or three years following the founding of the School, much actual headway was made in realizing the objective of training for policy-making. The program of the School and it method made a strong impression in government circles and in the world of education. Since then, the School has lost considerable of the advantage of such a splendid start. If it does not take hold with vigor again and press forward along the lines laid out, it will lose it entirely in five or ten more years and become nothing more than a minor adjunct of the two conventional departments of the University. This the departments themselves cannot afford to let happen. Neither can Harvard University.

Looking at the present problem in this light, there can be no doubt that the great weakness in our present situation is in persons qualified to train advanced graduate students in policy-making, who have the aptitude for it as well as the background. The interests of the departments are in such an appointment at this time. The training in policy-making, comparatively speaking, is not suffering now, and will not suffer for several years, because of deficiencies in the preliminary graduate training needed as a foundation for it.

Also needing to be considered are important and somewhat similar relations to other departments of Harvard University, particularly to the Graduate School of Business Administration, to the Law School, and to the new Department of Social Relations. The School can add something of high importance to each of these if its seminars in the policy-making function are adequately developed; and in turn its contribution will be much enriched by what workers in these fields have to offer.

An appointment at this time of one new professor qualified as indicated will not of course take us far alone the way we need to go. But it will make a good start. We shall need mainly two things in addition: A. Additional research funds for the different seminars — to be used in employing research associates, financing field work, statistical laboratory work, etc., B. Some appointments wholly on the faculty of the School. Funds for both of these, especially the first, can be obtained if sought in earnest.

In conclusion, it should be stated that the School has made a start exactly along the right lines. It does not need in the least to back up and take a fresh start, but instead only to pick up what it has and go forward with it.

You, Provost Buck, do not need to be told that since I made this statement, the School has done exactly what I was hoping for. Almost certainly now at least three of the major seminars of the School will have research projects combined with them, each with small staffs of research associates. Steps are being taken to bring the School into effective working relations with the Law school and the Department of Social Relations. The need for an appointment that will strengthen its instruction in the policy-making function has in consequence become even more urgent then it was a year ago.

When it came time to offer nominations again this year, I felt that in view of the strong vote for Galbraith last year, surely he should be considered again. The third men in the top three this year, Smithies, has been substituted for Samuelson by those who supported Samuelson last year, apparently for two reasons: one, they now admit Samuelson’s shortcomings in the policy role, and consider Smithies a better candidate from this point of view; two, they expect to have Samuelson appointed to the full professorship now vacant in the Department of Economics. There seems to be more general acceptance than year ago of my conception of the needs of the appointment.

It has been necessary for me to make this last statement because it is the basis for the most important factor in the whole situation as it now develops, namely, that to appoint both Smithies and Samuelson at this time would further unbalance the work in economics at Harvard in the direction of the monetary-fiscal policy axis, since both of these men work mainly along these lines. The simple fact of the matter is that the men working in money and banking, fiscal policy and international trade, plus a few (in theory mostly) who vote with them on appointments, already constitute a voting majority in the Department of Economics. (You will remember that they did their utmost to prevent Dunlop’s appointment two years ago.) To add one more to this axis at this time would be highly unfortunate. It is, of course, not their voting which is most important — it is the narrowing effect which they have on the teaching and research in economics at Harvard. Those two appointments would contribute more than usual to such narrowing, since they are Keynesians in addition.

Of course none of these in this axis considers that he is narrow. In their discussions, to be sure, they draw in all phases of the economy. But they organize it all in terms of a single framework of reference. They pour it all, as it were, through one narrow funnel, and do some sieving in the process. As to how much they may mislead themselves in so doing, — and unfortunately some of the policy-makers of the nation; we have had abundant evidence in the past two years.

We can be reasonably certain that within ten or fifteen years, the Keynesian system of economic thinking will have been pretty well taken in stride. It would be unfortunate if at that time Harvard found itself with a faculty in economics too largely clothed in outworn habiliments. The economies of that day will have a different cast then the pre-Keynesian; but it will have lost much of its gaudy Keynesian trappings.

One of the first stories told me about Harvard when I arrived in 1927 was of President Eliot’s having been asked why Harvard University’s Department of Psychology had never developed a “school” of thought in that field, as had the Departments of Cornell and Columbia, and of his having answered that if he had discovered that his Department of Psychology was becoming dominated by one school of thought he would have hastened to appoint the strongest man he could find of an opposing school.

Of course this last point is no argument for the appointment of Galbraith. It is merely an argument against appointing Smithies if Samuelson is going to be appointed to the Department of Economics — and the pressure for Samuelson’s appointment is very strong in the Department of Economics.

I do not propose to present any strong affirmative arguments in support of Galbraith’s appointment. I nominated him because I believed that he should at least be considered. It has been the votes of my colleagues that has put him in the running, and I prefer that they tell you their reasons. I would not want him appointed if in their judgment, and that of the ad hoc committee, he is not the strongest man for this joint appointment.

I say this even though I would hope that if Galbraith were appointed he could spare a small fraction of his time to helping me give the two year courses which I now give in Commodity Distribution and Prices (ordinarily called Marketing.) Even though I am now giving these two courses, with the help of one-fifth of the time of an annual instructor, in addition to three full year courses in the Economies of Agricultura (with help of part of the time of one visiting lecturer) besides supervising a score of doctor’s theses, I shall manage somehow if I can get some other regular help with the three courses in the Economics of Agriculture.1

____________

  1. The undergraduate course in marketing had 90 students in the fall term, and the graduate course had 12 plus 8 auditors. This course was offered to Harvard undergraduate in 1946-47 for the first time, except for sone special instruction in food marketing given to armed service prospects during the war. The graduate course has been given since 1933.

    ____________

It may also be of interest that 12 of the 120 Ph.D’s reported as conferred in Economics in the United States in 1946-47 (12 months) were to candidates writing theses under my direction. (See September 1947 American Economic Review.)

There have, however, been some statements made about Galbraith in faculty discussions that must be commented upon in the interest of truth and sound decision. It has been said of him that he is “not a highly competent technical economist.” All this means is that he has published no articles in which he has applied methods of statistical and mathematical analysis, to the development of refinements of economic and monetary theory. I have no doubt of Galbraith’s ability to do this when this is the important thing for him to do. The simple truth is that a man of his breadth of comprehension is likely to find himself mainly absorbed in dealing with broad fundamental economic relationships; and this is especially true in times as disturbed as those in which he has been doing his writing. When asked, in the summer of 1947, to read a paper on the current economic situation, I entitled this paper “Fundamental Elements in the Current Agricultural Situation,” and I wrote as follows:

“The day and the hour seem to call for analysis in terms of broad fundamentals. This is no occasion for the refinements of theory and their application; but rather for over-simplification and over-emphasis on a few vital elements. Something of accuracy is lost in consequence; but this is not relatively important in the emergency that confronts us. There are wild horses loose in the world and the first task is to bring them to leash. Later we can break them to the plow and the cart.”

This statement is truer today than it was in 1942. If any economist of today is turning out articles or books presenting analysis of refinements, he is doing it because he lacks real power of analysis of the larger issues of the day, or as a by-product of such analysis, or as relaxation from the steady grind of his regular job. No doubt some of Smithies’ articles fit into these latter descriptions. Galbraith’s writings of the past ten years have covered the larger aspects of a very broad range of subjects.

Another criticism has been that he is not a good speaker. It is true that he often speaks haltingly when extemporizing. He needs time to find the exact word he wants. But he writes excellent papers, and reads them very effectively. (John Williams reported at a recent faculty meeting that his paper and Ed Mason’s were the outstanding papers at a full meeting in Philadelphia. His paper at the Atlantic City meeting in December 1946 was an outstanding performance.) In fact, he has become a very effective writer. To have a man in the Graduate School of Public Administration who can write as effectively as Galbraith on public questions of the day will be a highly valuable asset.

It needs to be added that he is effective in the classroom in spite of halting for a word now and then. The secret of this is that he has an uncanny sense for the vital points in a classroom discussion the same in analyzing public issues, and for putting these in their proper perspective. He is also a very stimulating influence among students in private discussion.

Rating higher in my scale of values than in those of many other academicians is capacity. Some of my colleagues do twice as much teaching, research and writing as some others, and do it fully as well or better. Galbraith has demonstrated a high order of capacity.

The other adverse report concerning Galbraith is not so easy to analyze. It is that he does not handle public relations well, nor even his relations with colleagues and subordinates. Surely a man of Galbraith’s type needed a man of different sort to work alongside him and handle the difficult public relations of OPA. And surely Leon Henderson was not that man. He was less apt at it even than Galbraith. The public relations man for OPA had to say “No” very often; and Galbraith does not have the ease of manner for such an assignment. Given time enough to plan for it in advance, he is able to differ with his colleagues and associates in a pleasant and gracious manner; but not in haste and under pressure, and especially when some body is trying to “put something over”.

No doubt a factor in his relations with others has been his urge to get on with the job and not waste too much time talking about it. I must confess a kinship with him in this respect. He no more than I should be assigned task a with many administrative decisions.

On this point, I am ready to predict without any hesitancy that Galbraith’s relations with his colleagues in the School and in the Department of Economics, should he receive this appointment, would be more congenial by a wide margin then those now generally prevailing in these departments; also that in the role of a Harvard professor, his relations with the public and with government officials would be unusually cooperative and friendly.

Perhaps a word is in order as to why I did not vote for Yntema. Most of all, I do not want to take a chance on either of two things (1) that he will prefer to continue with his present job, thus postponing our filling this appointment for another year: (2) that he will accept the appointment, but will want to continue a tie-us with CED that will remain his main interest. We cannot afford any more such tie-ups. Second, he seems to be so well fitted to his present assignment that I do not believe he would fit ours.

Very truly yours,

John D. Black

Source: John F. Kennedy Presidential Library. John Kenneth Galbraith Papers. Box 519. Series 5. Harvard University File, 1949-1990. Folder: “Correspondence Re: Appointment of JKG as Professor of Economics. 12/22/47—3/22/50”.

Image Source:  Professor John D. Black in Harvard Class Album 1945.

Categories
Economics Programs Harvard

Harvard. Meeting of the Visiting Committee with the Economics Department. January 1944

 

Maybe attending to the routine business of the Harvard economics department was seen as a welcome respite amidst the Sturm und Drang of the Second World War. Maybe the consensus was simply shared that the transistory shock of the war would soon be over and it was time to worry again about the core missions of Harvard and its economics department. In any event, the following report outlines a “Research Program for the Department of Economics” presented to the visiting committee by the chair of the department’s Committee on Research Program, Professor John D. Black. 

____________________________

Visiting Committee Reports available at Economics in the Rear-view Mirror

Visiting Committee Report 1915

Visiting Committee Report 1974

____________________________

Meeting of the Visiting Committee of the Department of Economics with the Department, on Monday, January 10, 1944.

The Visiting Committee of the Department of Economics met with the Department at seven o’clock on Monday, January 10, 1944, at the Harvard Club in Boston. There were present for the Visiting Committee: Roger N. Baldwin, Albert F. Bigelow, Paul M. Herzog, George Rublee (chairman), Charles E. Spencer, and Orrin G. Wood. For the Department: John D. Black, H. H. Burbank, W. L. Crum, John T. Dunlop, Edwin Frickey, Seymour E. Harris, Arthur E. Monroe, Wassily Leontief, Abbott P. Usher, John H. Williams, and Edwin B. Wilson. Mr. Rublee presided.

 

Mr. Rublee called on Professor Burbank, the chairman of the Department of Economics, to make an opening statement.

Professor Burbank said that in previous years we had at these dinners talked about our teaching difficulties, especially those connected with the junior staff. Last year we discussed Professor Slichter’s experiment with the labor-union representatives. This year the Department had suggested to Mr. Rublee that we consider our most pressing problem of the present, as well as the immediate and long-run future. Fundamentally, this problem is concerned with the Department’s research. We must have a vigorous and effective program of research if we are to have a dominant Department of Economic in the University or, indeed, if the University itself is to maintain its high standing. The Department of Economics has recently appointed a Committee on Research Program. Professor Black is the chairman of this committee.

Professor Black then presented the following report:

RESEARCH PROGRAM FOR THE DEPARTMENT OF ECONOMICS

A department of economics in a large university has three functions to perform:

  1. To teach and train students,
  2. To contribute to an understanding of the current problems of private enterprise and public affairs,
  3. To help develop the science of economics.

In a small college a good job of teaching is about all that can be expected of a department of economics. In a great university the second and third functions are as important as the first.

Fortunately those three functions not only need not interfere with each other, but in a large university can be performed in such a way that each strengthens the other. This does not mean that all can be performed in the same time, but rather that each is better done if the other two are also being strongly carried. As a matter of fact, however, much time and energy is saved if all three are combined. Thus what is learned from the study of current problems can be used very effectively in the classroom and at the same time furnishes needed and valuable inductive material for the development of economic science. One’s teaching, in turn, especially one’s graduate instruction, is a constant source of ideas and suggestions to be developed in research. Only, therefore, if the staff of a department of economics is large enough and well enough financed so that it can work along all three of these lines, is it able to yield a large return upon the investment in it. Only if thus set up and thus functioning is it able to realize the possible economies of combination of these functions.

The Department of Economics of Harvard University has been performing on all of these fronts ever since it was organized. But in the period while the members of this committee have been associated with it, it has by no means measured up to its opportunities on the last two of them, and what is more important, unless some action is taken in the near future, it will miss out still more on its opportunities after the war. It will not only do less well the job it has been trying to do, for reasons to be indicated presently, but also will not reach out and encompass the larger needs of the years ahead. Needless to state, society and the nation are going to be faced with major tasks of adjustment in the years just ahead and over the next decade or two and likewise breath-taking possibilities for social advancement. So important is the role of economies in these developments that if the Department of Economies of Harvard University does not contribute its part to them, this alone will almost be enough to shrink Harvard University in toto into a second- rate institution. This, therefore, is a moment for stock-taking and laying out plans.

It is not part of the assignment of this committee to consider the teaching function of the Department. But some reference must be made to it for the reasons just given. the present course offerings and methods of instruction are not well fitted to the present and the impending future. The function of teaching in a field like ours is primarily to train students to apply economics, and the methods of economic analysis, to the situations which confront them after they leave college. For Harvard undergraduates, most of these situations are situations in private enterprise, although having important public relations. A limited proportion are assignments in the public service itself. The program of teaching needs to be organized in anticipation of the kinds of jobs, mostly private, that the graduates of Harvard University get to do. The graduate teaching program needs to envisage e wide range of working assignments, a large fraction of them in the public service. Training teachers of economics is only one of the functions of graduate teaching. Because the teaching is not organized as needed, there are some large gaps in the present program, and these gaps, it will appear presently, coincide with gaps in the research activities of the department.

The other two functions, contributing directly to an understanding of current situations, and developing economic science, are orginarily considered as research. There is considerably more to the first of these than just research, but since good research is basic to it, we will here consider them both as research and treat them under one head from this point on.

The deficiencies in the research activities of the Department of Economics, considered especially from the standpoint of the postwar can be designated under the following heads:

  1. Not enough research is being done
  2. There are gaps in it
  3. Some of it is not of enough significance.

The reasons for these deficiencies are as follows:

  1. Lack of resources to carry on the needed volume of research.
  2. This includes resources in research personnel as well as in the expenses of clerical assistants, field study, publication, and the like.
  3. Inadequate staff, or none at all, in some important fields.
  4. Very little in the way of leadership. Staff not organized in such a way as to promote research.

Let us now consider briefly these four reasons. When an economist does not have financial resources with which to do significant research, he may put in his spare energy on library work on the writings of his predecessors, the Congressional Record, and the like. For this he needs only someone to type his manuscript. If in addition, he has a little money to hire a computer, he may go to work on the census records and other official statistics. Those two descriptions about cover all the research now being done by the Harvard Department of Economics as such.

Lacking funds for anything more, two developments have followed. First, a goodly number of the staff members have taken on research or related assignments with other agencies. Merely to list these agencies tells the story. (We are purposely omitting the wartime agencies), the Treasury Department, the State Department, the Department of Agriculture, the Bureau of Labor Statistics, the Federal Reserve Board, the National Resources Planning Board, the Food and Nutrition Board, the Bureau of Economic Research, the League of Nations, the Twentieth Century Fund, the National Planning Association, the National Industrial Conference Board, etc. While most of those assignments are important, to have as many of them disorganizes the research and teaching of the Department. Also the Department as such does not get adequate recognition for work done under other auspices. Finally, there is great need for having research done that is largely independent of government agencies. This point cannot be too strongly emphasized.

The second development has been that several members of the Department have started projects that they have not been able to complete thus far. They have learned by sad experience that they cannot swing ambitious projects without the help of trained younger associates who can direct the detail of the analysis and help with the writing. As a result, a number of important projects are now left suspended.

If the Department is to have a vigorous research program of its own, there must be funds with which to employ a dozen or two of these younger research associates, as well as funds for computers, clerical help, drafting, travel and field study.

The Committee is also disposed to think that a clearer recognition should be given to research duties in the total program of the Department. It would suggest that consideration be given to a plan which would differentiate teaching loads according to research carried. Staff members who do very little research, because not inclined that way, or having small capacity for it, would handle more classes under such a plan.

The nature of the gaps in the present program may be judged from a following incomplete survey of fields of research and teaching and the needs of each.

  1. Money and credit. Staff ample, but research associates, clerical and other help much needed. High time that a research showing be made.
  2. Business cycles. Staff ample. Funds to continue the program that was under way before the war.
  3. International economic relationship. Staff probably not entirely adequate and great need of developing a well-rounded research program suited to the postwar world. This program should include work on Inter-American relationships, development of resources of Latin America, international food supply and distribution and related population problems. Research associates and other financial help.
  4. Public finance. Staff ample. Research associates and other help needed.
  5. Economic history. A teaching as well as research associate needed. One professor now working alone in the field.
  6. Labor and industrial relations. The principle problem is to develop a workable program for using the research funds now available.
  7. Agriculture. A teaching associate needed, and probably two research associates with necessary supplementary funds.
  8. Commodity distribution. Needs complete staffing. An undergraduate and a graduate course are now being given on a makeshift basis. No research under way.
  9. Production economics. Courses now bracketed. Needs complete staffing.
  10. Forestry economies. A slight beginning has been made on a program in this field in collaboration with the Harvard Forest. An opportunity for an important contribution here. Needs a man to develop teaching and research with such financial support as required.
  11. Concerning the several other present fields of teaching and research in the Department, no statement is being made at this time.

The present research funds available for the Department are:

  1. A share with three other departments in the remnants of grant that will expire in June 1946. (About $40,000 left, most of which must be reserved for publication expenses.)
  2. Remnants of three other small grants, totaling about $6000, for special projects.
  3. The Wertheim fund, yielding about $3000 a year, for research in industrial relations, to be shared with other divisions of the University.

The committee suggests as a method of approach to the situation outlined that the Department set up a committee to draft a research program for the Department, and another one to develop a procedure for securing the necessary support for the program.

*  *  *  *  *  *  *  *  *  *  *

Professor Black added that in the natural sciences the idea of large laboratories is well established. In Economics also we need extensive laboratories and personnel therefor. Further, we need funds for field workers and for traveling expenses.

Mr. Bigelow asked whether there were any project being worked on in the School of Public Administration which could be coordinated with the research of the Economics Department. Professor Black answered that the idea of combining has already been carried as far as possible. The School of Public Administration funds are sufficient only to take care of the assembling of materials and other routine connected with the seminars.

Mr. Baldwin asked what the Department did with its research funds in the past when such funds were available. Professor Black answered that we made small grants to individual professors to help them finish projects in which they were engaged. These grants covered such activities as preliminary research, computing, and typing, but in general not much was available for field work or for traveling. Some eight or ten books have been published as a result of these projects. The publication of these books, as well as the research behind them, depended largely on research grants. Our research funds are now almost exhausted; we have very little money available for the future.

Professor Usher pointed out that in these earlier grants the modes and procedures were laid down by the donors. The Department did not have a free hand in organizing and planning research.

Mr. Baldwin asked whether the Economics Department today has a claim for research funds superior to that of other departments. Professor Burbank urged that a very strong case can be made out for such a position.

Professor Wilson observed that in days gone by great emphasis was laid on “inter-disciplinary” research. A second-rate “interdisciplinary” project would be given preference over a first-rate piece of restricted research. Professor Wilson further remarked that the research programs of the natural sciences were well set up thirty or forty years ago. Our social sciences, on the other hand, were for a long time treated as mere teaching departments. The movement away from this stand received a great impetus from an article by the late Professor Charles J. Bullock, in the Harvard Graduates’ Magazine for June 1915. This article called attention to the need of more generous and systematic provision for economic research. Our research program for Economics needs to be extended to a scale comparable with that of the natural sciences—unless, indeed, the United States government is to handle all the economic research in this country!

There was some discussion regarding the relation of university research in Economics to governmental research. Professor Usher pointed out that university research can be the basis for developing techniques of analysis which government bureaus can later put into “mass production.” Mr. Bigelow suggested that the development of techniques is more difficult in the social sciences than in the natural sciences. Professor Leontief predicted that the Economies Department’s research will set the direction for larger-scale governmental or “foundation” research, and emphasized that independent research, especially in its earlier stages, can never be reproduced in the “rough and tumble” conditions of governmental work. Dean Williams supported this view: a situation has been developing for some time—not just in connection with the War emergency—in which men are pulled out of university work to become mere administrators, to “run” projects; furthermore, working under governmental supervision may mean a certain loss of independence of thought, for consciously or unconsciously a men may be affected by considerations of “official policy.” Dr. Dunlop declared that you simply cannot do fundamental research under governmental auspices, there are always too many pressing current problems.

Mr. Herzog urged that the Department’s next step is to present cogent arguments to support its contentions regarding research needs. In this connection, it will be quite important to show people what contributions the Department has made in the past with the research grants allotted to it—what, for example, has resulted for practical use of the Government. Professor Burbank responded that we might take as an example the history of the statistical work on the Balance of International Payments. At the end of the last war the government and business men were vitally interested in this subject. Dean Williams was a pioneer in the field. Dean Williams briefly outlined the record. He began with an examination of the balance of payments for Argentina. Then, under the auspices of the Harvard Economics Society he, together with Professor Bullock and Mr. Tucker, made and presented a historical study of the Balance of Payments of the United States from 1789 to 1920. He kept this study up to date for several years and then turned it over to the Department of Commerce, working with them for a transition period of one year. The Department of Commerce has subsequently carried on the study currently.

As a suggestion regarding further possibilities of this sort, Professor Burbank referred to the problems connected with the incidence of taxation; these are most certainly current issues of the utmost importance. The country needs evidence for the formulation of governmental policy. We have in the Department a young man of high ability who has made a start on the investigation of these problems. We have no funds to help him, not even money for clerical and mechanical assistance.

Professor Burbank indicated that the Department would work a report along the lines of Mr. Herzog’s suggestion.

Mr. Wood urged that the Department visualize its projects and lay them out fully, with an indication of minimum and maximum amounts of money needed. Very little will be gained by talking in generalizations; the program must be concrete. Incidentally, with the Federal tax situation as it is, the present is a propitious time to obtain money for research—with reference both to individuals and to corporations.

Mr. Rublee raised question as to the exact significance of the title “Research Associate.” Professor Black answered that we have something in mind beyond a mere statistical clerk. Between the man in charge of a project and those doing the mechanical work, we need trained young economists who can assume the burden of direct supervision and also can help in writing up the results. Other Research Associates are needed to do traveling and field work. Professor Leontief suggested that the appointment of Research Associates is important for still another reason. Many of the young men thus appointed will become leaders in the economic developments of the future. The experience gained on our projects will be extremely valuable to them.

*  *  *  *  *  *  *  *  *  *  *

Mr. Rublee asked Dr. Dunlop to say a few words about the progress of the trade-union experiment which was described by Professor Slichter in this meeting last year. Dr. Dunlop said that this year we have gone ahead with the program, although of necessity on a reduced scale because of man power shortage in the various unions. We have six union representatives who, on the whole, are superior to the group we had last year. We have continued the development of techniques of instruction and we have widened our range of contacts with the unions. The unions are supporting the program and we are establishing new connections with certain important unions. In spite of the fact that the teaching staff has been somewhat depleted and we have had to furnish instruction on the basis of special arrangements, we feel that the year has been decidedly profitable and worth while, both for the union representatives and for us.

Mr. Herzog urged that by all means the work should continue, even though it had to be on a reduced scale. It is much easier to keep on with a going concern than to start afresh. He confirmed Dr. Dunlop’s impressions as to the high quality of the union personnel. He also reported the sincere testimony of a leading member of the labor-union group that the work at Harvard was felt to be highly worth while—to be a vital and crucial experience.

*  *  *  *  *  *  *  *  *  *  *

The meeting closed with general expressions of appreciation for Mr. Rublee’s work as chairman of the visiting Committee during the past few years and of the deep indebtedness which the Department feels to him for this work.

 

Source: Harvard University Archives. Department of Economics, Correspondence and Papers 1930-1961 (UAV 349.11). Box 25. Folder: “Visiting Committee Correspondence, 1943-45.”

Image Source: Cropped image of  John D. Black (1938). Harvard Library, Digital Collections.

Categories
Economics Programs Harvard Teaching Undergraduate

Harvard. Economics Department Reports to the Dean, 1941-1946

This post adds the Chairman’s annual reports on the Harvard Economics Department for the World War II years to the series:

Department of Economics Reports to the Dean of Harvard, 1932-1941

More about Harvard during WWII: Coreydon Ireland, “Harvard Goes to War,” The Harvard Gazette (November 10, 2011).

_______________________

1941-42

October 15, 1942

Dear Dean Buck:

I submit herewith a report on the work of the Department of Economics covering the past year.

The only honor conferred upon a member of the Department during this period has been the election of Professor Leontief to the American Academy of Arts and Sciences.

Several books have been published by members of the Department, including Professor Harris’s two major works (appearing, I believe, not more than a month apart), The Economics of American Defense and Economics of Social Security; Professor Black’s Parity, Parity, Parity; Professor Hansen’s Fiscal Policy and Business Cycles; and Professor Haberler’s Consumer Credit and Economic Fluctuations. Professor Haberler’s Prosperity and Depression has also gone through a third edition. Professor Crum was co-author of Fiscal Planning for Total War. The list of articles, pamphlets, reviews, and other items seems unusually long. Professor Hansen has listed thirteen items, Professor Slichter eight, and Professor Black six. The Harvard Economic Studies has expanded from 70 to 72 volumes during the year.

The contribution of the Department to the war effort has been substantial. Professor Mason continues on leave of absence with the Office of Strategic Services, and Professor Harris has recently been granted full time leave to serve as Director of the Division of Export-Import Price Control in the Office of Price Administration. Among those in the Department who are more or less active as Consultants or in other part time war activities are Professors Black, Crum, Hansen, Leontief, and Slichter, and Dr. Butters. Numerous younger men have, of course, entered the war services or have declined possible reappointment at Harvard in order to accept administrative and research positions in Washington.

The problem of maintaining instructional standards has, of course, been aggravated by the war. Fortunately, exceptions to the two-thirds rule have been granted in many cases; otherwise it would have been literally impossible in the face of competing wartime opportunities to recruit a staff of younger men at all. Out of the present staff of fifteen teaching fellows eleven are on more than two-thirds time, and almost without exception these men would not have been available (that is, not even at two-thirds time) if exceptions to the rule had not been made. The average experience of the Economics A staff has improved owing to a policy of putting more experienced men into Economics A and breaking in new men either in tutorial work or in the Statistics and Accounting courses. 36% of concentrators in Economics are tutored by new men this year; 60% by men of one year or less experience. The very sizeable staff in Statistics and Accounting is made up almost entirely of new appointees.

In view of the desperate need for trained economists in the expanding activities of the United States Government, the Department has announced for the current year an Undergraduate Training Program in Economics for Government Service which has attracted a substantial enrolment. The program has been opened to non-honors as well as to honors candidates. It has been carefully designed to give advanced training of a type which will enable them to undertake with a minimum of delay and adaptation administrative and research positions in the government service. It includes, in addition to a substantial corps of standard courses in Economics, three new courses, namely, Economics 7a and 7b, Research in Market Organization, Commodity Distribution, and Prices; Economics 19a, Research in Money and Finance; and Economics 22b, Government Statistics. One striking indication of the merits of this program might appear in the fact that a program of training announced by the Department of Government seems to consist essentially in normal concentration Government plus an election from these new courses in Economics.

Sincerely yours,

E. H. Chamberlin

Dean Paul H. Buck

_______________________

1942-43

October 21, 1943

Dear Dean Buck:

I submit herewith the report on the work of the Department of Economics for the academic year.

The war effort has continued to deplete our staff. Since the opening of the academic year Professors Chamberlin and Haberler and Dr. Dunlop have been granted leave of absence to undertake work in war agencies in Washington. However, Professor Crum resumes his work with the Department after leave of absence from the University to conduct an investigation on Fiscal Planning for the National Bureau of Economic Research of which he is currently the Chairman. Also Associate Professor Seymour Harris has returned to the University after a year and a half of service with the Office of Price Administration where he served as Director of the Office of Import-Export Price Control. A very small fraction of the once large junior staff now remains. By the end of the coming term it is expected that not more than four Annual Instructors will be active in instruction.

The incidence of war activities on research and publication has been two-fold. In some instances long-time research projects have been put aside, but concurrently much effort has been applied to projects concerned with war and post-war problems. Having in mind the inevitable interruptions of the war period, it is gratifying to be able to report that the books, scientific articles, addresses and reports have been in about the same number as the average of the immediately preceding years.

Of the major publications during the year the following should be mentioned:

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

P. M. Sweezy, The Theory of Capitalist Development

Edwin Frickey, Economic Fluctuations in the United States: a Systematic Analysis of Long-Run Trends and Business Cycles, 1866-1914

S. E. Harris, Economics of America at War

S. E. Harris, Editor, Postwar Economic Problems

A. P. Usher, The Early History of Deposit Banking in Mediterranean Europe has just left the press.

J. T. Dunlop, Cost Behavior and Price Policy

It is also indicative of the demands of war activities that some forty or fifty articles directly related to the war and post-war economy have been published by members of the Department. In addition numerous reports have been issued to or under the auspices of various war agencies such as Professor Harris, “O.P.A. Manual of Price Control” and his “Reports on Anti-Inflationary Programs in South America,” and Professor Crum’s memorandum on Fiscal Planning for Reconstruction and Peace for the National Bureau of Economic Research. The Quarterly Journal of Economics has continued successfully through another year, bringing the total volumes of this publication to 57. The Review of Economic Statistics now in its 25th volume is continuing under the editorship of Professor Harris. The Harvard Economic Studies is now publishing its 75th volume.

The rapid reduction in the numbers of the teaching staff has been met in part by the increased activity of those remaining. With the very active cooperation of the members of the staff we have been able to offer a reasonably full and well balanced program of instruction. On the graduate level flexibility of instruction has been more necessary than in previous years because of the cosmopolitan group now in attendance –not less than a dozen different nationalities are represented. This flexibility is being achieved largely by increased individual supervision and instruction.

The sharp decline in the undergraduate body together with the presence of a small but able and experienced staff of teachers has made possible a degree of experimentation in the introductory course in Economics which should lead to significant changes in the conduct of this course in the post-war period. Also at the present time some attention is being given to a question which has been in the minds of a number of members of the staff for some year—the so-called quiz section. It has been a quite common practice, in the conduct of middle group courses to provide for two lectures and one section meeting each week. On occasion five lectures are followed by the section meeting. For many years the usefulness of the section meeting has been in question. It is to be admitted that it does relieve the instructor of a lecture, but whether or not it provides equivalent or better instruction is debatable. At the present time Professor Crum and Dr. Smith are conducting a controlled experiment in the section meetings connected with their offering Government Control of Industry and Public Utilities. In the course time they will report their findings to the Department.

At this point I should like to mention the interesting and valuable “experiment” which Professor Slichter has called The Trade Union Fellowship Project. I am enclosing Professor Slichter’s report on this project which, I believe, you will find of interest. We regard the experiment as not only highly successful from both the point of view of the University and the Unions, but the experience furnishes a good deal of evidence regarding educational processes which may prove to be highly significant.

Very sincerely yours,

H. H. Burbank

_______________________

1943-44

October 13, 1944

Dear Dean Buck:

I submit herewith a brief report on the work of the Department of Economies for the academic year.

In the main, this report is a continuation of the report sent to you a year ago. In spite of the multifarious wartime activities of the member of the staff, the Department has maintained a well balanced offering of courses on both the undergraduate and graduate level. Course elections have continued to be surprisingly large, but I believe that the decline we have been expecting will actually begin with the Winter Term. The large proportion of foreign students on the graduate level, together with our inability to give complete offerings each Term, has necessitated an unusual amount of individual instruction.

Professors Mason and Chamberlin and Drs. Sweezy and Dunlop were on leave for the entire year. Professor Haberler resumed his work with us for the Summer Term.

I can repeat from my report of last year that the incidence of war activities on research and publication has been twofold. Most of our long time research projects have been put aside, but currently many projects concerned with war and postwar problems have been initiated and some of them completed. Although publication has been diminished by war activities, it is still gratifying to be able to report that the books, scientific articles, addresses, and reports—although not in quite the same quantity as in the prewar years—have nevertheless appeared in substantial numbers. Progress on the publication of books has shown a more definite interruption, but four books have been published during the year and not less than six books are now either actually in the press or are nearing form for publication. The books published during the year were:

J. D. Black, Food Enough

A. H. Hansen, (with H. S. Perloff), State and Local Finance in the National Economy

S. H. Slichter, Present Savings and Postwar Markets

J. H. Williams, Postwar Monetary Plans and Other Essays

Both of our periodicals — the Quarterly Journal of Economics and the Review of Economic Statistics — have been able to continue publication without interruption and have been able to maintain their high standards. The difficulties encountered by scientific periodicals during these years are very real. One other volume has been added to the Harvard Economic Studies.

In my last report I mentioned the experimentation, particularly in the Introductory course, which had been initiated. I am very happy to be able to report that this experimentation has continued through another year with very gratifying results. A very interesting problem is involved in the attempt to present adequately the introductory material in Economies. Most of us who have been intimately concerned with the problem believe that a single course can serve both for those who will concentrate in Economics and for those whose main, interest lie elsewhere. The content of such a course, and the effective presentation of the material, is now being studied.

I might add here—because fundamentally it is experimentation in methods and relationships—that the Trade Union Fellowship Project has been conducted successfully for another year. At various times I have sort you Professor Slichter’s reports on these projects. We believe that a very interesting and productive educational experiment is being carried on with the Trade Union men.

Also in the sane connection I should like to record that during the last year we were presented with a variety of problems by the numerous South American students who came to us on the graduate level.We gave these students particular attention. By the end of the year we had learned that it would be highly profitable to develop for such students some specialized instruction which would overcome the difficulties under which all of them labored in their first term or two of residence. Their educational background, following European patterns, is such that it is necessary for us to present to them in concentrated form certain types of qualitative and quantitative analysis with which they are unfamiliar and which is not now offered on the graduate level.

The members of the Department have continued to discuss and to arrive at decisions regarding course instruction in the postwar years. In sone respects, we will strengthen the instruction offered mainly for the specialist in Economics, but we are more concerned with broader offerings which will prove to be desirable, and we hope necessary, for the college at large. Our permanent staff is large and versatile. We hope to be able to utilize to the full the resources we possess. In connection with the enrichment of our teaching, we expect to utilize more effectively in our instruction the material forthcoming from a number of proposed seminars.

It seems unnecessary to mention in detail the wartime activities of our staff members. Practically every member of the staff is actively engaged in some type of war activity. Without exception, each officer is utilizing his special aptitudes and training in connection with the various Federal agencies concerned with economic problems.

Very sincerely,

H. H. Burbank

Dean Paul H. Buck
University Hall 5
Cambridge, Massachusetts

_______________________

1944-45

October 24, 1945

Dear Dean Buck:

I submit herewith a brief report on the Department of Economics for the last year.

As in the preceding war years, the Department has been able to present a very respectable offering of courses, both on the graduate and undergraduate level. The number of graduate students continued to be unexpectedly large, necessitating a rather more elaborate course offering for them than we had planned. To a somewhat larger extent than in the two preceding years the students enrolled represent such a diverse background of training and experience that sone new types of instruction were involved. Some seventeen nationalities were represented. We are inclined to believe that this is not altogether a temporary and war situation. Even after the European universities are reestablished, we expect to draw many students with foreign background and training. If this expectation is fulfilled, our wartime experience with foreign students will have been of considerable value.

Even before the war the Department was concerned with the reorganization of its instruction. Our discussions continued throughout the year materializing in a curriculum in theoretical and applied Economics which tends to utilize to the full the unusual capacities of the members of the staff. Our present position, however, is by no means definitive. We have always relied heavily upon the stimulating intellectual activities of the younger members of the staff. When recruitment is again possible we expect to strengthen our position markedly through the cooperation of these younger members.

The reorganization of instruction has been concerned mainly with the content and coverage of courses, but in some cases it has dealt with the actual methods of classroom instruction. The introductory course has been completely recast, involving new types of material and new methods of presentation. The full effects of these changes will have to wait upon the enlargement of our junior staff. Also, some of our plans involving quantitative instruction necessarily are held in abeyance until the questions regarding a statistical laboratory have been settled.

The war effort of many officers of the Department continued through the year. Professor Mason and Drs. Sweezy and Dunlop were on leave from the University devoting their entire time to their respective wartime assignments. Professor Chamberlin returned to Cambridge in February from his post with the office of Strategic Services. Other members of the Department, particularly Professors Hansen, Slichter, Harris, Leontief and Black, while meeting their University obligations also served in various capacities with wartime agencies.

The incidence of this wartime service upon research and publishing activities of the group was marked. Both books and articles were fewer in number than in the normal year and in the main reflected the particular war activities of the authors. However, in all some

34 articles and 7 books were published. It should be noted that at least three volumes which the authors had expected to complete in the last year are now being prepared for the press.

The difficulties involved in the publication of scientific journals have been great but not insurmountable. We have been able to continue the publication of the Quarterly Journal of Economies and the Review of Economic Statistics without reduction in size and without omission of numbers. In the Harvard Economic Series [rest of line blank] that some four volumes either in the hands of the press or the Department were ready for publication but because of the war restrictions were not actually published.

Latterly the Department has been concerned with the vexing problems of the definition of objectives of students on the graduate level and the adjustment of these objectives to the various higher degrees offered. We are concerned with the administration not only of the Ph.D. degree in Business Economies, the Ph.D. in Political Economy and Government, and in part with the Ph.D. in Public Administration which may be conferred through the Littauer School of Public Administration. The problems involved in defining and administering each of these degrees will receive continued attention.

Although no honorary degrees have been reported by members of the staff, Professor E. H. Chamberlin was elected Membre Correspondent de L’Institut de Science Économique Appliquée, May 1945, and Professor S. E. Harris was elected to membership in the American Academy of Arts and Sciences.

Very sincerely,

[H.H. Burbank]

_______________________

1945-46

September 30, 1946

Dear Dean Buck:

You have requested a brief report on the Department of Economics for the academic year 1945-46.

Although the Department of Economics had anticipated to a considerable extent the problems that would be presented by the post-war situation, it found the academic year 1945-46 presenting difficulties for which there, was no immediate solution.

Fortunately we had devoted a great deal of time and thought to our course offering and to methods of instruction. We were moderately well prepared to take up the new work involved in new instruction and also the work involved in changing the content of, old courses. Again we were fortunate in being able to meet most of the difficulties presented by the unprecedented number of graduate students. With all of the permanent members of the staff in residence, we were able to meet the graduate situation although it taxed our resources to the limit. Many of our most insistent problems were concerned with the difficulties we met in assembling and training an adequate junior staff. We began the fall term with 2 Assistant Professors (Faculty Instructors), 3 Annual Instructors, and 7 Teaching Fellows. The staff was increased during the year but it was far from adequate to meet the course work, involved in our offering. However, this would seem to be a problem of relatively short duration. A few young scholars are being brought from other institutions and occupations and our Graduate School contains a number of most promising young scholars whose development is proceeding rapidly.

During the fall of 1945 the Department surveyed repeatedly the obligations it had undertaken. We were committed to an elaborate course offering. He realized that the permanent personnel of the Department could not be expanded and we recognized that in the range of the junior staff immediate and extensive increases in personnel also were impossible. Because of the irreducible demands upon our limited resources, we reconsidered repeatedly our efforts in the area of tutorial instruction and eventually voted to suspend tutorial instruction for a period with the stipulation that the subject be reconsidered at such time as the Department might see fit and in no event not later than two years.

The foregoing remarks have indicated that all members of the staff are carrying much heavier loads than in pre-war days. The burden necessarily is apportioned unevenly but all are affected. The main incidence of this situation is on research. For some officers it means that research must be put aside temporarily. For others, less than ordinary progress is being made. However, as the following titles indicate, the contributions have been substantial:

Black, John D., and a committee consisting of M. R. Benedict, S. T. Dana, and L. K. Pomeroy; Credit for Small Timberland Owners, Including Farmers with Woodlands; A Report on Forest Credit. (In press)

Black, John D., with some guidance from Jorge Ahumada of Chile, Roberto Arellano Bonilla of Honduras, and Jorge Alcazer of Bolivia; Farm Cost Analysis, with Some Reference

Black, John D.; Clawson, Marion; Sayre, C.F.; Willcox, W. W.; Farm Management. The Macmillan Company (in press).

Chamberlin, E. H.; Fifth edition of the Theory of Monopolistic Competition (Chapter added). Translation of the above book into Spanish.

Crum, W. L., and Schumpeter, J. A.; Rudimentary Mathematics for Economists and Statisticians. McGraw-Hill.

Hansen, A. H.; America’s Role in the World Economy. W. W. Norton.

Hansen, A. H.; The United States After the War. Cornell Uiv. Press.

Hansen, A. H.; Financing American Propsperity. 20th Century Fund.

Harris, S. E.; Price Control in the International Field. (In press)

Harris, S. E.; National Debt. (In press)

Mason, E. S.; Controlling World Trade; Cartels and Commodity Agreements. McGraw-Hill.

Morgan, T.; The Development of the Hawaiian Economy, 1778-1876. Stanford Press. (In press)

In addition to the above books, some 72 articles have been contributed to scientific journals. We feel particularly happy in having been able to carry our publications, the Quarterly Journal of Economics and the Review of Economic Statistics, through the war period without serious alterations. Both publications are in sound financial condition. Actually, the Review of Economic Statistics will be in a much sounder position financially at the end of the current fiscal year than at the beginning of the war. However, increased publication costs are a matter for concern.

We have added two volumes to the Harvard Economic Series and published a revision of one. Three more volumes are now in the press. Again, increasing publication costs constitute a serious problem.

As mentioned above, all of the permanent officers of the Department had returned to active duty in Cambridge at the beginning of the year. A few officers have maintained contacts with various Washington departments and on occasion are called upon for consultation. In this connection, Professor John D. Black has served as Chairman of the Committee on Food Supplies for the Food and Nutrition Board of the National Research Council and also has served actively with at least four other agencies. Professor John T. Dunlop has served as Consultant in the Office of Economic Stabilization and the Office of War Mobilization and Reconversion. Professor Seymour E. Harris has served as Consultant for the office of Price Administration. Professor Edward S. Mason has served as Consultant for the Department of State.

Very sincerely,

H. H. Burbank

Dean Paul H. Buck
5 University Hall

_______________________

Source: Harvard University Archives. Department of Economics, Correspondence and Papers 1930-1961 (UAV 349.11). Box 2, Folder “Provost Buck—Annual Report of Dept.”

Image Source: A Harvard Army ROTC unit on parade along Memorial Drive, July 1943. From the Harvard Archives published in: Coreydon Ireland,  “To Honor the Living and Dead“, The Harvard Gazette (November 10, 2011).

Categories
Economics Programs Graduate Student Support Harvard Undergraduate

Harvard. Economics Chairman’s Report to the Dean. Harris, 1956

 

The previous post provided transcriptions of the annual reports to the Dean by the chairman of the economics department from 1932 through 1941. This post skips ahead to the middle of the 1950s to give us a glimpse of the post-war Harvard economics department. Seymour Harris’ big take-aways from his 45 year survey of undergraduate and graduate economics courses taught by Harvard economics faculty: (i) “the proportion of undergraduate courses given by full professors has fallen from 75 to 35 percent” and (ii) “graduate courses are relatively 5 times as numerous as they were in 1909-10.” (from July 3, 1956 cover letter to Dean McGeorge Bundy that accompanied the report transcribed below).

It is also interesting to note that the economics department’s continues to plead for more funds to compensate it for “…about one half the teaching burden of the G.S.P.A. and students in the G.S.P.A. account[ing] for about one third of all the graduate students in economics (on a full-time basis)…”. Harris wrote this report two decades after the Graduate School of Public Administration had opened for business.

____________________________

CONFIDENTIAL

June 30, 1956

Report to the Dean of the Faculty for the Academic Year 1955-56
by Seymour E. Harris, Chairman of the Department of Economics

Contents

Undergraduate Instruction

  1. More Mature Staff for Economics 1.
  2. Contents of Economics 1.
  3. Staff Meetings of Economics 1.
  4. Lectures in Economics 1.
  5. Economics Tutorial.
  6. High Honors Concentrators.
  7. Seminars for Honors Graduates.

Allocation of Resources

  1. Enrollment of Undergraduates in Graduate Courses and Vice Versa.
  2. Increase in the Number of Undergraduate Courses, 1909-10 to 1955-56.
  3. Increase in the Number of Graduate Courses, 1909-10 to 1955-56.
  4. Table 1 – Distribution of Courses by Academic Rank, 1909-10 to 1955-56.
  5. Table 2 – Courses Given by Faculty, 1909-10 to 1955-56, by Rank.
  6. Table 3 – Percentage of Courses, Undergraduate and Graduate.
  7. The Increased Importance of Graduate Instruction.
  8. Reduced Undergraduate Instruction by Higher Ranking Members of Faculty.
  9. Ibid., Statistical Summary.
  10. Number of Faculty by Rank.

Relations with G.S.P.A.

  1. Teaching Responsibilities of Economics Department in G.S.P.A.
  2. Contributions of G.S.P.A. to Economics Department.
  3. Overall Consideration of Number of G.S.P.A. Seminars.

Library Problems

  1. Library Problems.

Fellowships

  1. Inadequate Fellowships.
  2. Campaign for Additional Money.
  3. Outside Fellowships.

Research and Personnel Problems

  1. Competition of Research Fellowships for Potential Teachers.
  2. Research Projects.
  3. Financing of Pay of Director of Research Projects.
  4. Small Research Grants.
  5. Secretarial Help.
  6. Personnel Changes.
  7. Honors, etc.

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

Undergraduate Instruction

The Department is especially concerned with the problem of undergraduate instruction. Confronted with a trend away from economics the country over (see my Memo to the Alumni of the Harvard Graduate School in Economics, May, 1956, p. 4) and the competition of an unusually able corps of undergraduate teachers in competing fields at Harvard and notably in history and government we are paying increased attention to our undergraduate instruction. In the last year we have taken the following steps:

  1. More Mature Staff for Economics 1. We are using a larger proportion of instructors and assistant professors in Economics 1. We expect that half the Economics 1 staff will consist of instructors and assistant professors in 1956-57 as compared with 20 per cent in 1955-56.
  2. Contents of Economics 1. We are revising Economics 1 for 1956-57. Economics 1 has become too technical. One advantage of increasing the average age of the staff is that the older men are less inclined to teach the highly technical economics they get in graduate courses. Probably less than 20 per cent of those enrolled in Economics 1 are, or are likely to become, concentrators in economics; and no more than 1-2 per cent will become economists. Our major responsibility is to give the student in Economics 1 relatively simple economic theory and relate it to the major issues of public policy. We intend to devote more time to integrating our economics with history and political science. Macroeconomics will continue to receive a major part of our attention, but less time will be given to the economics of the firm.
  3. Staff Meetings of Economics 1. The Chairman now meets with the Economics 1 staff for 1½ hours every 2 weeks and in every possible way is trying to make the teaching fellow and other junior members, who contribute so much time and enthusiasm to our teaching program, feel as though they are an important part of our department staff.
  4. Lectures in Economics 1. This year we doubled our lectures in Economics 1 — a lecture every other week. In these lectures we try to go over ground not covered in the readings and also incidentally to give the undergraduate an opportunity to listen to some of the top economists in the country. We are now not disposed to increase the number of lectures further but we shall continue the experiment. Of this I am convinced — lectures are not likely to be as important in Economics 1 as in the elementary course in government and history (Social Science). The undergraduate probably gets much more from discussions of economics in small sections than from lectures.
  1. Economics Tutorial. Tutorial in economics is not as good as it ought to be. We are wrestling with this problem. We intend to have more meetings of tutors and to impress upon them the importance of tutorial. At one of our Executive Committee meetings, we had a frank discussion with the seven masters and several senior tutors concerning our tutorial work. Our Junior tests, tied to house tutorial, seem to be working well. This year we prepared an extensive reading list for Sophomore tutorial; and next year we intend to integrate tutorial and Economics 1 more than in the past. We hope that tutorial in the second half of the Sophomore year will deal with some of the theoretical problems that will be excluded from Economics 1.
  1. High Honors Concentrators. This year we had periodic meetings with all first and second group men in economics. At these meetings (one evening every two weeks) we try to encourage discussions of important problems in the seminar manner.
  1. Seminars for Honor Graduates. Economics 100 and 102 are two new courses (to be introduced in 1956-57 and 1957-58) to be open to Junior and Senior honors students. They will be run on a seminar basis, limited in enrollment, and will be integrated with tutorial. The student will get an opportunity to deal with theoretical problems and their empirical counterpart.

Allocation of Resources

  1. Enrollment of Undergraduates in Graduate Courses and Vice Versa. Here are some tables which throw some light on the allocation of resources between undergraduate and graduate courses. Generally courses for undergraduates and graduates are taken primarily by undergraduates, and courses for graduates primarily by graduates. Hence, we assume that the courses for undergraduates and graduates are in fact courses for undergraduates and courses for graduates are in fact courses for graduates. (In the spring term 1956 the percentage of Arts and Science graduate enrollment in courses for undergraduates and graduates was 14 or 1 per cent of the 1181 enrolled in these courses; the enrollment of undergraduates in courses primarily for graduates was 10 of 482, or 2 per cent).
  2. Increase in the Number of Undergraduate Courses, 1909-10 to 1955-56. Table 1 reveals relatively unimportant changes in the number of courses for undergraduates; and the net change in the number of courses for undergraduates and graduates (in fact undergraduate courses) in the last 40-50 years has not been large. In 1909-10, there were 10½ undergraduate courses (inclusive of half courses for undergraduates and graduates and exclusive of bracketed courses); in 1955-56, there were 14½ of such courses.
  3. Increase in the Number of Graduate Courses, 1909-10 to 1955-56. It is especially in graduate courses that the rise has been spectacular. In 1909-10 there were 1½ graduate courses in Economics (exclusive of bracketed ones); by 1929-30, there were 11; by 1939-40, there were 12½ courses; by 1949-50, there were 21½ courses; and by 1955-56, there were 24. All these totals include half courses.
  1. Table 1 — Distribution of Courses by Academic Rank, 1909-10 to 1955-56*
    (Refers to Units of Full Courses)
  1909-10 1919-20 1929-30 1939-40 1949-50 1955-56
Rank U G U G U G U G U G U G
Full Prof. 8 1 3 7 4 ½ 7 7 ¼ 16 ¾ 8 15 ¼ 5 18
Assoc. Prof. — — — — 3 3 3 ¼ 1 ¾ 1 3 ¼ 3 2 ½
Asst. Prof. 1 ½ ½ 3 ½ 2 ½ 1 — ½ — 2 ½ — 4 2
Instructor & Lecturer 1 — 3 1 1 ½ 1 1 ½ 1 3 3 2 ½ 1 ½
Total 10 ½ 1 ½ 9 ½ 10 ½ 10 11 12 ½ 19 ½ 14 ½ 21 ½ 14 ½ 24
  1. Table 2 — Courses Given by Faculty, 1909-10 to 1955-56, by Rank*
    (Refers to Nearest Decimal point)
  1909-10 1919-20 1929-30 1939-40 1949-50 1955-56
Rank U G U G U G U G U G U G
Full Prof. 76 66 32 67 45 64 58 86 55 73 35 75
Assoc. Prof. — — — — 30 27 26 9 7 14 21 10
Asst. Prof. 14 — 36 24 10 — 4 — 17 — 27 8
Instructor & Lecturer 10 34 32 9 15 9 12 5 21 13 17 7
Total 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100

* U = “undergraduate” and “undergraduate and graduate”;  G = “graduate”.
Source: Compiled from Course of Study Volumes.

  1. Table 3 — Percentage of Courses, Undergraduate and Graduate
Total No. of Courses % of Total Courses
(Exclusive of Bracketed Courses)
“Undergraduate” and
“Undergraduate & Graduate”		 Graduate
(Inclusive of G.S.P.A. Economics Courses)
1909-10 12 88 12
1929-30 21 56 44
1939-40 32 39 61
1949-50 36 41 59
1955-56 38½ 38 62

From 1909 to 1929-30 the percentage of graduate courses was up from 12 to 44 per cent; but since 1929-30 the rise has been less spectacular. In Table 2, we note the courses, both undergraduate and graduate, given by men of various rank, from 1909-10 to 1955-56. The following points should be noted.

  1. The Increased Importance of Graduate Instruction. In 1909-10 there were but 1½ out of 12 courses, or 12 per cent, graduate courses. By 1929-30 courses were roughly evenly divided between graduate and undergraduate. By 1939-40 and 1949-50 the ratio was about 60 per cent graduate courses; and by 1955-56, 62 per cent of all courses were graduate courses, or 5 times as much relatively as in 1909-10.
  2. Reduced Undergraduate Instruction by Higher Ranking Members Faculty. Whereas in 1909-10 full professors accounted for 76 per cent of undergraduate course work, by 1955-56 they gave only 35 per cent of these courses; and there has been a marked decline since 1949-50. The total of undergraduate courses taught by them dropped from 1949-50 to 1955-56 by 3, or 37 per cent, and of graduate courses rose by 2¾ or 18 per cent. A similar trend is evident for associate professors, though from 1949-50 to 1955-56, the percentage of undergraduate courses taught by associate professors rose. It is a striking fact that in 1955-56, full professors taught 37 per cent less undergraduate courses and 1700 per cent more graduate courses than in 1909-10. In the former year there were 4 full professors, each responsible on the average for 2 full undergraduate courses and ¼ graduate courses. In 1955-56, 13 full professors averaged 1/3 of 1 undergraduate course and 1.4 graduate courses. (All 13 were not on full time). It is clear that the trend is away from undergraduate teaching for permanent members of the Department.
  3. Ibid., Statistical Summary. As might be expected, the percentage of all graduate courses taught by full professors tends to rise and of undergraduate courses to fall — the latter courses taught by professors declined from 76 per cent in 1909-10 to 45 per cent in 1929-30, and to 35 per cent by 1955-56.
  4. Number of Faculty by Rank. In this connection, the number at different ranks is of some interest. The full professors account for a somewhat larger proportion (teaching fellows omitted) than 50 years ago; but permanent appointments are an increased percentage.
  1909-10 1929-30 1939-40 1949-50 1955-56
Professors 4 5 12 13 13
Assoc. Professors — 3 3 2 4
Asst. Professors 1 2 1 4 4
Lecturers and Instructors 3 2 3 4 3
Visiting, etc. Professors 2
(part-time)		 3
(part-time)		 — — 1
Total (excl. Visiting) 8 12 19 23 24
———— ———— ———— ———— ———— ————
% Full Prof. (excl. Visiting) 50 42 63 57 54
% Permanent (incl. Permanent Lecturers) 50 67 89 74 75

Relations with the Graduate School of Public Administration

  1. Teaching Responsibilities of Economics Department in G.S.P.A. Our relations with the G.S.P.A. are of great importance. It is now close to 20 years since the G.S.P.A. was founded and yet the Department of Economics has never taken a long look at our relations. The Economics Department accounts for about one half the teaching burden of the G.S.P.A. and students in the G.S.P.A. account for about one third of all the graduate students in economics (on a full-time basis).
  2. Contributions of G.S.P.A to Economics Department. The G.S.P.A. has made an important contribution towards the Economics Department. It provides some research and secretarial help, good physical facilities, useful library, central facilities for students and faculty, an opportunity to give our students excellent seminars, and to meet outstanding scholars and practical men in government.
  3. Over-all Consideration of Number of G.S.P.A. Seminars. It may be that a decision should be made concerning the number of seminars. We tend to add one at a time, and the numbers now are at such a level that we may be putting a disproportionate amount of energy into these seminars. At any rate, net additions should be considered with care, given our available manpower. At present only 6 of the 18 permanent members of our faculty are not associated with the G.S.P.A.; and of the 6, Professors Dorfman and Duesenberry are about to participate. Of 27 courses to be given by permanent members of the Department, 7¼ will be as seminars in the G.S.P.A.

Library Problems

  1. Library Problems. Professor Arthur Cole retires this year. He has for many years been responsible for the acquisition of books in economics. Unless this responsibility is assumed by another, our economic collection will deteriorate. So far we have not been able to work out an arrangement acceptable to the Dean and the Director of the library. In my opinion, there is need for a central responsibility for library acquisitions in economics.

Fellowships

  1. Inadequate Fellowships. One of our most serious problems is fellowships. A study of fellowship funds announced as available to students suggested that Harvard was falling way behind. In a recent period of 5 years, five institution which are our strongest competitors had 30, 23, 20, 10, and 5 times as much money available for fellowships per Ph.D. granted in these five years. Increasingly we are losing the best students to rival institutions.
  2. Campaign for Additional Money. We have discussed this problem with Dean Bundy and Dean Elder, and also with our Visiting Committee. We have set up a committee consisting of Dean Mason, Professors Slichter, Dunlop and Harris to seek aggressively more fellowship funds. We are seeking these funds in the expectation that the major part of new funds will be available as additional funds for the Economics Department. Our goal is 6 fellowships at $2500 per year, or $15,000 per year additional. We discovered last year that by offering large fellowships to a limited number, we were more successful than in the past in attracting the more able candidates.
  3. Outside Fellowships. Our fellowship problem is eased by the availability of fellowships given by outside groups — governments, foundations etc. For example, Harvard received 5 of the 15 Wilson National fellowships for 1956-57. But it should be observed that there is often pressure to deny applicants access to the major universities and especially to Harvard. There is pressure to distribute widely, Moreover, a large proportion of these fellowship holders are often below our usual fellowship standards.

Research and Personnel Problems

  1. Competition of Research Fellowship Money for Potential Teachers. It is becoming increasingly easy for graduate students writing theses to receive fellowships that generally pay at least as much as a teaching fellowship. This year we lost 10 potential teachers as a result of these lucrative fellowships.
  2. Research Projects. Many of the Senior members of the staff are associated with large research projects, some of them of great significance. At least 9 of these projects may be classified as giant projects, three of them involving outlays of one half million or more dollars in the next 3-5 years. In 1955-56, Professor Leontief received almost one half million dollars to continue the projects of the Harvard Economic Group, and Dean Mason received $450,000 for a study of the New York Metropolitan area.
  3. Financing of Pay of Directors of Projects. It has always seemed to the Chairman, at least, that the foundations ought to pay part of the salary of the faculty members who direct these projects. When these projects are the major interest of those responsible for them, a case could be made for the foundation paying part of the salary of the relevant members of the faculty.
  4. Small Research Grants. It would be helpful to get some help from the Ford Foundation for small research projects especially for those who do not participate in the giant projects. I have had some preliminary discussion with the Ford Foundation, and I believe they would look with favor on an application for $25,000-30,000 per year for research help. Grants might vary from a few hundred dollars to $1,000-2,000 and be tied with specific projects. The great danger here is abuse of the privileges. Hence any such grant would have to be carefully administered – with some representation of outside economists on the committee.
  5. Secretarial Help. A related problem is that of secretarial help. Most of the Senior members, through administrative posts, control of seminars, editorial work, and research grants, manage to get the minimum amount of secretarial help. But 5 of our permanent members have virtually no access to secretaries and this is also true of most of our assistant professors. It would be helpful if some provision could be made for secretarial help for those without it. We realize this raises serious problems of finance.
  6. Personnel Changes. Professor Hansen retires this year and Professor Williams next year. We thus lose the best combination in money, cycles, and fiscal policy available anywhere. It is going to be difficult to fill this gap. Professor Black’s departure has also left a serious gap. We have added 2 very able assistant professors, Drs. J. Henderson and Valavanis, aside from two appointments (Drs. Moses and Conrad) in which the Economics Department shares one quarter of the cost. For 1957-58 and 1958-59, the Economics Department will have the services of Dr. E. Hoover for 3/7 of his time. We probably have the most able group of assistant professors in our history. It is not going to be easy to fill the gaps noted above, and make the most effective use of the young talent now in the Department. The Visiting Committee is again raising the question of a Professor of Business Enterprise, a matter to which we should give earnest attention. President Conant and Provost Buck were apparently prepared at the last discussion of this problem to provide an additional appointment for this purpose.
  7. Honors, etc. Dean Mason received an honorary degree from Harvard, and was a United States Representative at the United Nations Conference in Geneva on Peaceful Use of Atomic Energy.

Professor Hansen gave the Walgreen lectures at the University of Chicago.

Professor Harris served as Chairman of the Nor England Governors” Textile Committee,

Professor Galbraith advised the Indian Government on their Five Year Plan.

Professor Smithies was a Visiting Professor at Oxford and Professor

Kaysen at the London School of Economics.

 

Books:

Galbraith and Holton: Marketing Efficiency in Puerto Rico.

Harris: Keynes: Economist and Policy Maker.

Harris: New England Textiles and the New England Economy: Report to the Conference of New England Governors.

Kaysen: United States v. United Shoe Machinery Corporation: An Economic Analysis of an Anti-Trust Case.

Kaysen and Harris were two of the four co-authors of the American Business Creed.

 

Source: Harvard University Archives. Department of Economics, Correspondence and Papers (UAV 349.11). Box 2,  Folder: “Departmental Annual Reports to the Dean, 1955-”.

Image Source: Seymour E. Harris in The Harvard Class Album 1957.

 

Categories
Bibliography Fields Harvard Suggested Reading

Harvard. Fiscal Seminar Bibliography and Topics. Williams and Hansen, 1946-47

Alvin Hansen and John H. Williams’  Fiscal Policy Seminar at Harvard was a major parade ground for Keynesian policy ideas in the United States. This post provides a transcription of all 29 pages of bibliography provided for the seminar along with three pages of fiscal policy topics, presumably suggestions for student papers/presentations. An earlier post includes lists of speakers for the first eight years of the seminar.

Harvard’s Fiscal Seminar, speakers 1937-44

_________________________

Seminar Enrollment

[Economics] 148a. (fall term) Professors J. H. Williams and Hansen. — (A seminar offered by the Graduate School of Public Administration.) Fiscal Policy.

Total 26: 9 Graduates, 17 Public Administration.

[Economics] 148b. (spring term) Professors J. H. Williams and Hansen. — (A seminar offered by the Graduate School of Public Administration.) Fiscal Policy.

Total 22: 7 Graduates, 1 Graduate Business, 14 Public Administration.

Source: Harvard University. Report of the President of Harvard College, 1946-47, p. 71.

_________________________

ECONOMICS 148
FISCAL POLICY SEMINAR
1946-1947

BIBLIOGRAPHY

  1. The National Income and Its Composition:
    1. Books:

Barger, Harold — Outlay and Income in the United States, 1942.

Basic Facts on Employment and Production, U. S. Senate Committee on Banking and Currency, 19th Congress, First Session, (Committee Print No. 4).

Bowley, A. L. — Studies in the National Income, 1942.

Clark, C. — National Income and Outlay, 1938.

Fabricant, S. — Capital Consumption and Adjustment, 1938.

Friedrich, C. J. and Mason, E. S., editors — Public Policy, Volume II, Chapters VII, 1941.

Hicks, J. R. — The Social Framework, Oxford, 1942.

Hicks and Hart — The Social Framework of the American Economy, Oxford, 1945.

Kuznets, S. — National Income and Capital Formation, 1919-1935, National Bureau of Economic Research, 1937.

Kuznets, S. — National Income and its Composition, 1919-1938, 2 volumes, National Bureau of Economic Research, 1941.

Lindahl, Dahlgren, and Koch — National Income of Sweden, 1861-1930, 1937.

Livingston, S.M. — Markets After the War. Bureau of Foreign and Domestic Commerce, 1943.

Martin, R. F. — National Income in the U.S., 1799-1938, National Industrial Conference Board, 1939.

Meade and Stone, National Income and Expenditure, (Oxford, 1944).

National Wealth and Income —Report by the Federal Trade Commission.

Readings in Income Distribution, Blakiston Co. (1945).

Seventh Report of Director of War Mobilization and Reconversion, July 1, 1946.

Studies in Income and Wealth, National Bureau of Economic Research, 3 volumes, 1937, 1938, and 1939.

    1. Articles:

Gilbert, M. — “Measuring National Income as Affected by the War”, Journal of American Statistical Association, June 1942.

Chawner, L. J. — “Capital Expenditure in Selected Manufacturing Industries”, Survey of Current Business, December 1941.

Kaldor, N. — “The 1941 White Paper on National Income and Expenditure”, Economic Journal, June-September 1942.

Kaldor, N., “The 1943 White Paper on National Income and Expenditure,” Economic Journal, June-September 1943.

Harris, S. E. — “The British White paper on War Finance and National Income and Expenditure”, Journal of Political Economy, February 1942.

Copeland, M.A. — “The Defense Effort and the National Income Response Pattern”, Journal of Political Economy, June 1942.

Survey of Current Business — Articles on National Income and Gross National Product, Various Issues, 1942-46.

Stone, Richard — “National Income in the United Kingdom and the United States of America”, Review of Economic Studies, Winter 1942-1943.

Stone, R. — “Two Studies in Income and Expenditure in the U.S.”, Economic Journal, April 1943.

Stone, Richard —“The National Income Output and Expenditure of U.S.A., 1929-1941”, Economic Journal, June-September 1942.

Painter, Mary S. — “Estimates of Gross National Product, 1919-1928”, Federal Reserve Bulletin, September 1945.

Kalecki, M. — “The White Paper on the National Income and Expenditure in the years 1938-43”, Oxford Institute of Statistics Bulletin, July 1, 1944, Volume 6, No. 9.

Dacey, W. M. — “The 1944 White Paper on National Income and Expenditure”, Economic Journal, June-September 1944.

Bangs, R. B. — “The Changing Relation of Consumer Income and Expenditure”, Survey of Current Business, April 1942.

Gilbert, M. and Bangs, R. B. — “Preliminary Estimates of Gross National Product, 1929-1941”, Survey of Current Business, May 1942.

Gilbert, M. — “War Expenditure and National Production”, Survey of Current Business, March 1942.

Gilbert, M. — “U. S. National Income Statistics”, Economic Journal, April 1943.

Gilbert and Jaszi — “The 1945 White Paper on National Income and Expenditure”, Economic Journal, December 1945.

Smith, T. and Merwin, C. — “Corporate Profits and National Income Estimates, Quarterly, 1938-42”, Survey of Current Business, June 1942.

Hance, W. D. — “Estimates of Annual Business Inventories, 1928-1941”, Survey of Current Business, September 1942.

British White Paper on War Finance, Cmd. 6520 (reprinted in Federal Reserve Bulletin, July 1944.)

Stern, E. H. — “Public Expenditure in the National Income”, Economica, May 1943.

Gilbert, Milton; Staehle, Hans; Woytinsky, W. S. — “National Product, War and Prewar: Some Comments on Professor Kuznets’s Study”, Review of Economic Statistics, August 1944.

Hagen, Everett E. — “Postwar Output in the United States at Full Employment”, Review of Economic Statistics, May 1945.

Hagen, E. E. and Kirkpatrick, N. B. — “The National Output at Full Employment in 1950”, American Economic Review, September 1944.

Hoffenberg, M. — “Estimates of National Output, Distributed Income, Consumer Spending, Saving and Capital Formation”, Review of Economic Statistics, May 1943.

“Consumer Incomes and Expenditures in Wartime”, Federal Reserve Bulletin, April 1944.

  1. Fiscal Policy, Income and Employment
    1. Books.

Arndt, H. W. — The Economic Lessons of the Nineteen Thirties, Oxford, 1944.

Beveridge, W. H. — Full Employment in A Free Society, 1945.

Burchardt and Others — The Economics of Full Employment: Six Studies in Applied Economics, Oxford University Institute of Statistics, 1944.

Burns, A. E. and Watson, D. S. — Government Spending and Economic Expansion, 1940.

Copland, D. B. — The Road to High Employment, Harvard University Press, 1945.

deChazeau, Hart and Others — Jobs and Markets, McGraw-Hill, 1946.

Financing American Prosperity, A symposium (Anderson, Clark, Ellis, Hansen, Slichter, Williams) Twentieth Century Fund, 1945.

Giblin, L. F. — The Problem of Maintaining Full Employment, Melbourne University, 1943.

Hansen, A. H. — Full Recovery or Stagnation, 1938.

Hansen, A. H. — Fiscal Policy and Business Cycles, 1941.

Hansen, A. H. — Economic Policy and Full Employment, 1946.

Harris, S. E. (editor) — Postwar Economic Problems, McGraw-Hill, 1943.

Harris, S. E. (editor) — Economic Reconstruction, McGraw-Hill, 1945.

Hayes, H. Gordon — Spending, Saving, and Employment, Knopf, 1945.

Keynes, J. M. — General Theory of Employment, Interest, and Money, Harcourt, 1936.

Lerner, A. P. — The Economics of Control, Macmillan, 1944.

Nathan, Otto — Mobilizing for Abundance, McGraw-Hill, 1944.

National Budgets for Full Employment, National Planning Association.

National Resources Planning Board — The Structure of the American Economy, Part II, Toward Full Use of Resources, 1940.

Pigou, A. C. — Lapses from Full Employment, Macmillan, 1945.

Pigou, A. C. — Employment and Equilibrium, Macmillan, 1941.

Polanyi, M. — Full Employment and Free Trade, Cambridge University Press, 1945.

Pierson, J. H. G. — Full Employment, 1941.

Robertson, D. H. — Essays in Monetary Theory, King, 1940.

Ruml, B. and Sonne, H. C. — Fiscal and Monetary Policy, National Planning Association, 1944.

Seven Harvard and Tufts Economists — An Economic Program for American Democracy, 1938.

Williams, John H. Postwar Monetary Plans, 2nd, 1945.

Wilson, T. — Fluctuations in Income and Employment, 1942.

Wright, D. McC. — Creation of Purchasing Power, 1942.

Committee on National Expenditure (May Committee) Cmd. 3920 (1931)

N.E.C. — Final Report of the Executive Secretary, Chapters 5, 7-13, 16.

Postwar Economic Studies, Nos. 1, 3, and 6, Board of Governors, Federal Reserve System, 1945-6.

    1. Articles:

Lerner, Simons, and Others — “Planning and Paying for Full Employment”, International Postwar Problems, October 1945 and January 1946.

Hardy, C. O. — “Fiscal Policy and National Income: Review”, American Economic Review, March 1942.

Slichter, S. H. — “The Conditions of Expansion”, American Economic Review, March 1942.

Clark, J. M. — “The Relation of Government to the Economy of the Future”, Journal of Political Economy, December 1941.

Temporary National Economic Committee — Review of the Monographs, pp. 573-601, American Economic Review, September 1941.

Gayer, A. D. — “Fiscal Policies”, American Economic Association Proceedings, 1938.

MacGibbon, D. A. — “Fiscal Policy and Business Cycles”, Canadian Journal of Economic and Political Science, February 1943.

Mitchell, W. C. — “Economic Resources in Economic Theory”, University of Pennsylvania Bicentennial Conference, Studies in Economics and industrial Relations, 1941.

Clark, J. M. — “Investment in Relation to Business Activity and Employment”, University of Pennsylvania Bicentennial Conference, Studies in Economics and Industrial Relations, 1941.

Kuznets, S. — “Capital Formation, 1879-1938”, University of Pennsylvania Bicentennial Conference, Studies in Economics and Industrial Relations, 1941.

Slichter, S. H. — “The Development of National Labor Policy”, University of Pennsylvania Bicentennial Conference, Studies in Economics and Industrial Relations, 1941.

Brown, J. D. — “Is Unemployment Inevitable?”, University of Pennsylvania Bicentennial Conference, Studies in Economics and Industrial Relations, 1941.

Berridge, W. A. — “Is Unemployment Inevitable?”, University of Pennsylvania Bicentennial Conference, Studies in Economics and Industrial Relations, 1941.

Clark, J. M. — “An Appraisal of the Workability of Compensatory Devices”, American Economic Review, Proceedings, 1939.

Gayer, A. D. — “Fiscal Policies”, American Economic Review, Proceedings, 1938.

Myrdal, G. — “Fiscal Policy in the Business Cycle”, American Economic Review, Proceedings, 1939.

Seltzer, L. H. — “Direct vs. Fiscal and Institutional Factors”, American Economic Review, Proceedings, 1941.

Simons, H. C. — “Hansen on Fiscal Policy”, Journal of Political Economy, April 1942.

Williams, J. H. — “The Implications of Fiscal Policy for Monetary Policy and the Banking Systems”, American Economic Review, Proceedings, 1942.

Hansen, A. H. — “Income, Consumption, and National Defense”, Yale Review, Autumn, 1941.

Hardy, C. O. — “Fiscal Policy and National Income: Review”, American Economic Review, March 1942.

Somers, H. M. — “The Impact of Fiscal Policy on National Income”, Canadian Journal of Economics and Political Science, August 1942.

Abbott, C. C. — “Administration of Fiscal Policy”, Harvard Business Review, Autumn, 1944.

Abrahamson, A. G. — “The Problem of Full Employment,” Harvard Business Review, Spring, 1944.

Anderson, Clay J. — “The Compensatory Theory of Public Works Expenditure”, The Journal of Political Economy, September 1945.

Beveridge, Sir W. — “The Government’s Employment Policy”, Economic Journal, June-September 1944.

Copeland, Morris A. — “How Achieve Full and Stable Employment”, American Economic Review, March 1944.

Garland, J. M. — “Some Aspects of Full Employment”, Economic Record, December 1944.

Goldenweiser, E. A. — “Postwar Problems and Policies”, Federal Reserve Bulletin, February 1945.

Pigou, A. C. — “The Classical Stationary State”, Economic Journal, December 1943.
(See also comment by M. Kalecki in Economic Journal, April 1944.)

Gragg, C. I. and Teele, S. F. — “The Proposed Full Employment Act”, Harvard Business Review, Spring 1945.

Hansen, A. H. — “Fiscal Policy: A Clarification”, American Economic Review, June 1945.

Hansen, A. H. — “Three Methods of Expansion Through Fiscal Policy”, American Economic Review, June 1945.

Hansen, Harris, Haberler, Slichter, McNair — “Five Views on the Murray Full Employment Bill”, Review of Economic Statistics, August 1945.

Harrod, R. F. — “Full Employment and Security of Livelihood”, Economic Journal, December 1943.

Herrick, L. — “Employment and Postwar Prosperity”, Yale Review, December 1944.

Hirsch, Julius —“Facts and Fantasies Concerning Full Employment”, American Economic Review, March 1944.

Klein, Lawrence R. — “The Cost of a Beveridge Plan in the United States”, Quarterly Journal, May 1944.

Langer, H. C., Jr. — “Maintaining Full Employment”, American Economic Review, December 1943.

McNair, Malcolm P. — “The Full Employment Problem”, Harvard Business Review, Autumn 1945.

Pierson, J. H. G. — “The Underwriting of Aggregate Consumer Spending as a Pillar of Full-Employment Policy”, American Economic Review, March 1944.

Smithies, Arthur — “Full Employment in a Free Society”, American Economic Review, June 1945.

Smullyan, E. B. — “Seventeen Postwar Plans — The Pabst Postwar Employment Awards”, American Economic Review, March 1945.

Wallich, H. C. — “Income-Generating Effects of a Balanced Budget”, Quarterly Journal of Economics, November 1944.

Warburton, C. — “Normal Production, Income, and Employment, 1945-1965”, Southern Economic Journal, January 1945.

Welcker, J. W. — “The Federal Budget: A Challenge to Businessmen”, Harvard Business Review, Summer 1944.

Williams, John H. — “The Postwar Monetary Plans”, American Economic Review, March 1944.

Williams, R. S. — “Fiscal Policy and Propensity to Consume”, Economic Journal, December 1945.

Woytinsky, W.S. and Halasi, A. — “Prospects of Permanent Full Employment”, International Postwar Problems, September 1944.

Wright, D. McC. — “The Future of Keynesian Economics”, American Economic Review, June 1945.

Wright, D. McC. — “Hopes and Fears — The Shape of Things to Come”, Review of Economic Statistics, November 1944.

Yntema, Theodore O. — “Full Employment in a Private Enterprise System”, American Economic Review, March 1944.

“Employment Policy in Great Britain: The Government’s White Paper”, International Labor Review, August 1944.

Beattie, J. R. — “Some Aspects of the Problem of Full Employment”, Canadian Journal of Economics and Political Science, August 1944.

Joseph, J. F. W., “The British White Paper on Employment Policy”, American Economic Review, September 1944.

  1. Saving and Investment
    1. Books:

Angell, J. W. — Investment and Business Cycles, 1941.

Hansen, A. H. — N. F. C. Hearings, Part IX, 1939.

Long, C. D. — Building Cycles and the Theory of Investment, 1940.

Machinery and Allied Products Institute — Savings and American Progress, December 1937.

Machinery and Allied Products Institute — Savings and Investment in the American Enterprise System, July 1939.

Moulton, H. G. — The Formation of Capital, Brookings, 1935.

National Industrial Conference Board — Capital Formation and Its Elements, 1939.

Postwar Economic Studies, No. 5., Federal Reserve Board, 1946.

Private Capital Requirements, Postwar Economic Studies, Board of Governors, Federal Reserve System, 1945.

Williams, John H., Postwar Monetary Plans, 2nd, 1946.

N.E.C. Monograph No. 37, Saving, Investment and National Income.

    1. Articles:

Freeman and Barre — “Saving and Spending Pattern,” American Economic Review, June 1944.

Ezekiel, M. — “Saving, Consumption and Investment,” American Economic Review, March and June 1942.

Abramovitz, M. —“Savings and Investment: Profits vs. Prosperity,” American Economic Review, Supplement, June 1942.

Silberling, N. J. — “Some Aspects of Durable Consumer Goods Financing and Investment Fluctuations,” American Economic Review, September 1938.

Slichter, S. H. — “The Conditions of Expansion,” American Economic Review, March 1942.

Hoover, C. B. (Chairman) — “Durable Consumers Goods,” American Economic Association Proceedings, 1938.

Weintraub, D. — “Effects of Current and Prospective Technological Developments Upon Capital Formation,” American Economic Association Proceedings, 1939.

Deibler, F. S. (Chairman) — “The Effects of Industrial and Technological Developments Upon the Demand for Capital,” American Economic Association Proceedings, 1939.

Crum, W. L. (Chairman) — “Income and Capital Formation,” American Economic Association Proceedings, 1939.

Ruggles, C. — “Corporate Surpluses, Income and Employment,” American Economic Review, December 1939.

Dirks, F. C. — “Durable Goods Expenditures in 1941,” Federal Reserve Bulletin, April 1942.

Gilboy, E. W. — “The Propensity to Consume,” Quarterly Journal of Economics, November 1938.

Gilboy, E. W. — “Changes in Consumption Expenditures and the Defense Program,” Review of Economic Statistics, November 1941.

Humphrey, D. D. — “The Relation of Surpluses to Income and Employment During Depression,” American Economic Review, June 1938.

Shackle, G. L. S. — “A Means of Promoting Investment,” Economic Journal, June-September 1941.

Simpson, K. — “Securities Markets and the Investment Process,” American Economic Review, Proceedings, 1938.

“Status and Role of Private Investment in the American Economy,” American Economic Review, Proceedings, 1941.

Tucker, R. S. — “Estimates of Savings of American Families,” Review of Economic Statistics, February 1942.

Weintraub, D. — “Effects of Current and Prospective Technological Developments Upon Capital Formation,” American Economic Review, Proceedings, 1939.

Isard, W. A. — “A Neglected Cycle: The Transport-Building Cycle,” Review of Economic Statistics, November 1942.

Hicks, J. R. — “Maintaining Capital Intact: A Further Suggestion,” Economica, May 1942.

Wright, D. McC. — “The interpretation of the Kuznets-Fabricant Figures for ‘Net’ Capital Consumption,” Journal of Political Economy, June 1942.

Fulcher, G. S. — “Annual Saving and Underspending of Individuals 1926-37,” Review of Economic Statistics, February 1941.

Gilbert, R. V. and Perlo, V. — “The Investment Factor Method of Forecasting Business Activity,” Econometrica, July-October 1942.

O’Leary, J. J. — “Malthus and Keynes,” Journal of Political Economy, December 1942.

Terborgh, G. — “Estimated Expenditures for Durable Goods, 1919-1938,” Federal Reserve Bulletin, September 1939.

Anderson, Montgomery, “A Formula for Total Savings,” Quarterly Journal, November 1943.

Jones, M. V. — “Secular and Cyclical Saving Propensities,” Journal of Business, University of Chicago, January 1944.

Leontief, W. W. — “Output, Employment, Consumption, and Investment,” Quarterly Journal of Economics, February 1944.

Neisser, Hans— “Government Net Contribution and Foreign Balance As Offset to Savings,” Review of Economic Statistics, November 1944.

Wright, D. McC. — “Limits to the Use of Capital,” Quarterly Journal of Economics, August 1944.

  1. Technology, Population, and Investment:
    1. Books:

Gourvitch, Survey of Economic Theory on Technological Change and Employment, W.P.A. National Research Project, Report No. G-6 (1940).

Hearings, Temporary National Economic Committee, Part IX, 1939.

Lederer, E. — Technical Progress and Unemployment, International Labour Office, 1938.

Machinery and Allied Products Institute — Ten Facts on Technology and Employment, February 1936.

Machinery and Allied Products Institute — More Facts on Technology and Employment, April 1936.

Moulton, H. G. et al. — Capital Expansion, Employment and Economic Stability, 1940.

Myrdal, G. — Population, a Problem for Democracy, 1940.

National Resources Committee — Technological Trends and National Policy, 1937.

National Resources Committee — The Problem of a Changing Population, 1938.

Reddaway, W. B. — The Economics of a Declining Population, 1939.

Terborgh, G. — The Bogey of Economic Maturity, Machinery and Allied Products Institute, 1945.

Weintraub, D. — Effects of Technological Developments Upon Capital Formation, National Research Project, Report g-4 (1939).

T.N.E.C. Hearings, Part 30, Technology and Concentration of Economic Power.

T.N.E.C. Monograph, No. 22, Technology in Our Economy.

    1. Articles:

Neisser, H. P. — “Permanent Technological Unemployment,” American Economic Review, March 1942.

Dulles, E. — “War and Investment Opportunities: An Historical Analysis,” American Economic Review, Proceedings, March 1942.

McLauchlin, G. E. and Watkins, R. J. — “The Problem of Industrial Growth in a Mature Economy,” American Economic Association Proceedings, 1939.

DuBrul, S.M. (Chairman) — “Expansion and Contraction in the American Economy,” American Economic Association Proceedings, 1939.

Fleming, J. M. — “Secular Unemployment,” Quarterly Journal of Economics, November 1939.

Hansen, A. H. — “Extensive Expansion and Population Growth,” Journal of Political Economy, August 1940.

Hawley, A. H. and Bogue, D. J. — “Recent Shifts in Population: 1930-40,” Review of Economic Statistics, August 1942.

Round Table on Population Problems, American Economic Association Proceedings, 1940, pp. 283-298.

Weintraub, D. (Director) — “Unemployment and Increasing Productivity,” National Research Project, W.P.A., 1937.

Weintraub, D. (Director) — “Summary of Findings to Date,” National Research Project, W.P.A., March 1938.

Weintraub, D. — “Effects of Current and Prospective Technological Developments Upon Capital Formation,” National Research Project, 1939.

Gill, C. — “Unemployment and Technological Change,” National Research Project, W.P.A., 1950.

Gourvitch, A. — “Survey of Economic Theory on Technological Change and Employment,” National Research Project, W.P.A., 1940.

Hopkins, J. A. — “Changing Technology and Employment in Agriculture,” National Research Project, W.P.A., 1941.

Fellner, W. — “The Technological Argument of the Stagnation Thesis,” Quarterly Journal of Economics, August 1941.

Lonigan, E. — “The Effect of Modern Technological Conditions Upon the Employment of Labor,” American Economic Review, June 1939.

Staehle, H. — “Employment in Relation to Technical Progress,” Review of Economic Statistics, May 1940.

Hansen, A. H. — “Economic Progress and a Declining Population Growth,” American Economic Review, March 1939.

Keynes, J. M. — “Some Consequences of a Declining Population,” Eugenics Review, Volume XXX, No. 1, April 1937.

Spengler, J. J. — “Population Movements and Economic Equilibrium in the United States,” Journal of Political Economy, April 1940.

Sweezy, A. R. — “Population Growth and Investment Opportunity,” Quarterly Journal of Economics, November 1940.

Hansen, A. H. — “Some Notes on Terborgh’s ‘The Bogey of Economic Maturity,’” Review of Economic Statistics, February 1946.

Wright, D. M. — “Terborgh vs. Hansen,” Review of Economic Statistics, February 1946.

Samuelson, P. A. — “Dynamics, Statics, and the Stationary State,” Review of Economic Statistics, February 1943.

King, W. I. — “Are We Suffering From Economic Maturity?” Journal of Political Economy, October 1939.

Jones, M. V. — “Secular Trends and Idle Resources,” Journal of Business, October 1944.

  1. The Role of Public Investment
    1. Books:

Bretherton, Burchardt, Rutherford — Public Investment and the Trade Cycle in Great Britain, 1941.

Duffus, R. L. — The Valley and Its People: A Portrait of TVA, 1945.

Gayer, A. D. — Public Works in Prosperity and Depression, 1935.

Hansen, A. H. and Perloff, H. S. — Regional Resource Development, National Planning Association, 1942.

Housing, Social Security and Public Works, Postwar Economic Studies, No. 6, Federal Reserve Board, 1946.

International Development Loans, National Planning Association, 1942.

Lilienthal, David — V.A. Democracy on the March, (Harpers, 1944).

National Resources Committee — Public Works Planning, Report of the Committee, 1937.

National Resources Planning Board — The Structure of the American Economy, Part II, Toward Full Use of Resources, 1940.

National Resources Planning Board — The Economic Effects of the Federal Public Works Expenditures, 1833-1938, November 1940.

National Resources Planning Board — National Resources Development Report for 1942, January 1942.

Staley, E. — World Economic Development, 1944.

    1. Articles:

Government Expansion in the Economic Sphere,” Annals of the American Academy of Political and Social Science, November 1939.

Lewis, B. W. — “Government Competition and Private Investment,” American Economic Review, June 1939.

Copeland, M.A. — “Public Investment in the United States,” American Economic Association, Proceedings, 1939.

Blakey, R. G. (Chairman) — “The Role of Public Investment and Consumer Capital Formation,” American Economic Association Proceedings, 1939.

“Economic Planning,” pp. 247-280, American Economic Association Proceedings, 1940.

Gibson, A. H. — “Will Banking Eventually Become Nationalized?” Bankers’ Magazine, March 1944.

Hansen, A. H. and Kindleberger, C. — “World Institutions for Stability and Expansion,” Foreign Affairs, January 1944.

Smithies, Arthur — “The International Bank for Reconstruction and Development,” American Economic Review, December 1944.

Benedict, M. R. — “The Relation of Public to Private Lending Agencies (in Agriculture) and Recent Trends in Their Development,” Journal of Farm Economy, February 1945.

  1. Urban Redevelopment and Housing:
    1. Books:

Colean, Miles L. — American Housing, Problems and Prospects, 1944.

Greer, G. and Others — The Problem of Urban Redevelopment, Institute on Postwar Reconstruction, 1944.

Greer and Hansen — Urban Redevelopment and Housing, National Planning Association, 1942.

Housing, Social Security, and Public Works, Postwar Economic Studies, Board of Governors, Federal Reserve System, 1946.

Housing Costs, Bulletin No. 2, National Housing Agency, 1944.

Housing Needs, Bulletin No. 1, National Housing Agency, 1944.

Housing After World War I, Bullentin No. 4, National Housing Agency, 1945.

Hearings on S. 1592, Committee on Banking and Currency, U.S. Senate, 79th Congress, 1st

Land Assembly for Urban Redevelopment, Bulletin No. 3, National Housing Agency, 1945.

National Resources Committee — Housing Monographs, Nos. 1-3, 1939.

National Resources Planning Board — Housing, the Continuing Problem, June 1940.

Postwar Economic Studies, No. 6, Federal Reserve Board, 1946.

Simon, Sir Ernest, Re-building Britain —A Twenty-year Plan (Victor Gollancz, 1945).

Uthwatt Report, Cmd. 6386 (1942).

The Problem of the Cities and Towns — Conference on Urbanism, Harvard University, 1942.

S. 1592, 70th Congress, 2nd Session — An Act to Establish a National Housing Policy.

T.N.E.C. Monograph No. 8, Toward More Housing.

    1. Articles:

Greer, Guy — “Housing,” Fortune, November 1944.

Greer, Guy — “A New Start for Cities,” Fortune, September 1944.

Husband, W. H. — “Interest Rates for Home Financing,” American Economic Review, June 1940.

French, D. M. — “The Contest for a National System of Home-Mortgage Finance,” American Political Science Review, February 1941.

“Call of Our Cities, Redevelopment and Postwar Housing,” Survey Graphic, April 1944.

Grebler, L. — “Housing Policy and the Building Cycle,” Review of Economic Statistics, May 1942.

Isard, W. and Isard C. — “The Transport-Building Cycle in Urban Development: Chicago,” Review of Economic Statistics, November 1943.

  1. Income Distribution, Consumption, and Saving:
    1. Books:

Bangs, R. B. — The Changing Relation of Consumer Income and Expenditure, April 1942.

Department of Agriculture — Consumer Purchases Studies, on Family Income and Expenditures, 1939-1941.

Family Spending and Saving in Wartime, Bulletin No. 822, U.S. Department of Labor, 1945.

Fisher, A. G. B., Economic Progress and Social Security (Macmillan, 1945).

Haberler, G. — Consumer Instalment Credit and Economic Fluctuations, 1942.

Leven, Moulton and Warburton — America’s Capacity to Consume, Brookings, 1934.

Leven, M. — The Income Structure of the U.S., 1938.

Moulton, H. G. — Income and Economic Progress, Brookings, 1935.

National Resources Committee — Consumer Expenditures in the U.S., 1933-36, 1939.

National Resources Planning Board — Family Expenditures in the U.S., Statistical Tables and Appendices, June 1941.

Nourse, E. G. — America’s Capacity to Produce.

T.N.E.C. Monograph No. 4, Concentration and Composition of Individual Incomes, 1918-1937.

    1. Articles:

Tucker, R. S. — “Estimates of Savings of American Families,” Review of Economic Statistics, February 1942.

Green, A. R. — “Social Reconstruction by the Regulation of Incomes,” Economic Journal, April 1942.

Stauffacher, C. — “The Effect of Governmental Expenditures and Tax Withdrawals Upon Income Distribution, 1930-1939,” Public Policy, Volume II, 1941.

Tucker, R. S. — “The National Resources Committee’s Report on Distribution of Income,” Review of Economic Statistics, November 1940.

Gilboy, E. W. — “Income-Expenditure Relations,” Review of Economic Statistics, August 1940.

Pancoast, O., Jr. — “Malthus vs. Ricardo: The Effects of Distribution on Production,” Political Science Quarterly, March 1943.

Samuelson, P. A. — “Fiscal Policy and Income Determination,” Quarterly Journal of Economics, August 1942.

Metzler, L. A. — “Effects of Income Distribution,” Review of Economic Statistics, February 1943.

Pigou, A. C. — “Comparisons of Real Income,” Economica, May 1943.

Rhodes, E.C. — “The Distribution of incomes,” Economica, August 1942.

Smullyan, E. B. — “Net Investment, Consumption and Full Employment,” American Economic Review, December 1944.

Sweezy, A. R. — “Reply (to E. B. Smullyan),” American Economic Review, December 1944.

  1. Wages, Costs, and Prices:
    1. Books:

Abramovitz — Price Theory for a Changing Economy (Columbia U. Press, 1939).

Clark, J. M. — Demobilization of Wartime Economic Controls (McGraw-Hill, 1944).

de Chazeau, and others — Jobs and Markets (McGraw-Hill, 1944).

Financing American Prosperity, 20th Century Fund (1945).

Harris, S. E. — Inflation and the American Economy (McGraw-Hill, 1945).

Harris, S. E. — Price and Related Controls in the U.S. (McGraw-Hill, 1945).

Lange, O. — Price Flexibility and Employment, 1944.

National Bureau of Economic Research — Cost Behavior and Price Policy, 1943.

Oxford institute of Statistics, The Economics of Full Employment (Blackwell, 1944).

Pigou, A. C., Lapses from Full Employment (Macmillan, 1945).

Prices, Wages, and Employment, Postwar Economic Studies, no. 4, Board of Governors, Federal Reserve System, 1946.

T.N.E.C. Hearings, Part 5, Monopolistic Practices in Industries.

National Resources Planning Board, The Structure of the American Economy, Part II (1940).

    1. Articles:

Mund, V. A. — “Monopolistic Competition Theory and Public Price Policy,” American Economic Review, December 1942.

Bangs, R. B. — “Wage Reductions and Employment,” Journal of Political Economy, April 1942.

Ezekiel, M. — “Productivity, Wage Rates, and Employment,” American Economic Review, September 1940.

Sweezy, A. — “Wages and Investment,” Journal of Political Economy, February 1942.

Weintraub, S. — “Monopoly Equilibrium and Anticipated Demand,” Journal of Political Economy, June 1942.

Bergson, A. — “Price Flexibility and the Level of Income,” Review of Economic Statistics, February 1943.

Keynes, J. M. — “Relative Movements of Real Wages and Output,” Economic Journal, March 1939.

  1. Taxation, Investment, and Consumption:
    1. Books:

Butters, J. K. and Lintner, J. — Effect of Federal Taxes on Growing Enterprises, Study No. 2, Polaroid Corporation, 1945.

Colm, G. and Lehmann, F. — Economic Consequences of Recent American Tax Policy, 1939.

Committee on National Debt and Taxation (Colwyn Committee) Cmd. 2800 (1927).

Curran, Kenneth J. — Excess Profits Taxation, 1943.

Groves, H. M. — Production, Jobs, and Taxes, McGraw-Hill, 1944.

Groves, H. M. — Postwar Taxation and Economic Progress, McGraw-Hill, 1946.

Hazelett, C. W. — Incentive Taxation, 1939.

Hicks, J. R. and U. K. — The Incidence of Social Rates in G. B., (Occasional Paper No. 8 of National Institute of Economic and Social Research, Cambridge U. Press, 1945).

Koch, Albert R. — The Financing of Large Corporations—1929-39, National Bureau of Economic Research, 1943.

Machinery and Allied products Institute — Taxes and American Progress, March 1938.

Mering, O. — The Shifting and Incidence of Taxation, (Blakiston, 1942).

Newcomer, M. — A Tax Policy for Postwar America, Postwar Goals and Economic Reconstruction, Series 2, No. 6, 1943.

Tarasov, Helen, Who Does Pay the Taxes? Supplement IV, Social Research, (1942).

T.N.E.C. Monograph, No. 3, Who Pays the Taxes?

T.N.E.C. Monograph, No. 9, Taxation of Corporate Enterprise.

T.N.E.C. Monograph, No. 12, Profits and New Investment.

    1. Articles:

Benham, F. — “What is the Best Tax System?” Economica, May 1942.

Bradley, P. D. — “The Direct Effects of a Corporate Income Tax,” Quarterly Journal of Economics, August 1942.

Gilbert, D. W. — “Taxation and Economic Stability,” Quarterly Journal of Economics, May 1942.

Pettengill, R. B. — “Division of the Tax Burden Among Income Groups in the United States in 1936,” American Economic Review, March 1940.

Kuznets, S. — “National Income and Taxable Capacity,” American Economic Review, Proceedings, March 1942.

Colm, G. — “Full Employment Through Tax Policy? Social Research, November 1940.

Gilbert, D. W. — “Taxation and Economic Stability,” Quarterly Journal of Economics, February 1942.

Paul, R. E. — “Redesigning Federal Taxation,” Harvard Business Review, Winter 1941.

Friedman, M. and Poole, K. E. — “The Spending Tax,” American Economics Review, March 1943.

Boulding, K. E. — “The Incidence of a Profits Tax,” American Economic Review, September, 1944.

Brown E. C. and Patterson, G. — “Accelerated Depreciation: A Neglected Chapter in War Taxation,” Quarterly Journal of Economics, August 1943.

Buehler, A. G. — “The Sales Tax,” Bulletin National Tax Association, February 1945.

Buehler, A. G. — “The Taxation of Business,” Bulletin National Tax Association, December 1944.

Burkhead, J. V. — “Property Tax as a Burden on Shelter,” Journal of Land and Public Utility Economics, August 1944.

Ciriacy-Wantrup, C. — “Taxation and the Conservation of Resources,” Quarterly Journal of Economics, February 1944.

Domar, E. D. and Musgrave, R. A. — “Proportional Income Taxation and Risk-Taking,” Quarterly Journal of Economics, May 1944.

Dowell, A. A. and Toben, G. E. — “Some Economic Effects of Graduated Income Tax Rates on Investors in Farm Capital,” Journal of Farm Economics, May 1944.

Dowsett, W. T. — “The Tax Lag Myth,” Economic Record, December 1944.

Ebersole, J. F. — “Banks Can Make More Postwar Jobs,” Harvard Business Review, Part I, Autumn 1943.

Goode, R. — “The Corporate Income Tax and the Price Level,” American Economic Review, March 1945.

Hubbard, J. C. — “Income Creation by Means of Income Taxation,” Quarterly Journal of Economics, February 1944.

Macy, C. W. — “The Corporation Net Income Tax and the Cost-Price Structure,” Bulletin of National Tax Association, May 1944.

Magill, R. — “Business, Investment and Taxation,” Trusts and Estates, October 1943.

May, G. O. — “Corporate Structures and Federal Income Taxation,” Harvard Business Review, Part I, Autumn 1943.

Wald, H. P. — “A Comparative Analysis of Three Variations of Retail Sales Taxes,” American Economic Review, June 1944.

Ballantine, A. A. — “The Corporation and the Income Tax,” Harvard Business Reivew, Spring 1944.

  1. The Public Debt and Debt Management
    1. Books:

Cadman, F. F. — National Income and Deficit Financing, 1939.

Colwyn Report, Committee on National Debt and Taxation, Cmd. 2800, (1927).

Ellis, P. W. — The World’s Biggest Business —American Public Spending, 1914-1944, 1944.

Fine, Sherwood — Public Spending and Postwar Economic Policy, 1944.

Moulton, H. G. — The New Philosophy of Public Debt, Brookings, 1943.

Phillips, C. F. and Garland, J. V. — Government Spending and Economic Recovery, 1938.

Public Finance and Full Employment, Postwar Economic Studies, Board of Governors, Federal Reserve System, 1946.

Seckler-Hudson, C. (Editor) — The Evolution of the Budgetary Concept in The Federal Government, 1944.

Villard, H. H. — Deficit Spending and the National Income, 1941.

Williams, J. H. — Post War Monetary Plans, (2nd 1945).
(See also titles in other sections)

    1. Articles:

Ratchford, B. U. — “The Burden of a Domestic Debt,” American Economic Review, September 1942.

Haley, B. F. — “The Federal Budget: Economic Consequences of Deficit Financing,” American Economic Review, Proceedings, 1941.

Hansen, A. H. and Greer, Guy — “The Federal Debt and the Future, Harpers, April 1942.

Higgins, B. and Musgrave, R. A. — “Deficit Finance —The Case Examined,” Public Policy, Volume II, 1941.

Smith, D. T. — “Is Deficit Spending Practical?” Harvard Business Review, Autumn 1939.

Williams, J. H. — “Federal Budget: Economic Consequences of Deficit Spending,” American Economic Review, Proceedings, 1941.

Williams, J. H. — “The Implications of Fiscal Policy for Monetary Policy and the Banking System,” American Economic Review, Proceedings, 1942.

Mitnitzky, M. — “Aspects of Government Borrowing,” American Economic Review, March 1943.

Roberts, R. O. — “Ricardo’s Theory of Public Debts,” Economica, August 1942.

Domar, E. D. — “The ‘Burden of the Debt’ and the National Income,” American Economic Review, December 1944.

Hansen, A. H. — “National Debt, Flexible Budget and Tax Cut,” Bulletin of National Tax Association, May 1944.

Poindexter, J. C. — “Fallacies of Interest-Free Deficit Financing,” Quarterly Journal of Economics, May 1944.

Stettner, Walter F. — “Sir James Stewart on the Public Debt,” Quarterly Journal of Economics, May 1945.

Warburton, Clark. — “The Monetary Theory of Deficit Spending,” Review of Economic Statistics, May 1945.

Wright, D. McC. — “Interest-Free Deficit Financing: A Reply,” Quarterly Journal of Economics, August 1944.

Bell, E. V. — “Consequences of $300,000,000,000 Debt,” Savings Bank Journal, February 1945.

Lanston, A. G. — “Crucial Problems of the Federal Debt,” Harvard Business Review, Winter 1946.

Leland, S. E. — “The Government, the Banks, and the Debt,” Commercial and Financial Chronicle, January 17, 1946.

Slater, A. — “U.S. Debt Pattern,” (Public and Private Debt), Survey of Current Business, September 1945.

Shoup, Carl — “Postwar Federal Interest Charge,” Supplement of American Economic Review, Part 2, June 1944.

Simons, H. C. — “On Debt Policy,” Journal of Political Economy, December 1944.

Simons, H. C. — “Debt Policy and Fiscal Policy,” Rev. of Econ. Stat., May 1946.

Abbott, Charles C. — “Management of the Federal Debt,” Harvard Business Review, Autumn 1945.

Leland, Simeon E. — “Management of the Public Debt After the War,” American Economic Review Supplement, Part 2, June 1944.

Symposium on Fiscal and Monetary Policy, Rev. of Econ. Stat., May 1946.

  1. Fiscal Policy and the War Economy:
    1. Books:

Crowther, G. — Ways and Means of War, 1940.

Crum, Fennelly, Seltzer — Fiscal Planning for Total War, 1942.

Durbin, E. F. M. — How to Pay for the War, 1941.

Harris, S. E. — Economics of American Defense.

Hart and Allen — Paying for Defense, 1941.

Hicks, J. R., Hicks, U. K., and Rostas, L. — The Taxation of War Wealth, 1941.

Keynes, J. M. — How to Pay for the War, Harcourt, 1940.

Parkinson, J. F. — Canadian War Economics, 1941.

Seidemann, H. P. — Curtailment of Non-Defense Expenditures, Brookings Institution Pamphlet No. 30, 1941.

Spiegel, H. W. — The Economics of Total War, 1942.

Stein and Backman (Editors) — War Economics, 1942.

Tax Institute Symposium — Financing the War, 1942.

U.S. Department of Labor, Bureau of Labor Statistics — Study of Consumer Purchases, 1939-1941.

    1. Articles

“Billions for Defense,” Annals of the American Academy of Political and Social Science, March 1941.

“Bank Credit and War Finance,” Federal Reserve Bulletin, June 1942.

Clark, J. M. — “Further Remarks on Defense Financing and Inflation,” Review of Economic Statistics, August 1941.

Crum, W. L. — “Paying for the War,” Academy of Political Science Proceedings, May 1942.

Douglas, M. — “Limitations of the Financial Factor in a War Economy,” Canadian Journal of Economics and Political Science, August 1942.

Eccles, M. S. — “How Shall We Pay for the War?”, Federal Reserve Bulletin, March 1942.

George, C. O. — “British Public Finance in Peace and War,” Journal of Royal Statistical Society, Part III, 1941.

Hansen, A. H. — “Monetary and Fiscal Controls in Wartime,” Yale Review, Winter 1940.

Hansen, A. H. — “Defense Financing and Inflation Potentialities,” Review of Economic Statistics, February 1941.

Hansen, A. H. — “Some Additional Comments on the Inflation Symposium,” Review of Economics Statistics, May 1941.

Hansen, A. H. and Others — “Some Economic Problems of War, Defense, and Postwar Reconstruction,” American Economic Review, February 1941.

Hansen, A. H. — “We Can Pay the War Bill,” The Atlantic, October 1942.

Hart, A. G. — “Flexible Taxes to Combat Inflation,” American Economic Review, March 1942.

Hart, A. G. — “What It Takes to Block Inflation,” Review of Economic Statistics, August 1942.

Feiler, A. — “‘Full Employment of Resources’ and War Economy,” (Note) Social Research, February 1942.

Mackintosh, W. A. — “Canadian War Financing,” Journal of Political Economy, August 1942.

Polak, J. J. — “Rationing of Purchasing Power to Restrict Consumption,” Economica, August 1941.

Roberts, G. and Others — “War Finance and Inflation,” Academy of Political Science Proceedings, May 1942.

Villard, H. H. — “The Effect of the War Upon Capital Markets,” American Economic Review Proceedings, March 1942.

Viner, J. — “Inflation: Menace or Bogey?” Yale Review, Summer 1942.

Blakey, R. G. and G. C. — “The Revenue Act of 1941,” American Economic Review, December 1941.

Weintraub, S. — “Compulsory Savings in Great Britain,” Harvard Business Review, Autumn 1941.

Hansen, A. H. — “Changes in Economic Structure Arising Out of the War and Their Implications for Public Policy,” Part III, Chapter IV, Public Policy, Volume III, Harvard University, 1942.

Fellner, W. — “War Finance and Inflation,” American Economic Review, June 1942.

Salant, W. A. — “The Inflationary Gap,” American Economic Review, June 1942.

Pigou, A. C. — “Types of War Inflation,” Economic Journal, December, 1941.

Nathan, O. and Fried, M. — “Consumer Spending, Inflation and the Wage Earner in the United States,” International Labour Review, February 1942.

Blakey, R. G. and C. C. — “Federal Revenue Legislation, 1943-44,” American Political Science Review, April 1944.

Ensley, G. W. — “Budget for the Nation,” Social Research, September 1943.

Haig, R. M. — “The Background of Our War Finance,” Political Science Quarterly, September 1943.

Harris, C. L. — “Revenue Implications of a Progressive-Rate Tax on Expenditure,” Review of Economic Statistics, August 1943.

Mosak, J. L. and Salant, W. S. — “Income, Money, and Prices in War-Time,” American Economic Review, December 1944.

Newcomer, M. — “Congressional Tax Policies in 1943,” American Economic Review, December 1944.

Seligman, H. L. — “Patterns of Wartime Borrowing in the United States, the United Kingdom, and Canada,” Federal Reserve Bulletin, November 1944.

Allen, E. D. — “Treasury Tax Policies in 1943,” American Economic Review, December 1944.

Hansen, A. H. — “A General View of the Institutional Effects of the War,” American Economic Review Supplement, March 1942.

Musgrave, R. A. and Seligman, H. L. — “The Wartime Tax Effort in the United States, the United Kingdom and Canada,” Federal Reserve Bulletin, January 1944.

  1. Fiscal Policy in the Post War:
    1. Books:

Clark, C. — The Conditions of Economic Progress, 1940.

Eccles and Others — Curbing Inflation Through Taxation, Symposium, Tax Institute, 1944.

Galloway, G. B. and Associates — Planning for America, 1941.

Galloway, G. B. — Postwar Planning in the U.S., 1942.

Hansen, A. H. — After the War — Full Employment, National Resources Planning Board, January 1942; Revised, February 1943.

National Planning Association, Pamphlet No. 15 — International Development Loans, September 1942.

Shoup, C. — Federal Finances in the Coming Decade, 1941.

Shoup, Carl; Friedman, Milton; and Mack, Ruth P. — Taxing to Prevent Inflation, 1943.

Financing American Prosperity; 20th Century Fund (1945).

    1. Articles:

Hansen, A. H. — “Wanted: Ten Million Jobs”, Atlantic Monthly, September 1943.

Hansen, Alvin H., and Guy Greer — “Toward Full Use of Our Resources”, Fortune, November 1942.

“From War to Work”, (Articles by Sir Arthur Greenwood, Marriner Eccles, B. Ruml, Sidney Hollman, Walther Nash, Alvin Hansen) Survey Graphic, May 1943.

Clark, J. M. — “Economic Adjustments After Wars: The Theoretical Issues”, American Economic Review Supplement, March 1942.

Blakey, R. G. — “State and Local Postwar Financial Policies”, Bulletin of National Tax Association, March 1944.

Burrell, O. K. — “The Pattern of Postwar Federal Taxes”, Oregon Business Review, December 31, 1944; January 31, 1945.

Butters, J. Keith — “An Appraisal of Postwar Tax Plans”, Harvard Business Review, Winter 1945.

Butters, J. Keith — “Tax Revisions for Reconversion Needs”, Harvard Business Review, Spring 1944.

Eccles, M. S. — “Statement on a Capital Gains Tax to Curb Rising Prices of Capital Values”, Federal Reserve Bulletin, March 1945.

Groves, Harold M. — “Revising the Postwar Federal Tax System”, American Economic Review Supplement, Part 2, June 1944.

Haygood, T. F. — “Federal Fiscal Measures and Agricultural Prosperity”, Agricultural Financial Review, November 1944.

Heer, C. — “Styles in Postwar Taxation”, (Review Article), Bulletin of National Tax Association, December 1944.

Houston, G. S. — “Postwar Taxes: Individuals vs. Corporate Tax Reduction”, Trusts and Estates, December 1944.

Howenstine, E. J., Jr. — “Methods of Federal Financing of Postwar Public Works”, Bulletin of National Tax Association, February 1945.

Lerner, A. P. — “Government Spending, Public Debt and Postwar Taxation”, International Postwar Problems, January 1945.

Lutz, H. L. — “A Postwar Tax Program”, Bulletin of National Tax Association, June 1944.

Musgrave, R. A. — “Three Plans for Postwar Taxation: A Comparison of the CED, Twin Cities and Ruml-Sonne Tax Proposals”, Federal Reserve Bulletin, December 1944.

Shoup, C. — “Three Plans for Postwar Taxation”, American Economic Review, December 1944.

Slichter, S. H. — “Present Savings and Postwar Markets”, Harvard Business Review, Part II, Autumn 1943.

Spero, H. and Leavitt, J. A. — “Inflation as a Postwar Problem”, Journal of Political Economy, August 1943.

Wolman, Leo — “Policies of Postwar Employment”, Political Science Quarterly, December 1943.

“Possibilities of Postwar Inflation and Suggested Tax Action”, Federal Reserve Bulletin, March 1944.

“Slowing Down of Credit Expansion”, Federal Reserve Bulletin, June 1944.

“War Finance and Banking”, Federal Reserve Bulletin, August 1944.

“The Wartime Expansion of Liquid Assets”, Federal Reserve Bulletin, October 1944.

Bell, D. W. — “Financing the War and the Postwar Readjustment”, Federal Reserve Bulletin, January 1944.

Hansen, A. H. and Kindleberger, C. P. — “The Economic Tasks of the Postwar World”, Foreign Affairs, April 1942.

Hansen, A. H. — “Changes in Economic Structure Arising Out of the War and Their Implications for Public Policy”, Public Policy, Volume III, 1942.

Slichter, S. H. — “Postwar Boom or Collapse”, Harvard Business Review, Autumn 1942.

Thorp, W. L. — “Postwar Depressions”, American Economic Review Proceedings, 1941.

Gustin, R. P. and Holme, S. A. — “An Approach to Postwar Planning”, Harvard Business Review, Summer 1942.

  1. Inter-governmental Relations:
    1. Books:

Federal, State, and Local Government Fiscal Relations, U.S. Treasury Department, 1943.

Hansen and Perloff — State and Local Finance in the National Economy, 1944.

Hicks, J. R. and U. K. — Standards of Local Expenditure, Macmillan, New York, 1943.

Silver, A. N. — The Reform of Local Government Finance, 1945.

    1. Articles:

Blakey, R. G. (Chairman) — “Coordination of Federal, State and Local Fiscal Systems”, American Economic Review Supplement, March 1942.

Blakey, R. G. — “State and Local Taxation of Federal Property”, Bulletin of National Tax Association, January 1945.

Graves, W. B. and Scholz, K. W. H. — “Meeting the Needs for State and Local Revenues in the Postwar Era”, American Political Science Review, October 1944.

Haig, R. M. — “Federal-State Financial Relations: A Conscientious Governor Studies a Senate Document,” Political Science Quarterly, June 1944.

Heer, C. — “State and Local Finance in the Postwar Plans of the South,” Southern Economic Journal, January 1945.

Hicks, J. R. and U. K. — “The Beveridge Plan and Local Government Finance”, Review of Economic Studies, Winter, 1943.

Kaiser, A. R. — “Coordination of Federal and Local Revenue Sources”, Bulletin of National Tax Association, November 1944.

Pond, C. B. — “Impact of the War on State Tax Systems”, Bulletin of National Tax Association, November 1943.

Source: Harvard University Archives. Syllabi, course outlines and reading lists in economics, 1895-2003. Box 4, Folder “Economics 1946-47 (2 of 2)”.

_________________________

ECONOMICS 128
FISCAL POLICY SEMINAR
1946-1947
TOPICS ON FISCAL POLICY

  1. Fiscal policy as a business-cycle control measure contrasted with fiscal policy as a means for structural readjustment.
  2. The fiscal problems growing out of war and depression contrasted.
  3. Deficit spending and its limits.
  4. A high-consumption economy vs. a high-savings economy.
  5. The dual economy and its relation to stability and full employment; the role of the government corporation (T.V.A., R.F.C., etc.); the program of the British Labor Party.
  6. The relation between income, output, and employment in the short run and in the long run.
  7. The public debt as an instrument of fiscal policy.
  8. The economic background of war-time expansion in the United States compared with that in Great Britain.
  9. Increased production vs. reduced consumption as war-time anti-inflation measures.
  10. Consumption, investment, income, and national expenditure in war time.
  11. The relation and importance of the various war-time control schemes (direct controls, monetary controls, fiscal controls).
  12. The timing of the various control measures in the transition period.
  13. Federal non-armament expenditures during the war.
  14. The control of non-essential investments in war time.
  15. A sharply progressive income tax vs. consumption taxes as a means to reduce war-time consumption.
  16. The relation between taxation and borrowing at different stages in the war and transition periods.
  17. Fiscal policy and the control of inflation in the postwar.
  18. “Easy money” and the role of monetary control in the prevention of postwar inflation.
  19. The taxation of war wealth.
  20. The Keynes plan of deferred wage payments as a means to prevent war-time inflation.
  21. Accumulation of social security reserves as a means to prevent war-time inflation.
  22. Forecasting and the timing of fiscal control measures in the postwar.
  23. Fiscal policy as a measure against:
    1. a postwar inflation,
    2. a postwar slump.
  24. Public investments and relief expenditures in the postwar period.
  25. Fiscal policy and the redistribution of income.
  26. The shift from a “free market” to a planned economy.
  27. British discussions on postwar debt and the wisdom of a capital levy.
  28. British and American postwar debt problems contrasted.
  29. Establishment of a monetary and fiscal authority to administer a flexible fiscal policy.
  30. Effective fiscal policy as a means of securing international stability.
  31. Trends in intergovernmental fiscal relations since the first World War.
  32. The shift of functions toward the central government in Canada and the U.S. and fiscal implications of this development.
  33. Efforts toward limiting the property tax and substituting other tax sources.
  34. A reorganized system of federal, state, and local taxation.
  35. The relation between the spending unit and the revenue-raising unit as a test of financial efficiency.
  36. Administrative reorganization as a prerequisite for intergovernmental fiscal reorganization.
  37. State control of local finance.
  38. Methods of revenue sharing between federal, state, and local government.
  39. The relation between federal, state, and local debt.
  40. Federal fiscal policy and the redistribution of income among the various states.
  41. The impact of the war on the fiscal relations between federal, state, and local government.
  42. War prosperity and the financial situation of the local governmental units.
  43. Trends in federal-local fiscal relations in Australia, Canada, and Great Britain.
  44. The relation between the federal debt and liquid assets.
  45. The relation between the public debt and the money supply.
  46. The public debt and the commercial banks.
  47. The relation between public debt retirement and the maintenance of private savings.
  48. The monetization of the debt.
  49. Interest-free financing proposals.
  50. Debt retirement and the “100 per cent money” proposal.
  51. Recent trend among some economists to emphasize monetary rather than fiscal policy.
  52. The inter-relations between monetary and fiscal policy.
  53. The effect of increased taxation on new enterprise.
  54. The effect of increased taxation on investment.
  55. The effect of increased taxation on consumption.
  56. The effect of modern progressive tax structures (England, Canada, U.S.) on income distribution.
  57. Comparison of the effects of:
    1. capital gains tax,
    2. inheritance tax,
    3. income tax,
      …on enterprise and investment.
  58. Comparison of postwar federal tax plans.
  59. The proposal to tax idle money.
  60. The proposal to underwrite private consumer expenditures.

Source: Harvard University Archives. Alvin Harvey Hansen. Lecture Notes and Other Course Material. Box 1 [might be box 3], Folder “Econs. 148”.

Image Source: Hansen (left), Williams (right). Harvard Class Album, 1942.

 

 

 

Categories
Exam Questions Harvard Suggested Reading

Harvard. Readings and Exams for undergraduate money, banking, and crises. Harris and Williams, 1941-42

 

A staple of the undergraduate economics program at Harvard throughout the first half of the 20th century covered both money/banking and commercial crises. For this academic year that included the entry of the United States into World War II, I have only been able to locate the first semester course outline and the final exam for both semesters. If I ever come across the course outline for the second semester, I will be sure to post it!

The materials for the 1937-38 academic year taught by Williams and Harris have been posted earlier.

______________________

Course enrollment

Economics 41. Professor Williams and Associate Professor Harris. — Money, Banking, and Commercial Crises.

Total 81: 18 Seniors, 50 Juniors, 11 Sophomores, 1 School of Public Administration, 1 Other

Source: Harvard University. Report of the President of Harvard College, 1941-42, p. 63.

______________________

1941-42
Readings in Economics 41 (First Term)

  1. Introductory Survey
    1. “The Federal Reserve System—Its Purposes and Functions”
      (Published by Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System; a good brief statement of our deposit banking and Federal Reserve mechanism.)
  2. Nature and Functions of Banking
    1. Dunbar, “Theory and History of Banking”, Chs. 1,2,3,4, pp. 1-60.
    2. White, “Money and Banking”, Ch. 16, pp. 349-372.
  3. Note Issue
    1. Currie. “Supply and Control of Money”, Ch. 10, pp. 110-115.
    2. Longstreet, “Currency System of United States”, in Banking Studies by Members of the Staff, Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System, pp. 65-83.
  4. Creation of Deposits
    1. Phillips, “Bank Credit”, Ch. 3., pp. 32-77.
    2. Currie, op. cit., Chs. 6, pp. 65-68.
  5. Commercial Loan Theory
    1. Robertson, “Money”, Ch. 5, pp. 92-117.
    2. Currie, op.  cit., Ch. 4, pp. 34-46.
  6. Central Banking; Federal Reserve System
    1. “Banking Studies”, pp. 1-476.
    2. Federal Reserve Bulletin, July 1935: “Supply and Use of Member Bank Reserve Funds,” pp. 419-428.
    3. Langum, “The Statement of Supply and Use of Member Bank Reserve Funds,” Review of Economic Statistics, August, 1939, pp. 110-115.
    4. Williams, “The Banking Act of 1935”, American Economic Review Supplement, March 19366, pp. 95-105.
  7. Some Current Problems of Reserve Organization
    Excess reserves; 100 per cent reserves; special reserves against inter-bank deposits; “ceiling plan”, et cetera; branch banking
  8. International Monetary Organization and Policy; The “Gold Problem”
    1. Graham and Whittlesey, “Golden Avalanche”.
    2. Hansen, “Gold in a Warring World”, Yale Review, June, 1940, pp. 668-686.
    3. Williams, “The Adequacy of Existing Currency Mechanisms Under Varying Circumstances”. American Economic Review Supplement, March, 1937, pp. 151-168.

Source: Harvard University Archives. Syllabi, course outlines and reading lists in Economics, 1895-2003. Box 3, Folder “Economics, 1941-42”.

Reading Period
Jan. 5-14, 1942
Economics 41

Read one of the following:

  1. Hardy, Federal Reserve Policy.
  2. Hawtrey, Art of Central Banking, pp. 116-303.
  3. Keynes, Treatise on Money, Vol. II, Book VII.
  4. Sprague, Crises under the National Banking System.

Source: Harvard University Archives. Syllabi, course outlines and reading lists in Economics, 1895-2003. Box 3, Folder “Economics, 1941-42”.

______________________

1941-42
HARVARD UNIVERSITY
ECONOMICS 41
Money, Banking and Commercial Crises
Mid-Year Examination

Please put the day and hour of your section meeting on the cover of your first blue book.

Part I
(Answer all three questions.)

  1. Supply and Use of Member Bank Reserve Funds.
(millions of dollars)
Nov. 19— Nov. 19—
Bills discounted 2,762 1,228
Bills bought 276 79
U.S. Government securities 320 208
Other Reserve bank credit 109 29
Monetary gold stock 2,586 3,308
Treasury and National bank currency, 1,711 1,835
Money in circulation 5,375 4,386
Treasury cash and deposits with the Federal Reserve banks 236 260
Non-member deposits 27 28
Other Federal Reserve accounts 344 350
Member bank reserve balances 1,782 ?
    1. For each of the above items, give the meaning, indicate the manner in which it influences the volume of member bank reserve balances, and state in figures what its actual effect was on these balances in the period covered by the example.
    2. Calculate what member bank reserve balances were at the later date and explain in words their change from the earlier.
    3. To what years do you think the statement might apply?
    4. What can you deduce from these figures about monetary changes and central bank policy during this period?
  2. What is meant by the difference between “compensated” and “uncompensated” deposits or withdrawals, and how do their effects differ? Describe briefly all the types of “uncompensated” payments.
  3. Reading period. Answer one of the following:
    1. Hardy: Give a résumé of the problem of “qualitative” vs. “quantitative” credit control by the Federal Reserve. What was its meaning and importance?
    2. Sprague: “Somewhere in the banking system of a country there should be a reserve of lending power.” Discuss with relation to any one of the crises prior to 1914.
    3. Hawtrey or Keynes: Contrast the more significant differences between the working of the Federal Reserve System and the Bank of England. Assess their importance in practice.
    4. Keynes: Can the banking system control the rate of investment?

Part II
Answer any TWO questions.

  1. Discuss: “The cost of acquiring [gold] imposes a heavy burden; the purchase constitutes a subsidy to producers; the chief benefit goes to foreigners.” Do you regard this as a correct analysis of the cost of our huge gold imports during the last eight years?
  2. What, in your view, are the chief merits and defects of the 100% reserve plan?
  3. Discuss the significance of “liquidity” for the operation of the commercial banking system.
  4. Discuss: “Whereas the lack of a banking crisis in 1920 or 1929 led us to believe the Federal Reserve System a satisfactory cure for the evils of the national banking system, the bank holiday in 1933 proved that this is not the case.”
  5. Would you agree that the function of the central bank is to enable the banking system “to accommodate the needs of trade”?
  6. What limitations are placed on domestic monetary policy by external considerations?

 

Source: Harvard University Archives. Harvard University Mid-term Examinations, 1852-1943, Box 15. Papers Printed for Mid-Year Examinations [in] History, History of Religions, …, Economics, …,Military Science, Naval Science. January-February, 1942.

______________________

Reading Period.
May 4-23, 1942

Economics 41. Read one of the following:

  1. Keynes, General Theory of Employment, Chs. 1-19, omit appendices.
  2. Hawtrey, Capital and Employment, all but Chs. 8, 9, 11.
  3. Hawtrey, Art of Central Banking, Chs. 1, 2, 4, 8.
  4. Durbin, The Problem of Credit Policy.
  5. Hansen, Full Recovery or Stagnation.
  6. K. Wicksell, Interest and Prices, and Keynes, Treatise, I, Chs. 2-5, 7, 14.
  7. G. Haberler, Prosperity and Depression (1939 ed.), Part I.
  8. E. Wood, English Theories of Central Banking Control.
  9. Paper Pound of 1797-1821 (Cannan edition), and
  10. Heckscher, Sweden in the World War, Part III.

Source: Harvard University Archives. Syllabi, course outlines and reading lists in Economics, 1895-2003. Box 3, Folder “Economics, 1941-42”.

______________________

1941-42
HARVARD UNIVERSITY
ECONOMICS 41
Final Examination

Answer five questions, one in Part I, the question in Part II, and three in Part III.

Part I
(Take one hour. Answer one question only.)

  1. “The gold standard limits the discretion and fetters the independent action of the Government or Central Bank of any country which has bound itself to the international gold standard. It may not be the ideal system, but it maintains a certain standard of efficiency and avoids violent disturbances and gross aberrations of policy.” Discuss this point and assess its importance in the advantages and disadvantages of the gold standard.
  2. Can the banking system control the price level?
  3. “The question now arises whether the magnitude of this velocity of circulation can be regarded as determined by independent factors; or whether, rather as is sometimes maintained, it is not merely the resultant, given the quantity of goods exchanged and of available money, of the particular level of commodity prices, themselves determined by quite different ” What does Wicksell say about this? If you disagree on any points give your reasons.

Part II
(Answer one question.)

  1. Write an essay on some one topic discussed in the book you took as the reading period assignment. Do notwrite a summary of the book.

Part III
(Answer any three questions.)

  1. What is the relation of the gold standard and the quantity theory of money? Discuss the relationship as a factor contributing towards the breakdown of the gold standard? Mention briefly some other factors contributing towards the collapse of the gold standard.
  2. What kind of foreign exchange policy would you advocate for the U.S. after the war? Support your recommendations.
  3. “The real cause of a rise in prices is to be looked for, not in the expansion of the amount of money as such but in the provision by the Bank of easier credit, which is itself the cause of the expansion.”
  4. What is the nature of the relations between the quantity of money and interest and prices?
  5. “The problem of war finance is simple. If the government wishes to avoid inflation, it must not allow any increase in the quantity of money.” Do you agree?
  6. Is Chandler a Keynesian?

Source: Harvard University Archives. Harvard University Final Examinations, 1853-2001, Box 6, Papers Printed for Final Examinations [in] History, History of Religions, …, Economics, …,Military Science, Naval Science. June, 1942.

Image Source: John H. Williams (left) and Seymour Harris (right) from Harvard Class Album 1950.

 

 

Categories
Exam Questions Harvard Suggested Reading Syllabus

Harvard. Graduate Money and Banking. Williams and Hansen, 1941-42

 

This post adds to the growing stock of course materials for the money and banking field taught in the Harvard economics department.

____________________

Course materials for graduate money and banking taught by John Williams and Alvin Hansen for other years posted at Economics in the Rear-view Mirror.

____________________

Course Enrollment

Economics 141. Professors Williams and Hansen.—Principles of Money and Banking.

Total 37: 24 Graduates, 7 School of Public Administration, 2 Radcliffe, 4 Others.

Source: Harvard University. Report of the President of Harvard College, 1941-42, p. 64.

____________________

ECONOMICS 141
Principles of Money and Banking
1941-1942

  1. Pre-requisite reading. (For those who have not had advanced undergraduate course in Money and Banking.)
    1. Board of Governors, Federal Reserve System: Banking Studies — 1941
    2. Escher, Franklin: Modern Foreign Exchange — Macmillan, 1935
  1. Minimum required Reading (It is recommended to begin with Robertson’s book on Money, and then the chapters indicated in Wicksell’s Interest and Prices and Hawtrey’s A Century of Bank Rate. This may be followed by the chapters required in Keynes’ A Treatise on Money.)
  1. Books:
    1. Angell, James W.: Investment and Business Cycles — McGraw-Hill, 1941
    2. Haberler, Gottfried:  Prosperity and Depression — League of Nations, 1939), Chapter 8.
    3. Hansen, Alvin H.: Fiscal Policy and Business Cycles — Norton, 1941
    4. Hansen, Alvin H.: Full Recovery or Stagnation? — Norton, 1938
    5. Hansen, Alvin H.: Business Cycle Theory — Ginn 1927. Chapter IV.
    6. Hawtrey, R.G.: A Century of Bank Rate — Longmans, 1938
    7. Hayek, F. A.: Prices and Production — Routledge, 1935 (rev. ed.)
    8. Keynes, J. M.: Treatise on Money — Harcourt, Brace, 1930. Chapters 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 30.
    9. Keynes, J. M.: General Theory of Employment, Interest and Money — Harcourt, Brace, 1936.
    10. Lindahl, Erik: Studies in the Theory of Money and Capital — Allen and Unwin, 1939. Part II. Chapters III, IV, V, VI.
    11. Myrdal, G.: Monetary Equilibrium — Hodge, 1939. Chapters I, II, III
    12. Robertson, D. H.: Money — Harcourt, Brace, 1929. (2nd ed.)
    13. Robertson, D. H.: Essays in Monetary Theory — King, 1940
    14. Schumpeter, J. A.: Business Cycles — McGraw-Hill, 1939. Chapters 14, 15
    15. Wicksell, K.: Interest and Prices — Macmillan, 1936. Introduction by Bertil Ohlin, Author’s Preface, and Chapters 5, 7, 8, 11
  1. Articles:

See articles marked * in general reference list below.

  1. General reference reading

Angell, J.W.: Behavior of Money — McGraw-Hill, 1935

Armstrong, W.E.: Saving and Investment — Routledge, 1936

Beach, W.E.: British International Gold Movements and Banking Policy — Harvard U. Press, 1935

Board of Governors, Federal Reserve System: Twenty-Fifth Annual Report

Bresciani-Turroni, C.: The Economics of Inflation — Allen & Unwin, 1937

Brookings Institution: The Recovery Problem in the United States — 1936

Burgess, W.R.: The Reserve Banks and the Money Market — Harpers, 1936

Cassel, G.: The Downfall of the Gold Standard — Clarendon Press, 1936

Cassel, G.: On Quantitative Thinking in Economics — Clarendon Press, 1935.

Cassel, G.: Money and Foreign Exchange after 1914 — Macmillan, 1923.

Chandler, L.V.: An Introduction to Monetary Theory — Harper, 1940

Clark, Colin: National Income and Outlay — Macmillan, 1938

Clark, J.M.: Economics of Planning Public Works — Gov’t .Printing Office, 1935

Clark, J.M.: Strategic Factors in the Business Cycle — National Bureau of Economic Research, 1934

Cole, G.D.H.: What Everybody Wants to Know about Money — Knopf, 1933

Committee on Finance and Industry: Macmillan Report — H.M.S.O., 1931

Copland, Douglas: Australia in the World Crisis, 1929-1933 — Macmillan, 1934

Coulborn, W, A. L.: An Introduction to Money — Longmans, 1938

Crowther, G.: An Outline of Money — Nelson, 1941

Currie, L.: Supply and Control of Money in the United States — Harvard U. Press, 1934

Durbin, E.F.M.: Purchasing Power and Trade Depressions — Cape, 1933

Durbin, E.F.M.: The Problem of Credit Policy — Van Nostrand, 1935

Economic Essays in Honour of Gustav Cassel — Allen & Unwin, 1933

Economic Reconstruction — Report of Columbia Commission, Columbia U. Press, 1934

Einzig, Paul: World Finance, 1939-40 — Kegan, Paul, 1940

Ellis, H.S.: German Monetary Theory — Harvard U. Press, 1934

Ellsworth, P.T.: International Economics — Macmillan, 1938

Fisher, Irving: Purchasing Power of Money — Macmillan, 1911

Fisher, Irving: Booms and Depressions — Adelphi, 1932

Fisher, Irving. 100 Per Cent Money — Adelphi, 1935

Foster and Catchings: Money — Houghton, Mifflin, 1930

Foster and Catchings: Profits — Houghton, Mifflin, 1925

Gayer, A.D.: Monetary Policy and Economic Stabilization — Macmillan, 1935

Gayer, A.D.: Public Works in Prosperity and Depression — N.B.E.R., 1935

Gilbert, Milton: Currency Depreciation and Monetary Policy — U. of Penn. Press, 1939

Graham, F.D.: Exchange, Prices and Production in Hyper-Inflation: Germany, 1920-1923 — Princeton U. Press, 1930

Graham, F.D. and Whittlesey, C.R.: Golden Avalanche — Princeton U. Press, 1939

Gregory, T.E.: The Gold Standard and its Future — Dutton, 1935

Greidanus, T.: The Development of Keynes’ Economic Theories — King, 1939

Hall, N.F.: The Exchange Equalization Account — Macmillan, 1935

Hamilton, E.J.: American Treasure and the Price Revolution in Spain — Harvard U. Press, 1934

Hansen, Alvin H.: Economic Stabilization in an Unbalanced World — Harcourt, Brace, 1932

Hansen, Alvin H.: International Economic Relations, Part III — Hutchins Commission, U. of Minnesota Press, 1934.

Hardy, C.O. Credit Policies of the Federal Reserve System — Brookings, 1932

Hardy, C.O. Is There Enough Gold? — Brookings, 1936

Harris Institute Lectures: Gold and Monetary Stabilization — U. of Chicago Press, 1932

Harris, S.E.: Assignats — Harvard U. Press, 1930

Harris, S.E.: Monetary Problems of the British Empire-Macmillan, 1931

Harris, S.E.: Twenty Years of Federal Reserve Policy — Harvard U. Press, 1933

Harris, S.E.: Exchange Depreciation — Harvard U. Press, 1936.

Harris, S.E.: Economics of the American Defense Program — Norton, 1941

Harrod, R. F.: The Trade Cycle — Clarendon Press, 1936.

Harrod, R. F.: International Economics — Nisbet, 1939.

Hawtrey, R.G.: Currency and Credit — Longmans, 1928

Hawtrey, R.G.: Art of Central Banking — Longmans, 1932

Hawtrey, R.G.: A Century of Bank Rate — Longmans, 1939

Hayek, F.A.: Monetary Theory and the Trade Cycle — Harcourt, Brace, 1933

Hayek, F.A.: Beiträge zur Geldtheorie — Springer, 1933

Hayek, F.A.: Monetary Nationalism and International Stability — Longmans, 1937

Hayek, F.A.: Profits, Interest and Investment — Routledge, 1939

Hayek, F.A.: The Pure Theory of Capital — Macmillan, 1941

Heilperin, M.A.: International Monetary Economics — Longmans, 1939

Hicks, J.R.: Value and Capital — Oxford U. Press, 1939

Iversen, Carl: International Capital Movements — Oxford U. Press, 1936

Johnson, G.G.: The Treasury and Monetary Policy, 1933-38 — Harvard U. Press, 1939

Kalecki, M.: The Theory of Economic Fluctuations — Farrar and Rinehart, 1939

Kemmerer, E.W.: The A B C of the Federal Reserve System — Princeton U. Press, 1938

Kemmerer, E.W.: The Gold Standard — its Nature and Future — Economists Nat’l Com. On Monetary Policy, 1940

Keynes, J.M.: A Tract on Monetary Reform — Macmillan, 1923

Keynes, J.M.: Unemployment as a World Problem — U. of Chicago, 1931 (pp. 1-42)

Keynes, J.M.: Means to Prosperity — Harcourt, Brace, 1933

Keynes, J.M.: How to Pay for the War — Harcourt, Brace, 1940

King, W.T.C.: History of the London Discount Market — Routledge, 1936

Knight, A.W.: What is Wrong with the Economic System — Longmans, 1939

Kuznets, S.S.: National Income and Capital Formation, 1919-1935 — Nat’l Bureau of Econ. Research, 1937

League of Nations: Final Report on Gold–1932

League of Nations: World Economic Survey (Annual)

League of Nations: Money and Banking; Monetary Review, Commercial and Central Banks (Vols. I and II) Annual

Lester, R.A.: Monetary Experiments — Princeton U. Press, 1939

Lundberg, E.: Economic Expansion — King, 1937

Machlup, Fritz: The Stock Market, Credit, and Capital Formation — Hodge, 1940

Madden, J.R. and Nadler, M.: International Money Markets — Prentice-Hall, 1935

Marget, A.W.: The Theory of Prices — Prentice-Hall, 1938

Marshall: Money, Credit, and Commerce — Macmillan, 1923

Marshall: Official Papers — Macmillan, 1926

Meade, J.E.: An Introduction to Economic Analysis and Policy — Oxford U. Press, 1938

Meade, J.E.: Consumers’ Credits and Unemployment — Oxford U. Press, 1938

Mises, L.: The Theory of Money and Credit — Harcourt, Brace, 1935

Moulton, H.G.: The Formation of Capital — Brookings, 1935

Moulton, H.G.: Income and Economic Progress — Brookings, 1935

Moulton, H.G.: Financial Organization and the Economic System — McGraw-Hill, 1938

Myers, Margaret G.: Paris as a Financial Centre — Columbia U. Press, 1936

National Industrial Conference Board: The Availability of Bank Credit, 1933-38 — 1939

Northrup, Mildred B.: Control Policies of the Reichsbank — Columbia U. Press, 1938

Ohlin, B.: Penningpolitik, Offentliga Arbeiten, etc., — Nordstedt, 1934

Ohlin, B.: Interregional and International Trade — Harvard U. Press, 1933

Ohlin, B.: Editor of issue of The Annals, May 1938 on Some Problems and Policies in Sweden

Paris, J.D.: Monetary Policies of the U.S., 1932-38 — Columbia U. Press, 1938

Phillips, C.A.; McManus, T.F. and Nelson, R.W.: Banking and the Business Cycle — Macmillan, 1939

Pigou, A.C.: The Theory of Unemployment — Macmillan, 1933

Pigou, A.C.: Employment and Equilibrium — Macmillan, 1941

Plumptre, A.F.W.: Central Banking in the British Dominions — U. of Toronto Press, 1940

Prather, C.L.: Money and Banking — Irwin, 1940

Riefler, W.W.: Money Rates and the Money Market — Harper, 1930

Robbins, Lionel: The Great Depression — Macmillan, 1934

Robinson, Joan: Introduction to the Theory of Employment — Macmillan, 1937

Roll, Erich: About Money — Faber and Faber, 1934

Saulnier, R.J.: Contemporary Monetary Theory — Columbia U. Press, 1938

Sayers, R.S.: Modern Banking — Oxford U. Press, 1937

Schumpeter, J.A.: The Theory of Economic Development — Harvard U. Press, 1934

Shackle, G.L.S.: Expectations, Investment and Income — Oxford U. Press, 1938

Shepherd, Henry L.: The Monetary Experience of Belgium, 1914-1936 — Princeton U. Press, 1936

Spahr, Walter E.: The Case for the Gold Standard — Economists’ Nat’l Com. On Monetary Policy, 1940

Thornton, Henry: An Enquiry into the Nature and Effects of the Paper Credit of Great Britain (1802) — Farrar and Rinehart, 1939 (Introduction by Hayek)

Thorp, Willard L.: Economic Problems in a Changing World — Farrar and Rinehart, 1939

Timoshenko, V.: World Agriculture and the Depression — U. of Michigan, Bureau of Business Research, 1933

Turner, R.C.: Member-Bank Borrowing — Ohio State U., 1938

Veblen, T.: Theory of Business Enterprise — Scribner’s, 1904

Veblen, T.: The Engineers and the Price System — Huebsch, 1921

Villard, H.H.: Deficit Spending and the National Income — Farrar and Rinehart, 1941

Vineberg, P.F.: The French Franc and the Gold Standard — McGill U., 1938

Viner, Jacob: Studies in the Theory of International Trade — Harper, 1937

Warren and Pearson: Gold and Prices — Chapman and Hall, 1935

Warren and Pearson: World Prices and the Building Industry — Wiley, 1937

Westerfield, R.B.: Our Silver Debacle — Ronald Press, 1936

Westerfield, R.B.: Money, Credit and Banking — Ronald Press, 1938

Whitaker, A.C.: Foreign Exchange — Appleton-Century, 2nd ed., 1933

White, Horace: Money and Banking — Ginn, 1936 (revised edition by Tippetts and Froman)

Whittlesey, C.R.: International Monetary Issues — McGraw-Hill, 1937

Wicksell, K.: Lectures on Political Economy, Money — Macmillan, 1935

Williams, J.H.: Argentine Trade under Inconvertible Paper — Harvard U. Press, 1920.

Willis, H.P., and Beckhart, B.H.: Foreign Banking System — Holt, 1929

Wood, Elmer: English Theories of Central Banking Control, 1819-1858 — Harvard U. Press, 1939

Articles

Angell, J.W.: “The 100% Reserve Plan” Quarterly Journal of Economics, November 1935

Angell, J.W.: “Foreign Exchange” Encyclopedia of the Social Sciences, Volume 6

Beveridge, W. H.: “Unemployment in the Trade Cycle”, Economic Journal, March, 1939.

Clark, Colin: “The Determination of the Multiplier from National Income Statistics”, Economic Journal, September, 1938.

Currie, L.: “The Failure of Monetary Policy to Prevent the Depression of 1929-32”, Journal of Political Economy, April 1934.

Curtis, Myra: “Is Money Saving Equal to Investment?” Quarterly Journal of Economics, August 1937

Duncan, A.J., and Gilboy, E.W.: “Propensity to Consume” Quarterly Journal of Economics, August 1939

Eddy, George A.: “The Present Status of New Security Issues”, Review of Economic Statistics, August 1939.

Ellis, Howard: “Some Fundamentals in the Theory of Velocity”, Quarterly Journal of Economics, May 1939.

Ellis, Howard: “Notes on Recent Business-Cycle Literature”, Review of Economic Statistics, August, 1938.

Ellis, Howard: “Exchange Control in Austria and Hungary” Quarterly Journal of Economics November 1939. Part II.

Graham, F.D.: “100% Reserves: comment”, American Economic Review, June, 1941.

Haberler, G.: “Mr. Kahn’s Review of ‘Prosperity and Depression’”, with rejoinder by R.F.Kahn, Economic Journal, June 1938

Hansen, Alvin H.: “Progress and Declining Population” American Economic Review, March 1939

Hansen*, Alvin H.: “Gold in a Warring World,” Yale Review, Summer, 1940

Hansen*, Alvin H.: “Monetary and Fiscal Controls in War Time” Yale Review, Winter, 1940

Hansen, Alvin H.: “Income, Consumption, and National Defense” Yale Review, Winter, 1940

Harris*, S.E.: “American Gold Policy and Allied War Economics”, Economic Journal, September, 1940.

Harrod R.F.: “An Essay in Dynamic Theory”, Economic Journal, March, 1939.

Hicks*, J.R.: “Mr. Keynes’ Theory of Employment”, Economic Journal, June, 1936.

Hicks*, J.R.: “Mr. Keynes and the ‘Classics’”: a Suggested Interpretation” Econometrica, April 1937

Hicks*, J.R.: “Mr. Hawtrey on Bank Rate and the Long-Term Rate of Interest,” The Manchester School, Vol. X, no. 1, 1939

Holden, G.R.: “Rationing and Exchange Control in British War Finance” Quarterly Journal of Economics, February 1940

Horsefield, J.K.: “Currency Devaluation and Public Finance, 1929-37” Economica, August 1939

Kaldor, Nicholas: “Capital Intensity and the Trade Cycle”, Economica, February, 1939.

Kaldor*, Nicholas: “Stability and Full Employment”, Economic Journal, December, 1938.

Kalecki, M.: “The Short-Term Rate of Interest and Velocity of Cash Circulation”, Review of Economic Statistics, May, 1941.

Keynes*, J.M.: “Alternative Theories of the Rate of Interest”, Economic Journal, June, 1937.

Keynes*, J.M.: “Relative Movements in Real Wages and Output” Economic Journal, March 1939

Kondratieff, M.D.: “The Long Waves in Economic Life”, Review of Economic Statistics, November, 1935.

Lange*, Oscar: “The Rate of Interest and the Optimum Propensity to Consume”, Economica, February 1938

Langum, J.K.: “The Statement of Supply and Use of Member Bank Reserve Funds”, Review of Economics Statistics, August, 1939.

Lehmann, Fritz: “One Hundred Per Cent Money”, Social Research, February, 1936.

Lerner*, A.P.: “Mr. Keynes’ General Theory of Employment, Interest and Money”, International Labour Review, October 1936 and November 1937.

Lerner, A.P.: “Saving Equals Investment”, Quarterly Journal of Economics, February 1938.

Lerner, A.P.: Alternative Formulations of the Theory of Interest,” Economic Journal, June, 1938.

Lerner*, Lange, Curtis, Lutz: “Saving and Investment”, Quarterly Journal of Economics, August, 1939.

Long, C.D.: “Long Cycles in the Building Industry, 1856-1935”, Quarterly Journal of Economics, May, 1939.

Lutz, F.A.: “The Outcome of the Saving-Investment Discussion”, Quarterly Journal of Economics, August, 1938.

Lutz, F.A.: “Velocity Analysis and the Theory of the Creation of Deposits”, Economica, May 1939.

Machlup*, F.: “Period Analysis and the Multiplier Theory”, Quarterly Journal of Economics, November, 1939.

Machlup, F.: “The Theory of Foreign Exchanges”, Economica, November, 1939.

Marget, A.W.: “The Monetary Aspects of the Walrasian System”, Journal of Political Economy, April 1935.

Marget, A.W.: “Leon Walras and the ‘Cash-Balance’ Approach to the Problem of the Value of Money”, Journal of Political Economy, October, 1931.

Morgenstern, O.: “Professor Hicks on Value and Capital” Journal of Political Economy, June 1941

Ohlin, Robertson, Hawtrey: “Alternative Theories of the Rate of Interest: Three Rejoinders”, Economic Journal, September, 1937.

Ohlin*, B.: Some Notes on the Stockholm Theory of Savings and Investment”, Economic Journal, March 1937, June, 1937.

Ohlin, B.: “Mechanism and Objectives of Exchange Control”, Supplement to American Economic Review, March 1937.

Pigou, A.C.: “Mr. J.M. Keynes’ ‘General Theory of Employment, Interest, and Money” Economica, May 1936

Plumptre, A. F. W.: “Interest Rates and Bank Credit in the British Dominions”, Economic Journal, June, 1939.

Poole, K.H.: “Tax Remission as a Means of Influencing Cyclical Fluctuations” Quarterly Journal of Economics, February 1939

Robinson*, Joan: The Concept of Hoarding”, Economic Journal, June, 1938.

Samuelson*, P.: “Interactions between the Multiplier Analysis and the Principle of Acceleration”, Review of Economic Statistics, May, 1939.

Samuelson, P.: “The Rate of Interest under Ideal Conditions”, Quarterly Journal of Economics, February, 1939.

Schumpeter, J. A.: “An Analysis of Economic Change”, Review of Economic Statistics, May, 1935.

Shirras, G. F.: “The Position and Prospects of Gold,” Economic Journal, June-September, 1940.

Simmons*, E. C.: “Treasury Deposits and Excess Reserves”, Journal of Political Economy, June, 1940.

Simons, H. C.: “Rules versus Authority in Monetary Policy”, Journal of Political Economy, February, 1936.

Somers, H. M.: “Monetary Policy and the Theory of Interest”, Quarterly Journal of Economics, May, 1941.

Viner, Jacob: “Mr. Keynes on the Causes of Unemployment: A Review” Quarterly Journal of Economics, November, 1936.

Watkins, L. L.: “The Expansion Power of the English Banking System,” Quarterly Journal of Economics, November, 1938.

Williams, J.H.: “The Adequacy of Existing Mechanisms under Varying Circumstances” Supplement to American Economic Review, March, 1937.

Williams*, John H.: “Fiscal Policy and Preparedness”, Proceedings, Academy of Political Science, May, 1939.

Williams, John H.: “Economic and Monetary Aspects of the Defense Program”, Federal Reserve Bulletin, February, 1941.

Source: Harvard University Archives. Syllabi, course outlines and reading lists in economics, 1895-2003, Box 3, Folder “Economics, 1941-1942”.

____________________

1941-42
HARVARD UNIVERSITY
ECONOMICS 141
Principles of Money and Banking
Mid-Year Examination

(Three hours)

  1. Choose any three from questions I-IV.
    1. Compare the formulations of (a) Robertson and (b) Keynes (Treatise and General Theory) with respect to the following:
      Equality or inequality of Saving and Investment (give equations and define terms).
      2. The role of investment as a determinant of income and employment.
    2. Develop Keynes’ theory of interest and compare with the theories (a) of the classicals and (b) of Wicksell and others belonging to his school.
      2. What is the role of the rate of interest as a determinant of income and employment?
    3. “The validity of the multiplier theory rests upon the stability of the consumption function.” Explain and evaluate this statement.
    4. Give a compact summary statement describing the most significant monetary events of the two decades 1920-1940, and indicate the lessons to be learned from each.
  1. Choose one from questions V and VI.
    1. According to Angell: (1) what are the inter-relations of (a) anticipations, (b) investment, and (c) income, and what are the determinants of each; (2) what are the determinants and the role of (a) market rates of interest, (b) the money supply, an (c) money hoards?
    2. Critically state and evaluate the central thesis in Hayek’s Prices and Production.

Source: Harvard University Archives. Harvard University Mid-term Examinations, 1852-1943, Box 15. Papers Printed for Mid-Year Examinations [in] History, History of Religions, …, Economics, …,Military Science, Naval Science. January-February, 1942.

____________________

1941-42
HARVARD UNIVERSITY
ECONOMICS 141
Principles of Money and Banking
Final Examination

(Three hours)

Discuss THREE topics.

  1. The relation of consumption to income and its significance for fiscal policy.
  2. The implications of fiscal policy for monetary policy and the banking system.
  3. The ideas of Foster and Catchings and of Hayek regarding the “paradox of savings.”
  4. Fellner’s analysis of the “technological argument of the stagnation thesis.”
  5. Milton Gilbert’s analysis of war expenditures and national production.

Source: Harvard University Archives. Harvard University Final Examinations, 1853-2001, Box 6, Papers Printed for Final Examinations [in] History, History of Religions, …, Economics, …,Military Science, Naval Science. June, 1942.

Images Source:  Hansen and Williams from Harvard Classbook 1942.

Categories
Exam Questions Harvard

Harvard. Exams for Undergraduate and Graduate Money and Banking. Williams, 1932-33.

John Henry Williams taught the money and banking/monetary policy courses at Harvard over several decades. Material for more years will be transcribed soon! This post takes us to the trough of the Great Depression. Joseph Schumpeter and Lauchlin Currie joined in teaching the undergraduate course this one time.

 

Principles of Money and Banking (graduate course, 1946-47)

Economics 141a, Reading Assignments and Exam (co-taught with Alvin Hansen) 1946-47

Economics 141b, Reading Assignments and Exam (co-taught with Richard Goodwin) 1946-47

Economics 141, thirteen pages of general course bibliography, 1946-47

________________________

Brief Undergraduate Course Description

[Economics] 3. Money, Banking, and Commercial Crises

Mon., Wed., Fri., at 2. Professor Williams.

The course will be conducted by means of lectures and discussions and (in the second half-year) a thesis based on work in the library. Certain subjects, such as the monetary and banking history of the United States, will be covered almost wholly by assigned reading.

Source: Division of History, Government, and Economics, containing an Announcement for 1932-33. Official Register of Harvard University, Vol XXVII, No. 51 (August 15, 1940), pp. 72, 81.

*  *  *  *  *  *  *  *  *  *  *  *

Enrollment

[Economics] 3. Professor Williams and Schumpeter and Dr. Currie — Money, Banking, and Commercial Crises.

Total 151: 32 Seniors, 103 Juniors, 8 Sophomores, 1 Freshman, 7 Others.

Source: Harvard University. Report of the President of Harvard College, 1932-33, p. 65.

 

*  *  *  *  *  *  *  *  *  *  *  *

1932-33
HARVARD UNIVERSITY

ECONOMICS 3

Money, Banking and Commercial Crises
Mid-year Examination, 1933

  1. Combined Statement of the Federal Reserve Banks

($000,000 omitted)

Sept. 1931

 Feb. 1933

June 1932
Total Reserves

3371

 3211

2844
Bills Discounted

328

 828

440
Bills bought

469

 109

67
U.S. Securities

742

 740

1784
Other Federal Reserve Securities

39

 31

19
Federal Reserve Notes

2098

 2651

2795
Member Bank Deposits

2364

 1849

1982
Government Deposits etc.

143

 76

34

Discuss the significance of the changes in each of the above items between September, 1931, and February, 1932, and between February, 1932, and June, 1932. How do you account for the changes in member bank deposits with the reserve banks? What conclusions do you draw regarding Federal Reserve policy in the two periods covered by the above statement?

  1. In how far do the Federal Reserve Act and Federal Reserve policy reveal an acceptance of the commercial loan theory of banking?
  2. Trace the evolution of the bank note in (a) the United States, (b) England, (c) Germany or What are the merits and defects of our present system and how could it be improved?
  3. Discuss one of the following:
    1. Burgess’ “Gold Paradox.”
    2. American Experience with bimetallism.

Source:  Harvard University Archives. Mid-year examinations, 1852-1943. Box 10. Folder “Mid-year examinations, 1932-1933.”

*  *  *  *  *  *  *  *  *  *  *  *

1932-33
HARVARD UNIVERSITY

ECONOMICS 3

Money, Banking and Commercial Crises
Final Examination, 1933

  1. Explain the equation P=\frac{E}{O}+\frac{{I}'-S}{R}. Can the course of business during the past five years be interpreted in terms of this equation?
  2. “A managed standard is incompatible with a world standard.”
    “Avoidance of monetary disturbances can be achieved only under a managed standard.”
  3. Compare the effects of
    1. Purchase of one billion dollars of securities b the Reserve Banks.
    2. Redemption of one billion dollars of government bonds by the issue of paper money.
    3. Reduction of the gold content of the dollar by one-hald.
    4. Adoption of bimetallism.
  4. Can the concepts of demand and marginal utility be applied in an explanation of the value of money?
  5. Is business stability compatible with stable prices? Compare the views of Foster and Catchings, Keynes and Hayek on this point.

Source: Harvard University Archives. Harvard Univ. Examination Papers. Finals, 1933. (HUC 7000.28) Volume 75. Papers Printed for Final Examinations. History, History of Religions,…, Economics,…, Military Science, Naval Science. January-June, 1933.

 

*  *  *  *  *  *  *  *  *  *  *  *

Brief Graduate Course Description

[Economics] 38. Principles of Money and Banking

Tu., Th., at 3, and a third hour at the pleasure of the instructor. Professor Williams.

This course is intended to afford training in analysis and research in the field of money and banking. The subject as a whole will be systematically reviewed. Selections from important writings dealing with monetary principles will be read and critically discussed. Particular attention will be given to the theory of the value of money and to the policy and operations of central banks.

Source: Division of History, Government, and Economics, containing an Announcement for 1932-33. Official Register of Harvard University, Vol XXVII, No. 51 (August 15, 1940), pp. 72, 81.

*  *  *  *  *  *  *  *  *  *  *  *

Enrollment

[Economics] 38. Professor Williams and Schumpeter. — Principles of Money and Banking.

Total 61: 36 Graduates, 16 Seniors, 1 Juniors, 5 Radcliffe, 3 Others.

Source: Harvard University. Report of the President of Harvard College, 1932-33, p. 66.

*  *  *  *  *  *  *  *  *  *  *  *

1932-33
HARVARD UNIVERSITY

ECONOMICS 38
Principles of Money and Banking
Mid-year Examination, 1933

[copy not yet recovered]

*  *  *  *  *  *  *  *  *  *  *  *

1932-33
HARVARD UNIVERSITY

ECONOMICS 38
Principles of Money and Banking
Final Examination, 1933

  1. Discuss “Hayek concludes…that the necessary condition of avoiding credit cycles is for the banking system to maintain the effective quantity of money…absolutely and forever unaltered.”
    Is this a correct interpretation of Hayek? Just what is involved, in the way of central bank action, in a “neutral” money policy? Would you favor such a policy?
  2. Discuss:
    1. The concept of international equilibrium.
    2. The mechanism of adjustment of departures from equilibrium under conditions of gold standard.
    3. The relation of gold standard to central banking.
  3. Discuss the effects of:
    1. A devaluation of the dollar relative to the pound sterling and the franc.
    2. An all-round devaluation of currencies.
    3. An all-round abandonment of the gold standard or of any other mechanism for providing stability of exchanges.
    4. The proposal to widen the zone between gold points to five per cent.

Source: Harvard University Archives. Harvard Univ. Examination Papers. Finals, 1933. (HUC 7000.28) Volume 75. Papers Printed for Final Examinations. History, History of Religions,…, Economics,…, Military Science, Naval Science. January-June, 1933.

Image Source:  John Henry Williams in the Harvard Album, 1932.