Author: Irwin Collier

Categories
Exam Questions Fields Harvard Undergraduate

Harvard. Undergraduate Departmental Examination and Essay Questions, 1942

 

 

The next post will provide transcriptions of three division special (i.e. field) examinations from 1942.

The 1939 departmental examination and  essay questions have been posted earlier.

______________________

DIVISION OF HISTORY, GOVERNMENT, AND ECONOMICS
Department of Economics
May 1, 1942

ESSAY PAPER
(One hour and a half)

Candidates for honors may write on ONE topic only. Others may, if they prefer, write on TWO topics. Please note on the front cover of the bluebook the number of each topic upon which you write.

  1. Economic imperialism.
  2. The pre-requisites of lasting peace.
  3. The economist who has most influenced your thinking.
  4. Some unsettled questions of economic science.
  5. Welfare economics.
  6. The relation of economics to sociology and political science.
  7. The distribution of wealth and income.
  8. The classical economists and their legacy.
  9. The nature and significance of general equilibrium analysis.
  10. Economic warfare.
  11. If Great Britain loses her empire.
  12. What killed laissez-faire?
  13. “The rise of political centralism is largely the product of economic centralism.”
  14. The relations and roles of the economic interests, and the social and cultural traditions, movements, and ideals, which are in conflict in the war.
  15. The American war effort and the profit system.
  16. Government controls which the American economy requires during the war, and those which it will require in the period of post-war adjustment.
  17. The applicability of traditional economic theory in explaining the course of economic life in totalitarian states.
  18. The future of capitalism.
  19. “The claim of economics to be a true science, like the modern physical sciences, must be given up as untenable.”
  20. Planned economies and human liberties.
  21. The value of training in economics, for success in business, and for good citizenship.
  22. “The physiologist’s task is not the physician’s; analysis and therapy are different; and economists, like physiologists, should confine themselves to explaining what happens, and leave the giving of advice to others.”

Source:  Duke University. David M. Rubenstein Rare Book & Manuscript Library. Economists’ Papers Archive. Papers of Randall Hinshaw. Box 1, Folder “Schoolwork, 1940s”.

___________________

DIVISION OF HISTORY, GOVERNMENT, AND ECONOMICS
Department of Economics
May 4, 1942

DEPARTMENTAL EXAMINATION
(Three hours)

Answer SIX questions; at least ONE question must be answered in each part, but not more than THREE questions may be taken in Part II. A senior may not take more than ONE question in that section of Part II which covers his special field.

PART I

  1. Define: elasticity of demand, unit elasticity, elastic demand, inelastic demand. Say weather, and explain why, you would expect the demand for each of the following commodities (in normal times) to be elastic or inelastic: automobiles, milk, tobacco, fur coats, window glass, oriental rugs, quinine, coal.
  2. Suppose that industries A, B, and C are all “purely competitive”, and that A has constant costs, B increasing costs, and C decreasing costs, for increasing outputs. If all three of these industries experience rapid, marked, and lasting increases of the public’s demands for their products, what will be (a) the immediate and (b) the ultimate effects upon the prices of the three different products? Explain your answers, and illustrate each case by the appropriate diagram. If now a cost-reducing invention (new method or machine) is generally adopted in each industry, show on your diagrams the effects of this on their cost conditions, outputs, and prices, and explain.
  3. Suppose a firm to be operating under these conditions:

Its total fixed cost is $1000 per day.
Its total operating cost for 1 unit output per day is $1000.00; for 2 units, $1800.00; for 3, $2550.00; 4, $3400.00; 5, $4500.00; 6, $6600.00. It can sell at price $1800.00, 1 unit; at $1500.00, 2 units; at $1250.00, 3 units; at $1100.00, 4 units; at $1000.00, 5 units; at $925.00, 6 units.

Infer from those figures, and draw on a diagram (as smooth curves) this firm’s average total unit cost, marginal cost, demand, and marginal revenue curves.
Now show on your diagram, and explain, the price and output required to maximize the firm’s profits.
Now assume “free entry” to the field, and that new competitors of this firm appear.
Show on your diagram, and explain, the ultimate effects of the new (increased) competition on this firm’s demand curve, output, average total unit cost, selling price, and profits.

  1. Explain as fully as you can, in terms of the relevant conditions of demand, supply, and marginal productivity, the present high wages of skilled workers in American war industries.
    To what extent, and how, do you think the efforts of trade unions make these wage-rates higher than they would be otherwise?
  2. In what principal ways do you think the war is affecting and likely to affect, while it lasts, the aggregate demand for and supply of capital and the level of interest rates within this country?
    What developments in the same respects do you think are most likely in the post—war period? Explain fully.
  3. Explain and discuss the significance of each of the following: total utility, law of diminishing utility, average and marginal utility, and consumers’ surplus.
  4. How would competition, if universally “pure”, tend to allocate resources, in a state of equilibrium of the whole economy?
    How is the equilibrium allocation altered by general prevalence of “monopolistic competition”?
    Explain concisely.
  5. Suppose that economic conditions in a country over a certain decade undergo the following changes. (1) The country’s population increases rapidly, while no additions are made to its territory or known natural resources. (2) Technological progress in all branches of production is steady and substantial; all innovations are capital-using, labor-saving inventions; physical outputs per man-hour of labor increase substantially. (3) A constant, rather high percentage of the national money income is annually saved and invested within the country. (4) Credit expansion is continually greater than the increase of total physical production, hence the price-level rises throughout the decade.
    Explain and discuss the probable, separate and joint effects of those developments on the absolute and relative shares of the national, real income respectively allotted, at the end as compared with the beginning of the decade, to (real) wages, economic rent, interest, and business profits. If you need to make assumptions more definite than those stated above, or additional assumptions, in order to reach definite conclusions, make clear the uncertainties in the problem as stated, and resolve them by explicit assumptions chosen as you please, at appropriate points in your discussion.

 

PART II
A
Statistics and Accounting

  1. Is it possible to devise an “ideal”, all-purpose, formula for price index numbers? Why or why not?
  2. What, in your judgment, are the greatest dangers that have to be guarded against in applying statistical methods to the available data of economic life?
  3. “Currently practiced accounting methods lead almost invariably to either overestimation or underestimation of true net earnings.” Explain carefully, indicating what is meant by “true net earnings” and why accepted accounting principles may lead to their misrepresentation. Do you think that in wartime, net earnings are likely to be overstated or understated?
  4. Answer concisely the following questions: (a) A corporation issues $100,000 par value stock to the promoters for nothing. In order to make the totals of the balance sheet equal, an item of “goodwill $100,000” is placed on the asset side. Assuming there is no reasonable ground for considering the “goodwill” to be actually valuable, how would you correct the balance sheet? (b) The amount of fixed assets – buildings and machinery – is less at the end of the year than at the beginning. What other changes would you expect to find on the balance sheet? Why? (c) In case a reappraisal of fixed assets shows a value in excess of value and it is desired to bring the appreciation into the books, how may this be done?

B
Modern Economic History

  1. What role would you assign to the National Banking System in the pattern of American business fluctuations from 1870 to 1914?
  2. Describe and explain the development of American tariff policy during the 19th century.
  3. Argue for or against the proposition that the Nazi economy is no more than the logical outcome of German economic policy from the time of Bismarck on.
  4. “The depression (1876-86) is, indeed, the watershed between the era of British industrial supremacy in the era of international competition.” Discuss.

 

C
Money and Finance

  1. Imagine that someone with no knowledge of economics asks you to explain to him, fully and clearly, why as an element of war finance government borrowing from the banks is peculiarly “inflationary”; and write out the explanation you would give.
  2. “Since government spending has become the main regulator of the volume and tempo of economic activity, Federal Reserve policy has become an academic subject of no real importance.”
  3. In a world at peace, with international trade proceeding normally, but with all countries on independent “paper standards” and exchanges “free” (with no fixed parities”, a position of general equilibrium and stable exchange rates has been reached. Now country A embarks, alone, on an internal monetary expansion which raises its price level.
    Trace and explain what effects, if any, this will tend to have on the balances of payments of A and other countries, foreign exchange rates, international transfers of products, factors, and “purchasing power”, and price levels in other countries. At what point, and how, will a new position of equilibrium be reached?
  4. “In the development of trade between an industrial nation, A, and an agricultural nation, B, both nations will gain by the trade, but the division of the gain will become unequal, in favor of A. The elastic demand for A’s products in B, and the inelastic demand for B’s products in A, will cause the terms of trade to shift in favor of A, as production in both countries in the trade between them expand.”
    Give a full and careful explanation of the concepts, assumptions, and reasoning suggested, and state any criticisms or qualifications that occur to you.
  5. Discuss the meaning and validity of the statement that a general sales tax is “regressive”; and the principal arguments for and against the view that this type of tax, even if undesirable in peace times, is peculiarly appropriate in wartime.
  6. “Our immense and upward-zooming federal debt is a prelude either to national bankruptcy, or else to socialism.”

 

D
Market Organization and Control

  1. Sketch the background, provisions, and chief consequences of the Sherman Anti-Trust Act.
  2. Is it possible for a Board of Directors to pursue a dividend policy which will consistently harmonize the interests of the corporation, its stockholders, and society as a whole? Explain.
  3. What are the methods which may be adopted to control war-time profits? What policy do you favor in this respect and why?
  4. “In the pricing of electrical energy no case can be made out on economic grounds for differential charges unless they are likely to lead to an improvement in the load factor, i.e., To a more uniform distribution of demand through time.” State your reasons for agreeing or disagreeing with this proposition.
  5. “Only a socialist has a right to complain about crop-restriction and price-raising in the field of agricultural production.” Discuss.
  6. “There seems to be little doubt that the complete ‘trustification’ of the economy, with the relative stability of prices which would follow therefrom, would go a long way toward eliminating business fluctuations.” Discuss.
  7. “Price stability is prima facie evidence of monopoly.” Discuss.

 

E
Labor Economics and Social Reform

  1. Outline and defend what you would advocate as the best national war-time policy in regard to wages, and whatever else you think must be controlled in order to control wages effectively.
  2. What principal, lasting effects do you think the war is likely to have on the American labor movement – union structures, strength, status, and policies? Explain your predictions and the evidence and reasoning on which you base them.
  3. “The current outcry against federal centralization of unemployment insurance, and in favor of ‘states rights’ in this field, is without merit, and a mere device of employer interests to limit the development of unemployment insurance and keep it as innocuous as possible.”
  4. “American labor unions are deluding themselves in blaming only the false propaganda put out against them by unprincipled opponents, for the better anti-union feelings of some millions of middle and lower-middle-class Americans. Real faults of union leadership and policy have done a great deal to cause and justify this public hostility, and the unions in their own interests can and must assuage it by putting their own houses in order.”
    Discuss this, as far as you can, in terms of concrete, illustrative situations and evidence of which you have some knowledge.
  5. “The Marxian theory that all property-incomes, or non-labor incomes, originate in exploitation of labor, is entirely compatible with the ‘marginal productivity’ theory of income distribution.” Explain and discuss.
  6. Outline, and discuss critically, what you regard as the logical, Marxist explanation of the origins and issues of the present war.
  7. What do you think American Labor, in supporting the war-effort, should put first among its “peace aims”, or aims in respect of the post-war settlement? Explain and defend your answer.

 

PART III

  1. “Economics can either explain the quasi-automatic operation of a true free enterprise economy, or devise a blue-print for rational planning in the socialist economy. But in a half-way house like our present society, where both private and public decisions must respond more often to political than to economic facts, economics can neither explain events nor guide public policy.”
  2. “After the last war, the reaction of business and the public against the war-time government controls gave a new lease of life to laissez-faire, with disastrous results; and there is danger that a like relapse will occur at the end of this war.”
  3. “The proper work of the economists, in helping to solve the problems of industry and society, may be said to begin where that of the engineers or technicians ends.”
  4. “If the opportunity for the employment of idle men and idle money is to be found in a free, private enterprise system then, obviously, we must find a way to stimulate new, private enterprises by encouraging the investment of private savings in them.”
  5. “The causes which bring trade barriers into existence and produce centralism in every form of economic activity must be attacked if a real system of free enterprise is to be re-established.”
  6. “To maintain and improve labor’s position economically is the traditional task of the unions. Today, not only the growth but even the existence of the unions has become in large measure a political problem.”
  7. “The last war, in its impact on the American economy, produced war-time overexpansion and post-war depression chiefly in agriculture. This time, it is the industrial sector of our economy which is threatened with that sequence, on a much more disastrous scale.”
  8. “The patriots who denounce, in war-time, all self-interested demands or actions on the part of business, labor, or farm groups, generally do not recognize the fact that rivalry of all interest-groups over distribution of war-time prosperity is inevitable under our profit-system, and cannot be eliminated unless we are willing to replace that system entirely, while the war lasts, with a governmental dictatorship of all economic life as complete is that now practiced in Germany, Japan, and Russia.”

Source:  Duke University. David M. Rubenstein Rare Book & Manuscript Library. Economists’ Papers Archive. Papers of Randall Hinshaw. Box 1, Folder “Schoolwork, 1940s”.

Image Source: John Harvard Statue from the Tichnor Brothers Collection of postcards. Boston Public Library, Print Department.

Categories
Columbia Socialism

Columbia. Seligman and Hillquit debate “Desirability of Socialism”. February, 1915

 

Economists have been debating the whats and hows of socialism from the earliest days of the socialist movement. As the term has taken on a renewed life in current political debate, from time to time Economics in the Rear-View Mirror will listen in to earlier debates in historical time. One sees that Seligman attempted to frame the debate for progress as striking the correct balance between individualism and socialism whereas Hillquit argued for the wholesale replacement of capitalism and its evils with socialism and its virtues.

________________________

“SOCIALISM A MERE VISION”—SELIGMAN
Charges Morris Hillquit With Failure to Produce Proofs of Its Practicability
LARGE CROWD HEARS DEBATE
[February 16, 1915 report]

            Before an audience that crowded the Horace Mann Auditorium to the doors, in spite of the bad weather, Prof. E. R. A. Seligman and Morris Hillquit debated the “Desirability of Socialism.” George Gordon Battle, the well-known lawyer, presided. While no decision was given, the sympathy of the audience seemed to go to Professor Seligman, who rested his argument, not on the perfection of the capitalist system, but on the failure of his opponent to show how Socialism would remedy the existing evils.

Mr. Hillquit opened the debate with an exposition of the principles of Socialism in which he defined the doctrine and showed its applicability to present-day civilization. The rest of his twenty-five minutes he spent in assailing the capitalistic system, which he asserted was responsible for every social evil now existing.

He outlined the development of the factory system which, according to his statement, took the tools from the workman and left him nothing. One hundred years ago the workman was independent, and he owed that independence not to the possession of capital but to his skill with his tools. The factory system substituted ten machines for the tools of a thousand workmen, but the workmen did not own the machines which took the place of their tools. The machines were owned and the workers were dependent upon the employer for their livelihood. Their employment was dependent solely upon the amount of profit resulting for the employer. This brought about the present conditions of widely prevalent unemployment, which was responsible for all the poverty, crime and vice now found in society.

Professor Seligman, in opening his speech, told his audience that far from being scientific, Socialism is an ideal. As an ideal, or religion, it deserves our gratitude, for it has been a spur to thought at all times.

He went on to say, in part: “The real point in the whole argument is this: We are told that conditions are bad. I grant you this, but the point is, is Socialism adequate to bring about better conditions?

“Let us come to this idea of Socialism being a ‘scientific and planful’ scheme, as Mr. Hillquit terms it. I think that Mr. Hillquit will agree that the ‘scientific’ Socialism is founded upon these bases: The labor theory of value, as advanced first by Carl Marx; the surplus labor theory of profits which was also also advanced by Carl Marx; and the generally accepted economic interpretation of history. It is upon these bases that ‘scientific’ Socialism stands—and yet not only has Marx been proven wrong in all these theories, but the foremost Socialists of today have refuted them.

“Here’s the way Carl Marx argued: He studied conditions about him, and he said, first, things are getting worse and worse; second, prices are getting worse and worse; third, therefore, things will get so bad that we will get to a cataclism of society, and all society will break up. And he said that this stage would be reached in five years at the most. But has it been reached, even though that was a century ago? I respect Carl Marx possibly more than any other economist, except Ricardo. Nevertheless, I think we can leave this ‘scientific’ Socialism there, flat on its back.”

In his rebuttal, Professor Seligman said, in part: “Capitalism, says Mr. Hillquit, is responsible for the present social evils; and he maintains that Socialism will do away with them. We have always had social evils, no matter what our state of society; and what reason is there for believing, beyond mere assertion and declaration, that Socialism will remove the social evils. We will all admit that civilization has progressed, and that we have from time to time remedied the evils of society; and I maintain that these social evils will be done away with in the course of progress, whether we have Socialism or no!

“I have shown you that competition and regulation, individualism and Socialism, have always been necessary to our progress; and I maintain that we shall need them for our progress, until the end of time. The Socialists say, individualism has certain evils, let us do away with individualism. No! for Socialism has even greater evils. What I want is socialized individualism, and that is what we are going to get. What we want is to preserve the good things of our society, and get rid of the bad things.”

Professor Seligman went on to say that it was absurd to condemn capitalism, before capitalism had fairly taken a start. He pointed out in elaborating this point, that it takes centuries to change systems. He said in conclusion: “Everyone is conscious of the mal-adjustment of society. We need light and guidement. We must not be blinded by the blatant light of capitalism, the press. And, on the other hand, we must not be misguided by the unreal vision that we can follow one principle to the exclusion of the other. Be sure that the foundation is solid, before you build upon it. In that way only can we hope to erect the lasting structure of social progress and social peace.”

Mr. Hillquit made his greatest stand in his rebuttal. He declared that his opponent had not controverted either of his main points that private or corporate capitalistic ownership was at the bottom of prevalent social ills and that social ownership would ameliorate these conditions. In reply to Professor Seligman’s assertion that the public schools and the Post Office were Socialism, Mr. Hillquit declared that they were only the forerunners of Socialism. He traced the growth of the early capitalism and its fight against feudalism and drew parallels between that and the conflict between capitalism and Socialism, incidentally stating that capitalism was beginning to show unpleasant and unmistakable signs of old age.

Taking up Professor Seligman’s main points, Mr. Hillquit waxed eloquent. Bringing his refutation to a conclusion, he said:

“My opponent states that production under Socialism will be less than at present, predicting his statement on the assertion that human beings are as lazy as they dare to be. Under the capitalistic system they are. Their work is not congenial or attractive. No man ever shirked work that he liked.

“In regard to distribution, let me say that we have no competition in distribution of wealth under the present system, and we will have under Socialism. Take the case of Mr. Harry K. Thaw. From what we know of the gentleman, we can hardly say that he is intellectual. But he has wealth because some ancestor bought stocks and bonds and passed them on to him. Under Socialism there will be no drain on productivity such as is furnished by the present abuses of capitalism. If we were to throw the wealth into the air and let the people race after it, we should have better distribution than at present.”

Source:  Columbia Daily Spectator, Volume LVIII, Number 105, 16 February 1915, pp. 1, 6.

Image Source: Morris Hillquit from Bain News Service (July 25, 1924) original glass negative, digitized by the Library of Congress.

 

 

 

Categories
Exam Questions Harvard History of Economics Suggested Reading Syllabus

Harvard. Graduate history of political economy course. Taylor, 1948-49

 

 

Overton Hume Taylor served as the Harvard economics department’s one-man show of PPE interdisciplinarity at both the undergraduate and graduate level for about two decades covering the middle of the 20th century. Materials from six of his courses have already been posted.

Econ 1. (with Leontief and Chamberlin) Honors Economic Theory, 1939-40
Econ 1b. Intellectual Background of Economic Thought, 1941, [Final Exam for the Course]
Econ 115. (with Leontief) Programs of Social and Economic Reconstruction, 1942-43
Econ 115. Economic and Political Ideas, 1948 , [Mid-year Exam for Economic and Political Ideas]
Econ 111. (with others) Economics of Socialism, 1950
Econ 111. Socialism, 1955

Here is a link to Taylor’s A History of Economic Thought (1960) that puts between two covers much, if not all, of what he had to say about the history of economics, politics and philosophy. 

Kindred spirits are to be found behind the course syllabi by Louis Putterman at Brown (1995) and Michael Piore at M.I.T (1977) posted earlier.

_____________________

Course Enrollment

[Economics] 205a (formerly Economics 105a). Main Currents of Thought in Economics and Related Studies over Recent Centuries (F). Dr. O. H. Taylor.

Total 15: 4 Graduates, 3 Seniors, 6 Public Administration, 2 Radcliffe.

Source: Harvard University. Report of the President of Harvard College, 1948-49, p. 77.

_____________________

Course Syllabus

Main Currents of Thought in Economics and Related Studies over Recent Centuries
Economics 205a
1948-49

  1. September 30—October 7. Introduction: Plato and the Middle Ages; Hobbes and the Mercantilists

Reading: (1) Plato Republic, Book II; (2) Hobbes, Leviathan, Chs. 1, 6, 13, 14, 17, 18, 21, 24; (3) One of the following: Sir T. Mun, England’s Treasure; Sir J. Child, Discourses in Trade; Sir D. North, Discourse on Trade; or Locke, Interest and Money

Thursday, September 30, Introductory lecture.

Tuesday, October 5. Plato and the ancient-medieval antecedents of modern-western culture and economic thought. Modernity vs. medievalism; 17th century England; and Hobbes vs. Plato

Thursday, October 7. 17th century English mercantilism and economic theory

  1. October 14—21. Liberalism; Locke, the Physiocrats, and Adam Smith; and Benthamism

Reading: (1) O. H. Taylor, 2 articles on natural law ideas and economics, Quarterly Journal of Economics, Vol. 44; (2) Locke, Civil Government, II, Chs. 2, 5, 7-12, inclusive; and (3) Adam Smith, Wealth of Nations, Chs. 1-7.

[Tuesday, October 12, Holiday]

Thursday, October 14. Liberalism and economic thought-varieties of former and their effects on latter—from early-modern times to the present

Tuesday, October 19. Ethical natural law and early-modern liberalism. Locke vs. Hobbes. Locke, Newton, and 18th century ideas of the natural order. Philosophies and economic theories of the Physiocrats and Adam Smith

Thursday, October 21. Benthamism. Utility and natural law. Utilitarian liberalism and classical economics

  1. October 26—November 4. Malthus and Ricardo; the Romantic Reaction: Comte; Early Socialism and J. S. Mill

Reading: (1) Ricardo, Principles of Political Economy, Chs. 11-6; (2) Sabine, History of Political Theory, Chs. 28, 29, 30, 34; (3) A. Comte, Positive Philosophy (translation, Martineau), Introd. Ch. 1; Book VI, 1, 2; and (4) J. S. Mill, Logic, Book VI.

Tuesday, October 26. (1) Malthus vs. the anarchist-socialists; (2) Ricardo’s Economic theory

Thursday, October 28. The romantic reaction against rationalism, science and liberalism. Political and economic ideas of the English romanticists. Special development of this outlook in Germany

Tuesday, November 2. Romanticism, positivism, and the main 18th century outlook-interrelations. The positivism of August Comte vs. liberalism and economic science

Thursday, November 4. (1) Pre-Marxian socialism; (2) J. S. Mill’s attempted synthesis

  1. November 9—18. Marxism

Reading: (1) Burns, Handbook of Marxism, Chs. 1, 13, 14, 22, 26, 29, 30; (2) Schumpeter, Capitalism, Socialism, and Democracy, Part I.

Tuesday, November 9. “Utopian” socialism, Hegel, Ricardo, and Marx; and the Marxian theory of history

[Thursday, November 11, Holiday]

Tuesday, November 16. The Marxian economics—theory of capitalism

Thursday, November 18. The Marxian vision of the future beyond capitalism; and concluding remarks on Marxism

  1. November 23—December 7. Victorian Conservative Liberalism and Neo-Classical Economics

Reading: A. Marshall, Principles of Economics, Book I, Chs. 1 and 2; Appendices A, B; Book III; Book IV, Chs. 1-3 inclusive and 8-13 inclusive; Book V, Chs. 1-5 inclusive

Tuesday, November 23. How in late 19th century the classical liberalism, originally a radical, became a conservative ideology. Social Philosophy of conservative liberalism, and new developments of economic theory in this context after 1870

[Thursday, November 25, Holiday]

Tuesday, November 30. Utility economics and utilitarianism—the free price system and economic welfare. Marginal productivity and distributive justice—Clark and Carver. And neo-classical theories about capital, money, business cycles, monopoly, and economic progress.

Thursday, December 2. The development, value, and limitations of mathematical economics

Tuesday, December 7. The special views and system of Alfred Marshall

  1. December 9—16. Veblen; Chamberlin; and Keynes

Reading: Max Lerner; The Portable Veblen (Viking Library), pp. 215-297; 306-349; 377-395; 431-467

Thursday, December 9. Thorstein Veblen’s philosophy and sociology (called economics) vs. the main-tradition economics. His contributions to “institutional economics,” and to the “New Deal” and latter-day American  liberalism.”

Tuesday, December 14. Veblen vs. neo-classical theory of competition, and Chamberlin’s theory of monopolistic competition. Critique of latter as analysis, and in its bearings and problems of public policy.

Thursday, December 16. “Keynesianism” the decisive break with neo-classicism and the old economic-liberal orthodoxy. Its antecedents in the main tradition of economic theory, and relations to mercantilism, liberalism, and socialism. Its contribution to analysis and policy, and its limitations.

[Reading Period]

“Dr. Taylor will announce assignment in class.”

[Based on last examination question below, the reading period assignment would probably have been: David Wright, Democracy and Progress]

 

Source: Harvard University Archives. Syllabi, course outlines and reading lists in Economics, 1895-2003. Box 4, Folder “Economics, 1948-1949 (2 of 2)”.

_____________________

Final Examination

ECONOMICS 205a
HARVARD UNIVERSITY
1948-49

Write on four questions, including the first and last in the following list. Devote one hour to the first question, and one hour to one of the others, marking as such your two one-hour essays.

  1. Discuss the statements (a), (b), and (c) below—each in turn, briefly, indicating with reasons your agreement or disagreement. Then either select the one (if any) which you agree with, or otherwise state your own position on the problem; and apply (illustrate) that position through relevant comments on any two of the general patterns of political-and-economic thought considered in the course.
    1. “Historical study of the co-variation of economic with political thought refutes the scientific claims of economics. Economists have always divided into ‘schools,’ on political lines; and each ‘school’ has developed its own system of economic theory, in conflict with all others, and in a close tie-up with its own partisan, political philosophy.”
    2. “Economists have too often mingled and confused suggestions of their personal, philosophical and political opinions with their contributions to scientific, economic theory or analysis. But in reality the former have been irrelevant, the latter independent of them; and the competent economists of all political persuasions have converged to agreement in the field of the science itself.”
    3. “The political philosophies of economists have not as a rule made their economic theories by any means wholly unscientific or non-scientific, nor—however sharp the oppositions between the former—irreconcilable. But they have produced biased concentrations on the special groups of economic-scientific problems seen as important from the standpoints of the political philosophies; and made all economic theories partial analyses, disclosing means to desired ends.”
  2. “Unqualified adherence to the premise that ‘natural’ human behavior is simply rational pursuit of individual self-interest, would have logically obliged Adam Smith and the classical economists after him to follow Hobbes in supporting a ‘Totalitarian,’ despotic government as indispensable for civil peace and order; and to follow the ‘mercantilist’ writers in supporting economic controls by such a government, as indispensable for national prosperity and an orderly working of the national economy. The ‘liberal,’ political and policy views of Adam Smith and his followers required and had as their ultimate foundation, a belief—shared with Locke but not with Hobbes—that moral self-restraint in deference to the rights of others is a ‘natural,’ human disposition, capable of limiting self-interested action to what is consistent with it.” Discuss.
  3. “The entire main tradition of economic theory, in its development from the eighteenth through the nineteenth into the twentieth century, retained, in defiance of growing factual evidence, a strong optimistic bias about the free-competition market economy—identification of its equilibrium with a social-economic optimum—which had its sole origin in the eighteenth century’s optimistic, metaphysical belief in an harmonious, natural order.” Discuss.
  4. Discuss the apparent and often alleged intellectual debts or similarities of basic elements of (a) Ricardian classical economic theory, (b) the later body of ‘neo-classical’ theory emphasizing ‘marginal utility’ etc., and (c) Pigou’s and more recent theories of ‘welfare economics,’ to Bentham’s psychological, ethical, and social theories. What elements of each (a, b, and c) might appear to derive from ‘Benthamism,’ and what real similarities and significant differences do you see between them and the corresponding elements of the latter?
  5. Describe and discuss either (a) the English and German ‘romantic’ or (b) August Comte’s ‘positivistic’ line of attack upon the classical-liberal pattern of political-and-economic thought and its ‘eighteenth century philosophical foundation.’
  6. Compare and discuss Ricardo’s and Marx’s “labor theory of value”—explaining how each author developed, supported, construed, and used the theory; the points wherein you think they agreed or differed; and the points you would make in defense and/or criticism of each author’s theory.
  7. Outline, explain briefly, and discuss critically the main philosophical and economic-theoretical ingredients of the Marxian “dynamic” theory of evolving capitalism.
  8. “In the development of economic theory since its early classical period, the prevalence of a too single-minded pursuit of increasing logical precision and rigor, mistakenly conceived as the whole of scientific progress, has made theory increasingly abstract and decreasingly useful in the study of concrete, real problems.”
  9. Compare and contrast the Veblenian with the Marxian theory of the modern ‘capitalist’ culture, the ‘class’ conflict within it, why and how ‘business’ injures the economic welfare of society, and the kind of régime which should (and will or may) replace ‘capitalism’ in the future; and develop your own appraisal or critique of Veblen’s views on these matters.
  10. Write your own summary of and commentary on the central thesis of David Wright’s “Democracy and Progress,” concerning the historic method or secret of modern economic progress, and the cultural and political trends now menacing its continuance.

 

Source:  Harvard University Archives. Final Examinations, 1853-2001. Box 16, Papers Printed for Final Examinations: History, History of Religions, Government, Economics,…Military Science, Naval Science, Feb. 1949.

Image Source:  Overton Hume Taylor, Lecturer on Economics and Tutor. Harvard Class Album, 1939.

Categories
Economists Methodology New School

New School for Social Research. Conference on Mathematics and Social Science, 1958

 

While searching for traces of Jacob Marschak in the digitized archives on-line for the New School for Social Research, I came across the following press release about a one-day conference on mathematization of the social sciences that featured R. Duncan Luce, William S. Vickrey, Tjalling C. Koopmans and Jacob Marschak among others. Perhaps papers or notes from the conference can be located by a fellow historian of social sciences?

_______________________

Conference on “The State of Mathematization of the Social Sciences”
Press release from The New School for Social Research

THE NEW SCHOOL FOR SOCIAL RESEARCH.
66 West Twelfth Street, New York 11, New York

From: Agnes de Lima
Director of Information
Regon 5-2700

FOR RELEASE

May 21, 1958
MAILED May 21 to city editors of dailies

 

Mathematical methods in the social sciences—in psychology, sociology and economics—will be discussed by nine leading scholars at an all-day conference to be held at the New School for Social Research, Sunday, May 25. Scholars drawn from Columbia, Harvard, Princeton and Yale will address the conference which meets at 10:30 A.M. and again at 2:30 P.M. Dr. Henry Margenau, Eugene Higgins Professor of Natural History and Physics at Yale, will preside.

Dr. William Gruen, associate professor of philosophy at New York University, will introduce the speakers. He described the conference, which bears the rather formidable title, “The State of Mathematization of the Social Sciences,” as in the nature of a progress report on the application of the game theory, and related theoretical techniques developed by the late distinguished mathematical physicist John von Neumann of Princeton University. Much of the conference, he said, will deal with the extension of the line of research begun by the epoch-making work of Drs. Von Neumann and Oscar Morgenstern, also of Princeton, on “The Theory of Games and Economic Behavior.”

Speakers at the morning session include Robert R. Bush, associate professor of applied mathematics, New York School for Social Work, Columbia; R. Duncan Luce, lecturer, Department of Social Relations, Harvard; and William S. Vickrey, associate professor of economics, Columbia. Carl G. Hempel, professor of philosophy, Princeton, will comment.

In the afternoon session addresses will be made by Tjalling C. Koopmans, professor of economics, Yale; Jacob Marschak, professor of economics, Yale; Paul F. Lazarsfeld, professor of sociology and chairman of the Department of Sociology, Columbia. Ernest Nagel, John Dewey Professor of Philosophy, Columbia, and Orville G. Brim, Russell Sage Foundation, will comment.

The meeting is sponsored by the Conference on Methods in Philosophy and the Sciences organized in 1957 by a group of top-ranking scholars from leading universities. This is the 43rd [sic, probably “3rd”] semi-annual gathering at the New School.

Dr. Margenau is chairman of the conference and Dr. Gruen is secretary-treasurer. Dr. Horace M. Kallen, research professor in social philosophy and professor emeritus of the Graduate Faculty of Political and Social Science of the New School, is honorary president.

 

Note to Editor: While next Sunday’s Conference on Methods in Philosophy and the Sciences is a scholar’s conference and some of the papers will be technical in nature your reporter can we believe gain some highly interesting material on the light thrown on human motivation and behavior by the application of mathematical methods in the fields of psychology, sociology and economics. Leading corporations in the country in recognition of this fact are increasingly employing mathematicians on their staffs. We suggest that your reporter get in touch with Dr. William Gruen at the conference.

Above “Note to Ed” added to copies of release for NY Times and Herald Trib.

 

Source: New School for Social Research (New York, N.Y.: 1919-1997). Announcement of a conference “The State of Mathematization of the Social Sciences“. May 21 1958. New School press release collection. New School Archives and Special Collections Digital Archive. Web. 07 Mar 2019.

Image Source: Exterior of 66 West 12th Street Building of The New School. 1930 – 1960. New School photograph collection; Buildings and campus (NS040101.SII). New School Archives and Special Collections Digital Archive. Web. 07 Mar 2019.

 

Categories
Columbia Economists Gender New School Texas

Columbia. Economics Ph.D. alumna. Dorothy Elizabeth Gregg, 1951

 

 

The previous post consisted of the syllabus, reading assignments and study questions for an undergraduate course taught at Columbia on the history of economics, ca. 1951. Curatorial pride led me to hunt for the “D. Gregg” who taught that course. I was able to track down Dorothy Elizabeth Gregg (1919-1997) and can add her now to the runnning series of Get-to-know-a-PhD-economist.

Gregg left academics for a highly successful career in corporate public relations in her mid-thirties. She was also very active in professional women’s issues and organizations (see the advertisement for a speech she gave at Columbia in December 1982 below).

______________________

U.S. Social Security Applications and Claims Index

Birth: December 4, 1919 Tempe, Arizona
Death: May 18 1997
Father: Alfred T. Gregg
Mother: Mamie E. Walker

______________________

U.S. Census and Draft Records

1920 U.S. Census. (23 January 1920)
Gilbert, Maricopa, Arizona

Husband: Alfred T. Gregg (b. ca 1889 in Mississippi), occupation: farmer.
Wife: Mamie Gregg (b. ca. 1894 in Mississippi)
Daughters: Louise (ca 1911, b. in Texas), Juanita (ca. 1917 b. in Arizona), Dorothy (ca Dec 1919, b. in Arizona) Gregg

1930 U.S. Census.
Chandler, Maricopa, Arizona.

Husband: Alfred T. Gregg (b. ca 1891 in Mississippi), occupation: farmer.
Wife: Mamie Gregg (b. ca. 1892 in Mississippi)
Daughters: Louise (ca 1911, b. in Texas), Juanita (ca. 1918 b. in Arizona), Dorothy (ca. 1920, b. in Arizona), Betty R. (ca. 1923 b. in Arizona) Gregg

1935-36 Notes

Dorothy’s 1935 Residence: Holtville, Imperial County California (according to 1940 U.S. Census). Her mother Mamie was living in Holtville, Imperial California in 1940.
Her father died 29 July 1936 in Imperial, California.

1940 Census (April 5, 1940)
Los Angeles County.

Married to Robert B Fox (21 years old). With 0/12 year old daughter Shaaron Lee (born March 10, 1940).
Husband worked as a clerk in household wares. Dorothy (born in Arizona) worked as a stenographer in a Glass Manufacturing Company. Both coded as having three years of college education.

Oct. 16 1940, Robert Bradford Fox draft card.

Born: May 11, 1918 in Galveston, Texas. Next of kin:  Dorothy Elizabeth Fox. Residence in El Centro (Imperial County), California, his occupation listed as student.

______________________

Miscellaneous University Records/Service

University of Texas

University Texas Yearbook, Cactus 1944, p. 290. Dorothy Gregg Fox listed as a member of the honorary government organization Pi Sigma Alpha.

University of Texas, Austin. B.A. in economics with a minor in government (1945), M.A. in economics (1948).

*  *  *  *  *  *  *  *  *

Columbia University

Doctoral dissertation of Dorothy Gregg:  The exploitation of the steamboat; the case of Colonel John Stevens.
Ph.D. conferred in 1951.

 Assistant professor in the School of General Studies. (according to biographical note in the New School Bulletin Vol. XII, No. 3 (Sept 20, 1954).

*  *  *  *  *  *  *  *  *

Courses offered at the New School for Social Research 1954-55

213 THE MANAGERIAL CONTROL OF BUSINESS
Fall. Mondays, 8:30-10:10 P.M. $21. (Reg. fee: p. 6) DOROTHY GREGG

Beginning October 4.This course analyzes the structure and dynamics of an important phenomenon in Western civilization—the big business corporation. Topics are discussed from a functional viewpoint, with emphasis upon current problems. The course is designed both for those interested in public affairs and for students of economics.

The general tendency in modern society towards big bureaucratic organizations, both in business and in government. An analysis of the various theories of bureaucracy—Weber, Mannheim, von Mises, Parsons, Merton. The American business corporation—its structure, impersonality, over-centralization. Problems of status and prestige, communication channels, recruiting and training of executives. Possible solutions: decentralization, rationalization, social engineering techniques. The economic, political and social implications of the growth of bureaucracy.

Source:   New School for Social Research. New School Bulletin 1954-55, Vol. 12, No. 1 (September 6, 1954), p. 45.

218 THE BUSINESS WORLD AND MASS COMMUNICATIONS
Thursdays, 6:20-8:00 P.M. $21. (Reg. fee: p. 6) DOROTHY GREGG

Beginning February 10.This course discusses one of the basic developments in western civilization—the mass media of communications and their impact on society. The growth of the mass media constitutes perhaps one of the most significant revolutions of our times. The technological factors of the mass media, the business organization they involve, and their influence on changing business structures will be examined. An analysis is also made of the social consequences of the mass media and their interaction with the social structure.

Source:   New School for Social Research. New School Bulletin Spring 1955, Vol. 12, No. 18 (January 3, 1955), p. 41.

*  *  *  *  *  *  *  *  *

According to Robert L. Heath (ed.) Encyclopedia of Public Relations (2ndEdition), Vol. 1 (SAGE Publications, 2013) p. 992, Dorothy Gregg also taught at Pace College and the University of Texas.

______________________

Featured Speaker on Professional Women’s Forum
at Columbia University in 1982

Source:  The Columbia Spectator, December 6, 1982.

______________________

Non-academic career

1954. Began career as a public relations consultant.
Ca. 1963-1975. Assistant to the director of public relations at U.S. Steel Corporation (16 years)
1975-1983. Vice president of communication Celanese Corporation
1983-1987. Senior consultant to Ruder, Finn & Rotman
1987. Established her own company.

Professional Women’s Organizations

First vice president of the National Council of Women in the United States
Committee on Women in Public Relations (chairperson)
Association for Women in Communication (President-elect 1981)
American Woman’s Association and the Advertising Women of New York (director)
International Women’s Forum (member of board of governors)
New York Women’s Forum (member of board of governors)

Sources:  Robert L. Heath (ed.) Encyclopedia of Public Relations (2ndEdition), Vol. 1 (SAGE Publications, 2013) p. 992. Also University of Texas alumni magazine. The Alcade, March-April, 1981.

Image Source: Dr. Dorothy Gregg for the Vernon C. Schranz Distinguished Lectureship in Public Relations of 1981.

Categories
Columbia History of Economics Undergraduate

Columbia. Undergraduate History of Economics Syllabus, Assignments. Gregg, ca. 1951

 

 

In the Joseph Dorfman Papers Collection at Columbia University, the following materials for a General Studies economics course on the history of economics taught by Dorothy E. Gregg were found. Gregg was awarded an economics Ph.D. in 1951. Dissertation title: The exploitation of the steamboat–the case of Colonel John Stevens.

For the next post I have saved biographical and career information that I found in the process of my sleuthing to identify the mysterious “Dr. D. Gregg”. While she quite apparently never went farther in research concerning the history of economics, her course materials would indicate a fairly serious academic interest in the history of economics. Joseph Dorfman, who taught the graduate history of economics courses at Columbia, added her materials to his own teaching files.

 

_______________________________

G.S. ECONOMICS 11
HISTORY OF ECONOMIC THOUGHT
Fall Semester
GENERAL OUTLINE OF COURSE
(Dr. Gregg)

The chief object of this course “…is primarily to acquaint you with the way in which economics has developed as part of humanity’s struggle to deal with the problems that evolving social life has brought upon us, to deal with those problems by trying to think them out, by seeing how successive generations have faced their problems, what they thought to be the central points of difficulty, the matters of grave social concern, and how they have dealt with those problems to which they have attached such importance…One of the results of any survey of the development of economic doctrine is to show that in very large measure the important departures in economic theory have been intellectual responses to changing current problems. That is, the economic theorists who have counted most in the development of thought have been men who have been very deeply concerned with problems that troubled their generations. Their theories have…dealt definitely with what ought to be done…We have good ground for supposing that the further growth of our science will be shaped in very large measure by the appearance of how social problems and the reaction of trained minds toward those problems…The times in which we live are likely to produce a very considerable stimulus to the growth of economics…And those of you who are now young and looking forward to the future have…a peculiarly heavy responsibility to face, a responsibility of endeavoring to equip yourselves thoroughly for constructive work in a task which the world need to have solved fare more desperately than it needed such aid or was conscious of needing such aid in recent generations.”
(from class lecture by Professor Wesley Mitchell, Columbia University, 1934-35.)

Books and Materials

The required texts for the course are: (1) Eric Roll, A History of Economic Thought, 1947 ed., (Prentice-Hall), (2) Masterworks of Economics, edited by Leonard Dalton Abbott (Doubleday & Co.), (3) Selections from The Encyclopedia of the Social Sciences (Macmillan, 1 vol. edition).

Unless otherwise noted, the greater part of the reading in the course will be in reference books to be found either in Burgess Library on the fourth floor, southwest wing, of the Nicholas Murray Butler Library or in Business Library, second floor of Butler Library. The running outline of the course is supplied in a mimeographed syllabus.

Reading Assignments

(An asterisk (*) indicates the required readings; the other readings are recommended)

SECTION I – MEDIEVAL ECONOMICS

*Roll, Eric, pp. 33-57
Bloch, M. “Feudalism—European,” in E.S.S., vol. VI, pp. 203-210.
Pirenne, H., Economic and Social History of Medieval Europe, pp. 45-57, 58-67, ch. IV, chs. VI-VII; Medieval Cities (1939 ed.), chs. 7-8
*Tawney, R.H., Religion and the Rise of Capitalism, (35¢ Pelican ed.), ch. I, “The Medieval Background,” pp. 11-60

SECTION II—MERCANTILISM

*Roll, pp. 57-132
*Thomas Mun, “England’s Treasure by Foreign Trade,” in Masterworks in Economics, pp. 11-37
Hayes, C., “Nationalism,” E.S:S:, v. XI, pp. 241-8
Malynes, Gerald, Consuetudo, ch. 9
Cunningham, Growth of English Industry and Commerce, vol. 2, pp. 1-20, 25-52, 214-223

SECTION III—THE PHYSIOCRATS

*Roll, pp. 132-142
*Turgot, “Reflections on the Formation and Distribution of Wealth,” in Masterworks, pp. 39-61
Quesnay, F., Economic Works (ed, A. Oncken, 1888), pp. 305-378, 538

SECTION IV—THE PRECONCEPTIONS OF ECONOMICS

  1. The Basic Preconceptions of Economics
    1. The various strains

*Veblen, Thorstein, “The Preconceptions of Economic Science, I, II, and III,” in The Place of Science in Modern Civilization, pp. 82-179
Ayres, C.E., The Theory of Economic Progress, chs. 1-4
Polanyi, Karl, The Great Transformation, chs. 5-6
*Hamilton, Walton, “Competition,” E.S.S., v. 4, pp. 141-47
*Laski, H.J., “The Rise of Liberalism,” E.S.S., v. 1, pp. 103-124
Brinton, Crane, “The Revolutions,” E.S.S., v. 1, pp. 124-144
*Beard, C.A., “Individualism and Capitalism,” E.S.S., v. 1, pp. 145-63
Mannheim, Karl, Ideology and Utopia, ch. 4
*Cole, G.D.H., “Laissez-faire,” E.S.S., v. 9, pp. 15-20
*Sombart, Werner, “Capitalism,” E.S.S., v. 3, pp. 195-202
“Economics”, “Liberalism”, “Natural Law”, “Natural Harmony”, “Natural Order”, “Utilitarianism”, “Hedonism”, “Social Darwinism”, “Freedom of Contract”, “Liberty”, “Rationalism”, “Nationalism”, “Social Contract”, “Natural Rights”, “Property”, “Vested Interests”, in the Encyclopedia of the Social Sciences
*Becker, Carl, The Heavenly City of the Eighteenth Century Philosophers, ch. 2
*Hofstadter, Richard, Social Darwinism in American Thought, chs. 2-3, 10
Spencer, Herbert, “Poor Laws,” in Man Versus the State(1892 ed.), pp. 144-55
*Commons, J.R., Legal Foundations of Capitalism, chs. 7-9
Tawney, R.H., Religion and the Rise of Capitalism, ch. 4, pp. 164-226
Weber, Max, The Protestant Ethic and the Spirit of Capitalism, chs. 2, 4-5
Robertson, H.M., Aspects of the Rise of Individualism, ch. 7
Parsons, Talcott, “Capitalism” in Recent German Literature: Sombart and Weber(an essay)
Sombart, Werner, The Quintessence of Capitalism, chs. 1-6
*Arnold, Thurman, The Folklore of Capitalism, chs. 1-5, 8-12
*Hogben, Lancelot, Retreat from Reason, chs. 2-3
Hawkins, Willard E., Castaways of Plenty: A Parable of Our Times(Basic Books)
Sumner, W.G., Folkways, ch. 15

    1. Utilitarianism, or the “felicific calculus”

“For political economy, ever since Adam Smith, has rested entirely on the thesis of the natural identity of interests. By the mechanism of exchange and the division of labour individuals, without desiring or knowing it, and while pursuing each his own interest, are working for the direct realization of the general interest.” (Eli Halévy, The Growth of Philosophic Radicalism,p. 16)

      1. Jeremy Bentham (1748-1832)
        *(1) Leslie Stephen, The English Utilitarians, [remaining half line smudged, illegible]
        (2) Eli Halévy, The Growth of Philosophic Radicalism, [remaining half line smudged, illegible]; Pt. II, ch. 3; Pt. III, ch. 1,4
        (3) Edwin A. Burtt, ed., The English Philosophers [remaining half line smudged, illegible]

(a) Bentham, “An Introduction to the Principles [remaining half line smudged, illegible] Legislation,” pp. 791-852

SECTION V—THE CLASSICAL SYSTEM

  1. Adam Smith (1725-1790)
    1. General

*Roll, pp. 143-183
*Smith, Adam, “The Wealth of Nations,” in Masterworks, pp. 63-189

    1. Value

Smith, Adam, The Wealth of Nations, Introduction and Plan of Work, and Bk. I, ch. 4 (last two pages), chs. 5-7 (Cannan’s ed., v. 1, pp. 30-40, 49-65)
Whittaker, Edmund, A History of Economic Ideas, pp. 95-108

    1. Wages

Smith, Adam, the Wealth of Nations, Bk. 1, chs. 8, 10, Pt. I (Cannan’s ed., v. 1, pp. 66-88, 101-120)
Cannan, Theories of Production and Distribution, pp. 199-200, 229-238, 359-362

    1. Profits

Smith, Adam, The Wealth of Nations, Bk. 1, ch. 9; Bk. 2, ch. 4 (Cannan’s ed., v. 1, pp. 89-100, 332-339)
Cannan, Theories of Production and Distribution, pp. 200-203, 276-279, 366-369

    1. Rent

Smith, Adam, The Wealth of Nations, Bk. 1, ch. 11, secs. 1 and 2, and “Conclusion of the Chapter” (Cannan’s ed., v. 1, pp. 45-175, 247-257)
Cannan, Theories of Production and Distribution, pp. 216-221, 310-312

    1. Capital

Smith, Adam, The Wealth of Nations, Bk. 2, “Introduction,” and chs. 1, 3, 5 (Cannan’s ed., v. I, pp. 259-269, 313-331, 340-354)
Cannan, Theories of Production and Distribution, pp. 53-89

MID-TERM EXAMINATION OF NOVEMBER 8. The questions on the exam will be drawn from the “Study Questions” at the end of the syllabus.

  1. The Period 1776-1817
    1. The Doctrine of Population

*Roll, pp. 207-211
*Malthus, T.R., An Essay on the Principle of Population, 1sted., chs. 1, 2, 8, 8-15; 7thed., Bk. 1, chs. 1-2; Bk. 2, ch. 13, Bk. 3, chs. 1-3; Bk 4, chs. 1, 3, OR Masterworks, pp. 191-270.
Bonar, J., “The Malthusiad: Fantasia Economica,” in Essays Contributed in Honor of John Bates Clark, pp. 22-28
Keene, James, “Two lectures on the subject of Machinery, delivered at the Bath mechanics’ institution; tending to prove that machinery is not the cause of the distress among the industrious classes; that the country is not over-populated; and that the real causes of the distress are within the power of the people to remove.” (1831, Seligman Library)

    1. The Doctrine of Diminishing Returns and of Rent

Cannan, Theories of Production and Distribution, pp. 147-168
*Whittaker, E., pp. 384-392
Malthus, T.R., “Observations on the Effects of the Corn Laws”
Malthus, T.R., “On the Policy of Restricting the Importation of Foreign Corn”
Malthus, T.R., “The Nature and Progress of Rent”

    1. Theories of Profit (Interest)
      1. The Residual Claimant Theory (Ricardo)
        *Whittaker, E., pp. 611-613
        Ricardo, D., “The Influence of a Low Price of Corn on the Profits of Stock” (reprinted in Ricardo’s Economic Essays, Gonner ed.)
      2. The Productivity Theory

Lauderdale, An Inquiry Into the Nature and Origin of Public Wealth
Boehm-Bawerk, Capital and Interest, Bk. 2, chs. 1-3 (to p. 149)
*Cannan, Theories of Production and Distribution, pp. 107-109, 203-204

  1. David Ricardo (1772-1823)
    1. General

*Roll, pp. 183-207
*Ricardo, “Principles of Political Economy and Taxation,” in Masterworks, pp. 271-342
Mitchell, W.C., “Postulates and Preconception of Ricardian Economics,” in Essays in Philosophy, ed. By T.V. Smith and W.K. Wright
Stephen, Leslie, The English Utilitarians, v. 2, ch. 5

    1. Value

Ricardo, D., Principles of Political Economy, chs. 1, 4, 20, 28, 30
Hollander, J.H., “The Development of Ricardo’s Theory of Value,” Quarterly Journal of Economics, v. 18, pp. 455-491, Aug., 1904
McCracken, H.L., Value Theory and Business Cycles, ch. 1
Whitaker, A.C., History and Criticism of the Labor Theory of Value, ch. 5

    1. Rent

Ricardo, D., Principles of Political Economy, chs. 2, 3, 24, 32
Cannan, Theories of Production and Distribution, pp. 225-227, 321-332

    1. Wages

Ricardo, D., Principles of Political Economy, ch. 5
Cannan, Theories of Production and Distribution, pp. 242-257
Wermel, M.T., The Evolution of Classical Wage Theory, pp. 153-161

    1. Profits

Ricardo, D., Principles of Political Economy, chs. 11, 21
Boehm-Bawerk, pp. 87-95
Cannan, Theories of Production and Distribution, pp. 279-291, 339-354

  1. Thomas Robert Malthus (1766-1834)
    1. General

*Roll, Eric, pp. 212-226
Patten, T.N., “Malthus and Ricardo,” in Essays in Economic Theory
Stephen, Leslie, The English Utilitarians, chs. 4, 6

    1. Value

*Malthus, T.R., Principles of Political Economy, 2nded., Bk. 1, chs. 2,6

    1. Rent

Malthus, T.R., Principles of Political Economy, Bk. 1, ch. 3
Whittaker, E., pp. 502-503

    1. Wages

Malthus, T.R., Principles of Political Economy, Bk. 1, ch. 4
Cannan, Theories of Production and Distribution, pp. 257-259
Wermel, M.T., The Evolution of Classical Wage Theory, pp. 139-152

    1. Profits and Capital

Malthus, T.H., Principles of Political Economy, Bk. 1, ch. 6; Bk. 2, ch. 1; secs. 3,5

SECTION VI—REACTION AGAINST CLASSICISM

  1. The Romantics.

*Roll, Eric, pp. 226-248
Dorfman, Joseph, The Economic Mind in American Civilization, v. 1, pp. 382-397; OR Johnson, E.A.J., Some Origins of the Modern Economic World, pp. 126-141

  1. Early Social Criticism
    1. General

*Roll, pp. 248-270

    1. Utopian Socialism
      1. Robert Owen

*Owen, Robert, “A New View of Society”, in Masterworks, pp. 343-378
Beer, M., History of British Socialism, v. 1, pp. 160-181
Laidler, H.W., History of Socialist Thought, ch. 10
“Owen and Owenism”, in E.S.S.

      1. Fourier

Fourier, C., Selections from the Works of Fourier (esp. “Introduction”)
Laidler, H.W., History of Socialist Thought, pp. 69-74, 123-133
Ely, R.T., French and German Socialism, ch.. 5
**Fourier and Fourierism” and “Brook Farm” in E.S.S.

  1. Karl Marx (1818-1883) and Friedrich Engels (1820-1895)
    1. General

*Roll, Eric, pp. 271-324.
*Marx, Karl, „Capital“ in Masterworks, pp. 453-614

    1. Marxian Philosophy and Interpretation of History

Handbook of Marxism, ed. by Emile Burns, pp. 21-59, 209-231, 240-301, 370-401, 537-547, 634-673.
Strachey, John, The Theory and Practice of Socialism, chs. 28-32
___________, The Coming Struggle for Power, chs. 1,2

    1. Value and Surplus Value; the Machinery of Capitalist Exploitation

Handbook of Marxism, pp. 405-275, 547-552.
Marx, Capital, v. 3, chs. 1-3, 8-10.
Engels, F., Herr Eugen Dühring’s Revolution in Science (International Publishers, ed.), pp. 211-250
*Dobb, Maurice, Political Economy and Capitalism, chs. 1, 3
Cole, G.D.H., What Marx Really Meant, chs. 7,8
*Sweezy, Paul, The Theory of Capitalist Development, ch. 4

    1. The Laws of Capitalist Development

Handbook of Marxism, pp. 475-547, 552-570
*Dobb, Maurice, Political Economy and Capitalism, ch. 4
*Sweezy, chs. 8, 9, 12
*Lenin, N., “Imperialism”
Cole, G.D.H., What Marx Really Meant, chs. 3,4
Strachey, John, The Coming Struggle for Power, Pt. II, Pt. IV

    1. Criticism of Marxian Theory

*Veblen, T., “The Socialist Economics of Karl Marx, I and II,” in The Place of Science in Modern Civilization, pp. 409-456.
Skelton, O.D., Socialism: A Critical Analysis, chs. 5-7
Boehm-Bawerk, Karl Marx and the Close of His System

  1. Heterodox Socialism
    1. Revisionism

Loucks, and Hoot, Comparative Economic Systems, ch. 15
*Laidler, H.W., History of Socialist Thought, chs. 20-21
Bernstein, E., Evolutionary Socialism

    1. Fabian Socialism

Fabian Tracts, No. 7, 70, 142, 147, 159, 164
*Fabian Essays, pp. 3-29, 131, 149, 173-201
Webb, S. and B., A Constitution for the Socialist Commonwealth of Great Britain
Laidler, H.W., History of Socialist Thought, chs. 17-18, 29

    1. Revolutionary Socialism (non-Marxist brand)

Laidler, H.W., History of Socialist Thought, ch. 22
Estey, J.A., Revolutionary Syndicalism, ch. 5
*Sorel, G., Reflections on Violence

 

G.S. HISTORY OF ECONOMIC THOUGHT
Fall Semester
STUDY QUESTIONS

SECTION I-MEDIEVAL ECONOMICS

    1. Outline the social structure of medieval Europe and the economic organization of the manorial economy.
    2. Trace the development of the medieval concept of “just price” as the beginning of a theory of value.
    3. Trace the evolution of the attitude of the medieval church toward usury.
    4. Trace the evolution of the attitude of the medieval church toward commerce and trade.
    5. What were the most powerful economic forces leading to the breakdown of medieval society?

SECTION II—MERCANTILISM

    1. Discuss the thesis that mercantilism can be explained primarily in terms of state-making. Do you agree?
    2. Discuss the thesis that mercantilism can be explained primarily in terms of the national and international power struggles of the rising bourgeoisie. Do you agree?
    3. Discuss the mercantilist attitude toward; (a) money (b) interest (c) international trade (d) domestic industry (c) wages (f) population.
    4. Distinguish between bullionism and mercantilism proper.
    5. Compare and contrast mercantilism and the classical economic system.

SECTION III—THE PHYSIOCRATS

    1. Discuss the meaning of the phrase “produit net.” Compare this concept with the labor theory of value and surplus value.
    2. Analyze the circulation of this “produit net” as set forth in Quesnay’s “Tableau oeconomique”
    3. What role did agriculture play in the physiocratic theoretical structure? Give reasons for this.
    4. Compare and contrast physiocracy and the classical economic system.

SECTION IV—THE PRECONCEPTIONS OF ECONOMICS

  1. The Basic Preconceptions
    1. The various strains
      1. Trace the importance of the following concepts for the development of the classical economic system:
        (1) Protestant Ethics
        (2) rationalism
        (3) natural order
        (4) individualism
        (5) laissez-faire
        (6) liberalism
        (7) competition, scarcity, and the survival of the fittest
        (8) Social Darwinism
      2. Compare Sombart’s and Weber’s explanations of the main forces leading to the rise and development of capitalism.
    2. Utilitarianism, or the “felicific calculus”
      1. Distinguish between the “Westminster philosophy” and the “Manchester philosophy”, showing the utilitarian roots of each. What major differences in policy flowed from these two schools?
      2. Which school triumphed in England? What social and economic forces brought this about and what were the consequences of the triumph?
      3. According to Bentham, what are the forces which control human behavior and how are these forces to be measured?
      4. What are the major difficulties in Bentham’s theory of human nature? Explore the full implications of Bentham’s theory of human nature.
      5. Discuss Halévy’s statement that “political economy, ever since Adam Smith has rested entirely on the thesis of the natural identity of interests.”
      6. What is the basic paradox of the thesis of the natural identity of interests?

SECTION V—THE CLASSICAL SYSTEM

  1. Adam Smith
    1. State or describe the preconceptions and assumptions of Adam Smith’s system of economic thought.
    2. How did Adam Smith define and measure the wealth of a nation? Can you suggest reasons for his particular definition and measurement? Summarize briefly what Smith regarded as the causes of the wealth of nations and note the implications of his argument.
    3. Develop Smith’s theory of economic order.
    4. State Smith’s theory (or theories) of value.
    5. Develop in some detail Smith’s theory of distribution, noting his concepts of the distributive shares, the determinants of each, and contradictory elements in this theory.
    6. Develop and analyze critically Smith’s theories (a) of saving, and (b) of capital.
    7. Discuss Smith’s theory of production.
  1. The Period 1776-1817
    1. Account for Malthus’ first essay on population and develop the doctrine expounded in the first essay.
    2. What are the chief differences between the first and the second essays?
    3. Appraise the validity of Malthus’ doctrine of population.
    4. Discuss the development during this period of the doctrines of diminishing returns and of rent. Explain both doctrines.
    5. Describe the evolution of the doctrine of diminishing returns.
    6. Why did the classical economists develop the doctrine of diminishing returns solely in relation to production on land? On what grounds did West argue that technological progress could not offset diminishing returns in agriculture? Note weaknesses in this argument.
    7. Compare the theory of rent developed by Sir Edward West in his Essay on the Application of Capital to Land with Malthus’ theory as developed in his essay on The Nature and Progress of Rent.
    8. Discuss the development of Ricardo’s theory of profits ad describe its nature.
    9. State and criticize Lauderdale’s productivity theory of interest.
  1. David Ricardo
    1. State or describe the preconceptions and assumptions of Ricardo’s system of economic thought.
    2. Explain carefully Ricardo’s theory of value, noting its nature, the assumption on which it is based, the problems involved in this type of theory and Ricardo’s solution of them.
    3. What is the significance of the labor theory of value as found in Adam Smith and Ricardo? What are the major differences? Account for the decline of the labor theory of value after Ricardo.
    4. How did Ricardo explain the nature, the existence and the amount of rent? What was his explanation of the relation between ret and prices?
    5. Develop and criticize Ricardo’s theory of wages.
    6. Develop Ricardo’s theory of capital. In what sense is classical theory essentially a theory of capital? How do you account for the particular form which the classical theory of capital formation assumed? On what grounds is this theory subject to criticism?
    7. Explain Ricardo’s theory of economic development. Give the theoretical reasons for his conclusions.
  1. Thomas Robert Malthus
    1. Compare Malthus’ theory of value with that of Ricardo, and account for the difference between them.
    2. With reference to the theory of rent, what were the points of difference between Ricardo and Malthus? What conclusions did each draw from his rent theory?
    3. Develop Malthus’ theory of wages.
    4. Develop Malthus’ theories of saving, capital, and profits. Compare the theories of profits of Ricardo and Malthus. How do you account for the differences between them?
    5. Compare Ricardo and Malthus as to their theories of the effects of capital formation on economic progress and the functioning of the capitalist economy.
    6. Show how in Ricardian economics the business cycle is impossible and how in Malthusian economics it is inevitable.

SECTION VI—REACTION AGAINS CLASSICISM

  1. The Romantics
    1. What were the chief economic forces leading to the rise of the German romantic movement?
    2. Trace a similar development in American economic history in the writings of Mathew Carey and Henry Carey.
    3. What were the major economic doctrines of: (a) Adam Muller, (b) J.G. Fichte, (c) Friedrich List.
  2. Early Socialist Criticism
    1. General
      1. It is sometimes claimed that economic theory is a rationalization of class interests. With reference to classical theory, is there any evidence that this characterization is warranted? If so, what? Would you agree that economic theory can properly be so characterized? Support your position.
      2. Discuss the major criticisms of the weaknesses of capitalism as set forth by Sismondi and evaluate his remedies.
      3. Discuss the major criticisms of the weaknesses of capitalism as set forth by Proudhon and evaluate his remedies.
    2. Utopian Socialism
      1. Outline succinctly Owen’s economic theory.
      2. Outline clearly Fourier’s economic system
      3. Discuss the major differences between Fourier and Owen
      4. What are the chief criticisms of utopian socialism? How valid do you think these criticisms are? Why?
  3. Karl Marx and Friederich Engels
    1. What does Marx mean by (a) forces of production (b) relations of production (c) the class struggle (d) classes? How does he use these concepts in his system of thought?
    2. Define the following terms as used by Marx: (a) use value, (b) exchange value (c) value (d) constant capital (e) variable capital (f) surplus value (g) price of production.
    3. Discuss Marx’s labor theory of value and compare it with Ricardo’s and Smith’s theories of value.
    4. Describe the so-called “great contradiction” in Marx’s labor theory of value and the way in which Marx resolved the contradiction.
    5. Discuss the origin of surplus value and the significance of this concept for Marxian theory.
    6. Discuss Marx’s theory of capitalist competition and the consequences of this. Do you find anything comparable in Ricardo?
    7. Discuss Marx’s theory of economic development and also Lenin’s contribution.
    8. Contrast Ricardo’s explanation of the falling tendency of the rate of profits with Marx’s explanation of the falling tendency of the rate of profits. What conclusions did Marx draw from this theory?
    9. Compare Marx’s theory of crises with Malthus’ theory of market gluts.
    10. Discuss: “Marxist economics is the economics of capitalism; orthodox economics of socialism.”
  4. Heterodox Socialism
    1. What is meant by evolutionary socialism? Describe briefly the chief points of difference between evolutionary socialism and Marxian socialism.
    2. Develop or outline the economic theory of the Fabian socialists. Criticize carefully the main arguments.
    3. On what grounds and in what respects did the revisionists and evolutionary socialists criticize the Marxian analysis and program? What programs of change did these critics set forth? Evaluate these programs.
    4. Describe briefly the chief points of difference between Marxism and the non-Marxist brand of revolutionary socialism (such as syndicalism). In what places in the world has revolutionary socialism had an important following? Why?

*  * *  *  *  *

HISTORY OF ECONOMIC THOUGHT
[Handwritten: “D. Gregg”]

Selected List of Histories of Economic Thought and Other Reference Works

Ashley, W.J., “Introduction to English Economic History and Theory.”
Beer, Max, “An Inquiry into Physiocracy.”
Beer, Max, “Early British Economics.”
Beer, Max, “History of British Socialism.”
Blanqui, J.A., “History of Political Economy.”
Bonar, James, “Philosophy and Political Economy.”
Boucke, O.F., “The Development of Economics, 1750-1900.”
Burtt, Edwin A., “Metaphysical Foundations of Modern Science.”
Cannan, Edwin, “A Review of Economic Theory.”
Commons, J.R., “Legal Foundations of Capitalism.”
Cunningham, William, “Early Writings on Politics and Economics.”
Feguson, J.M., “Landmarks of Economic Thought.”
Gambs, “Beyond Supply and Demand.”
Gide, C., and C. Rist, “History of Economic Doctrines.”
Gray, Alexander, “The development of Economic Doctrine.”
Gruchy, A.G., “Modern Economic Theory.”
Halévy, Elie, “Growth of Philosophical Radicalism.”
Haney, L.H., “History of Economic Thought.” (3rdrev. ed.)
Heckscher, Eli F., “Mercantilism.”
Homan, P.T., “Contemporary Economic Thought.”
Ingram, J.K., “History of Political Economy.”
Johnson, E.A.J., “Predecessors of Adam Smith.”
Laidler, H.W., “History of Socialist Thought.”
Loucks, W.N., and J.W. Hoot, “Comparative Economic Systems”
Palgrave, R.T. (ed), “Dictionary of Political Economy.”
Patterson, S.H., “Readings in the History of Economic Thought.”
Peck, Harvey W., “Economic Thought and its Institutional Background.”
Price, L.L., “A Short History of Political Economy in England from Adam Smith to Alfred Marshall.”
Robertson, H.M. “Aspects of the Rise of Individualism.”
Roll, Eric, “A History of Economic Thought.” (1947 rev. ed.)
Scott, W.A., “Development of Economics.”
Seligman, E.R.A., and A. Johnson (eds.), “Encyclopaedia of the Social Sciences.””
Sombart, Werner, “The Quintessence of Capitalism.”
Spann, Othmar, “The History of Economics.”
Spann, Othmar, “Types of Economic Theory.”
Stephen, Leslie, “The English Utilitarians.”
Strong, Gordon, B., “Adam Smith and the 18thcentury Conception of Progress.”
Tawney, R.H., “The Acquisitive Society.”
Tawney, R.H., “Religion and the Rise of Capitalism.”
Weber, Max, “General Economic History.”
Weber, Max, “The Protestant Ethic and the Spirit of Capitalism.”
Wermel, “The Evolution of Classical Wage Theory.”
Whittaker, Edmund, “A History of Economic Ideas.”
Dorfman, “The Economic Mind in American Civilization”

Selected List of Critical Works

Ayres, C.E., “The Theory of Economic Progress.”
Boehm-Bawerk, E. von, “Capital and Interest.”
Boucke, O.F., “A Critique of Economics. ”
Cannan, E., “A History of the Theories of Production and Distribution in English Political Economy from 1776 to 1848.”
Cannan, E., “A Review of Economic Theory.”
McCracken, H.L., “Value Theory and Business Cycles.”
Polanyi, Karl, “The Great Transformation.”
Spann, Othmar “The History of Economics.”
Taussig, F.W., “Wages and Capital.”
Triffin, R., “Monopolistic Competition and General Equilibrium Theory.”
Veblen, Thorstein, “The Place of Science in Modern Civilization.”
Whitaker, A.C., “History and Criticism of the Labor Theory of Value,” in Columbia Univ. Studies in History, Economics, and Public Law, vol. 19.

Source:  Columbia University Libraries, Manuscript Collections. Joseph Dorfman Collection. Box 13

 

 

 

 

 

 

Categories
Economists Harvard Radical Salaries

Harvard. Economics Ph.D. alumnus. Not hired as a teaching assistant. W. H. Crook, 1928

 

The meat of the following post is found in the correspondence regarding a one year appointment of a Harvard graduate student in 1922 as Thomas Nixon Carver’s assistant for Economics 8 (Principles of Sociology). Wilfrid Harris Crook’s appointment was shot down by the Harvard Corporation over the express positive recommendation of the department chairman (who happened to be Thomas Nixon Carver himself). There were two economics faculty members (unnamed) who voted against hiring Crook, and one suspects that one or both had raised red flags of pacifism and socialism in their dissent high enough for President Lowell to have seen them. I am simply amazed that any candidate for a humble teaching assistantship would have been vetted by the President of the university himself.

For those interested in what had become of Crook, who eventually went on to complete his Ph.D. in 1928, I have assembled a few snippits of biographical and career data. His irregular employment is consistent with both a difficult personality (“In a world of teetotalers Crook would be a conscientious drunkard”) and the challenges posed by dual academic careers.

Small world:  The above image of Crook’s calling card from his time as Assistant Minister, Central Congregational Church, Boston, 1916-1918 was found in the online material from the W.E.B. Du Bois archive.

_______________________

Scraps of information from the life and career of Wilfrid Harris Crook

Born: May 16, 1888 in Swinton, Lancastershire, England.

Married: Lucy Mildred Cluck, Sept. 1 1917 in New London, New Hampshire. (still together in 1930 according to the U.S. Census)
Son: Sydney L. Crook (b. ca. 1919)

Married: Evelyn Buchan Sept 8 1931 in Glens Falls New York. She was a professor at the University of Maine at the time according to the Bangor Maine City Directory, 1931.

1929-30. Bowdoin College Catalogue. Listed as Assistant Professor of Economics and Sociology. Besides listed with the other members of the department of economics and sociology, he is listed for the three semester courses in sociology (Principles of Sociology, Applied Sociology, and Social Evolution of the Hebrew People)

1930-31. Bowdoin College Catalogue. Listed as Associate Professor of Economics and Sociology on leave of absence.

1933-34 Boston City Directory: Wilfrid H. Crook and Evelyn B.  instr. Simmons College (see item below)

1935 Haverhill, Mass. City Directory.  Crook Wilfrid H. inst. Bradford Junior College.

1935 Wilkes-Barre, Penn. City directory. Wilfrid H. Crook and Evelyn B. instr. Bucknell University Jr. College.

Bucknell Junior College, Wilkes-Barre, Pa. (1942, Draft registration of Wilfrid H. Crook)

Wilfrid H. Crook born 16 May 1888, Social Security Claim date 30 April 1956.

Died April 16, 1963 in DeKalb, Georgia

Two details about Wilfrid H. Crook’s second wife Evelyn Buchan

From a UP report, Sept. 17 1946, Albany in the Dunkirk Evening Observer (Dunkirk, New York)

“Three professors of sociology join the faculty today of the Associated Colleges of upper New York. They are Mrs. Evelyn Buchan Crook, who has taught at five other universities….The associated college [is] located at Sampson…”

From The 1962 Yearbook of the Westminster Schools, Atlanta, Georgia (Vol. V):  Mrs Wilfrid Harris Crook, Testing and Counseling, Ph.B. and M.A., University of Chicago. (Note how in 1962 women still lost both their first and last names upon marriage!)

_______________________

Economics Ph.D. awarded 1928

Wilfrid Harris Crook, A.B. (Univ. of Oxford, England) 1911, A.M. (ibid.) 1914. Subject, Economics. Special Field, Labor Problems. Thesis, “The General Strike in Theory and Practice to 1914.” Assistant Professor of Economics and Sociology, Bowdoin College.

Source:  Harvard University. Report of the President of Harvard College 1927-28, p. 113.

_______________________

Instructorship at Simmons College

Wilfrid Harris Crook, Special Instructor in Economics. B.A., Lincoln College, Oxford, 1911; M.A., 1914; Hibbert Scholar, 1915; Harvard, 1914-16, 1921-1923; Ph.D., 1928.

Formerly: Assistant Minister, Central Congregational Church, Boston, 1916-1918; Editorial work, New York, 1919-1920; Special Instructor in Economics, 1922-1923; Assistant and Associate Professor of Economics and Sociology, Bowdoin College, 1923-1931.

Publications: The General Strike, 1931; articles in Encyclopedia of Social Sciences, The Survey. The Nation.

Source: 1933 Microcosm, Simmons College Yearbook, p. 35.

_______________________

The case made against hiring Wilfrid Harris Crook as a teaching assistant at Harvard in 1922…in spite of the departmental recommendation to hire him

Economics department’s recommendation to hire

HARVARD UNIVERSITY

Oct. 23, 1922

The Division Department of Economics respectfully recommends to the Corporation the appointment of W. H. Crook [as] Assistant [in] Economics for one year from Sept. 1, 1922 at a salary of $400. Courses in which instruction or assistance is to be given: Economics 8.

Remarks:  See letter to President Lowell.

[Signed|
T. N. Carver
Chairman.

*  *  *  *  *  *  *  *  *  *  *  *  *

Letter to President Lowell from the economics department chairman

HARVARD UNIVERSITY
DEPARTMENT OF ECONOMICS

Cambridge, Massachusetts
October 24, 1922

Dear President Lowell:

At a meeting of the Department of Economics held Monday afternoon, October 23, it was voted to recommend to the President and Fellows that W. H. Crook be appointed Assistant for one year in Economics 8, and that C. N. Burrows be appointed as Assistant for the first half-year in Economics 9a.

Sincerely yours,

[signed]
T. N. Carver
Chairman

President A. Lawrence Lowell

*  *  *  *  *  *  *  *  *  *  *  *  *

Elaboration by economics department chairman regarding the case of W. H. Crook

HARVARD UNIVERSITY
DEPARTMENT OF ECONOMICS

Cambridge, Massachusetts
October 24, 1922

Dear President Lowell:

The case of W. H. Crook was pretty thoroly [sic] discussed at the Department Meeting before the vote was taken. The vote stood eight in favor of the recommendation, two against it, the Chairman not voting.

When I talked with you about the case several days ago you stated that if new information could be furnished regarding the case you would take it into consideration. I asked Dean Sperry to write you what he knew about it. Mr. Crook has given me some documents, including his certificate of discharge from military service on the ground of physical unfitness, his correspondence with the Hibbert Trustees, etc. The information is pretty well summarized in the enclosed copy of a letter which he wrote to Professor Bullock in 1921. I think that this correspondence with the Hibbert Trustees and other documents which he submits support every important statement which he makes in the letter. It appears that his anti-war attitude in this country was by no means so positive as it has been made out to be. Being a pacifist he could not do otherwise than urge peaceful mediation on the part of this country rather than actual war. After war was declared he seems to have quite accepted the situation, did not take advantage either of the fact that he was an ordained minister or a conscientious objector to evade the draft. In fact I think he showed a much finer spirit in refusing to enjoy the luxuries of peace in war time than many of our people who pass as respectable.

I should be glad to hand you the other correspondence which Mr. Crook gave me if you care to be bothered with them. Their only value, however, would be to verify what Mr. Crook has said.

Very sincerely,
[signed]
T. N. Carver
Chairman

President A. Lawrence Lowell

*  *  *  *  *  *  *  *  *  *  *  *  *

President Lowell’s letter to Harvard Corporation member John F. Moors

HARVARD UNIVERSITY
CAMBRIDGE

PRESIDENT’S OFFICE

October 25, 1922

Dear John:

Would you mind looking over these papers and sending them back to me as soon as you can, for it is a question that will come up at the next Corporation meeting. Professor Bullock evidently thinks Crook a rather blatant propagandist for socialism and pacifism; and of course this is one of the cases where we shall be somewhat blamed whatever we do. But while protecting free speech on the part of our professors, I do not think that we are obliged to appoint to the instructing staff men who would bring us into unnecessary criticism, or people of a quarrelsome disposition. This last impression of Crook I derive rather strongly from the enclosed letter from Dean Sperry. This is a question of balance of judgment. What do you think?

Very truly yours,
[stamp] A. Lawrence Lowell

John F. Moors, Esq.
111 Devonshire Street
Boston, Mass.

*  *  *  *  *  *  *  *  *  *  *  *  *

Theology Dean’s assessment of Wilfrid Harris Crook

The Theological School in Harvard University
Andover Hall, Francis Avenue
Cambridge, Mass.

Office of the Dean

October 20, 1922

My dear President Lowell:

Professor Carver tells me that the name of Wilfrid Harris Crook has been suggested as an assistant in one of the economics courses, and that objection to this appointment has been filed with you, on the ground that he was an ‘English draft dodger’, etc. Professor Carver asks me to send you a word on the matter.

I know Mr. Crook well. He was my assistant for two or three years in Central Church, Boston.

The basic fact about Crook is this. He comes of a long line of English dissenters and Non-conformists. And the ‘dissidence of dissent’ is bred in his blood and bone. He had been, for years, a more or less doctrinaire pacifist of the Tolstoian type.

But he is not a ‘draft dodger’ in any correct sense of the word. In the spring of 1914 he had received from the Hibbert Trustees and Manchester College, Oxford, their Hibbert Fellowship for foreign study. He had intended to take the academic year 1914-15 doing economics in Germany, and was caught there at the outbreak of the War.

He came back at once to England, and with the consent of the Hibbert Trustees transferred his fellowship to this country and to Harvard. The draft was not then in force in England. Whether he ought to have stayed and volunteered, or faced the ultimate consequences of not volunteering is another matter.

He has been in this country ever since. He remained a ‘doctrinaire pacifist’ all through the War. His native non-conformity, with its anti-imperialist heckling temper was not understood here at all. His best friends deplored a good many of his utterances, and found it hard to bear with him at times. While he made a good many enemies who did not hesitate to go far beyond the facts and accuse him of actual political irregularities of which he was technically quite innocent.

The whole case of the man was put in a nutshell by the Chairman of my Parish Committee, who once said that, “In a world of teetotalers Crook would be a conscientious drunkard.”

It seemed impossible for him to do much useful work in our Parish in Boston after we had entered the War and he eventually dropped out. His opinions on War in general were abhorrent to most of our people at that time. But I never heard anything but words of respect and affection for the man’s character, his personal charm and his transparent integrity.

He must have been under suspicion here during the War. But so far as I know he never ran foul of any actual trouble with the authorities.

He was, I think, in process of becoming an American citizen during the war, and was called for the draft but dismissed at once for a shockingly bad heart, the result of rheumatic fever.

My impression is that his citizenship has since been granted, and that if there had been any technical case against him it would have appeared at that time and would have held that matter up permanently.

Perhaps he ought to have gone back to England, perhaps he ought to have felt differently here. All that is debatable ground.

Technically, I think his case stands clear. As to the basic fact of the man himself, it is the problem of the rather remote idealism of the Tolstoian type.

He has been plugging along latterly for the Ph.D. degree in economics. My latest impressions of him are of a man somewhat sobered and reluctantly making concessions to the stubborn world of hard facts, which his dissenting heredity and romantic temperament incline him to regard as given over to Satan.

Sincerely yours,
[signed]
Willard L. Sperry

President A. Lawrence Lowell
Harvard University

*  *  *  *  *  *  *  *  *  *  *  *  *

President Lowell’s response to Theology Dean

October 24, 1922

Dear Mr Sperry:

Thank you very much for your letter about Mr Crook. He does not seem to be the kind of person the Corporation would like to appoint as a member of the instructing staff.

I asked Mr. Foote to inform me about the denominational relations of the members of the Faculty, and I think you would be interested in his answer, which you need not return. It shows very clearly that the School has not been Unitarian; but I am not sure that the publicity would do us any good.

Very truly yours,
[stamp] A. Lawrence Lowell

Rev. Willard L. Sperry
Andover Hall
Cambridge

*  *  *  *  *  *  *  *  *  *  *  *  *

Harvard Corporation member John F. Moors responds to President Lowell

MOORS & CABOT
111 Devonshire Street
Boston, Mass.
Telephone Main 8170

Members
Boston Stock Exchange

John F. Moors
C. Lee Todd
Francis E. Smith
William Ferguson
Willis W. Clark

October 26, 1922.

President A. Lawrence Lowell,
Harvard University,
Cambridge, Mass.

Dear Lawrence:

I have read and return herewith the documents received from you today about Mr. Crook.

Let me say at the outset that it speaks well for Carver, who himself analyzes socialism, to advocate a man of the Crook type, for Carver, we know, is himself so far from being a socialist that it would be very easy for him to feel prejudiced.

Our bookkeeper in this office is a prominent member of Mr. Sperry’s church. I have today asked him about Crook and find that, though he likes him personally and respects him as a man, he has pronounced abhorrence of his views and says that in thus speaking he feels sure that he reflects a vast majority of the congregation.

I have heard Crook speak and have addressed audiences in the Chapel of the Central Congregational church at which Crook as assistant minister has been present. His voice is soft, he is gentlemanly, he has no brilliant sparks such as Laski threw forth, he is, I think, very much as Sperry describes him, a natural dissenter of the outwardly rather meek but inwardly recalcitrant type. He would, I imagine, present socialism sympathetically rather than analytically.

While his letter to Bullock indicates that Bullock took a rough attitude toward him, which may have led him to feel sore, it seems to me that the first paragraph and the next to the last paragraph in his letter lack self-restraint; and I though this before I read the rest of the correspondence, my eye having caught this letter first.

Having seen Crook mostly in the pleasant relationship of a speaker being introduced (as speakers are introduced!) I should have said before I read the correspondence that I liked him. I suppose too that no one can really teach anything who does not heartily believe in it; and Carver’s reasonableness is the thing which most impressed me in the whole correspondence. I should like to back him up in it. But while all great men are cranks, all cranks are not great men. Judgment seems to lie in distinguishing which is the great man without the crankiness, which the crank without the greatness. I am inclined to think that Crook would get us into hot water without our being sure, when we were in it, that we were right.

Yours very truly,
signed]
John F. Moors

Dict. J.F.M.

*  *  *  *  *  *  *  *  *  *  *  *  *

Department Chair T. N. Carver senses one or two other persons with a “vindictive disposition” are the source of Crook’s troubles

HARVARD UNIVERSITY
DEPARTMENT OF ECONOMICS

Cambridge, Massachusetts
November 6, 1922

Dear President Lowell:

I have your letter of October 31 informing me that the Corporation did not think wise to appoint Mr. Crook as Assistant in Economics 8. The reason given must be based on information that was not in the possession of the Chairman of the Department. You state that it was not on account of his opinions but on account of his disposition, and that the Corporation felt that it would be a mistake to introduce into the teaching staff a man who has shown so much capacity for getting into trouble. So far as any information has come to the Chairman of the Department, Mr. Crook has had no trouble since early in the war on account of his own disposition. Such trouble as he has had seems to be due entirely to the vindictive disposition of one or two other persons.

I think that Mr. Crook would like to have the carbon copy of his letter to Professor Bullock which I enclosed with my letter to you of recent date. Will you kindly have some one return it to me and I will hand it to Mr. Crook?

Very sincerely,
[signed]
T. N Carver

*  *  *  *  *  *  *  *  *  *  *  *  *

Wilfrid Harris Crook’s request to speak with Harvard Corporation member John F. Moors

20a Prescott Street
Cambridge, Mass.
November 9, 1922

Mr. John F. Moors
32 Mr. Vernon St.
Boston, Mass.

Dear Mr. Moors

Professor Carver of Harvard, in a letter of Nov. 6th, writes me as follows: The Department of Economics recommended your appointment as assistant in Economics 8, but the President and Fellows, as you learned the other day when in my office, declined to make the appointment. Inasmuch as all appointments have to be made by the President and Fellows, there is nothing more that the Department can do about it.”

As you are the only member of the Corporation with whom I am to any degree acquainted, I take the liberty of inquiring, for my own satisfaction, what were the reasons for the attitude of the Fellows to my appointment as Professor Carver’s assistant. I am studying for a Ph.D. at Harvard, and am meanwhile acting as Special Instructor of Economics at Simmons College. The decision is, therefore, one that causes me some degree of regret and of interest as to its cause.

I wonder if you will give me the privilege of a brief personal talk with you on this matter? If so, I should be glad to meet your convenience any afternoon next week, or any hour on Tuesday or Saturday, on which days I have no class.

Faithfully yours,
[signed]
Wilfrid Harris Crook

*  *  *  *  *  *  *  *  *  *  *  *  *

Harvard Corporation member J. F. Moors declines with “kindest personal feelings”

MOORS & CABOT
111 Devonshire Street, Boston

November 10, 1922.

Rev. Wilfrid Harris Crook,
20a Prescott St.
Cambridge, Mass.

Dear Mr. Crook:

I wish I could give you the information which you ask for. It is, however, essential that the views of the individual members of the Board on which I serve and the nature of our discussions should not be divulged except through the President of the University.

I have sent him your letter.

With the kindest personal feelings, I am,

Yours very truly,

 

Dict. J.F.M.

 

Source:   Harvard University Archives. President Lowell’s Papers 1922-1925, Box 189, Folder 188 (1922-25).

Image Source: Crook, Wilfrid Harris, b. 1888. W. Harris Crook, 1915?. W. E. B. Du Bois Papers (MS 312). Special Collections and University Archives, University of Massachusetts Amherst Libraries

 

Categories
Harvard Salaries

Harvard. Salary of the economics department secretary, Miss A. Pauline Ham, 1911-12

 

In an earlier post we encountered Martha P. Robinson, the Harvard secretary responsible for the economics tutorial program from 1935 to at least 1954. Today we have a short post that documents the salary of Miss Annie Pauline Ham that was covered by the economics department, the Quarterly Journal of Economics, and the central university budget at Harvard.

Two salary numbers for comparison:  Allyn A.Young’s visiting position at Harvard (1910-11) was budgeted for $4,000 (Dec. 10, 1910 letter of Taussig to President Lowell in President Lowell’s Papers, 1909-1914. Harvard University Archives, Box 15, Folder 413). Thus Miss Hamm was paid one fifth of what Allyn A. Young was paid. Incidentally,  John Bates Clark salary that year at Columbia was $5,000. 

________________

Annie Pauline Ham
Vital Data

Born 20 March 1881 (Shapleigh, York County, Maine), died 1 July 1968 (Lenox, Berkshire County, Massachusetts.  Father: Marcus L Ham and Mother: Martha Ann Ham.  Buried at the Riverside Cemetery in Springvale , York County, Maine.

Source: Find A Grave Webpage for Annie Pauline Ham.

________________

Census data

1910. 27 year old Pauline Ham (born in Maine and working as a teacher; incidentally, a fellow roomer was Harry N. Gardiner, a Smith college professor of psychology and philosophy), at 23 Crafts Ave. Northampton (Ward 1) Massachusetts.

1920. 38 year old, single Annie P. Ham (born in Maine and working as a secretary in the university) was one of four roomers  living at the home of John J. and Nattie M. Ritchie, 29 Mail Street, Cambridge (Ward 8), Massachusetts.

________________

Letter to Taussig

June 26, 1911

My dear Professor Taussig:—

Confirming our telephone conversation of this morning, I wish to state that Mr. Blake has agreed to the apportionment of Miss A. P. Ham’s salary, provided she is retained.

Salary of Miss Ham to be $65 per month, or $780 a year, of which three months, or $195, is chargeable to the President’s office, and nine months, or $585, is chargeable to the Department of Economics–$485 goes to the account of the Department appropriation, and $100 goes to the account of the Quarterly Journal of Economics.

I am also enclosing the letter from Chancellor Strong about which I spoke to you.

Very sincerely,
CCL
Secretary

 

Professor F.W. Taussig
Enclosure

________________

HARVARD UNIVERSITY
Department of Economics

Cambridge, Massachusetts
August 3, 1912.

Dear Mr. Hunnewell:

I believe there is a misunderstanding regarding the salary for the current year (that is, for the fiscal year beginning July 1st of Miss A. Pauline Ham, who acts as secretary for the Department of Economics, and is during the summer months also at work in University Hall. When making out the Department budget in May, I arranged with Mr. Blake that Miss Ham’s salary should be $70, and arranged also for the mode in which her total salary for the year 1912-’13 was to be apportioned between the Department of Economics, the staff in University Hall, and the Quarterly Journal of Economics.

Unfortunately, my memoranda regarding this matter are not on file at my house in Cambridge and I cannot get at them. I trust enough is on record in your office to authorize the settlement of Miss Ham’s salary at the revised figure, namely $70 per month. If you wish to see the papers which are in […]

 

Source:  Harvard University Archives. President Lowell’s Papers, 1909-1914. Box 15, Folder 413 (1909-14).

Categories
Exam Questions Harvard Suggested Reading

Harvard. Programs of Social Reconstruction. Readings and Exam. Mason, 1929

Edward S. Mason took over Thomas Nixon Carver’s course (Economics 7b Programs of Social Reconstruction) beginning in the second term of 1926-27. According to the course description, the course nominally covered the radical programmes of “socialism, communism, anarchism and the single tax”, but the memory of Henry George had faded by this time. Utopian socialism and communism together with anarchism were the focus of the course.  Thanks to the student notes of Albert Gailord Hart from 1929, we are able to sketch an outline of this relatively popular advanced undergraduate/graduate course in the Harvard economics curriculum.

____________________

Thomas Nixon Carver on handing over his course

By bringing [John D.] Black and [Pitirim] Sorokin to Harvard I was helping to make myself unnecessary. They took over two courses which I had created and developed [for agricultural economics and sociology, respectively]. I contributed further to my own elimination by relinquishing another course which I had developed and made influential—my course on methods of social reform. The tutorial system brought into the department a number of young men who were not content to be mere tutors but were anxious to give courses of their own. Among these was a promising young man—Edward S. Mason. I yielded to the suggestion that I let him take over the above-mentioned course, while I concentrated on economic theory. I was planning a course on the economic functions of government, but before I had time to offer it the time came for me to retire. I had reached the retiring age in the year 1932.

Source:   Thomas Nixon Carver, Recollections of an Unplanned Life (1949), p. 212.

____________________

Edward S. Mason remembers…

…My doctoral dissertation had been in the field of international trade, dealing with a type of price discrimination designated by the not very attractive title of “dumping.” It was submitted in 1925 but the appearance, shortly before it was completed, of a book on the same subject, and with the same title, by Jacob Viner, precluded working over the manuscript for publication. I then interested myself in the writings of 19th century socialists and published a number of articles on them in the Quarterly Journal. This trend of thought culminated in the publication of a not very good book on the Paris Commune (of 1871) in 1930. Although I continued to be interested in this field and taught for a number of years Carver’s old course on Socialism and Social Reform, my attention shifted beginning around 1930 to the area of corporations, industrial organization, and the regulation of business….
Source:  Edward S. Mason, A Life in Development: An Autobiography (2004), p. 31. Copy in the Harvard Archive: Box 1 of Papers of Edward Sagendorph Mason.

____________________

Course Announcement

[Economics] 7b 2hf. Programmes of Social Reconstruction

Half-course (second half-year). Mon., Wed., and (at the pleasure of the instructor). Fri., at 10. Asst. Professor Mason.

A comparison of the various radical programmes, such as socialism, communism, anarchism and the single tax, the theories upon which they are based, and the grounds of their attack upon the present industrial system. An examination of the various criteria of distributive justice, and of the social utility of the institution of property. A comparison of the merits of liberalism and authoritarianism, of radicalism and conservatism. An analysis also of the present tendenccies toward equality under liberalism in this country.

Source:  Official Register of Harvard University Vol. XXV, No. 29 (May 26, 1928). Division of History, Government, and Economics, 1928-29, p. 68.

____________________

Course Enrollment

7b 2hf. Asst. Professor Mason.—Programs of Social Reconstruction.

6 Graduates, 38 Seniors, 27 Juniors, 1 Freshman, 5 Other: Total 77.

 

Source: Harvard University. Reports of the President and the Treasurer of Harvard College 1928-1929, p. 72.

____________________

Course Assignments
[from Albert Gailord Hart’s student notes]

Texts and Links

Bober, Mandell Morton. Karl Marx’s Interpretation of History. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press, 1927. (2nd edition, 1948).

De Man, Hendrik.  Psychology of Socialism, London, Allen & Unwin. 1928 Translation of  Zur Psychologie des Sozialismus. Jena, E. Diederichs, 1927.

Gide, Charles and Charles Rist. A History of Economic Doctrines from the Time of the Physiocrats to the Present Day. Translation from the second revised and augmented edition of 1913 by R. Richards. London: George G. Harrap & Company, 1915.

Skelton, Oscar Douglas. Socialism: A Critical Analysis. Cambridge, MA: Riverside Press, 1911. [Chicago Ph.D. dissertation].

Marx, Karl and Frederick Engels. Manifesto of the Communist Party (English translation authorized by Engels, 1908).

Report of the Liberal Industrial Inquiry, Britain’s Industrial Future, 1928.

Kropotkin. The Conquest of Bread (1907).  Modern Science & Anarchism (1908).

Webb, Sidney and Beatrice. A Constitution for the Socialist Commonwealth of Great Britain (1920).

Lenin, V. Imperialism, the Highest Stage of Capitalism (1916). The State and Revolution (1917).

Assignments as recorded in Hart’s notes

Gide & Rist II, I-III

Book II: The Antagonists.

Chapter I (Sismondi and the origins of the critical school);
Chapter II (Saint-Simon, the Saint-Simonians, and the beginnings of collectivism);
Chapter III (The associative socialists—Robert Owen, Charles Fourier, and Louis Blanc)]

M. M. Bober—[Karl] Marx[’s] Ec[sic] Int[erpretation of] Hist[ory]

Part I: The Material Basis of History
Part II: The Human Element in History
Part III: The Ideological Element in History]
Part IV. [The Trend of History]

De Man Psychology of Soc[ialism]  Part I;  IV  1-4. Finish De Man in April.

Communist Manifesto—Marx & Engels

Skelton’s “Socialism” I-III, VIII, IX

I: Introduction
II: The Socialist Indictment
III: The Indictment Considered
VIII: The Modern Socialist Ideal
IX: The Modern Movement

 

RP [reading period]

one [of]

  1. Report   Lib[eral] Industr[ial] Committee [sic, ]
  2. Kropotkin. Conquest of Bread  200 [pages]
    [Modern] Science & Anarchism 100 [pages]
  3. S. Webb—Plan of [“a Constitution for the Socialist Commonwealth of Gr[eat] Br[itain]]
  4. V. Lenin—Imperialism
    The State and Revolution

Source: Columbia University Libraries. Manuscript Collections. Albert Gailord Hart Papers. Box 60, Folder “Mason Micro 1929”.

____________________

Final Examination
1928-29
Harvard University
ECONOMICS 7b2

I

Write an hour on one of the following.

  1. Discuss the nature of the state in a capitalist and in a socialist society according to Levin.
  2. What does Kropotkin mean by anarchism?
  3. [✓] To what extent is the report of the Liberal Industrial Enquiry socialist?
  4. Do the essential changes proposed in Sydney Web’s “Plan,” seem to you uneconomic? Why or why not?
  5. Discuss Shaw’s case for the equal distribution of income.

II

Answer two including the first.

  1. [✓] “Marx’s recognition of the fact that profits percent tend towards equality sounded the death knell of his theory of value.” Discuss.
  2. [✓] “In competitive advertising we have a typical waste of the system of production for profit and one which a socialist society could quickly eliminate.” Discuss.
  3. “Granted the best intelligence on the part of mass production industries as to scientific analysis of demand, it still remains true that the domestic market cannot long hope to keep up with the rapidly advancing capacity of machines and skilled management to turn out goods.” Discuss.

III

Answer two including the first.

  1. [✓] De Man maintains that, “the desire for responsible self-government in industry, essentially democratic, is fundamentally alien to Marxist thought.” Why does he think so?
  2. What do the Socialists mean by economic imperialism and how do they explain it?
  3. [✓] Discuss the significance in socialist thought one of the following: Fourier, Proudhon, Louis Blanc, Sismondi, St. Simon.

Source:  Columbia University Libraries, Manuscript Collections. Albert Gailord Hart Papers, Box 60, Folder “Exams CHI Qualifying [sic]”. Note: the checkmarks indicate which questions Hart chose to answer.

Image Source:  Edward S. Mason from the Harvard Classbook, 1934.

Categories
Curriculum Gender Smith Undergraduate

Smith College. Economics and Sociology Course Offerings, 1919-20

Professor F. Stuart Chapin

Source: Smith College, Classbook 1920, p. 238.

_______________________

The following pages come from the 1919-20 catalogue of Smith College. It was the last year that Charles Franklin Emerick (Columbia economics Ph.D., 1897), the subject of the previous post, taught at Smith. This post provides lists of faculty and courses in economics and sociology.

The above quote from Professor Chapin comes from the chapter “Jokes and Cartoons” in the Smith yearbook of 1920. Sounds like a funny statistics class and I don’t mean ha-ha funny.

_______________________

ECONOMICS AND SOCIOLOGY

[FACULTY]

Charles Franklin Emerick, Ph. D., Professor of Economics and Sociology on the Robert A. Woods Foundation

F. Stuart Chapin, Ph. D., Professor of Economics and Sociology on the Mary Huggins Gamble Foundation [Absent for first semester.]

Esther Lowenthal, Ph. D., Associate Professor

Chase Going Woodhouse, A. M., Assistant Professor

Julius Drachsler, A. M., Assistant Professor

Ella Lauchner Smith, A. M., Instructor

Ruth Wedgewood Doggett, A. B., Instructor

COURSES OF STUDY

The grade of each course is indicated by the first digit of the number. Grade I courses (primarily for Freshmen and Sophomores) have numbers beginning with 1; Grade II courses (primarily for Sophomores and Juniors) have numbers beginning with 2; and so on.

 

A. Economics

21. Outlines of Economics.A survey of Economic principles and such problems as trusts, railway rates, trade unions, the tariff, and money. Three hours, through the year. M. T. W. at 9 in S. 16; Th. F. S. at 9 in C. H. 1. Professor Emerick, Associate Professor Lowenthal.

311. Economic History of England.The history of English forms of industrial organization as a background for the critical study of modern capitalism. Three hours, through the year. Th. F. S. at 10 in S. 17. Miss Smith.

[312a. American Industrial Development.Special treatment of the agricultural, manufacturing, and commercial expansion of the United States. Three hours, first semester. Omitted in 1919-1920.]

[31a. History and Theories of Economic Control.The relations of the state and the individual in matters of trade and industry based on English history. For students who have taken one course in the Department. Three hours, first semester. M. T. W. at 10 in Lib. 9. Associate Professor Lowenthal. Omitted in 1919-1920.]

[31b. The Labor Movement. The wage system, trade unions, labor legislation. For students who have taken one course in the Department. Three hours, second semester. M. T. W. at 10 in Lib. 9. Associate Professor Lowenthal. Omitted in 1919-1920.]

32a. Money, Banking, Credit, and Foreign Exchange. For students who have taken 21 or 31a. Three hours, first semester. Th. F. S. at 11 in S. 26. Professor Emerick.

32b. Corporation Finance and the Railway Problem. For students who have taken 21 or 31a. Three hours, second semester. Th. F. S. at 11 in S. 26. Professor Emerick.

33a. Economic Theory and Theory of Socialism, 1776-1875. The classical economists, Adam Smith to Cairnes. The Ricardian Socialists and Karl Marx. For students who have taken 21 or 31a, or by special permission. Three hours, first semester. Associate Professor Lowenthal.

36. Economic Theory and Theory of Socialism from 1875. A critical study of the changes in economic thought since the time of John Stuart Mill and in socialist theory since Karl Marx. For students who have taken 21 or 31a, or by special permission. Three hours, second semester. Assistant Professor Woodhouse.

34a. Economics of Consumption. A study in the cost of living and the retail market. Three hours, first semester. M. at 10 in B. H. 6 T. W. at 10 in G. H. Assistant Professor Woodhouse.

34b. The Elements of Public Finance. Governmental revenues and expenditures, with special emphasis upon modern forms of taxation. For students who have taken 21 or 31a. Three hours, second semester. M. T. W. at 10 in Lib. 9. Associate Professor Lowenthal.

35b. Economic Aspects of Reconstruction.Three hours, second semester. M. T. W. at 9 in Lib. 9. Assistant Professor Woodhouse.

 

B. Sociology

26a. The Principles of Sociology. Three hours, first semester. M. T. W. at 10 in G. H. at 11 in C. H. 1; Th. F. S. at 12 in S. 17. Professor Chapin, Assistant Professors Woodhouse and Drachsler, Miss Smith.

26b. Social Economy. The problem of poverty, its causes, relief, and prevention. Methods of dealing with the defective and delinquent classes. For students who have taken 26a. Three hours, second semester. M. T. W. at 10 in G. H. and B. H. 6; at 11 in C. H. 1; Th. F. S. at 12 in S. 17. Professor Chapin, Assistant Professors Woodhouse and Drachsler, Miss Smith.

[36a. The Social, Economic, and Political Status of Women: A comparative and historical study. For students who have taken 21 or 26. Three hours, first semester. Th. F. S. at 10 in S. 17. Omitted in 1919-1920.]

[36b. The Family and Child Problems. For students who have taken 21 or 26. Three hours, second semester. Th. F. S. at 10 in S. 17. Omitted in 1919-1920.]

[37a. Methods of Social Research. A critical study of the Social Survey in England and America, and a study of the methods of investigation used by commissions of the Federal and State Governments. For students who have taken one course in Economics and one course in Sociology. Three hours, first semester. M. T. W. at 11 in Lib. 9. Professor Chapin. Omitted in 1919-1920.]

37b. Social and Economic Statistics. Population problems, the standard of living, and problems of human inheritance statistically treated, Variation and correlation. Methods of charting and graphic portrayal. For students who have taken one course in Economics and one course in Sociology. Three hours, second semester. M. T. W. at 11 in Lib. 9. Professor Chapin.

39a. History of Social Theories: Beginnings of Sociological Thought. A comparative study of some basic contributions of primitive, ancient and medieval society to modern social theories. For students who have taken Economics 21, Sociology 26, or Philosophy 31 or 32. Three hours, first semester. M. T. W. at 9 in C. 6. Assistant Professor Drachsler.

39b. History of Social Theories: Modern Sociological Thought. A comparative study of leading modern social theories with reference to the development of a comprehensive social science. For students who have taken Economics 21, Sociology 26, or Philosophy 31 or 32. Three hours, second semester. M. T. W. at 9 in C. 6. Assistant Professor Drachsler.

 

The Majors

Economics

Based on 21.

Essential Courses: Three courses in Economics above Grade II, including 32a.

Optional Courses: Sociology 26 and any course in Economics or Sociology above Grade II.

Mathematics 23 (Recommended with Sociology 37 for students preparing for economic or social investigation.)

History—any course above Grade II.

 

Sociology

Based on 26.

Essential Courses: 21, and two Grade III courses in Sociology.

Optional Courses: Economics—any courses.

History 342, 343,347.

Mathematics 23.

Philosophy 32, 314, 315, 317, 318.

Zoology 21, 31, 35, 41.

 

Source: Catalogue of Smith College 1919-1920 (October, 1919), pp. 62-64. Another copy of the 1919-20 Catalogue at www.archive.org.

Image Source: Faculty picture of F. Stuart Chapin in the Smith College Classbook 1920, p. 19.