Author: Irwin Collier

Categories
Courses Harvard Suggested Reading Syllabus

Harvard. Draft of Marxian Economics Course Outline. Leontief, ca 1935

 

Edward S. Mason and Wassily Leontief co-taught a semester course “Karl Marx” in the economics department of Harvard in the 1935-36 and 1936-37 academic years. There were few students enrolled in the course and it was not offered in 1937-38, but due to student demand for the course it was offered (it turns out for the last time) by Leontief and Paul Sweezy in 1938-39. The material was incorporated into the course Economics of Socialism.

From Leontief’s papers I have transcribed the undated handwritten outline that was apparently drafted for this course. 

________________________

Outline of Marxian course.

Meetings 1 & 2 to be devoted to bibliography on Marx and the historical and intellectual setting of Marx’s works.—(Perhaps only the 1st meeting)

 

Subjects of discussion.

  1. Dialectical materialism.—

Theses on Feuerbach
Deutsche Idealogie
Engels’ Anti-Dühring
Engels on Feuerbach. —

Hook’s version (Towards an Understanding of Karl Marx)
Eastman—The last stand of dialectical materialism.

(Misère de la Philosophie)

  1. Economic interpretation of history.

(a) Mode of production—productive relations—forces [of] production

(b) Concept of class—proletariat—

How class consciousness is acquired—{Relation of class to productive relations
Role of economic interests—
The class view of history—Marxian interpretation of particular events

(c) Marxian theory of the state and law.

Kritik der Hegelschen Rechtsphilosophie—
Texts from Marx’s writing. —

 

  1. Equilibrium economics vs. Marxian economics

—Lange’s article.          —methodology

 

  1. Marx’s economic analysis—

(a) Theory of value and surplus value.

(b) Laws of capitalist development. —

(c) Capital accumulation, population, theory of crises—wage tendencies, etc.

 

  1. Dictatorship of the proletariat and democracy. —

  2. Marxian theory of revolution—

 

[second page]

Communist Manifesto

  1. Capital 1st vol. Entire. 800
  2. Theses on Feuerbach. — 20
  3. Comments Gotha Program 20
  4. Anti-Dühring—Same parts— 150
  5. Rev. & Counterrev. 150

or Civil War in France. {Letters—[unclear word] Publishers 300 pp.

  1. Intro. to Critique.

______________

            Hook— 100 p.

Eastman— 60

 

________________________

Links to Leontief’s Reading Assignments.

Marx, Karl. Critique of the Gotha programme, in Marx/Engels Seleccted Works Vol Three, pp. 13-30. Moscow: Progress Publishers, 1970.

Frederick Engels. Landmarks of Scientific Socialism “Anti-Duehring”. Austin Lewis, trans. Chicago: Charles H. Kerr & Company. 1907.

Marx/Engels: Karl Marx and Frederic Engels. Manifesto of the Communist Party. Chicago: Charles H. Kerr & Company, ca. 1910.

Marx: Karl Marx. Capital.

Engels, Friedrich. Ludwig Feuerbach and the End of classical German philosophy, by Frederick Engels (1886).

Marx, Karl. Revolution and counter-revolution. Or Germany in 1848. Ed. by Eleanor Marx Aveling. Chicago: Charles H. Kerr & Company, 1919.

Marx, Karl. The Paris Commune […including “The Civil War in France”], New York: New York Labor News Company, 1920.

Selected correspondence, 1846-1895 [of] Karl Marx and Friedrich Engels; [translated with commentary and notes by Dona Torr]. Published 1934 by Martin Lawrence Ltd. in London .     New edition published in 1936. (The Marxist-Leninist Library, vol. 9)

Marx, Karl. A Contribution to the Critique of Political Economy with an Appendix Containing Marx’s Introduction to the Critique. Chicago, Charles H. Kerr & Company, 1904.

 

Source:  Harvard University Archives. HUG 4517.30, Wassily Leontief Papers. Manuscripts and Research Notes 1930-1970, Box 5, Folder “Marx and Theory”.

Categories
Cornell Economists Harvard Michigan

Harvard 1909 PhD Alumnus, Edmund Ezra Day. Cornell Memorial Minute, 1951

 

Edmund Ezra Day received his Ph.D. in economics from Harvard in 1909. In 1910 he joined the Harvard economics department with his specialty in the theory, organization, and practice of statistics. Following service with the War Industries Board in Washington during World War I, Day was promoted to professor at Harvard in 1920. He went on ultimately to become the president of Cornell University. His career is outlined in the Faculty Memorial Statement following his death in 1951 that is reproduced below.

______________________

Cornell University Faculty Memorial Statement
Edmund Ezra Day
December 7, 1883 — March 23, 1951

Edmund Ezra Day, destined to be the fifth President of Cornell University, was born in Manchester, New Hampshire, on December 7, 1883. His parents were Ezra Alonzo and Louise Moulton Nelson Day. He attended Dartmouth College, and there made a brilliant scholastic record. He was awarded a Rufus Choate scholarship, and thus acquired the nickname of “Rufus,” which clung to him all his life. He was a member of Phi Beta Kappa and Theta Delta Chi. He received his B. S. from Dartmouth in 1905 and an M. A. in 1906. He then entered the Harvard Graduate School, and gained a Ph. D. in Economics in 1909.

He began his teaching career as Instructor in Economics at Dartmouth, from 1907 to 1910. He entered the Harvard Department of Economics in 1910, and rose rapidly to become Professor of Economics and Chairman of the Department. During the first World War he served as statistician for the U. S. Shipping Board and the War Industries Board.

In 1923 he left Harvard for the University of Michigan. There he was Professor of Economics, organizer and first Dean of the School of Business Administration, and Dean of the University.

His administrative ability and his understanding of economic and social problems attracted the attention of the great Foundations. In 1927-28 he was associated with the Laura Spelman Rockefeller Memorial; in 1929 he left Michigan to become director for the social sciences with the Rockefeller Foundation. He carried on concurrently the duties of director of general education with the General Education Board. His signal success in these responsible positions prompted his appointment to the presidency of Cornell in 1937.

In the following years he added to his onerous presidential duties many important tasks in educational and social realms. It is impossible here to list more than a few examples. He was president of the New York State Citizens Council, the Association of Land-Grant Colleges and Universities, the World Student Service Fund, the American Statistical Association; he was chairman of the American Council on Education, director of the National Bureau of Economic Research, director of the Federal Reserve Bank of New York, Councillor of the National Industrial Conference Board. He held fifteen honorary degrees. He was the author of “Index of Physical Production,” “Statistical Analysis,” “The Growth of Manufactures,” (with W. Thomas), and “The Defense of Freedom”.

In 1912 he married Emily Sophia Emerson, daughter of Dean Charles F. Emerson of Dartmouth College. He leaves two sons and two daughters. One son (Dr. Emerson Day) at present holds a professorship in the Cornell Medical College.

Dr. Day was suddenly stricken by a heart attack on the morning of March 23, 1951.

Dr. Day was President of Cornell University from 1937 until his resignation on July 1, 1949. He was then appointed Chancellor, with the larger interests of the University in his hands. Counselled to disburden himself of such responsibilities for reasons of health, he resigned the Chancellorship on January 31, 1950.

The twelve years of his presidency were a period of rapid growth of the University. The student enrollment and the Faculty lists nearly doubled. New schools and units were established, responsive to new educational and social concerns of the nation: the School of Chemical and Metallurgical Engineering, the School of Industrial and Labor Relations, the School of Business and Public Administration, the School of Nutrition, the School of Aeronautical Engineering, the School of Nursing. The Floyd Newman Laboratory of Nuclear Studies in Ithaca and the Cornell Aeronautical Laboratory in Buffalo were inaugurated.

The physical development of the University kept pace with the new demands. Important buildings were erected, among them Olin Hall, the Newman Laboratory, Savage Hall, Moore Hall, Clara Dickson Hall, and the Administration Building. Arrangements were made for other buildings, now rising on our campus. The Greater Cornell Fund was carried triumphantly to its goal, raising over $12,500,000 for university needs.

To assess the value of Dr. Day’s contributions to the University would require far more space than can be here afforded. This much is clear and certain: that during a period of war, of disorganization and reorganization, of rapid social and economic change, of inflation, insecurity, fear, his strong hand at the helm guided us through the storms to calmer waters. We cannot know how much of his own strength, his own life, he sacrificed to this terrifying task.

The writer of the notice on the death of President Livingston Farrand (in the Necrology of the Faculty, 1940) said: “No doubt every true leader communicates something of himself to his companions. The Cornell of Andrew D. White partook of his indomitable idealism; the Cornell of Jacob Gould Schurman shared his superb, almost resistless energy; the Cornell of Livingston Farrand became somehow more urbane, more kindly, more human.” To these words we may now add that the Cornell of Edmund Ezra Day became more socially conscious, more cognizant of its duties to the state and the world, more aware of its function as an organ of the body politic. The Cornell new schools established during Dr. Day’s regime were mostly schools of social service. Within the older units of the University a corresponding influence was at work. Such Departments as Sociology and Psychology were reconstituted; the need for social justification was felt throughout the University.

Dr. Day liked to ask provocative and sometimes infuriating questions. He liked to affront a Professor of, for instance, English, with the demand: “What are you trying to do? What is the use of the study of literature?” The Professor of English usually found, after his first bewilderment or anger had died, that the necessity of defining his aims was very wholesome. Dr. Day of course knew his own answers before he asked the question.

His mood was often quizzical. He liked to shock, unsettle, disturb; he enjoyed playing dumb. He was convinced that the great menace to successful teaching is complacency, satisfaction with routine. Tirelessly experimental himself, he could easily be exasperated by the conservatism of the Faculties. And if, as was inevitably the case, Faculty members found themselves in disagreement with him, they had only to visit him to be most cordially received and most fairly heard. In such circumstances his visitors were usually astonished to find how minutely Dr. Day was acquainted with the least operations of his great, far-flung, multifarious University, and how he had given serious attention to the smallest of her problems.

He gained this knowledge by giving to Cornell the best part of his thought and his life. He had little time for recreation, all too little for the intellectual diversions he earnestly desired. His obligation to Cornell came always first, and this obligation never ended, never left him free.

He had planned, on his retirement, to take at last his rewards: the pleasure of friendship, the pleasure of reading, the mere simple pleasure of rest. He did not have time for his rewards. He had never had time. He had time only for his duty.

Morris Bishop, S. C. Hollister, L. A. Maynard

 

Source: Cornell University. Cornell University Faculty Memorial Statement, 1951.

Image Source: Edmund Ezra Day from Harvard Class Album 1920.

Categories
Berkeley Chicago Columbia Cornell Harvard Michigan Minnesota Princeton Regulations Stanford Wisconsin Yale

Harvard. Memo on Master’s degree requirements in ten other departments, 1935

 

The following memo was found in the papers of the Harvard department of economics outlining the formal requirements for the award of a master’s degree in economics for ten other departments ca. 1935.  Harvard requirements for 1934-35 have been previously posted here at Economics in the Rear-View Mirror.

____________________

REQUIREMENTS FOR A.M. IN ECONOMICS

University of Chicago
—Catalogue Vol. XXV, March 15, 1935—
No. 7, p. 293.

“The specific requirements for the Master’s degree are:

  1. A minimum of 8 courses, or their equivalent (of which at least 6 must be in Grades II and III above*). Either in his undergraduate or graduate work the candidate should cover the substantial equivalent of the requirements for the Bachelor’s degree in economics…(May be shown by examination.)
  2. A thesis involving research of at least semi-independent character.
  3. A final examination (either oral or written at discretion of the department). The examination is on the thesis and its field and on one other field chosen by the candidate.
  4. All candidates…are expected to show ability to think clearly…on abstract economic questions, and familiarity with terms and common concepts of economic science.

No language requirement for A.M. apparently.

No set time limit, but (p. 282) they seem to regard three of work in economics (either as graduate or as undergraduate) as “normal preparation” although “exceptionally capable” students may do it in less time.

* Grade II and III being respectively survey and problem courses (II), and Research, reading and seminar courses (III). Grade I includes intermediate courses.

 

Stanford University

  1. One academic year of graduate work (A “normal time” but also minimum).
  2. Thesis
  3. Examinations (general or final and at discretion of department).

 

Cornell University

  1. At least one full year of residence at Cornell.
  2. “No student may be admitted to candidacy for any of the degrees of A.M., M.S.,…, or Ph.D. whose training has not included work in a foreign language equivalent to three units of entrance in one language or two in each of two languages.
  3. A thesis or (at departmental discretion) an essay.
  4. Written or oral (at departmental discretion) final examination.

He must show a knowledge of:

Three special fields, such as: in Economic Theory and History:

(1) Good general knowledge of history of economic thought, including classical school and contemporary.
(2) Familiarity with economic analysis and controversial area of economic thought.
(3) A background knowledge of social and intellectual history.

or in Monetary Theory:

One requirement:
(1) A detailed understanding of the theory and history of money; monetary system of the United States, theory and history of banking; banking system of United States, foreign exchange, monetary aspects of cyclical fluctuations.

No specific course requirements as far as I can see.

 

University of Minnesota

  1. At least one full academic year’s work (in residence).
  2. Thesis required.
  3. Nine credit hours each quarter of graduate courses for three quarters.
  4. He must have done in three years (undergraduate) work in his major subject if it is open to freshmen, or two years otherwise.
  5. A reading knowledge of a foreign language to be determined by the department is necessary.
  6. An examination.

 

University of Michigan

  1. Residence requirement: One semester and one summer session, or three summer sessions; nine hours work a semester and six hours a summer session are minimum to establish residence at the respective sessions.
  2. A minimum of 24 hours of graduate work is required (i.e. necessary but not alone sufficient).
  3. Thesis may be required at discretion of department (apparently economics does not require it).

 

University of Wisconsin

  1. At least two semesters’ work, at least one of which to be at Wisconsin.
  2. An oral examination.
  3. A thesis may be required of students seeking to specialize in a definite line of study.

 

Princeton University

“After Commencement Day, 1935, the degree of M.A. will be awarded only to a student who has passed the general examination for the Doctor’s degree.” This implies a knowledge of French and German; and implies not less than two years graduate study. The examination may be written, oral, or both. One year of residence is required.

 

Yale University

  1. Two full years of resident graduate study required (but may be in less time in exceptional cases where unusual scholarship is demonstrated).
  2. Reading knowledge of either French or German.
  3. An essay is required of all candidates.
  4. (Apparently) A comprehensive written examination in field of concentration in Department of Economics (it is not specified for which degree so that it seems to apply to both M.A. and Ph.D.).

 

Columbia University

  1. “The candidate shall have registered for and attended courses aggregating not less than thirty tuition points, distributed over a period of not less than one academic year or its equivalent.”
  2. “The candidate shall have satisfied the department of his choice that he has satisfied requirements specified by the department for the degree.” (May include courses, examination, an essay, seminars, or “other work”.)

 

University of California

“There are required 20 semester units and in addition a thesis.”

“At least eight of the 20 units must be strictly graduate work.”

“The student must spend one year of residence.”

Rate of taking units:

“Graduate students in the regular session taking only upper division courses are limited to a program of 16 units” (a semester or a year? probably a semester).

“Graduate students…taking only graduate courses are limited to 12 units.” Mixtures are regulated in proportion thereto.

 

Source: Harvard University Archives. Department of Economics, Correspondence and Papers 1930-1961. (UAV 349.11) Box 13, Folder “Graduate Instruction, Degree Requirements.”

 

 

Categories
Fields Harvard

Harvard. Four Ph.D. Examinees in Economics, 1910-11

 

 

For four Harvard economics Ph.D. candidates this posting provides information about their respective academic backgrounds, the six subjects of their general examinations along with the names of the examiners, the subject of their special subject, thesis subject and advisor(s) (where available).

________________________________________

 

DIVISION OF HISTORY AND POLITICAL SCIENCE
EXAMINATIONS FOR THE DEGREE OF PH.D.
1910-11

Notice of hour and place will be sent out three days in advance of each examination.
The hour will ordinarily be 4 p.m.

Alfred Burpee Balcom.

General Examination in Economics, Monday, May 1, 1911.
Committee: Professors Taussig (chairman), Bullock, Carver, Sprague, Young, and Perry.
Academic History: Acadia College, 1904-07; Harvard Graduate School, 1908-11; S.B., Acadia, 1907; A. M., Harvard, 1909. Austin Teaching Fellow, 1910-11.
General Subjects: 1. Economic Theory and its History. 2. Economic History since 1750. 3. Sociology and Social Reform. 4. Public Finance and Financial History. 5. Labor Problems and Industrial Organization. 6. Philosophy.
Special Subject: Economic Theory.
Thesis Subject: “Nassau William Senior as an Economist.” (With Professor Taussig.)

Lucius Moody Bristol.

General Examination in Economics (Social Ethics), Thursday, May 4, 1911.
Committee: Professors Peabody (chairman), Taussig, Carver, Sprague, Young, and Dr. Brackett.
Academic History: University of North Carolina, 1894-95; Boston University School of Theology, 1896-99; Harvard Divinity School, 1909-10; Harvard Graduate School, 1910-11; A.B., North Carolina, 1895; S.T.B., Boston University, 1899.
General Subjects: 1. Ethical Theory. 2. Economic Theory. 3. Labor Problems. 4. Social Reforms. 5. Sociology. 6. Statistics.
Special Subject: Social Reforms.
Thesis Subject: “Conservation of Vital Forces in Boston.” (With Professor Peabody.)

Johann Gottfried Ohsol.

General Examination in Economics, Thursday, Friday, May 5, 1911.
Committee: Professors Gay (chairman), Bullock, Carver, Sprague, Dr. Foerster, and Dr. Holcombe.
Academic History: Polytechnic Institute of Riga, 1899-1903; Harvard Graduate School, 1909-11; Candidate in Commerce, Riga, 1903.
General Subjects: 1. Economic Theory and its History. 2. Economic History since 1750. 3. Sociology and Social Reform. 4. Public Finance and Financial History. 5. Labor Problems and Industrial Organization. 6. History of American Institutions.
Special Subject: Labor Problems.
Thesis Subject: (undecided).

Ralph Emerson Heilman.

General Examination in Economics (Social Ethics), Thursday, May 11, 1911.
Committee: Professors Peabody (chairman), Taussig, Bullock, Carver, Dr. Brackett and Dr. McConnell.
Academic History: Morningside College, 1903-06; Northwestern University, 1906-07; Harvard Graduate School, 1909-11; Ph.B., Morningside, 1906; A.M., Northwestern, 1907.
General Subjects: 1. Ethical Theory. 2. Economic Theory and its History. 3. Poor Relief. 4. Social Reforms. 5. Sociology. 6. Labor Problems.
Special Subject: (undecided).
Thesis Subject: “Chicago Traction.” (With Professor Ripley.)

 

Source: Harvard University Archives. Harvard University, Examinations for the Ph.D. (HUC 7000.70), Folder “Examinations for the Ph.D., 1910-11”.

Image Source:  Harvard University, ca. 1910. Library of Congress Prints and Photographs Division Washington, D.C. 20540 USA

Categories
Economists NBER

NBER. Mitchell to Burns about Friedman. 1945

 

 

Reading the letter written by Wesley Clair Mitchell, the Director of Research at the NBER, to Arthur Burns in which Mitchell offers discouraging words regarding an appointment at NBER for Milton Friedman in 1945, it is interesting to see how Milton Friedman and his wife report on the controversy that very clearly influenced Mitchell’s personal opinion of Milton Friedman. What is not yet clear is whether Arthur Burns ultimately made an offer to Friedman or whether it was perhaps the timely offer arranged by George Stigler for Milton Friedman to teach at the University of Minnesota that made a NBER appointment a moot point.

_______________________________

The Friedmans Remember

The publication of the NBER book by Simon Kuznets and Milton Friedman Incomes from Independent Professional Practice (1945) was delayed four years in part because of the new demands for statistical and economic analyses due to World War II. In Milton Friedman’s judgment the delay was caused “mostly by a controversy about one part of the manuscript” that attributed half the observed excess average income of physicians over dentists to “the difference in ease of entry, produced at least in part by the success of the American Medical Association in limiting entry into medicine.” (pp. 71-72) A member of the special reading committee of directors appointed to evaluate the manuscript, C. Reinhold Noyes, did not agree and wrote “I suggest that the subject of freedom of entry is a hot poker and be dropped.” Friedman described how he and Kuznets wrote eighty pages worth of memos in response to this and other criticisms of Noyes. In his account of the controversy, Milton Friedman has nothing but praise for Wesley Clair Mitchell: “Three years of back and forth discussion followed, with Wesley Mitchell…supporting the scientific freedom of bureau authors…In later years I came to appreciate how rare is the combination of toughness and diplomacy that Mitchell demonstrated in defense of our scientific freedom.” (pp. 74-76)

Rose Friedman wrote about her worries about her husband’s job prospects after World War II ended.

“Presumably he could have gone back to the Treasury but that was the last thing he wanted to do. A government career was never Milton’s choice. He could always return to the National Bureau, but I knew that too was not Milton’s preference. An academic career was what he wanted. By early September, when we moved back to our apartment in Manhattan, Milton had received no offer for the fall. As an inveterate worrier always fearing the worst, I was not happy. I remember very well a visit from the Burnses and Arthur’s attempt, while Milton was temporarily out of the room to reassure me by telling me that Milton was very gifted and would make it to the top and that I had no reason to be concerned.” (p. 147)

 

Source: Milton and Rose D. Friedman, Two Lucky People: Memoirs (Chicago, 1998).

_______________________________

 

Letter from Wesley Clair Mitchell to Arthur Burns

 

Huckleberry Rocks
Greensboro, Vermont

August 27 1945

Dear Arthur

Milton offers a problem that is painful indeed, but we ought to face it squarely. You know how highly I value Simon’s [Kuznets] judgment as well as your own. Both of you have longer + more intimate acquaintance with M. than have I. I am sure both of you try to be objective about him. So do I. That we differ must be due to the unlike weights we attach to qualities we agree, or admit, he possesses.

We agree about his acute mind, about his thorough training in mathematical statistics + mathematical economics, about his creative powers at least in the first of these fields and probably in the second, about his personal likeability, + about his honesty of intention. We must admit that he has fooled himself, unwittingly, + thereby fooled all three of us who were so predisposed to accept his findings. Do you remember that first paper in which M. argued that the incomes of physicians run substantially higher than those of dentists, + the criticisms Fred Mills made of the averages on which M. rested his conclusion? Simon was annoyed by Mills; you were annoyed by him; I was a little annoyed; but Mills was right in large part. Then came the second + graver case brought out by Noyes’ rather brutal attack which enlisted my sympathies as well as yours + Simon’s warmly on Milton’s side. M. drew up a table that seemed to settle the critical issue in his favor. It was made from data he had collected + studied. We knew nothing about these materials in detail. Simon accepted the results. You accepted them. I accepted them with pleasure. Noyes’ second set of criticisms forced a more searching examination. I put in more than a month of careful study + concluded that M. had misused his data in several ways + reached an indefensible conclusion. The best thing about that sad affair was that M. frankly admitted his errors.

I think Milton’s troubles arose from accepting a conclusion about the monopolistic practice of the medical societies, feeling sure that restriction of entry must tend to increase the incomes of medical practitioners, + so accepting at face value any statistical evidence that pointed in the direction he knew to be right. We are all of us subject to this type of error. We examine far more critically evidence that appears to run counter to our hypotheses than evidence that supports them. But M. seems to me worse than most of us on this respect.

Another weakness that I think hurts Milton is lack of interest in and appreciation of non-rational factors that influence, + sometimes dominate, economic behavior. They cannot be handled effectively by the calculus of economic theory concerned with what it is to the interest of men to do. Milton’s clever appraisal of the effect of the higher costs of medical than of dental education is a brilliant specimen of this sort of theorizing. Of course he knows his argument is most unrealistic + says so. Under pressure of criticisms he stressed his qualifications still further. What does such an analysis really add to our knowledge of how men choose their occupations? Can’t the simple bits of truth in the proposition that high costs of training limit the number who enter a profession be put better in simpler form? Why work out an accountant’s estimate in detail when you have to add that few men are able to do such work correctly; that still fewer possess the concrete evidence needed to give the estimate some air of reality; that a man clever enough to do the job + possessed of the factual data would realize that conditions might well change by the time he or his son was ready to set up in practice, + that no one should suppose that choices are really made in this way?

I wish I could share your intuitive faith that M. “has more to contribute to economic science than any man of his generation.” If only we could find the man of whom this remark is true + draw him into the National Bureau, I should be happy indeed! Whoever he may be, he has more insight into human nature than Milton has been blessed with.

Nor do I think you would be wise in taking on a man whom you would have to follow through all the details of his work to make sure that his deficiencies, genuine or problematical, would never again embarrass us. As director of research, you need colleagues who know a great deal more than you will have time to learn about the materials they are severally handling. The kind of watching M. needs is not critical examination of his statistical methods + general reasoning, but detailed study of his data + the way he uses them. That is a time consuming job. None of us did that for M. until far too late. I must accept primary responsibility for this error of omission. I don’t want to see you put in a position where your conscience will force you to spend weeks in making good the guarantee you suggest.

You know that I am grieved to write as I do. To me it seems that you are letting admiration for Milton’s technical proficiencies + personal liking warp your judgment. Loyalty to the aims we both cherish requires me to be candid, though at cost to your feelings as well as mine. If you can produce genuine evidence that my present opinions are wrong, I shall be glad. In the meantime, please do your best to give proper weight to my misgivings.

[…]

Ever yours

[signed]

Wesley C. Mitchell

 

Source: Arthur F. Burns Papers at the Economists’ Papers Archives. Duke University, David M. Rubenstein Library. Box 2, Folder “Correspondence: Wesley Clair Mitchell 1911-1945”.

Image Source: Columbia 250 Website:  Arthur F. Burns,  Milton Friedman. Foundation for the Study of Cycles Website: Wesley Clair Mitchell.

Categories
Germany Michigan

Michigan. Philo Parsons’ gift of the Karl Heinrich Rau personal library, 1871

 

The fact that the University of Michigan’s library was able to acquire the personal library of the Heidelberg economics professor Karl Heinrich Rau (1792-1870) in 1871 and thereby  increase its holdings by an estimated 20-25% has fascinated me. I was curious to find out more about the man who paid $1200 (gold-basis) for Rau’s books and pamphlets. The collection is described and the story is told by Z. Clark Dickinson in his paper “The Library and Works of Karl Heinrich Rau” in  Zeitschrift für die gesamte Staatswissenschaft/Journal of Institutional and Theoretical Economics, Bd. 114, H. 4. (1958), pp. 577-593.

For this posting I include an image of one of the book labels from the collection, an announcement of the acquisition in the 1871 report of the President of the University of Michigan to the Board of Regents, and an excerpt from Philo Parsons’ brother’s privately printed Genealogy of the Family of Lewis B. Parsons. (Second) from 1900 that provides some biographical detail about Philo Parsons, who among other career accomplishments was the  founding president of the First National Bank of Detroit.

One puzzle remains. There was a small steamship (136 feet), owned by Selah Dustin and named the Philo Parsons, that ran a regular schedule between Detroit and the southern ports of Lake Erie, including Sandusky.  The Philo Parsons played a featured role in Civil War history after Confederate agents highjacked the side paddle wheel packet steamer in a failed plot to free confederate prisoners held on Johnson Island in Lake Erie, near Sandusky, Ohio. Why the ship bore that name is something I haven’t been able to figure out (yet). Perhaps the fact that Philo Parsons’ brother, Lewis B. Parsons, served as Major General in the U.S. Army during the Civil War as the Chief of Rail and River Transportation could have played a role? 

 

__________________________

THE “PARSONS LIBRARY.”

Until the beginning of the present year no considerable donation has ever been made to the University library. Since that time, however, a very large and valuable private library has been purchased and presented to the University by Philo Parsons, Esq., of Detroit. It consists of the entire collection of the late Professor Rau of Heidelberg, made during his long service of fifty years as Professor of Political Economy in Heidelberg University, and embracing all the most valuable literature contained in the European languages on political science and kindred topics. The number of volumes in this collection is 4034, and of pamphlets more than two thousand. While this munificent gift is of great importance on account of the intrinsic worth of the collection, it is not less valuable as an example which cannot fail to find imitators.

Many of the volumes, as is almost always the case in libraries of this kind, are unbound, or require rebinding before they can be placed on the shelves and catalogued. Mr. Parsons, I understand, has already made arrangements for the binding necessary to be done.

The Librarian has prepared a general description of this collection as a part of his report on the General Library. It is undoubtedly as nearly perfect as a library can be made on the specialty which it represents. And it was the well authenticated statement of this fact, which influenced the authorities at Yale to send an order for the purchase of it before it was known to have been secured for this University.

While, however, it possesses this specific character, it contains also a large number of works of inestimable value on other subjects. The most important of these is the series of volumes issued by the Academy of Vienna, and those on the original sources for the history of the house of Hapsburg; a work of great importance in the study of European history. The languages represented in the Parsons library are German, French, English, Italian, Spanish, Portuguese, Latin, Greek, Hollandish, Danish, Swedish, Icelandic, Servian [sic], Polish, Hungarian, Russian, and the Slavic languages of the Lower Danube. A perfect university library must contain, first, all the standard literary productions, or classics, of all polite languages, and, second, all works in all languages necessary to the investigation and treatment of every special branch of science and learning. The building up of such a library is of itself a great work, not indeed to be perfected by one generation. Nothing, however, can contribute so much to its consummation as the acquisition from time to time, as opportunity may offer, of those complete topical libraries, so often collected in these days by eminent German and English savans, and not unfrequently offered for sale after their decease. At the same. time it should be observed that a university library which is known to be perfect even in one branch of knowledge, has gained much in the estimation of the literary public.

Source: President’s Report to the Board of Regents for the Year Ending June 30, 1871 published in Proceedings of the Board of Regents of the University of Michigan from January, 1870, to January, 1876 (Ann Arbor, 1876), pp. 115-116.

__________________________

TRIBUTE BY JOSEPH L. DANIELS OF
OLIVET COLLEGE, MICHIGAN,
TO
PHILO PARSONS.

Mr. Philo Parsons was born at Scipio, N. Y., February 6th, 1817. He was the second in a family of ten children. His father, Lewis Baldwin Parsons, was born at Williamstown, Massachusetts, April 30th, 1793, and died at Detroit, Michigan, December 21st, 1855. He was a man of rare native gifts, uncommon energy and force of character, independent and positive in his religious belief, yet catholic and tolerant toward all. His whole life was one of systematic benevolence and he left most of his property for the founding of Parsons’ College at Fairfield, Iowa.

He was married November 10, 1814, to Miss Lucina Hoar, a member of the famous Hoar family which migrated to this country in 1640 and located at Concord, Massachusetts. She was born at Brimfield, Massachusetts, October 31st, 1790, and died at Gouveneur, New York, October 3d, 1873. Mrs. Parsons was a woman of even temperament and self-poise, a devoted mother, an intelligent and earnest Christian, maintaining a lively interest in affairs of church and state, even to the advanced age of 83 years. Her pastor, Reverend Joseph R. Page, describes her as a “Mother in Israel, and a model in all the relations of life and of all the Christian graces.”

From such an ancestry with a record traceable back to the founders of Massachusetts was Mr. Philo Parsons descended. His early years were spent in Gouveneur, Homer and Perry, New York. At the latter place he entered into business with his father under the firm name of L. B. Parsons & Son. And he also married there in 1843 Miss Ann Eliza Barnum, Their long and happy married life was terminated in 1893 by the death of Mrs. Parsons, Mr. Parsons following her three years later, dying at Winchenden, Massachusetts, January 20, 1896. Eight children were born to them, of whom seven survived their parents. In 1844, Mr. Parsons removed to Detroit, Mich., and entered upon the grocery business under the firm name of Parsons & James. A few years later he established a private bank. In 1861, when the Government created the National banking system as an aid in carrying on the war, Mr. Parsons was the leader in organizing the First National Bank of Detroit, and was its first president and for many years one of its directors. He did much to promote the commercial prosperity of Detroit. He entered heartily into the project for bringing the Wabash Railroad into the city, was an active member of the Board of Trade, and for a time its President. For many years he represented his own city in the National Board of Trade and was honored repeatedly as one of its Vice-Presidents. His discussions in these National Conventions show a wealth of information, a candor and breadth of view and a discrimination akin to prophesy. He was an ardent lover of his own city and State, and yet on one occasion explained his vote, apparently against their interests as “for the greatest good of the greatest number.”

Mr. Parsons was active in the municipal affairs of Detroit, and for a time was a member of its council. The State, too, more than once conferred upon him honors and trusts; notably as Commissioner to the Yorktown Centennial, and as chairman of the Commission to secure the statue of General Lewis Cass to be placed in the Capitol at Washington. He brought to this work all the enthusiasm of a lifelong friendship and a patriotic pride for the honor of his beloved State. The statue, almost vocal with life, crowned his many months of toil and effort, and was one of the joys of his life. He honored himself in honoring the State.

Yet political offices and honors he did not seek. He even declined to consider them when they merely appealed to his personal ambition. Too much Puritanic and Revolutionary blood flowed in his veins to ever regard public offices as anything but a sacred trust, a patriotic service. Mr. Parsons had a lively interest in agriculture, was an active member of the State Agricultural Society of Michigan and served most acceptably as its President. He was an enthusiast in horticulture and fruit culture, and found relaxation and pleasure in personal work in his own garden, one of the finest in Detroit. He was a royal entertainer and was never happier than when sharing the hospitality of his elegant home with his friends.

His benevolence was a matter of principle. He took special delight in aiding young men who were preparing for the work of the Christian ministry. He was one of the largest and most systematic givers to the cause of missions. He was an enthusiastic believer in education.

While several institutions were looking with eager eyes toward the Ram [sic, Rau is correct] Library at Heidelberg, Mr. Parsons bought and donated it in its entirety to the Michigan State University [sic, University of Michigan is correct]. In keeping with his father’s spirit, he was especially devoted to the Christian College. He early became interested in Olivet College, Michigan. For thirty-six years he was a member of its Board of Trustees. He built his name into the history and even the very walls of the College. Parsons Hall and the Parsons Professorship are honored words to-day. Not only his munificent gifts, but his wise counsels and his lifelong devotion to the work at Olivet are gratefully remembered. And no less were these deeds of benevolence a grateful remembrance to Mr. Parsons himself. They were his glory and joy in his later years of illness. He found a rich reward in the satisfaction of building himself into institutions of education and religion. Olivet College grew dearer to him. His home church, the First Congregational Church of Detroit, grew dearer. His beloved pastor and his intimate friends at Olivet received frequent letters full of gratitude and joy for what he had been permitted to do, and full of trust and hope in prospect of a blessed immortality. In this spirit, he entered into rest. His death was literally a sleep. He slept on earth to awake in Heaven.

Source:  Genealogy of the Family of Lewis B. Parsons. (Second).  Parsons-Hoar (St. Louis, 1900), pp. 48-51

 

 

Categories
Curriculum Michigan

Michigan. Prussian university as the model for higher education. Tappan, 1852-53

 

Digging around the history of economics instruction at the University of Michigan, I stumbled across the fact that the first President of the University of Michigan was a huge fan of the organization of Prussian education. Henry P. Tappan‘s extended statement of his vision for American colleges and universities can be read in his 1851 book University Education. One sees his ambition to restructure the University of Michigan along Prussian lines in the excerpt below taken from the  first catalogue published under Tappan’s  leadership in 1852-53.

There are several things that struck me when I read the 1852-53 Michigan catalogue:  counting Tappan, the University of Michigan’s faculty of science, literature and arts was all of eight professors; the entire undergraduate student body in 1852-53 was sixty students; undergraduates who passed the admissions examinations had to be at least fourteen years old to be enrolled; the B.A. and B.S. degrees both included a mandatory single term course in political economy in the junior year; reponsibility for the political economy courses at the collegiate (undergraduate) and university (graduate) levels was with the Professor of Intellectual and Moral Philosophy (Henry P. Tappan).

______________________________________

First President of the University of Michigan

HENRY PHILIP TAPPAN was born at Rhinebeck on the Hudson, New York, April 18,1805. His father’s family was of Huguenot extraction; on his mother’s side he was Dutch. He entered Union College at the age of sixteen and was graduated Bachelor of Arts in 1825. Two years later he was graduated from the Auburn Theological Seminary and became associate pastor of the Dutch Reformed church in Schenectady, New York, for one year. He was next settled as pastor of the Congregational church at Pittsfield, Massachusetts. To this charge he took with him his newly married wife, a daughter of Colonel John Livingston, of New York. At the end of three years he was obliged to seek health and made a trip to the West Indies. On his return in 1832 he was elected professor of Intellectual and Moral Philosophy in the University of the City of New York. He had been a critic of the American college. He felt that it was not equal to the demands of American society, and now that he had become a teacher he began to study the problem more closely. He saw the need of better libraries and apparatus, better equipped faculties, and more freedom in the choice of studies; but his superiors were not yet prepared for his advanced ideas, and he resigned his chair. This was in 1838. He now turned his attention to authorship, at the same time conducting a private school. In 1839 appeared his “Review of Edwards’s Inquiry into the Freedom of the Will”; in 1840, “The Doctrine of the Will Determined by an Appeal to Consciousness”; in 1841, “The Doctrine of the Will Applied to Moral Agency and Responsibility”; in 1844, “Elements of Logic”; in 1851, a treatise on “University Education “; and in 1852, ” A Step from the New World to the Old and Back Again.” In 1852 he was invited to resume his former chair of Philosophy in the University of the City of New York, and the same year he was elected to the presidency of the University of Michigan. He accepted the call from Michigan and became the first President of the University, and Professor of Philosophy. He believed that a university worthy of the name must arise from the successive stages of primary and secondary schools. But these could be secured in completeness and perfection only by state authority, and by state and municipal appropriations derived from public funds and public taxation. These conditions he found partially established in the State of Michigan. Hope took possession of his heart, and he proceeded to create the American university according to his idea; but he moved faster than the circumstances would warrant, and after eleven years of labor he left the work to other hands. The seed he sowed took root, and in due time his controlling idea was embodied in practice, which was the university lecture and freedom in the choice of studies. A more detailed account of his work at Ann Arbor will be found in the chapter devoted to his administration. He received the degree of Doctor of Divinity from Union College in 1845 and the degree of Doctor of Laws from Columbia in 1854. In 1856 he was elected a corresponding member of the Imperial Institute of France. On leaving Michigan in 1863 he went immediately to Europe. In Berlin, Paris, Bonn, Frankfort, Basel, and Geneva he found literary friends and cultivated circles glad to welcome him. He resided at Basel for some years, and finally purchased a beautiful villa at Vevey, on the shores of Lake Geneva, where he passed his declining years, and where he died November 15, 1881. He lies buried, with his entire family, high up on the vineclad slopes above Vevey, facing the lake, with its heavenly blue, and the glorious mountains of Savoy beyond. Thither more than one of his old Michigan boys have found their way in the after years to do homage at his tomb.

Source: Burke A. Hinsdale, History of the University of Michigan (Ann Arbor, 1906), pp. 217-218.

______________________________________

Reception of Tappan’s Vision of a University

President Tappan incurred much opposition and ridicule on account of his persistent advocacy of the German
ideal. “So much was this foreign school system the burden of his discourse that it brought upon him a storm of
censure and abuse from some of the journals of the state, whose editors were alarmed for the glory of the American eagle, or, possibly, were glad of a theme so potent to rouse the stout patriotism of their American hearts. Of all the imitations of English aristocracy, German mysticism, Prussian imperiousness, and Parisian nonsensities, he is altogether the most un-Americanized, the most completely foreignized specimen of an abnormal Yankee we have ever seen. Such was the style of the attacks made upon him, worth notice only as pointing to the source from which opposition came.” — History of the University of Michigan, Elizabeth M. Farrand, Ann Arbor, 1885, pp. 112-113.

Source: Burke A. Hinsdale, History of the University of Michigan (Ann Arbor, 1906) p. 86.

______________________________________

Excerpts from First Catalogue of Tappan Presidency

ORGANIZATION OF THE UNIVERSITY.

THE system of Public Instruction adopted by the State of Michigan is copied from the Prussian, acknowledged to be the most perfect in the world.

Hence the Constitution ordains, first of all, that there shall be a Superintendent of Public Instruction, who “shall have a general supervision of public instruction.” This office corresponds in its general features to the Minister of Public Instruction in Prussia.

With respect to the Primary Schools, the Constitution has ordained that “a school shall be kept, without charge for tuition, at least three months in each year, in every school district in the State; and all instruction in said schools shall be conducted in the English language.” These schools it is designed to make as comprehensive and perfect as possible. To this end a system of Union Schools is going into operation, constituted by throwing together several District Schools. By this means the material of learning is increased, the course of study enlarged, and more competent teachers are provided.

The Union Schools will become the elementary classical and scientific schools preparatory to the Collegiate or Gymnastic Department of the University. This, too, is in accordance with the Prussian system, which makes the Primary Schools preparatory to the Gymnasia.

The Normal School, constituted for the education of Teachers, is an essential part of the Primary School system.

In the University, it is designed to organize all the Faculties with the exception of the Theological, which will be left to the different denominations. It is to be hoped, however, that schools of Theology will be established at Ann Arbor. In some departments of Theological science it may be possible for the different denominations to unite in establishing common professorships. In others they will naturally choose to have separate professorships. But every one will perceive, at once, the advantages to be derived from collecting all the learned Faculties in one place, where the students can enjoy the common benefit of the University library, and attend, at their pleasure, while engaged in particular professional studies, lectures on other branches of literature and science. Thus, too, a more general spirit of scholarship will be awakened, and a generous competition kept alive.

There are already organized two Faculties, that of Science, Literature and the Arts, and that of Medicine.

In the first named department, that grade of studies has been established which in our country is usually designated as the Collegiate or Undergraduate. This, in all our Colleges, corresponds in general to the course in the Gymnasia of Germany. In the University of Michigan, it is a cardinal object to make this correspondence as complete as possible. Hence, it is proposed to make the studies here pursued not only introductory to professional studies, and to studies in the higher branches of science and literature, but also to embrace such studies as are more particularly adapted to agriculture, the mechanic arts, and to the industrial arts generally. Accordingly, a distinct scientific course has been added, running parallel to the classical course, extending through the same term of four years, and embracing the same number of classes with the same designations. In this course, a more extended range of Mathematics will be substituted for the Greek and Latin languages. Students, who have in view particular branches as connected immediately with their pursuits in life, and who do not aim at general scientific or literary study, will be admitted to partial courses. The schools of Civil Engineering and Agricultural Chemistry will be among the partial courses.

The design of the Regents and Faculty is, to make the Collegiate or Gymnastic department as ample and rich as possible, and to adapt it to the wants of all classes of students that properly come within its range.

The classical and scientific courses, whether full or partial, will be conducted by the University Faculty of Science, Literature and the Arts.

But the Regents and Faculty cannot forget that a system of Public Instruction can never be complete without the highest form of education, any more than without that primary education which is the natural and necessary introduction to the whole. The Undergraduate course, after all that can be done to perfect it, is still limited to a certain term of years, and, necessarily, embraces only a limited range of studies. After this must come professional studies, and those more extended studies in Science, Literature and the Arts, which alone can lead to profound and finished scholarship. A system of education established on the Prussian principles of education, cannot discard that which forms the culmination of the whole. An institution cannot deserve the name of a University which does not aim, in all the material of learning, in the professorships which it establishes, and in the whole scope of its provisions, to make it possible for every student to study what he pleases, and to any extent he pleases. Nor can it be regarded as consistent with the spirit of a free country to deny to its citizens the possibilities of the highest knowledge.

It is proposed, therefore, at as early a day as practicable, to open courses of lectures for those who have graduated at this or other institutions, and for those who in other ways have made such preparation as may enable them to attend upon them with advantage. These lectures, in accordance with the educational systems of Germany and France, will form the proper development of the University, in distinction from the College or Gymnasium now in operation.

Such a scheme will require the erection of an observatory, a large increase of our library and our philosophical apparatus, and additional Professors. A great work, it will require great means: but when once accomplished, it will constitute the glory of our State, and give us an indisputable pre-eminence.

The Medical Department already established belongs to the University proper. Here instruction is carried on by lectures, and it is presumed that students, by the aid of these lectures the design of which is to present them a complete outline of medical science, and to direct them in their studies-by the study of learned works, and, availing themselves of all the preparations made for the thorough study of their profession, shall be enabled to compose the Theses and pass the examinations which are to test their scholarship and prove them worthy of being admitted as Doctors of Medicine.

Source: Catalogue of the Corporation, Officers and Students in the Departments of Medicine, Arts and Sciences, in the University of Michigan 1852-53 (Detroit, 1853), pp. 19-22.

DEPARTMENT OF SCIENCE, LITERATURE AND THE ARTS.
FACULTY.

REV. HENRY P. TAPPAN, D.D.,
CHANCELLOR,
And Professor of Intellectual and Moral Philosophy.

REV. GEORGE P. WILLIAMS, LL.D.,
Professor of Natural Philosophy and Mathematics.

ABRAM SAGER, A.M., M.D.,
Professor of Zoology and Botany.

SILAS H. DOUGLASS, A.M., M.D.,
Professor of Chemistry, Mineralogy and Geology.

LOUIS FASQUELLE, LL.D.,
Professor of Modern Languages.

JAMES R. BOISE, A.M.,
Professor of the Greek Language and Literature.

ALVAH BRADISH, A.M.,
Professor of Fine Arts.

REV. E. O. HAVEN, A.M.,
Professor of Latin Language and Literature.

[…]

[In the Department of Literature, Science and Arts there were a total of 60 undergraduates (10 Seniors, 21 Juniors, 18 Sophomores  and 11 Freshmen)]

[…]

TERMS OF ADMISSION.

DEPARTMENT OF SCIENCE, LITERATURE AND THE ARTS.—UNDERGRADUATE COURSE

  1. CLASSICAL COURSE. — No person will be admitted to this course unless he sustain a satisfactory examination in the following studies, namely: In English Grammar, Geography, Arithmetic and Algebra through equations of the first degree; in the Latin Grammar, Caesar’s Commentaries, Cicero’s Select Orations, and six books of the Æneid of Virgil, or in some equivalent amount of classical Latin; in the Greek Grammar and the Greek Reader, or in some equivalent amount of classical Greek; in the writing of the Latin and Greek (with the accents); and in Grecian and Roman Geography.
  2. SCIENTIFIC COURSE. — The examinations for admission to this course will be particularly rigid in the following studies, namely: English Grammar, Geography, Arithmetic, and Algebra through equations of the first degree.
  3. PARTIAL COURSE. — Those who do not desire to become candidates for a degree, may be admitted to any part of the classical or scientific course, for such length of time as they may choose, in case they exhibit satisfactory evidence of such proficiency as will enable them to proceed advantageously with the studies of the class which they propose to enter.

No person shall become a candidate for admission to any of the above courses until he have completed his fourteenth year, nor without presenting satisfactory evidence of unexceptionable moral character.

[…]

COURSE OF INSTRUCTION.

DEPARTMENT OF ARTS AND SCIENCES.—UNDERGRADUATES.

Classical Course

Scientific Course

FIRST YEAR

First term
Latin, English Language and Literature,
Greek, History,
Algebra. Algebra.

Second term
Algebra and Geometry, Algebra and Geometry,
Latin, History,
Greek. English Language and Literature

Third term
Geometry, Geometry,
Greek, French,
Latin. History.

SECOND YEAR

First term
Rhetoric, Rhetoric,
Trigonometry and Conic Sec., Trigonometry and Conic Sec.,
Latin or Greek. French.

Second term
Latin, German,
Rhetoric, French,

Greek.

 Mensuration, Navigation,[and Surveying].

Third term
Latin or Greek, German,
French, Descriptive and Analytical Geometry,
Natural Philosophy. Natural Philosophy.

THIRD YEAR

First term
Political Economy, Political Economy,
Natural Philosophy, Natural Philosophy,
French. German

Second term
German, Drawing, Perspective and Architecture,
Latin or Greek, Calculus,
French. Rhetoric.

Third term
German, Civil Engineering,
Astronomy, Mental Philosophy,
Latin or Greek. Chemistry.

FOURTH YEAR

First term
German, Civil Engineering,
Mental Philosophy, Mental Philosophy,
Chemistry. Chemistry.

Second term
Moral Science. Moral Science,
Mental Philosophy and Logic, Mental Philosophy and Logic,
Chemistry. Chemistry.

Third term
Moral Science, Moral Science,
Animal and Vegetable Physiology Animal and Vegetable Physiology,
Geology. Geology.

Lectures through the year, once each week, on Natural Theology and Evidences of Christianity, to all the classes.

Exercises in declamation and English composition, for each class, weekly, through both courses. Original declamations through the last two years.

[…]

UNIVERSITY COURSE.

This Course is designed for those who have taken the degree of Bachelor of Arts or the degree of Bachelor of Sciences, and for those generally who, by previous study, have attained a preparation and discipline to qualify them for pursuing it.

The Course will be conducted exclusively by lectures. Besides attending these the student will have full opportunity of availing himself of the library and all other means that can aid him in literary cultivation and scientific researches.

This Course, when completely furnished with able professors and the material of learning, will correspond to that pursued in the Universities of France and Germany.

The following scheme will present, in general, the subjects proper to such a course:

  1. Systematic Philosophy.
  2. History of Philosophy.
  3. History and Political Economy.
  4. Logic.
  5. Ethics and Evidences of Christianity.
  6. The Law of Nature — The Law of Nations — Constitutional Law.
  7. The Higher Mathematics.
  8. Astronomy.
  9. General Physics.
  10. Chemistry.
  11. Natural History.
  12. Philosophy.
  13. Greek Language and Literature.
  14. Latin Language and Literature.
  15. Oriental Languages.
  16. English Language and Literature.
  17. Modern Literature.
  18. Rhetoric and Criticism.
  19. The History of the Fine Arts.
  20. The Arts of Design.

[…]

OF DEGREES

DEPARTMENT OF SCIENCE, LITERATURE AND THE ARTS.

The degree of Bachelor of Arts, in accordance with general usage, will be conferred on students who complete the Classical Course and pass the examinations in the same.

The degree of Bachelor of Sciences will be conferred on students who complete the Scientific Course and pass the examinations in the same. This title, borrowed from the French Colleges, has already been introduced into the Lawrence Scientific School, of Harvard, and into the University of Rochester, to mark the graduation of a similar class of students.

The degree of Master of Arts will not be conferred in course upon graduates of three years standing, but only upon such graduates as have pursued professional or general scientific studies during that period. The candidate for the degree must pass an examination before one of the Faculties. He must also read a Thesis before the Faculties of the University at the time of taking the degree.

[…]

OBSERVATIONS ON THE COURSES OF STUDY PURSUED IN THE UNIVERSITY

[…]

INTELLECTUAL AND MORAL PHILOSOPHY.

This study is conducted by the use of text books, accompanied with lectures. Essays on subjects connected with the course are read by the students and criticised by the professor. One is read at each recitation. Reference is made to the standard works of ancient and modern writers on philosophy.

A complete development of this branch of knowledge must necessarily be reserved for the University Course.

HISTORY AND POLITICAL ECONOMY

History, particularly that of the Greeks and Romans, is connected with the study of the ancient languages.

Political Economy is, at present, assigned to the Professor of Intellectual and Moral Philosophy [Chancellor Rev. Henry P. Tappan, D.D.]. Instruction is here given, as in Intellectual and Moral Philosophy, by the use of text books, accompanied with lectures and by references to the standard works on Political Economy. The students are here also required to read original essays on subjects connected with the course.

 

Source: Catalogue of the Corporation, Officers and Students in the Departments of Medicine, Arts and Sciences, in the University of Michigan 1852-53 (Detroit, 1853), pp. 13, 23-26, 28, 30.

Image Source: Web transcription of Elizabeth S. Adams,  “Henry Philip Tappan Administration” in The University of Michigan, An Encyclopedic Survey in Four Volumes, Wilfred B. Shaw, editor, Volume 1, Part 1 (Ann Arbor, 1942),  pp.  39-52.

Categories
Michigan

Michigan. Economics within Political Sciences, 1843-1910

 

The Department of Economics at the University of Michigan emerged from the interdisciplinary pool of “Political Science” at the start of the twentieth century. The idea of a school of political science following a German model was quite like that of the Columbia Faculty of Political Science that was established ten months before the University of Michigan program (June 1881). Another account of the history of the Michigan economics department that goes forward to 1940 has been posted earlier. 

Political Science at the University of Michigan
[up to 1910]

In February, 1910, the Regents of The University of Michigan authorized Acting President Harry B. Hutchins to recommend a candidate for Professor of Political Science. The duties of the first Professor of Political Science at the University would be to give the courses previously taught by Dr. James B. Angell and to relieve the History Department of its instruction in the field of government. In April of that year, Jesse S. Reeves, assistant professor of political science at Dartmouth College, was appointed to this position.

Thus in September, 1910, the Department of Political Science was formally established as such at The University of Michigan. In its first school year the Department offered American Government (federal, state, and local), Municipal Government, Public International Law and History of American Diplomacy, plus a seminar in the History of Political Theory. During the year a total of 250 registrations were recorded.

Although the formal beginning of the Political Science Department occurred in 1910, the teaching of political science seems to have anticipated Regental action by as much as fifty years. The course of study in philosophy, as announced in the Catalog of 1843-44, was divided into three parts: (1) language and literature, (2) mathematics and physics, and (3) intellectual and moral science. Instruction in political science was included within intellectual and moral science. Professor Edward Thomson, later president of Ohio Wesleyan University, listed among the texts for his courses: Wayland’s Political Grammar and Political Economy and Story’s Commentaries on The Constitution. However, it appears that these studies were not continued and a return to them awaited the stimulus provided by President Henry Philip Tappan in 1852.

Under President Tappan interest in the general area of the social sciences was revitalized. This was due in part to his high educational ideals and broad intellectual interests and in part to his establishment of the university course. In his plan for a university or graduate course, President Tappan had made provision for twenty areas of study, two of which would be included in our present concept of political science: (1) history and political economy, and (2) the law of nature, the law of nations, and constitutional law.

The University System

Not only was Tappan a man of distinction as a scholar and a teacher, but he drew others with comparable qualities to the faculty. One of these was Andrew Dickson White who, when he was appointed in 1857, brought with him a manner of teaching which was new to the American college campus. Rather than using daily recitations, he introduced the lecture system and gave his students an introduction to historical criticism and original investigation. Through White’s concept of history the way was prepared for later emphasis on political studies.

Catalogs from the sixties stated that the effort of the History Department was threefold: (1) a review of general history; (2) an insight into the philosophy of history; and (3) a foundation for a thorough study of the political and constitutional history of our own country.

Instruction in the field of political science, as such, officially began in 1860, when the Regents voted to require the resident law professor to deliver a course of lectures on Constitutional Law and History to the senior class of the Academic Department. In 1861, Professor, later Judge, Thomas McIntyre Cooley began these lectures which were continued until 1865.

With the termination of Professor Cooley’s lectures, instruction in government was placed solely in the hands of the History Department. Professor Charles Kendall Adams, a graduate of Michigan, offered lectures on the Government of Great Britain, the Governments of Continental Europe, and the Political History of the United States.

In 1867 Professor Adams became chairman of the History Department, succeeding Andrew D. White. At this time the seniors were receiving, during the second semester, lectures on the Characteristics of the Constitution of the United States and the Growth of Liberty in England. In 1871-72, this course, given to seniors, was made an elective and extended to the length of a school year. The Catalog of that year explained that the course covered three subjects: growth of parliamentary government in England; constitutional history of the United States; and constitutional characteristics of the principal governments of Europe. Later the program provided English Constitutional History and American Constitutional History, both one semester courses.

In 1870, while Professor Henry S. Frieze was serving as Acting President, the library facilities in the field of political science were greatly enhanced by a gift, which was the first important addition made to the University library by a private donor. Philo Parsons, Esq., of Detroit, purchased for the University the library of Professor Karl Heinrich Rau of Heidelberg. It consisted of about 4,000 volumes and 5,000 pamphlets dealing with the science of government, political economy and related subjects. Mr. Parsons also volunteered to fill out important sets of books and periodicals that were found to be incomplete. This gift proved to be one of the major justifications for the subsequent establishment of a separate School of Political Science.

With the coming of President James B. Angell to the University in 1871, and due to his active interest in public and international affairs, a course in International Law was added to the curriculum. He himself taught it and at this time emphasized to the Regents the need for more extensive work in the “political sciences.” Later he also offered a course in Political Economy.

Seminar Instruction

President Angell, in his report of 1871-72, gave the first printed account of the seminar method of instruction which had been introduced by Adams. Shortly after this time, the same system was introduced at Harvard and other American universities. Adams patterned the seminar after the German method of instruction which he had observed during a visit to that country the previous year. During the second semester the seminar group, which was open to seniors and graduate students, studied the constitutional history of the United States and also dealt with the fundamental principles of political philosophy through the means of a comparative study of ancient and modern political constitutions.

Under the direction of Adams, the History Department developed and the curriculum was enlarged. Among the new courses offered were: Political Institutions, English and American Constitutional History, and Comparative European Government. President Angell added another course, History of Treaties, which with International Law, he continued to teach until 1910.

During his administration as president, Dr. Angell was called by the government to serve as Minister to the Ottoman Empire and to China. While President Angell was absent as Minister to China, action was taken by the Regents in June, 1881, to organize a School of Political Science within the Department of Literature, Science, and the Arts. Although a similar school had been organized at Columbia ten months earlier, Michigan’s was the first in the West. The University Catalog stated “the aim of the School is to afford exceptional opportunities for students interested in public questions to specialize in History, Political Economy, International Law, and kindred subjects under guidance of their instructors.” On October 3, 1881, the new School opened with Professor Charles K. Adams as dean. Its faculty of seven included: President James B. Angell (Dr. Henry Carter Adams served in his absence), Professor Thomas M. Cooley, Professor Charles K. Adams, Assistant Professor Richard Hudson, Professor Edward S. Dunster, Assistant Professor Victor C. Vaughan, and Assistant Professor Volney M. Spalding.

The address Dean C. K. Adams delivered at the official opening presented a case for the advantages which their instruction in political science had brought to the practice of European governments. He proceeded to dispose of the argument that American political institutions were superior to those of Europe and that, therefore, America had no need of political science. The argument was revealing in its exclusive emphasis upon the practical benefits to be expected. He pointed out the areas which political science could help to improve and then summed up by saying:

It is for the purpose of aiding in the several directions that have been hinted at, and in others that would be mentioned if there were time, that the School of Political Science in the University of Michigan has been established. It finds its justification where the other schools of the University find theirs: in the good of the people and the welfare of the State.

Professor Hans J. Morgenthau in his “Reflections on the State of Political Science,” has noted Dean Adam’s address as illuminating in its outline of the purpose of political science and has commented that its growth was a response to the needs of the day. Professor Morgenthau wrote:

The first departments of political science in this country, then, did not grow organically from a general conception as to what was covered by the field of political science, nor did they respond to a strongly felt intellectual need. Rather they tried to satisfy practical demands, which other academic disciplines refused to meet. For instance, in that period the law schools would not deal with public law. It was felt that somebody ought to deal with it, and thus it was made part of political science. There was a demand for instruction in journalism, but there was no place for it to be taught; thus it was made part of political science. There was a local demand for guidance in certain aspects of municipal administration; and thus a course in that subject was made part of the curriculum of political science.

In other words, political science grew not by virtue of an intellectual principle germane to the field, but in response to pressures from the outside. What could not be defined in terms of a traditional academic discipline was defined as political science. This inorganic growth and haphazard character of political science is strikingly reflected in the curricula of the early departments of political science, such as those of Michigan, Columbia, and Harvard.

In 1881-82

In the 1881-82 Catalog, seven subject areas were listed in the political science program: history, political economy, international law, sanitary science, rights, social science, and forestry. Dean Adams stated in 1882 that he thought this was the first time that the courses in Rights and Forestry had been offered in any university. It was intended that the course content and the method of instruction would be the same as those offered in the schools of political science at Paris, Leipzig, Tubingen and Vienna. H. B. Adams remarked “the courses were not required as at Columbia, and the plan was like the elective system of German universities.”

In his The Relations of Political Science to National Prosperity, Dean Charles K. Adams outlined the program:

A prominent place was to be given to studies in history, such as general history, history of political institutions, recent political history of Europe, and the political and constitutional history of England and of the United States. Courses in political economy were also included in the program. “Social Science” was to deal with crime prevention and public welfare service. A course in Political Ethics was also outlined to furnish the proper basis for judging the relations of the individual to the state, as well as of nation to nation. Allied to this and crowning the whole were to be courses on: The Idea of the State; Nature of Individual, Social and Political Rights; History of Political Ideas; Government of Cities; Theories and Methods of Taxation; Comparative Constitutional Law; Comparative Administrative Law; Theories of International Law; and History of Modern Diplomacy.

School of Political Science

Students to be admitted to the new School must have completed two years of study in the Department of Literature, Science, and the Arts—sixty hours—including all the work for the first two years of the program prescribed for a bachelor’s degree. Students from other institutions who had done an equivalent amount of work were also accepted as candidates. Although the new School was organized under the Department of Literature, Science, and the Arts, it was not limited to undergraduate study. All degree candidates were required to write examinations at the close of each semester; also, they were to appear before a committee of the faculty to present and defend a thesis showing evidence of original research and, finally, pass an examination in three areas of study, a major and two minors. A student who completed all these requirements was recommended for a Doctor of Philosophy degree. No specification was made in regard to time except that no one would be recommended in less than three years after enrollment in the School. A year later, in 1882-83, provision was made for obtaining bachelor’s and master’s degrees.

The new School was successful in developing interest in its program. The first year a total of 889 registrations were listed in the nineteen courses offered—481 during the first semester and 408 the second.

In 1882, the library received another sizeable gift which furthered the study of political science. Mr. J. J. Hagerman of Colorado Springs gave the University 2,000 volumes, including works on political and constitutional history and methods of local government in Europe and America, plus a collection of great serial publications. The following year Cooley offered a course on Comparative Administrative Law with special emphasis on local government, using these materials.

Under the leadership of Angell, Adams and Cooley, the School of Political Science attracted considerable attention, both in the United States and in Europe. During those years Michigan shared with Columbia and Johns Hopkins pre-eminence among the universities of the United States for training in the field of political science—a pre-eminence that was to lapse before blossoming again.

Electives

The University System of study, which had been an integral part of the School of Political Science, survived the School by a number of years. Immediately upon establishment, the School pointed the way to a freedom of study, permitting greater concentration with large concessions to the student’s choice, both of subjects and methods. Various faculty members began to argue that areas other than political science should be accorded these advantages. There was the feeling that this system was an approach to the German universities with their distinction between preparatory and graduate or genuine university work. Within this plan of study the student would be granted a bachelor of arts degree if his examination at the end of four years proved to be satisfactory. The student might be granted a master of arts degree if he wrote a brilliant examination and presented a meritorious thesis. Making the distinction between a “satisfactory” and a “brilliant” examination was, of course, the source of some of the difficulties that arose.

From the outset, the School progressed and appeared promising; however, its position as a graduate school with its own dean, organized within the framework of an undergraduate school, was indeed awkward. Faculty members of the School of Political Science were also serving in other departments of the University, and the establishment of the School necessitated a revision of the prevailing rules regarding doctor’s degrees. Conditions, it was said, “produced numerous conflicts and misunderstandings and various exhibitions of human nature in its less endearing forms.”

In spite of the administrative difficulties, the School continued until 1887-88. The Catalog for that year noted: “Since the establishment, in 1881, of the School of Political Science, experience has shown that, under the flexible elective system now in force in this Department, instruction in the studies peculiar to such a school may be provided without maintaining any sharply defined independent organization.”

An announcement in the Catalog the following year read: “It has been found unnecessary to retain an independent School of Political Science, under the form of organization described in the calendars of previous years.”

In addition to the above mentioned difficulties, there had been other circumstances that contributed to the disappearance of the School. C. K. Adams resigned in 1885 to accept the presidency of Cornell. T. M. Cooley succeeded him as dean; however, he also left the University in 1887 to become chairman of the Interstate Commerce Commission when it was established during that year. It seems that no one on the faculty was interested in accepting responsibility for carrying on the School after that time.

The feeling seemed to be that the plan for a School of Political Science was premature; however, this did not halt the teaching of many of the subjects under the prior purview of the former School. The history courses continued to be predominantly constitutional. Semester courses in International Law and the History of Treaties were still taught by President Angell. The changing of some titles to include “institutions” was the chief difference in the next few years.

Instruction in Constitutional Law and Political History of the United States was started by McLaughlin in 1891 and continued beyond 1900. This was also the period when Comparative Constitutional Law, as taught by Richard Hudson, was introduced to the Michigan campus.

In 1892, Fred M. Taylor and Charles Horton Cooley came to the University to instruct in the field of political economy. Encouraged by H. C. Adams, Cooley offered courses in sociology which were so successful that in 1895-96 the name of the Department was changed to Political Economy and Sociology.

During the following years another notable man gave instruction in the field of political science. John Dewey, who had come to the University to work in philosophy and psychology, gradually turned his psychology courses over to his younger colleagues and interested himself in ethical and social problems. He offered courses in the Theory and Institutions of Social Organization, Special Studies in the History of Political Philosophy (topic changed each year). Movements of Thought in the Nineteenth Century, and Political Philosophy or Ethics of Human Relations.

In 1896-97, a new course was added to the program by Hudson—first semester, Municipal Government in Great Britain and second semester. Municipal Government in Continental Europe.

With the disappearance of the University System which President Tappan had instituted in 1852, instruction in the subjects of political science was taken over by the History Department. In spite of this relegation, political science was consistently receiving more attention. In 1900, the history courses were officially announced under two topics: history and government. At this time the work of government was placed under the direction of John A. Fairlie, who was then appointed Professor of Administrative Law. He gave instruction in Municipal Administration, while courses in American Constitutional Law and Political Institutions were taught by Andrew Cunningham McLaughlin. In addition to these Undergraduate Studies graduate research courses in these fields were also given.

The ten years prior to the establishment of the present Political Science Department witnessed an ever increasing amount of activity which portended the final separation of the master discipline. Some of the more outstanding activities were: 1900-01, the formation of a Political Science Club; 1902-09, the evolution of Political Economy, Industry, Commerce and Sociology as a separate department; 1909-10, a further change in departmental title to Political Economy and Sociology.

[…]

Source: Gerald Eitig Faye,  Political Science at the University of Michigan 1910-1960 (Ann Arbor, Michigan: 1960?).

Image Source: “Who Was James Angell” by James Tobin [not the Yale economist!] in Michigan Today, July 29, 2013.

Categories
Exam Questions Harvard Suggested Reading Syllabus

Harvard. Regulation of Public Utilities and Transportation. Chamberlin, 1939-40

 

This is the third industrial organization/regulation semester course offered at Harvard in the immediate pre-WWII era. Syllabi and other material have previously been posted for E. S. Mason and P. Sweezy’s “The Corporation and its Regulation” and Mason’s “Industrial Organization and Control”. Edward H. Chamberlin’s teaching portfolio at Harvard included transportation economics from 1931. Here the focus is on regulation of natural monopolies such as public utilities and railroads.

______________________

Course Description, 1940-41

[Economics 63b 2hf. Public Utilities (including Transportation).] Half-course (second half-year). Tu., Th., (at the pleasure of the instructor) Sat., at 12. Professor Chamberlin.
Omitted in 1940-41; to be given in 1941-42.

The regulation of the public utility and transportation industries as a phase of the control over economic activity exercised by the modern state. Rates, service, earnings, efficiency, financial practices, holding companies and consolidations, coordination, national planning, government competition with private enterprise, and public ownership.

Source: Division of History, Government, and Economics Containing an Announcement for 1940-41, Official Register of Harvard University, Vol. XXXVII, No. 51 (August 15, 1940), p. 57.

______________________

Enrollment 1939-40

[Economics] 63b 2hf. Professor Chamberlin.—Public Utilities (including Transportation).

Total 90: 1 Graduate, 43 Seniors, 34 Juniors, 5 Sophomores, 7 Other.

Source: Report of the President of Harvard College, 1939-40, p. 99.

______________________

Economics 63b
1939-40

Reading List

Principal books used:

D. P. Locklin, Economics of Transportation (revised ed.)
Mosher & Crawford, Public Utility Regulation
Wilfred Owen, Highway Economics
G. L. Wilson, [J. M.] Herring, [R. B.] Eutsler, Public Utility Regulation

 

Week

Assignment

1

 Development of railroad transportation and regulation to 1920 Locklin, Chs. 1-5, 9, 10

2

 Theory of railroad rates — competition and control Locklin, Chs. 7, 14

3

 Particular rates, discrimination: railroads Locklin, Chs. 6, 8, 20

4

 Particular rates, discrimination: utilities Mosher & Crawford, Introduction and Chs. 17-21

5

 Legal and economic criteria for public utilities
Commissions, legislatures and courts		 Mosher & Crawford, Ch. 1
Mosher & Crawford, Chs. 2-6
Locklin, Ch. 13

6

 Railroad consolidation Locklin, Ch. 11
Jones, Principles of Railway Transportation, Ch. 17
Locklin, Ch. 19, pp. 315-21, 643-42

7

 Railroad consolidation, financial regulation
(Hour examination, Thursday, March 21)		 Locklin, Chs. 12, 25, 26

8

 Public Utility Holding Company
National Power Policy		 Wilson, et al. Ch. 11; pp. 310-319, Chs. 15, 16

Vacation

9

 Control of investment, general rate level, earnings Mosher & Crawford, Ch. 7
Locklin, Chs. 15-18

10

 Control of investment (continued)
Highway transport		 Mosher & Crawford, Chs. 8, 9, 16
Owen, whole essay

11

 Highway, water and air transport; coordination Locklin, Chs. 33, 34, 31, 35, 36

12

 Public ownership Locklin, Ch. 29
Mosher & Crawford, Chs. 32-34 and Conclusion

 

Source: Harvard University Archives. Department of Economics. Correspondence & Papers 1902-1950 (UAV.349.10). Box 23, Folder “Course outlines 1935-37-38-42”.

______________________

Reading Period Assignment

Economics 63b: Read one of the following:

  1. First Report of the Federal Coördinator of Transportation, pp. 1-37.
    Fourth Report of the Federal Coördinator of Transportation, pp. 1-60.
    Report—Immediate Relief for Railroads (April, 1938), 19-71 (75th Congress, 3rd Session, House Doc. No. 583).
    Report of Committee Appointed by the President—Recommendations upon the General Transportation Situation (Dec., 1938), pp. 3-64 (Committee on Public Relations of Eastern Railroads).
  2. S. Daggett, Principles of Inland Transportation (revised edition). Chs. 36-37 [3rd edition, 1941].
    Three articles by H. E. Dougall on French Railways in Journal of Political Economy, June, 1933; June, 1934; April, 1938.
    Annals of American Academy of Political and Social Science. January, 1939, pp. 185-226.
  3. A. L. Gordon, The Public Corporation in Great Britain, Chs. 1, 3, 4, 6.
  4. Bauer and Gold, Public Utility Valuation for Purposes of Rate Control, pp. 155-362.

Source: Harvard University Archives. Syllabi, course outlines and reading lists in economics, 1895-2003 (HUC 8522.2.1). Box 2, Folder “1939-40 (1 of 2)”.

______________________

1939—1940
HARVARD UNIVERSITY

ECONOMICS 63b2

Write on FIVE questions, including numbers 1 and 6.*

  1. According to what principles do you believe the level of earnings of railroads and utilities should be regulated? Discuss the chief problems arising out of applying your principles to the situation as you find it in the United States.
  2. Contrast and evaluate the Public Utility Holding Company Act of 1935 and the Tennessee Valley Authority as alternative methods of public utility regulation.
  3. What various solutions have been proposed for the strong and weak road problem? Discuss the advantages and disadvantages of each.
  4. Discuss the possibilities and limitations of reducing the cost of railroad transportation (a) through consolidation or coordination without government ownership; (b) through government ownership.
  5. Do you believe this country should subsidize directly or indirectly any means of transportation? If so, what means, to what extent and why? If not, why not?
  6. Answer the question corresponding to your reading period choice:
    1. (Coördinator’s and other reports) which of the recommendations in the several reports assigned would you consider most relevant to the transportation problem as it appears in 1940? Indicate your own evaluation of them.
    2. (Foreign railways) Contrast the French rate-making scheme set up by the Convention of 1921 with the rate-making arrangement prevailing in the United States after 1920. How do you account for the differences?
    3. (Gordon) “More than any other existing institution in Great Britain, the Central Electricity Board has faced and met a task of economic rationalization on a national scale.” What were the factors which led to a demand for rationalization and how was this rationalization accomplished?
    4. (Bauer and Gold) Discuss any two or three of the chief issues raised by your reading in Bauer and Gold relative to valuation for rate making purposes.

*If you prefer, instead of answering specific questions, you may write a three hour essay describing what you consider to be the chief problems confronting the railroad and utility industries in the United States today and outlining (and defending) a program of legislation to meet them.

Final. 1940.

 

Source: Harvard University Archives. Harvard University, Final examinations, 1853-2001 (HUC 7000.28) Box 5. Faculty of Arts and Sciences. Papers Printed for Final Examinations: History, History of Religions,…Economics,…,Military Science, Naval Science. June, 1940.

Image Source: Edward H. Chamberlin from Harvard Class Album 1946.

 

Categories
Curator's Favorites ERVM

ERVM. Curator’s Favorites. Third in the Series

 

 

The newest addition to the series of Curator’s Favorites is the fully-linked list of 18 Popular Economic Tracts from 1880-1891 published by the Society for Political Education.

The second item in the series of Curator’s Favorites is the list of reading assignments extracted from Frank W. Fetter’s student notes from 1923-24 when he took Frank W. Taussig’s course “Economics 11”, Economic Theory. This list too has links to the individual items on the reading list.

The first of the series of Curator’s Favorites is the list of items “Recommended Teacher’s Library of Economics” put together by J. Laurence Laughlin and published in 1887.