Author: Irwin Collier

Categories
Chicago Economists

Chicago. Visiting Professorship Offered Schumpeter for 1926

 

Joseph Schumpeter did not teach at the University of Chicago in 1926 but he was sent a cable offering him $4000 to teach  during the  five months April through August 1926. No reply was filed with the exchange of letters between the President’s Office and the Department of Political Economy and the copy of the cable sent to Schumpeter’s address in Vienna. I would guess that the Chicago colleagues were unaware that Schumpeter had just been appointed to a professorship in Bonn in 1925. In November 1925 Schumpeter was married in a Lutheran church in Vienna, so perhaps he actually saw the informal offer.

I have added “[sic]” after the street address given for Schumpeter in Vienna. An umlaut was added, presumably by someone who thought Schumpeter’s street could use a diacritical mark. The street got its name to honor the Royal Counselor (and unumlauted) Johann Peter Strudel von Strudenhof (1648-1714).

Salaries for the 1926-27 year (found in the budget recommendations for 1927-1928) ranged from $8000 for the head of the department, L. C. Marshall (Professor) through $6000 for Jacob Viner (Professor) to $3250 for L.W. Mints (Assistant Professor) so that $4000 for two quarters of teaching was a pretty generous offer.

______________________________________________

Letter from Vice President Tufts to Professor Field

[COPY]

8 October 1925

Professor James A. Field
Faculty Exchange

Dear Professor Field:

Confirming our conversation, it was the judgment of the President in consultation with Mr. Arnett and myself that in view of our present financial situation we could not go beyond the provision of the budget as would be required if Professor Schumpeter were to be invited for three quarters. The suggestion was made for the consideration of the Department that it might consider an offer, preferable for one quarter or perhaps for two quarters, one of these to be the summer quarter, for which there would be funds in the present budget. If he were to be invited for two quarters the understanding is that he might be offered four thousand dollars. If for a single quarter a larger proportionate sum would doubtless be necessary, as for example twenty-five hundred dollars, although we have had several distinguished men from Europe for the summer quarter whom we have paid eighteen hundred or two thousand dollars.

The Department will of course consider whether this appointment would be its best use of the available funds.

Very truly yours,

James H. Tufts

JHT.p

______________________________________________

 

Response by Prof. Field to Vice-President James H. Tufts

The University of Chicago
Department of Political Economy

October 8th, 1925.

Mr. James H. Tufts,
Vice-president
The University of Chicago

Dear Mr. Tufts:

At our departmental meeting this noon we discussed at some length the proposal to invite Professor Schumpeter to give instruction here in the Spring and Summer quarters of the coming year. We were unanimously of the opinion that both our Summer schedule and our general departmental situation would be very much strengthened if Professor Schumpeter could be induced to come on the terms suggested in your memorandum, namely four thousand dollars ($4,000) for the two quarters.

We shall be glad, therefore, if the president’s office will extend an invitation to Professor Schumpeter. In order that we may lose no time, either in reaching him or in obtaining his tentative answer, we suggest that a cablegram be sent him asking if he would consider an appointment on the proposed terms, requesting an answer by return cable, and indicating that if his provisional answer is favorable we will write him a letter explaining fully the sort of arrangement we are proposing and the character of the work which would be assigned to him. The cablegram should presumably specify the actual dates at which his term of service would begin and end. Professor Schumpeter’s address is Strüdlhofgasse [sic] 17, Vienna IX.

If you feel that you need any additional information before you cable Professor Schumpeter will you be good enough to let me know at once? Our hope of getting him probably depends on quick action.

Sincerely yours,

[signed| James A. Field

JAP-mk

______________________________________________

 

WESTERN UNION CABLEGRAM

October 12, 1925

Professor Schumpeter
Strüdlhofgasse [sic] 17
Vienna IX

Would you consider teaching this university April first to September first next Cable and if yes letter will explain details Honorarium four thousand dollars

President University Chicago

Prepay and charge
The University of Chicago (President’s Office)

 

Source: University of Chicago, Department of Special Collections. Office of the President. Mason Administration. Records. Box 24, Folder “24/1 Economics Department appointments and budgets 1925-1927”.

Categories
Columbia Computing Economists

Columbia. Chaddock’s Request for Funding for his Statistical Laboratory, 1911.


From time to time I like to add a little budgetary detail.  For the year 1911-12 assistant professor Robert E. Chaddock’s salary was $2500 (the top professor salary in economics, $6000, went to Henry R. Seager). Today’s post is a request for $500 of additional funds for the 1911-12 budget for the statistical laboratory run by Chaddock.  I add some biographical material for Chaddock (the photograph from the 1919 Barnard College yearbook is the only picture of him I have been able to find in my online search), including the Columbia Spectator’s report of his suicide in 1940.

Earlier posts at Economics in the Rear-View Mirror concerning the purchase of calculating equipment for economic research were:  1928 (Henry Schultz at Chicago) and  1948 (George Stigler at Columbia).

______________________________

Source: Barnard College, Mortarboard, 1919.

Memorial:  Frederick E. Croxton, “Robert Emmet Chaddock, 1879-1940,” Journal of the American Statistical Association, Vol. 36, No. 213 (March, 1941), pp. 116-119.

 

______________________________

 

Copy of letter by Seligman to Butler

December 18, 1911

Nicholas Murray Butler, LL.D.,

President, Columbia University

New York.

Dear President Butler:-

I have asked Professor Chaddock, our new assistant professor of statistics, to give me a report of the work that has been done in the statistical laboratory this year. I take pleasure in sending a copy of his report herewith and with your permission I should like to amend the budget letter of the Department, if that is still practicable, to the extent of asking for a special appropriation of $500 for the statistical laboratory, the amount to be expended for the statistical machine and for such supplies, charts, atlases, etc. which would not properly come under the head of the library appropriation.

You will remember that two or three years ago you were kind enough to secure a special appropriation of $500 for some comptometers for the laboratory. That amount was not included in our budget letter. Perhaps this also could be taken care of in a similar way.

Respectfully,

[unsigned copy, E.R.A. Seligman]

SE-S

______________________________

Copy of letter by Chaddock to Seligman

C O P Y

December 18, 1911

Professor E. R. A. Seligman,

Columbia University.

Dear Professor Seligman:

As suggested, I am sending you this letter to describe the work and needs of the statistical laboratory. On the theory that the laboratory is a place for practice and a place where sources of information may be found, it has been our aim this year to keep the laboratory open between the hours of 9 A.M. and 6 P.M. Much of the time some men have been found there at its opening and closing hours.

The class in elementary statistics numbers about 45, of whom 40 are engaged in doing actual laboratory work in addition to the two hours of lectures weekly. Our plan has been to divide the lecture group into five sections for their laboratory work, meeting Monday, Wednesday, and Friday at nine o’clock and Monday and Wednesday at eleven o’clock, in addition to lectures Monday and Wednesday at ten o’clock. By this plan the groups are reduced to eight or ten men and scientific work is possible. The lecture work is made concrete to each individual through his own work and his misconceptions are checked and corrected by personal supervision. The student is thus enabled also to know and to use the mechanical aids without which the work of the statistician would be largely impossible today.

Besides the class in elementary statistics, there are students who, having had the lecture work, are engaged in writing their dissertation which involves statistical work. The laboratory offers facilities for work of this character and should aim to make it possible to turn out better digested statistical material in our dissertations.

An effort is being made to provide in the laboratory sources of information contained in Federal, State, and City reports and in reports of special investigations. Periodical document lists of the State and Federal governments are kept convenient for reference.

The effort has also been made to get into touch by correspondence and personal conference, with the practical statistical work being done in the city both by public and private agencies, with the view of impressing the student with the concrete problems of statistical work and with the importance of a working knowledge of how to use and judge supposed facts.

It would seem also to be important that the statistical laboratory at Columbia, by its equipment, demonstrate to all who see it and use it what the ordinary working equipment of a statistician ought to be, what the sources of information are, and how they may be handled.

In view of these aims we venture to set forth certain needs, the satisfaction of which conditions the complete efficiency of the laboratory:

(1) One calculating machine of “Millionaire” or “Ensign” type—probably $250 or $300. The present equipment of machines is not adequate to keep a group busy without loss of time.

(2) A Statistician’s working library to be kept on the laboratory shelves. Some appropriation toward this library which is to contain the chief works on theory and method as well as special sources, i.e., Webb, Dictionary of Statistics.

(3) 10 copies of Barlow’s tables of squares, cubes, etc., up to 10,000 @ 6 s. each—60 s.

(4) 10 copies of Peter’s Multiplication and division tables at 15 s. each—150 s.

(5) Provision for a card file in the laboratory itself of all the statistical material available in the library so that the student in statistics may have a ready reference. Also for the purpose of recording all documents and sources received and kept in the laboratory itself.

(6) Provision for securing portraits of certain men most prominent in the development of statistical science, for the laboratory walls, i.e. Pearson, Quetelet, Engel, La Place, etc.

Attempts have been made by correspondence and conference, and will be made, to find out the best equipment for a laboratory such as ours and we ask your cooperation.

Sincerely,

(signed) Robert E. Chaddock.

 

Source: Columbia University Libraries, Manuscript Collections. Papers of Edwin Robert Anderson Seligman, Box 98A, Folder “Columbia (A-Z) 1911-1913”.

 

______________________________

Professor Chaddock Dies in Fall
Sociology Head, 61, Plunges from Roof; Believed a Suicide

 

Dr. Robert Emmet Chaddock. Professor of Statistics and head of the Columbia Department of Sociology, died yesterday morning at 11:20 after falling eleven stories from the roof of his apartment house at 39 Claremont Avenue. He was sixty-one years old.

It is believed that Dr. Chaddock’s death was a suicide.

Professor Chaddock left his apartment on the fifth floor at 10 A.M., the usual hour he left for his office, and walked to the roof of the building. He was dressed in an overcoat and hat, and carried a brief case and an umbrella.

Shortly after 11 A.M., a maid from an adjoining apartment, Ethel Anderson, discovered him sitting on the parapet on the west side of the building. She called the elevator boy, but before either could summon assistance, Dr. Chaddock jumped or fell to the courtyard below. He left his overcoat, hat, brief case and glasses along the edge of the roof.

Worried About Wife

Seemingly In good health and spirit prior to his death, it was learned on good authority yesterday that the 61-year old professor had been worried over the health of his wife, Mrs. Rose A. Chaddock, who survives him. Dr. Chaddock left no communication, but fatigue and overwork were some of the motives put forth as possible causes of his death.

A daughter, Mrs. Parker Soule of Roswell, New Mexico, is his only other survivor. She was in Roswell at the time of the accident.

Dr. Nicholas Murray Butler, President of the University headed the list of bereaved faculty associates. In a statement to The Spectator yesterday, Dr. Butler stated:

“Our whole University family is stupefied and heartbroken at the tragic death of Professor Chaddock. Himself a scholar of outstanding importance and large influence in his chosen field, we all held him in affectionate friendship and looked forward to many years yet of continuing accomplishment. Our feeling at this sudden ending of his life is too deep to be put into words.”

Speaking for the entire Sociology Department of which he has been acting in the capacity of chairman for the past two weeks, Dr. Willard W. Waller, Associate Professor of Sociology, stated, “We have lost a sincere friend and a valued colleague. That is the sentiment of Fayerweather Hall.”

Dr. Chaddock was born in Minerva, Ohio on April 16, 1879. A member of the University faculty for thirty-one years, he was Professor of Sociology and Statistics since 1922.

Held Two Degrees

His degrees included A.B. Wooster College, Wooster, Ohio; LL.D. (Hon.) 1929. He was a member of Phi Beta Kappa; Fellow of the American Statistical Association, American Public Health Association and the Population Association of America and a member of the American Sociological Society.

He was one of the founders of the Cities Census Committee which developed the “census tract” unit for enumeration and tabulation of population and other types of data in New York City. This “census tract” idea has now been adopted by many cities, following the lead of New York.

Dr. Chaddock’s book, “Principle and Methods in Statistics,” published in 1925, has long been accepted as the standard text in the field.

Source: Columbia Daily Spectator, Volume LXIV, Number 20, 22 October 1940.

 

______________________________

Comptometer

 

Comptometers were made by the Felt & Tarrant Manufacturing Company of Chicago, Illinois and the initial patent holder was Dorr E. Felt. This is a very unusual model in black paint and gold decorations. Almost all Comptometers are in copper patena or polished copper housings. While there are some very rare listing (printing) models, the ones most often found do not have printing capability as is the case with this particular one. The Comptometer was probably the most important adding machine or calculator ever made. The first one (model one) was made with an all wooden case (see the model one in our collection) and came out in 1887 and the last one was made with an cast aluminum case sometime in the early 1960s. The people who operated them (usually women) were also called comptometers and the modern term for the person in charge of an accounting department, Comptroller, is the evolution of the name comptometer (operators titles). The more modern term for the chief accountant, Controller, is also an evolution from Comptometer. The last listed patent date on this Comptometer is 1914 and that is most likely, or very close to, the year it was manufactured. This machine comes with its original tin case and the case is prlobably more rare than the machine. Both the machine and the case have an estimated condition rating of 2+, 2.

Source: Comptometer at Branford House Antiques Website.

 

______________________________

Millionaire Calculator

This lever-set, manually operated non-printing calculating machine has a brass mechanism and a metal case with lid. The lid and the flat plates that cover the mechanism are painted black. The carriage is entirely contained within the case. The machine carries out direct multiplication.
Ten German silver levers are pulled forward to set up numbers. A crank left of these may be set anywhere between 0 and 9 for direct multiplication and division. A lever right of the digit levers may be set at addition, multiplication, division, or subtraction. Right of it is the operating crank. A row of ten windows in front of the levers shows the number set on the levers. It is labeled DIVISOR.
In front of this is the carriage, with two other rows of windows. The row closest to the levers (further from the front) indicates the multiplier or quotient. The other row shows the result or the dividend. The result windows are labeled DIVIDEND and may be set with a dividend using thumbscrews. The carriage has zeroing knobs for both these registers. Holes for decimal markers are between the digits of all three registers. Between the front two registers, at left, is a button used to shift the carriage. A bell rings if the number in the result window changes sign (as when subtraction produces a negative number).
A paper sheet inside the lid gives instructions for operating the machine and related tables, along with a cleaning brush and key. The stand is stored separately.
A mark on the middle of the front of the machine reads: THE MILLIONAIRE. A metal tag on the right reads: Hans W. Egli (/) Ingenieur (/) Fabrikation von Rechenmaschinen (/) Pat. O. Steiger (/) ZURICH II. A metal tag on the left reads: W.A. Morschhauser (/) SOLE AGENT (/) 1 Madison Avenue (/) NEW YORK CITY. Just under this tag is stamped the serial number: No 2609. A mark on the carriage next to the result register reads: PTD MAY 7TH 1895. SEPT. 17TH 1895. Scratched in the middle of the front of the machine is the mark: FOR PARTS ONLY.
For related documentation see MA*319929.03 through MA*319929.07.
Daniel Lewin has estimated that Millionaire calculating machines with serial number 1600 date from 1905, and those with serial number 2800, from 1910. Hence the rough date of 1909 is assigned to the object.
This calculating machine was used by the physicist William F. Meggars of the United States National Bureau of Standards.

 

Source: Smithsonian. The National Museum of American History.

 

______________________________

Ensign Model 90 Calculating Machine

This full-keyboard direct multiplication non-printing electric calculating machine has an iron and steel case painted black, The nine columns of plastic black and white keys are colored according to the place values represented. Complementary digits are indicated on the keys. Keys for odd digits are concave, and those for even ones are flat. The keyboard is covered with green felt.

Right of the number keys is an addition bar. Considerably to the right of this is a key to be depressed in division and ten digit keys used to enter digits directly in multiplication. To the left of the keyboard is a key marked “C” that, when depressed, locks the keyboard. A row of seven number dials serves as a revolution counter. These dials are covered with glass.

On the left side is a handle for clearing the revolution counter and result register. Behind the keyboard and revolution counter, inside the machine, in a row of 16 number dials recording the result. These dials are also covered with glass. They are deep within the machine, and difficult to read. The result register may be divided to record two results simultaneously. The base of the case is open, with a cloth cover inside it. This example has no motor.

A mark on the front of the machine reads: The Ensign. A mark on the right side reads: ENSIGN (/) MANUFACTURING CO. (/) BOSTON, U.S.A. (/) PATENTED (/) NOV. 1, 1904. – JAN. 2, 1906. (/) JULY 9, 1907. – FEB. 18, 1908 (/) JUNE 2, 1908. (/) OTHER PATENTS PENDING.

The Ensign was an early example of an electrically operated calculating machine. The Ensign Manufacturing Company of Waltham, Massachusetts is listed in Thomas’ Register for 1909. The dates on the machine refer to dates of patents of Emory S. Ensign, who was president of the company. The Ensign Manufacturing Company of Boston, Massachusetts, is listed in Thomas’ Register for 1912, 1914, 1915, 1916, and 1917. It was not listed in 1918. By this time, Ensign seems to have moved to Queens, New York. The machine was manufactured until about 1925.

 

Source: Smithsonian. The National Museum of American History.

______________________________

Image Source: Robert Emmet Chaddock from Barnard College, Mortarboard, 1919.

 

 

Categories
Curriculum Fields Harvard Undergraduate

Harvard. Taussig Reports to Alumni About the Special Needs of the Economics Department, 1915

 

A recent post provided Harvard President Lowell’s interpretation (1916) of the results of a recently completed study on economics instruction at Harvard (subsequently published in 1917). In this post we see how Professor Frank W. Taussig spins his reception of the ongoing study for a pitch to Harvard alumni to get over their edifice complexes (i.e. their revealed preference to fund new structures) and to create more endowments to fund graduate students and post-docs who are an important link between the research and instructional missions of the University in general and the department of economics in particular.

______________________________

 

THE DEPARTMENT OF ECONOMICS.
PROF. F. W. TAUSSIG, ’79.

The most striking change that has taken place during the last fifty years in the content of the College curriculum has been the dominance acquired by the political and economic subjects. What Greek, Latin, Mathematics were a half-century ago, that Economics, Government, History are now, — the backbone of the ordinary undergraduate’s studies. I will not undertake to say whether on the whole the change is or is not to be welcomed. It has its good sides and its bad sides. In one respect it is undoubtedly good. The main cause behind it is a great awakening of public spirit, — a consciousness that the country is confronted with pressing political and economical problems, and that we must gird our loins to meet them. And an assured consequence will be that the new generation of College men, who are being graduated every year by the thousands and tens of thousands, all trained in these subjects, will constitute a leavening force which must in time affect profoundly and beneficially the conduct of public affairs. At all events, so far as university teachers and administrators are concerned, the plain fact must be faced: instruction in these subjects has to be provided on a large scale.

The responsibility thus devolving on the Harvard Department of Economics among others was impressed on its members by the outcome of the new system of concentration introduced in 1910. It appeared that in some years this department had the largest number of concentrations of any; and in every year the number was very large. Its only rival was the English Department. These figures — familiar enough to Harvard men — set the economists to thinking. Under the able leadership of the chairman, Prof. C. J. Bullock, a deliberate inspection of the Department’s work was decided on. Obviously, the surest way to get at the unvarnished facts was to enlist the services of outside critics. To this end the Department of Education was asked to come to our aid. Its members were invited to attend lectures and recitations, to read examination books and theses, to learn by questionnaires what the students themselves said and thought, to suggest improvements. In addition, some members of the Visiting Committee appointed by the Board of Overseers really visited, attending systematically the exercises in some courses and preparing valuable critical reports. The Educators responded to the appeal with gratifying heartiness, and the two Departments have cooperated cordially in a course of action which is unique in the history of the University.

Already this movement has borne fruit; and it will bear still more. The introductory course Economics A (which has successively borne the names Philosophy 6, Political Economy 1, Economics 1, and now Economics A) has been systematically visited. New methods of instruction have been suggested, old methods have been tested, promising devices are on trial. It should be added that the more expensive and effective methods of instruction tried in it, and started even before the educational survey, were made possible only by generous financial support from the Visiting Committee. This is the largest elective course in College, having over 500 students; here is the most important teaching task. In the next tier of courses, two are being conducted on new lines; in these cases on the department’s own initiative rather than in consequence of advice from outside. They are the undergraduate courses on accounting and statistics, in which something closely akin to a laboratory system is being applied. That is, the assigned tasks are done, not in the student’s room and at his own (procrastinated!) hour, but in special quarters equipped for the purpose, at times appointed in advance, and under the supervision and with the aid of well-trained assistants. Other courses, especially those having considerable numbers, are now under similar inspection, and we have every hope that in them also good advice will be secured and good results obtained.

The problems of instruction in this subject, as in so many others, are far from being solved. How far lecture, how far enlist discussion, how far recite? In what way bring it about that the students shall think for themselves? In what way communicate to them the best thinking of others? Almost every department of the University, not excepting the professional schools, is asking itself these questions and is experimenting with solutions. Undoubtedly, different methods will prove advantageous for different subjects. Within the Department of Economics itself there is occasion for variety in methods. Some courses, especially those dealing with matters of general principle and of theoretic reasoning, are best conducted by discussion. Others, dealing with concrete problems, with the history of industry and of legislation, with description and fact, call for a judicious admixture of required reading, lectures, written work. In all, the great thing to be aimed at is power and mastery: training in thinking for yourself, in reaching conclusions of your own, in expressing clearly and effectively what you have learned and thought out. The courses that deal with industrial history, with the labor problems, with railways and combinations, taxation and public finance, money and banking, need something in the nature of laboratory work, such as I have just referred to; an extension and improvement, supervision and systematization, of the familiar thesis work.

Now, throughout all such endeavor and experimentation, the indispensable thing is a staff of capable and well-trained instructors. We need able men, effective personalities. We need them throughout, from top to bottom, — professors, assistant professors, instructors, assistants. The ideal man is one having a good head, good judgment, good teaching power, good presence, good training, the spirit of scholarship and research. Men who possess all these qualities are rare birds; we are in luck when we get the perfect combination. Often we have to accept men not up to the ideal. But we know what we ought to have, and we should strive to get as nearly to its height as we can.

In no subject is there greater need of good teachers and of trained thinkers than in economics. The subject is difficult, and it abounds with unsolved problems. Some things in its domain are indeed settled, — more than would be inferred from current popular controversies or from the differences in the ranks of the economists themselves. But on sundry important topics it is useless to maintain that we have reached demonstrable conclusions. There are pros and cons; conflicting arguments must be weighed; only qualified propositions can be stated. Differences of temperament, of upbringing, of environment, will cause the opinions of able and conscientious men to vary. Hence there is need above all of teachers who can think, weigh, judge; who are aware of the inevitable divergencies of opinion and of the causes that underlie them. There is abundant room for conviction, for enthusiasm, for the emphatic statement of one’s own views. But also there is need, above all in the teacher, of patience, discrimination, charity for those whose views are different.

It is thus of the utmost importance that young men of the right stamp should be drawn into the profession. I say the profession, because it has come to be such. And it is a profession with large possibilities, one that may well tempt a capable, high-spirited, and ambitious young man. Twenty-five years ago, when I was in the early stage of my teaching career, it would have been rash to encourage such a youth to train himself to be an economist. Then academic positions were but ill-paid, and were not held in assured high esteem. The situation has changed. Though salaries are still meager, they are rising; and the public regard for scientific work is increasing for all subjects, and not least for this one. Quite as important is the circumstance that the services of trained economists are now in demand for the public service, and that in this direction there are large opportunities for usefulness and for distinction. The possible range of work has come to be much wider than the academic field. And no large pecuniary bait is necessary to enlist men of the needed quality. Those who are interested primarily in money-making cannot indeed be advised to enter the profession; but they are also not of the sort to be welcomed in it. I am convinced that nowadays there are more young men than ever, in Harvard and elsewhere, to whom something nobler appeals. The spirit of service is abroad in the land, and moves students not only in their choice of college courses, but in their choice of a career. Yet a career should be in sight. There should be a reasonable prospect of promotion, a decent income according to the standards of educated men.

To enlist men of the right stamp in the service of the University there must be still another sort of inducement. There must be a stimulating atmosphere, a pervasive spirit of initiative and research. To mould the thoughts of students and so the opinions of the coming generation is an attractive task; but no less attractive, often more so, — much will depend on temperament, — is the opportunity to influence the forward march of thought, the solution of new problems. As I have just said, economics offers unsolved problems in abundance. There are high questions of theory, concerned with the very foundations of the social order and tempting to the man of severe intellectual ambition. There are intricate questions of legislation and administration, calling for elaborate investigation and pressing for prompt action; these will tempt the man of practical bent. For either sort of work, there must be something more inspiring than the opportunity for routine teaching. The advanced student needs the clash of mind on mind, the companionship of eager inquiry. It is this way that the Graduate School most serves Harvard College, and indeed is indispensable to the College. Without the opportunity and the stimulus of independent scientific work by the graduate students as well as by the teaching staff, it would be hopeless to try to enlist in the University service promising men of the desired quality.

I dwell for a moment on this aspect of the situation, because it is not understood by those among the alumni who believe that too much of the University’s money and too much of the professors’ time are given to graduate instruction. The late Professor Child, one of the most distinguished scholars as well as one of the most delightful men in the annals of Harvard, is said to have remarked that Cambridge would be a most attractive place were it not for the students. The remark reflects the weariness which in time comes over the professor whose teaching is confined to the routine instruction of undergraduates. It is astonishing how much scholarly work of high quality was achieved by Child and others of the older generation, under the untoward conditions of their day; sometimes, there is ground for suspecting, — not, by the way, in Child’s case, — because they simply slighted their routine teaching. Under the new conditions and the new competition in the academic world, we may be sure that if this were the only sort of work expected of the staff, the staff would be made up in the main of men qualified for this work only. It is the opportunity of doing creative work that tempts the highest intellectual ability; and creative work needs a creative atmosphere.

It is to be noted, further, that the source from which Harvard College and all the colleges must draw their teaching staffs is in these graduate schools. The experience of the Department of Economics convinces its members that the only way to secure a good staff of junior teachers, — instructors and assistants, — is to train them in a graduate school. The staff of the Department has been very much improved during the last ten years, and the improvement has come almost exclusively by recruiting from its own advanced students. We are confident that the training we give them is thoroughly good; we even cherish the belief that nowhere else can so good a training be secured. At all events, we try to retain the best of our advanced students in our service; if not indefinitely, at least for considerable stretches of time. And among the inducements which lead them to stay with us are the opportunities not only for teaching, but for research of their own, made possible by a moderate stint of stated work and enriched by the wealth of material in our great library.

What the Department of Economics most needs, then, and indeed what the University most needs in every department, is men. The University must have buildings, laboratories, libraries; but most of all it must have ripe scholars, inspiring teachers, forward thinkers. As it happens, external and mechanical facilities count less in economics than in many other subjects. There is no need of expensive laboratories, such as are indispensable for physics, chemistry, biology, the medical sciences. Like the Law School, we use chiefly collections of books and documents, and convenient lecture and conference rooms. The one fundamental thing is the men, and the one way to get them is to have free money, — enough money to pay good salaries to those on the ground, and to draw to the University the rare genius whenever by good fortune he is to be found. The specific way in which the generous-minded graduate can serve the needs of such a department is by the endowment of instruction and research.

The endowment of instruction ordinarily takes the form of the establishment of a professorship; and this will doubtless remain the most effective way of achieving the end. But there are other ways also. Professor Bullock has recently called attention in these columns to the possibilities of the endowment of economic research. I venture to offer a suggestion for something analogous, — something which may combine the endowment of research with that of instruction, and which has the further merit of not requiring so formidable a sum as is necessary nowadays for the foundation of a professorship. The University has at its disposal a not inconsiderable number of fellowships for training young men of promise. I believe that it could use with high advantage similar posts, more dignified and more liberally endowed, for mature men who are more than promising, — whose powers are proved, whose achievements are assured. Research fellowships they might be called, or professorial fellowships, if you please. An endowment of a moderate amount would enable the incumbent of such a post, if a young unmarried man, to give his whole time to research; if an older man, to limit his teaching hours within moderate bounds and so to give a large share of his time and energy to research and publication. The appointments would be made, I should suppose, for a specified term of years; and they would go preferably to scholars in the full vigor of early manhood. They would be highly honorable, and they would be tempting to men of high ideals and of quality coming up to our own ideals of University service. Will not some of our friends, not of the multi-millionaire class, desirous of doing what they can for our benignant mother, and perhaps of perpetuating a cherished name, reflect on this possibility?

 

Source: The Harvard Graduates’ Magazine. Vol. 24, No. 94 (December, 1915), pp. 274-279.

 

Categories
Chicago Economists Harvard

Harvard. Jacob Viner Beats Paul Douglas for Ricardo Prize Scholarship, 1916

 

Jacob Viner and Paul Douglas were not only colleagues at the University of Chicago, they also overlapped briefly in graduate school at Harvard in 1915-16. The Ricardo prize scholarship  that they both competed for was worth $350 and considerably exceeded the regular annual tuition-fee, e.g., for a newly enrolled (1916-17) full-time, resident student in the Graduate School of Arts and Sciences annual tuition was $200. Since both were already enrolled in 1915-16, they would have been charged the tuition fee published in the earlier catalogue for 1915-16 that I have not yet hunted down. One might  speculate that Douglas had hoped to complete his Ph.D. at Harvard but that he needed to win the scholarship…or perhaps “honorable mention” was not honorable enough for him. In any event, Douglas went on to receive his Ph.D. from Columbia University. In all fairness, Viner was in his second year at Harvard and could use the Ricardo prize scholarship exam in April as a dress rehearsal for his Ph.D. examinations that he took the next month.

________________________

Ricardo Prize Exam. Will be Held in Upper Dane Tomorrow

Harvard Crimson, April 4, 1916

The Ricardo Prize Scholarship examination will be held in Upper Dane Hall tomorrow at 2 o’clock. The scholarship is valued at $350, and is open to anyone who is this year a member of the University, and who will next year be either a member of the Senior class or of the Graduate School of Arts and Sciences. Each candidate will write in the examination room an essay on a topic chosen by himself from a list not previously announced, in economics and political science. In addition, statements of previous studies, and any written work, must be submitted by every candidate to the Chairman of the Department of Economics not later than the time of the examination. The man who wins the scholarship must devote the majority of his time next year to economics and political studies.

________________________

Ricardo Prize Scholarship

The Ricardo Prize Scholarship for 1916-17 has been awarded to Jacob Viner, A.M., of Montreal, Quebec, a second-year student in the Graduate School of Arts and Sciences. Honorable mention has been awarded to Paul Howard Douglas, A.M., of Cambridge, a first-year student in the Graduate School of Arts and Sciences.

Source: Harvard University Gazette, Vol. XI, No. 34, May 13, 1916, p. 181 .

Image Source: Collage of details taken from photos apf1-08488 (Viner) and  apf1-05851 (Douglas) from University of Chicago Photographic Archive, Special Collections Research Center, University of Chicago Library.

Categories
Curriculum Harvard Undergraduate

Harvard College President Lowell on Instruction in Economics Department, 1917

In 1912 the economics department of Harvard initiated a major study of economics instruction in the University that was completed in 1916 and published as: 

The Teaching of Economics in Harvard University. A Report Presented by the Division of Education at the Request of the Department of Economics. Cambridge, Massachusetts: Harvard University Press, 1917. 248 pages.

I will of course rummage through the report for tidbits to post in Economics in the Rear-View Mirror, but for now, visitors at least have a link that will take them directly to the published study together with the following reflections of the President of Harvard College at the time A. Lawrence Lowell that were stimulated by the study. One does not really feel 100 years away from Lowell’s time, give-or-take a presentation software package, a MOOC or some learning platform (e.g. “Blackboard”).

___________________________

From the Annual Report for 1915-16 of the President of Harvard College, A. Lawrence Lowell:

One of the most interesting things done in the College during the last few years has been an invitation given by the Department of Economics to the Department of Education to investigate the undergraduate instruction in economics with a view to its improvement. Such a request to another body was not needed to prove the open mind, the desire to improve, the willingness to change its methods and to deal with its instruction as a systematic whole, which has been conspicuous in the case of the Department of Economics; but it is highly significant and full of promise. The investigation, which occupied a couple of years, has been very elaborate, making a large use of statistics, of questionnaires to instructors, students and graduates, of examination questions designed to test the progress of students in their capacity to deal with problems, and of other methods of inquiry that need not be described here. It has touched many different aspects of instruction, some of them of value far beyond the department immediately concerned. These things will appear when the report is published, but it may not be out of place to mention a couple of them here.

The fundamental questions in all education are the object sought and the result attained. Is economics studied in college for the sake of its general educational value in training the mind and preparing for good citizenship, or with a view to its vocational utility in the student’s subsequent career; and how far does it actually fulfil each purpose? An answer to these questions was sought by means of questionnaires addressed to all students taking economic courses and to a thousand graduates, beginning as far back as the Class of 1880 and comprising men engaged in every kind of occupation. Of course all the persons addressed did not reply, and many of the answers were too vague to be of use. Yet among the replies there were a large number definite enough to be of great value. Of the students, about one-third intended to take up a business of some kind; more than one-half as many were looking forward to the law; while the rest were distributed among all the different careers of which an undergraduate can conceive. Of all these men, about two-fifths gave as their chief reason for electing economics its value in training the mind or in understanding public and social problems; while even of those intending to adopt some occupation for which the subject is popularly supposed to offer a preparation, only about one-fifth expected to find what they learned directly helpful, although many more trusted that it would be of indirect assistance.

More interesting still are the replies from the graduates, for they had been enabled to measure what they had acquired by the light of experience in their various pursuits. The men in almost every occupation speak more commonly of the general cultural or civic benefit that they obtained than of vocational profit. This is notably true of the lawyers, and in a less degree also of the business men. The only two classes of graduates who speak with equal frequency of the two kinds of benefit derived are the journalists and the farmers; but they are few in number, and their answers do not appear to have been closely discriminating in this respect.

Results like those brought out by the inquiry of the Department of Education have a direct bearing upon the teaching of Economics, and the position of the subject in the undergraduate course of study. If the chief value of economics, is vocational, it ought to be taught mainly from that point of view, and undergraduates ought not to be generally encouraged to elect it who will not pursue some vocation to which it leads. But if, on the other hand, its principal benefit lies in training men to think clearly, and to analyze and sift evidence in the class of problems that force themselves upon public attention in this generation, then the greater part of the courses ought to be conducted with that object, and it is well for every undergraduate to study the subject to some extent. An attempt to aim at two birds with the same stone, is apt to result in hitting neither. Moreover, a confusion of objectives is misleading for the student. An impression often arises, without any sufficient basis, that some particular subject is an especially good preparation for a certain profession, and the theory is sometimes advocated warmly by the teachers of the subject from a laudable desire to magnify the importance of their field. Students naturally follow the prevailing view without the means of testing its correctness; not infrequently, as they afterwards discover, to the neglect of something they need more. The traditional path to eminence at the English bar has been at Oxford the honor school in literae humaniores, at Cambridge the mathematical tripos, and since the strongest minds in each university habitually took these roads, the results appeared to prove the proposition. It is well, therefore, that we should seek the most accurate and the most comprehensive data possible on the effect of particular studies upon men in various occupations, and upon different classes of minds. Such data are not easy to procure and are still more difficult to interpret, but when obtained they are of great value, and would throw light upon pressing educational questions about which we talk freely and know almost nothing.

Another matter with which the Department of Education dealt in their inquiry, again by the use of the questionnaire, is the relative value attached by students to the various methods of instruction. These were classified as lectures, class-room discussion, assigned reading, reports, essays or theses prepared by the student, and other less prominent agencies. Taken as a whole the students ascribed distinctly the greatest value to the reading, the next to the class-room discussion, placing lectures decidedly third, with reports and other exercises well below the first three. This order was especially marked in the case of the general introductory course known as Economics A. In the more advanced courses the order is somewhat changed. Even here the required reading is given the highest value, but the lectures in these courses are deemed more important than the class-room discussion. Among the better scholars in the advanced courses the value attributed to the lectures is, in fact, nearly as great as that ascribed to the assigned reading. These men also give to the reports, essays and theses a slightly greater importance than do the elementary and the inferior advanced students, although they do not place them on a par with the other three methods of instruction.

Answers of this kind are not infallible. There are always a considerable number of students who express no opinions, or whose opinions are not carefully considered. Nevertheless the replies are highly significant as indicating an impression—the impression of persons who, imperfect as their judgment may be, are after all the best judges, if not indeed the only judges, of what they have obtained from the different methods of instruction. In some ways the answers are unexpected. One would have supposed that class-room discussion would be of more value in an advanced course than in an elementary one. For it would presumably be remunerative in proportion as the members of the class possess information about the subject and a grasp of the principles involved. Probably the real reason for the relatively small importance attached to it by students in advanced courses is to be found in the fact that many of these courses are conducted mainly as lecture courses without much class-room discussion. The most illuminating fact that appears from the replies is the high value attached to the assigned reading as compared with the lectures. Even in the cases of the better scholars in the advanced courses it is not safe to assume an opinion that the lectures are of equal value with books, because they may be referring strictly to the reading formally assigned which is only a part of the reading that they do.

The problem of the relative value of books and lectures in higher education, or, for that matter, of books and direct oral teaching at school, is one that ought to receive very careful attention. The tendency for more than a generation, from the primary school to the university, has been to throw a greater emphasis on oral instruction as compared with study of the printed page. Half a century ago the boy at school and the student in college were habitually assigned a certain task, and the exercise in the class-room was in the main a recitation, the work of the teacher consisting chiefly in ascertaining whether the task had been properly performed, the set number of pages diligently and intelligently read, and in giving help over hard places or removing confusion in the pupil’s mind. But since that time the whole trend of education in all its grades has been towards in increase in the amount of direct instruction by the teacher. At school he or she talks to the class more and listens less than formerly, teaches it more directly, imparts more information. In the college or university the recitation has almost entirely disappeared, giving place mainly to lectures and in a smaller degree to class discussion. In fact, the impression among the general public, and in the minds of many academic people, is that the chief function of a professor is to give lectures, — not of course in the literal sense of reading something he has written, but imparting information directly to the class by an oral statement throughout the lecture hour.

Lectures are an excellent, and in fact an indispensable, part of university work, but it is possible to have too many of them, to treat them as the one vital method of instruction. This has two dangers. It tends to put the student too much in a purely receptive attitude of absorbing information poured out upon him, instead of compelling him to extract it from books for himself; so that his education becomes a passive rather than an active process. Lectures should probably be in the main a means of stimulating thought, rather than of imparting facts which can generally be impressed upon the mind more accurately and effectively by the printed page than by the spoken word.

Then again there is the danger that if lecture courses are regarded as the main object of the professors’ chair, the universities, and the departments therein, will value themselves, and be valued, in proportion to the number of lecture courses that they offer. This matter will bear a moment’s consideration, for it is connected with certain important general considerations of educational policy. To make the question clear, and point out its bearing upon our own problems, something may be said about the relations that exist between instruction in the College and in other departments of the University.

Many American universities have adopted a combined degree, whereby the earlier portion of the professional instruction in law, medicine, and other technical subjects, is taken as a part of the college course; and at the same time they maintain separate faculties for the college, or undergraduate academic department, and for the graduate school of arts and sciences. At Harvard we have gone on the opposite principle in both cases. We have separated each of the professional schools almost wholly from the college, with a distinct faculty and a distinct student life of its own. We have done this on the ground that a strictly professional atmosphere is an advantage in the study of a profession, and we believe that the earnestness, the almost ferociously keen interest, of the student body in our Law School, for example, has been largely due to this fact. We believe that the best results in both general and professional education are attained by a sharp separation between the two. On the other hand, we have not established a distinct faculty for the graduate school, but have the same faculty and to a great extent the same body of instruction for undergraduates and graduates, each man being expected to take such part of it as fits his own state of progress. We have done this because we have not regarded the Graduate School of Arts and Sciences as exclusively or distinctly a professional school for future teachers. If it were so, it would probably be necessary to give it more of a pedagogical character than it has today. Indeed there has appeared to be no serious disadvantage, such as exists in the case of a purely professional school, in our practice of not separating the graduate school wholly from the college. Although there is a single faculty the two bodies of students are quite distinct, and the graduates take no part in the athletics or social activities of the men in college. They are in no danger of any lack of industry, nor do they suffer from contact with the college students taking courses primarily for graduates. The best Seniors who have reached the point of electing advanced courses are by no means inferior in capacity, education, or earnestness to the average graduate. And, on the other hand, competent undergraduates benefit greatly by following instruction that would not otherwise be open to them.

Our system, by closing professional education to undergraduates, obliges them to devote their college course entirely to academic studies; and at the same time it opens all academic instruction to undergraduates and graduates alike. By so doing it treats the whole list of academic courses as one body of instruction whereof the quantity can be readily measured and the nature perceived. In this way our system brings into peculiar prominence a question that affects the whole university policy in this country. A university, as its name implies, is an institution where all branches are studied, but this principle easily transforms itself into the doctrine that a university ought to offer systematic instruction in every part of every subject; and in fact almost all departments press for an increase of courses, hoping to maintain so far as possible a distinct course upon every sub-division of their fields. This is in large measure due to the fact that American graduate students, unlike German students, tend to select their university on account of the number and richness of the courses listed in the catalogue on their particular subjects, rather than by reason of the eminence of the professors who teach them. Some years ago it happened that a professor of rare distinction in his field, and an admirable teacher, who had a large number of graduate students in his seminar, accepted a chair in another university. His successors at his former post, however good, were by no means men with his reputation. Under these circumstances, one would have supposed that many of his pupils would have followed him, and that fresh students would have sought him in his new chair. But in fact the seminar at the place he left was substantially undiminished, and he had a comparatively small body of graduate students in the university to which he migrated.

The real reason for increasing the list of courses, though it is often not consciously recognized, is quite as much a desire to attract students as a belief in the benefit conferred on them after they come. The result has been a great expansion within the last score of years in the number of courses offered by all the larger universities. Counting two half-courses as equivalent to one full course, our Faculty of Arts and Sciences offered last year to undergraduates or graduates 417½ courses running throughout the year. Of these 67 were designated as seminars, where advanced students work together in a special field under the guidance of the professors. More will be said of these later. Some of the remaining 350½ were in reality of the same character, and others involved purely laboratory work; but most of them were systematic courses of instruction, mainly what are called, not always accurately, lecture courses. In addition, there were 119 more courses listed in the catalogue, but marked as being omitted that year. These are in the main courses designed to be given in alternate years, where the number of applicants is not large enough to justify their repetition annually. A student has thus an opportunity to take them at some time during his college career. They entail upon the instructor almost as much labor in preparation as the others, and are an integral part of the courses of instruction provided by the University. The total number of courses, therefore, offered by the Faculty of Arts and Sciences was 536½, whereby something over 73 were in the nature of seminars.

Some years ago a committee of the Board of Overseers suggested that there were needless courses provided, and the Committee of the Faculty on Instruction examined the whole list, making careful inquiries of the members of the several departments, and reported that with one or two exceptions there were no courses for which good and sufficient reasons could not be given. The result of a similar inquiry would be the same today. There are few, if any, courses that could be seriously considered by anyone as useless or superfluous in themselves. Almost every one of them is intrinsically valuable, and a distinct contribution to the instruction in the subject. Nevertheless, it is a proper subject for consideration whether the policy of offering courses of instruction covering every part of every subject is wise. No European university attempts to do so. No single student can take them all in any large field and his powers would be deadened by a surfeit of instruction if he did. For the undergraduates a comparatively small array of staple courses on the most important portions of the subject, with a limited number of others on more highly specialized aspects thereof, is sufficient. For the graduate students who remain only a year to take the degree of Master of Arts, and who are doing much the same work as the more advanced Seniors, the same list of courses would be enough; and for those graduates who intend to become professors in universities and productive scholars it would probably be better, — beyond these typical specialized courses, which would suffice to show the method of approaching the subject — to give all the advanced instruction by means of seminars where the students work together on related, but not identical paths, with the aid of mutual criticism and under the guidance of the professors. Fewer courses, more thoroughly given, would free instructors for a larger amount of personal supervision of the students, would be better for the pupils; and would make it possible for the University to allow those members of the staff who are capable of original work of a high order more time for productive scholarship. Many a professor at the present day, under the pressure of preparing a new course, cannot find time to work up the discoveries he has made, or to publish a work throwing a new light on existing knowledge.

In making these suggestions there is no intention of urging a reduction of our existing schedule. But it is time to discuss the assumption, now apparently prevalent in all American universities, that an indefinite increase in the number of courses provided is to be aimed at in higher education. The question is whether that policy is not defective in principle, and whether we are not following it to excess, thereby sacrificing to it other objects equally, if not more, important.

Courses are merely a means to an end, and that end is the education of the student. One method of placing courses in their true light as a means of education is the provision of comprehensive examinations for graduation, covering the general field of the student’s principal work beyond the precise limits of the courses he has taken. This has long been done in the case of the doctorate of philosophy; and in the year covered by this report it was applied for the first time to undergraduates concentrating in the Division of History, Government and Economics. Only 24 students of the Class of 1917, who finished their work in three years and concentrated in this field, came under its operation; but they were numerous enough to give a definite indication of the working of the plan. To that extent the results were satisfactory. The examination papers were well designed for measuring the knowledge and grasp of the subject, with a large enough range of options to include the various portions of the field covered by the different candidates; and the examiners themselves were satisfied with the plan as a fair means of testing the qualification of the students. During the coming year a much larger number of men will come up for this comprehensive examination, which promises to mark a new departure in American college methods.

 

Source: Harvard University. Reports of the President and the Treasurer of Harvard College 1915-16 (Cambridge, 1917), pp. 11-19. Reprinted in Harvard Crimson, January 19, 1917.

Image Source: Harvard President A. Lawrence Lowell from Harvard Class Album 1920.

 

Categories
Chicago Cornell Economists Harvard

Harvard and Chicago. Harvard Class of 1873 reports from J. Laurence Laughlin 1879-1913


James Laurence Laughlin (1850-1933) was the founding head of the Department of Political Economy at the University of Chicago. One earlier post provided a mid-career biographical sketch of Laughlin and another his proposal at Cornell to expand the economics course offerings. Also of interest is his list of suggested titles for a personal library of economics as of 1887.

When compared to the notes submitted to the respective Harvard Class Secretaries,   Frank W. Taussig (Class of 1879) or Robert Franz Foerster (Class of 1909), Laughlin appears to have had a less intense filial attachment to his alma mater.

______________________________

1879

JAMES LAWRENCE [sic] LAUGHLIN.

Secretary has heard nothing from him. At last accounts he was teaching school in Boston

Source: The Second Triennial Report of the Secretary of the Class of 1873 of Harvard College. Boston, Geo. H. Ellis Press, Commencement 1879. Page 18.

_______________________________

1883

JAMES LAWRENCE [sic] LAUGHLIN.

Received degree of Ph. D. from Harvard in 1876 and was appointed instructor in Political Economy in 1878. Has been made Assistant Professor in the same department the current year. Has been a contributor to the “Atlantic,” “International,” etc. Was married September 9, 1875, to Alice McGuffey of Cincinnati. A daughter, Agatha, was born January 3, 1880, and his wife died January 11, 1880.

Source: The Third Triennial Report of the Secretary of the Class of 1873 of Harvard College. Newport, Davis & Pitman, Commencement 1883. Page 17.

_______________________________

1885

JAMES LAWRENCE [sic] LAUGHLIN.

Assistant professor of political economy at Cambridge. Has published ” Laughlin’s Mill’s Political Economy,” and written a few magazine articles. Was married to Miss H. M. Pitman, Sept. 4, 1883.

Source: The Fourth Triennial Report of the Secretary of the Class of 1873 of Harvard College. Boston, Rand, Avery, & Co., Commencement 1885. Page 14.

_______________________________

1888

JAMES LAURENCE LAUGHLIN.

626 Chestnut St., Philadelphia. “I have written a new book : ‘The Elements of Political Economy; with some applications to Questions of the Day,’ in 1887, and it has gone into a second edition. ‘Gold and Prices since 1873;’ a study on the so-called appreciation of gold, etc., etc. My ‘History of Bimetalism,’ has gone into its second edition; and my edition of ‘Mill,’ into its fourth or fifth. I have resigned my position in Cambridge, and

have come to Philadelphia to take the management of an Insurance Co., the ‘Philadelphia Manufacturers Mutual Fire Insurance Co.;’ but shall continue my economic writing.”

Source: The Fifth Triennial Report of the Secretary of the Class of 1873 of Harvard College. Boston, S. J. Parkhill & Co., Commencement 1888. Page 21.

_______________________________

1891

JAMES LAWRENCE [sic] LAUGHLIN.
“I am Professor of Political Economy and Finance at Cornell University and see Jack White every day. These are my two distinctions since last writing.”

[…]

HORATIO STEVENS WHITE.

“I have just finished my third year as Dean of the Faculty. This spring I was called to the chair of Germanic languages in the new Stanford University, Palo Alto, California. The trustees here meanwhile appointed me as head of the German department with an increase in salary. The California offer however remains open, and I shall visit the Pacific coast next winter and study the situation on the spot before coming to a final decision. Our Faculty baseball nine, which has been organized for several years, continues to win a majority of its games with various student clubs. The chair of Political Economy left vacant by the resignation of Professor E. B. Andrews, who was elected President of the Brown University, has been filled by the appointment of our classmate Laughlin, who has occupied the position this year with general acceptance. As a result of his efforts the trustees have decided to appoint an associate professor in the department, to establish two special fellowships in Political Economy, and to place at his disposal a generous publication fund. The University is to be congratulated upon this able contribution which ’73 has thus made to our Faculty.”

Source: The Sixth Triennial Report of the Secretary of the Class of 1873 of Harvard College. Boston, S. J. Parkhill & Co., Commencement 1891. Pp. 19, 39.

_______________________________

1898

JAMES LAWRENCE [sic] LAUGHLIN.

5747 Lexington Ave., Chicago, I11. Taught school in Boston, and took degree of Ph.D. at Cambridge in 1876. Was appointed instructor in Political Economy at Harvard in 1878 and Assistant Professor in 1883. In 1888 he was in Philadelphia, where he had the management of the Philadelphia Manufacturers’ Mutual Fire Insurance Co. Subsequently he was Professor of Political Economy and Finance at Cornell, and is now at Chicago University in a similar capacity. He has devoted much time to writing on political economy and finance, and has published some important books on those subjects.

Source: The Seventh Report of the Secretary of the Class of 1873 of Harvard College Issued upon the Twenty-fifth Anniversary of Graduation. Boston, S. J. Parkhill & Co., Commencement 1898. Page 23.

_______________________________

1905

JAMES LAWRENCE [sic] LAUGHLIN.

Since 1892 he has been Head Professor of the department of Political Economy in the University of Chicago. For some years he has been editor of the “Journal of Political Economy.” He served on the Monetary Commission appointed by the Indianapolis Convention of Boards of Trade, in 1898, and was entrusted with the preparation of the report which appeared in a volume of six hundred and eight pages. In 1894 he was invited to prepare a currency law for Santo Domingo. The visit to the island on a special steamer, the negotiations with the government, the enactment of the law and its provisions, were subsequently published in the “Journal of Political Economy.” In 1902 he published the first volume of a magnum opus on money. This volume, “The Principles of Money,” will be followed by five succeeding volumes “when time is granted to finish them.” In addition to this work he has written many books and articles treating of the various phases of his specialty in this and other countries.

Source: The Eight Report of the Secretary of the Class of 1873 Harvard. Boston, Rockwell and Churchill Press, Commencement 1905. Pp. 23-4.

_______________________________

1913

JAMES LAURENCE LAUGHLIN.

Is at the head of the Department of Political Economy at Chicago, and an authority on finance whose reputation is world-wide. At the Three Hundredth Jubilee of the University of Giessen, Germany, in 1907, he was given an Honorary Doctorate. He writes:

“Any modest member of the Class of 1873 does not feel that he has done anything worth reporting. In 1906 I was appointed by the German Kultus Ministerium an exchange professor from the University of Chicago to Berlin. I lectured in German before the Vereinigung für Staatswissenschaftliche Fortbildung, and also in Cologne, as well as at the University of Berlin. In the winter of 1908-09, I was one of two delegates (the other being Professor A. A. Michaelson, the recipient of a Nobel Prize) to the Scientific Congress of all American Republics in Santiago, Chile. I crossed the Andes, visiting Argentina, and came home by the east coast. In June, 1911, I was given leave of absence from the University in order to take charge of the nation-wide campaign to obtain a reconstruction of our currency and banking system. In this work I was chairman of the Executive Committee of the National Citizens’ League for the promotion of a sound banking system. The results of this campaign are now apparent. Not only is there an insistent and intelligent public opinion demanding reform, but the new administration is ready to put a satisfactory measure through Congress. It now looks as if the purpose of this campaign was certainly attained. Of course I have been guilty off and on of publishing some books and articles, but they are not as good as I should like to have them, and when I get to the next world I am going to revise them and make them just what they ought to be for an audience that I hope will not yet be made up very largely of the Class of 1873. For I hope that the surviving members of the class will long be here after I have departed.”

Source: The Ninth Report of the Secretary of the Class of 1873 Harvard. Boston, Rockwell and Churchill Press, Commencement 1913. Pp. 25-6.

Image Source: Clipped from printed speech given at the 78th meeting of The Sunset Club at the Grand Pacific Hotel, Chicago, December 6, 1894 found in Laughlin, James Laurence. Papers, [Box 1, Folder 17], Special Collections Research Center, University of Chicago Library.

 

 

 

 

Categories
Economists Harvard Princeton

Harvard. Economics Ph.D. Alumnus. Robert Franz Foerster, 1909


Robert Franz Foerster (b. July 8, 1883; d. July 29, 1941) was the son of the American composer Adolph Martin Foerster, earned his BA from Harvard a year ahead of his class and went on at Harvard to earn a Ph.D. in economics on the topic of Italian emigration. The first twenty years of his career following his undergraduate education is sketched in the following four notes he submitted to the secretary of the Class of 1906. Foerster went on to become Professor of Industrial Relations at Princeton University. Some details about his undergraduate years can be gleaned from the Secretary’s First Report Harvard College Class of 1906, Cambridge, Crimson Printing, June 1907.

_______________________________

1912

ROBERT FRANZ FOERSTER

Graduating in 1905, as of 1906, I spent in Europe fourteen months of 1905-1906, travelling in England, France, Germany, Switzerland, Austria, Hungary, Italy, Holland and Belgium. For four months I was in Italy, for five in Berlin, where I took courses at the university. In the fall of 1906 I returned to Harvard, where for three years I was in the Graduate School. In 1909 I received the degree of Ph.D. in economics, my thesis dealing with Italian emigration. From 1908-1909 I was an assistant at Harvard in social ethics, from 1909-1911 an instructor, and since 1911 an instructor on the Faculty. I am chairman of the Immigration Committee of the American Unitarian Association and director of the Social Research Council of Boston. The latter has recently been affiliated with the department of social ethics, with offices in Emerson Hall, Cambridge. Books or plays of my authorship: “A Statistical Survey of Italian Emigration,” Quarterly Journal of Economics, November, 1908; “The French Old Age Insurance Law of 1910,” Quarterly Journal of Economics, August, 1910; “The British National Insurance Act,” Quarterly Journal of Economics, February, 1912; reviews and translations in economic journals; bibliographies in “A Guide to Reading in Social Ethics and Allied Subjects,” Harvard University, 1910. Member: American Economic Association, American Statistical Association, American Association for Labor Legislation. Business address: Harvard University, Cambridge, Mass. Present residence: 71 Perkins Hall, Cambridge, Mass.

 

Source:   Secretary’s Second Report Harvard College Class of 1906, Cambridge, Crimson Printing, June 1912, pp. 99-100.

_______________________________

1916

ROBERT FRANZ FOERSTER

Born              Pittsburgh, Pa., July 8, 1883.

Parents         Adolph Martin Foerster, Henrietta Margaret Reineman.

School           Central High School, Pittsburgh, Pa.

Years in College 1902-1905.

Degrees         A.B., 1905 (1906); Ph.D., 1909.

Occupation   University Professor.

Address        (home) 11 Shady Hill Square, Cambridge, Mass. (business) Emerson Hall, Harvard University, Cambridge, Mass.

I have continued to teach in the department of social ethics at Harvard. In 1913 I was promoted to an assistant professorship. Upon the retirement of Dr. Peabody, early in that year, Professor Ford and I took over the conduct of the course “Social Ethics 1” which our predecessor had for many years given as “Philosophy 5″—the first course of a department, established in 1906, which has continued to grow both in courses and in student enrolments. In 1912 I was appointed by Governor Foss chairman of a commission to study the question of the dependency of widows’ families. Our report was presented to the legislature in January of the following year. In the spring, after a considerable fight, a measure providing a system of “mothers’ aid,” based partly on the commission’s bill, was enacted. During the summer of 1913, in an absence from America of six or seven weeks, I journeyed, via the Azores, Madeira, and Algiers, to Sicily, Calabria, and Basilicata, regions in which I had become interested in a study of Italian emigration; I returned via the Tyrol, Switzerland, and France. The summer of 1914 I spent largely in Cambridge, doing a piece of work for Dr. Mackenzie King in connection with the department of industrial relations newly established by the Rockefeller Foundation. In these several years I have maintained connections with various social and philanthropic enterprises. In 1915 I became engaged to Miss Lilian Hillyer Smith, Radcliffe 1915, of Forest Hills, Mass, subsequently of Princeton, N. J. After our marriage, we expect to settle, in the fall, in No. 11 Shady Hill Square, Cambridge. I have written: Report (majority) of the Massachusetts Commission on the Support of Dependent Minor Children of Widowed Mothers (Boston, 1913). Member: Colonial Club, Cambridge, Harvard Club of Boston, American Economic Association, American Association for Labor Legislation, American Statistical Association.

 

Source:   Secretary’s Third Report Harvard College Class of 1906, Cambridge, Crimson Printing, 1916, pp. 139-40.

_______________________________

1921

ROBERT FRANZ FOERSTER

Address:       (home) 11 Shady Hill Sq., Cambridge, Mass.

Occupation: University Professor.

Married:       Lilian Hillyer Smith, Princeton, N. J., June 5, 1916.

I continued after the War broke out to teach at Harvard, and by the Spring of 1918 was the only person left teaching in my department. I had been overworking for a considerable period and suffered a breakdown in April, 1918. Though I continued to teach for the remainder of the Spring Term, I found it impossible to return to the University in the Fall. The Fall and Winter were devoted to the effort to regain my health and included a considerable stay in Johns Hopkins Hospital. At the end of March, 1919 I returned to Harvard to teach. Last Summer (1920) I went abroad with my wife, returning in much sounder health than when I went away, and to-day I regard myself as quite restored to health. (But what an absurdly common thing it is for professor folk at some stage or other to go to pieces!) Late in 1919 I published a comprehensive volume on Italian emigration, which had been on my hands for some years and which I had virtually completed, except for seeing through the press, by the Spring of 1918.

Have written: “The Italian Emigration of our Times” (558 pages). (Published by Harvard University Press, Cambridge, Mass., December, 1919.)

Member: American Economic Association; American Association for Labor Legislation; American Statistical Association.

 

Source:   Harvard College Class of 1906, Fifteenth Anniversary Report (No. 4), Cambridge, Massachusetts: University Press, 1921, pp. 112-113.

_______________________________

1926

ROBERT FRANZ FOERSTER

Address:       4 College Rd., Princeton, N. J.

Occupation:  Economist.

Married:       Lilian Hillyer Smith, Princeton, N. J., June 5, 1916.

Children:      Lilian Egleston, born April 16, 1922; Margaret Dorothea, born October 15, 1924.

In the summer of 1920 I went with my wife to Europe, visiting scenes familiar and unfamiliar. In the late summer of the following year I entered upon various field studies dealing with labor relationships, first in Colorado and subsequently in Western Pennsylvania, and chiefly concerned with the coal industry.

In the summer of 1922 I was appointed to a professorship of economics in Princeton University, where my duties were essentially those of a director of the Industrial Relations Section, an organization interested mainly in constructive action in the field of industrial relations. My immediate duty here was the assembling of documentary information on labor relationships. I have had unusual opportunities for contact with employers and with representatives of the employed and have traveled considerably to places where interesting activities were being carried on.

During my free time in recent years I have undertaken advisory or research work in labor subjects. The results of one such employment, undertaken for the Secretary of Labor, were published in 1925 under the title “The Racial Problems Involved in Immigration from Latin America and the West Indies to the United States,” and brought a variety of interesting reactions.

            Have written: “The Italian Emigration of our Times” (558 pages). (Published by Harvard University Press, Cambridge, Mass., December, 1919.) Various articles; and a report, “The Racial Conditions Involved in Immigration from Latin America and the West Indies to the United States,” published by the Department of Labor, Washington, 1925.

Member: American Economic Association; American Statistical Association; American Association for Labor Legislation; American Management Association; Advisory Committee, Washington Branch Internal Labor Office; Committee on Immigration of Social Science Research Council; Committee on Personnel Management of American Management Association.

 

Source:   Harvard College Class of 1906, Twentieth Anniversary Report (No. 5), Cambridge, Massachusetts: University Press, 1926, pp. 95-96.

Image Source: Assistant Professor of Social Ethics, Robert Franz Foerster in Harvard Album 1920.

Categories
Economists Harvard

Harvard. Seven Personal Reports to the Class of 1879, Frank Taussig. 1882-1914


Serendipity struck again during an unrelated search of hathitrust.org. This time I stumbled across Harvard class reports  (i.e. B.A. cohorts) irregularly submitted by the secretaries of the respective classes and published as part of the annual Harvard commencement exercises (e.g. for the Class of 1879). I decided to sample the reports for the biggest gun in the Harvard economics department at the turn of the 20th century, Frank W. Taussig, and was delighted to find what turns out to be essentially personal notes written to his classmates about the course of  his post-undergraduate career. Today I provide Taussig’s notes from the second through eighth reports of the Class of 1879.

In a later post  I shall provide information about Taussig’s undergraduate life from information culled from the Class of 1879/Secretary’s Report/No. I./1879.

________________________________

1882

[p. 98-99]

FRANK WILLIAM TAUSSIG.

“In September, 1879, I went abroad with E. C. Felton. After spending a few weeks together in London, we separated. I went to Germany, and spent a winter, from October till March, at the University of Berlin, studying Roman Law and Political Economy. In March, I left Germany, and rejoined Felton in Italy. We spent two months together in Italy, and then went to Paris, by way of Geneva. In Paris, in May, we again separated, Felton going to England, on his way home, while I travelled in different parts of Europe, chiefly in Austria and Switzerland. I returned to America in August, 1880. In September, 1880, I went to Cambridge, intending to enter the Law School. The position of secretary to President- Eliot was offered me and accepted. Since this time, I have continued to act as secretary to the President, and have, at the same time, studied for the degree of Ph.D., which I hope to obtain in June, 1883. The special subject which I have studied for the degree has been the History of the Tariff Legislation of the United States. In March, 1882, was appointed instructor in Political Economy, in Harvard College, for the year 1882-83. While in Europe, wrote some articles, which were published in the New York Nation.”

 

Source: Harvard College. Class of 1879. Secretary’s Report. No. II. Commencement, 1882.

________________________________

1885

[pp. 34-35]

EDGAR CONWAY FELTON.

(April 26.)—” You will remember that my communication for the last Triennial Report reached you too late for insertion, so I will begin my contribution to your second report with my graduation.

“In September, 1879, Frank Taussig and I started for Europe together. We stayed in London about a month enjoying ourselves hugely, and among other short excursions going to Oxford, where I had a cousin, an undergraduate in New College, who gave us rather exceptional facilities for observing this the oldest of the English Universities. In London we separated, I going to Paris where I stayed about six weeks, sight-seeing and attending occasional lectures at the University. From Paris I went to Vienna, stopping on the way at Munich. Christmas and New Year’s I was in Vienna with my uncle, who has lived there for about thirty years. Then I went south to Rome, where I found Ned Hale, and many a pleasant walk and talk we had together in the Eternal City. Here Frank Taussig joined me again, having finished a semester at the University, and we started off together, going though the Italian cities, making the tour of the Italian lakes, and crossing into Switzerland by the Simplon. After a short stay in Paris I started for home, taking a run through some of the cathedral towns of England and into Scotland on the way…

 

[pp. 65-66]

FRANK WILLIAM TAUSSIG.

(February 8.)—” I have lived in Cambridge since the date of the last Class Report. In 1882 I was appointed instructor in Political Economy in Harvard College, and devoted my time for the year 1882-3 entirely to teaching, and work of that kind. In the course of that year I published an essay on ‘Protection to Young Industries as Applied in the United States,’ which gave the results of investigations in the economic history of the country in the years 1789-1830. In June, 1883, I received the degree of Doctor of Philosophy from Harvard University.

“In the fall of 1883 I entered the Harvard Law School with the intention of taking the regular three years course, and of practising after I got through the school. At the same time I continued my connection with the college as instructor in Political Economy, having been re-appointed to that office. I gave a course on the Tariff History of the United States, a subject to which I have given special attention. During the past year (1884-5) I have continued my studies in the Law-School as a second-year student, and have also continued as instructor in the college, giving the same course as in the previous year.

“In 1884, I wrote an introductory notice to the English translation of Laveleye’s ‘Elements of Political Economy,’ and added a supplementary chapter on some economic questions of present practical importance. In 1885 I published a second small volume on economic history, this being a ‘History of the Existing Tariff. It gives an account of the tariff legislation of the country from 1860 to 1883, with more or less comment from the point of view of one who adheres to the principle of free trade. I have written occasionally for the newspapers, on economic questions, chiefly for the Boston Herald and Advertiser, and a little for the New York Nation. I have been, and am still, a member of the committee to edit the Civil Service Record, a monthly paper published for the promotion of civil service reform, and have written regularly for it.”

Is a member of the Massachusetts Reform Club, and of the Cobden Club. Since April 1 has conducted the course on American History in the college during the absence of Hart.

 

Source: Harvard College. Class of 1879. Secretary’s Report. No. III. Commencement, 1885.

________________________________

1890

[p. vi-viii]

…In 1886 our classmate Taussig was appointed Assistant Professor of Political Economy, a signal honor for so young a man, the next to the youngest in the class. In April of that year a movement was started in the class to raise funds to equip a special library and reading-room for the Political Economy department of the college, the money to be used under Taussig’s direction. Six hundred and seventy-five dollars and seventy cents was raised and formally presented to the President and Fellows of Harvard College, and gratefully accepted by them.

The names of the subscribers are as follows, the subscriptions ranging from one to one hundred dollars: Almy, Andrews, Amen, Baily, Baylies, Bissell, Brooks, Burr, Carey, Cary, Churchill, R. W. Ellis, Evans, Felton, Gilbert, Hale, S. H. Hill, Hoadly, Holmes, Hubbard, Hudson, Hyde, Keene, Kidder, C. J. Mason, McLennan, Rindge, Sheldon, Somerby, St. John, H. Stetson, Taussig, Thorp, Trimble, Urquhart, Warren, Wright.

In June, 1887, Taussig furnished the following account of the way the money had been used and the practical working of the room:

“Of the sum contributed by members of the class ($675.70), about $400 has so far been expended for books. We have gone slowly in buying books, as needs change from time to time and better selection was likely to be got by buying when a want arose, rather than by anticipating wants. A considerable number of books will probably be added next year, but even as it stands, the collection is fairly complete for certain courses, and is exceedingly useful. It contains the works of the classic economists, like Adam Smith, Ricardo, Malthus most of them in duplicate; and also the works of the leading economists of more recent times, such as Cairnes, Sidgwick, Marshall, Jevon, Rogers, Walker, among English writers; Wagner, Cohn and Schoenberg, among German; and Bastiat and Leroi-Beaulieu among French. Many of these also are duplicated. There is a good working collection on tariff and financial matters for the United States, on railroads and on economic history in general. A considerable number of dictionaries and books of reference have been put in, such as ‘Lalor’s Political Science Cyclopaedia,’ the French ‘Dictionnaire d’Économie Politique,’ McCulloch’s “Commercial Dictionary,’ Kolb’s ‘Condition of Nations.’

“In addition there are a number of government publications, which are by no means the least useful part of the library. Besides the statistical abstracts of the United States, England and France, there are sets of United States Census Reports (including a full set of the census of 1880), Massachusetts Census Reports, the Finance Reports (U. S.) since 1870, Reports of the Comptroller of the Currency since 1876, the Statutes at Large, a full set of the Massachusetts Labor Reports, documents and reports on railroads and tariff legislation, and important foreign documents, such as the well-known British Reports on the Depreciation of Silver (1876) and on Railroads (1881). Among the periodicals kept on file are the Financial Chronicle, The Railroad Gazette, The Political Science Quarterly and our own [Quarterly] Journal of Economics.

“The library has undoubtedly been of great service to instructors and students. It has been very freely used by the latter, and it has been a frequent and pleasant experience to hear their expressions of acknowledgment of the aid and pleasure it has given them.

“It is interesting and significant that a similar plan is to be put in operation next year in the department of American History and Politics. A Working Library is to be provided, and will probably be put in the room now used for the Political Economy Library, so that the two will be used together. The money comes in a way from our class, being given in memory of our classmate, Glendower Evans, whose death last year made so sad a gap in our ranks.”

Each volume bears a neat book plate stating that it is given by members of the Class of 1879 to the Political Economy Department.

 

[pp. 86-88]

FRANK WILLIAM TAUSSIG

(Cambridge, April 2.)—”In 1885-86 I took my third year at Harvard Law School, receiving the degree of LL. B. in June, 1886. But some months before this I had been offered and had accepted an appointment as Assistant Professor of Political Economy in Harvard University, and in the fall of 1886 entered on the duties of that position. Since then I have lived the uneventful life of a college teacher. I was so fortunate as to be appointed just in time to take part in the celebration of the 250th anniversary of the founding of the University, and, being then the youngest member of the faculty, seem to have a better chance than any other member of taking part in the 300th anniversary when that comes around.

“On June 29, 1888, I was married at Exeter, N. H., to Edith Thomas Guild, of Boston, daughter of George Dwight Guild, of the class of ’45, and of Mary Thomas Guild (now Mrs. William H. Gorham). On May 3, 1889, we had born a son, William Guild Taussig. During the past summer (1889) we have built a house on land formerly belonging to Professor Norton, off Kirkland Street, and hope to live here in peace and quiet for many years to come.

“In connection with my teaching work, I have written and published on economic topics. Most of my writing has been for the Quarterly Journal of Economics, which was established by the University in 1886. In 1888 I published a volume entitled, ‘The Tariff History of the United States,’ made up, with revisions and additions, of the two smaller books published previously (on ‘Protection to Young Industries’ and on the ‘History of the Present Tariff’), and of the two other essays on tariff history mentioned in the subjoined list, which I have prepared at the request of our inquisitive Secretary. During the year 1889-90, in the absence of Professor Dunbar, I have edited the [Quarterly] Journal of Economics.

“In 1888 I was elected a fellow of the American Academy of Arts and Sciences. I am also a member of various scientific societies, to which my work naturally leads me, such as the American Economic and Historical Associations and the Political Economy Club. The list of my publications since 1885, not including minor articles in periodicals, is, in chronological order:

( 1) “Translation, with comment, of Wagner on the Present State of Political Economy; Quarterly Journal of Economics, October, 1886.

(2) “The Southwestern Strike of 1886; ibid., January, 1887.

(3) “Translation of Soetbeer’s Materials on the Silver Question, undertaken for the government, and published in Mr. Edward Atkinson’s Report on Bi-metallism, 1887.

(4) “A Suggested Re-arrangement of Economic Study; Quarterly Journal of Economics, January, 1888.

(5) “The Tariff of 1828; Political Science Quarterly, March, 1888.

(6) “The Tariff, 1830-1860; Quarterly Journal of Economics, April, 1888.

(7) “The Tariff History of the United States; New York, G. P. Putnam’s Sons, 1888.

(8) “How the Tariff Affects Wages; The Forum, October, 1888.

(9) “Some Aspects of the Tariff Question; Quarterly Journal of Economics, April, 1889.

(10) “Political Economy and Business; The Harvard Monthly, June, 1889.

(11) “Workmen’s Insurance in Germany; The Forum, October, 1889.

(12) “The Silver Situation in the United States; Quarterly Journal of Economics, April, 1890.

“I have also done a good deal of miscellaneous editorial work on the Quarterly Journal of Economics in arranging letters and appendix matter, and in writing notes and memoranda, and have written occasionally for the Nation and other papers. My address is 2 Scott Street, Cambridge, Mass.”

 

Source: Harvard College. Class of 1879. Secretary’s Report. No. IV. Commencement, 1890.

________________________________

1895

[pp. 95-8]

FRANK WILLIAM TAUSSIG.

(Florence, Italy, April 9.)—Since our last report, my life has moved in the easy current of the University stream, in which it seems likely to remain for the rest of my days. In 1892 I was promoted from the Assistant Professorship, which I then held, to a Professorship of Political Economy, and in the following year was made Chairman of the Department of Economics. As the tenure of a professorship is for good behavior, and as I trust I shall neither behave ill nor become useless to the University, I may hope to live in Cambridge and work for Harvard until I die.

“Among domestic happenings, I can report the birth of a second child, Mary Guild Taussig, on May 8, 1892.

“Becoming entitled, under the University regulations, to a sabbatical year, I determined to take advantage of the opportunity, and accordingly am spending this year (1894-95) in Europe. We left home in early October, and sailed direct for the Mediterranean. After a stop at Gibraltar and a glimpse of Spain, we proceeded to Naples, and remained for over two months in Southern Italy. I took a flying trip to Sicily, but spent most of the time with my family at the Island of Capri, which I can recommend to weary travelers in search of quiet and peace, beautiful scenery, healthful air, and quaint people. Thence we moved to Rome, where another two months passed pleasantly and where I learned something of Italian public affairs and of Italian economic literature. During the winter I have added to my professional equipment by acquiring a reading knowledge of Italian. We are in Florence at this writing and shall move north with the season.

“Among other happenings which have left an impression in my memory, I mention a trip to Washington in 1892, as member of a committee sent from Boston to protest against threatened legislation for free silver. I got a glimpse of President Harrison and of other prominent public men, which was interesting and instructive. Of a very different sort, but no less interesting, and much more satisfactory in its tangible results, was a trip to the woods of Maine in the summer of 1894, with R. W. Lovett, ’91, during which I first experienced the delights of trout fishing.

“In University politics, I am a firm advocate of the shortening of the College course to three years, and of the modification of the admission requirements in such manner as no longer to give Greek any preference or premium among the subjects that may be offered by candidates. On the vexed athletic question I have made a confession of my faith in an article in the Graduate Magazine for March of this year. In University finances I am a firm believer in the endowment of higher education in general, of Harvard University in particular, and of the Political Economy Department of Harvard University in special particular. In politics I am a disgusted independent, awaiting the appearance of a new party that shall stand squarely on the platform of a moderated tariff, sound money, and, above all, civil service reform and honest government. I may mention here that in 1893-94 I was a member of the School Committee of the City of Cambridge, and should have gladly continued to fill that modest public office had not the sabbatical vacation made it necessary for me to resign.

“The tale of my interests and activity is best told by my publications. Residing, as I do, far away from home, I cannot give any such a complete list of them as the ever methodical Almy would wish, but can recall enough to indicate what subjects have occupied my attention. In 1892 a second edition of my ‘Tariff History of the United States’ was published, in review and much enlarged form. In 1891 (I am not sure of the exact date) appeared a monograph on the ‘Silver Situation in the United States,’ first issued by the American Economic Association, and afterwards published in a second and enlarged edition by the firm of Putnam’s. I have contributed freely to periodicals, and especially to the Quarterly Journal of Economics, published by the University. In that journal I recall the following papers: ‘A Contribution to the Theory of Railway Rates,’ 1891; ‘Reciprocity,’ 1892; ‘The Duties on Wool and Woolens,’ 1893; ‘The Wages-Fund Doctrine at the Hands of German Economists,’ 1894. I gave aid and comfort to the enemy in 1893 by contributing to the Yale Review an article on ‘Recent Investigations on Prices in the United States.’ In 1894 there appeared, simultaneously in the Economic Journal of England and the Political Science Quarterly of New York, a paper on ‘The Tariff of 1894.’ My very last article is on ‘II Tesoro degli Stati Uniti’ (The Treasury of the United States), which appeared in the Giornale degli Economisti in March, 1895. This I will confess not to have written in Italian; it was translated from my manuscript. I may mention that in 1890-91 this same Italian Giornale degli Economisti had an article of mine on the McKinley tariff act, which was afterwards translated in the English Economic Journal, and finally became the basis of the chapter on the tariff of 1890 in the second edition of my ‘ Tariff History.’ During this winter (1894-95) I have been at work completing a book on ‘Some Aspects of the Theory of Wages,’ which I hope to give to the press on my return home in the autumn.

“I am the American correspondent of the British Economic Association, and in that capacity have contributed various shorter articles to the journal published by that Association. I am told that the position as correspondent has caused me to be regarded in some quarters as a suborned and traitorous enemy to American prosperity, but I am content to accept it as an honorable appointment from a body of distinguished men of science.

“My address is 2 Scott street, Cambridge, off Kirkland street, where classmates who may pilgrimize it to Cambridge will always be welcome.”

 

[pp. 134-5]

Taussig.—

“The Tariff History of the United States.” First edition, New York, 1888; second revised and enlarged edition, New York, 1892. (Of this volume, two parts had previously appeared in independent form; an essay on “Protection to Young Industries, as Applied in the United States,” in two editions, Cambridge, 1883, and New York, 1884; and a “History of the Present Tariff, 1860-1883,” New York, 1885. The other parts of the volume had also been previously published in the form of periodical articles for the Quarterly Journal of Economics and for the Political Science Quarterly. All were revised for the first and second editions of the book.)

“The Silver Situation in the United States.” First edition, Baltimore, 1892 (in the publications of the American Economic Association); second revised and enlarged edition, New York, 1893.

“Introductory Note and Supplemental Chapter to Laveleye’s Elements of Political Economy,” New York. 1884.

“Translation of Soetbeer’s Materials toward the Elucidation of the Economic Questions Affecting the Precious Metals,” undertaken for the Department of State. U. S. Senate Executive Documents, Fiftieth Congress, first session, No. 34, pp. 57-286, 1888.

“The Southwestern Strike of 1886,” Quarterly Journal of Economics, January, 1887.

“Prices in Great Britain, Germany, France and the United States,” (with J. L. Laughlin), Quarterly Journal of Economics, April, 1887.

“The Tariff Literature of the Campaign of 1888,” Quarterly Journal of Economics, January. 1889.

“A Contribution to the Theory of Railway Rates,” Quarterly Journal of Economics, July, 1891.

“Reciprocity,” Quarterly Journal of Economics, October, 1892.

“Recent Literature on Protection,” Quarterly Journal of Economics, January, 1893.

“The Wages Fund Doctrine at the Hands of German Economists,” Quarterly Journal of Economics, October, 1894.

“Recent Discussions on Railway Management in Prussia,” Quarterly Journal of Economics, October, 1894.

“How the Tariff Affects Wages,” Forum, October, 1888.

“Political Economy and Business,” Harvard Monthly, June, 1889,

“Workmen’s Insurance in Germany,” Forum, October, 1889.

“The Working of the New Silver Act of 1890,” Forum, October, 1890.

“La Tarifa McKinley,” Giornale degli Economisti, January, 1891. “The McKinley Tariff Act,” a translation of the preceding; Economic Journal, July, 1891.

”The Homestead Strike,” Economic Journal, June, 1893.

“Why Silver Ceases to be Money,” Popular Science Monthly, Sept., 1893.

“Results of Recent Investigations on Prices in the United States,” Yale Review, November, 1893. Also printed in the Bulletin of the International Statistical Institute.

“The United States Tariff of 1894,” published simultaneously in the British Economic Journal for December, 1894, and in the Political Science Quarterly of New York, for December, 1894.

“II Tesoro degli Stati Uniti,” Giornale degli Economisti, April, 1895.

In addition various articles and book reviews in the Nation, book reviews in the Political Science Quarterly, and notes and memoranda in the Quarterly Journal of Economics.

 

Source: Harvard College. Class of 1879. Secretary’s Report. No. V. Commencement, 1895.

________________________________

1900

[pp. 99-100]

FRANK WILLIAM TAUSSIG.

(Cambridge, May 4.)—”My last biographical instalment for our reports was written in April, 1895, at Florence, Italy, in the course of a sabbatical year spent abroad. I returned to Cambridge in September of 1895, and since then have been steadily in academic harness; and the happenings in my life have been such as naturally come to a University Professor. I have had plenty of work to do in teaching, for the resort of students to the department of political economy is large and growing. The introductory course (what used to be Political Economy —now Economics) has over 500 students, and the more advanced courses have numbers in proportion. The lectures to these 500 men — the instruction is now in good part by lectures — I find a serious tax on my strength, but also a great source of satisfaction, since they give an inspiring opportunity of reaching the mass of the undergraduates.

“A good part of my time of late years has been given to my editorial duties on the Quarterly Journal of Economics, the University’s publication in my subject. In 1896, Professor Dunbar resigned from the post of editor, to which I was appointed by the corporation. The Journal attained high repute among students of economics under Professor Dunbar’s management, and it is my endeavor to maintain the standard which he set. I have also acted, since 1896, as Chairman of the Publication Committee of the American Economic Association, and in that capacity have had still further editorial and administrative work to do. In 1897 I was appointed by Governor Wolcott member of a commission to examine and report upon the laws on taxation in the State of Massachusetts, and, being chosen Secretary of the commission, gave much time and labor to its investigations. Indeed, the report of the commission, though it presented, of course, not my own conclusions but those of the commission as a whole, was drafted almost entirely by myself, and occupied me throughout the summer of 1897. In the winter of 1897, and again in 1898, I was sent to the Indianapolis Monetary Convention as delegate from the Boston Merchants’ Association. In 1896 I was elected a member of the School Committee of the City of Cambridge, and have served on the committee since that date.

“This year (1900) wrote three considerable articles in consecutive numbers of the Quarterly Journal of Economics,— two on the ‘Iron Industry of the United States,’ one on the ‘New Currency Act’ wrote another article on the ‘Currency Act’ for the British Economic Journal; prepared an article on ‘Tariffs’ for the new edition of the Cyclopedia Britannica; and delivered a Commencement Address on ‘Education for the Business Man’ before the University of Missouri, on July 4th.

“I append a list of my writings [see Bibliographical Record], which indicates what subjects have chiefly engaged my attention.”

Married in 1888: one son, three daughters.

 

[p. 130]

Taussig.—

“Wages and Capital: An Examination of the Wages Fund Doctrine,” New York, D. Appleton & Co., 1896.

Also, new editions of older books:

“The Silver Situation in the United States,” third enlarged edition, New York, Putnam’s, 1896.

“The Tariff History of the United States.” Fourth enlarged and revised edition, New York, G. P. Putnam’s Sons, 1898.

Articles in the Quarterly Journal of Economics, published for Harvard University:

“The Employer’s Place in Distribution” ; Vol. X., October, 1895.

“Rabbeno’s ‘American Commercial Policy'”; Vol. X., October, 1895.

“The International Silver Situation”; Vol. XI., October, 1896.

“The Tariff Act of 1897”; Vol. XII., October, 1897.

“The United States Treasury in 1894-96” ; Vol. XIII., January, 1899.

“The Iron Industry in the United States: I. A Survey of Growth; II. The Working of Protection”; Vol. XIV., February and August, 1900.

“The Currency Act of 1900 ” ; Vol. XIV., May, 1900.

”Bond Sales and the Gold Standard,” Forum, November, 1896.

“The United States Tariff Act” (of 1897), British Economic Journal, December, 1897.

“The Taxation of Securities” (an address delivered at the University of Michigan), Political Science Quarterly, March, 1899.

“The Problem of Secondary Education, as Regards Training in Citizenship,” Educational Review, May, 1899.

“Charles Franklin Dunbar” (an obituary sketch), Harvard Monthly, February, 1900.

 

[p. 137]

MARRIAGE AND BIRTH RECORD

TAUSSIG EDITH THOMAS GUILD Exeter, N.H., June 20, 1888
William Guild Cambridge, Mass., May 3, 1889.
Mary Guild Cambridge, Mass., May 8, 1892.
Catharine Crombie Cambridge, Mass., Dec. 8, 1896.
Helen Brooke Cambridge, Mass., May 24, 1898.

 

 

Source: Harvard College. Class of 1879. Secretary’s Report. No. VI. Commencement, 1900.

________________________________

1905

[pp. 112-3]

FRANK WILLIAM TAUSSIG (Cambridge, Massachusetts, May 10). “I am sorry to say that I have not much to show for the last five years. In 1901 I felt seriously the strain of overwork, and was compelled to spend two years in complete idleness. I went abroad with my family in the autumn of 1901, expecting to need only one year for recovery; but a second year proved to be needed, and it was not until 1903 that we returned. We spent the first winter at Meran, in the Austrian Tyrol, the summer of 1902 in Switzerland, and the greater part of the winter of 1902-03 on the Italian Riviera. In the autumn of 1903 I resumed my work in the University, and was able to carry on my teaching work, but not to do a great deal besides. During the current academic year (1904-05), I have been able to accomplish more, but do not yet feel that I have recovered full working strength.

“In the course of 1899-1900 I published in the Quarterly Journal of Economics two articles on the ‘Iron Industry in the United States,’ and a third article on the ‘Currency Act of 1900.’ These were the last things I was able to achieve for a considerable time. In 1904 I was elected President of the American Economic Association, and prepared a presidential address, which was delivered at the meeting of the Association at Chicago in December, 1904, on the ‘Present Position of the Doctrine of Free Trade.’ Having been re-elected President of the Association, I am now preparing a second address, to be delivered in 1905. I resumed the editorship of the Quarterly Journal of Economics, which continues to flourish, and holds, I believe, no unworthy place among the publications of the University.

“In 1901 the title of my post in the University was changed, or rather my appointment was changed. Having previously simply been Professor of Political Economy, I was made Henry Lee Professor of Economics. The Lee professorship was founded by the widow and children of the late Colonel Henry Lee, and is the first endowed professorship established at the University in my subject.”

 

Source: Harvard College. Class of 1879. Secretary’s Report. No. VII., 1905.

________________________________

1914

[pp. 293-8]

FRANK WILLIAM TAUSSIG, son of William and Adèle (Würpel) Taussig, was born at St. Louis, Missouri, December 28, 1859. He entered Harvard from Washington University in October, 1876, as a sophomore.

In September, 1879, he went abroad with E. C. Felton. After a few weeks together in London they separated, and Taussig went to Germany, where he remained until March, 1880, studying Roman law and political economy at the University of Berlin. In March he again joined Felton, and spent the next two months with him in Italy and at Paris. In May they again separated, and Taussig traveled for a time in Europe, chiefly in Austria and Switzerland. During his stay in Europe he wrote several articles for the New York Nation. He returned to America in August, and in September went to Cambridge, intending to enter the Law School; but the position of secretary to President Eliot was offered him, and he accepted it and at the same time began study for the degree of Ph.D., selecting as his special subject the history of the tariff legislation of the United States. In March, 1882, he was appointed instructor in political economy at Harvard for the year 1882-83. He resigned his secretaryship and during the next year devoted all his time to his teaching and the work connected with it. “In the course of that year,” he wrote, “I published an essay on ‘ Protection to Young Industries as Applied in the United States,’ which gave the results of investigations in the economic history of the country in the years 1789-1830. In June, 1883, I received the degree of Ph.D. from Harvard University.” In the fall of 1883 he entered the Harvard Law School, “with the intention of taking the regular three years’ course and of practising after I got through the School.” At the same time he continued his work as instructor in political economy, giving a course on the tariff history of the United States. “In 1884 I wrote an introductory notice to the English translation of Laveleye’s ‘Elements of Political Economy’ and added a supplementary chapter on some economic questions of present practical importance. In 1885 I published a second small volume on economic history, this being a ‘ History of the Existing Tariff.’ It gives an account of the tariff legislation of the country from 1860 to 1883, with more or less comment from the point of view of one who adheres to the principle of free trade.” He wrote at this time occasionally for the Boston Herald and Advertiser and for the Nation and was a member of the committee to edit the Civil Service Record, a. monthly paper published for the promotion of civil service reform, and wrote regularly for it. He joined the Massachusetts Reform Club and the Cobden Club. During the spring of 1885 he conducted the course on American history at Harvard in the absence of A. B. Hart, ’80, the regular instructor.

In June, 1886, he graduated from the Law School, with the degree of LL.B. Meanwhile he had been offered and had accepted an appointment as assistant professor of political economy at Harvard, and in the fall of 1886 entered on the duties of that position. “Since then,” he wrote in 1890, “I have lived the uneventful life of a college teacher. … In connection with my teaching work, I have written and published on economic topics. Most of my writing has been for the Quarterly Journal of Economics, which was established by the University in 1886. In 1888 I published a volume entitled ‘The Tariff History of the United States,’ made up, with revisions and additions, of the two smaller books published previously . . . and of the two other essays on tariff history” (on “The Tariff of 1828,” published in the Political Science Quarterly for March, 1888, and “The Tariff, 1830-1860,” published in the Quarterly Journal of Economics for April, 1888). During the year 1889-90, in the absence of Professor Dunbar, he edited the [Quarterly] Journal of Economics. In 1888 he was elected a fellow of the American Academy of Arts and Sciences. He had also become a member “of various scientific societies, to which my work naturally leads me, such as the American Economic and Historical associations and the Political Economy Club.”

In 1892 he was made professor of political economy at Harvard and, in the following year, chairman of the department of economics. In 1892 he went to Washington as a member of a committee sent from Boston to protest against threatened legislation for free silver. “I got a glimpse of President Harrison and of other prominent public men, which was interesting and instructive. Of a very different sort, but no less interesting and much more satisfactory in its tangible results, was a trip to the woods of Maine in the summer of 1894 with R. W. Lovett, ’91, during which I first experienced the delights of trout fishing.” The year 1894-95 he spent in Europe with his family, remaining for two months in southern Italy and then passing two months in Rome before going further north. He continued to contribute freely to various periodicals, especially to the Quarterly Journal of Economics. “I gave aid and comfort to the enemy in 1893 by contributing to the Yale Review an article on ‘Recent Investigations on Prices in the United States.’ . . . My very last article,” he wrote from Florence, Italy, in April, 1895,” is on ‘ II Tesoro degli Stati Uniti’ . . . which appeared in the Giornale degli Economisti in March, 1895. This I will confess not to have written in Italian; it was translated from my manuscript.” In 1890-91 he had published an article in the Giornale on the McKinley tariff act, which was afterwards translated in the English Economic Journal, and finally became the basis of the chapter on the tariff of 1890 in the second edition of his

“Tariff History.” As the American correspondent of the British Economic Association he had contributed various articles to the journal published by the association. “In politics,” he wrote at this time, “I am a disgusted independent, awaiting the appearance of a new party that shall stand squarely on the platform of a moderated tariff, sound money and, above all, civil service reform and honest government…. In 1893-94 I was a member of the school committee of the city of Cambridge, and should have gladly continued to fill that modest public office had not the sabbatical vacation made it necessary for me to resign.”

In 1896 Professor Dunbar resigned as editor of the Quarterly Journal of Economics, and Taussig was appointed by the President and Fellows to succeed him. In the same year he was made chairman of the Publication Committee of the

American Economic Association, involving much editorial and administrative work. In 1897 he was appointed by Governor Wolcott member of a commission to examine and report upon the laws on taxation in the State of Massachusetts, and as secretary of the commission gave much time and labor to its investigations. The drafting of its report was almost entirely his work and occupied him throughout the summer of 1897. In the winter of 1897, and again in 1898, he was sent to the Indianapolis Monetary Convention as delegate from the Boston Merchants’ Association. In 1896 he had been elected again a member of the school committee of Cambridge, and was still serving on the committee when he wrote for the Class Report of 1900. Besides articles in the Quarterly Journal of Economics, he had written an article on the “Currency Act” for the British Economic Journal, had prepared an article on “Tariffs” for the new edition of the Encyclopedia Britannica and had delivered a commencement address on “Education for the Business Man” before the University of Missouri, July 4, 1900. In 1901 he was appointed to the newly established Henry Lee professorship of economics, founded in memory of the late Colonel Henry Lee by his widow and children, and the first endowed professorship established at Harvard in the department of economics. That year the strain of overwork compelled him to go abroad for rest. After two years in Europe with his family he returned, and in the fall of 1903 resumed work in the University. In 1904 he was elected president of the American Economic Association, and at its annual meeting at Chicago in December, 1904, delivered an address on ” The Present Position of the Doctrine of Free Trade,” which was printed in the Publications of the Association, February, 1905. He was reelected president of the Economic Association, and at the annual meeting in December, 1905, delivered an address on “The Love of Wealth and the Public Service,” which was printed in the Publications of the Association, February, 1906, and also in the Atlantic Monthly for March, 1906.

He writes, July 28, 1912, “My life during the past seven years has been quiet, the winters at work in Cambridge, the summers spent at our house at Cotuit. I continue to conduct nearly the same courses as in previous years, and give a large part of my energy to Economics I, the first course in the subject, and now the largest elective course on the College list. It is the policy of our department, and indeed of the College in general, not to put the much frequented general courses into the hands of young instructors, but to keep them under the older and more experienced members of the teaching staff. Not a few descendants of ’79 have sat under me during the past decade. In the spring of 1912 I took a brief journey to Europe as representative of the Boston Chamber of Commerce at an international meeting at Brussels. There is to be an International Congress of Chambers of Commerce in Boston in September, 1912, and I have been asked to act as chairman of the Committee on Programme for that congress. For the settlement of the programme it was necessary that some one should meet the representatives of the other countries taking part in the congress, and I was asked to appear for the Boston Chamber. I had a pleasant journey, spending a couple of weeks in London and there seeing something of men in public life. Among publications the chief has been my ‘Principles of Economics,’ in two volumes, published by Macmillan in the autumn of 1911. It is the result of many years of teaching and reflection, and its writing has occupied most of my spare time since our last report.”

He was married at Exeter, New Hampshire, June 20, 1888, to Edith Thomas Guild of Boston, daughter of George Dwight Guild of the Class of ’45 and Mary Thomas Guild, now Mrs. William H. Gorham. She died April 15, 1910. Their children are: William Guild, born at Cambridge, May 3, 1889; Mary Guild, born at Cambridge, May 8, 1892; Catharine Crombie, born at Cambridge, December 8, 1896; and Helen Brooke, born at Cambridge, May 24, 1898.

Taussig’s address is 2 Scott Street, Cambridge, Massachusetts.

Source: Harvard College. Class of 1879. Secretary’s Report. No. VIII. Commencement, 1914.

Image Source: Frank Taussig from Harvard Album 1900.

Categories
Berkeley Economists Harvard

Harvard Ph.D. Alumnus (1906) and Berkeley Professor Stuart Daggett

I have my eye out for such Faculty memorial minutes like the following from the University of California System for Berkeley professor Stuart Daggett. In the previous post you can find the list of fields chosen by Daggett for his doctoral examination.

___________________________

 

Stuart Daggett, Transportation Engineering: Berkeley
by E. T. Grether, I. B. Cross, and P. S. Taylor

Stuart Daggett was born on March 2, 1881, in Milwaukee, Wisconsin. His career ended on December 22, 1954, at his home in Berkeley. It was characteristic of him that on the same day on which his final illness struck him, he had been at the University collecting materials dealing with the St. Lawrence Seaway. Although he had just sent to his publisher the revised manuscript of the fourth edition of his monumental Principles of Inland Transportation, first published in 1928, he was already beginning another major investigation. His physician has remarked that it would have been mental and physical bondage for Stuart Daggett to have given up systematic scholarly pursuits.

Stuart Daggett received all three of his degrees, the A.B. in 1903, the A.M. in 1904, and the Ph.D in 1906, from Harvard University. During 1906 to 1909 he was Instructor at Harvard, but in 1909 accepted appointment to the University of California as Assistant Professor of Railway Economics on the Flood Foundation. From that day until his death he was a faculty member at Berkeley. When he came to the campus he joined that small, distinguished pioneering company of scholars in economics, which then included Adolph C. Miller, Wesley Clair Mitchell, Carl Copping Plehn, Lincoln Hutchinson, Jessica B. Peixotto, A. W. Whitney, and Henry Rand Hatfield. Professor Daggett was the last surviving member of this group. His notable contributions to teaching, research, scholarly writing, and University and public service over the years more than amply justified the wisdom of the University administration in bringing him into this extraordinarily able assembly of economists. Only six years after his arrival at the University, he was appointed Professor of Transportation on the Flood Foundation.

Professor Daggett was the author of numerous books, contributions to scholarly publications, and reviews. Among his most significant publications were Railroad Reorganization, Chapters on the History of the Southern Pacific, Principles of Inland Transportation (four editions), Railroad Consolidation West of the Mississippi River, and Structure of Transcontinental Railroad Rates.

Professor Daggett was often called upon to render federal, state, and local public service. In 1912 he served as expert for a committee to advise the governor of California on the equalization of taxes. During World War I, he was with the War Industries Board, Division of Planning and Statistics. In 1924 he was expert for the Presidential Committee on Coördination of Rail and Water Facilities. During World War II, he was public member of various War Labor Board panels. He also made important contributions to private industry in various ways, including publication in trade papers, participation in business conferences, and acting as private arbitrator.

Professor Daggett’s greatest influence, however, was through his services as a teacher, administrator, and colleague on the faculty of the University of California. In the classroom his lectures were marked by extraordinary care in preparation and presentation. Running through the orderly discussion were numerous evidences of subtle humor, much to the delight of those students whose thirst for knowledge included also an appreciation of the lighter touch. His judicious temperament and ability in carrying heavy responsibilities brought him many demands in University government and administration. From 1920 to 1927 he was Dean of the College of Commerce (replaced by the School of Business Administration in 1943). The truest evidence of his stature among his colleagues was his inevitable membership or chairmanship on those committees concerned with the most serious, urgent, and critical issues of University government. Over the years, he was a member or chairman of almost all of the leading committees of the Academic Senate, and in 1948 became its Vice-Chairman. In 1951, on the recommendation of the Senate committee, he was elected Faculty Research Lecturer, the highest accolade bestowed by the Academic Senate.

Stuart Daggett was truly one of the great statesmen of the University of California. In a sense, too, he may be characterized as a “professor’s professor,” for he possessed to a high degree so many of the talents and qualities characteristic of the academic scholar–objectivity, meticulous precision, unyielding integrity, high standards of performance and personal dignity. His intimates and members of his immediate family realized that behind his reserve and dignity there was also warm friendliness, kindliness, affection, and a high degree of sensitivity.

 

Source: Academic Senate of the University of California System. University of California: In Memoriam [1957], pp. 45-47.

Image Source:  University of California Yearbook. Blue and Gold, 1922.

 

Categories
Fields Harvard

Harvard. Subjects Chosen by Economics Ph.D. Candidates for Examination, 1905

 

This posting lists seven graduate students in economics who took their subject examinations for the Ph.D. at Harvard between December, 1904 and June, 1905.  The examination committee members, academic history, general and specific subjects are provided along with the doctoral thesis subject, when declared. Lists for 1903-04,  1915-16, and 1926-27 were posted previously. In the same archival box one finds lists for the academic years 1902-03 through 1904-05, 1906-07 through 1913-14, 1915-16, 1917-18 through 1918-19, and finally 1926-27. I only include graduate students of economics (i.e. not included are the Ph.D. candidates in history and government).

Titles and dates of Harvard economic dissertations for the period 1875-1926 can be found here.

______________________________

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

1904-05

 

Stuart Daggett.

General Examination in Economics, Thursday, December 1, 1904.
Committee: Professors Taussig, Ripley, Carver, Gay, and Andrew.
Academic History: Harvard College, 1899-1903; Harvard Graduate School, 1903-05; A.B. (Harvard) 1903; A.M. (ibid.) 1904.
General Subjects: 1. Economic Theory and its History. 2. Sociology and Statistics. 3. Money, Banking and Commercial Crises. 4. Labor Problems and Industrial Organization. 5. History of American Institutions. 6. English Economic History to 1800.
Special Subject: Transportation.
Thesis Subject: “Railroad Reorganization.” (With Professor Ripley.)

Lincoln Hutchinson.

General Examination in Economics, Wednesday, April 12, 1905.
Committee: Professors Taussig (chairman), Emerton, Bullock, Gay, Andrew, and Sprague.
Academic History: University of California, 1882-84, 1887-89; Harvard University, 1892-Jan. 1894, 1898-99; Ph.B. (Univ. of Calif.) 1889; A.B. (Harvard) 1893; A.M. (ibid.) 1899.
General Subjects: 1. Economic Theory and its History. 2. Economic History to 1750. 3. Money, Banking and Commercial Crises. 4. Public Finance and Taxation. 5. Commercial Geography. 6. History of Political Institutions in Mediaeval Europe, including England.
Special Subject: International Trade: its History, Theory, and Present Position.
Thesis Subject: “Ten Years’ Competition (1894-1903) for Markets in Brazil and the River Plate.”

Lincoln Hutchinson.

Special Examination in Economics, Monday, April 24, 1905.
Committee: Professors Taussig (chairman), Ripley, Gay, Andrew, and Sprague.
(See above.)

Joseph Clarence Hemmeon.

General Examination in Economics, Friday, May 26, 1905.
Committee: Professors Carver (chairman), Macvane, Hart, Bullock, Gay, and Sprague.
Academic History: Acadia College (N.S.), 1894-98, 1902-03; Harvard Graduate School, 1903-05; A.B. (Acadia) 1898; A.M. (ibid.) 1903; A.M. (Harvard) 1904.
General Subjects: 1. Economic Theory and its History. 2. Modern Economic History of Europe and Economic History of the United States from 1789. 3. Sociology and Social Reform. 4. Public Finance and Financial History. 5. Modern Government. 6. History of England since 1685, and History of the United States since 1763.
Special Subject: Sociology and Social Reform.
Thesis Subject: Not yet announced.

Vanderveer Custis.

Special Examination in Economics, Wednesday, June 7, 1905.
General Examination passed May 20, 1904.
Committee: Professors Taussig (chairman), Ripley, Bullock, Sprague, and Wyman.
Academic History: Harvard College, 1897-1901; Harvard Graduate School, 1901-04; A.B. (Harvard) 1901; A.M. (ibid.) 1902.
Special Subject: Industrial Organization.
Thesis Subject: “The Theory of Industrial Consolidation.” (With Professor Ripley).

James Alfred Field.

General Examination in Economics, Monday, June 12, 1905.
Committee: Professors Taussig (chairman), Ripley, Carver, Gay, Castle, and Dr. Munro.
Academic History: Harvard College, 1899-1903; Harvard Graduate School, 1903-05; A.B. (Harvard) 1903.
General Subjects: 1. Economic Theory and its History. 2. Economic History. 3. Sociology. 4. Labor Problems and Industrial Organization. 5. The Sociological Aspect of the Evolution Theory. 6. International Law.
Special Subject: Sociology.
Thesis Subject: (Not yet announced.)

Albert Benedict Wolfe.

Special Examination in Economics, Monday, June 19, 10 a.m. 1905.
General Examination passed May 11, 1904.
Committee: Professors Taussig (chairman), Ripley, Carver, Bullock, and Andrew.
Academic History: Harvard College, 1899-1902; Harvard Graduate School, 1902-04; A.B. (Harvard) 1902; A.M. (ibid.) 1903.
Special Subject: Modern Economic Theory.
Thesis Subject: “The Lodging House Problem in Boston, with some Reference to Other Cities.” (With Professor Ripley).

William Hyde Price.

Special Examination in Economics, Tuesday, June 20, 1905.
General Examination passed April 13, 1904.
Committee: Professors Taussig (chairman), Ripley, Carver, Bullock, and Gay.
Academic History: Tufts College, 1897-1901; Harvard Graduate School, 1901-05; A.B. (Tufts) 1901; A.M. (ibid.) 1901; A.M. (Harvard) 1902.
Special Subject: English Economic History of the Sixteenth and Seventeenth Centuries.
Thesis Subject: “The English Patents of monopoly, 1550-1650.” (With Professor Gay).

 

 

Source: Harvard University Archives. Harvard University, Examinations for the Ph.D. (HUC 7000.70), Folder “Examinations for the Ph.D., 1904-1905”.

Image Source:   Harvard University. Quinquennial Catalogue of the Officers and Graduates, 1636-1920. Cambridge, Massachusetts, 1920. Front cover.