Categories
Berkeley Carnegie Institute of Technology Chicago Colorado Columbia Cornell Duke Economist Market Harvard Illinois Indiana Iowa Johns Hopkins M.I.T. Michigan Michigan State Minnesota North Carolina Northwestern NYU Ohio State Pennsylvania Princeton Purdue Rochester Salaries Stanford Texas Vanderbilt Virginia Wisconsin Yale

Assistant Professors’ Salaries in U.S. Economics Departments (3), 1964/5-1965/66

 

 

This is the third table from the so-called “Cartel” summary report from December 1965 of 9-10 month salaries paid in U.S. economics departments. Tables 3c give figures for the distribution of assistant professor salaries across the departments reporting. Last posting gave the distribution for full-professors and the distribution for associate professors. The next posting has the distribution for entering salaries for new Ph.D.’s. Refer to the first posting in this series of tables for information about the compiler Professor Francis Boddy of the University of Minnesota and a list of the 30 departments belonging to the Chairmen’s Group.

Also there is a table of the anticipated (as of December 1965) range of salaries to hire freshly completed PhD’s for the coming academic year, 1966-67.

Using the BLS web CPI Inflation calculator, one can inflate nominal levels (say for December 1965, the date of the report) to April 2017 using a factor of 7.69.

____________________

TABLE 3c
ASSISTANT PROFESSORS 1965-66, 1964-65

(1)
Median Salaries
All Assistant Professors

MID-POINT
OF RANGE

1965-66 1964-65
Over 11,249 0

1

11,000

0 0
10,500 3

0

10,000

7 1
9,750 2

0

9,500

6 6
9,250 3

2

9,000

4 5
8,750 1

6

8,500

1 2
8,250 1

3

8,000

1 2
7,750 0

0

7,500

0 0
7,250 0

1

N=

29 29
Median $9,500

$8,900

Mean

$9,402

$8,936

 

 

TABLE 3c
ASSISTANT PROFESSORS 1965-66, 1964-65

(2)
Average Salaries
“Superior Assistance Professors”
(Top 1/3)

MID-POINT
OF RANGE

1965-66 1964-65
Over 11,249 4

1

11,000

3 2
10,500 8

5

10,000

7 3
9,750 2

2

9,500 3 4
9,250 0

3

9,000

1 3
8,750 1

3

8,500

0 0
8,250 0

2

8,000

0 0
7,750 0

0

7,500

0 0
7,250 0

1

N=

 

29

 

29

Median $10,250

$9,500

Mean

$10,333

$9,575

 

 

TABLE 3c
ASSISTANT PROFESSORS 1965-66, 1964-65

(3)
Average Salaries
“Average Assistant Professors”
(Lower 2/3)

MID-POINT
OF RANGE

1965-66 1964-65
Over 10,749 0

1

10,500

1 0
10,000 5

0

9,750

2 0
9,500 4

3

9,250 7 1
9,000 2

8

8,750

4 3
8,500 1

5

8,250

2 3
8,000 1

1

7,750

0 2
7,500 0

1

7,250

0 1
N= 29

29

Median

$9,300 $8,800
Mean $9,251

$9,063

 

Source: Johns Hopkins University. The Ferdinand Hamburger, Jr. Archives. Department of Political Economy, Series 5, Box 6, Folder 2 “Statistical Information”.

Image Source: Brussells conference, cartel magnate (detail). Postcard from 1902. Library of Congress Prints and Photographs Division Washington, D.C. 20540 USA.

Categories
Berkeley Carnegie Institute of Technology Chicago Colorado Columbia Cornell Duke Economist Market Harvard Illinois Indiana Iowa Johns Hopkins M.I.T. Michigan Michigan State Minnesota North Carolina Northwestern NYU Ohio State Pennsylvania Princeton Purdue Rochester Salaries Stanford Texas Vanderbilt Virginia Wisconsin Yale

Associate Professors’ Salaries in U.S. Economics Departments (2), 1964/5-1965/66

 

This is the second table from the so-called “Cartel” summary report from December 1965 of 9-10 month salaries paid in U.S. economics departments. Tables 2c give figures for the distribution of associate professor salaries across the departments reporting. Last posting gave the distribution for full-professors. Future postings include the actual salary distributions for assistant professors and freshly completed PhD’s 1964/65 and 1965/66. Refer to the first posting in this series of tables for information about the compiler Professor Francis Boddy of the University of Minnesota and a list of the 30 departments belonging to the Chairmen’s Group.

Also there is a table of the anticipated (as of December 1965) range of salaries to hire freshly completed PhD’s for the coming academic year, 1966-67.

Using the BLS web CPI Inflation calculator, one can inflate nominal levels (say for December 1965, the date of the report) to April 2017 using a factor of 7.69.

____________________

TABLE 2c
ASSOCIATE PROFESSORS 1965-66, 1964-65

(1)
Median Salaries
All Associate Professors

MID-POINT
OF RANGE
1965-66 1964-65
Over 13,749 3 0
13,500 2 0
13,000 2 1
12,500 6 3
12,000 5 2
11,500 4 3
11,000 3 11
10,500 2 4
10,000 0 0
9,750 0 1
9,500 0 2
N= 27 27
Median $12,000 $11,000
Mean $12,173 $11,093

 

 

TABLE 2c
ASSOCIATE PROFESSORS 1965-66, 1964-65

(2)
Average Salaries
“Superior Associate Professors”
(Top 1/3)

MID-POINT
OF RANGE
1965-66 1964-65
Over 16,249 0 1
16,000 1 0
15,500 1 0
15,000 2 0
14,500 2 0
14,000 5 2
13,500 6 4
13,000 4 6
12,500 3 3
12,000 0 4
11,500 1 3
 [sic, cell empty] 1 2
 [sic, cell empty] 0 1
N= 26 26
Median $13,000 $12,186
Mean $13,082 $12,159

 

 

TABLE 2c
ASSOCIATE PROFESSORS 1965-66, 1964-65

(3)
Average Salaries
“Average Assoc Professors”
(Lower 2/3)

MID-POINT
OF RANGE
1965-66 1964-65
14,500 0 0
14,000 1 0
13,500 0 0
13,000 4 1
12,500 4 1
12,000 2 2
11,500 3 2
11,000 7 8
10,500 3 4
10,000 2 4
9,750 0 1
9,500 0 2
9,250 0 0
9,000 0 0
8,750 0 1
8,500 0 0
N= 26 26
Median $11,265 $10,775
Mean $11,640 $10,760

 

Source: Johns Hopkins University. The Ferdinand Hamburger, Jr. Archives. Department of Political Economy, Series 5, Box 6, Folder 2 “Statistical Information”.

Image Source: “The monopolists’ may-pole” by F. Opper.  Centerfold of Puck, vol. 17, no. 425 (April 29, 1885). Library of Congress Prints and Photographs Division Washington, D.C. 20540 USA.

Categories
Berkeley Carnegie Institute of Technology Chicago Colorado Columbia Cornell Duke Economist Market Economists Harvard Illinois Indiana Iowa Johns Hopkins M.I.T. Michigan Michigan State Minnesota North Carolina Northwestern NYU Ohio State Pennsylvania Princeton Purdue Rochester Salaries Stanford Texas Vanderbilt Virginia Wisconsin Yale

Professors’ salaries in U.S. economics departments (1), 1964/5-1965/66

 

 

From my March 2017 expedition to the Johns Hopkins University archives’ collection of material from the Department of Political Economy, I came across one of those documents that help to provide an empirical baseline for the history of the market for economics professors. It is worth savouring the sets of tables one by one. In all, this so-called “cartel” summary with information collected from 29 departments in October 1965 consists of eight sets of tables.

On the last page of this summary for full-professor salaries can be found the name of the presumable compiler of the tables: Francis M. Boddy, Graduate School, University of Minnesota. It is dated December 21, 1965.

Two documents later in the same folder I found the list of 30 members of the Chairmen’s Group, dated December 13, 1965. With 29 responses to the salary questionnaire from which the “cartel” data have been assembled, it leaves only to guess which department did not report back to the “cartel”. I do believe that the ironic self-designation of cartel is not entirely contrary to functional fact here.

The salary distributions across the participating departments for associate professors, assistant professors, and for the starting salaries for newly minted Ph.D. hires have been posted in the meantime. Also there is a table of the anticipated (as of December 1965) range of salaries to hire freshly completed PhD’s for the coming academic year, 1966-67.

Using the BLS web CPI Inflation calculator, one can inflate nominal levels (say for December 1965, the date of the report) to April 2017 using a factor of 7.69.

___________________________________

About Francis M. Boddy

Boddy, Francis M, 1115 Bus. Admin., West Bank, Dept. of Econs., U. of Minn., Minneapolis, MN 55455. Phone: Office (612)373-3583;Home (612)926-1063. Fields: 020, 610. Birth Yr: 1906. Degrees: B.B.A., U. of Minn., 1930; M.A., U. of Minn., 1936; Ph.D., U. of Minn., 1939. Prin. Cur. Position: Prof. Emer. Of Econs., U. of Minn. At Twin Cities. 1975-. Concurrent/Past Positions: Acting Exec. Secy., Bd. Of Investment, State of Minn., 1978-79; Assoc. Dean of Grad. Sch. U. of Minn., 1961-73.

Source: “Biographical Listing of Members.” The American Economic Review 71, no. 6 (1981): p. 67.

___________________________________

Research Hint:
Boddy’s data go back to 1957/58

“I have, over the past six years, conducted an informal survey of some 30 of the leading departments of economics in the country, defined largely as being those departments which have been major producers of Ph.D.’s in economics.”

Source:  Boddy, Francis M. “The Demand for Economists.” The American Economic Review 52, no. 2 (1962): 503-08.

 

Also of interest from about the same time is the AER Supplement:

Tolles, N. Arnold, and Emanuel Melichar. “Studies of the Structure of Economists’ Salaries and Income” The American Economic Review 58, no. 5 (1968):

___________________________________

MEMBERS OF THE CHAIRMEN’S GROUP, 1965-66
December 13, 1965

  1. Professor Gerard Debreu
    University of California
    Berkeley, California 94720
  2. Dean R. M. Cyert
    Carnegie Institute of Technology
    Pittsburgh 13, Pennsylvania
  3. Professor Arnold C. Harberger
    University of Chicago
    1126 East 59th Street
    Chicago 37, Illinois
  4. Professor Carl McGuire
    University of Colorado
    Boulder, Colorado
  5. Professor William Vickrey
    Columbia University
    New York 27, New York
  6. Professor Douglas F. Dowd
    Acting Chairman
    Cornell University
    Ithaca, New York
    (Professor Frank H. Golay, the Chairman, is on leave in 1965-66.)
  7. Professor Robert S. Smith
    Duke University
    Durham, North Carolina
  8. Professor John Dunlop
    Harvard University
    Cambridge, Massachusetts 02138
  9. Professor John F. Due
    University of Illinois
    Urbana, Illinois 61803
  10. Professor George Wilson
    Indiana University
    Bloomington, Indiana 47405
  11. Professor Karl A. Fox
    Iowa State University
    Ames, Iowa 50010
  12. Professor Carl F. Christ
    Johns Hopkins University
    Baltimore, Maryland
  13. Professor Robert F. Lanzilotti
    Michigan State University
    East Lansing, Michigan
  14. Professor Warren L. Smith
    University of Michigan
    Ann Arbor, Michigan
  15. Professor E. Cary Brown
    Massachusetts Institute of Technology
    Cambridge 39, Massachusetts
  16. Professor Emanuel Stein
    New York University
    New York 3, New York
  17. Professor John Turnbull
    University of Minnesota
    Minneapolis, Minnesota
  18. Professor Ralph W. Pfouts
    university of North Carolina
    Chapel Hill, North Carolina
  19. Professor Robert Eisner
    Northwestern University
    Evanston, Illinois
  20. Professor Paul G. Craig
    Ohio State University
    Columbus, Ohio
  21. Professor Irving B. Kravis
    University of Pennsylvania
    Philadelphia 4, Pennsylvania
  22. Professor Richard A. Lester
    Princeton University
    Princeton, New Jersey
  23. Dean Emanuel T. Weiler
    Purdue University
    Lafayette, Indiana
  24. Professor Lionel McKenzie
    University of Rochester
    Rochester 20, New York
  25. Professor Edward S. Shaw
    Stanford University
    Stanford, California
  26. Professor Carey Thompson
    University of Texas
    Austin, Texas
  27. Professor James W. McKie
    Vanderbilt University
    Nashville, Tennessee
  28. Professor Alexandre Kafka
    Acting Chairman
    University of Virginia
    Charlottesville, Virginia
    (Professor Warren Nutter, the Chairman, is on leave in 1965-66.)
  29. Professor David B. Johnson
    University of Wisconsin
    Madison, Wisconsin
  30. Professor Raymond Powell
    Yale University
    New Haven, Connecticut

 

Source: Johns Hopkins University. The Ferdinand Hamburger, Jr. Archives. Department of Political Economy, Series 5, Box 6, Folder 2 “Statistical Information”.

 

___________________________________

 

CARTEL
SUMMARY of the October-1965 Questionnaire to Departments of Economics in the United States

SUMMARY of the salary (1965-66 and 1964-65 academic years, 9-10 month basis) and other data of 29 (out of 29) Departments of Economics. N = Number of Departments reporting.

 

TABLE 1c
PROFESSORS 1965-66, 1964-65

(1)
Median Salaries
All Professors

MID-POINT
OF RANGE

1965-66

1964-65

Over 20,249

2 1
20,000 4

0

19,500

0 1
19,000 3

1

18,500

2 3
18,000 2

1

17,500

3 1
17,000 2

4

16,500

2 4
16,000 1

4

15,500

2 0
15,000 2

1

14,500

0 2
14,000 3

1

13,500

0 1
13,000 1

4

N=

29 29
Median $17,500

$16,500

Mean

$17,377

$16,319

 

 

TABLE 1c
PROFESSORS 1965-66, 1964-65

(2)

Average Salaries
“Superior Professors”
(Top 1/3)

MID-POINT
OF RANGE

1965-66

1964-65

Over 23,749

3 1
23,500 2

0

23,000

0 0
22,500 3

0

22,000

1 2
21,500 4

3

21,000

1 2
20,500 4

2

20,000

0 3
19,500 2

2

19,000

2 4
18,500 1

0

18,000

3 1
17,500 1

2

17,000

0 0
16,500 2

1

16,000

0 4
15,500 0

1

15,000

0 0
14,500 0

1

14,000

0 0
N= 29

29

Median

$20,600 $19,500
Mean $20,677

$19,093

 

 

TABLE 1c
PROFESSORS 1965-66, 1964-65

(3)

Average Salaries
“Average Professors”
(Lower 2/3)

MID-POINT
OF RANGE

1965-66

1964-65

Over 18,749

4 2
18,500 0

1

18,000

3 1
17,500 1

1

17,000

3 1
16,500 3

2

16,000

5 8
15,500 1

4

15,000

2 1
14,500 1

1

14,000

2 0
13,500

2

2

13,000

1 4
12,500 1

0

12,000

0 1
11,500 0

0

N=

29 29
Median $16,100

$15,390

Mean

$16,192

$15,119

 

Source: Johns Hopkins University. The Ferdinand Hamburger, Jr. Archives. Department of Political Economy, Series 5, Box 6, Folder 2 “Statistical Information”.

Image: From left to right: Monopolies, Uncle Sam, Trusts.

Taylor, Charles Jay, Artist. In the hands of his philanthropic friends / C.J. Taylor. , 1897. N.Y.: Published in Puck, March 10, 1897. . Retrieved from the Library of Congress, . (Accessed May 12, 2017). https://www.loc.gov/item/2012647652/

Categories
Columbia Economists Harvard Stanford

Columbia Ph.D. alumnus. Two images of Kenneth Arrow.

 

Many economists are sharing their personal memories of Kenneth Arrow. Today I’ll just share the photo heading this post that I took on August 22, 2011, one day before his 90th birthday. Taking a break from working in the Hoover Institution Archives at Stanford, I visited Kenneth Arrow in his office to interview him about his own graduate education and memories of Columbia University. 

Those same intense eyes can be seen in his 1936 high-school yearbook photo (Townsend Harris High School in Flushing, NY).

Categories
Chicago Columbia Economists Stanford Syllabus

Chicago. Economics Ph.D. Alumnus Simon James McLean, 1897

It all began as a humble search for a single mosaic tile — where did Simon James McLean study before going to the University of Chicago and becoming one of its first four Ph.D.’s in Political Economy? Before getting an answer to that question, I uncovered many other details of a life begun in Brooklyn (1871) with first academic degrees from the University of Toronto (A.B., 1894; LL.B., 1895), then A.M. at Columbia (1896) and finally Ph.D. from the University of Chicago (1897).

After getting the Ph.D. McLean’s career literally went south, namely to the University of Arkansas (1897-1902), then west to Stanford (1902-05), and then back north to the University of Toronto (1906) at the age of 35.

From the University of Chicago’s registers of its Ph.D’s. for the years 1921, 1931, and 1938 I discovered that McLean morphed from a leading academic light regarding the economics of railroad regulation into a policy mover-and-shaker on the Board of Railway Commissioners for Canada (1908-1938). The man covered a lot of territory in his life.

But wait, there’s more. While on McLean’s trail through Fayetteville, Arkansas, I came across the course descriptions at the University of Arkansas for economics and sociology that included his textbook choices. Since there is no indication of anyone else offering any of these courses, it would appear the young professor had a teaching load for each semester of 14 hours per week. I think it is reasonable to assume that his choices of topics and texts represent an average of his own earlier coursework at Columbia and Chicago. I have added links to all the texts given in the course descriptions.

 

Sources:

Theses of the University of Chicago, Doctors of Philosophy. June 1893—December 1921. Chicago: Harper Memorial Library, University of Chicago.

University of Chicago Announcements, Register Number, Doctors of Philosophy. June, 1893—April, 1931. Chicago: University of Chicago Press, pp. 122-127.

University of Chicago Announcements, Register of Doctors of Philosophy. Jan, 1893—April, 1938. Chicago: University of Chicago Press, pp. 139-144.

______________________________

 

McLean, Simon James.
University of Chicago thesis (1897):
The railway policy of Canada.

McLean’s Ph.D. thesis does appear to have been published as such. However, he did write a series of articles for the Journal of Political Economy that together account for much of his dissertation work.

An early chapter in Canadian railroad policy. Journal of Political Economy, Vol. 6 (June 1898), 323-352.
Canadian railways and the bonding question. Journal of Political Economy, Vol. 7 (September 1899), pp. 500-542.
The railway policy of Canada, 1849 to 1867: I. Journal of Political Economy, Vol. 9 (March 1901), pp.
The railway policy of Canada, 1849 to 1867: II. Journal of Political Economy, Vol. 9 (June 1901), pp. 351-383.

______________________________

 

Arkansas University.—Dr. Simon James McLean has been appointed Professor of History and Political Economy at the University of Arkansas. He was born at Brooklyn, N.Y., June 14, 1871. After passing through the public schools of Quebec and Cumberland, Canada, and the Ontario Collegiate Institute of Ottawa, he entered the Toronto University. Here he obtained the degree of A.B. in 1894 and that of LL.B. in 1895. He then pursued further graduate studies at Columbia, receiving his A.M. in 1896, and at Chicago, where, in 1897, he obtained the degree of Ph.D. In the same year he was appointed Professor of Economics and Sociology at the University of Arkansas. Professor McLean has published:

Tariff History of Canada.” University of Toronto Studies, 1895. Pp.53.
The University Settlement Movement.” Canadian Magazine, March, 1897,
Early Railway History of Canada.” Ibid., March, 1899.
Early Canadian Railway Policy.” Journal of Political Economy, June, 1898.
Canadian Railways and the Bonding Question.” Ibid., September, 1899.

 

Source: The Annals of the American Academy of Political and Social Science, Vol. 14 (September 1899) p. 64 [page 220 in printed volume].

______________________________

 

Course offerings in economics and sociology at the University of Arkansas
1899-1900

ECONOMICS AND SOCIOLOGY.
S. J. McLean, Professor.

 

The courses offered in this department are designed to afford such instruction as will be advantageous to those who intend to enter public life, or those callings which will bring them closely in touch with the activities of citizenship. Course 1 is required before more advanced courses in this department are taken.

  1. Principles of Economics (both terms)……….2

Recitations, prescribed readings, reports and debates. Text-book: Walker, Political Economy [3rd edition, 1888 ].

  1. Industrial History of America and Europe since 1763 (first term)……….3

The leading industrial facts of this period are considered, including panics and trusts. A detailed study of some of the more important industries will also be made. Lectures, reports, and prescribed readings. Selected portions of Rand’s Economic History [Selections Illustrating Economic History since the Seven Years’ War 3rd ed., 1895]will be studied.

  1. Banking (first part of second term)……….3

The principles of Banking and the history of Banking Systems. [Chapters on the theory and history of banking. 1st ed., New York and London: G. P. Putnam’s Sons, 1891. ] Lectures, recitations, reports, and readings. Text-book: Dunbar, Chapters in the Theory and History of Banking.

  1. Money (latter part of second term)……….3

The principles of Money and the history of Monetary Systems are considered. [From 1898-99 Catalogue: “Text-books: Walker and Jevons” [Francis A. Walker, Money (1878). William Stanley Jevons, Money and the mechanism of exchange (1875).]

  1. Tariff History and Problems (first term)……….2

United States, England, France and Germany. Special attention will be devoted to the tariff history of the United States. Text-book: Taussig, Tariff History of the United States. [1888] This will be supplemented by lectures and use of government documents.

  1. History of Economic Thought, from Plato and Aristotle to the Present (second term) ……….2

Text-book: Ingram’s History of Political Economy [1887]; supplementary readings and reports will also be required.

  1. Public Finance (first term)……….3

Principles and history of taxation, management of public debts, consideration of governmental activities, etc. Text-book: Plehn, Introduction to Public Finance [1896]. Lectures, readings and use of government documents.

  1. Transportation. Its History and Problems (second term)……….3

The economic aspects of water transportation, the great lakes, canal systems, and the Mississippi; the evolution of the railroad system, railroad geography, state versus private ownership, methods of government control, railroad finances, etc. Lectures, prescribed readings, and use of original material. Text-book: Hadley, Railroad Transportation. [1885]

  1. Principles of Sociology (first term)……….2

This course considers the elements and conditions of social growth and progress. Recitations, lectures and reading of assigned chapters in Spencer’s Principles of Sociology [Vol. 1, Vol. 2, Vol. 3.] and in Gidding’s Principles of Sociology [1896]. Text-book: Fairbanks’s Introduction to Sociology [1896].

  1. Problems of Social Growth (second term)……….2

Trade-unionism, arbitration and conciliation, socialism, communism, co-operation and profit-sharing. Lectures and reports. For reference: Ely, The Labor Movement in America [1886], and Ely, French and German Socialism [1883].

  1. Commerce (first term)……….2

Theory of foreign commerce; investigation of the commercial resources of the leading countries of the present. Students will be expected to acquaint themselves with the United States Consular Reports. Text-book: Chisholm, Smaller Commercial Geography [1897 Handbook of Commercial Geography.].

  1. Labor Legislation (second term)……….2

History and critical investigation of the attitude of the State towards Labor; apprenticeship laws, combination laws, trade union recognition, factory legislation, etc. For reference, Stimson, Handbook to the Labor Law of the United States. [1896]

 

Source: Catalogue of the University of Arkansas, 1899-1900. Fayetteville, Ark., pp. 77-79.

______________________________

PROF. M’LEAN [sic] RESIGNS
HEAD OF ECONOMICS DEPARTMENT TO GO TO TORONTO.

Will Leave Stanford in January to Take Professsorship in Economics of Commerce and Transportation.

Professor Simon James McLean, present head of the Department of Economics, has tendered his resignation and will leave Stanford at the end of the present semester. He goes to accept the professorship of economics of commerce and transportation at the University of Toronto in Canada. Professor McLean has been contemplating this step for some time, as, aside from the fact that the work at Toronto will be along lines offering him better opportunities for advancement, the call from his alma mater was one which he felt he could not refuse. Dr. Jordan has accepted Professor McLean’s resignation and in his letter accepting it speaks as follows: “We recognize your ripe scholarship, your high ideals in education, your calmness of judgment, and your possession of those traits of character and thought which mark the gentleman among other men. As a teacher in a line of work so much afflicted by hasty judgment, by sensationalism and emotionalism, you have always held the attitude of a careful and patient investigator, one of the most solid and accurate within the range of my acquaintance.” It is still too early for any definite statement regarding the filling of Professor McLean’s place in the Department of Economics, as he will continue in charge of his classes until the twenty-second of December. Professor McLean came to Stanford in 1902 from the University of Arkansas, where he was professor of economics and sociology. He took his A. B. at the University of Toronto in 1884 and his degree of LL.B. in 1895 from the same university. The degrees A. M. from Columbia and Ph.D. from Chicago came in 1896 and 1897. Professor McLean is a recognized authority on the subject of railway rates, and has been a member of several special commissions appointed by the government to investigate conditions along this line.

 

Source: The Stanford Daily, Vol. XXVII, Issue 66, November 28, 1905.

 

 

 

 

Categories
Courses Johns Hopkins Stanford Suggested Reading Syllabus

Johns Hopkins. Lectures on Charities by A. G. Warner, 1893

In 1892 Amos G. Warner (1861-1900) was hired as the head of the newly established Department of Economics and Social Science at Stanford. A sketch of his biography is found in the eulogies reported at his memorial service at Stanford.  This is followed by an outline with readings for a course of lectures he held at Johns Hopkins University in 1893 “On Charities and their Administration”.

 

 

___________________________

MEMORIAL TO DR. A.G. WARNER.

Friends and Colleagues of the Dead Professor Pay Tribute to a Truly Great Man.

Last night memorial services were held in the chapel for Dr. Amos Griswold Warner, late head of the department of Economics and Sociology in the University. The touching tributes of recollection bore eloquent testimony how deeply his friends at Stanford have felt his death.

President Jordan first spoke, saying : “About fourteen years ago I was told by one who had attended a convention of political economists that the man who was the most sane, interesting, and human of them all was the professor of economics in the University of Nebraska, Dr. Amos G. Warner. It was largely through this statement that I was led to investigate his life and work and to offer him a professorship, first in the East and again in the West, the last of which he finally accepted. It was through Dr. Warner’s recommendation that I first came to look up the records of Dr. Ross and Dr. Howard, so he had a great deal to do with this institution.”

Dr. Jordan introduced Dr. Howard, who said of Dr. Warner, in part : “I have had an acquaintance with him extending over a score of years and must be excused if I give personal reminiscences.

“Just twenty years ago last September there appeared for registration in the University of Nebraska a farmer’s boy from Roca, a village about eleven miles distant from there. His clothes were of the severest country type. His eye, as many of you know, constantly gave a human and somewhat quizzical light —looking out into the new world into which he was about to enter, and of which in more than usual measure he took possession. I had just returned from Germany and for three months was a supply teacher, and with others felt that a new power had come among us, as we learned more and more to appreciate his mind. The part which a young man or a young woman has to take in academic life in the making of the institutions which constitute that life is very important. As he is strong or great in that life he is likely to be in the life beyond. Dr. Warner had a sense of humor almost unsurpassed, and was often a leader in college fun — in true college fun — that kind which had the joy of gentleness, but he was never found in that group whose only claim to academic distinction is good clothes, nor among those who are eager to imitate evil, nor among those who in the name of a college joke or prank delight to persecute those who are physically or mentally weaker than themselves. He told me that he had resolved to graduate and then carry the culture he had obtained into a farmer’s life. While yet a graduate student he received his first call to public duty. In Baltimore, the patron of charities in that city heard of him and the young boy received an invitation to organize the charities —the most difficult work that any man can undertake. The plough boy of Roca undertook the work and he succeeded. And then came the first call to teach. He was appointed an associate professor and my colleague, and now after a few months’ teaching came his second call to public work, to Washington. The thing which finally determined his coming to Stanford was the gift of the Hopkins Library to this institution. He was deeply interested in railroad matters and would build up a railroad school here which would be a great activity.

“But was the work of Dr. Warner left unfinished? He first organized the Associated Charities, and then he organized one of the most important branches of another science, that of Economic Corporations. But there is something more than that which is better, and that is the influence of that good and true soul which he put forth. One may compare it in its results to a diamond cast into the water. The waves of intellectual and moral influence recede further and further, until they break the uttermost shores of time. He had knowledge of man, and of men in all forms and shapes, which only the wise can possess. His work led him in the lowest walks of society, and he came out of it a master of men. When one stands in the presence of that noble and pure soul he cannot but feel humility. When one considers his greatness and his strength one may have faith and hope for the man of democracy.”

Dr. Edward A. Ross was the next to speak of Dr. Warner. He said : “Professor Warner was a most original man. His was the pioneer mind. He seemed to have the capacity to relate economics to real life. He was always on the growing margin of the science, where something new is to be discovered. His methods were original and effective. Instead of sending his students to texts, he sent them out in the world to study the jails, almshouses, and city halls. Students who are here now simply cannot realize the deep devotion of Professor Warner’s students to him, and the profound impression that he has left on every one of them. He had a rare common sense. When he was here two years ago he gave four lay sermons, and I think that they will never be forgotten. I have hardly heard a person comment on these sermons. They are of the kind that you think over, and carry in your mind.”

[…]

Source:  The Stanford Daily. Vol. XVI, Issue 9 (January 24, 1900), p. 1.

 

________________________

CHARITIES AND THEIR ADMINISTRATION.
ABSTRACT OF A COURSE OF LECTURES BY A. G. WARNER, PH. D.
[1893]

The lectures to graduate students on Social Science during the current year were opened with an introductory course by President Gilman. He briefly characterized some of the fundamental and special works of sociology and showed its relation to history, politics, economics, education, sanitation, penology, and other distinct fields of social inquiry. The relations of university men to the State and to society were discussed, together with various practical topics pertaining to political ethics, public morality, social reform, and organized charity.

These introductory lectures were followed by courses by Dr. A. G. Warner and Dr. E. R. L. Gould.

A course of ten lectures on “Charities and their Administration ” was delivered during December and January by A. G. Warner, Ph. D., Superintendent of Charities for the District of Columbia, and Professor-Elect of Economics in the Leland Stanford Jr. University. During and following the course, a company of those especially interested in the subject visited many of the charitable and penal institutions of the city and vicinity, under the guidance of Mr. F. D. Morrison, Superintendent of the Maryland School for the Blind, who represented the Baltimore Charity Organization Society, and Mr. D. I. Green, who was chosen chairman of the class.

The substance of Dr. Warner’s lectures will eventually be incorporated in a work entitled “American Charities, a Study in Philanthropy and Economics,” [Volume 4 in Crowell’s Library of Economics and Politics, 1894] but it is thought best to print at once for the use of those interested in the subject the list of references and a brief synopsis of the lectures themselves.

The references as given by Dr. Warner have been extended by, Mr. D. I. Green, through the addition of dates and places of publication and the completion of titles. They are presented here not as a bibliography of charities but as a reader’s guide which has already proved useful to students of social science.

Perhaps the best bibliography for the American student of charity, though by no means complete, is that found in the appendix of the last Baltimore Directory of Charities. The Directory may be obtained from the Charity Organization Society of Baltimore for fifty cents. The Library Catalogue of the London Charity Organization Society, now appearing in Charity Organization Review, will constitute a more complete bibliography.

 

List of Works Suggested by the Lecturer for Reference in connection with this Course.

 

(a) Bibliographical Helps:

Adams, H. B. Notes on the Literature of Charities. Johns Hopkins University Studies, fifth series, No. 8. 1887.
Commons, John R. Popular Bibliography of Sociology. The Christian Social Union, Madison, Wis. 1891.
Catalogue of the Library of the State Charities Aid Association. New York City. 1886. Directory of Charities of Baltimore, Appendix E. Charity Organization Society, Baltimore. 1892.
Catalogue of Library of the London Charity Organization Society. This is being printed in sections as a supplement to the Charity Organization Review, beginning with January, 1893. London.

 

(b) Periodicals:

The Charities Review. Published monthly from November to June. Charity Organization Society of New York City. $1.00.
Lend a Hand. Edited by Rev. E. E. Hale. Monthly. Boston. $2.00.
State Charities Record. Published bi-monthly. The State Charities Aid Association of New York. Discontinued, June, 1892.
Charity Organization Review. Published monthly. The Charity Organization Society of London. 6 d. each.
The Monthly Register. The Philadelphia Society for Organizing Charity. 50 cts.
Die Arbeiter-Kolonie. Monthly. Gadderbaum, Germany. 50cts.

 

(c) European:

Nicholls, George. History of the Poor Laws. London. 4 vols. 1854-1857.
Chalmers, Thomas. Christian and Economic Polity of Large Towns. Glasgow, 1858.
Fowle, T. W. The Poor Law. London, 1881.
Fawcett, Henry. Pauperism; Its Causes and Remedies. London, 1871.
Hodder, Edwin. Life and Work of the Earl of Shaftesbury. London and New York, 1886.
Booth, Charles. Labor and Life of the People. 3 Vols. London. 1889, 1891, 1892.
Schönberg’s Handbuch der Politischen Oekonomie, third edition, article, “Armenwesen,” by E. Löning. Tübingen, 1891.
Conrad’s Handwörterbuch der Staatswissenschaften, articles, “Armenwesen,” by Dr. Aschrott and others; and “Arbeiter-Kolonien,” by J. Berthold. Jena, 1890
Emminghaus, A. Poor Relief in Different Parts of Europe. Translation. London, 1873.
Böhmert, Victor. Armenwesen in 77 Deutschon Städten. Dresden, 1886.

 

(d) American:

Annual Reports of the National Conference of Charities and Correction, 19 vols. Boston.
Reports of State Boards of Charities.
Report on the Defective, Dependent and Delinquent Classes. Tenth Census of the United States. Vol. XXI.
Aschrott, P. F. Poverty and Its Relief in the United States of America. Translated for the Baltimore Charity Organization Society. Baltimore, 1890.
Gilman, D. C. Our Relations to Our Other Neighbors. Baltimore, 1891.
Warner. Dr. Amos G. Charities: The Relation of the State, the City, and the Individual to Modern Philanthropic Work. 12 pages. Supplement to Johns Hopkins Univ. Studies. Baltimore, 1889.
Riis, Jacob A. How the Other Half Lives. New York, 1889.
Crooker, Joseph H. Problems in American Society. Boston, 1889.
Ely, Richard T. Philanthropy. Reprinted by the Baltimore Charity Organization Society, 1887.

 

In studying pauperism, we study one branch of the science of social pathology; in studying charities and their administration we are concerned with one branch of social therapeutics. Pauperism is natural and inevitable only in the same sense that bodily disease is natural and inevitable. Both are evils to be treated by scientific methods and to be assailed in their causes. Parenthetically it may be said that the tendency to use the term social science or sociology as meaning simply what is here called social pathology and therapeutics is a pernicious one. There is no good name for the branch of social science which relates to the care of social weaklings.

In the present course little will be said about gratuitous charity-made pauperism. The evils resulting from unwise giving are to be mentioned only incidentally. It is desired to dwell on what needs doing rather than on what should not be done, to consider especially those great and various groups of individuals whose destitution is undoubted, and to outline the wisest methods of helping them.

 

Lecture No. 1.
PAUPERISM AS A PHASE OF NATURAL SELECTION.

(a) On Natural Selection in its Application to Man:

Huxley, Thomas H. The Struggle for Existence. The Nineteenth Century, Feb., 1888. On the Natural Inequalities of Men. Ibid, Jan., 1890.
Wallace, A. R. Contributions to the Theory of Natural Selection. London, 1871.
Ritchie, D. G. Darwinism and Politics. London, 1889.
Bagehot, Walter. Physics and Politics, chapter on the “Uses of Conflict.” 1872.
Darwin, Charles. Origin of Species, 1859; and the Descent of Man, 1871.
Spencer, Herbert. Principles of Biology, 1864; and Principles of Sociology, 1874 et seq.
Malthus, Rev. Thomas Robert. The Principle of Population. London, 1798, 1803, etc., New York, 1890.

 

(b) On the Causes of Pauperism:

Booth, Charles. Pauperism and the Endowment of Old Age, chapter VII, and the tables there cited. London and New York, 1892.
Böhmert, (see above) pp. 114-116.
Reports of the Charity Organization Societies of Boston, Buffalo, New York, Baltimore, etc.
Warner. A. G. Notes on the Statistical Determination of the Causes of Poverty. Publications of the Am. Statistical Association, New Series, Vol. I, No. 5. Boston, 1889.
Crooker. Problems in American Society. Boston, 1889, p. 146.

 

“The Unfit” is an ambiguous term (see Huxley and Ritchie). In a narrow sense it means simply unfitness to cope with circumstances at a given time and a given place; in a broader sense it means unfitness from the standpoint of race improvement and it is a common but mischievous error to assume that those who are unfit in one sense of the term are also unfit in the other. Natural selection as a means of race improvement is always efficient, but sometimes enormously slow and wasteful. A man would be unfit in the sense of failing to cope with circumstances who should not be able to resist an attack of small pox, or who finding himself thrown into deep water should be unable to swim. Vaccination and life preservers are used to prevent such persons from becoming victims of temporary misfortune or weakness; and this is a proper modification of natural selection, because the persons who are not by nature fitted to cope with the special circumstances of the time and place may be eminently fit from the standpoint of race improvement. The purpose of philanthropy should be first, to preserve those who are fit from the standpoint of race improvement from being crushed by unfortunate local or temporary conditions, and second to enable those who are unfit from the standpoint of race improvement to become extinct with the least possible suffering.

In trying to determine what constitutes the unfitness of the individuals composing the pauper class, a system of case counting is frequently resorted to. A tabular exhibit of the result reached by German, English and American investigators shows that the most constant factor is sickness; next in importance in chronic pauperism is weakness of old age, and in incipient pauperism, the weakness of extreme youth. An attempt to classify the cases of pauperism according as the causes indicate misfortune or indicate misconduct has for its leading result the conclusion that very little dependence can be placed upon such a classification. The study of a concrete mass of pauperism tends to confirm Dugdale’s conclusions that “Hereditary pauperism rests chiefly upon disease in some form, tends to terminate in extinction, and may be called the sociological aspect of physical degeneration.”

 

Lecture No. 2.
SOME OF THE SOCIAL CAUSES AND EFFECTS OF INDIVIDUAL DEGENERATION.

 

Billings, John S. On Vital and Medical Statistics. Reprinted from The Medical Record. New York, 1889.
Eleventh Census, Bulletin 100.
Körösi. Joseph. Sterblichkeit der Stadt Buda-pest in den Jahren 1876-1881 und deren Ursachen, Mittheilungen über individual Mortalitäts-beobachtungen, and other works. Budapest, Hungary.
Reports of the New Jersey Bureau of Labor for 1889,1890 and 1891, chapters upon the “Health and Trade-Life of Workmen.”
Twiss, Travers. Tests of a Thriving Population. London, 1845.
Porter, Dwight. A Sanitary Inspection of Certain Tenement-House Districts of Boston. 1889.
Chapin, H. D. Preventable Causes of Poverty. The Forum. June, 1889.
Humphreys, Noel A. Class-Mortality Statistics. Journal of Royal Statistical Society. June, 1887.
Newsholme, Arthur. Elements of Vital Statistics. London, 1889.
Grimshaw, T. W. Reports as Registrar General of Ireland, 1885 et seq.

 

Influences which often tend to lower the industrial and social status of the individual that are commonly treated in works on economies, are the variations in the purchasing power of money, changes in industry, undue power of class over class, specialized industries, and the work of women and children. For present purposes we do not take up these topics which are treated elsewhere, but will content ourselves with certain statistical investigations as to occupational-mortality and morbidity.

By computations based on a table given by Körösi we find that out of 1000 merchants (Kaufleute) who are in the business at the age of 25 there will be alive at the age of 60, 587.7; of the same number of tailors, 420.6; of shoemakers, 376.2; of servants, 290.2; of day laborers, 253.4. The high mortality of the laboring classes carries with it an implication of a relative large amount of sickness. Taking an average of two years of sickness to each death—which is the proportion commonly assumed by statisticians— we find that merchants would have 32.5 years of health in which to provide for one year of sickness, tailors 21.3, shoemakers 18.7, servants 15.5, and day laborers only 13 years. This, however, does not indicate fully the burden imposed upon the lower classes by a high death rate. In order to give a more adequate idea of this burden we must turn to statistics of class-mortality and morbidity, since only here do we obtain a view of sickness and health in the population of all ages. Taking the population of Dublin, as statistically described by Dr. Grimshaw, it is found that among persons of the independent and professional classes there is an average of 24.5 years of health for persons over fifteen years of age in which provision may be made for one year of sickness in the whole population of the same class; while for the poorest class there are only 8.8 years of effective health in which to provide for one of sickness.

In the first lecture we reached the conclusion that disease is an important cause of poverty. We now reach the conclusion that poverty is an important cause of disease. Yet it is not without advantage that we travel all the way around this circle, and reach no general conclusion more novel than that already announced in Proverbs, “The destruction of the poor is their poverty.” It enables us to realize anew the interaction of social forces, and the manner in which that which they have is taken away from those which have not.

 

Lecture. 3.
PERSONAL CAUSES OF DEGENERATION.

Weismann, A. F. L. Heredity and Kindred Biological Problems. Translation, Oxford, 1889.
Ward, Lester F. The Transmission of Culture. The Forum, May 1891; and Neo-Darwinism and Neo-Lamarkism. Pamphlet. Washington, 1891.
Galton, Francis. Hereditary Genius. London, 1869.
Dugdale, R. L. The Jukes. New York, 1877, 1884.
McCulloch, O. C. The Tribe of Ishmael. Indianapolis, 1888.
Ely, R. T. Pauperism in the United States. North American Review, April, 1891.
Strahan, S. A. K. Marriage and Disease. New York, 1892.
Booth, Charles. Pauperism and Endowment of Old Age. 1892.
Drummond, Henry. Natural Law in the Spiritual World, chapters on Semi-Parasitism, and Parasitism. New York, 1887.
Tenth Annual Report of the New York State Board of Charities. 1877.
Royce, S. Deterioration and Race Education. New York, 1877.

 

As to heredity it must be said that it is now an open question among scientists whether or not acquired characteristics are transmitted by inheritance. If not, we are more in the dark as to the cause of variation in the human and other species than was for a time supposed; and much bearing on our present subject that has been written by Spencer, Maudsley, Bagehot and Dugdale is out of date. For instance, Mr. Dugdale’s tentative conclusion that “heredity itself is an organized result of invariable environment” would have to be given up. If Weismann’s contention is correct those interested in race-improvement will have to pay more attention than might otherwise have been thought necessary to the principles of selection. Galton has investigated the influence of heredity in producing unusually able men; Dugdale, McCulloch, Mrs. Lowell, and Charles Booth have investigated its influence in producing paupers, criminals and prostitutes.

Among secondary causes of degeneration pertaining to persons the following are of leading importance:

(1). Sexual licentiousness. All careful observers agree that perversion of sexual instincts is one of the chief causes of individual degeneration. It results in specific disease, general under-vitalization and incapacity. (2). Intemperance. Its degenerative influence is greatest in classes considerably above the pauper class (Booth, pp. 39-41). Its influence has not been studied with the scientific care it merits. (3). Laziness and under-vitalization merges into various forms of specific disease and into idiocy. It often appears in the children of the licentious and intemperate. (4). Parasitism, or the habit of dependence. Is at once an evidence and a source of degeneration. Is closely analogous to parasitism among plants and animals. (See Drummond, above). It may be indefinitely developed by unwise philanthropy.

We need not for the present inquire whether the secondary causes result from the influence of the individual’s “free choice,” from hereditary or from environment. There is said to be a tendency among defectives to intermarry, and so eventually to hasten extinction. (See Strahan).

 

Lecture No. 4.
THE ALMSHOUSE AND ITS INMATES.

(a) On Almshouses:

Booth, Charles. Pauperism and Endowment of Old Age, 1892, especially pp. 33 and 117.
Eleventh Census, Bulletin 90.
Report of a Conference on Charities held in Baltimore, April, 1887. Especially F. B. Sanborn on “Work in Almshouses,” and A. G. Warner on “The Charities of Baltimore.”
Reports of State Boards of Charities, especially New York, Indiana, Illinois, and Wisconsin.
Reports of the National Conferences of Charities and Correction. Especially papers by Messrs. Giles and Sanborn, 1884; Byers, 1886, and Mrs. Lowell, 1879.
Pamphlets issued by the Wisconsin State Board of Charities on the Construction and Management of Almshouses.

 

(b) On Out-Door Relief:

Reports of the National Conference, 1879, pp. 200 ff; 1881, pp. 144-154; symposium, 1891.
Farnam, H. W. Report on the Advisability of Establishing a Workhouse, etc. New Haven, 1887.
Lee, Joseph. A Study in Out-Door Relief. State Charities Record. April, 1892.
Report of Committee on Out-Door Alms of the Town of Hartford, Conn., 1891.

 

(c) On Old Age Pensions:

Booth. Pauperism. (See above).
Spender, J. A. The State and Pensions in Old Age. London, 1892.
Chamberlain, Joseph. Old Age Pensions. The National Review. Feb., 1892.
Loch, C. S. Old Age Pensions and Pauperism. London, 1892.

 

The almshouse is the fundamental institution in American poor relief. The abjectly destitute not otherwise provided for are sent here (inmates of almshouses in the United States 1890-73,015, ratio of population 1 to 857; 1880, inmates of almshouses, 66,203, ratio to population 1 to 758—Census Bulletin No. 90).

Formerly almost the entire care of the poor was left to the local political units. Under such circumstances all classes of dependents were jumbled together in the almshouse. Now, specialization is so far advanced that the state usually cares for the blind, the deaf and dumb, and in many cases for the insane and the feeble minded, and children are usually provided for by special agencies. This leaves for the almshouse at the present time the old, the infirm, the decrepit and chronic invalids and paupers. The stigma attaching to the acceptance of almshouse relief seems to come not so much from the fact that it is supported by the public as from the fact that a great majority of its inmates are thoroughly degenerate physically and morally. (See Hartford Report).

The almshouse is usually managed either by the county, city or township. Its character depends first upon the man employed as its superintendent, and second on the supervision. It is an institution that people willingly forget and reluctantly visit. It should be on a farm but near a town, so that visitors may easily reach it. Besides this, State supervision is indispensable and adequate control is desirable. (See Illinois Report, 1890—page 104).

To prevent excessive almshouse population the following deterrent influences have been used at various times and places: (a) Inhuman and-unallowable: dirt, hunger, cold, cruelty, vermin, and the promiscuous mingling of the evil and the good. (b) Beneficent: Rigid discipline, work for all capable of doing anything, cleanliness, and thorough investigation of applicants.

The evils to be guarded against other than those indicated above: (a) Lax rules regarding admission and departure (Booth and Mrs. Lowell); (b) Lack of proper classification (as to sex, age, character, etc.); (c) Presence of insane and feeble minded without adequate provision for them; (d) Presence of children; (e) Excessive cost; (f) Undue attractiveness.

Attempts have been made to provide in other ways for those commonly sent to the almshouse; the first of these is out-door relief. Strangely enough, the effect of giving such relief has usually been to increase the number of in-door poor, and conversely when the supply of out-door relief has summarily been cut off; the number of out-door poor has diminished, or remained stationary. Several proposals for the endowment of old age have recently been made in England. Canon Blackley, Joseph Chamberlain and Charles Booth have severally made proposals upon which a large number of variations have been suggested by others. It is not certain that pensions are a cure for pauperism, as our own experience indicates.

The almshouse must continue to be the basis of public poor relief. It is therefore the duty of those interested in the welfare of the poor to know that the almshouse in the community in which they live is well and humanely managed; that it is a proper place for those who ought to go there; and that those that should not, especially the children and certain classes of the insane, are elsewhere provided for.

 

Lecture No. 5.
THE SICK, THE INSANE, AND THE FEEBLE-MINDED.

(a) On Charities for the Sick:

Rentoul R. B. Reform of our Voluntary Medical Charities. Paris, 1891.
Reports of the National Conferences of Charities and Correction. Papers on Medical Charities: 1883, pp. 428 ff.; 1875, pp. 52 ff.; 1877, pp. 81-46; on Hospitals: 1890, pp. 155-177; 1891, pp. 52 ff.; on Training Schools for Nurses, 1890, pp. 110-147.
Hampton, Miss I. A. District Nursing. Report of the Charity Organization Society of Baltimore for 1891, and The Charities Review for February, 1892.
Hampton, Miss I. A. Nursing: Its Principles and Practice. Philadelphia, 1893.
Hunter, Mrs. Hospital Nursing. Eng. Illustrated Magazine for March, 1891.

 

(b) On the Care of the Insane:

Report of the National Conference. Especially 1882, p. 97, and 1888, pp. 25-95 and 384.
Finley, J. H. American Reform in the Care of the Insane. Review of Reviews, June, 1891.
Hammerton, C. R. Modern Treatment of the Insane. Chautauquan, Dec., 1891.

 

(c) On the Care of the Feeble-Minded

Reports on the National Conference: 1884, pp. 246-263; 1885, pp. 158-178; 1886, pp. 288-302; 1887, pp. 250-260; especially 1888, pp. 99-113 and 395; 1890, pp. 224 ff.
Institution Bulletin, and Annual Reports of the Pennsylvania Training School for Feeble Minded Children, especially the Circular of Information for 1888. West Chester, Pa.

 

In these three departments of charity work the problem is to provide the best possible curative treatment for those that are curable, and to furnish kind custodial care for the incurable. It is especially necessary that adult females incurably insane or feeble-minded should have custodial care during their entire lives.

 

Lecture No. 6.
THE UNEMPLOYED AND THE HOMELESS POOR

Reports of the Massachusetts Bureau of Statistics of Labor. 1879, and especially 1887.
Reports of the Ohio Bureau of Labor. 1890 and 1891.
Warner, A. G. Some Experiments on Behalf of the Unemployed. Reprinted from The Quarterly Journal of Economics for Oct., 1890. Boston.
Die Arbeiter-Kolonie. Monthly Magazine. Gadderbaum, Germany.
Peabody, F. G. German Labor Colonies. Forum, February, 1892.
Report of Indiana State Conference of Charities. 1891.
Willink, H. G. Dutch Home Labor Colonies. London, 1889.
Reports of the Philadelphia Society for Organizing Charity.
Booth, Wm. In Darkest England and the Way Out. London and New York,1890.
Huxley, Thos. H. Social Diseases and Worse Remedies. London, 1891.
Loch, C. 8., Bosanquet, B., and Dwyer, C. P. Criticisms on “General” Booth’s Scheme, London, 1891.
The Homeless Poor of London. Report of the London Charity Organization Society. June, 1891.
Ribton-Turner, C. J. History of Vagrants and Vagrancy. London, 1889.

 

The problem of the unemployed is very largely the problem of the inefficient. The evil must be assailed in its causes, as very little can be done for the inefficient adult.

There are three distinct ways of dealing with the homeless poor: First, aid them or force them to move on,—this simply results in a shifting of burdens; is very expensive and inefficient if it is the only method adopted. Second, punishment, — a severe law passed in Connecticut worked well for a time, but is now a dead letter. Third, give indiscriminately what they ask, — this promotes vagabondage and consequent misery. As a matter of fact each case must be treated individually, some should be aided to move on, some should be punished and some should be given what they ask. The station house system of free lodgings suits the tramp and degrades and repels the merely unfortunate. Vermin, bad air, dirt and crowding are luxuries to the tramp; cleanliness and work are the things he cannot stand. What is needed is a lodging house with clean beds, good ventilation, a shower bath, a steam chest or fumigating room for devitalizing clothing, and a wood yard or stone heap where the work test may be applied.

 

Lecture No. 7.
DEPENDENT CHILDREN.

Brace, Charles Loring. The Dangerous Classes of New York. New York, 1872.
Wines, E. C. State of Prisons and Child Saving Institutions in the Civilized World. Cambridge, Mass., 1880.
Review of Reviews for January, 1892. Including “The Child Problem in Cities,” by J. H. Finley, and “Two Champions of the Children” (Elbridge Gerry and Benjamin Waugh), by the editors.
Riis, Jacob A. Children of the Poor. New York, 1892.
Reports of the National Conference of Charities and Correction. Especially 1880, pp. 166-174; 1881, pp. 271-308; 1884, pp. 115-207 and 354 ff..; 1888, pp. 215-235 and 279 ff.; 1889, pp. 1-9.
The Charities Review for March,1898. Several articles concerning dependent children.
Reports of the Children’s Aid Society, New York.

 

The work for children is the most hopeful branch of charitable endeavor. Institutional care results in a very high death rate for infants, and among older children in a failure to develop properly and fully; there is a lack of preparation for ordinary life, the children acquire habits of dependence and lack inventiveness, vitality and energy. “Placing out,” if done with care, gives the child an opportunity for healthful development, and readily makes of him an independent member of the community. The placing out system is perhaps worse than the institutional system unless it. is administered with “an adequate supply of eternal vigilance.”

 

Lecture No. 8.
PHILANTHROPIC FINANCIERING.

 

Reports of the National Conference of Charities and Correction. 1888, paper by Seth Low on Municipal Charities; the reports on state boards of charities in every volume; 1889, paper by Mrs. Lowell.
First Report of the Superintendent of Charities of the District of Columbia, 1891.
Johnson, Alex. Some Incidentals of Quasi-Public Charity. Charities Review, Feb., 1892.
Hobhouse, Arthur. The Dead Hand. London, 1880.
Fitch, J. G. Endowments. Printed in the Proceedings of the College Association. Philadelphia, 1888.
English Blue Books. Returns of the Commissioners of Inquiry into Charities.

 

Passing with nothing more than mention the well-known distinctions between public and private charities, we find, under the head of to-day’s lecture, two subjects of pressing and practical importance. The first is that of endowments. The proper regulation of bequests to charitable institutions is of even more importance in this country than in England, because of the Dartmouth College decision, yet but little attention has been paid to it. We practically give a man who possesses wealth the power of controlling its disposition indefinitely. The experience of European countries admonishes us that this is a distinctly dangerous power to confer. All States should provide for the systematic “visitation” of endowed charities, and give to some public body the power to control their administration. Regulation of holdings in mortmain is more indispensable in institutions for giving material relief than in educational institutions. The latter deal with the intelligent and often with the influential classes, and must, at any rate, compete with one another for students. Institutions affording material relief deal especially with the defenceless classes, and the element of competition is absent.

The second subject of importance is that of public subsidies to private charities. To grant such subsidies is usually at first a cheap method of providing for certain classes of the poor, but eventually results in the multiplication of institutions, in excessive expense, and undesirable entanglements with sects and cliques. It is only allowable when some public official passes upon the indigency of the beneficiaries, and payment is then made to the private institution on the principle of specific payment for specific work. The experience of New York with charities for children, and of Pennsylvania and the District of Columbia with medical charities is especially instructive.

 

Lecture No. 9.
THE CHARITIES OF AMERICAN CITIES.

 

Reference should be made to the Directories of Charities of the leading cities, and especially to the Directory of the Charities of Boston; Directory of the Charities of New York; Directory of the Charities of Baltimore; and the Indianapolis “Charity Year Book.” For comparison see the “Charities Register and Digest” of London.

The charitable systems of cities are of especial importance because the inefficient and the destitute drift to the centres of population. We often hear of the growth of the city population through the coming to the city of farmer boys who make the successful business men of a succeeding generation, and it is maintained that the city must receive this infusion of new blood or it could not continue to exist. But there is another drift towards the cities of the incapable and the destitute. Those who must depend upon others are apt to fare hardly in the isolation of the rural districts. There is what has been called an element of rural hard-heartedness, which drives the destitute to the cities. Some four or five cities in the United States now have such a large number of charitable organizations at work within their limits that is found necessary to publish a directory of charities. In New York the additions and changes are so numerous that an annual edition of this is published. As an indication of what we are coming to, it is perhaps well to compare these small volumes with the Register and Digest of the London charities, a large octavo of nearly 1000 pages.

To study the table of contents of a directory of charities, or the systematic account of the institutions as given in the body of the book, might leave on the mind the false impression that there was something systematic about their arrangement and that they had come into existence according to a prearranged plan. Such is not the case; their various lines of work intersect and overlap each other, and one gets a more correct idea of the heterogeneous mass of charitable agencies by reading an alphabetical list of them.

 

Lecture No. 10.
RECENT EXPERIENCES IN THE ORGANIZATION OF CHARITIES.

(a) Charity Organization:

Gurtean, S. H. A Hand-book of Charity Organization. Buffalo, 1882.
Loch, C. S. Charity Organization. London, 1890.
Crooker, J. H. Problems in American Society, 1889, pp. 105-115.
Lowell, Josephine S. Public Relief and Private Charity. New York, 1884.
Reports of the National Conference of Charities and Correction since 1879.
Reports and publications of the American Charity Organization Societies, especially those of Boston, New York, Buffalo, Baltimore, Philadelphia, New Haven, Indianapolis, and Cincinnati.
Hill, Miss Octavia. Various pamphlets and review articles.
Fields, Mrs. J. T. How to Help the Poor. Boston, 1884.
Pains, Robert Treat, Jr. Work of Volunteer Visitors. Boston, 1880.
Charities Register and Digest. Introduction, 3d edition. London, 1890.
Wines, F. H. The Law of Organic Life: Its Application in Public and Private Charity. An address delivered before the Charity Organization Society of Baltimore, Dec. 1891. Springfield, Ill., 1891.

 

(b) State Boards of Charities:

Reports of the National Conference of Charities and Correction, all volumes.
Reports of the boards of the several states.

 

Public charities are usually co-ordinated by a State board, and the larger cities also have municipal boards of supervision or control. State boards of charities are of two general kinds, first, those having executive power, such as Rhode Island, Wisconsin and Kansas. In these cases the members usually receive a salary. Secondly, boards having powers of supervision and report only, with an unsalaried membership and a salaried secretary who is an expert. The State board should have powers of visitation and report regarding county and city institutions as well as State institutions, and it is better when they can be given powers of visitation over all charitable institutions in the commonwealth, whether such institutions receive public money or not.

Supplementary to the work of the State boards are the State charities aid associations as found in New York and New Jersey. These are supported by private contributions and are made up of volunteer workers with possibly a paid Secretary. The law gives the right of visitation over all public charitable institutions. They are intended to supplement the work of investigation as performed by public officials, and to improve in every possible way the administration of public charities.

The work of co-ordinating all charitable agencies of the cities and towns so as to avoid the overlapping of relief, the perpetration of fraud, and to secure the greatest possible efficiency of the allied agencies, is the work of what is known as a charity organization society. A charity organization society is primarily an animated directory of all the charities of the city in which it exists. It undertakes to secure the harmonious co-operation of all the persons interested in aiding the poor, to see that prompt and fitting relief is found for all cases of genuine distress of whatever kind, so to visit and investigate each applicant for relief so as to secure accurate knowledge of his needs, to register by cases all relief given and all facts learned regarding applicants for relief, to apply correctional influence to all able and unwilling to work, to applicants the poor with friends other than almsgivers, and to undertake the collection and diffusion of knowledge upon all subjects connected with the administration of charity.

 

Conclusion.

Among the hopeful tendencies in modern philanthropic work, may be mentioned the emphasis that is being put upon preventive work, especially in the matter of securing more healthful conditions for the poor, the protection of the young, and the encouragement of charities having the educational element strongly developed. Not as much attention as could be wished has been paid to the matter of enabling the distinctly unfit to become painlessly extinct

In speaking to a company of graduate students, most of whom look forward to professorial careers, it is desirable to indicate the use of courses in social pathology. The matter will receive perhaps its first systematic treatment in the work of section 7, of the International Congress of Charities, Correction and Philanthropy, which will be held in Chicago, next June. From the time that Chalmers delivered his lectures on political economy, and especially on pauperism at the University of Glasgow, and re-enforced them by the practical work of abolishing public out-door relief in his own parish, to the time of Toynbee, and to the present when fully a half-dozen American colleges or universities give systematic instruction in this branch, more or less has been done in this line. Aside from the practical outcome of such instruction and its influence on benevolent work, there is a distinct value in approaching the labor problem, for instance, from the standpoint of the incapable, or the subject of public administration from the point of departure of those institutions where abuses are most frequent.

The specialist must, however, be careful not to mistake his particular study for the whole subject. Social pathology is not social science but only a branch of it.

 

Source: Johns Hopkins University University Circulars. Vol. XII, No. 105 (May, 1893), pp. 73-77.

 

 

 

Categories
Courses Curriculum Stanford

Stanford. Early Economics Courses and Faculty, 1890s

It took about three years (1891-92 to 1893-94) for the Leland Stanford Junior University to put together full course offerings in economics and social science. In today’s posting I have included the first three years of official announcements along with c.v. information of the faculty involved. Note that the listing for the academic year 1892-93 is merely a declaration of intention, I have yet to find what was actually offered. I would presume it looks much more like what we see for the announcement for 1893-94 than the extremely meager pickings for 1891-92.

Categories
Economists Stanford

History of Behavioral Sciences at Stanford. From Report to Ford Foundation, 1954

Having most recently posted brief histories of the behavioral sciences as reported by Harvard and Chicago to a larger Ford Foundation Project that was completed 1953-4, I simply couldn’t resist going the extra mile to add the corresponding chapter for Stanford University’s contribution to the project here. I have added boldface to highlight economics-specific information for those of you historians of economics in a hurry.

________________________________

[p. 6]

Chapter 3
The Development of the Behavioral Sciences at Stanford

I. PRIOR TO THE SECOND WORLD WAR

A. Teaching. When instruction at the University began, in 1891, there were at Stanford only three departments—History, Psychology, and Economics and Social Science—embracing the field of the behavioral sciences. The last of these had three divisions: I. Political Economy, Statistics and Finance; II. Sociology; and III. Political Science. Thus all the present behavioral science departments except Journalism were present in some form or other from the very start. The Economics Department retained its conglomerate character as the haven of incipient departments until the Second World War.

In the next year, 1892, there were added two new departments — Education and Law — which for a period of years were closely related to the original three. The Department of Law was not conceived on a merely vocational basis, but listed among its “ultimate aims” the furnishing of “such instruction in the elementary principles of Anglo-American law as may properly form a part of the education of an American citizen”; the furnishing of “such instruction in commercial law as may be adapted to the needs of those who intend to become merchants, bankers, brokers, etc. or to follow other lines of business”; the providing “for students intending to enter the public service, adequate instruction in public and international law”; and the furnishing “to students of political and social science, training in special branches of law related to such subjects”.1 The Department of Education in its very first year listed at least one course, “Studies on Children”, that was [p. 7] substantially a psychology course, and over the many succeeding years such courses were increased in number and scope as the Department developed into a School.

The “charter members” of the Stanford faculty in the behavioral sciences included at least two eminent figures. Andrew Dickson White, who had been President of Cornell from 1866-1885 and Minister to Germany from 1879-1881, was the first Professor of History. His service at Stanford was interrupted from 1892-1894 while he was President Cleveland’s Minister to Russia and in 1896 while he served on the Venezuelan Commission. The first Professor of Law was Benjamin Harrison, who came to his chair at Stanford immediately on taking his leave of the Presidency of the United States in 1893. The original Professor of Psychology, Frank Angell, continued in his chair until 1921 and was the last of the “charter” faculty in the behavioral sciences to retire. Amos Griswold Warner, first Professor of Economics, had been Superintendent of Charities in Washington, D. C. The stamp of his influence was reflected in the curriculum for most of the years following until the Second World War, particularly in the emphasis on social institutions, on reform and remedial legislation, and on charities and humanitarianism.

Stanford was coeducational from the start; in fact, the first person awarded the Ph.D. degree in the behavioral sciences was a woman, Mary Roberts Smith, who received her degree in Sociology in the year 1896. The first doctorate in any field had been awarded two years before in Geology. In the very first academic year, nine behavioral science degrees were awarded, 8 in History and 1 in Economics and Social Science. There were 63 student majors in the behavioral sciences that year—1 in Psychology, 49 in History, and 13 in Economics and Social Science. At the second commencement 4 students of History and 1 in Economics and Social Science were granted master’s degrees, the first in the departments’ history. The first class to complete four years’ residence, 1894-95, graduated 31 in behavioral sciences: [p. 8] 20 A.B.’s and 1 M.A. in History, 6 A.B.’s in Economics and Social Science, and 4 A.B.’s in Law.

The curriculum of the first year, especially in History and in Economics and Social Science, reflected the major concerns and horizons of that age. The Psychology Department offered only two courses, Elementary and Advanced Psychology. The History Department offered courses in Greek, Roman, and Medieval History, the History of the Christian Church, of the English Constitution, of the French Revolution, of the Pacific Slope, and American Political History — a historical diet confined largely to the history of Western Europe and Anglo-America. The History Department listed three courses for graduate students with this explanation: “The courses offered to graduate students are especially designed to afford a training in methods of historical research, through the use of original materials. The results of such investigations are presented in the seminary, to which these courses are tributary. No attempt, however, is made sharply to separate the undergraduate from the graduate department. Graduates will often find it to their advantage to take courses designated for undergraduates; while undergraduates with adequate preparation may, by invitation of the professor, be admitted to courses primarily designed for graduates.”2 The problem of graduate courses has, it can be seen, been with us from the beginning. The fuzziness of disciplinary lines is reflected in the first list of courses in the Department of Economics and Social Science. As a matter of interest it is reproduced here.

  1. Principles of Political Economy. Elementary course.
  2. Advanced Economic Theory: Bimetallism, Railway Transportation, etc.
  3. A History of Tariff Legislation in the United States.
  4. Taxation and Finance.
  5. Statistics: History, Theory, and Technique.
  6. [p. 9] Social Science: with special reference to Public Charities and the Management of Penal Institutions.
  7. A Study of Industrial Corporations.
  8. A History of Agriculture and Prices.
  9. Commercial Relations of the United States.
  10. History of Economic Theories.
  11. Civil Service Reform in England and the United States.
  12. Sociology
  13. Land and Land Tenure. The Australian System of Registration.
  14. Method in Domestic Consumption.
  15. Communism and Socialism.
  16. Co-operation: Its History and its Influence.
  17. A History of Industry, including Trade Unions, Guilds, Factory Systems, Strikes, Arbitration, Labor Organizations, etc.
  18. Municipal Administration: the Natural Monopolies, Police, Taxation, etc.
  19. Railroad Management: A Course offered in cooperation with the Engineering Department.
  20. City and State Politics.
  21. A History of Estates and Land Tenure in California.
  22. Recent Social Reform.

 

There were many changes during the University’s first fifty years. One of the early changes occurred in 1899 in the Department of Law. In that year the departmental objective was redefined: “This Department offers such courses in Law as are usually given in professional law schools.”3 in that year a three-year program leading to the Bachelor of Laws degree was inaugurated, and the A.B. in law was soon thereafter abandoned.

The changing names of the Department originally called Economics and Social Science reflect its changes in personnel and curriculum. Sociology courses waxed and waned several times in its history. Political Science ran a more even course, but it also virtually disappeared in the years from 1902 until 1908. The following table summarizes the development of this department.

Department Title:   Years

Department of Economics and Social Science:   1891-1894
Department of Economics and Sociology:   1895-1901
Department of Economics and Social Science:   1902-1911
[p. 10]
Department of Economics:   1912-1914
Department of Economics and Political Science:   1915-1918
Department of Economics:   1919 – date
Department of Political Science:   1919 – date
Division of Sociology, Department of Economics:   1926 through 1940

While the Department of Psychology expanded very slowly in its first thirty years under Professor Angell, the psychology offering in the Department of Education4 flourished in the earlier years (1897-1903) under Professor Edwin Diller Starbuck and later (1910-1921) under Professor Lewis Madison Terman. On Professor Angell’s retirement in 1921, President Wilbur designated Professor Terman head of the Department of Psychology, after which date the department grew rapidly in personnel, in curriculum, and in enrollment. Whereas in the preceding years the psychology curriculum in the Department of Education had rivaled that of the department proper in every respect, thereafter the Psychology Department was dominant.

One of the present behavioral sciences originated at Stanford in the humanities curriculum. In 1908 the Department of English Literature and Rhetoric announced that “students preparing for journalism may substitute for the more advanced courses in literature, courses in Advanced Composition, History, Economics and Social Science.”5 In 1910 Everett Wallace Smith gave a course in News Writing in this department. In 1917 Journalism became a sub-division of the Department of English. It became the Division of Journalism in 1920, and in 1924 the Division was transferred from the Department of English to the jurisdiction of the newly organized School of Social Sciences.6

[p. 11] In the years following upon the First World War there were two major additions to the behavioral science resources of Stanford, both deriving from the interests and activities of her most celebrated alumnus, Herbert Hoover. These were, of course, the Food Research Institute established in 1921 and the Hoover War Library established in 1924. “The Food Research Institute is organized under a grant from the Carnegie Corporation of New York for the purpose of studying the production, distribution, and consumption of food,” declared the Annual Register of 1922. “The Hoover War Library is a collection of materials for research in the causes, conduct, and results of the Great War, covering also the period of reconstruction since the end of the war. These materials are of all kinds and from all the nations of the world, whether belligerent or neutral, but special efforts have been made to secure those which will be useful in research along the lines of non-military history and on social, economic, and governmental problems.”7

There was also expansion in this post-war period in the direction of a required course for freshmen not intent upon a behavioral science major. In 1923, Professor Edgar Eugene Robinson of the History Department was made director of an interdisciplinary program in Citizenship. It consisted of “a general introductory course required of all students in their first year. Designed to present the salient features in the bases and background of present-day society; to consider the place of education in modern life and the political equipment of the citizen; and to examine in detail the fundamental political, social, and economic problems of the American people.”8 Lectures were given by professors in such fields as History, Geology, Law, Philosophy, Political Science, Mechanical Engineering, Education, and Psychology. These were supplemented by smaller discussion groups. In 1935 [p. 12] Citizenship gave way to the History of Western Civilization under the jurisdiction of the Department of History, by this time headed by Professor Robinson, as the course required of all freshmen. It retained the technique of combining lectures with discussion sessions.

One may perhaps summarize the growth of the faculty over the University’s first fifty years by citing some of the better-known names among them. The Department of History included such regular members as Max Farrand, Ralph Haswell Lutz, Edward Maslin Hulme, Thomas Andrew Bailey, and George Vernadsky, and such visitors as Carl Lotus Becker, Guy Stanton Ford, Ralph Henry Gabriel, Samuel Flagg Bemis, and Carlton J. H. Hayes. The Department of Psychology had Walter R. Miles, Lewis Madison Terman, Calvin B. Stone, and Ernest Hilgard as members, and Karl Buhler, Albert Edward Michotte, Kurt Lewin, and Edwin G. Boring as visitors. The Economics Department claimed among its number Thorstein Veblen, Alvin Saunders Johnson, Harley Leist Lutz, Bernard Francis Haley, Joseph Stancliffe Davis, and Theodore Harding Boggs, and among its visitors Frank Albert Fetter, John Maurice Clark, Charles Jesse Bullock, Alvin Harvey Hansen, Jacob Viner, and Fritz Machlup. The political scientists included such permanent professors as Westel Woodbury Willoughby, Burt Estes Howard, Victor J. West, Edward Angell Cottrell, Thomas Swain Barclay, Hugh McDowall Clokie, and Charles Fairman, and such guests as James Wilford Garner, Arthur N. Holcombe, Francis William Coker, Edward Samuel Corwin, Harold Hance Sprout, Arthur W. MacMahon, Henry Russell Spencer, Peter H. Odegard, William Anderson, Clyde Eagleton, James Kerr Pollock, and Leonard Dupee White.9 Among the sociologists there were Charles N. Reynolds and Richard LaPiere. From 1907 to 1914 George H. Sabine was a member of the Department of Philosophy.

The office of Executive Head of the Department was first mentioned in the Annual Register of 1913-1914. It was early established that the Stanford [p.13] policy was to have a permanent department head rather than a rotating one, except in the Food Research Institute. The Department of Economics had two permanent heads in the period from the beginning of the First World War to the beginning of the Second World War, Murray Shipley Wildman (1915-1930) and Bernard Francis Haley (from 1931). History had four chairmen: Edward Benjamin Krehbiel (1913-1914), Ephraim Douglas Adams (1914-1922), Payson Jackson Treat (1922-1930), and Edgar Eugene Robinson (from 1930). Psychology had two chairmen: Frank Angell (1913-1922) and Lewis Madison Terman (from 1922). Political Science also had two: Victor J. West (1919-1927) and Edwin Angell Cottrell (from 1927). The Food Research Institute had three joint directors, who rotated the executive directorship among them – Alonzo Engelbert Taylor, Carl Lucas Alsberg, and Joseph Stancliffe Davis. In 1942 the present director, Merrill Kelley Bennett became executive director. There were two chairmen of the Hoover War Library: Ephraim Douglass Adams (1923-1924) and Ralph Haswell Lutz (from 1924), as there were in the School of Social Sciences—Murray Shipley Wildman (1923-1930) and Edwin Angell Cottrell (from 1930)–and in the Department of Journalism— Everett Wallace Smith (1927-1933) and Chilton Rowlette Bush (from 1933).

Until the year 1908-1909 the History Department had the greatest enrollment of student majors. In that year the Economics Department overtook History and with the exception of a few years immediately following has remained the largest department in terms of total enrollment in the behavioral sciences area. The History Department, however, continued to have the greatest enrollment of graduate students throughout this period. From the beginning, the Psychology Department had the smallest enrollment in the behavioral sciences area. When the Political Science Department was established in 1919, it immediately exceeded the Psychology Department in enrollment. From the year 1922 on—the first of Professor Terman’s chairmanship—the number of graduate students was higher [p. 14] in proportion to undergraduates in the Psychology Department than in any other behavioral science department.

The table which follows summarizes the degrees granted by the several behavioral science departments in the first fifty years of Stanford’s history, and in the case of Ph.D.’s through the academic year 1952-1953.

A.B.’s M.A.’s Ph.D.’s
 

Depart-ment

Prior 1920 1921-1940 Prior 1920 1921-1940 Prior 1920 1921-1940 1941-1953
Econo-mics 600 2998 34 82 4 41 14
History 708 917 90 223 2 55 63
Journal-ism 8 317 0 20 0 0 0
Food Research 0 0 0 0 0 0 1
Inter-national Relations 0 0 0 0 0 0 2
Political Science 7 1000 1 138 0 33 26
Psycho-logy 31 303 1 70 1 49 64
Sociology & Anthro-pology * 159 * 22 1 12 9
Social Sciences 0 1161 0 9 0 1 0

*Prior to 1928, Sociology A.B.’s and M.A.’s were included as Economics Degrees.

It is noteworthy that the number of A.B.’s in Psychology increased ten times in the inter-war years as compared with the first thirty years, and the A.B.’s in Economics six times in the same period, in spite of the fact that in the later period such new departments and programs as Political Science, Sociology, and Social Sciences siphoned off elements among the students previously included under Economics. Growth in terms of the number of advanced degrees awarded is similarly reflected in comparing the two periods—with the single exception of the number of Ph.D.’s granted in Economics between 1941 and 1953. Whereas the average had earlier been [p. 15] about two Economics Ph.D.’s a year, in the more recent period it has declined to slightly more than one per year.

In all the fields there has been a great increase in the number of courses given. In the inter-war years the departments began to classify their course offerings both as to level of complexity and as to subject matter. The establishment of the lower division and the increase in the size of the faculty were among the factors leading to this change. It is also possible to detect changes in emphasis in the course offerings of the departments over the years, reflecting both the development of the subject matter of the several fields and the shifting interests of individual faculty members.

In the field of psychology, for example, in the first thirty years the courses primarily bore such all-embracing titles as Elementary, Advanced, Experimental, Applied, Systematic, Comparative, and Social Psychology and Psychological Literature. Child psychology and testing were offered in the School of Education. After the First World War, statistics, physiology, clinical psychology, child psychology, and testing, personality measurement, and vocational guidance were emphasized in the curriculum.

Throughout the first fifty years of Stanford’s history the economics curriculum was dominated by courses on economic institutions as opposed to economic theory. Courses on railroads, corporation finance, money and banking, economic history, labor legislation, accounting, insurance, tax procedure and the like comprised the major part of the offering. Secretarial training was also included in the economics curriculum. It is apparent that the primary objective of this department was to afford apprenticeship to a business career. In the later years of this period, however, there was an increase in the offering of theoretical [p. 16] courses such as capital and income, production economics, mathematical economics, value and distribution, and the history of economic thought.

Perhaps the most striking changes in emphasis over the years occurred in the history curriculum. The early emphasis on Rome, the Middle Ages, the Italian Renaissance, and British constitutional history was supplemented in the first decade of the century by courses in International Law, Diplomatic History of the United States, and the Westward Movement in the United States, and such courses in the history of the Far East as the History of Australasia, the Philippines, and Tropical Colonization in the Far East. In 1911 there were added a course on Spain and Spanish America and one on international conciliation, and in 1913 the first courses in Japanese history. After the war there appeared courses in the Slavic nationalities, Russia, the Baltic States, the World War, and the Paris Peace Conference. As the number of courses on modern Europe, the history of the United States, Latin America and the Far East increased, Greek and Roman history were taken over by the Classics Department; international law and conciliation were taken over by the Department of Political Science and the School of Law; and the Middle Ages and the History of the Christian Church assumed-a lesser role.

When political science was still a part of the Economics Department, such courses as the theory of the state, methods of legislating, administration of states, cities, and towns, practical politics, modern federal government, and political theory were offered. The History Department, as has been noted, offered courses in the international field. When the Department of Political Science was organized after the war, the course offering fell into the following general areas: elementary courses in American government and state and local government, comparative government, political theory, political parties, administration, relation of [p. 17] government and industry, and international relations. As early as 1924 there was a course in quantitative measurements in public administration, and in the following year there was a course in political statistics. In 1928 a course in public law was offered for the first time. With the exception of the statistical courses, these general areas have continued to be the principal ones in the political science curriculum.

Throughout the first fifty years of the University’s history, the sociology curriculum was combined with Economics. There is, however, evidence of the development of the subject matter during this period. In the nineties there were courses in static and dynamic sociology (using as texts Herbert Spencer and Lester F. Ward), in social pathology, charities and corrections, penology, and even statistics and sociology. Static and dynamic sociology disappeared, but charities, causes of poverty, and courses of that type persisted into the war years. After the war the character of the courses changed. Problems of Poverty, of Child Welfare, Crime as a Social Problem, and Care of Dependents were courses given in the early twenties. Later, courses in population, rural society, social organization, and sociological theory were added to the curriculum, and from this developed an emphasis that persisted until the Second World War. In 1937 a course in Cultural Anthropology was included in the sociology offering, marking the beginning of anthropological instruction.

We have already noted the beginnings of Journalism in the English Department, with one course in Newswriting in 1910 supplemented in 1912 by one in Current Newspapers. By 1916 there were eight courses covering newswriting, analysis, reporting, editing, management and advertising. In 1920, as we have seen, Journalism was recognized as a Division of English and, in 1925, of the School of Social Sciences. From this time the curriculum continued to grow—with courses in geographical, [p. 18] sociological and legal aspects of journalism, techniques of propaganda and investigative methods in journalism.

From its inception the Food Research Institute offered a course in Food Research Problems. In 1934 a course for upper division students in The World’s Food was added, and in 1940 there was a considerable increase in the number of courses offered, including Consumption Economics, Commodity Prices, American Agricultural Policy, Foreign Agricultural Policy, and Agriculture and the Business Cycle.

In 1931 the Hoover Library offered a course in Problems of Research. By 1937 this had been expanded to include directed research in such special fields as the World War and Reconstruction, Austria-Hungary, the Bolshevik Party and the Third International, Soviet Policies and the Civil War, Housing in the United States, History of International Relations since 1914, European Totalitarianism, and the German Revolution, 1918-1919.

 

B. Research Institutes and Grants. The establishment of the Hoover War Library just after the First World War inaugurated the first major research development in the behavioral sciences at Stanford. The Annual Report of the President for 1920 notes that:

The Hoover War Library has grown steadily during the year through gifts and purchases. Professor E. D. Adams and Professor Ralph Lutz have been actively engaged in assembling and classifying this notable collection. Several students have already entered the University in order to do research work with the help of this collection and it is inevitable that there will be a considerable increase in the number of such students from year to year.10

In the following year the plans for establishing the Food Research Institute were announced.

[p. 19] During the year the final plans for the organization of the Food Research Institute of Stanford University have been consummated. The general terms of this gift are as follows: A contract was drawn up between Stanford and the Carnegie Corporation of New York in which the University agreed to set up the research organization ‘to study the problems of the production, distribution and consumption of foodstuffs’, to appoint 3 scientists as Directors who shall determine the research pursuits and be Professors with teaching a secondary aspect of their duties, appoint a 7 man Advisory Committee, furnish housing etc. free, and disburse the money.11

The Corporation agreed to supply $54,000 from July 1, 1921, to June 30, 1922; $66,000 from July 1, 1922, to June 30, 1923; and $73,000 annually for the next eight years. Two years before the expiration of the contract a conference would be held to determine the Institute’s future status.

The Annual Report12 went on to state that

Dr. Alonzo E.Taylor, Dr. Carl L. Alsberg, and Dr. Joseph S. Davis have been appointed as Directors of the Institute. The Advisory Committee is made up as follows: Mr. Herbert Hoover, Mr. A. R. Howard, of the American Farm Bureau; Dr. John C. Merriam, President of the Carnegie Institution of Washington; Mr. George C. Roeding, Mr. Julius Barnes, President William M. Jardine, of the Kansas State Agricultural College; President of the Carnegie Corporation, President of Stanford University. One of the original buildings in the Inner Quadrangle, formerly occupied by the Department of German, has been set aside for the use of the Directors. The Hoover War Library, which formed the main center of attraction for the Food Research Institute, is being assembled on one floor of the stacks of the new Library with an adjacent special reading room for the use of the members of the Food Research Institute and faculty and students of the Departments of History and Economics. The Food Research Institute constitutes one of the most notable opportunities for research of a wide scope that has come to any university in America within recent years.

In 1924, the specific plans for the Hoover War Library were announced.13

[p. 20] The Hoover War Library is a separate gift and has special endowment funds for the maintenance of certain of its features. It is under the general administration of the University Librarian.

In order to make it possible to:

a. secure acquisitions in the many different fields touched upon by the Library,
b. care for the interests of graduate students and others using the facilities of the Library, and
c. determine upon the lines of development,

Directors of the Hoover War Library are to be appointed with a relationship to the Library similar to that of a departmental faculty …

Many additions have been made to the collection during the course of the year. Mr. Hoover has increased his personal gifts until they now total about $90,000 in cash expended. The Directors of the library are making every reasonable effort to make it one of the great war collections of the world.

When the time came for renegotiation of the original contract of the Food Research Institute, the Carnegie Corporation acted by granting $750,000 in 1931 to provide a permanent endowment. In the brochure of the Institute describing its activities and publications14 its financial history is described as follows:

The [Carnegie] Corporation guaranteed funds for a period of ten years, while Stanford University undertook to provide quarters and facilities for the Institute and accorded it departmental status. Financial support is at present derived jointly from endowment granted by Carnegie Corporation to Stanford University in continuing support of the Institute, from University appropriations, and from short-term grants provided by foundations and other private organizations.

In 1939, the plans for building the Hoover Library building were announced

For some years we have been accumulating funds for the construction of the Hoover Library Building. With the original funds, the gift of $50,000 from Mr. John D. Rockefeller, Jr., and the $300,000 from the Belgian- American Educational Foundation, Inc.,in hand, the university architects prepared plans for a monumental structure… It is anticipated that the building will be completed in 1940.15

[p. 21] With the completion of this building the two principal research facilities of Stanford’s first fifty years, and, indeed, in the lifetime of the University were solidly established.

The major grants for behavioral science research in the years prior to the Second World War, aside from those for the Hoover Library and the Food Research Institute, were the Laura Spellman Fund of the Rockefeller Foundation, which amounted to $454,838.49; funds to Professor Terman for his studies of intellectually gifted children—$60,673.29 from the Commonwealth Fund and $26,000 from the Carnegie Corporation; and funds for sex research granted to Professors Stone, Miles, and Terman by the Academy of Sciences, amounting to $73,298.73.

The principal publication output of the Hoover Library comprised a series of eighteen books of collected documents, memoirs, and special studies, and those of the Food Research Institute included seventeen volumes of Wheat Studies, three monographs in the Grain Economics Series, seven Fats and Oils Studies, and nine Miscellaneous Publications. The publications resulting from the Laura Spellman Fund are tabulated in Appendix I to Chapter 14.

[p. 22]

II. SINCE THE SECOND WORLD WAR

Since the Second World War the following major ohanges in the behavioral science field have occurred at Stanford:

 

A. New Departments and Agencies Established. The Department of Sociology and Anthropology was set up on an independent basis in 1948. Previously sociology had been under the Department of Economics. Anthropology teaching had begun with the arrival at Stanford in 1945 of Felix M. Keesing, who was to be appointed three years later as head of the new joint department. Other major additions to the staff in this area included Paul Wallin (appointed in 1942) in sociology and Bernard J. Siegel (appointed in 1947) and Bert A. Gerow (appointed in 1948) in anthropology.

The Department of Statistics was established in 1949 under the chairmanship of Albert H. Bowker. It quickly became a major center for research, which two years later was institutionalized as the Laboratory of Applied Mathematics and Statistics. Important staff appointments included Meyer Abraham Girshick (1948), Herman Chernoff (1951), and Charles E. Stein (1953).

In 1943 two professors of geography were brought to Stanford on a permanent basis. Seven years later, geography was established as a separate department under the chairmanship of C. Langdon White.

In 1951 the Committee for Research in the Social Sciences (CRISS) was set up as an inter-departmental body for the initiation, screening, and coordination of social science research. In the following year Alfred de Grazia, of the Political Science Department, was appointed its first executive officer, (see Chapter 8,III).

 

B. Remade Departments. In the years following 1945, first under the chairmanship of Bernard P. Haley and later under that of Edward S. Shaw, [p. 23] the Economics Department was restaffed with a series of outstanding younger scholars. The result has been a “planned” and well-integrated staff. The present national reputation of the department, particularly in the field of economic theory, largely dates from this period. The major additions to the staff, with their dates of appointment, are as follows: Tiber Scitovsky (1946), Lorie Tarshis (1946), Melvin W. Reder (1947), Moses Abramovitz (1948), Paul A. Baran (1949), Kenneth J. Arrow (1949).

A similar expansion tool: place in the Department of Psychology following the appointment of Ernest R. Hilgard as executive head in 1945. Here the chief additions to the staff now at associate or full professor rank included: Lois Meek Stolz (1945), Donald W. Taylor (1.945), Clarence L. Winder (1948), and Douglas H. Lawrence (1949). Last year Robert R. Sears was called to Stanford from a Harvard professorship to succeed Professor Hilgard as head of the department following the latter’s appointment as Dean of the Graduate Division.

The expansion of the Psychology Department was in three directions: (1) the Clinical Psychology Ph.D. program supported by the Veterans Administration and the Public Health Service; (2) the nursery school and child development laboratory; (3) the Office of Project Research, as a “holding company” and initiator of research sponsored by the government and the foundations (see Chapter 8,V).

 

C. Changes in Other Behavioral Science Areas. Both History and Political Science have recently acquired new chairmen. In 1952 Thomas A. Bailey was appointed executive head of the former department and James T. Watkins IV of the latter. Today, of the behavioral science departments, only Journalism is under its pre-war head.

Of recent years the Department of History has pursued a vigorous policy of recruiting its staff from highly diversified academic and [p.24] geographical backgrounds. Areas in which substantial new staff recruiting has taken place include Far Eastern History—Claude A. Buss (1946), Arthur F. Wright (1947), and Thomas C. Smith (1948)—and United States history— John C. Miller (1949), Frank Freidel (1953), and Don E. Fehrenbacher (1953).

In Political Science, eight out of ten staff members of the rank of assistant professor and above are post-war appointees. Concurrently the Department has supplemented its earlier emphasis on international relations with added attention to public administration and political behavior.

The immediate post-war years saw the Hoover Institute and Library expanding its interests in new areas to which the Second World War had given increased importance. Whereas the pre-war collections had been heavily concentrated on Central and Eastern Europe, the Far East and, to a lesser extent, the Middle East now became areas of major interest. In 1941, the Hoover Library holdings on Asia and the Middle East consisted only of materials relating to mandates or colonies of European powers. Virtually none of this material was in the vernacular languages of these areas.

Since 1945, the Hoover Library has been making a systematic effort to collect and preserve the sources for the political, social, and economic history of Asia and the Middle East during the twentieth century, together with relevant background materials. The political and social movements of the twentieth century—nationalism, communism, religious movements with political significance, etc.—have formed the basis for the collections. The Chinese collection now numbers some 34,000 volumes; the Japanese collection, some 20,000 volumes; the Middle East collections, principally in Turkish and Arabic, some 8,000 volumes; the South Asian, and Southeast Asian collections are much smaller. These new interests have been reflected in the appointment of highly-trained scholars to serve as curators for the new collections—Christina P. Harris (Middle [p. 25] East), Mary C. Wright (China, Southeast Asia, and South Asia), and Nobutaka Ike (Japan).

Experiments in the application of newer techniques of behavioral science have constituted much of the post-war research in the Hoover Institute. The leading project, Revolution and the Development of International Relations (RADIR), was supported by the Carnegie Corporation.

 

D. Related Professional Schools. A further sign of the post-war tendency toward growth and change can be seen in the appointment of new deans for the School of law (Carl B. Spaeth, 1946), the School of Medicine (Windsor C. Cutting, 1953), and the School of Education (I. James Quillen, 1953).

 

E. Conclusion: Prospects for Continued Development. It is the conviction of the committee responsible for the present survey that the above evidences of development and branching into new fields of teaching and research represent the dominant tendency in Stanford today. The growth potential of the University is apparent in nearly all areas of behavioral science interest. The purpose of the present study is to look ahead on the basis of the foundations now in existence—bearing constantly in mind that for a comparatively small university the most advisable course is considerable specialization within departments rather than an effort to cover all fields equally.

 

[NOTES]

  1. Annual Register, 1892-93, p. 72.
  2. Annual Register, 1891-92.
  3. Annual Register, 1899-1900, p. 98.
  4. Became School of Education in 1917.
  5. Annual Register, 1908-09, p. 89.
  6. Established in 1924.
  7. Annual Register, 1924-25, p.240
  8. Annual Register, 1923-24.
  9. These twelve men are all former presidents of the American Political Science Association, as was W. W. Willoughby, mentioned earlier.
  10. Annual Report of the President, 1920, p. 28.
  11. Annual Report of the President, 1921, p.7.
  12. Ibid., p. 9.
  13. Annual Report of the President, 1924, p.3.
  14. Stanford University Press, 1948, p. 2.
  15. Annual Report of the President, 1939, p. 14.

 

Source: The Stanford Survey of the Behavioral Sciences. Report of the Executive Committee and Staff, July 1954.

Image Source: Library of Congress. Encina Hall, Leland Stanford Junior University (1898).