Categories
Chicago Economists

Chicago. Historical Enrollment Trends, Economics Faculty by Age and Educational Background. 1944-45.

__________________________

On April 10, 1945, the chairman of the University of Chicago’s economics department, Professor Simeon E. Leland, submitted a 77 page (!) memorandum to President Robert M. Hutchins entitled “Postwar Plans of the Department of Economics–A Wide Variety of Observations and Suggestions All Intended To Be Helpful in Improving the State of the University”.

In his cover letter Leland wrote “…in the preparation of the memorandum, I learned much that was new about the past history of the Department. Some of this, incorporated in the memorandum, looks like filler stuck in, but I thought it ought to be included for historical reasons and to furnish some background for a few of the suggestions.” 

In a recent post I provided a list of visiting professors who taught economics at the University of Chicago up through 1944 (excluding those visitors who were to receive permanent appointments). For this post I have selected a few supporting tables from the memo providing data on the age distribution and educational backgrounds of the economics faculty along with time series on enrollments and registrations.  A later post provides talent-scouting lists for possible permanent, visiting and joint appointments.

______________________________

In making his plea for administration support for new additional hires, Chairman Leland began by noting that in 1944 Professor Chester Wright “was transferred to the emeritus status”. Negotiations with Professor H. A. Innis of the University of Toronto to succeed Wright were taking place but Leland did not appear to be overly confident, having written “If he [Innis] does not [accept a Chicago offer], due to the scarcity of men in Economic History, the post occupied by Professor Wright will be very difficult to fill.”

Looking ahead over the six years before the retirements of Knight and Kyrk were scheduled, Leland hoped to get support to begin the process of hiring younger faculty (only three of the staff were under 40 years of age as of the end of 1944), so that  (1) gaps in the existing program would not occur and (2) promising new fields could be covered.

Furthermore Leland argued “…the Department does not seem to have enough young men as instructors and assistant professors. As a result, the chores of running a department, including sharing in administration and advising students, fall heavily on the older, higher-salaried men on the staff.”

 

Ages of Staff Members
(as of December 31, 1944)

Name

Rank Age

Came to University of Chicago

Bloch, Henry Simon

Instructor

29

1939

Douglas, Paul Howard

Professor*

52

1920

Harbison, Frederick Harris

Assistant Professor

33

1940

Knight, Frank Hyneman

Professor

59

1917-19; 1927

Kyrk, Hazel

Professor; also Home Economics

59

1925

Lange, Oscar

Professor

40

1938

Leland, Simeon Elbridge

Professor; also Political Science

47

1928

Lewis, Harold Gregg

Instructor*

30

1939

Marschak, Jacob

Professor

46

1943

Mints, Lloyd Wynn

Associate Professor

56

1919

Nef, John Ulric

Professor; also History

45

1929

Schultz, Theodore William

Professor

42

1943

Simons, Henry Calvert

Associate Professor

45

1927

Viner, Jacob

Professor

52

1916

This list does not include part-time instructors (3), research associates (3), lecturers, or members of the college staff (3).

*On leave for military service

______________________________

To reassure the President that the department was not in danger of “inbreeding” the following table was included in the memo. Leland’s first comment was that the educational backgrounds of the economics faculty included some 18 U.S. and 13 foreign institutions. While noting a significant concentration of Harvard and/or Chicago training of the economics faculty, only five of the fourteen actually had advanced training at Chicago and of those just two held Ph.D.’s from Chicago as of 1945 (Kyrk and Leland).

 

Educational Institutions Attended by Members of the Department of Economics

 

Name and Rank Degrees or Advanced Training Other Work
A.B. A.M. Ph.D.
H. S. Bloch
(Instructor)
Nancy* Nancy Strasbourg*
Paris’
Nancy (Dr. en Droit)
Acad. Int’l. Law
The Hague
P. H. Douglas
(Professor)
Bowdoin Columbia Columbia Harvard
F. H. Harbison
(Asst. Prof.)
Princeton Princeton Princeton
F. H. Knight
(Professor)
Tennesee(B.S.)
Milligan (Ph.B.)
Tennessee Cornell University American University, Harriman, Tennessee
H. Kyrk
(Professor)
Ohio Wesleyan*
Chicago (Ph.B.)
Chicago
O. Lange
(Professor)
Poznan* Cracow (LL.M.) Cracow (LL.D.) London
S. E. Leland
(Professor)
De Pauw Kentucky Chicago Harvard Law School
H. G. Lewis
(Instructor)
Chicago Chicago* Chicago*
J. Marschak
(Professor)
Oxford Heidelberg Technolog. Institut, Kiev
Berlin
L. W. Mints
(Assoc. Prof.)
Colorado Colorado Chicago*
J. U. Nef
(Professor)
Harvard (B.S.) Paris*
London*
Montpellier*
Brookings
T. W. Schultz
(Professor)
South Dakota State Wisconsin Wisconsin
H. C. Simons
(Assoc. Prof.)
Michigan Michigan* Iowa*
Chicago*
Columbia*
Berlin*
J. Viner
(Professor)
McGill Harvard Harvard

*Work taken at this level; no degree conferred.

______________________________

 

Two time series were included in Leland’s memo to provide evidence for an upward trend in the demand for economics courses: enrollments and course registrations.

It is difficult to forecast the postwar enrollment in Economics. Since 1928 there has been a steady upward trend in the number of students majoring in the Department, as is shown in the following table. Even the depression only slightly retarded the growth of our student body. Part of the increase was due to the emphasis given our subject matter by the events of the Thirties. Another factor responsible for the gain in students was the strength of the faculty—its reputation in the United States and abroad.

 

Total Number of Different Graduate Students Majoring in the Department of Economics Who Have Been in Residence a Part or All of the Years Indicated Below

 

Years

Number of Students
1943-44

57

1942-43

77

1941-42

133
1940-41

162

1939-40

156
1938-39

144

1937-38

133
1936-37

113

1935-36

111
1934-35

98

1933-34

114
1932-33

111

1931-32

125
1930-31

113

1929-30

118
1928-29

101

 

The trend of registrations in the Department for “200- and 300-level courses” (roughly corresponding to former undergraduate and graduate registrations) is shown in the following table. Data are shown only since 1931-32 inasmuch as statistics prior to that date included introductory courses for College freshmen and sophomores. This inflates all statistics prior to 1931 and destroys their validity for comparative purposes. The peak of enrollment in Economics came in 1938-39. It is believed that comparable enrollments will reappear soon after the cessation of hostilities.

 

Registration in Courses Offered by the Department of Economics

Years

Quarters

Summer Autumn Winter

Spring

First Term

Second Term

1944-45

74
1943-44 62 202 138

185

1942-43

252 237 249 207 153
1941-42 214 206 329 396

406

1940-41

264 225 455 529 516
1939-40 262 224 431 589

583

1938-39

277 244 560 516 689
1937-38 249 214 477 447

592

1936-37

243 206 407 438 457
1935-36 245 218 367 503

534

1934-35

239 206 325 460 398
1933-34 183 174 361 371

396

1932-33

278 244 337 427 244
1931-32 233 224 443 411

339

 

Source: University of Chicago Library, Department of Special Collections. Office of the President. Hutchins Administration Records. Box 73, Folder “Economics Dept., “Post-War Plans” Simeon E. Leland, 1945″.

 

Categories
Chicago Economists

Chicago. Memorandum on a Fiscal Stimulus, 1932

Today’s post is a jewel of fiscal policy thought in a memorandum from the University of Chicago written in 1932 at the trough of the Great Depression in the United States. Looking at the signers of the memorandum that argues for aggressive fiscal stimulus (economists covering the ideological spectrum from Aaron Director through Paul Douglas), one is reminded of Ben Bernanke’s bon mot from the last big financial crisis: “There are no atheists in foxholes or ideologues in a financial crisis”.

Note: Bernanke’s crack appears to be a minor variation on Jeffrey Frankel’s twist.

Backstory

After WWI, veterans lobbied for “adjusted compensation” to partially make up the difference between their combat pay and the significantly higher wages that had been paid to workers at home during the War. Veterans preferred the term “adjusted compensation” to the term “bonus” (the latter term being construed as implying something that goes beyond full and fair compensation). In 1924 veterans were finally granted “adjusted universal compensation” in the form of certificates that credited $1.25 for each day served abroad plus $1.00 for those days served in the U.S. These certificates were essentially 20-year insurance policies equal to 125% of the service credit to be redeemed in full on the veteran’s birthday in 1945. (Exceptions for immediate cash payments were granted for amounts less than $50 and in order to settle estates of deceased veterans for payments of less than $500). More details can be found at this link

In 1932 the question arose whether an early payout of these certificates would be a prudent and effective fiscal stimulus and Congressman Samuel Barrett Pettengill (Democrat) of Indiana sent the questionnaire that follows to academic economists across the country to solicit their advice in the matter.

A month later protesting “Bonus Marchers” (ca 20,000 veterans) set up camps in Washington, D.C. that they were evicted from by regular troops of the U.S. Army let by General Douglas MacArthur. It wasn’t until 1936 that the WWI veterans were paid their adjusted compensation.

Responses to Congressman Pettengill’s inquiry were published in the Hearings of the House Committee on Ways and Means for:

Edwin Walter Kemmerer,  Princeton University
Frank Whitson Fetter, Assistant Professor of Economics, Princeton University
Thomas Nixon Carver, Professor of Economics, Harvard University
S. J. Coon, Dean of the College of Business Administration, University of Washington
Harry E. Miller, Professor of Economics, Brown University
C. W. Hasek, Head of the Department of Economics and Sociology, Pennsylvania State College
Walter W. McLaren, Department of Economics, Williams College
Harry L. Severson, Assistant Professor, Department of Economics and Sociology, Indiana University
Hiram L. Jome, Professor of Economics, DePauw University
Warren B. Catlin, Department of Economics and Sociology, Boudoin College
E. E. Agger, Professor of Economics and head of the Department of Economics, Rutgers University
Edwin R. A. Seligman, Columbia University
H. A. Millis et al., Department of Political Economy, University of Chicago
Jacob H. Hollander, Johns Hopkins University
William C. Schleter, University of Pennsylvania
Albert Bushnell Hart, Harvard University (historian)

 Today’s post begins with the cover statement of the memorandum found with the copy in the Papers of the President of the University of Chicago, Robert Maynard Hutchins, Box 72.  It is followed by Congressman Pettengill’s list of questions, as well as the Chicago memorandum submitted by H. A. Millis and eleven of his University of Chicago colleagues.

A cursory sweep of the web discovered that this Chicago memorandum has been reprinted as Appendix B in J. Ronnie Davis’s 1967 Virginia Ph.D. dissertation, “Pre-Keynesian economic policy proposals in the United States during the Great Depression.” A scanned version of the Congressional Hearings in which the Chicago memorandum was published can be found at Hathitrust.org. I have compared the published version from the House Ways and Means Committee Hearings with the typed copy filed with the papers of President Hutchins at the University of Chicago Archives. Other than minor differences in spelling (e.g. the capitalized form “Federal” is used in the published version), the memorandum was published by the House Ways and Means Committee exactly as received.

__________________________________

 

A MEMORANDUM PRESENTED TO A MEMBER OF THE HOUSE COMMITTEE ON MILITARY AFFAIRS, APRIL 26, 1932.

Two members of the staff of the Department of economics, at the University of Chicago, received letters from a member of the House Committee on Military Affairs, requesting answers to certain questions. Inasmuch as the views of a large number of economists were desired, the letter was circulated among and read by twelve men of the Chicago faculty; and steps were taken to prepare a memorandum covering the points raised….The memorandum, with the names of the twelve professors participating in its formulation, is reproduced in its entirety. Because of the character of the issues raised, it seemed better to prepare the memorandum in the form it has taken than to answer the specific questions, the one after the other.

Source: University of Chicago Archives. Hutchins Box 72. Folder 6 “Economics Department, 1932-1933”.

__________________________________

 

STATEMENT OF HON. SAMUEL B. PETTENGILL, A REPRESENTATIVE IN CONGRESS FROM THE STATE OF INDIANA

Mr. Pettengill. Mr. Chairman, I am not on the calendar this morning and therefore in justice to those who are here I have asked for only one minute.

Some time ago, before I knew when the Ways and Means Committee was to have hearings on this matter, on my own initiative I sent a questionnaire to 50 of the leading economists of the country on the Patman and the Thomas bills; also with reference to the benefit of “reflation” and the danger of inflation.

I have a very interesting file here, including letters from Mr. Kemmerer and Mr. King who have appeared before the committee.

In order to shorten the record as much as possible, I have briefed the replies somewhat. The entire letters, of course, are available.

[…]

Mr. Pettengill. Mr. Chairman, as I have stated, I endeavored to get the benefit of the best and most disinterested economic thought of the country with reference to the advisability of either borrowing money or printing money with which to liquidate the adjusted service certificates. In the main, I sent my letters to the economics department of our leading colleges and universities. In order to make their replies more intelligible to you, as many of them answered numbered questions in my letter, I attach, first, my original letter.

(The letter referred to is as follows:)

Dear Sir: I am writing you and other leading economists in the country with reference to the problem confronting Congress with regard to the proposed payment of the soldiers’ bonus. I trust that I will be able to secure a symposium of opinion by authorities such as yourself which will be of real value to Congress.

As you know, at the end of this fiscal year we will have an accumulated deficit of some $3,000,000,000. It is, I think, the largest peace-time deficit of any country in the world. It is rapidly getting larger. We are going into the red now $7,000,000 a day. United States obligations have recently sold below 85.

On the other hand, commodity, wage, land, and security prices are slowly drifting to levels so disastrous that they threaten the most widespread repudiation of debts and tax defaults, which may wipe out, along with the debtors, classes holding the obligations of individuals, corporations, States, and municipalities now totaling some one hundred fifty to two hundred billion dollars, which is about one-half the Nation’s wealth. For example, the conservative Washington Post, April 11, said:

“The dollar increases in value every day … unless this vicious movement is checked it will result in panic. The extension of credit will not be sufficient. Heroic emergency measures that will arrest the fall of prices seem to be in order. … This economic malady has reached a point where it can not be expected to cure itself without leaving horrible scars. … Some powerful agency must be thrown into the breach to restore the value of goods and services against this exaggerated value of money. … Emergencies of this kind call for drastic action. … It is time for the leaders in Government and financial circles to focus their minds upon realignment of values. The people would not countenance the manufacture of fiat money to make prices rise, But some method of currency expansion on a sound gold basis may be necessary.”

            The question is the advisability of paying the so-called soldiers’ bonus as an antideflationary, inflationary, “reflationary” or stabilizing measure. The name, of course, is not important.

A number of different bills have been proposed. H. R. 1, introduced by Mr. Patman, of Texas, calls for borrowing the $2,400,000,000 necessary to make payment.

  1. Do you think we can, or should, borrow this?

Sentiment here, however, is crystallizing around (for or against) Mr. Patman’s substitute, H. R. 7726; I inclose copy.
This bill simply proposes to print money to pay the debt. Is this sound, advisable, or defensible, in view of the existing emergency? And in the light of present gold reserves?

 It has been suggested that it could be strengthened as follows:
Call in the outstanding adjusted-service certificates now redeemable in 1945. Collateralize them together with 40 per cent gold which is said to be now available over and above the amount necessary for circulation now outstanding. Issue currency against this hypothecation and pay the veterans off. Then set up a sinking fund to retire the currency (together with the certificates) in whole or in part in 1945, or gradually before that time.

With reference to “excess reserves” see Federal Reserve Bulletin, March, 1932, page 143: “On the basis of these excess reserves, the Federal reserve banks could issue $3,500,000,000 of credit if the demand were for currency and $4,000,000,000 if it were for deposits at the reserve banks.”

  1. What credit do you give this statement as a basis for the proposed bonus payment?

There are, of course, all sorts of social and political features around this problem, but I direct your attention to its economic and fiscal aspects. It is a problem of the most tremendous consequences and Members here who are patriotically trying to do their best to cut the present vicious circle for the good of the entire country (not the veterans alone) need, and will appreciate, the advice of men like yourself, whose life study makes your judgment so valuable.

  1. Is the suggested alternative sound?
  1. Does it in reality add any element of safety to H. R. 7726, the outright issue of nonretirable currency?
  1. Can it be improved? If so, how?
  1. It is said the Europe holds $2,000,000,000 of deposits in this country. With their experience with “printing-press” money, would they become frightened for the solvency of the dollar, and cause disastrous liquidation and withdrawals here in America? Could such liquidation of foreign-held obligations be stopped unless we “went off gold,” or had available the precautionary device of authorizing the Treasury to change the amount of gold in our dollar along the lines advocated by Irving Fisher? If foreign exchange began to go against us, would it help Europe pay us her public and private debts, as an offset against our investment and deposit obligations held by Europeans?
  1. Would the introduction of $2,400,000,000 new currency into the pockets of the people necessarily result in the rise of commodity and other levels thus causing merchants to place orders for the products of farm and factory, thus starting production and accelerating employment?
  1. The Glass-Steagall bill, as you know, for the period of one year, authorized placing 60 per cent Government bonds plus 40 per cent gold behind Federal reserve money. This, of course, as I understand it, is 60 per cent “greenbackism,” placing one promise to pay (Government bond) behind another promise to pay (currency) to the extent of 60 per cent. Assuming that the adjusted-service certificates are also promises to pay, can the Glass-Steagall bill and the suggested method of handling the payment of the bonus be distinguished, from the standpoint of soundness?

The Glass-Steagall bill, as it appears to me, does not seem to have stopped the deflationary trend, for the reason that its potential currency expansion is based upon borrowing, and banks and individuals are not borrowing (or lending).
Recently I have heard Willford I. King, professor of economics, New York University, testify before the House Banking and Currency Committee. Although not directing his particular attention to the “bonus” he was quite clear that the currency must be expanded at the present time in order to start commodity prices upward and permit debts and taxes to be paid, as well as to start buying, and employment. However, he was equally clear that for such currency something of equal value should be taken in by the Government, e. g., Government bonds, thus temporarily substituting noncirculating certificates of indebtedness (bonds) for circulating certificates (currency). Then, he said, when commodity prices reach the desired level, e. g., 1926 commodity index, the process would be reversed, the bonds resold, and the currency retired. It was his opinion that such a device is necessary in order to stop the elevator at the right floor—i. e., prevent inflation beyond a certain point.
Neither the Patman nor the suggested alternative plan seems to me to contain this safeguard. That is, the adjusted-compensation certificates when once taken in would not be available for reissue.

            I need not state that every member here is anxious to solve the problem, not from the standpoint of helping the needy veteran and his family at the expense of the rest of the community, but only from the standpoint of benefiting the entire Nation, on the theory that a distribution to the veteran would, of course, be passed on at once in the payment of taxes, interest, land contracts, doctors’ and merchants’ bills, etc., and with the expectation that this would stop and reverse the trend of values. If the plan or any other conceivable plan at this time would bring only disaster to the Nation and thus to the veteran and his family we have no alternative except to wait until the present economic storm blows over.

Your thoughtful consideration of this matter is most earnestly requested. Your prompt reply will be a distinct public service.

I desire, of course, to use the substance of your reply, but will not quote you, by name, without your permission. Please let me know if you do give this permission.

Sincerely yours,

Samuel B. Pettengill, Member of Congress.

 

Source:  U. S. Congress (Seventy-Second Congress, First Session). Payment of Adjusted-Compensation Certificates in Hearings before the Committee on Ways and Means, House of Representatives (April 11 to 29, and May 2 and 3, 1932),pp. 508, 511-513

______________________________

 

The University of Chicago,
Department of Economics,
April 26, 1932.

Hon. Samuel. B. Pettengill,
            House Office Building, Washington, D. C.

My Dear Mr. Pettengill: The inclosed memorandum has been prepared in an attempt to answer the questions put in your letter of April 13. It has been developed in a committee of two, in conference, and in round table. It is approved by all of the University of Chicago economists who participated in the discussion and formulation; their names appear at the end of the memorandum.

It has seemed better to answer your questions in a memorandum divided into five sections rather than to answer them specifically, the one after the other. I think all of your questions, save that relating to Professor King’s testimony, are answered. No direct reference is made to King’s position because it has seemed better to take a positive stand rather than to criticize.

You ask permission to use the replies to your questions. This is, of course, granted, but our preference would be to have the whole rather than a part of the memorandum given publicity.

Trusting that the memorandum will be of some assistance to you, I am

Very truly yours,

H. A. Millis.

 

(The memorandum referred to follows:)

I.

Severe depression and deflation can be checked, and recovery initiated, either by virtue of automatic adjustments, or by deliberate governmental action. The automatic process involves tremendous losses, in wastage of productive capacity, and in acute suffering. It requires drastic reduction of wage rates, rents, and other “sticky” prices, notably those in industries where readjustments are impeded by monopoly and exceeding politeness of competition. It must also involve widespread insolvency and financial reorganization, with consequent reduction of fixed charges, in order that firms may be placed in position to obtain necessary working capital when and where expansion of output becomes profitable. Given drastic deflation of costs and elimination of fixed charges, business will discover opportunities for profitably increasing employment, firms will become anxious to borrow, and banks will be more willing to lend.

As long as wage cutting is evaded by reducing employment, and as long as monopolies, including public utilities, resist pressure for lower prices, deflation may continue indefinitely. The more intractable the “sticky” prices, the further credit contraction will go, and the more drastic must be the ultimate readjustment. We have developed an economy in which the volume and velocity of credit is exceedingly flexible and sensitive, while wages and pegged prices are highly resistant to downward pressure. This is at once the explanation of our plight and the ground on which governmental action may be justified. Recovery can be brought about, either by reduction of costs to a level consistent with existing commodity prices, or by injecting enough new purchasing power so that much larger production will be profitable at existing costs. The first method is conveniently automatic but dreadfully slow; and it admits hardly at all of being facilitated by political measures. The second method, while readily amenable to abuse, only requires a courageous fiscal policy on the part of the central government.

(We agree entirely with your remarks as to the inadequacy of the Glass-Steagall bill and similar expedients. Little is to be gained merely by easing the circumstances of banks, in a situation where, by virtue of cost-price relations, everyone, including the banks, is anxious to get out of debt. Such measures may retard deflation and prepare the way for recovery; but they cannot much mitigate the fundamental maladjustments between prices and costs.)

II.

If action is needed to raise prices (and we believe it is), it should take the form of generous Federal expenditures, financed without resort to taxes on commodities or transactions. For the effect on prices, the direction of expenditure is not crucially important. Heavy Federal contribution toward relief of distress is the most urgent and, for reflation, perhaps the most effective measure. Large appropriations for public and semipublic improvements are also an attractive expedient, provided projects are chosen which can be started quickly and opportunely stopped. Generous bonus legislation would be the most objectionable of all available devices for releasing purchasing power. Purchase of the certificates at their present value, instead of at maturity value, is perhaps relatively unobjectionable.

Bonus legislation invites comparison with a program of Federal subsidy to agencies engaged in administering emergency relief. Both measures involve a sort of outright gift, the provision of funds to individuals or for their support. One involves allocation according to need, when need is dreadfully acute; the other ignores this criterion completely. Furthermore, funds spent for relief would certainly be spent for commodities, and very promptly, while less needy veterans might only use additional cash further to increase hoarded savings. Of the possible consequences of bonus concessions for the future of pension legislation, mere reminder should suffice. Congress has already capitulated to the veterans and their votes on the grounds that the Treasury was full, and the community prosperous. It is now on the verge of capitulating again, on the grounds that the Treasury is empty, and the community impoverished.

III.

It is impossible to estimate in advance how much Federal expenditure might be required to bring genuine revival of business. We are persuaded, however, that the automatic adjustments have already proceeded to a stage where the necessary inflationary expenditures would be handsomely rewarded, in greater production, larger employment, and higher tax revenues.

One should recognize at the outset a danger that any measures of fiscal inflation may be too meager and too short lived. Inadequate, temporary stimulation might well leave conditions worse than it found them. We might experience temporary revival and then serious relapse, followed by more drastic deflation than would otherwise have been necessary. If we indorse inflation, we should be prepared to administer heavy doses of stimulant if necessary, to continue them until recovery is firmly established, and to discontinue them when the emergency is ended. It is obvious that the bonus measures fail utterly to provide this necessary flexibility.

IV.

The question of how emergency expenditures, for whatever purposes, should be financed, is difficult and highly controversial. The wisest policy for the present, however, would seem to be one guided largely by psychological considerations. It is likely that adequate stimulus could be imparted, and recovery assured, without creating an excessive drain upon our gold reserves. Inflationary measures, in whatever form, will probably accelerate for a time the export of gold; but this strain we may well be able to endure until revival of business is assured. Domestic hoarding of gold, on the other hand, might force us to suspension of our currency laws; and this possibility dictates caution as to the technique of inflation. The problem is simply that of selecting the procedure which will be least alarming.

On other grounds, the issue of greenbacks seems most expedient; but this method must be ruled out unless one is ready to abandon gold immediately, for it would create the greatest danger of domestic drain. Large sales of Federal bonds in the open market would be much less alarming; but the probable effect upon the prices of such bonds must give us pause, especially since a marked decline might jeopardize the position of many banks. It would certainly be better for the Government to sell new issues directly to the reserve banks or, in effect, to exchange bonds for bank deposits and Federal Reserve notes. Much may be said, indeed, for issuing the bonds with the circulation privilege, thus permitting the Reserve Banks to issue Federal Reserve Bank notes in exchange; for this procedure does not much invite suspicion, has supporting precedent, and would greatly reduce the legal requirements with respect to gold.

It is well to face the possibility, though it seems remote, that adequate fiscal inflation might force us to abandon gold for a time. We must be prepared to see a sort of race between depletion of the gold holdings of the reserve banks and improvement of business. If definite business revival is attained before the gold position becomes acute, the hoarders will have missed some great investment bargains; if inflation must be carried beyond the limits tolerated by gold, the hoarders will reap a profit. Moreover, if other gold-standard countries follow our example, as is quite probable, the threat to our adherence to the gold standard will prove negligible.

But we would insist again that, once deliberate reflation is undertaken, it must be carried through, whatever that policy may mean for gold. To withdraw artificial support before genuine recovery is achieved, might create a situation worse than that which would have obtained in the absence of remedial efforts. If the time comes, as it probably will not, when we must choose between recovery and convertibility, we must then abandon gold, pending the not distant time when world recovery will permit our returning to the old standard on the old terms. The remote possibility of our being forced to this step, however, should not influence our decision now. The supposedly awful consequences of departure from gold are, as England has shown us so clearly, nothing but fantastic illusions.

V.

It is easy to be too greatly alarmed about the possibility of extreme and uncontrolled inflation. With improvement of business, Federal revenues will automatically increase. Expenditures may then be financed to a lesser extent by borrowing, and thus with less inflationary influence. Indeed, one might maintain that temporary inflation is the most promising means to restore a balanced Budget. Moreover, with proper precautions, it should not be difficult to effect drastic reduction of expenditures at the appropriate time. The emergency character of inflationary appropriations should be emphasized in the acts themselves; and Congress should record the intention of balancing expenditures and revenues over a period of, say four or five years. Incidentally, no emergency expenditures would permit of more opportune retrenchment than those for relief of distress.

We find it difficult, at the present juncture, to give due attention to the problem of preventing or modifying the next boom. Obviously, we should attend to getting out of the present emergency first. It demands emphasis, however, that successful resort to fiscal methods for terminating deflation will present the very serious problem of keeping recovery within safe bounds. A merely salutary inflation treatment will fail to satisfy many groups. There will certainly be demand for more inflation and more “prosperity” than we can afford or sanely endure. Fiscal inflation must be regarded as a means for meeting an acute emergency for industry as a whole. It should not be viewed as a means of solving the agricultural problem, nor as a method for deflating the rentier. It is properly a most temporary expedient, to be abandoned (and reversed) long before many individual industries and classes have obtained the measure of relief which justice might prescribe.

We have suggested that for the period of the ensuing five years all Federal expenditures, including those of an emergency character, should be covered by tax revenues. To minimize the total necessary outlay, outlays should be very generous now; parsimonious inflation is an illusory economy. It would also be eminently wise to avoid now any new taxes which fall at the producer’s (or dealer’s) margin. The levies on income, however, should be advanced immediately to the maximum levels which an imperfect, but improving, administrative system can support. While such levies will be rather unproductive for a time, they will have no very deterrent effect upon business; and, having gotten them into the statutes during a period of least political resistance, we may be assured of large revenues at the appropriate time. Even after recovery, additional commodity taxes should be resorted to only if more equitable levies prove inadequate to full completion of the “5-year plan.” Indeed, by 1940, our Federal debt should stand at a figure far below that contemplated by existing legislation. We should have high income taxes when incomes are high.

Sound fiscal management during the next few years should give close attention to indexes of production, employment, and wholesale prices. We shall not undertake at this time to indicate any definite rules. There is no immediate problem of excessive inflation—rather, a danger of doing nothing or of a too modest beginning. For the not distant future, however, most careful and intelligent management will be imperative. Once there is clear evidence of revival, of increased and profitable production, the mechanism of credit expansion will begin to operate, and to carry on the task which fiscal inflation has begun. As soon as this happens, retrenchment must be started; emergency expenditures must be reduced as rapidly as is possible without undermining recovery. We should not attempt, by deliberate inflation, to bring prices to any level which we choose to regard as normal; nor should artificial stimulus be continued until production and employment attain really satisfactory levels. Fiscal measures should only be used to give to recovery a sure start. When this is done, the real task will be that of preventing the recovery from becoming a boom; and a beginning must be made in this task long before any alarming signs appear. The seeds of booms are sown by innocent expansion of credit during years of seemingly wholesome revival. The task of control is easily neglected at such times; and there is grave danger that both the Reserve Board and the Treasury will adopt inadequately deflationary tactics in this period when it is so easy to have no policy at all.

In summary, it is our unequivocal position that drastic but temporary fiscal inflation can now be productive of tremendous gains, with no possible losses of compensating magnitude; further, that after genuine revival of business has occurred, and especially if it is attained by artificial stimulation, there will soon be urgent need for prompt and decisive action of a deflationary character.

Garfield V. Cox.         Lloyd W. Mints.
Aaron Director.         Henry Schultz.
Paul H. Douglas.       Henry C. Simons.
Harry D. Gideonse.   Jacob Viner.
Frank H. Knight.       Chester W. Wright.
Harry A. Millis.          Theodore O. Yntem.[sic]

 

Source: U. S. Congress (Seventy-Second Congress, First Session). Payment of Adjusted-Compensation Certificates in Hearings before the Committee on Ways and Means, House of Representatives (April 11 to 29, and May 2 and 3, 1932), pp. 524-527.

Image Source:  Authentic History Center website: Page “Hoover & the Depression: The Bonus Army.”

Categories
Business School Chicago Economists

Chicago. Problem of Faculty Turnover, 1923

The Special Collections Research Center of the University of Chicago Library is putting scans of records from the respective administrations of Presidents Harper, Judson and Burton (1869-1925)  on-line (52 boxes of 91 boxes thus far!).  For today’s posting I have transcribed the introduction and conclusions of a summary “of the most imperative needs of the Graduate School of Arts and Literature” written in October 1923 as well as the section for the Department of Political Economy. Additionally I provide c.v. data for the economists named published in the Annual Register 1921-22 for the University of Chicago and additional biographical information (obituaries/memorials) to follow their post-Chicago careers.

 

____________________________________

The University of Chicago
The Graduate School of Arts and Literature

Office of the Dean

October 30, 1923.

Dean J. H. Tufts,
The University of Chicago.

Dear Dean Tufts:

I enclose a summary of the most imperative needs of the Graduate School of Arts and Literature. I have drawn it up only after a most careful examination of the condition of the Departments. I am convinced that it is only by making the new appointments which I have listed and providing the increases I have indicated that the School can hope to make any appreciable contribution to graduate studies in America or even to hold its own with the other Graduate Schools in the country. In the case of some departments the situation is almost inconceivably bad. It is so bad that it is only by making new appointments of strong men—major appointments that would command attention—and by increasing the salaries of many members of the teaching staff who are being tempted away that we can hope to regain our prestige. I hope that this will not sound like an exaggeration. It is not. It is a lamentable fact that some of the departments that ten or fifteen years ago were famous and attracted graduate students from all parts of the continent are now deplorably weak, while some of the others, though still doing efficient work, have recently suffered serious losses in their teaching staff and are threatened with still more. Let me speak of these in detail.

 

I. The Weak Departments:

  1. The Department of Psychology
  2. The Department of the History of Art
  3. The Department of German….
  4. The Department of Latin
  5. Another notable example of weakness is found in Anthropology
  6. The Department of General Literature

 

[II.] The Other Departments:

  1. Romance Languages
  2. History
  3. Political Economy

The situation here is especially precarious. The instructional staff is an efficient one but extremely difficult to hold. Within recent years three men have gone: Moulton, Hardy and Lyon. Some of the men here now have received tempting offers of positions wither in government bureaus or in industries. The new appointment in Money and Banking is to fill the vacancy caused by Moulton’s going to Washington two years ago. Viner has had more than one call. Good men in Political Economy seem to be increasingly hard to get.

May I remind you also of the fine contribution that this Department, under Mr. Marshall’s inspiration, has made to that cooperative study of economic, social, and political conditions in Chicago that is being carried on by all the departments in the Social Science Group. This whole piece of work is, as you yourself know, a most interesting experiment, and in its detailed analysis of the characteristics of the Chicago community, will in all probability prove to be a model for the study of any large metropolitan area.

I hope you will pardon my writing at such length, but the situation seems to me to be critical. We cannot afford to delay remedial measures. The money that I am asking for is not simply for the University of Chicago, it is for Graduate Studies in the whole Middle West, which looks to Chicago for its teachers. Of all the new appointments that I have urged there is not one that would not influence higher education throughout the Mississippi Valley.

 

Yours very truly,

[signed]
Gordon J. Laing

 

Source: University of Chicago. Office of the President: Harper, Judson and Burton Administrations Records 1869-1925. Box 47, Folder 6 “Graduate schools, development, 1914-1924”.

 

____________________________________

 

Charles Oscar Hardy, Ph.D., Assistant Professor of Financial Organization in the School of Commerce and Administration. [Resigned]

A.B., Ottawa University, 1904; Professor of History and Economics, ibid., 1910-18; Dean of the College, ibid., 1916-18; Ph.D., University of Chicago, 1916; Lecturer in the School of Commerce and Administration, ibid., 1918-19; Assistant Professor, ibid., 1919-22.

 

Harold Glenn Moulton, Ph.B., Ph.D., Professor of Political Economy. [Resigned]

Ph.B., University of Chicago, 1907; Assistant in Political Economy, ibid., 1910-11; Instructor, ibid., 1911-14; Ph.D., ibid., 1914; Assistant Professor, ibid., 1914-18; Associate Professor, ibid., 1918-1922; Professor, ibid., 1922.

 

Leverett Samuel Lyon, A.M., LL.B., Ph.D., Assistant Professor of Commercial Organization in the School of Commerce and Administration.

Ph.B., University of Chicago, 1910; LL.B., Chicago Kent College of Law, 1915; Assistant in Commercial Organization in the School of Commerce and Administration, ibid., 1916-17; Instructor, ibid., 1917-19; A.M., ibid., 1918; Assistant Professor, ibid., 1919—; Ph.D., ibid., 1921.

 

Jacob Viner, Ph.D., Assistant Professor of Political Economy.

B.A., McGill University, 1914; A.M., Harvard University, 1915; Instructor in Political Economy, University of Chicago, 1916-19; Assistant Professor, ibid., 1919—; Ph.D., Harvard University, 1922.

 

Leon Carroll Marshall, A.M., LL.D., Professor and Chairman of the Department of Political Economy; Dean of the School of Commerce and Administration and of the Graduate School of Social Service Administration.

A.B., Ohio Wesleyan University, 1900; A.B., Harvard University, 1901; A.M., ibid., 1902; Assistant, ibid., 1902-3; Professor of Economics, Ohio Wesleyan University, 1903-7; Assistant Professor of Political Economy, University of Chicago, 1907-8; Associate Professor, ibid., 1908-11; Dean of the School of Commerce and Administration, ibid., 1909—; Professor of Political Economy, ibid., 1911—; Dean of the Senior Colleges, ibid., 1911-20; LL.D., Ohio Wesleyan University, 1918; Dean of the Graduate School of Social Service Administration, University of Chicago, 1920—.

 

 

Source: University of Chicago, Annual Register, 1921-1922, pp. 38, 40, 54, 57.

 

____________________________________

 

Life after the University of Chicago

“In Memoriam: Charles Oscar Hardy, 1884-1948”. American Economic Review, Vol. 39, No. 3 (May, 1949), pp. 478-480.

Harold Moulton, Economist, Dead. Ex-President of Brookings Institution in the Capital,” The New York Times, December 15, 1965, p. 48.

Engle, N. H., Leverett Samuel Lyon, Journal of Marketing, Vol 24, No. 1 (July, 1959), pp. 67-69.

“Dr. Jacob Viner, Economist, Dead: Princeton Professor was U.S. Adviser 4 Decades,” The New York Times, September 13, 1970.

Marshall, Leon Carroll, 1879-1966. Biographical notes. Social Networks and Archival Context (SNAC). [Webpage].

 

Image Source: Leon C. Marshall. University of Chicago Photographic Archive, apf1-04113, Special Collections Research Center, University of Chicago Library.

Categories
Economists Fields Harvard

Harvard. Thirteen Ph.D. Examinees, 1915-16

For thirteen Harvard economics Ph.D. candidates this posting provides information about their respective academic backgrounds, the six subjects of their general examinations along with the names of the examiners, the subject of their special subject, thesis subject and advisor(s) (where available). Of particular note are the records for Harvard historian of early economic thought, Arthur Eli Monroe, and the soon to become distinguished Chicago (later Princeton) economist, Jacob Viner.

________________________________________

 

DIVISION OF HISTORY, GOVERNMENT, AND ECONOMICS
EXAMINATIONS FOR THE DEGREE OF PH.D.
1915-16

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

 

Arthur Eli Monroe.

General Examination in Economics, Wednesday, October 13, 1915.
Committee: Professors Bullock (chairman), Taussig, Gay, Day, and Holcombe.
Academic History: Harvard College, 1904-08; Harvard Graduate School, 1913-February, 1916. A.B., Harvard, 1908; A. M., ibid., 1914. Teacher of Latin and German, Kent School, Connecticut, 1909-13; Assistant in Economics, Harvard, 1914-February, 1916; Tutor in the Division of History, Government, and Economics, 1915-February, 1916; Instructor I Economics, Williams College, February, 1916-.
General Subjects: 1. Economic Theory and its History. 2. Economic History since 1750. 3. Public Finance. 4. Statistical Method and its Application. 5. History of Political Theory. 6. Topic in the History of Economic Thought.
Special Subject: Some topic in the History of American Economic Thought.

 

Merton Kirk Cameron.

General Examination in Economics, Wednesday, November 17, 1915.
Committee: Professors Gay (chairman), Ripley, Taussig, Anderson, and Day.
Academic History: Princeton University, 1904-08; Harvard Graduate School, 1913-. A.B., Princeton, 1908; A. M., Harvard, 1914. Head of Department of History, Lanier High School, Montgomery, Alabama, 1911-13; Assistant in Economics, Harvard, 1915-.
General Subjects: 1. Economic Theory and its History. 2. Economic History since 1750. 3. Money, Banking, and Crises. 4. Transportation. 5. Economics of Corporations. 6. American History.
Special Subject: Economic History of the United States.
Thesis Subject: “The History of the Tobacco Growing Industry in the United States.” (With Professor E. F. Gay.)

 

Herbert Knight Dennis

General Examination in Economics, Tuesday, February 29, 1916.
Committee: Professors Bullock (chairman), Perry, Tozzer, Ford, Foerster, and Anderson.
Academic History: Allegheny College, 1907-08; Brown University, 1910-12; Princeton University, 1912-14; Harvard Graduate School, 1914-. Ph.B., Brown, 1912; A. M., Princeton, 1914; A.M. Harvard, 1915.
General Subjects: 1. Economic Theory and its History. 2. Ethical Theory and its History. 3. Poor Relief. 4. Social Reforms. 5. Sociology. 6. Anthropology.
Special Subject: Social Psychology.Thesis Subject: “The French Canadians—A Study in Race Psychology.” (With Professor Foerster.)

 

James Washington Bell.

General Examination in Economics, Wednesday, May 3, 1916.
Committee: Professors Bullock (chairman), Ripley, Munro, Anderson, and Copeland.
Academic History: University of Colorado, 1908-14; Harvard Graduate School, 1914-. A.B., Colorado, 1912; A.M., ibid., 1913. Assistant in Economics, University of Colorado, 1912-14.
General Subjects: 1. Economic Theory and its History. 2. Economic History since 1750. 3. Public Finance. 4. Labor Problems. 5. Sociology. 6. Municipal Government.
Special Subject: Public Finance.
Thesis Subject: “Taxation of Railroads in New England.” (With Professor Bullock.)

 

William Burke Belknap.

General Examination in Economics, Thursday, May 4, 1916.
Committee: Professors Bullock (chairman), Gay, Ripley, Anderson, and Dr. Morison.
Academic History: Yale College, 1904-08; University of Chicago, 1913-14 (two terms); Haverad Graduate School, 1914-. A.V., Yale, 1908; A.M. Harvard, 1915.
General Subjects: 1. Economic Theory and its History. 2. Economic History since 1750. 3. Labor Problems. 4. Money and Banking. 5. American History since 1789. 6. Public Finance.
Special Subject: Public Finance.
Thesis Subject: “History of the State Finances of Kentucky.” (With Professor Bullock.)

 

Henry Bass Hall.

General Examination in Economics, Friday, May 5, 1916.
Committee: Professors Gay (chairman), Taussig, Turner, Day, and Anderson.
Academic History: Harvard College, 1904-05; Amherst College, 1906-07; Massachusetts Agricultural College, 1911-12; Harvard Graduate School, 1912-. S.B., Massachusetts Agricultural College, 1912.
General Subjects: 1. Economic Theory and its History. 2. Money and Banking. 3. International Trade. 4. Economic History since 1750. 5. Agricultural Economics. 6. American History since 1789.
Special Subject: Agricultural Economics.
Thesis Subject: “Economic History of Massachusetts Agriculture.” (With Professors Carver and Gay.)

 

Charles Cloyd Creekpaum.

General Examination in Economics, Monday, May 8, 1916.
Committee: Professors Bullock (chairman), Day, Anderson, Copeland, and Holcombe.
Academic History: University of Nebraska, 1908-12; Harvard Graduate School, 1914-. A. B., Nebraska, 1912. Principal of High School, Alvo, Nebraska, 1912-13; Principal of High School, McCool Junction, Nebraska, 1913-14.
General Subjects: 1. Economic Theory and its History. 2. Economic History since 1750. 3. Sociology. 4. Statistics. 5. History of Political Theory. 6. Public Finance.
Special Subject: Public Finance.
Thesis Subject: “the Financial Results of Public Ownership of Railways.” (With Professor Bullock.)

 

Mark Anson Smith.

General Examination in Economics, Thursday, May 11, 1916.
Committee: Professors Bullock (chairman), Hart, Gay, Ripley, and Dr. Davis.
Academic History: Dartmouth College, 1906-10; University of Wisconsin, 1911-14; Harvard Graduate School, 1914-. A.B., Dartmouth, 1910; A.M., Wisconsin, 1913.
General Subjects: 1. Economic Theory and its History. 2. Economic History since 1750. 3. Money and Banking. 4. Economics of Corporations. 5. Public Finance. 6. American Government and Constitutional Law.
Special Subject: Public Finance.

 

John Emmett Kirshman.

General Examination in Economics, Friday, May 12, 1916.
Committee: Professors Bullock (chairman), Ripley, Gay, Munro, and Foerster.
Academic History: Central Wesleyan College, 1901-04; Syracuse University, 1907-08; University of Wisconsin, 1908-09; University of Illinois, 1914-15; Harvard Graduate School, 1915-. Ph.B., Central Wesleyan, 1904; Ph.M. Syracuse, 1908. Assistant Professor of History, North Dakota Agricultural College, 1909-14; Teaching Fellow in Economics, University of Illinois, 1914-15.
General Subjects: 1. Economic Theory and its History. 2. Public Finance. 3. Economic History since 1750. 4. Comparative Modern Government. 5. Economics of Corporations. 6. Socialism and Social Reform.
Special Subject: Public Finance
Thesis Subject: “Taxation of Banking Institutions.” (With Professor Bullock)

 

Zenas Clark Dickinson.

General Examination in Economics, Monday, May 15, 1916.
Committee: Professors Taussig (chairman), Gay, Yerkes, Day, and Dr. Burbank
Academic History: University of Nebraska, 1910-14; Harvard Graduate School, 1914-. A.B., Nebraska, 1914.
General Subjects: 1. Economic Theory and its History. 2. Economic History since 1750. 3. Statistical Method and its Application. 4. Public Finance. 5. Psychology. 6. Suitable Field in Economic Theory and its History, with special reference to Psychology.
Special Subject: Suitable Field in Economic Theory.

 

Arthur Harrison Cole.

Special Examination in Economics, Thursday, May 18, 1916.
Committee:
General Examination passed January 7, 1915.
Academic History: Bowdoin College, 1907-11; Harvard Graduate School, 1911-. A.B., Bowdoin, 1911; A.M., Harvard, 1913. Assistant in Economics, Harvard, 1913
General Subjects: 1. Economic Theory and its History. 2. Economic History since 1750. 3. Money, Banking, and Commercial Crises. 4. Public Finance and Financial History. 5. International Trade and Tariff History. 6. Political and Constitutional History of the United States.
Special Subject: Economic History of the United States.
Committee: Professors Gay (chairman), Taussig, Turner, and Sprague.
Thesis Subject
: “History of the Wool Manufacturing Industry in the United States, to the year 1830.” (With Professors Gay and Taussig.)
Committee on Thesis: Professors Gay, Taussig, and Sprague.

 

Jacob Viner

General Examination in Economics, Friday, May 19, 1916.
Committee: Professors Taussig (chairman), Bullock, R. B. Perry, Anderson, and Gras.
Academic History: McGill University, Montreal, 1911-14; Harvard Graduate School, 1914-. A.B., McGill. 1914; A.M., Harvard, 1915.
General Subjects: 1. Economic Theory and its History. 2. International Trade. 3. Public Finance. 4. Sociology. 5. Economic History since 1750. 6. Theory of Value (Philosophy).
Special Subject: International Trade.
Thesis Subject: “International Balance of Payments” (With Professor Taussig)

 

Percy Gamble Kammerer.

Special Examination in Economics, Monday, May 22, 1916.
General Examination passed May 14, 1914.
Academic History: Harvard College, 1904-06, 1910-12; Harvard Graduate School, 1912-. A. B., 1908 (1913).
General Subjects: : 1. Economic Theory and its History. 2. Ethical Theory. 3. Poor Relief. 4. Social Reforms. 5. Sociology. 6. The Labor Question.
Special Subject: The Family considered Historically and in its Relation to Social Institutions.
Committee: Professors Foerster (chairman), Ripley, Feguson, Tozzer, Ford, and Anderson.
Thesis Subject: “The Unmarried Mother: a Study of Case Histories.” (With Professor Foerster.)
Committee on Thesis: Professors Foerster, Taussig, and Dearborn.

 

Source: Harvard University Archives. Harvard University, Examinations for the Ph.D. (HUC 7000.70), Folder “Examinations for the Ph.D., 1915-1916”.

Image Source: Library of Congress Prints and Photographs Division, Washington, D.C. Digital ID:  cph 3c14486

Categories
Chicago Curriculum Fields

Chicago. Advanced General Survey Courses in Economics. Memo, 1926

The memo of this posting was written by the head of the Chicago department of economics, Leon Carroll Marshall. I have chosen this to begin a category “Fields”. The groups named below were tasked with preparing bibliographies, not for use in the survey courses, but to make explicit the level of preparation expected of students in those courses. Cox and Mints by the following summer apparently established “Money and banking” as a field distinct from business finance (a memo in the same folder dated August 9, 1927).  It is also interesting to note that Marshall seems to have thought it important to pair economics and business in as many fields as he could.

______________________

November 30, 1926

Memorandum from L. C. Marshall to All Persons Mentioned Herein:

The problem attacked in this memorandum is that of carrying through effectively our arrangements with respect to our advanced general survey courses—courses that in the past we have sometimes referred to as “Introduction to the Graduate Study of X,” although we are not now following this terminology.

The following background facts will need to be kept in mind:

  1. We are to have introductory point of view courses designed to give an organic view of the Economic Order. These courses are numbered 102, 103, 104.
  2. Our next range of courses is designed primarily to deal with method. This range includes: 1. Economic History; 2. Statistics; 3. Accounting; 4. Intermediate Theory.
  3. The foregoing seven courses are the only courses for which we assume responsibility as far as the ordinary [Arts and Literature] undergraduate is concerned. It may well be that from time to time some member of the staff will be interested in giving for undergraduates a course on some live problem of the day, but this is an exceptional matter and not a matter of our standard arrangement.
  4. Our best undergraduates may move on to the type of courses referred to above in the first paragraph, such as courses 330, 340, 335, 345, etc. In general the prerequisites for admission to these courses (as far a undergraduates are concerned) would be a certain number of majors in our work plus 27 majors with an average of B. Under the regulations which the Graduate Faculty has laid down, students who have less than 27 majors could not be admitted to these courses except with the consent of the group and Dean Laing.

 

It is highly essential that our work in these advanced survey courses such as 330, 340, 335, 345, etc. shall:

  1. Really assume the method courses mentioned above: really be conducted at a level which assumes that the student possesses certain techniques.
  2. Really assume an adequate background of subject-matter content.

 

Will the person whose name is underscored in each group undertake (as promptly as reasonably may be) the responsibility of conducting conferences designed

  1. To lead to explicit definite arrangements looking toward the actual utilization of the earlier method courses in these advance survey courses
  2. To prepare a bibliography that can be mimeographed and placed in each student’s hands who enters one of these advanced survey courses. This bibliography is not to be a bibliography of the course (that is a separate matter) but a bibliography of what is assumed by way of preparation for the course. Whether a somewhat different bibliography should be made for the Economics course and the Business course in a given field is left for each group to discuss. Personally I hope that it will be a single bibliography for the two. Mr. Palyi suggests the desirability of a bibliographical article (worthy of publication) for each field. This seems to me an admirable suggestion—one difficult to resist.

 

Will each leader of the group referred to below please put the outcome of your discussion in writing and send to the undersigned? It is to be hoped that you will find other matters to report upon in addition to the foregoing.

GROUPS

  1. The Financial System and Financial Administration

Meech, Mints, Cox, Palyi

  1. Labor and Personnel Administration

Douglas, Millis, Stone, Kornhauser

  1. The Market and the Administration of Marketing

Palmer, Duddy, Barnes, Dinsmore

  1. Risk and Its Administration

Nerlove, Cox, Millis, Mints

  1. Transportation, Communication and Traffic Administration

Sorrell, Wright, Duddy, Douglas

  1. Government Finance

Viner, Millis, Douglas, Stone

  1. Population and the Standard of Living

Kyrk, Douglas, Viner

  1. Resources, Technology and the Administration of Production

Mitchell, Daines, McKinsey

 

The following fields are not included in this memorandum either because of specific course prerequisites or because of obvious difficulties in the case:

  1. Economic Theory and Principles of Administration
  2. Statistics and Accounting
  3. Economic History and Historical Method
  4. Social Direction and Control of Economic Activity.

 

Source: University of Chicago Archives. Department of Economics, Records. Box 22, Folder 6.

Image Source: Leon Carroll Marshall. University of Chicago Photographic Archive, apf1-04114, Special Collections Research Center, University of Chicago Library.

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).

 

 

 

Categories
Bibliography Chicago Courses Syllabus

Chicago. Course on International Economic Policies. Viner, 1944.

As the previous posting for Economics 370 (International Trade and Finance) taught by Jacob Viner at the University of Chicago during the Winter Quarter of 1944, this posting is based on detailed notes taken by Don Patinkin from which I have extracted a rough course outline with a corresponding list of assigned as well as suggested readings and references. 

After the course description, the course outline and Viner’s reading assignments as written by Don Patinkin in his notes have been transcribed.  A list of term paper topics for the course has also been transcribed. I am happy to report that almost all of the readings have been properly identified and brought into proper bibliographic form in a separate list placed at the end of this posting. As most of the readings for Viner’s policy course are well on this side of the copyright threshold, fewer links can be offered. The periodical literature that can be accessed at jstor.org has been linked, but most folks this interested in the history of 20th century economics have access to jstor through their university affiliations.

__________________________

[Course Description]

XI. INTERNATIONAL ECONOMIC RELATIONS

  1. International Economic Policies. A survey, with particular reference to the United States, of the international aspects of the economic policies and activities of governments. Topics: the fundamentals of international trade; tariffs and tariff technique; quotas and exchange controls; commercial treaties; unfair competition; colonial policies; international capital investments; commodity controls; the international aspects of shipping and railroad policies; international economic institutions; economic factors in diplomacy and war. Prereq: Two years’ work in the Division of the Social Sciences, or equiv. Spr: M, W, F, 9, Viner.

Source: The University of Chicago, Announcements, The College and the Divisions. Sessions of 1943-1944.   Vol. XLIII, No. 10 (August 10, 1943), p. 317.

__________________________

[Course Outline and Reading Assignments]

Economics 371
International Economic Policies
Spring Quarter, 1944
Jacob Viner

[Outline]

 

Subject LECTURES
Types of Econ. Policy
Mercantilism
Scandal Theory
Tariffs (MFN & CMFN)
Tariff Bargaining (History etc.)
New Forms of Trade Barriers
Monopoly Question
Int’l Cartels
Customs-Union
Colonial Problems
Native Labor Problem
Int’l Movements of Capital
Postwar investment policy
Raw Materials
Commodity Agreements
International Agencies

 

[Readings Assigned/Suggested in Sequence As Announced by Viner]

Winslow, “Marxian, Liberal, & Sociological Theories of Imperialism,” JPE v. 39 #6,Dec. ’31, pp. 713-86]

Robbins, Economic Causes of War, pp. 94-8, & Appendix pp. 111-24, London, 1939.

Staley, Foreign Investment & War. U. of C. Public Policy Pamphlets, 13-24]

Sulzbach, “Capitalistic Warmongers” U. of C. Public Policy Pamphlets. 25-35

cf. also Staley “War & The Private Investor” [not assigned]

John H. Herz, “Power Politics & World Organization” Am. Pol. Science Review Dec 42, v. 36 #6.

Int’l Relations. Jacob Viner, Proceeding American Econ Association March ‘44

Jacob Viner. Address before League of Nations. Society in Canada. Interdependence, V. 13 #3 &4 1936, pp. 218-229.

Haberler, Theory of Int’l Trade pp. 211-26, 245-95,
or
Ellsworth, Int’l Econ. pp. 275-340

U.S. Tariff Comm. Reciprocity Report, pp. 27-47, 504-510

Viner, Tariffs, Ency. Soc. Sciences

Tasca, Reciprocal Trade Policy of U.S. ch.’s 2-5 (pp. 10-9

Viner, Most Favored Nations Clause, JPE Feb ’24,
Index Jan ‘31

Viner, Trade Relations between Free-Market & Controlled Economies (League of Nations Memo 1943)

Joseph B. Lockey Am. Journal of Int’l Law 235-43

B. Nolde, Recueil de Cours Academie de Droit Internationale, 1924 II.

Viner—Proc. American Econ. Assoc. March 1944, pp. 315-29 “Intern. Relations between State-Controlled Nat. Economies”

Ellsworth
Haberler

(These not assignments, merely references)
Margaret Gordon, Barriers to World Trade
Howard Ellis, Exchange Control
Henry J. Tasca, World Trading Systems (Diff. between U.S. & Eng. on export controls)

 

League of Nations, Commercial Policy in Interwar period

[League of Nations] Haberler, Quantitative Trade Controls

Howard Ellis, Exchange Control, pp. 13-17

July [sic, May] ’43 Social Research. Schüller

Corwin Edwards “Int’l Cartels as Obstacles to Int’l Trade”. Proceed. A. E. Assoc. March ‘44

Ervin Hexner “Int. Cartels in the Post-War World” Southern Econ. Journal. Oct. ‘43

New Republic—special supplement on Cartels March 27, 1944

Federalist—No. XI & passim

De Beers “Tariff Aspects of the Federal Union” QJE Nov. 1941

U.S. Tariff Comm. Colonial Tariff Policies, Introduction, pp. 1-16, 26-42, 55-9, 63-78

P. Bidwell Tariff Policy of the U.S. 1933, pp. 70-101

Royal Institute of Int’l Affairs—The Colonial Problem. ch’s 1, 3,4.

Viner. typewritten article on U.S. colonial policy – on reserve.

Violet Conolly, Soviet Trade from the Pacific to the Levant” (1935)

[Violet Conolly], Soviet Economic Policy in East 1933.

Haberler [Regional blocs]—in Seymour Harris ed. Postwar Econ. Problems 1943, pp. 325-344

Skim [next three items]

Feis, Europe the World’s Banker. ch’s 1-3, pp. 463-69
Viner, Int’l Finance & Balance of Power Diplomacy, Southwestern Political and Social Science Quarterly March ’29, V. IX, No. 4.
Viner, Political Aspects of Int’l Finance” Journal of Business of U. of C. April-July ’28.

R.I.I.A.—The Problem of Int’l Investment. ch’s 1, 2,3 (=pp. 1-39); & 8 (=pp. 102-12)

J.W. Angell—Financial For. Policy of U.S. 1933—ch’s 3, 4,7

O. R. Hobson, The Function of Foreign Lending (pamphlet on reserve)

Staley, “Une critique de la protection diplomatique des placements à l’étranger” Revue gén. de Droit Int. Pub. Sept-Oct., 1935, pp. 541-558.

Knorr- Hist. of Eng. Colonial Theories (U of C. Ph.D. thesis)

On forced colonial labor: Lord Olivier, White Men & Colonial Labor (sic, white capital and coloured labour. McMillan (Penguin book). Lord Hailey, African Surveys.

Wallace & Edminster, Int’l Control of Raw Materials, ch’s 1, 9, 10, 11, 12

Staley, Raw Materials in Peace & War ch’s 1, 3, 5, 6, 7, 8,11

Round Table Discussion. Proceedings A.E. Assoc. (St. Louis, 1926), pp. 41-8

Viner, (Rubber Control), Foreign Affairs, July ‘26

Viner, Raw Materials Problem in Porritt (ed.), The Causes of War, 185-202 (Just look at last two)

Viner, Objectives of Post-War Int’l Econ. Reconstruction. New Wilmington lecture. May 1942,(on reserve).

______________________________

Possible Term Papers

Policy of U. S. with respect to any post war econ.

Lessons for post-war settlement from past failures

Foreign Investment in Backward Countries

Econ. Provisions other than P-p(?)

Lend-Lease as means of Inter-Allied Econ. Relation[?]

Case studies: Missionaries & Imperialism

Am. gov. preferences to domestic trade in gov. purchases

gov. intervention to collect foreign debt—any case study

Study of literature dealing with econ motives of U.S. entry into World War I.

Econ. Doctrine as applied by World Court in its Decisions

Canadian-American Hydro-agreements

Int’l action of cooperatives

Intl trade theories underlying activities of I. L.O.

 

______________________________

Bibliography for Viner’s Economics 371 in 1944

 

Angell, James Waterhouse. Financial foreign policy of U.S. New York: 1933. [A report to the second International studies conference on the state and economic life, London, May 29 to June 2, 1933, prepared for the American committee appointed by the council on foreign relations.]

Bidwell, Percy Wells. Tariff policy of the U.S.; A study of recent experience. New York: Council on Foreign Relations.1933 [A report to the second International studies conference on the state and economic life, London, May 29 to June 2, 1933, prepared for the American committee appointed by the council on foreign relations.]

Conolly, Violet. Soviet trade from the Pacific to the Levant, with an economic study of the soviet Far Eastern region. London: Oxford University Press, H. Milford, 1935.

Conolly, Violet. Soviet economic policy in the East; Turkey, Persia, Afghanistan, Mongolia and Tana Tuva, Sin Kiang. London: Oxford University Press, H. Milford, 1933.

de Beers, John S. Tariff aspects of a federal union. Quarterly Journal of Economics v. 56, no. 1 ( November 1941), pp. 49-92.

Edwards, Corwin D. International cartels as obstacles international trade. American Economic Review, Papers and Proceedings. v. 34, No. 1, part 2 supplement (March 1944) pp. 330-40.

Ellis, Howard Sylvester. Exchange control in central Europe. Harvard economic studies, no. 69. Cambridge: Harvard University Press, 1941. [Originally published as ‘Exchange control in Austria and Hungary’ and ‘Exchange control in Germany’ in the Quarterly journal of economics, volume 54, no. 1, part 2, November, 1939 and volume 54, no. 4, part 2, August, 1940.]

Ellsworth, Paul Theodore. International economics. New York: Macmillan, 1938.

Feis, Herbert. Europe the world’s banker, 1870-1914. New Haven: Yale University Press, 1931.

Gordon, Margaret S. Barriers to world trade; a study of recent commercial policy. New York: Macmillan, 1941. [Bureau of international research of Harvard university and Radcliffe college.]

Hamilton, Alexander. The utility of the union in respect to commercial relations and a navy. The Federalist, Number 11. 1787-88.

Haberler, Gottfried. The theory of international trade with its application to commercial policy (translated by Alfred W. Stonier and Frederic Benham). London: W. Hodge & company, 1936.

Haberler, Gottfried. Quantitative trade controls: their causes and nature. Geneva: League of Nations, Series II, Economic and financial. 1943. [“Prepared by Professor Gottfried Haberler … in collaboration with Mr. Martin Hill.”]

Haberler, Gottfried. “The political economy of regional or continental blocs” In Seymour Edwin Harris (ed.), Postwar economic problems, New York, McGraw Hill, 1943, pp. 325-44.

Hailey, William Malcolm (Lord Hailey). An African survey: a study of problems arising in Africa south of the Sahara. London: Oxford University Press, 1938. [Issued by the Committee of the African Research Survey under the auspices of the Royal Institute of International Affairs.]p

Herz, John H. Power Politics and world organization. American Political Science Review v. 36, no. 6 (December 1942), pp. 1039-1052.

Hexner, Ervin. International cartels in the postwar world. Southern Economic Journal v. 10, no. 2 (October 1943), pp. 114-135.

Hobson, O.R. The function of foreign lending. [International Chamber of Commerce. 9th International Congress (Berlin), 1937, Document #3].

Knorr, Klaus. British colonial theories, 1570-1850. Toronto: University of Toronto Press, 1944. [University of Chicago Ph.D. thesis]

League of Nations. Economic, Financial and Transit Department. Commercial policy in interwar period. Geneva: League of Nations, 1942.

Lockey, Joseph B. Pan-Americanism and imperialism. American Journal of International Law vol. 32, no. 2 (April 1938), pp. 244-243.

New Republic. Special supplement on cartels, March 27, 1944.

Nolde, Boris. Recueil des Cours 1924 II. Académie de Droit Internationale.

Olivier, Sydney Haldane (Lord). White capital & coloured labour. London: Independent Labour Party,1906 [also London: Hogarth Press by Leonard & Virginia Woolf]

Robbins, Lionel. Economic causes of war. London: J. Cape, 1939.

Royal Institute of International Affairs. The colonial problem. London: Oxford Press, 1937.

Royal Institute of International Affairs. The problem of international investment. London: Oxford University Press, 1937.

Schüller, Richard. Commercial policy between the two wars; personal observations of a participant. Social Research v. 10, no. 2 (May 1943), pp. 152-174.

Staley, Eugene. War and the private investor; a study in the relations of international politics and international private investment. Garden City, NJ: Doubleday, Doran & company, 1935.

Staley, Eugene. Une critique de la protection diplomatique des placements à l’étranger. Revue Générale de Droit International Public. v. 42 (September-October, 1935), pp. 541-558.

Staley, Eugene. Foreign investment and war. University of Chicago Public Policy Pamphlets, Nr. 18, 1935.

Staley, Eugene. Raw materials in peace and war. New York: Council on Foreign Relations, 1937.

Sulzbach, Walter. “Capitalistic warmongers”: a modern superstition. University of Chicago Public Policy Pamphlets, Nr.35, 1942.

Henry J. Tasca. The reciprocal trade policy of the U.S.; a study in trade philosophy. Philadelphia, University of Pennsylvania Press, 1938.

Henry J. Tasca, World trading systems; a study of American and British commercial policies. Paris: International institute of intellectual co-operation, League of Nations, 1939.

U. S. Tariff Commission. [Stanley Kuhl Hornbeck; Jacob Viner; Clive Day; Walter B. Palmer]. Reciprocity and commercial treaties. Washington, DC: Government Printing Office, 1919.

U. S. Tariff Commission. Colonial tariff policies. Washington, DC: Government Printing Office, 1922.

Viner, Jacob. The most-favored-nations clause in American commercial treaties. Journal of Political Economy v. 32, no. 1 (February 1924), pp. 101-129. [Reprinted in Viner, 1951.]
http://www.jstor.org/stable/1822463

Viner, Jacob. The most-favored-nation clause. Index v. 61 (February 1931), pp. 2-17. [Reprinted in Viner, 1951.]

Viner, Jacob. Political aspects of international finance. Journal of Business of the University of Chicago v. 1, no. 2 and no. 3 (April and July 1928)

Viner, Jacob. International finance and balance of power diplomacy, 1880-1914. Southwestern Political and Social Science Quarterly. v. 9, No. 4 (March 1929).

Viner, Jacob. Tariffs. In vol. 14 of Edwin R. A. Seligman and Alvin Saunders Johnson (eds.) Encylopaedia of the social sciences. New York: Macmillan 1930

Viner, Jacob. Address before League of Nations Society in Canada, Interdependence, v. 13, nos. 3 and 4 (1936), pp. 218-229.

Viner, Jacob. National monopolies of raw materials. (Rubber Control), Foreign Affairs v.4, no. 4 (July 1926), pp. 585-600. (rubber control)

Viner, Jacob. Raw materials problem. In Arthur Porritt and Arthur Salter (eds.), The causes of war. New York: Macmillan, 1932.

Viner, Jacob. U.S. Policy with Respect to the ‘Colonial Problem’. Typescript. [Perhaps later published as “The American interest in the ‘colonial problem.’” New York: Council on Foreign Relations, 1944.]

Viner, Jacob. Objectives of post-war international economic reconstruction. New Wilmington lecture, May 1942.

Viner, Jacob. International Economics. Glencoe, IL: Free Press, 1951.

Viner, Jacob. Trade relations between free-market and controlled economies. Geneva: League of Nations, 1943.

Viner, Jacob. International relations between state-controlled national economies. American Economic Review, Papers and Proceedings v. 34, no. 1, part 2 (March 1944, pp. 315-29
http://www.jstor.org/stable/1818704

Wallace, Benjamin B. (chairman). American practices analogous to foreign controls over raw materials, round table discussion. American Economic Review, Papers and Proceedings vol. 17, no. 1 Supplement (March 1927), pp. 41-8. [W. E. Grimes, H. E. Erdman, J. D. Black, Vanderveer Custis, Amos E. Taylor]

Wallace, Benjamin Bruce and Edminster, Lynn Ramsay. International control of raw materials. Brookings Institution. Washington, D.C., 1930.

Winslow, E. M. Marxian, liberal, and sociological theories of imperialism. Journal of Political Economy, v. 39, no. 6 (December 1931), pp. 713-86]

 

Source: Don Patinkin Papers. Duke University Rare Book Library. Box 3 (Course Materials and Class Notes), Folder “Patinkin as Student: Notebooks (1944)”.

Image source: Jacob Viner on the left, Theodore W. Schultz on the right. Undated. University of Chicago Photographic Archive, apf1-07483, Special Collections Research Center, University of Chicago Library.

 

Categories
Bibliography Chicago Courses Syllabus

Chicago. International Trade and Finance. Viner, 1944

 

Don Patinkin took reasonably detailed notes in two of Jacob Viner’s three graduate courses in international economics in 1944 from which it is a fairly easy task to put together course outlines and the corresponding lists of assigned as well as suggested readings and references.

Just as in his core economic theory course Economics 301, Price and Distribution Theory, Viner appears to have given reading assignments generally in blocks at a time that one presumes he wrote or had written on a black board to be copied into student’s notes. During his lectures there was the occasional new reference to be given.

A Chicago quarter is a dozen weeks long. Viner packed into the first dozen weeks a historical survey of mercantilism followed by one on the bullionist controversy and found time to talk about both exchange rate determination and the pure theory of trade as well as the competing plans by Keynes and White put forward on the eve Bretton Woods conference. An educational tour-de-force.

Almost all of the readings have been properly identified and brought into proper bibliographic form. And if this is not enough, I include Patinkin’s list of 19 Ph.D. examination questions for the field.

More recently I have posted the bibliography and exam questions for this course as taught by Viner in the Winter Quarter of the 1932/33 year. That information was found in the Milton Friedman papers in the Hoover Institution archives.

__________________________

Econ. 370
International Trade and Finance
Jacob Viner

Winter Quarter, 1944

__________________________

[Course Description]

XI. INTERNATIONAL ECONOMIC RELATIONS

  1. International Trade and Finance. The theory of international values, the mechanism of adjustment of international balances, foreign-exchange theory, the international aspects of monetary and banking theory, and tariff theory. Prereq: Econ 301 or equiv. Win: M, W, F 9, Viner.

Source: The University of Chicago, Announcements, The College and the Divisions. Sessions of 1943-1944.   Vol. XLIII, No. 10 (August 10, 1943), p. 317.

__________________________

[Course Outline and Reading Assignments]

Subject LECTURES
MERCANTILISM
BULLIONIST CONTROVERSY
INT’L MECHANISM: SIMPLE SPECIE
role of exchange rate fluctuations
role of price changes
role of specie flow
income elasticity for imports
terms of trade
unilateral payments
inductive studies
purchasing power parity theory
FRACTIONAL RESERVES
short term capital movements
inter-regional adjustments
flight capital
fixed and flexible exchanges
current int’l monetary agreement discussion
PURE THEORY OF INTERNATIONAL TRADE
Ohlin on determinants of specialization
Alternative cost doctrine
The case for FREE TRADE
Graphical analysis—Edgeworth on gains from trade

 

Mercantilism

Viner, Studies, ch. 1 & 2.

Heckscher, Mercantilism, II, 175-261.

—— Ency. Soc. Sciences, v. 10, pp. 333b-339a.

—— Econ. Hist. Review, Nov. 1936.

Viner, Review of Heckscher, Econ. Hist. Review, v. 6.

—— “Balance of Trade”, Ency. Soc. Sciences, v. 2, pp. 399-406.

Seligman, Bullionists, Ency. Soc. Sciences, v. 3, pp. 60-64.

Mun, England’s Treasure, ch’s 2, 3,4,5,6,7,8,19,20.

Hume’s Essays: “Of Money”, “Of the Balance of Trade”

Malynes

Bullionist Controversy

Viner, Studies, ch. 3 & 4.

Silberling, “Financial & Monetary Policy” (Q.J.E.—skim; Feb. & May 1924).

Angell, James W. Theory of international prices. Ch III & Appendix A, pp. 427-503.

Viner—Review of Angell. J.P.E. (pp. 601-611 only).

Ricardo—High Prices of Bullion in McCulloch edition of Works or in Gonner ed. Ricardo’s Essays.

Mechanism of International Equilibrium

E. M. Bernstein, J.P.E. 1939

Imre de Vegh in Review of Econ. Statistics, 1941

Leontieff (Essays in Honor of Taussig)

Robertson—Viner. QJE Feb 1939.

Ricardo, Principles ch. 7.

J.S. Mill, Principles, Book III, chs. 17 & 18.

Ohlin—Interregional & International Trade. ch’s 1,2,4,14,20; Appendices I & II.

Viner—Studies ch. 6.

[for material of ch. 5 (Viner) see—

Elmer Wood—Eng. Theories of Central Banking Control

E.V. Morgen. Hist. of Central Banking Theories

Wadrey [?], Ph.D. thesis]

read Ellsworth—Int’l Economics—chs. 5 &6—well organized

Mosak — Dr.’s thesis on material of ch. 6

Bronfenbrenner — Studies in Math. Economics-Lange

Haberler — Theory of Int’l Trade

 

International Mechanism Under Gold Standard, Fractional Reserves

[Viner] Studies — ch. 7

Explorations in Economics [Taussig Festschrift]: Currie [Domestic Stability & the Mechanism of Trade Adjustment to Int’l. Capital Movements]—pp.46-56, also Angell pp. 15-19, Leontief [Notes on the Pure Theory of Capital Transfer]—pp.84-91.

E. M. Bernstein, J.P.E., June 1940.

J.C. Gilbert, R.E. Studies V (1937-8), 187ff.

Imre de Vegh, R.E. Stat, 1942. [sic]

Paish, Economica, Nov. 1936

Interest Rates & Capital Movements

O. M. W. Sprague [Economic Adviser to the Bank of England]—Memorandum [presented after the Bank for International Settlements in May 1932]: Statistical Data on Foreign Short-Term Loans—their Collection & Use

[Paish, F. W.] Banking Policy & Int’l Payment. Economica [Nov.] 1936.

Gilbert. Review of Econ. Studies V. 5, pp. 187 ff.

The “Gold Standard”

[criticism of…next three items]

Keynes — Treatise on Money.

Whittlesey

Graham & Whittlesey. Golden avalanche

Bretton Woods:

Get Keynes’ plan (British Ministry of Information) & White (Treasury) plan (revised of July)

see also FR bulletin

Princeton bibliography on this.

Williams’ July- 1943 and Jan 1944, Foreign Affairs.

Irving Trust Co. Symposium. Read: texts of agreement

Goldenweiser, E. A.

articles by Kemmerer, Viner, Williams

C. P. Kindleberger, Short-Term Capital Movement (1936)

Marco Fanno. Normal and Abnormal Cap. movements.

Paul Einzig. Foreign Balances (1936)

Viner—Two plans for int’l monetary standard. Yale Review.

Pure theory of Int’l Trade

Viner—Studies ch.’s 8-9.

Lerner-(two articles) Diagrammatical Represent. Economica 346-56, 1932-34 319-34.

Leontieff — Use of Indifference Curves—Q.J.E. 1933.

Samuelson — Welfare Econ A.E.R. 1938.

Kaldor — Tariff — Economica 1940.

De Scitovszky — Reconsideration of Tariff — Review of Econ Studies—summer 1942.

J.C. Gilbert—Rev. Econ. Studies V. 3 “Present State of Int’l Theory”

Q.J.E. May 1938 Robertson on [Viner’s] Studies pp. 539ff.

__________________________

Bibliography for Viner’s Economics 370 in 1944

Angell, James W. Theory of international prices: History, criticism and restatement. Harvard Economic Studies No. 28, Cambridge, Harvard University Press, 1926.

Angell, James W. Equilibrium in international payments: the United States, 1919-1925. In Explorations in economics, notes and essays contributed in honor of F. W. Taussig. (1936).

Bernstein, E. M. Exchange rates under the gold standard. Journal of Political Economy, Vol. 48, No. 3 (Jun., 1940), pp. 345-356.

Bronfenbrenner, Martin. International transfers and the terms of trade: An Extension of Pigou’s Analyis. In Studies in mathematical economics and econometrics: in memory of Henry Schultz (1942).

Currie, Lauchlin. Domestic stability and the mechanism of trade adjustment to international capital movements. In Explorations in economics, notes and essays contributed in honor of F. W. Taussig. (1936)

De Scitovszky, T. A reconsideration of the theory of tariffs. The Review of Economic Studies, Vol. 9, No. 2 (Summer, 1942), pp. 89-110.

de Vegh, Imre. Imports and income in the United States and Canada. The Review of Economics and Statistics, Vol. 23, No. 3 (Aug., 1941), pp. 130-146

Einzig, Paul. Foreign balances. London: Macmillan, 1938.

Ellsworth, P. T. International economics. New York: Macmillan, 1938.

Encyclopaedia of the Social Sciences. Edwin R. A. Seligman and Alvin Johnson (eds.). New York, Macmillan Co.

Vol. 2 (1930);  Vol. 10 (1933)

Explorations in economics, notes and essays contributed in honor of F. W. Taussig. New York: McGraw-Hill, 1936.

Fanno, Marco. Normal and abnormal international capital transfers. University of Minnesota Press, 1939.

Fisher, Irving. The purchasing power of money. Its determination and relation to credit, interest and crises. New York: Macmillan, 1911.

Gilbert, J. C. The present position of the theory of international trade. The Review of Economic Studies, Vol. 3, No. 1 (Oct., 1935), pp. 18-34.

Gilbert, J. C. The mechanism of interregional redistributions of money. The Review of Economic Studies, Vol. 5, No. 3 (Jun., 1938), pp. 187-194.

Graham, Frank D. and Charles R. Whittlesey. Golden avalanche. Princeton: Princeton University Press, 1939.

Haberler, Gottfried. The theory of international trade. Trans. by Alfred Stonier and Frederic Benham. London: William Hodge, 1936.

Heckscher, Eli F. Mercantilism (2 vols.) London: George Allen and Unwin, first edition, 193; revised, second edition, 1955. Original Swedish edition, 1931). (Review Essay by John J. McCusker in EH.net)

Heckscher, Eli F. Mercantilism. The Economic History Review, Vol. 7, No. 1 (Nov., 1936), pp. 44-54

Hume, David. Essays, moral, political, and literary. Eugene F. Miller (ed.). Indianapolis: Liberty Fund, Inc.

Kaldor, Nicholas. A note on tariffs and the terms of trade. Economica, New Series, Vol. 7, No. 28 (Nov., 1940), pp. 377-380.

Keynes, John Maynard. A treatise on money. (2 vols.) New York: Harcourt, Brace and Company, 1930.

Kindleberger, Charles P. International short-term capital movements. New York: Columbia University Press, 1939.

Leontief, Wassily W. The use of indifference curves in the analysis of foreign trade. The Quarterly Journal of Economics, Vol. 47, No. 3 (May, 1933), pp. 493-503.

Leontief, Wassily. Note on the pure theory of capital transfer. In . In Explorations in economics, notes and essays contributed in honor of F. W. Taussig. (1936).

Lerner, A. P. The diagrammatical representation of cost conditions in international trade. Economica, No. 37 (Aug., 1932), pp. 346-356.

Lerner, A. P. The diagrammatical representation of demand conditions in international trade. Economica, New Series, Vol. 1, No. 3 (Aug., 1934), pp. 319-334.

Malynes, Gerard. A treatise of the canker of England’s commonwealth, 1601. in Tawney and Power, Tudor economic documents, III, 1924, pp. 386-505.

Malynes, Gerard. The circle of commerce or the ballance of trade, in defence [sic] of free trade [sic], 1623.

Mill, John Stuart. Principles of political economy with some of their applications to social philosophy. (7th ed.). A. J. Ashley (ed.). London: Longmans, Green and Co., 1909.

Morgan, E.Victor The theory and practice of central banking, 1797-1913. Cambridge,: Cambridge University Press, 1943.

Mosak, Jacob L. General-Equilibrium theory in international trade (University of Chicago doctoral dissertation, 1941).Bloomington, IN: Principia Press, 1944.

Mun, Thomas. England’s Treasure by Forraign Trade (1664). New York, Macmillan and Co., 1895.

Ohlin, Bertil G. Interregional and international trade. Harvard Economic Studies No. 39. Cambridge: Harvard University Press, 1933.

Paish, F. W. Banking policy and the balance of international payments. Economica, New Series, Vol. 3, No. 12 (Nov., 1936), pp. 404-422.

The Works of David Ricardo (New edition). J. R. McCulloch (ed.). London: John Murray, 1888.

Economic Essays by David Ricardo. Edited with introductory essay and notes by E. C. K. Gonner. London, G. Bell and Sons, 1926.

Ricardo, David. Principles of Political Economy and Taxation, E. C.K. Gonner (ed.). London, George Bell and Sons, 1903.

Robertson, D. H. Changes in international demand and the terms of trade. The Quarterly Journal of Economics, Vol. 52, No. 3 (May, 1938), pp. 539-540.

Robertson, D. H. Indemnity Payments and Gold Movements. Quarterly Journal of Economics, Vol. 53, No. 2 (Feb., 1939), pp. 312-314.

Robertson, D. H. Indemnity Payments and Gold Movements: A Rejoinder. Quarterly Journal of Economics, Vol. 53, No. 2 (Feb., 1939), pp. 317.

Samuelson, Paul A. Welfare economics and international trade. The American Economic Review, Vol. 28, No. 2 (Jun., 1938), pp. 261-266

Shields, Murry (ed.) International financial stabilization: a symposium. New York: Irving Trust Company, 1944.

Silberling, Norman J. Financial and Monetary Policy of Great Britain During the Napoleonic Wars, Quarterly Journal of Economics, Vol. 38, No. 2 (Feb., 1924), pp. 214-233; No. 3 (May, 1924), pp. 397-439.

Sprague, O. M. W. “Statistical Data on Foreign Short-term Funds; their Collection and Use.” Paper read before an assembly of central bank governors following the General Meeting at the Bank for International Settlements in May 1932. [mentioned in Third Annual Report, Bank for International Settlements, Basle (May 8, 1933), p. 22.]

Studies in mathematical economics and econometrics: in memory of Henry Schultz. Oscar Lange, Francis McIntyre and Theodore O. Yntema (eds.). Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1942.

Viner, Jacob. Angell’s Theory of International Prices. Journal of Political Economy, Vol. 34, No. 5 (Oct., 1926), pp. 597-623.

Viner, Jacob. Review of Heckscher. The Economic History Review, Vol. 6, No. 1 (Oct., 1935), pp. 99-101

Viner, Jacob. Studies in the Theory of International Trade. New York: Harper and Brothers Publishers, 1937.

Viner, Jacob. Indemnity Payments and Gold Movements: A Reply. Quarterly Journal of Economics, Vol. 53, No. 2 (Feb., 1939), pp. 314-317.

Viner, Jacob. Two plans for international monetary stabilization. Yale Review, Vol. XXXIII (1943-44), p. 77ff.

Whittlesey, Charles Raymond. International monetary issues. New York: McGraw-Hill, 1937.

Williams, John H. Currency stabilization: The Keynes and White Plans. Foreign Affairs, Vol. 21, No. 4 (Jul., 1943), pp. 645-658.

Williams, John H. Currency stabilization: American and British attitudes. Foreign Affairs, Vol. 22, No. 2 (Jan., 1944), pp. 233-247

Wood, Elmer. English theories of central banking control, 1819-1858, with some account of contemporary procedure. Harvard Economic Studies 64. Cambridge: Harvard University Press, 1939.

____________________________

Ph. D. Exam questions in int’l trade

  1. Basic determinants of course of trade (direction, volume, constituent items) between regions in absence of legal barriers. How reconcile this with statement that course of trade determined by (1) comparative cost of prod. (2) relative scarcities of factors of production in regions.
  1. Explain differences & similarities in mechanism of capital transfer under (a) int’l metallic standard & (b) flexible exchanges.
  1. Is it possible to demonstrate superiority of fixed over flexible exchanges, or vice versa, from a national point of view, on purely a priori grounds? Why or why not?
  1. Role in int’l monetary equilibrium of (a) official gold price (b) stabilization fund (c) sterilization (d) tripartite agreement.
  1. Give an account of the evolution of terms of trade theorizing or explain the role in mercantilist thought of (a) bullionist doctrine (b) balance of labor doctrine c) quantity theory of value of money.
  1. Discuss the role in Eng. mercantilist thinking of (a) considerations of power as distinguished from consideration of plenty (b) provision motive (c) quantity theory of money.
  1. Discuss the role of “income elasticity” in the older & newer literature on the mechanism of adjustment of int’l balances.
  1. Discuss the role of short-term capital movements under flexible & fixed exchanges.
  1. Explain the possibilities & the limitations of national gain in the long-run thru governmental restriction on for. trade.
  1. int’l monetary system
  1. Explain the relationship to each other in int’l static equilibrium of (a) comparative costs (b) relative scarcity of factors (c) reciprocal demand.
  1. Discuss role in operations of pre-1914 gold standard of (a) central banking (b) London money market (c) exchange rate fluctuations.
  1. Explain role in mechanism of adjustment to disturbances of int’l balances of payments of (a) income elasticity (b) price elasticity (c) final purchase (or income) velocity.
  1. Note on following pre-Smithian doctrines (a) power vs. plenty as objectives of trade policy (b) the desirability or undesirability of hoards of the precious metals (c) a divinely ordained “universal economy.” (d) balance of labor.
  1. What are the possibilities in the long run, of national & of world economic gains from the imposition by national units of restrictions on foreign trade.
  1. Role of int’l short-term capital movements in int’l monetary & trade mechanism.
  1. Under free trade the nature of interregional specialization is determined by the relative scarcities of the factors of production in the diff. regions.
    1. What is meant by relative scarcity of factors of prod.
    2. Do the exponents of this theory mean “determined solely”
    3. Does free trade necessarily conduce to the lessening of the differences in the relative rates of remuneration of the diff. categories of “factors of production” as between diff. countries.
    4. If you were setting up a system of equalities to illustrate the nature of int’l equilibrium under free trade—what “standard of living” consideration would you take care of & how?
  1. Discuss interrelationships (if any) of balance of power, balance of trade, “balance of labor” considerations in English mercantilist doctrine.
  1. Explain basic theoretical issues between bullionists & the ant-bullionists of Restriction period & indicate to what extent Ricardo’s views were not generally accepted by the bullionists.

_____________________________

Source: Don Patinkin Papers. David M. Rubenstein Rare Book & Manuscript Library, Duke University.. Box 3 (Course Materials and Class Notes), Folder “Patinkin as Student: Notebooks (1944)”.

Image Source: University of Chicago Photographic Archive, apf1-08488, Special Collections Research Center, University of Chicago Library. The photograph is dated 14 June 1944.

Categories
Chicago Columbia Cornell Harvard Johns Hopkins Michigan Pennsylvania

Top Eleven Economics PhD Programs in US, 1934

A listing of 22 U.S. graduate programs in economics judged by majority vote of a jury of 54 individuals (identified by name) to be adequately staffed and equipped for work leading to the doctorate in Economics. Eleven of those programs were designated to be “distinguished”.

________________________________

Excerpt from:

American Council on Education.
Report of Committee on Graduate Instruction.
Washington, D. C., April 1934.

…In preparing a list of graduate schools the following procedure was followed:

  1. A list of 50 fields of knowledge in which it seemed possible to study the graduate work was prepared. The study as concluded covered only 35 fields.
  2. A list of the 50 fields was sent to the Dean of the graduate school of every institution known to be offering work for the doctorate. The Dean was requested to check the fields in which graduate work for the doctorate was offered, to indicate the number of doctorates conferred in the last 5 years, and to submit a list of the graduate faculty in each field. The responses of the deans varied in accuracy and comprehensiveness.
  3. From the reports of the deans, supplemented by study of catalogs, lists of institutions offering graduate work for the doctorate in each field, were prepared, complete so far as our information went.
  4. The secretary of the national learned society in each field was requested to provide a list of 100 well-known scholars distributed, as far as possible, among the various special branches of the field.
  5. To each of these scholars was sent a list of all the institutions offering work for the doctorate in the field with their respective graduate staffs in the field. Each scholar was requested to check those institutions which in his judgment had an adequate staff and equipment to prepare candidates for the doctorate; and to star the departments of the highest rank, roughly the highest 20 per cent.
  6. The returns from these scholars were summarized, and those institutions accorded a star by the majority voting were placed in the starred group; those checked by a majority, but failing of a majority of stars, were placed in the group of those adequately staffed and equipped….

…Many votes on departments came in too late for inclusion in tabulations.

[…]

ECONOMICS
100 ballots sent out.
61 returns; majority, 31 votes.
535 doctorates were conferred in the period 1928-1932: 53 institutions offered work for doctorate.

Composite ratings were made from reports of the following persons: James W. Angell, George E. Barnett, J. W. Bell, A. B. Berglund, Roy G. Blakey, E. L. Bogart, O. F. Bouche, F. A. Bradford, T. N. Carver, J. M. Clark, Clive Day, F. S. Deibler, Paul Douglas, F. A. Fetter, Irving Fisher, F. B. Garver, Carter Goodrich, C. E. Griffin, M. B. Hammond, Alvin Hansen, C. D. Hardy, B. H. Hibbard, H. E. Hoagland, Grover G. Huebner, John Ise, Jens Jensen, Eliot Jones, Edwin Kemmerer, James E. LeRossingnol, H. L. Lutz, David McCabe, H. A. Millis, Broadus Mitchell, Wesley C. Mitchell, H. G. Moulton, C. T. Murchison, E. G. Nourse, E. M. Patterson, Carl Plohn, C. O. Ruggles, W. A. Scott, Horace Secrist, S. H. Slichter, T. R. Snavely, W. E. Spahr, R. A. Stevenson, G. W. Stocking, Frank P. Stockton, H. C. Taylor, Jesse Tullock, Francis Tyson, Jacob Viner, G. S. Watkins, A. B. Wolfe.

The jury named above has by a majority vote approved the following institutions as adequately staffed and equipped for work leading to the doctorate in Economics, starring which it considers most distinguished:

Brown University

*

University of Chicago

*

Columbia University University of Illinois

*

Cornell University University of Iowa

*

Harvard University—Radcliffe College

*

University of Michigan
Johns Hopkins University

*

University of Minnesota
New York University University of Missouri
Northwestern University

*

University of Pennsylvania
Ohio State University University of Texas

*

Princeton University University of Virginia
Stanford University

*

University of Wisconsin

*

University of California

*

Yale University

[…]

 

Source: Columbia University Rare Book & Manuscript Library. William Vickrey Papers, Box 35, Folder “510.7/1934/Am3”.

Categories
Chicago Courses Exam Questions

Chicago. Modern Tendencies in Economics. Viner. 1933

The following list of readings and examination questions come from the Milton Friedman papers. Only the examination questions are from a typed copy, the list of reading assignments has been transcribed from Friedman’s handwritten notes from when he took the course with Jacob Viner. Links have been added whenever found.  Anything within square brackets has been added by me, otherwise I have left the text for the most part as I found it.

____________________________

From Courses of Instruction 1932-33.

303. Modern Tendencies in Economics.–A critical study of controversial questions in the general body of orthodox theory, and of some modern departures from orthodox theory. The discussion covers questions as to the selection of problems in economic theory, methods, tools of thought, assumptions, laws and standards of validity appropriate to the central body of economic though under present conditions. Prerequisite: Economics 301 or its equivalent. Spring, Viner.

Source: Announcements,Arts, Literature and Science, vol. XXXII, February, 1932, no. 12 (for the sessions 1932-33), p. 354.

____________________________

Economics 303 [Spring Quarter 1933]
Modern Economic Tendencies
Jacob Viner

 Assignments

J. S. Mill—System of Logic

Bk III, chs 8, 10, 11
Bk VI, chs 1,3,7,8,9

Some Unsettled Questions, Essay V

W. H. Hamilton—The Place of Value Theory in Economics. J.P.E. March-May [sic], 1918

[Part I, March; Part II, April]

Lionel Robbins: Essay on the Nature etc of Economics ch 1 & 2

Wesley Michel [Mitchell] Role of Money in Ec[onomic] Theory Am Ec Rev Supplement March 1916

Fetter, Price Ecs vs Welfare Ecs. Am Ec Rev. Sept, ‘20

Marshall. Consumer’s Surplus & Max satisfaction

Bk II ch VI
Bk V ch XIII, 94-97
Math App. Cost & ¶ of note XIII

J.A. Hobson, Work & Wealth. Ch 1-5, 7, 8, 9, 12, 22.

[J. A. Hobson] Free Thought & the Social Sciences pp. 131-145

Viner. Utility Concept Aug 1925, J.P.E.

Robbins: Essay on the Nature etc of Economics ch 6

Pigou Ec’s of Welfare—3rd ed only

Part I ch 1-2
Part II ch 1-5, 9, 11
Appendix III pp. 787-815
[last two items “minimum”]

[4th edition, The principal changes made in this edition affect Chapter IV. and Chapter VI. §§ 12-13 in Part I.; Chapter XI. § 2 and Chapter XV. in Part II.; and Chapter IX. §§ 2-3 and Chapter XIV. § 1 in Part III.]

Veblen: “Why is Econ not an Econ Science? Place of Science pp. 56ff or Q. J. E. July 1898

Instinct of Workmanship. Chs 5 & 6

Theory of the Leisure Class. chs 1-5

Prof. Clark’s Ec’s [Economics]: Place of Science 180 ff.

Homan. Ch. VIII in Odum Am[erican] Masters of Soc[ial] Science or in Contemporary Ec[onomic] Thought pp. 105-192.

[Homan, Paul T. (1927) ‘Thorstein Veblen’, in Odum, Howard W. (ed.) American Masters of Social Science (New York: Holt), pp. 231-70.
Homan, Paul T. (1928). Contemporary Economic Thought, Harper & Bros.]

 

Institutionalism

W. C. Mitchell Prospects of Ec[onomic]’s in Tugwell. Trends pp. 1-34.

[The Trend of Economics, Rexford Guy Tugwell (ed.) (1930). The Prospects Of Economics, By W. C. Mitchell; On Measurement In Economics, By F. C. Mills; The Socializing Of Theoretical Economics, By J. M. Clark; Communities Of Economic Interest And The Price System, By M. A. Copeland; The Reality Of Noncommercial Incentives In Economic Life, By P. H. Douglas; Economic Theory And The Statesman, By R. L. Hale; The Limitations Of Scientific Methods In Economics, By F. H. Knight; Some Recent Developments Of Economic Theory, By R. T. Bye; The Organization And Control Of Economic Activity, By S. H. Slichter; Economics Science And Art, By G. Soule; Experimental Economics, By R. G. Tugwell; Regional Comparison And Economic Progress, By W. E. Weld; Functional Economics, By A. B. Wolfe.]

Hamilton The Institutional Approach. Amer. Ec. Rev. Suppl. IV, 309-324.

[Walton H. Hamilton. The Institutional Approach to Economic Theory
The American Economic Review. Vol. 9, No. 1, Supplement, Papers and Proceedings of the Thirty-First Annual Meeting of the American Economic Association (Mar., 1919), pp. 309-318.]

Hamilton. Control of Wages ch 10, 11, 12

[Walton Hamilton and Stacy May. The Control of Wages. New York: George H. Doran, 1923).]

A. A. Young pp. 249-260 in Ec. Problems, New & Old [sic]

[Allyn Abbott Young. Economic Problems: New and Old. Houghton Mifflin Comp, 1927]

[A. A. Young] English Pol. Ec. Economica, [illegible word(s)]

[Allyn A. Young. English Political Economy. Economica. No. 22 (Mar., 1928), pp. 1-15]

 

Suggestion:

Albion Small [1924] “Origins of Sociology” ch. 11 [The Attempt to Reconstruct Classical Economic Theory on the Basis of Comparative Economic History, 1850], 14 [Later Phases of the Conflict Between the Historical and the Austrian Schools].

[Albion W. Small, Origins of Sociology. Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1924.
This book was first published serially in the American Journal of Sociology, January, 1923-November, 1924, with the title Some Contributions to the History of Sociology (Section XI and XIV). The corresponding articles are found at Vol. 29, No. 4 (Jan., 1924), pp. 443-454 and Vol. 29, No. 5 (Mar., 1924), pp. 571-598.]

Cliff. Leslie [T. E. Cliffe Leslie] “Philos. Essays” Essay 14

[cf. First edition (1879, Essay XIV “On the Philosophical Method of Political Economy”) with Second edition (1888, Essay XIV Economic Science and Statistics). Essay XVI “Political Economy and Sociology” of the second edition appears to me the reading that best fits to the sociology theme at this point in the reading list..]

Parsons “Summary of …” J. P. E. Dec. 1928, Feb. 1929

[Talcott Parsons. “Capitalism” In Recent German Literature: Sombart and Weber. Journal of Political Economy. Vol. 36, No. 6 (Dec., 1928), pp. 641-661; Vol. 37, No. 1 (Feb., 1929), pp. 31-51.]

Mitchell “On Sombart” Feb ‘29

[Wesley C. Mitchell. Sombart’s Hochkapitalismus. The Quarterly Journal of Economics Vol. 43, No. 2 (Feb., 1929), pp. 303-323]

Rogin “On Sombart” Apr. ‘33

[Leo Rogin. Werner Sombart and the “Natural Science Method” in Economics. Journal of Political Economy. Vol. 41, No. 2 (Apr., 1933), pp. 222-236]

Sombart “Die Drei Nationalökonomien”

[Werner Sombart. Die drei Nationalökonomien : Geschichte und System der Lehre von der Wirtschaft. München [u.a.] : Duncker & Humblot, 1930]

F. C. Mills in Tugwell, Trends “On Imp[?] Methd[?]”

[The Trend of Economics, Rexford Guy Tugwell (ed.) (1930). The Prospects Of Economics, By W. C. Mitchell; On Measurement In Economics, By F. C. Mills; The Socializing Of Theoretical Economics, By J. M. Clark; Communities Of Economic Interest And The Price System, By M. A. Copeland; The Reality Of Noncommercial Incentives In Economic Life, By P. H. Douglas; Economic Theory And The Statesman, By R. L. Hale; The Limitations Of Scientific Methods In Economics, By F. H. Knight; Some Recent Developments Of Economic Theory, By R. T. Bye; The Organization And Control Of Economic Activity, By S. H. Slichter; Economics Science And Art, By G. Soule; Experimental Economics, By R. G. Tugwell; Regional Comparison And Economic Progress, By W. E. Weld; Functional Economics, By A. B. Wolfe.]

Mitchell Nov[sic] 1925. Proceedings of Am. Ec. Assoc.

[Wesley C. Mitchell. Quantitative Analysis in Economic Theory. The American Economic Review. Vol. 15, No. 1 (Mar., 1925), pp. 1-12]

[Mitchell] Mar 1929 pp. 28… (A.E.R)

[Frederick C. Mills , Jacob H. Hollander , Jacob Viner , E. B. Wilson , Wesley C. Mitchell , F. W. Taussig , T. S. Adams , John D. Black and John Candler Cobb in “The Present Status and Future Prospects of Quantitative Economics”. The American Economic Review. Vol. 18, No. 1, Supplement, Papers and Proceedings of the Fortieth Annual Meeting of the American Economic Association (Mar., 1928), pp. 28-45]

Viner. Q. J. E. Feb ’29—Rev. of Millis on prices.

[Jacob Viner. Review of Behavior of Prices by Frederick Mills. The Quarterly Journal of Economics. Vol. 43, No. 2 (Feb., 1929), pp. 337-352]

Spann “ Types of Econ Theories[“] Preface, ch. 4, 12.

[Othmar Spann. Types of Economic Theory. 1929 English translation of the 19th edition of Die Haupttheorien der Vokswirtschaftslehre,  17th edition in German]

 

Schultz assignments

Chp 3, Manuel of Pareto

[Vilfredo Pareto. Manuel d’Économie Politique. Paris: V. Giard & E. Brière, 1909]

Pareto, Traité de Sociologie Général, look in index under Dependance Mutuel, & Equilibrium

[Cf. George C. Homans and Charles P. Curtis, Jr. An Introduction Pareto: His Sociology. New York: Alfred A. Knopf, 1934.]

Zawadzki, W. Les mathématiques appliqués à l’économie politique. [Paris, Rivière, 1914].

 

On In[stitutional] Ec’s [Economics]

Mitchell’s essays[sic] in Trends[sic] in Ec’s[Economics] by Tugwell & paper by Mills and Mitchell’s Pres. Address to Am. St. Ass. in 1927 volume. [?]

[The Trend of Economics, Rexford Guy Tugwell (ed.) (1930). The Prospects Of Economics, By W. C. Mitchell; On Measurement In Economics, By F. C. Mills; The Socializing Of Theoretical Economics, By J. M. Clark; Communities Of Economic Interest And The Price System, By M. A. Copeland; The Reality Of Noncommercial Incentives In Economic Life, By P. H. Douglas; Economic Theory And The Statesman, By R. L. Hale; The Limitations Of Scientific Methods In Economics, By F. H. Knight; Some Recent Developments Of Economic Theory, By R. T. Bye; The Organization And Control Of Economic Activity, By S. H. Slichter; Economics Science And Art, By G. Soule; Experimental Economics, By R. G. Tugwell; Regional Comparison And Economic Progress, By W. E. Weld; Functional Economics, By A. B. Wolfe.
Wesley C. Mitchell. Statistics and Government. Publications of the American Statistical Association. Vol. 16, No. 125 (Mar., 1919), pp. 223-235]

Source: Hoover Institution. Milton Friedman Papers, Box 120. Handwritten notes for Economics 303,Modern Economic Tendencies, Jacob Viner.

­­­­­­­­­­____________________________

 

[signature: Milton Friedman]

Economics 303
1st Examination—1 hour

  1. What was J. S. Mill’s position with respect to:

(a) the scope for induction in the social sciences;

(b) the use of the “geometric method” in political economy; in the social sciences;

(c) the “economic man.”

 

  1. Explain and appraise Marshall’s technique of “maximum satisfaction” analysis.

(a) What were Veblen’s principal contributions to economic methodology?

(b) What are the differences and what the resemblances between the content of what Hobson calls “human values” and what ordinary utility theorists call “utility” or “satisfaction” or “economic welfare”?

(c) In what manner and degree does Pigou’s technique of welfare analysis overcome the difficulties in the way of accepting price as the measure of welfare.

Source: Hoover Institution. Milton Friedman Papers, Box 115, Folder 13. “Biographical: Class Exams circa 1932-1938”.

­­­­­­­­­­____________________________

[signature: Milton Friedman]

Economics 303
2nd Examination—1 hour

  1. Explain, with reference to exponents of these types of economics, any five of the following:

(a) institutional economics; [✓]

(b) genetic economics; [✓]

(c) historical economics; [✓]

(d)“verstehende” economics; [✓]

(e) functional economics; [✓]

(f) experimental economics; [✓]

(g) social economics;

(h) romantic economics[✓]

2.    (a) List all of the empirical (historical) laws of economics which have been allegedly discovered by quantitative methods, and indicate for each very briefly whether you are inclined to accept it as a law, and if so on what grounds.

(b) State as briefly as possible the nature of the difficulties in the way of the discovery of genuine empirical laws of a quantitative nature in the field of economic phenomena.

  1. Write on either:

(a) Give the equations of the general equilibrium of exchange and production indicating the underlying assumptions, and the economic meaning of each equation. Compare the general equilibrium approach with that of Marshall.

or

(b) Explain the way in which pure theory has been used to determine one of the following:

(1) the concrete, statistical curve of the marginal utility of money.

(2) statistical demand curves, with special reference to the demand for related (completing or competing) goods.

(3) theoretical “cycles” of production and prices.

Point out the underlying assumptions and critically appraise the results obtained.

 

Source: Hoover Institution. Milton Friedman Papers, Box 115, Folder 13. “Biographical: Class Exams circa 1932-1938”.

Image Source: University of Chicago Photographic Archive, apf1-08488, Special Collections Research Center, University of Chicago Library. The photograph is dated 14 June 1944.