Categories
Harvard Salaries

Harvard(?). Professor’s standard of living, 1905

In an old email (2003!) from my Berliner Humboldt Universität colleague/buddy Michael Burda, I found a gem he forwarded to me from Brad DeLong’s Semi-Daily Journal (July 6, 2003). I was unable to establish a link to the original page at DeLong’s current website. 

Today’s post is an article from 1905 that provides spending data based on family accounts kept by the wife of an anonymous professor over a nine year period. Let me provide my thoughts why I believe the professor in question was at Harvard University.

Note that the G.H.M. in the byline to the article appears to be reporting what he was told by an unnamed professor. From the Table of Contents for vol. 95 of The Atlantic Monthly, there is an article (The Ethics of Trust Competition) written by one Gilbert Holland Montague (note: G.H.M.), whom I conclude was the author of the article “What Should College Professors Be Paid?” posted below.

Montague received his BA (1901) and MA (1902) at Harvard where he also went to law school, graduating in 1904. He was an instructor in economics at Harvard while a law student. It would appear from the biographical sketch below that he probably was working at a New York law firm at the time the article was published.

I suppose it would be possible to identify the anonymous professor assuming he overlapped with Montague’s years at Harvard. It seems reasonable to begin a search in the Harvard Law School or the Harvard department of economics. From the article posted below we are told the accounts are based on household records for 9 years (perhaps: 1895-1904) covering two years at the rank of instructor, two years as assistant professor and the last five years at the rank of associate professor. The nine year of accounts begins with the marriage of the couple that had its first child (or servant) after two years. Maybe somebody will track down the Harvard professor, but for my purposes, I am satisfied with establishing a likely Harvard connection.

_____________________________

Gilbert Holland Montague, 1880-1961

Lawyer, pro-business economist, book collector; economics instructor of FDR.

Born Springfield, Mass., 1880; BA Harvard, 1901; MA 1902; instructor in economics at Harvard while attending Harvard Law school, Franklin D. Roosevelt was one of his students; graduated Harvard Law School, 1904; worked for New York legal firm; clerked for NY Supreme Court, 1908-1910; special deputy attorney general prosecuting election fraud; taught engineering contracts at Brooklyn Polytechnic, 1906-1917; leading practitioner of antitrust law (Sherman and Clayton acts ); employed representing nearly all the large oil companies; actively involved in pro-business “lobbying” and public policy; involved in numerous congressional investigations and committees; served as an advisor to the Treasury and Justice departments; on Attorney General’s Commission to Study Antitrust Laws, and authored most of its 405-page final report calling for reduced government restrictions on private enterprise, 1955.

He is particularly of note for his collection of over 15,000 books and 20,000 pamphlets. He collected manuscripts, including a 14th century copy of the Magna Carta. He was a relative of Emily Dickinson and kept a collection of over 900 of her items. He became somewhat of an expert on Emily, and donated his collection to Harvard in 1950, enabling a number of questions about her life to be answered.

A firm believer in free trade, he wrote diligently in defense of free markets and reduced government involvement in business. He wrote a number of books, including Business Competition and the Law (1917) and Rise and Progress of the Standard Oil Company (1903). He chaired numerous bar association panels, including the ABA’s Antitrust Division, the Committee on Monopolies and Restraints of Trade, and the Committee on the Federal Trade Commission.

Gilbert and his wife maintained a summer home in Seal Harbor, Me., which they called Beaulieu.

Source: Montague Millennium Homepage, page Gilbert Holland Montague, 1880-1961.

____________________________

WHAT SHOULD COLLEGE PROFESSORS BE PAID?

BY G. H. M.
[Gilbert Holland Montague(?)]

A GREAT deal has been written of late, especially in the annual reports of college presidents, regarding the inadequacy of the compensation received by university teachers. The writer, to whom the question is one of vital importance, has seen many of these general statements, but has failed to find any which has taken up the matter in conclusive form. This he hopes to do here concisely.

Primarily the question is one of standard of living. If a grocery clerk can maintain his family in a suitable degree of decency and comfort on seventy-five dollars a month, have we a right to expect that a college instructor can do the same? The answer to this involves the demands which society makes upon the respective individuals.

To get at this point the writer analyzed the itemized household accounts which his wife has kept for the past nine years, during which time he has been connected with one of our large and wealthy universities. Two years were spent as instructor, two as assistant professor, and the next five as associate professor.

Summing up his total expenditures for these nine years, and in like manner his salary for the same period, he finds his expenditures have been to his salary in the ratio of 2.1 to 1.

His average annual expenditure has been $2794.27.

His average salary has been $1328.15.

For the privilege of teaching he has paid the difference, or $1466.12 annually, from private means.

Even the unbusinesslike professor must pause before such a state of affairs, and try to fathom the reason for this discrepancy, when his firm belief is that he is living on as low a scale of economy as is possible for him in his position.

In order to find out where the bad management might be, — if bad management there was, — he divided his expenditure account into thirty-one separate items, arranged in tabular form under the following heads: —

  1. Household Furnishing and Repairs.
  2. Groceries, Meat, Fruit, Vegetables, etc.
  3. Servants.
  4. Fuel.
  5. Light and Water.
  6. Gardener and Grounds.
  7. Laundry.
  8. Taxes.
  9. Life Insurance.
  10. Fire Insurance.
  11. Rent, or Interest on House and Lot.
  12. Bicycles and repairs. Horse, care and feed.
  13. Doctors and Dentists.
  14. Hospitals, Nurses, Drugs.
  15. Death Expenses.
  16. Legal Services.
  17. Interest on Borrowed Money, for running expenses.
  18. P. O. Box, Postage, Stationery, Telegrams, Telephone, Express, etc.
  19. Newspapers, Books, and Periodicals.
  20. Clothing, Dry Goods, Shoes, etc.
  21. Learned Societies and Social Clubs.
  22. University Gifts and Supplies. Typewriting, Printing and Mimeographing.
  23. Children’s Tuition and Pocket Money.
  24. Subscriptions and Charity.
  25. Theatre, Concerts, Athletic Sports.
  26. Christmas and other Gifts. Entertainment of Friends.
  27. Wine, Beer, Tobacco, Candy, and other Luxuries.
  28. Personal and Toilet Supplies.
  29. Business and Recreation Trips, Hotels, R.R. Fare, Carfare, etc.
  30. Family Obligations, or Payment of Education Debt.
  31. Savings, other than Life Insurance, looking toward old age.

He believes that, assuming that a college professor has the right to marry and have two or three children, there is not a single one of these items which may be omitted from a consideration of expenses to cover a period of years. The whole question, then, resolves itself into this: how much per year is it reasonable to allow for each of these items?

In the community in which he lives, with a family of two adults, two children, and one servant, at the present high prices of the necessities of life, he believes that the sums he mentions are the very least upon which his household can be conducted. And he bases this belief upon a most accurate analysis of fully itemized accounts.

Taking up the items in detail: —

  1. Household furnishing and repairs.

This item must cover, for a period of years. the original cost of household furniture of all descriptions. In addition, it must look after natural wear, tear, and breakage of furniture, glass, dishes, kitchen utensils, rugs, curtains, bedding, etc., as well as carpentry, plumbing, and the like. It must also provide for pictures, “works of art,” and household adornments in general.

Does $75 a year seem excessive for this? Say $6 a month.

  1. For five persons a grocery bill of $25 per month, a meat bill of $15, milk, $5, fruit, vegetables, butter and eggs, $10, or a total of $55 ($11 per person), should not seem unreasonable.
  2. We must pay $25 a month for even a passable servant. Shall we expect our wives to bear and rear children, do all of the housework, sustain their social duties, and remain well and strong?
  3. Kitchen, fireplace, and furnace fuel will aggregate $120 per year, or $10 a month.
  4. Light and water average with us just $5 a month.
  5. The labor of a gardener one day a month is $2.
  6. Our laundry averages just $10 monthly. Our servants will do no laundry work.
  7. An investment of $5000 in house and lot, together with personal property and poll tax, makes this $10 a month.

If there were no house owned, the rent item (11) would have to be increased.

  1. To protect the family of a man who is not in a position to save, $5000 life insurance is not too much. The monthly premium on this amount, assuming a twenty-payment ordinary life policy, will be $10.
  2. $3000 insurance on house, and $2000 on personal property, makes $18 per year, or $1.50 a month.
  3. Six per cent on $5000 invested in house and lot is $300 annually, or $25 a month. This does not provide for depreciation, maintenance, and repairs. No desirable house on the campus can be rented for less than $35.
  4. Not caring to pay so large a rent, we live off the campus and use bicycles. Their depreciation and repairs average $2 a month. Keeping a horse would cost $8 a month.
  5. An experience of ten years shows us that not less than $10 a month may be set down for doctors and dentists for the family. A single attack of appendicitis in ten years will take the whole of this.
  6. Hospitals, nurses, and drugs average $5 a month.
  7. Since the average duration of life is about forty years, in a family of four individuals one death is to be expected every ten years. This item may be set down at $2 a month.
  8. Occasional notary and minor legal services average $1 a month.
  9. Certain expenses, like life insurance and taxes, being payable in large amounts, necessitate loans from the bank, which are gradually repaid. This item may be set down at fifty cents monthly.
  10. For a live family with connections, postage, stationery, telegrams, telephones, express, freight, cartage, and allied items, will aggregate $3 a month.
  11. Newspapers, books, and periodicals college professor is supposed to revel in this sort of thing. Suppose we allow him $5 a month.
  12. To clothe four individuals neatly and completely cannot cost less than $180 a year, can it?

This is $15 a month.

  1. Learned society and social club initiation fees and dues must amount to at least $2 monthly.
  2. University gifts and supplies, type-writing, etc. We are constantly going into our pockets for small items which the university will not or cannot furnish without unbearable delay; or we may be working on lines of investigation which call for outlay. Say $1 a month.
  3. In our case, our children are of the kindergarten and primary school age, so this item is only $9 a month.

Older colleagues, whose children have advanced to the music lesson and preparatory school age, say they must allow $50 to $60 monthly.

  1. Some families belong to a church. We all have charitable instincts, we are of that class to which the call of needy or suffering humanity appeals.

May we allow $2 a month?

  1. Our education has given us a refined appreciation of the drama, and we have a knowledge of and love for the best music. The annual foot-ball game is a social event which every loyal member of the college community is supposed to attend. We cut this out long ago. Grand opera exists for us only in the memory of our German days.

Let us keep the spark alive by taking our wives once a month to a cheap concert; say $1.

  1. We have children and friends; there are birthdays and anniversaries, as well as Christmas. Is $50 a year too much? This is $4 a month. Dinners, receptions, and the like, are not for us.
  2. Occasionally a man is jaded; he has a wild desire to “blow himself.” May he have $1 a month pocket money, to share with his wife?
  3. Most of us can shave ourselves, but we cannot cut our own hair, although we may invert a bowl over the heads of our youngsters, and trim around the edges.

Here is another $1.

  1. When summer comes, a teacher is pretty nearly always exhausted. His work is trying and confining. His family requires an occasional change of air.

His professional needs may call for a long journey to attend an important meeting of fellow workers, etc. For an average geographical location $100 a year, or $8.50 a month, is not too much to cover these items. For an exceptional location, like the extreme Pacific coast, this item should be trebled.

  1. The writer has known many colleagues whose education expenses had put them under obligations which they were pledged to repay. In most cases it takes ten years to wipe out these obligations. Sometimes at the end of this period not even the beginning of discharging the debt has been made. Our college professors often come from families whose means are small. The support of aged parents or other relatives may have to be borne by them in common with their brothers and sisters. Every man is apt to have some such claim on himself or his wife.

To cover these items let us allow him $10 a month.

  1. A few, a very few, of our colleges pay pensions to their old and worn-out teachers. In such cases perhaps there is no need for a man to lay aside something for his old age, or to make provision for his children’s start in life.

Perhaps he owes a duty to his children, to give them as good an education and chance as he himself received. If so, he must begin to lay aside for it.

Where there is no pension, should he not aim, after thirty years of faithful service, to have $10,000 laid aside? He is not in a position to know of places where he can get large returns on his small investments.

Shall we allow him $250 a year to put aside (providing there are no “exceptional and unusual” expenses that year, as there always are)?

Let us say $20 per month.

SUMMARY

These are certainly not great demands. Yet, summing them up, taking the smaller of the two when two sums are mentioned, we have $262.50 monthly, or $31501 per year. Let us talk no more of bad management,—we and our wives face an impossible problem.

CONCLUSION

If this seems extravagant to those who have to determine upon the proper minimum compensation for a man of long training, education, and refinement, we must ask them to look over these items carefully, one by one, and put down what they think a fair sum for each item for a family of the college professor’s social status. Then let them foot up the total. The average college professor’s salary, in the United States, is about $2000.2 The inevitable deduction from the table of analyzed expenses, borne out by the experience of the writer and of all of his colleagues whom he has consulted, is that this must be increased sixty per cent, —the increase to be uniform in all grades, from instructor to head professor.

If the profession of teaching is to attract the highest type of efficient manhood, a living salary must be paid. A man who devotes his life to the cause of the advancement of education must feel a “call ” to it. He should be of a type which joyfully relinquishes all desire to accumulate worldly wealth or to live in luxury. Large salaries, commensurate with what equal ability would bring in other lines of work ($10,000 to $50,000), might be just, but would be undesirable, as they would tend to serve as bait to attract mercenary and lower types of men.

But a man fit to occupy a chair in a university should be paid enough to enable him to live in decency and comfort, rearing and educating his children, and retiring in his old age to something other than absolute penury.

The writer would commend a careful study of his table to all college trustees.

Can a man, whose energies are spent in so unequal and impossible a struggle to make both ends meet, maintain freshness and vigor in his work, be an inspiration to his students, and fulfill in scholarship the promise of his early years? The alternative demanded by the conditions is celibacy.

The difference between this sum and the writer’s average of $2,794.27 is accounted for by the fact that he has saved nothing, and that his accounts begin with his first year of married life, when both his wife and he were well supplied with clothing, books, pictures, and certain items of household furnishings. No children and no servant for the first two years. Owning our own home since the second year, we have not included anything for rent or interest.

This includes not merely full professors, but the other ranks as well.

Source:   The Atlantic Monthly, vol. 95, no. 5 (May, 1905), pp. 647-650.

Categories
Columbia Computing

Columbia. Statistical Lab Equipment for Economics Faculty Request, 1948

__________________________

One detects George Stigler’s style in the justification below for the purchase of two pieces of calculating equipment for the use of economics faculty at Columbia in 1948: “…the economist requires more than a library, a pen, a desk, and possibly a crystal-ball to prosecute his studies. He requires empirical material, lots of it, and this material is often numerical.” In the same budget request we also find a list (with current costs) of mundane faculty office furniture items, classroom accessories, and a dictionary for the department administrator.

Cf. An earlier posting for the purchase of a calculator by Henry Schultz at the University of Chicago in 1928.

__________________________

Columbia University
in the City of New York
[New York 27, N.Y.]

FACULTY OF POLITICAL SCIENCE

January 13, 1948

Dr. Frank D. Fackenthal, Acting President,
213 Low Memorial Library.

Dear Mr. President:

I beg to submit the requests of the Department of Economics for fixed equipment and physical changes for the fiscal year 1948-49. The greater part of the sum asked is for non-recurring items. The total request is for $1,465, divided as follows:

1) New furniture necessitated by recent alterations in Fayerweather and Hamilton Halls

$270.00

2) Ordinary needs for 1948-49

$195.00

3) Statistical equipment for Economics Faculty

$1000.00

            Item 1) represents furniture equipment urgently needed as a result of the alterations in the two halls. The details are given on the following page. A part of this equipment has already been asked for during the present fiscal year and all of it should, if possible, be provided at once and paid for on the present budget.

Item 2) is explained on the second page following.

Item 3) represents a request for technical equipment which would be of great service in the work of members of the Department. This request is explained and justified in detail in the appended statement prepared by a Departmental committee consisting of Professor Stigler, chairman, and Professors Haig and Harriss.

Respectfully yours,
[signed] Carter Goodrich

__________________________

1) [New furniture]

Item For Cost
Book shelves A. R. Burns $30.00
Clothing tree A. R. Burns $ 5.00
Club chair R. Nurkse $75.00
Legal size filing cabinet R. Nurkse $75.00
6 straight chairs H. Taylor $30.00
Swivel chair C. L. Harriss $15.00
4 coat racks H. Taylor $20.00
Small table O. Hoeffding $20.00
[Total] $270.00

2)        Ordinary needs for 1949-49

Item For Cost
Wall map of Europe R. Nurkse $   20.00
Grid-panel blackboard in classroom W. S. Vickrey $   20.00
Dictionary G. D. Stewart $     5.00
Other needs $150.00
[Total] $195.00

 

3) Proposal of a Statistical Laboratory for Faculty in Economics

$1,000.00

  1. The need

Contrary to a widely held opinion, the economist requires more than a library, a pen, a desk, and possibly a crystal-ball to prosecute his studies. He requires empirical material, lots of it, and this material is often numerical. Statistical analysis, broadly defined, is the social scientist’s laboratory, and in principle the social scientist must spend more time in his laboratory than the natural scientist in his because the social scientist’s findings become obsolete even in the absence of improved techniques and doctrines. The statistical method is important in all branches of economics; it is noteworthy that the present proposal is energetically supported by five teachers of economic theory.

Granting the necessity for quantitative work, and noting the frequency with which such work leads to fairly extensive computations, the faculty requires access to computational equipment (and, one is tempted to say, assistance). At present this access is small and fortuitous. The available computational equipment is being used extensively by students, and it is common to be unsuccessful for several days before obtaining use of a machine. Since the department of economics has no such equipment, a protracted use of the machines (that is, more than say 6 hours a week) is properly objected to by the administrator of the laboratory, but usually this is an unattainable limit.

  1. The detailed proposal

1.  Equipment. We propose to purchase two machines:

Underwood Sundstrand, tape adding machine, Model 1014p
Marchant Calculator, Model ACT – 10M

2. Cost. The purchase price of these machines would be:

Sundstrand: $330 less 10 percent plus 6 percent = $316.80
Marchant:     $750 less 15 percent plus 6 percent = $682.50,

a total of $999.30. The annual cost of servicing the machines would be (1) nothing the first year, (2) $18 for the Sundstrand and $36 for the Marchant thereafter. In addition there would be the cost of the tapes for the Sundstrand, electricity, and space.

These machines will last, at a very conservative minimum, 10 years. Hence, the pro-rate annual cost of the laboratory would be on the order of $170 (of which $100 is depreciation), or $10 per member of the department.

  1. Administration. The machines would be most generally useful if they were placed in some small room to which the faculty had access. A much less efficient alternative would be to keep them in the departmental office when not in use.

 

Source: Columbia University Archives, Central Files 1890- (UA#001). Box 406. Folder “1.1.313 (1/4);  Goodrich, Carter; 7/1946 – 6/1948”.

Image Source: Marchant Calculator, Model ACT-10M. Smithsonian. The National Museum of American History.

Categories
Chicago Fields

Chicago. Doctoral Examination Committees by Fields 1923-24

____________________________

Three memos that propose the faculty members in Political Economy (and Commerce and Administration) to prepare the written doctoral examination questions by fields, 1923-1924 along with a list of the names of the examinees by fields for the summer quarter of 1925.

____________________________

October 24, 1923

MEMORANDUM to the PERSONS mentioned below
SUBJECT:       Written Examinations for the Doctorate. Autumn Quarter, 1923.

  1. New questions will need to be prepared in the fields indicated below.
  2. It has been customary to have the questions cover a very broad territory and to give a considerable number of options. Each examination lasts for three and a half hours.
  3. Will Mr. Clark and Mr. Viner assume joint responsibility for the questions in “Economic Theory”.
  4. Will Mr. Wright and Mr. Clark assume joint responsibility for the questions in “Capitalistic Organization”.
  5. Will Mr. Barnes and Dr. Duddy assume joint responsibility for the question in “The Manager’ Relationship to the Market”.
  6. Will Mr. Wright prepare the questions in “The Historical Evolution of Industrial Society”.
  7. Will Mr. Millis and Mr. Douglas assume joint responsibility for the questions in “Labor”.
  8. Will Mr. Field and Mr. McKinsey assume joint responsibility for the questions in “Statistics and Accounting”.
  9. Will Mr. Viner assume responsibility for the questions in “Economics of Government Administration”, conferring with such other persons as seems to him appropriate.

W. H. Spencer, for Commerce and Administration
C. W. Wright, for Political Economy

WHS:EL

____________________________

 

January — 1924

Memorandum to the persons mentioned below
Subject:          Written Examination for the Doctorate. Winter Quarter, 1924.

 

  1. New questions will need to be prepared in the fields indicated below. Please remember that the examinations are in fields and not in courses.
  2. It has been customary to have the questions cover a very broad territory and to give a considerable number of options. Each examination lasts for three and a half hours.
  3. Will Mr. Clark prepare a paper on “Economic Theory”, consulting with Mr. Viner?
  4. Will Mr. Christ prepare a paper on “Social Direction and Control of Economic Activity”, conferring with Messrs. Wright, Spencer, and Clark?
  5. Will Mr. Marshall prepare a paper on “The Pecuniary and Financial System” and the “Manager’s Relationship to Finance”?
  6. Will Mr. Douglas assume the responsibility for the paper on “Capitalistic Organization”, consulting with Messrs. Marshall, Viner, and Wright?
  7. Will Mr. McKinsey and Mr. Field assume joint responsibility of preparing a paper in “Statistics and Accounting”?
  8. Will Mr. Millis, Chairman, and Mr. Douglas prepare a paper on “Labor and the Manager’s Relationship to Personnel”?
  9. Will Mr. Viner prepare a paper on “The Economics of Government Administration”, consulting, perhaps, with Messrs. Merriam and Millis?
  10. Will Mr. Wright prepare a paper on “Historical Evolution of Industrial Society”, conferring with such other persons as seems to him appropriate?

____________________________

 

WRITTEN EXAMINATION FOR THE DOCTORATE, SPRING QUARTER 1924

Memorandum to the persons mentioned below:

  1. New questions will need to be prepared in the fields indicated below. Please remember that the examinations are in fields and not in courses.
  2. It has been customary to have the questions cover a very broad territory and to give a considerable number of options. Each examination lasts for three and a half hours.
  3. Will Mr. Clark prepare a paper on “Economic Theory”, consulting with Mr. Viner?
  4. Will Mr. Christ prepare a paper on “Social Direction and Control of Economic Activity”, conferring with Messrs. Wright, Spencer, and Clark?
  5. Will Mr. Marshall prepare a paper on “The Pecuniary and Financial System” and the “Manager’s Relationship to Finance”?
  6. Will Mr. Viner prepare the paper on “Capitalistic Organization”, consulting with Messrs. Millis, Douglas, and Wright?
  7. Will Mr. McKinsey and Mr. Field assume joint responsibility of preparing a paper in “Statistics and Accounting”?
  8. Will Mr. Millis, Chairman, and Mr. Douglas prepare a paper on “Labor and the Manager’s Relationship to Personnel”?
  9. Will Mr. Viner prepare a paper on “The Economics of Government Administration”, consulting, perhaps, with Messrs. Merriam and Millis?
  10. Will Mr. Wright prepare a paper on “Historical Evolution of Industrial Society”, conferring with such other persons as seems to him appropriate?

THIS MATTER NEEDS TO BE RUSHED THIS CURRENT QUARTER; WE NEED TO HAVE ALL EXAMINATION PAPERS IN SOME CONSIDERABLE TIME AHEAD OF THE BEGINNING OF THE EXAMINATION PERIOD. SEVERAL COLLECTIONS OF PAPERS HAVE TO GO TO OUTSIDE PARTIES TO ADMINISTER THE EXAMINATIONS. WE OUGHT TO SEND THESE EXAMINATIONS IN ONE BUNCH.

LCM: EL

____________________________

 

SUMMER QUARTER, 1925

August 1.       Economic Theory

Mr. [S. E.] Beckett
Mr. [Clifford Austin] Curtis
Mr. [Harold Amos] Logan
Mr. [Royal Ewert] Montgomery
Mr. [H. V.] Olson
Mr. [Christian] Van Riper

August 8.       Govt. Finance

Mr. [Harold Amos] Logan
Miss [Mabel] Magee

August 8.       Social Direction and Control

Mr. [Christian] Van Riper

August 15.     Labor

Mr. [S. E.] Beckett
Mrs. [Helen] Homan
Miss [Leila] Houghteling
Mr. [Harold Amos] Logan
Mr. [H. V.] Olsen

August 22.     Economic History

Mr. [S. E.] Beckett
Mrs. [Helen] Hohman
Mr. [H. V.] Olsen

 

Source: University of Chicago Archives. Department of Economics. Records, Box 26, Folder 9.

Image Source: University of Chicago Photographic Archive, apf4-01703, Special Collections Research Center, University of Chicago Library.

Categories
Columbia Economists Exam Questions History of Economics

Columbia. Classical Economics Exam by J.M. Clark. 1951

John Maurice Clark taught a history of economic theory sequence at Columbia University that had its origins in a similar course that had been taught earlier by Wesley Clair Mitchell. On the back of Clark’s examination questions for the first session of the 1950-51 academic year one finds a list of names and grades that we can strongly presume constitute the grade distribution for the course. 43 students were listed by John Maurice Clark in his handwritten grade sheet for the first semester of formative types of economic theory, of whom 26 received grades (3.12 average on a 4 point scale, median 3.17). Mark Blaug, whose magnum opus Economic Theory in Retrospect has served as a staple of the analytic narrative of the evolution of economics, received only a grade of B- (2.67) which put him tied with two other students at rank 21. A few years later Blaug was to find his mentor and dissertation adviser, George Stigler.

The later Congressional Research Service economist John P. Hardt (Columbia Ph.D., 1954) was  on the list but not awarded a grade for the course.

Oops it happens every so often, I have repeated myself. The original posting along with another year’s examination can be found here.

_____________________

Course Announcement

Economics 115-116 — Formative types of economic theory.
3 points each session. Professor Clark.
M. W. 12. 313 Fayerweather.

Readings and critical discussion of outstanding examples of the parent stock of classical economics with some regard to historical setting, and of subsequent outstanding contributions.

Source: Columbia University. Announcement of the Faculty of Political Science for the Winter and Spring Sessions 1950-51, p. 46.

_______________________________

Course Description

Economics 115-116—Formative types of economic theory. 3 points each session. Professor Clark.

M.W. 12.         313 Fayerweather.

Readings and critical discussion of outstanding examples of the parent stock of classical economics, with some regard to historical setting, and of subsequent outstanding contributions.

Source:   Columbia University. Announcement of the Faculty of Political Science for the Winter and Spring Sessions 1950-51, p. 46.

_______________________________

Take-Home Examination Questions

Economics 115
Final Examination
January, 1951

Answer any two questions, taking about the time for the actual writing that a regular examination would take. Those who do the work during Christmas holidays will please return papers January 8; others Friday, January 26, unless otherwise specified.

  1. Do the views of ancient writers (Hebrew, Greek or Roman) afford the same kind of evidence as the writings of modern economists as to economic conditions and practices of their time?
  2. Discuss extent of applicability of medieval doctrine on price; variations or relaxations; and how far the doctrine was effective in practice.
  3. Explain and appraise Quesnay’s “Tableau Économique”.
  4. State key doctrines of the Physiocrats and indicate how they could be regarded as adaptations to an historical situation.
  5. Compare views of Smith and Ricardo on the relation of labor to value.
  6. Compare treatment of rent in Smith, Malthus and Ricardo.
  7. On what grounds did Adam Smith sanction departures from laissez-faire?
  8. Topic: dominant conceptions of what economic activity is for. Compare the dominant conception (or at most a few dominant conceptions) of as many of the following as you feel you can reasonably cover: typical Mercantilists, Physiocrats, Ricardo, John Stuart Mill.
  9. What does Bentham’s theory contribute to the basic rationale of economics, aside from his ideas on economic matters themselves? (Book V of J. S. Mill’s “Principles of Political Economy” might contain hints.)
  10. State doctrines of Ricardo which had roots in historical conditions of the time, and indicate the connection.
  11. Compare Ricardo’s treatment of value with either Adam Smith’s or John Stuart Mill’s.
  12. What were the sources of J. S. Mill’s departure from strict Ricardianism?

_______________________________

Probable Grade Distribution

Letter Grade

Number of students
A

2

A to A-

1
A-

5

B+

5
B

6

B to B-

1
B-

2

C+

1
C

3

Note:  Mark Blaug received the B to B- grade.

Source: Columbia University Archives. John M. Clark Papers. Box 24 (Courses Misc.), Unlabeled Folder.

Image Source: Portrait of John Maurice Clark from the collection of portraits of economists presented in 1997 as a gift to the Department of Economics of Duke University by Professor Warren J. Samuels of Michigan State University. Free use of these portraits in Web documents, and for other educational purposes, is encouraged: users are requested to acknowledge that the images come from The Warren J. Samuels Portrait Collection at Duke University.

Categories
Chicago Economists

Chicago. Talent-Scouting for New Faculty, Joint Appointments and Visiting Faculty, 1945

__________________________

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 recent posts I have 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) and supporting tables with enrollment trends and faculty data (ages and educational backgrounds).

In this post we have three lists of names for economists who in 1945 could be taken into consideration for either permanent economics, joint appointments with other department or visiting appointments at the University of Chicago. Many names are immediately recognisable, others less so, and other known names left unnamed. Instead of observing the actual choices of the department, we have, so to speak, an observation of the “choice set” as perceived by the department.

______________________________

          The following list of possible additions to the staff of the Department of Economics represents an enumeration of suggestions made by various members of the Department. It, of course, does not include all of those whom the Department would like to invite as permanent members of the University staff. Many of those whom we would most like to have, it is well-known, are not available; nor can the Department be sure that those listed below would favorably consider an invitation to join our staff. Likewise, this list must not be construed as nominations for membership in the Department. Some members of the staff are known to object to the inclusion of some of the names listed below. But if unanimous consent were required before suggestions could be made, little progress in building a Department would be possible. In its present state, the list is only an enumeration of suggestions warranting further inquiry. The fields of interest of many of the potential candidates overlap and the appointment of some individuals would make it undesirable, or at least uneconomic, to appoint others. Nevertheless, the list does given an idea of some persons who might be considered for future appointments. This list, like any other enumeration, is subject to constant revision, both in the addition or subtraction of names.

Name

Present Location

Field of Interest or Specialization

Abraham (sic) Bergson University of Texas Wages and Wage Theory
Robert Bryce Ottawa, Canada
Norman Buchanan University of California Public Utilities, Corporation Finance, Business Cycles (also possible interest in United States Economic History)
Earl Hamilton Northwestern University Economic History
Albert G. Hart C.E.D., Chicago Theory, Finance, etc.
J. R. Hicks University of Manchester, England Economic Theory
Harold A. Innis University of Toronto Economic History
Maurice Kelso University of Wisconsin Land Economics
Tjalling Koopmans Cowles Commission Statistics; Mathematical Economics; Business Cycles; Shipping
Simon Kuznets University of Pennsylvania National Income; Historical Statistics
Sanford Mosk University of California Economic History
Charles A. Myers Massachusetts Institute of Technology Labor; Industrial Relations
Walter Rostow Columbia University Economic History (XIX Century)
Leonard Salter University of Wisconsin Land Economics
T. Scitovszky London School of Economics; U.S. Army Theory of Capital and Interest; Theory of Tariffs
Arthur Smithies University of Michigan; Bureau of the Budget, Washington, D. C. Fiscal Policy; Theory; Money and Banking
Eugene Staley School of Advanced International Studies (Washington, D.C.) International Economics; Foreign Trade
George Stigler University of Minnesota Theory and Foreign Trade
R. H. Tawney London School of Economics Economic History
Allen Wallis Stanford University Statistics

______________________________

Joint Appointments

The Department of Economics shares an interest in many fields with other departments, schools and divisions of the University. It recognizes that most problems of the Social Sciences have economic aspects, and other aspects as well. Many of the fields embraced within particular disciplines are explained by accident or tradition, not always by logic. No one department can, therefore, assert a valid claim for the exclusive staffing of fields of interest held in common with other branches of knowledge. It seems wisest to develop these common grounds through joint appointments. Not only does this enable us to attract to the University more outstanding scholars than the fellowship of one department might provide, but it should also place at the disposition of those interested in promoting joint fields, perhaps, larger resources than either acting alone could command.

Joint appointments, too, will tend to integrate the Social Sciences with the other schools and departments affected, as well as contribute to the unity of the University as a whole. The Department of Economics, therefore, ventures to suggest joint appointments in the following fields:

Fields Units Affected
Trusts and Monopolies Business, Law, Economics
Railroads and Transportation Business, Economics
Public Utilities Economics, Political Science, Law
Social Control of Business Business, Law, Political Science, Economics
Advanced Applied Mathematics and Statistics Economics, Mathematics, Business, Institute of Statistics, other departments interested in statistics
Urban Planning (or the Utilization of Land) Geography, Political Science, Economics, Law, Business, Sociology
Social Legislation, particularly affecting Labor Business, Sociology, Social Service Administration, Law, Political Science, Economics

[…]

Among those who might be proposed for joint appointments are the following:

Name Present Location Field of Interest Appropriate Appointment
Charles L. Dearing Brookings Institution and U.S. Government Transportation Economics, Business
Corwin D. Edwards Northwestern University Trusts, Monopolies, Control of Business Political Science, Law, Economics
Milton Friedman Columbia University Economic Theory, Public Finance, Monetary Policy Economics, Institute of Statistics
Homer Hoyt Regional Plan Association, Inc., New York, N.Y. Land Planning Economic Geography, Political Science
David E. Lilienthal T. V. A. Public Utilities Political Science, Law, Economics
Abraham Wald Columbia University Applied Mathematics, Statistics Mathematics, Economics
Allen Wallis Columbia University Applied Mathematics, Statistics Mathematics, Economics
Samuel S. Wilks Princeton University Applied Mathematics, Statistics Mathematics, Economics

Visiting Professorships

Each department needs to diversify its courses. Too frequently the attempt at diversification is made by adding permanent members to the regular staff. The need can best be met by the appointment of visiting professors.

[…]

A list of some who might be invited to the University as Visiting Professors is as follows:

Name Present Location Fields of Interest
John D. Black Harvard Agricultural Economics
(J.) Roy Blough U. S. Treasury Public Finance
Kenneth Boulding Iowa State College Economic Analysis; Theory of Capital
Karl Brandt Food Institute, Stanford U. Agricultural Economics
Harry G. Brown University of Missouri Economic Theory, Public Finance
J. Douglas Brown Princeton University Industrial Relations
Edward H. Chamberlain(sic) Harvard Economic Theory; Monopolistic Competition
J. M. Clark Columbia University Economic theory
J. B. Condliffe California International Trade; International Commercial Policy
Joseph S. Davis Food Institute, Stanford U. Agricultural Economics
Milton Gilbert Office of Price Administration, Washington, D.C. Economic Theory; Price Control
T. Haavelmo Norwegian Shipping Administration, New York, N.Y. Econometrics
Alvin Hansen Harvard Economic Theory; Fiscal Policy
F. A. Hayek London School of Economics and Political Science History of Social Thought; Economic Theory; Monetary Policy
J. R. Hicks University of Manchester Economic Theory
George Jaszy U. S. Dept. of Commerce National Income; Business Analysis
O. B. Jesness University of Minnesota Agricultural Economics
Nicholas Kaldor London School of Economics Theory of the Firm; Imperfect Competition; Money; Business Cycles
M. Kalecki Institute of Statistics of University of Oxford, England Economic Fluctuations; Expenditure Rationing
M. Slade Kendrick Cornell University Public Finance; Farm Taxation
Arthur Kent San Francisco Attorney-at-Law Taxation
J. M. Keynes Cambridge University Fiscal and Monetary Policy
Simon S. Kuznets National Bureau of Economic Research; University of Pennsylvania Statistics; National Income and Its Problem
A. P. Lerner New School for Social Research Economic Theory; Fiscal Policy; Public Finance
Edward S. Mason Harvard University Economic Theory; International Trade and Trade Practices
Wesley C. Mitchell Columbia University Money and Prices
Jacob Mosak Office of Price Administration, Washington, D.C. Economic Theory; Statistics; Control of Prices
R. A. Musgrave Federal Reserve Board, Washington, D. C. Public Finance
Randolph Paul Lord, Day and Lord, Attorneys-at-Law Taxation
Paul A. Samuelson Massachusetts Institute of Technology Economic Theory; Money and Banking; Fiscal Policy
Lawrence H. Seltzer Wayne University Money and Banking; Public Debts; Fiscal Policy
Carl S. Shoup Columbia University Public Finance
Sumner H. Slichter Harvard University Business Economics
Richard Stone England Statistics; National Income
R. H. Tawney London School of Economics Economic History
Abraham Wald Columbia University Mathematics and Statistics
John H. Williams Harvard University Money and Banking

In the past, the Department has supplemented its staff by the appointment of visiting professors, but the invitations have ordinarily been restricted to the Summer Quarter in order (1) to relieve the regular staff from summer teaching and (2) to provide “window-dressing” to make the Summer Quarters more attractive to new students. The potentialities of the visiting professorship can hardly be realized when the practice is applied only to the Summer Quarter. That it has made that Quarter more attractive would seem to be indicated by the outstanding economists who have been guests of the University of Chicago.

[…]

The practice of inviting outstanding men to the University of Chicago seems to have been more prevalent in the early years of the University than it is today. Visiting appointments also declined with the strained finances of the University during the late depression. The Department is anxious to develop a program of instruction and research based upon the policy of the regular employment of visitors. A sum, equal to the stipend of a full professor, if used to finance a program of regular visitors, would add greater content and prestige to the Department than could be secured in any other way.

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. 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
Agricultural Economics

Taylor & Taylor. History of Agricultural Economics in the U.S., 1849-1932

 

__________________________

Here a serendipitous find that I came upon while searching biographical detail regarding a 1924 University of Chicago Ph.D. (Victor Nelson Valgren) whose career took him off to the U.S. Department of Agriculture. Apparently not in copyright, according to archive.org, is the following survey of the field of agricultural economics from 1840 through 1932. Every department of economics worthy of its name in the first half of the twentieth century had at least one agricultural economist on the faculty so this is a useful work to have handy.

The link below takes you to the archive.org site where you can either read on-line or download a file in any one of a variety of formats. Here is  a USDA biography about Henry Charles Taylor, the senior author of this survey.

__________________________

Henry C. and Anne Dewees Taylor, The Story of Agricultural Economics in the United States, 1840-1932. Men-Services-Ideas. Ames, Iowa: Iowa State College Press, 1952.

From the Forward by Everett E. Edwards

…No one is better qualified to outline this story than Henry C. Taylor — the first professor of agricultural economics in a land-grant institution, the author of the first American textbook dealing with the principles of agricultural economics, and the organizer and first Chief of the Bureau of Agricultural Economics in the U. S. Department of Agriculture. In addition to this intimate and first-hand knowledge of the field is the fact that the Taylors had at their command the time, the resources, and the skill to see that the task be adequately done. The story is not only interestingly told, it is well documented….

The project of writing the history of the development of agricultural economics owed much to the fact that the senior author
has had a lifelong interest in history and the historical method as a medium of approach to the social sciences. I do not know when
Clio won Taylor as a disciple. Certainly his association with Richard T. Ely and Frederick J. Turner at the University of Wisconsin in the 1890’s stimulated that interest. His studies in the London School of Economics, and in the University of Berlin at the turn of the century, gave further emphasis to the importance of the historical approach to the problems of a dynamic agriculture. While in Europe, he tried his skill in the use of the method by searching for pertinent material and writing the history of the decline of landowning farmers in England and along with that the constructive work of the English in solving the problems of equitable relations between landlords and tenants.

In his pioneering in the teaching of agricultural economics at the University of Wisconsin, Taylor emphasized the historical method. He required his promising graduate students to familiarize themselves with the method — to go to the history department and take a seminar in research methods with W. L. Westerman or F. J. Turner. It was Taylor who emphasized both the historical and the geographical methods in the Bureau of Agricultural Economics, and from that day to this the Bureau has had a unit serving as a clearing-house on historical matters. But Taylor used other methods also. He was eclectic. He used the survey, accounting, and statistical techniques along with inductive and deductive analysis. Another of Taylor’s qualifications came from his pioneer experience in the field of agricultural economics and his participation for fifty years in the historical development depicted in this book.

In 1939 the Bureau of Agricultural Economics in co-operation with the Office of the Under Secretary of Agriculture, M. L. Wilson, held a conference to evaluate the historical work done in the Department and draw up a prospectus for future research. H. C. Taylor participated in that conference, which resulted in the suggestion that the history unit of the Bureau of Agricultural Economics initiate a research project devoted to the history of agricultural economics. Anne Dewees was assigned to execute this new project for which she had special qualifications. Trained and experienced as a research librarian, she had the capacity to unearth and gather pertinent data for the project. She was able to see, evaluate, and group ideas and facts in historical relation. She had also an appreciation of the importance of accuracy of quotation and of fact….

Everett E. Edwards
History Section
Bureau of Agricultural Economics
Washington, D. C.
January, 1952

Image Source: Henry C. Taylor from http://www.ers.usda.gov/AmberWaves/November04/Gleanings/recentmeetings.htm at the Internet Archive Wayback Machine (snapshot from November 12, 2004).

Categories
Chicago Economists

Chicago. Visiting Economics Professors, 1896-1943.

__________________________

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.” 

The memorandum deserves reproduction in its entirety sometime (and will probably be done by somebody else), but I intend to serve at least several blogpost-sized portions from Leland’s memo. So look forward for more tables/excerpts to come.

Today we have (1) a list compiled by Leland of visiting professors to the department of economics who had not been absorbed into the faculty as of 1945 (e.g. George Stigler was still at Minnesota at the time of the memo was written. Later posts include (2) data on economics faculty 1944/45 and the trend of enrolments and (3) talent-scouting lists for possible permanent, visiting and joint appointments.

__________________________

 

List of visiting professors
(excluding faculty members who frequently were visitors before joining the University)

[An asterisk (*) for deceased colleagues]

Visiting Professor

Year Institution

Present Location

G. W. S. Adams

1902

Henry C. Adams*

1902

Michigan
Clarence E. Ayers

1923

Amherst

Texas

Stephan Bauer

1899

Chamber of Commerce, Brünn, Austria
Spurgeon Bell

1920

Texas

National Resources Planning Board

E. L. Bogart

1910

Princeton

Illinois (Emeritus)

Arthur J. Boynton*

1914

Kansas
Harry G. Brown

1917

Missouri

Missouri

J. B. Canning

1924

Stanford

Stanford

T. N. Carver

1908

Harvard

Harvard (Emeritus)

Paul T. Cherington

1914

Harvard

McKinsey & Co., Management Consultants, 60 East 42nd St., N.Y.C.

F. E. Clark

1921

Northwestern

Northwestern

F. R. Clow*

1904

State Normal, Oshkosh, Wisconsin
J. B. Condliffe

1941

California

California

Frederick E. Croxton

1926

Ohio State

Columbia

E. E. Day

1910

Harvard

Cornell

F. S. Deibler

1917

Northwestern

Northwestern (Emeritus)

J. C. Duncan

1913

Illinois
J. F. Ebersole

1914

Minnesota

Harvard

Donald English

1916

Cornell

Cornell

Frank A. Fetter

1926

Princeton

Princeton (Emeritus)

Martin G. Glaeser

1930

Wisconsin

Wisconsin

John Paul Good

1899

Eastern Ill. State Normal, Charleston
Frank D. Graham

1930

Princeton

Princeton

Waldo E. Grimes

1939

Kansas State College

Kansas State College

Lawrence H. Grinstead

1926

Ohio State
Walton H. Hamilton

1917

Amherst

Yale

Matthew B. Hammond*

1921

Ohio State
Max S. Handman*

1928

Texas
Lewis H. Haney

1914

Texas

New York

Charles O. Hardy

1923
1925)
1929)
1933)

State Univ. of Iowa

Brookings Institution

Federal Reserve Bank, Kansas City, Missouri

Ernest L. Harris

1904

Grover G. Heubner

1926

Pennsylvania

Pennsylvania

Jens P. Jensen*

1920)
1930)

Kansas
Alvin S. Johnson

1909

Texas

New School for Social Research

Eliot Jones

1925

Stanford

Stanford

Albert S. Keister

1926)
1927)

North Carolina Woman’s College

North Carolina Woman’s College

William S. Krebs

1921

Washington University

Washington University

Robert R. Kuczynski

1923

Statistical Office, Berlin

12 Lawn Rd., London, N.W. 3, England

Ben W. Lewis

1931)
1937)

Oberlin

Oberlin

H. L. Lutz

1915

Oberlin

Princeton

Leverett S. Lyon

1926)
1927

Brookings Institution

Chicago Association of Commerce

James D. Magee

1916

Cincinnati

New York

T. W. Mitchell

1911

Minnesota
Bernard Moses*

1898

California
Edwin G. Nourse

1931

Brookings Institution

Brookings Institution

T. W. Page*

1898

Randolph-Macon
Maffeo Pantaleoni*

1896

Naples
C. A. Phillips

1931

State Univ. of Iowa

State Univ. of Iowa

H. H. Preston

1924

Univ. of Washington

Univ. of Washington

Benjamin M. Rastall

1910

Wisconsin
H. L. Reed

1923

Washington University

Cornell

R. R. Renne

1940

Montana State

Montana State

Edward V. Robinson*

1908

Minnesota
Clyde O. Ruggles

1916)
1920)

Ohio State

Harvard

William J. Shultz

1926

College of the City of New York

College of the City of New York

Guy E. Snider

1915

College of the City of New York

College of the City of New York

A. E. Staley

1941

Fletcher School of Law and Diplomacy

School of Advanced International Studies, Washington, D.C.

George J. Stigler

1943

Minnesota

Minnesota

Walter W. Stewart

1915

Missouri

Institute for Advanced Study, Princeton, N.J.

R. H. Tawney

1939

London

London

George O. Virtue*

1915

Nebraska
Norman J. Ware

1942

Wesleyan

Wesleyan

G. S. Wehrwein*

1940

Wisconsin
Louis Weld

1916

Yale

McCann-Erikson Co., New York

Albert C. Whitaker

1912)
1913)

Stanford

Stanford (Emeritus)

Nathaniel R. Whitney

1921

Cincinnati

Proctor and Gamble, Cincinnati

Murray S. Wildman*

1909

Missouri
John H. Williams

1921

Northwestern

Harvard

Milburn L. Wilson

1923

Montana

Chief, Nutrition Programs Branch, Office of Distribution, War Food Administration

Ambrose P. Winston

1913

Pekin
A. B. Wolfe

1915

Texas

Ohio State

Holbrook Working

1928

Stanford

Stanford

Bruce Wyman*

1903

Harvard
Allyn A. Young*

1912

Washington University
Ernest C. Young

1939

Purdue

Purdue

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″.

Image Source: Detail of Simeon E. Leland photograph. University of Chicago Photographic Archive, apf1-03717, Special Collections Research Center, University of Chicago Library.

Categories
Courses Economists Harvard Suggested Reading

Harvard. Economics and Public Policy for Public Administration, Smithies. 1949-50

 

Following the brief obituary for Arthur Smithies from the Harvard Crimson, course enrollment statistics and the course reading list for his public administration course “Economic Analysis and Public Policy” at mid-century are included in today’s post.

The mid-year and course final examinations have been transcribed and posted now as well.

________________________________

 

Economist and K-House Master Arthur Smithies Dies at Age 73

The Harvard Crimson
September 14, 1981

Arthur Smithies, Ropes Professor of Political Economy Emeritus and a former master of Kirkland House, died of a heart attack at the Cambridge Boat Club last Wednesday after rowing on the Charles River. He was 73 years old.

Smithies, an authority on the Federal budget and the fiscal policies of developing countries, served as chairman of the Economics department from 1950 to 1955 and from 1959 to 1961. “Smithies did a lot for Harvard,” Otto Eckstein, Warburg Professor of Economics and one of Smithies’ students, said yesterday. “He really started the modern era of the Economics department here.”

An early advocate of Keynesian economics, Smithies wrote extensively on the Federal budget, fiscal policy and full employment. His “The Federal Budget and Fiscal Policy,” published in 1948, was regarded as the standard work in the field for two decades.

By the 1960s, however, his interests had changed to the economic problems of developing countries. In the 1970s, Smithies helped develop and implement policies aimed at preventing the South Vietnamese government from collapsing economically in the face of high military expenditures.

“Unlike many economists, Smithies correctly believed that the difference between a good economist and an inferior one is his sense of history,” John Kenneth Galbraith, Warburg Professor of Economics Emeritus, said Friday. Smithies was “one of the most popular and engaging members of the Harvard Economics department,” Galbraith added.

As master of Kirkland House from 1965 to 1974, Smithies was known for his affection for students, his ability to stimulate debate, and his love of athletics, former students and associates said last week. He was also known for his annual renditions of “Waltzing Matilda” at the Kirkland House Christmas party. A native of Tasmania, Smithies had “a terrible singing voice, which the students always induced him to use,” Warren Wacker, master of South House and a close friend of Smithies, said yesterday.

________________________________

 

Course Enrollment

[Economics] 206. (formerly Economics 106a and 106b). Economic Analysis and Public Policy. (Full Co.) Professor Smithies.

(F) Total 59: 6 Graduates, 1 Senior, 39 Public Administration, 7 Business School, 5 Radcliffe, 1 Other.

(S) Total 58 (sic): 6 Graduates, 1 Senior, 36 Public Administration, 9 Business School, 4 Radcliffe, 1 Other.

 

Source: Harvard University, Report of the President of Harvard College and Reports of the Departments 1949-50, p. 74.

________________________________

 

ECONOMICS 206

Reading List 1949-50

 

American Economic Association, (ed. Howard Ellis) Survey of Contemporary Economics, “Federal Budgeting and Fiscal Policy,” by Arthur Smithies, Blakiston, 1948.

American Political Science Review, “Federal Executive Reorganization Re-examined,” A Symposium edited by Fritz Marx, February 1947, pp. 48-84.

Appleby, Paul H., Big Democracy, Alfred Knopf, New York, 1945.

Beveridge, Sir William [*], Full Employment in a Free Society, Norton, New York, 1945.

Economic Reports of the President [*], all issues, particularly Midyear Economic Report, July 1949.

Federal Expenditures and Revenue Policies, Hearings before the U.S. Joint Committee on Economic Report, 81st Congress, September 1949.

Franks, Sir Oliver (Essays) Central Planning and Control in War and Peace, Harvard University Press, 1947.

Hansen, Alvin H., Fiscal Policy and Business Cycles, Norton, 1941.

Hayek, Friedrich, Road to Serfdom, University of Chicago Press, 1945.

Income, Employment and Public Policy: Essays in Honor of Alvin H. Hansen, Norton, 1948, New York. Article: “Income-Consumption Relations and Their Implications” by James S. Duesenberry.

Keynes, J. M. General Theory of Employment, Interest and Money, Harcourt Brace & Co., New York 1936.

Lange, Oskar, On the Economic Theory of Socialism, University of Minnesota, 1948.

Mills and Long, National Bureau of Economic Research, Statistical Agencies of the Federal Government, New York, 1949.

Mises, Von, Ludwig, Economic Planning, Dynamic America, New York, 1945.

Nathan, Robert, A National Wage Policy for 1947, Washington, 1947.

Samuelson, Paul A. [*], Economics: An Introductory Analysis, McGraw-Hill, 1948.

Schumpeter, Joseph [*], Capitalism, Socialism, and Democracy, Harpers and Brothers, New York, 1947.

Smithies, Arthur, Business Cycle Analysis and Public Policy, Paper submitted to Business Cycle Conference, New York, November 26, 1949.

Spence Bill, Economic Stability Act of 1949, H. R. 2756.

United Nations, Secretariat, Department of Economic Affairs, Maintenance of Full Employment, 1949 (especially United Kingdom), 1949.

 

Reading Period Assignment

Meade, J., Planning and the Price System, Allen & Unwin, London, 1948.

Sweezy, Paul, Socialism, Economic Handbook Series (Harris, ed.), McGraw-Hill, New York, 1949.

 

[*] Indicates that book is authorized for purchase by veterans.

 

Source: Harvard University Archives. Syllabi, course outlines and reading lists in Economics, 1895-2003. Box 5, Folder “Economics, 1949-50 (3 of 3)”.

Image Source: Harvard Album 1952.

 

Categories
Carnegie Institute of Technology Chicago Economists Harvard Johns Hopkins M.I.T. Michigan

Harvard. Evsey Domar’s Ph.D. Thesis story. 1947

_______________________________

This post is the second in the series dedicated to the economists who trained me (the first post about John Michael Montias is here). In the Evsey Domar papers archived at Duke University I found the following two-page, undated typed note about my Doktorvater’s own experience with his dissertation. Let us just say that his thesis committee fell rather short of any reasonable standard of due diligence. 

_______________________________

 

M.I.T. Obituary

Professor Emeritus of Economics Evsey D. Domar died on April 1 [1997] in Emerson Hospital in Concord. He was 82.

Domar came to MIT in 1957 as a visiting professor from Johns Hopkins University; he received tenure a year later. In 1972, Domar became one of seven professors endowed by the Ford Foundation. He retired in 1984.

Among Domar’s pupils in macroeconomics was Robert William Fogel, winner of the 1993 Nobel Memorial Prize in Economics.

Domar was an expert on Soviet economics during the Cold War and an early proponent of Keynesian economic theory.

In recent years, Domar remained politically active in his field. Along with 1,100 other economists, he signed an Economic Policy Institute statement opposing the proposed balanced budget amendment.

Domar served as a consultant for the RAND Corp., the Ford Foundation, the Brookings Institution, the National Science Foundation, the Batelle Memorial Institute, and the Institute for Defense Analysis.

Domar was born in Lodz, Poland in 1914. He was raised in Manchuria and emigrated to the United States in 1936.

He received his bachelor of arts from UCLA in 1939, a master of science from University of Michigan in 1940, another MS from Harvard University in 1943, and his doctorate from Harvard in 1947.

Before coming to MIT, Domar taught at the Carnegie Institute of Technology, the University of Chicago, and Johns Hopkins.

Domar was a fellow of the American Academy of Arts and Sciences, the Econometric Society, and the Center for Advanced Study in the Behavioral Sciences.

He was on the executive committee of the American Economic Association from 1964—65, and became the organization’s vice president in 1970, when he was also president of the Association for Comparative Economics.

Domar is survived by his wife, Carola, of Concord, two daughters, Alice D. Domar, of Sudbury, and Erica D. Banderob, of Milton, and three granddaughters.

Source: MIT, The Tech, Vol. 117, No. 19 Tuesday, April 15, 1997.

Image Source: Joshua Domashevitsky (Evsey Domar). 1939 UCLA Yearbook Southern Campus portrait.

_______________________________

 

THE STORY OF MY THESIS

When I entered graduate school I knew that someday I would have to write a thesis but I did not have the slightest idea what it would be on. Once, browsing in the Harper Library at the University of Chicago I stumbled into Bronfennbrenner’s thesis. Its mathematics was overwhelming. I was in a panic: surely I would never be able to write anything like it.

Originally, I was supposed to write a thesis on post-war taxation, but as time went on I was finding the subject less and less interesting. In the meantime, I began to publish papers on growth models. Harvard rules permit the submission of several related articles instead of one book-like study. It took me several years to accumulate four papers, of which three, I believe, had been published. (A full time job, whether at the Federal Reserve or in teaching is not the best environment to write a dissertation.) Finally, the last paper was finished and all four were sent to Hansen at Harvard.

I needed the degree very badly. I was very unhappy at Carnegie Tech and anxious to find another job. Prospective employers appeared to lose all interest when informed that I had not yet received my degree. So in the letter accompanying the thesis I besieged (sic) Hansen to render his decision as soon as possible.

Weeks went by with no word from him. Finally I called him on the phone. (In those days long-distance phone calls were regarded as an exotic luxury particularly for an underpaid assistant professor.) “Thesis,” said he, in his gruff voice, “what thesis?” I explained. “Wait a moment, let me find it.” I heard the sound of an envelope torn open. “Fine,” he said, “Fine. Send it in.” And that was all the supervision I was to get.

When I arrived in Cambridge a day before my final examination, I noticed that the secretary of another member of the committee was just bringing my thesis to him. (She tried to hide it behind her back.) At least he had one day to take a look at it.

Schumpeter, who was the third member, never bothered to look at it at all. He invited me to lunch, and said: “You are coming up tomorrow, aren’t you? What shall we talk about?” I told him what I was working on. “Fine,” he said. When the committee met he turned to Hansen, the chairman: “Instead of talking about the thesis, why don’t we ask the candidate to tell us about his current work.” His suggestion was accepted at once, I thought, even with a sense of relief: as I was to find out repeatedly in my time, doctoral examinations can be quite boring for the examiners. And that was my doctoral examination.

Were our teachers guilty of neglect or were they sufficiently brave to pay no attention to rules? Would we have the courage to disregard them under similar circumstances?

 

Source:   Duke University, Rubenstein Library. Evsey Domar Papers. Box 18, Folder “Miscellaneous: Biographical “The Story of My Thesis.”