Category: AEA

Johns Hopkins. Essay on Political Economy in America. Ely, 1887

Post author By Irwin Collier
Post date 2024-10-14

NORTH AMERICAN REVIEW.
FEBRUARY, 1887.

POLITICAL ECONOMY IN AMERICA.
by RICHARD T. ELY

At a meeting of political economists held at Saratoga in the month of September, 1885, in order to form an economic society — finally called the American Economic Association — Professor Alexander Johnston, of Princeton College, defined the purposes of the contemplated organization, as understood by him, in these words:

“This is an effort to stop the formation of any ‘crust’ on the development of economics, to assert the economic right of attempts to develop in every direction, unhampered by any accusation of heterodoxy, with the assurance that unlimited freedom of individual attempt to develop will bring about the truest, most natural, and healthiest development.”

Other ideas were brought out in the interesting discussion about the aims which should animate a body of American economists at the present time, and valuable suggestions were derived from men like Hon. Andrew D. White; Rev. Dr. Washington Gladden; Professor Henry C. Adams, of Michigan University; Professor E. J. James, of the University of Pennsylvania; Dr. Herbert B. Adams, of the Johns Hopkins University; Dr. Edwin R. A. Seligman, of Columbia College; Professor Andrews, of Brown University; and President Charles Kendall Adams, of Cornell University.

There can be no doubt, however, that all present agreed with Professor Johnston, and it is equally certain that he struck the key-note of future progress in economics.

But what did the undertaking signify? What did it mean to remove the “crust” already formed on the development of economics and to prevent its formation in the future? It is necessary for us to get a clear idea of this, if we would understand the past history and present condition of economic science in America.

The word “heterodoxy” uttered by Professor Johnston is one which throws a whole flood of light on the situation. The utterly unscientific conceptions, orthodoxy and heterodoxy, had crept into political economy; and men had with their aid attempted to check every advance in the science with a strong hand. What was orthodox? What was heterodox? Certain Englishmen, Ricardo, Malthus, Mill, Senior, successors of Adam Smith, had developed an à priori political economy which was well-pleasing to influential social elements. This was still further purified by later successors until the strong and mighty could find in it nothing to terrify “or make afraid,” nothing to disturb their calm repose. This at last became the political economy of the most conservative portion of the press, and as such gave us, to use the words of Professor Gustav Cohn, not a description of actual life, but at best a picture of the life of men in society such as one might expect to find in the “Dream of the Millionaire.” It was a Utopia as dangerous as it was pleasing. Imported to this country, it acquired a strength in certain educated circles — particularly in the North and East — to which it could scarcely aspire, even in England. It was always ready with its little tests of orthodoxy to mete out praise or condemnation, to accord honor or shame. Acceptance of its creed was often a condition of academic preferment. A small clique of men, not without newspaper influence, constituted themselves its special guardians and, still maintaining that position, even now attempt to exercise a sort of terrorism over the intellect of the country. Any deviation from the straight and narrow path laid down by them was deeply damned. Was there not, indeed, that never-failing refuge of incompetence and malignity, the epithet “socialism,” ready to hurl at all offenders?

Manifestly, the first need of the hour was to break this “crust,” and this was a worthy object for the American Economic Association. “Orthodox” and “heterodox” must be as completely driven out of economic discussion as out of biology and mineralogy. Those who use these phrases must necessarily look back to the past to discover the belief of others, whereas science should ever keep its glance directed to the future and press on to the discovery of new truth.

This determination “to assert the right of attempts to develop in every direction, unhampered by any accusation of heterodoxy,” is of particular importance in political economy, because, in the nature of things, economists worthy of the name always have been, and always will be, in opposition to current opinion. What is an economist? An economist is a man who studies the economic life of men as members of society. Now, if the science of economics is not a humbug, he must know more about industrial society than others, and that is simply saying, in other words, that he holds opinions not generally received. The true economist is a guide who always keeps in advance, who marks out new paths of social progress. This explains why the “heterodox” economist of one age becomes the “orthodox” economist of a succeeding one. Social development has gone on in the direction in which he foresaw it must move. An American writer [Daniel Raymond, Thoughts on Political Economy] in 1820, for example, speaks of the “gross heresies” of Adam Smith’s “Wealth of Nations,” and even this great “Father” of English political economy did not escape the reproach of socialism. Could that progressive, far-seeing man know that his name was now used to retard the advance of his favorite study, he surely could not rest easy in his grave!

All articles on political economy in America written before 1880 are chiefly concerned with the question: Why have Americans done comparatively nothing to advance the science of industrial society? This is the nature of Professor Dunbar’s article on “Political Economy in the United States from 1776 to 1876,” which appeared in the NORTH AMERICAN REVIEW in the latter year; it is also the nature of T. E. Cliffe Leslie’s article on “Political Economy in the United States,” which appeared in the Fortnightly Review, in 1880. The main thought brought out is the preponderating importance attached to the pursuit of wealth rather than to an inquiry as to its philosophy in this new country. The absence of obviously pressing economic questions is also dwelt upon by both writers. All this is true. The two chief causes of research in economics are large financial questions, and wide-spread dissatisfaction among the masses with existing social arrangements, coupled with a determination to change these radically. Our late civil war brought us one of these two chief causes of economic study; events of the past ten years have brought us the other. Thus has a mighty impulse been given to the development of political economy. But there is another aspect of the situation — not unrelated to what has already been said about economic orthodoxy — which deserves mention. The chairs of political economy in the United States have in the past been filled, to large extent, by men who were not appointed, like professors of chemistry, as searchers after truth, but as advocates — chiefly of free trade or protection as the case might be. This has been sufficiently understood, and it has acted injuriously in several ways. It has kept the best men out of the academic career, and it has repressed aspirations looking in the direction of new scientific explorations. Finally, it has reduced the influence of political economists to a minimum. Business men have despised them, while their power to guide and direct the thought of the laboring classes has been less than nothing. It has been so generally felt that professors of political economy in America were mere advocates of existing institutions, that the masses have turned away from them in angry impatience, and have been prejudiced even against the important and unassailable doctrines which they did teach. Thus has the task been rendered more difficult for those truly scientific men who with the impartiality of all science, tell the plain truth to all classes and would thus benefit all alike — for a lie is of no permanent benefit to any one! And what about the politicians? Well, every one knows they have given themselves little concern about political economy, and the political economists often censure them severely on this account. While the politicians doubtless deserve it, there is another side to the case, brought out by my good friend Professor Jesse Macy in those felicitous words: “A political science which does not at least honestly seek to give direction to actual politics is an unmitigated nuisance. Colleges and universities have in the past been treated with contempt by practical politicians simply because their work has been contemptible. Politicians are the last men in the world to treat with contempt a respectable and efficient political power and influence.”

The present time is one in which the evolution of society is proceeding with more than its usual rapidity, and it is evident that we need a positive constructive political economy, and this requirement the old political economy cannot meet. Let the reader consider for a moment the age in which its great masters, Quesnay, Turgot, and Adam Smith, lived. It was the latter half of the eighteenth century, when the progress of industry was retarded by a multitude of old institutions, good in their day, doubtless, but then antiquated. The cry of men who understood their time was, “Remove the barriers! clear the way for new social forms!” The work which the great economists advocated during that period was very properly negative and destructive. It ought not then to surprise us that when we go to our old text books of political economy to seek advice in reference to practical measures, the one chief lesson which we learn is “DON’T.” Manifestly, the call of our age is DO.

A new movement in economics was then inevitable, and it has already come. Its precise beginning cannot, perhaps, be ascertained, but the writings of the distinguished head of the Massachusetts Institute of Technology, General Francis A. Walker, first made it a clearly recognized accomplished fact in America. Probably, his works have inspired more of the American economists under thirty-five-possibly under forty-than those of any other man. He sowed seed which is now springing up and bearing fruit in all parts of our land. The movement was furthered by the establishment of new chairs of political economy in American colleges and universities, which was due to the wonderful impulse given to the study by the undeniable existence of those two classes of economic phenomena to which reference has already been made; namely, large financial problems and pressing social questions. Before 1876 one might have counted on one’s fingers the institutions where any serious instruction in political economy was given, whereas provision is now made for its study in every one of the more prominent colleges of the country; and although it is still inadequate in most cases, this is a remarkable advance. There are now a few colleges with two or three instructors, even, and it is not foolish to hope that in a not remote future we shall have as completely developed departments of political economy as we now have of physics and chemistry in our best universities.

Another good sign is the growing faith, both within and without our institutions of learning, in truth. People value the searcher for truth more than formerly, the mere advocate less. It is a significant fact that the youngest of the great American universities, the Johns Hopkins, founded in 1876, took for its motto, “Veritas vos liberabit.” [“Truth will set you free”] Another equally significant fact is this: The Johns Hopkins University assumed a non-partisan attitude in natural science. Its biological laboratory was instituted solely for the search of truth, regardless of consequences. Darwinian and anti-Darwinian doctrines, as such, could not be considered. Some good people were prejudiced against the University at the start on this account, and looked with much trepidation upon its teachings; but in ten years this has for a large part disappeared, and no college has warmer, more devoted friends among the clergy. This means faith in truth and a conscious recognition of the fact that one truth can not clash with another. One other illustration of this all-important point must follow, if the reader will pardon a personal allusion. When the writer’s name was brought forward for the position of teacher of political economy in the Johns Hopkins University five years ago, the authorities of the institution, true to their motto, asked no questions about his opinions in regard to free trade and protection or anything else, although these were then as unknown as he himself. There was simply an endeavor to ascertain his qualifications for the position. This is an experience which is probably almost unique.

People are learning, both in political economy and natural science, that truth alone can make them free; that truth alone has in it the power of life; that truth — not error — is able to conserve the good, and that to fear it is unworthy of an enlightened people.

There has been the same remarkable progress in the development of an economic literature in America, which has been noted elsewhere. To confine ourselves to the past few months, such works may be mentioned as James on “The Relation of the Modern Municipality to the Gas Supply;” Shaw on “Co-operation in a Western City” — two remarkable publications of the American Economic Association — Hudson on “Railways and the Republic;” Hadley on “Railroad Transportation,” and Laughlin on “Bi-metallism in the United States.” These are all based on investigations in the rich field of American economic life. We have also bold endeavors to reconstruct fundamental principles in economics, like Patten’s “Premises of Political Economy,” and J. B. Clark’s “Philosophy of Wealth.” All these are works of international importance.

One year ago there was no economic periodical in the United States. To-day there are three, and all evidently rest on a permanent basis. They are the bi-monthly monographs of the American Economic Association, published in Baltimore; the Political Science Quarterly of Columbia College, and the Quarterly Journal of Economics, published under the auspices of Harvard University.

A change in the conception of political economy must not fail to be noticed in this place. Its scope has become enlarged, and it is not quite the same thing which it was once. It has become a distinctively ethical science, and necessarily includes purpose within its province. It is clearly recognized that the will of man is a chief factor in economic life, and that, within certain limits, we can have just such a social system as we choose — always, be it observed, however, within certain limits. Accordingly, ideals for the individual, for the State, for society, for the church, are placed before men, and they are urged to strive for them in every practicable way. It is on this account, also, that the new political economy lays so much stress on ethical education, for it is seen that errors as often proceed from the heart as from the head.

It must not be supposed that the new political economy has gained exclusive sway even in the colleges and universities of the United States — much less outside of them. Still it is making its way rapidly; it is accepted by the teachers in most of our colleges, and it is beginning to permeate the thought of our time, as may be seen in the utterances of press and pulpit.

The economists of the older school cannot, either, be denied their use. They are not mere drags on the car of progress, but with their criticism, sharp and ungracious though it sometimes be, they render the advance surer.

In conclusion, however, it is undeniable that the prime need of the hour is increased light in economics, a further development of the new political economy, and the qualities indispensable in the men who would carry on the work already so auspiciously begun are these: a good heart, a strong intellect, and dauntless courage.

Source: North American Review, Vol. 144, No. 363 (February, 1887), pp. 113-119.

Image Source: Universities and their sons; history, influence and characteristics of American universities, with biographical sketches and of alumni and recipients of honorary degrees, Vol. IV (1900), p. 505. Image was smoothed and colorised at Economics in the Rear-view Mirror.

AEA Amherst Columbia Economists Germany Johns Hopkins Smith

Columbia. Short biographical note on John Bates Clark at age 52

Post author By Irwin Collier
Post date 2021-09-13

Today’s post adds to the virtual clipping file of relatively obscure biographical items for John Bates Clark. The turn of the century volumes edited by Joshua L. Chamberlain, Universities and Their Sons, serve as a who’s who with an academic twist and the source of this early-through-mid-career biography for the great John Bates Clark.

Pro-tip: At the bottom of this post you can click on the keyword “ClarkJB” to summon all the John Bates Clark related posts here at Economics in the Rear-view Mirror.

_________________________

CLARK, John Bates, 1847-

Born in Providence, R. I., 1857; studied at Brown for two years; Amherst for two years, graduating in 1872; studied abroad at Heidelberg University for one and a half years and at Zurich University one-half year; Professor of Political Economy and History, Carleton (Minnesota) College, 1877-81; Professor of History and Political Science at Smith College, 1882-93; Professor of Political Economy at Amherst, 1892-95; Lecturer on Political Economy, Johns Hopkins. 1892-94; Professor of Political Economy at Columbia since 1895.

JOHN BATES CLARK, Ph.D., LL.D., Professor of Political Economy at Columbia, was born in Providence, Rhode Island, January 26, 1847. His parents were John Hezekiah Clark, a well-known manufacturer of Providence, and Charlotte Stoddard Huntington, a granddaughter of General Jedediah Huntington of New London, Connecticut. He received his early education in the public schools of his native place. In 1865 he entered Brown, spending two years in study there, and later entered Amherst. During an interval of absence from this College he engaged in the manufacture of ploughs, and was one of the founders of the Monitor Plow Company, of Minneapolis, Minnesota. He retired from active business in 1871, and returned to Amherst, graduating in 1872. He then went abroad and studied for a year and a half at the University of Heidelberg, for a term at the University of Zurich, and for a short period in Paris. He returned to America in 1875 and, two years later, became Professor of Political Economy at Carleton College. He retained this position for four years, and then came to Massachusetts to take the Professorship of History and Political Science at Smith College. He was with Smith in this capacity for eleven years, until, in 1893, he was made Professor of Political Economy at Amherst College. From 1892 to 1894 he was also Lecturer on Political Economy at Johns Hopkins. He left Amherst in 1895 to take a Chair of Political Economy at Columbia, and has since been in charge of the department of Economic Theory of the University. In 1893 and also in 1894 he was elected President of the American Economic Association. Professor Clark has written a number of monographs and articles on economic subjects, and a book — The Philosophy of Wealth — which presents new theories. He also published in collaboration with Professor F. H. Giddings, The Modern Distributive Process, and is now about to publish a second work on Distribution [The Distribution of Wealth; A Theory of Wages, Interest and Profits (1899)]. He is a member of the Century and Barnard Clubs. Professor Clark married, September 28, 1875, Myra Almeda Smith of Minneapolis. They have four children, three girls and a boy.

Source: Universities and their sons; history, influence and characteristics of American universities, with biographical sketches and portraits of alumni and recipients of honorary degrees, Joshua L. Chamberlain, ed., Vol. II (Boston: R. Herndon Company, 1899), p. 423.

Image Source: Same.

Tags ClarkJB, Giddings

AEA Berkeley Chicago Cornell Economist Market Economists Johns Hopkins M.I.T. Princeton Stanford Yale

M.I.T. Memo regarding potential hires to interview at AEA Dec meeting, 1965

Post author By Irwin Collier
Post date 2020-08-07

This artifact provides us a glimpse into the demand side of the market for assistant professors of economics in the United States as seen from one of the mid-1960’s peak departments. The chairperson of the M.I.T. economics department at the time, E. Cary Brown, apparently conducted a quick survey of fellow department heads and packed his results into a memo for his colleagues who in one capacity or the other would be attending the annual meeting of the American Economic Association held in New York City in the days following the Christmas holidays of December 1965. The absence of Harvard names in the memo probably only indicates that Brown presumed his colleagues were well aware of any potential candidates coming from farther up the Charles River.

From Brown’s memo, Duncan Foley (Yale) and Miguel Sidrauski (Chicago) ended up on the M.I.T. faculty as assistant professors for the 1966-67 academic year. John Williamson was a visiting assistant professor that year too.

_____________________________

Dating the Memo

The folder label in the M.I.T. archives incorrectly gives the date Dec. 28-30, 1969, where the 1969 has been added in pencil.

Two keys for dating the memo. Brown’s comment to John Williamson (York): “Wants a semester here, Jan.-June 1967″. “Solow is hearing paper at meetings” (Conlisk of Stanford) who presented in the invited doctoral dissertation session “The Analysis and Testing of the Asymptotic Behavior of Aggregate Growth Models” (affiliation given as Rice University (Ph.D., Stanford University) where Solow was listed as a discussant. AEA’s 78^th Annual Meeting was held in New York City at the end of December 1965.

_____________________________

Memo from E. Cary Brown to M.I.T. faculty going to Dec. 1965 AEA meeting

[Pencil note: “Put in beginning of 1966-7”]

Memorandum Regarding Personnel Interviews in New York

To: Department Members Attending AEA Convention
From: E. C. Brown

University of Chicago

Sidrauski, Miguel (26). International Trade, Monetary Theory, Economic Growth, Mathematical Economics

Thesis—“Studies in the Theory of Growth and Inflation” under Uzawa
References: Harberger, Johnson, Lewis

[He came here a year ago to ask about a short-term appointment before he returned to Argentina. Griliches believes him to be tops. Had him in class myself and he was first rate. Called him on phone last week and he still wants to be had.]

Thornber, Edgar H. (24). [H. = Hodson] Econometrics, Mathematical Methods, Computers

Thesis—“A Distributed Lag Model: Bayes vs. Sampling Theory Analyses” under Telser
References: Griliches, Zellner

[Supposed to be equal of Sidrauski. Heavily computer oriented. Doesn’t sound interesting for us, but we should talk to him.]

Treadway, Arthur. Mathematical Economist

Thesis on the investment function

[A younger man who, according to Svi [sic], regards himself as the equal of the above. Stronger in mathematics, and very high grades. Wasn’t on market because thesis didn’t appear as completable. Now it seems that it will be and he wants consideration.]

Evenson, Robert E. (31). Agricultural Economics and Economic Growth, Public Finance

Thesis—“Contribution of Agricultural Experiment Station Research to Agricultural Production” under Schultz
References: Gale Johnson, Berg

[He is just slightly below the others. Mature and very solid and combines agriculture and economic growth where we need strength.]

Gould, John (26).

(Ph.D. in Business School)

[Bud Fackler mentioned him as their best. Uzawa and Griliches are trying to get the Econ. Dept. to hire him. Franco knows him and is after him.]

Princeton

Klevorick, Alvin (22). Mathematical Economics, Econometrics, Economic Theory

Thesis: “Mathematical Programming and the Problem of Capital Budgeting under Uncertainty” (Quandt)
References: Baumol, Kuhn

[Apparently the best they have had for some time. Young and very brash.]

Monsma, George N. (24). Labor Economics, Economics of Medical Care, Public Finance

Thesis: Supply and Demand for Medical Personnel” (Harbison)
References: Patterson, Machlup

[Dick Lester was high on him. While not a traditional labor economist, he works that field.]

Silber, William L. (23). Monetary Economics, Public Finance, Econometrics

Thesis: “Structure of Interest Rates” (Chandler)
References: Goldfeld, Musgrave, Quandt

[One of their best four. Not sure he sounds like what we want in fields, however.]

Grabowski, Henry G. (25). Research and Development, Econometrics, Mathematical Economics

Thesis: “Determinants and Profitability of Industrial Research and Development” (Quandt)
References: Morgenstern, Baumol

[Lester says he is good all around man. His field makes him especially interesting.]

Stanford

Conlisk [John]— Economic growth and development

[Arrow has written about him, recommending him highly. His field should be interesting. Solow is hearing paper at meetings.]

Bradford [David Frantz]— Public finance

[Has been interviewed up here, but more should see him who wish to.]

Yale

Foley [Duncan Karl] (Probably not at meetings. Best Tobin’s had.]

Bryant [Ralph Clement] (Now at Federal Reserve Board. Number 2 for Tobin]

York

Williamson, John

[Wants a semester here, Jan.-June 1967. Alan Peacock at meetings.]

Johns Hopkins

[Ask Bill Oakland]

University of California, Berkeley

[Ask Aaron Gordon or Tibor Scitovsky.]

Cornell

Bridge [John L.] — Econometrics, Foreign Trade

Lindert [Peter]— International Economics

[Their two best as indicated in their letter to Department Chairman.]

Buffalo

Mathis, E.J. [Ask Mitch Horwitz if it’s worth pursuing.]

Columbia U.

[Ask Bill Vickrey]

Pittsburgh

Miller, Norman C. (26). International Economics; Money, Macro, Micro and Math Economics

Thesis: “Capital Flows and International Trade Theory” (Whitman)
References: Marina Whitman, Jacob Cohen, Peter Kenen, Graeme Dorrance

[Letter to Evsey Domar from Mark Perlman (Chm.) recommending him to us for further training.]

Source: Massachusetts Institute of Technology. Institute Archives and Special Collections. MIT Department of Economics records, Box 1, Folder “AEA Chairmen MEETING—Dec. 28-30, 1969 (sic)”.

Image Sources: Duncan Foley (left) from his home page. Miguel Sidrauski (right) from the History of Economic Thought website.

Tags BrownEC, Domar, Foley, Sidrauski, Solow, WilliamsonJ

AEA

American Economic Association. Economic Studies, 1896-1899

Post author By Irwin Collier
Post date 2020-04-20

A few posts ago I put together a list of links to the contents of eleven volumes of monographs published by the American Economic Association from 1886 through 1896.

Those eleven published volumes were briefly followed (1896-1899) by two series of AEA publications, viz.: the bi-monthly Economic Studies, and an extremely short “new series” of larger monographs that would be printed at irregular intervals. In 1900 the American Economic Association reverted to the policy of issuing its monographs, called the “third series” of the publications, at quarterly intervals.

This post provides links to the 1896-1899 intermezzo of AEA publications.

______________________

American Economic Association
ECONOMIC STUDIES.

Price of the Economic Studies $2.50 per volume in paper, $3.00 in cloth. The set of four volumes, in cloth, $10.00.

VOLUME I, 1896
[prices in paper]

No. 1 (Apr., Supplement) Eighth Annual Meeting: Hand-Book and Report. Pp. 178. Price 50 cents.

No. 1 (Apr.). The Theory of Economic Progress, by John B. Clark, Ph.D.; The Relation of Changes in the Volume of the Currency to Prosperity, by Francis A. Walker, LL.D. Pp. 46. Price 50 cents.

No. 2 (Jun.). The Adjustment of Wages to Efficiency. Three papers: Gain Sharing, by Henry R. Towne; The Premium Plan of Paying for Labor, by F.A. Halsey; A Piece-Rate System, by F.W. Taylor. Pp. 83 Price 50 cents.

No. 3 (Aug.). The Populist Movement. By Frank L. McVey, Ph.D. Pp. 81 Price 50 cents.

No. 4 (Oct.). The Present Monetary Situation. An address by Dr. W. Lexis, University of Göttingen translated by Professor John Cummings. Pp. 72. Price 75 cents.

Nos. 5-6 (Dec.). The Street Railway Problem in Cleveland. By W.R. Hopkins. Pp. 94. Price 50 cents.

VOLUME II, 1897

No. 1 (Feb., Supplement). Ninth Annual Meeting: Hand-Book and Report. Pp. 162. Price 50 cents.

No. 1 (Feb.). Economics and Jurisprudence. By Henry C. Adams, Ph.D. Pp. 48. Price 50 cents.

No. 2 (Apr.). The Saloon Question in Chicago. By John E. George, Ph.B. Pp. 62. Price 50 cents.

No. 3 (Jun.). The General Property Tax in California. By Carl C. Plehn, Ph.D. Pp. 88. Price 50 cents.

No. 4 (Aug.). Area and Population of U. S. at Eleventh Census. By Walter F. Willcox, Ph.D. Pp. 60. Price 50 cents.

No. 5 (Oct.). A Discourse Concerning the Currencies of the British Plantations in America, etc. By William Douglass. Edited by Charles J. Bullock, Ph.D. Pp. 228. Price 50 cents.

No. 6 (Dec.). Density and Distribution of Population in U.S. at Eleventh Census. By Walter F. Wilcox, Ph.D. Pp. 79.Price 50 cents.

VOLUME III, 1898

No. 1 (Feb., Supplement). Tenth Annual Meeting: Hand-Book and Report. Pp. 136. Price 50 cents.

No. 1 (Feb.). Government by Injunction. By William H. Dunbar, A.M., LL.B. Pp. 44. Price 50 cents.

No. 2 (Apr.). Economic Aspects of Railroad Receiverships. By Henry H. Swain, Ph.D. Pp. 118. Price 50 cents.

No. 3 (Jun.). The Ohio Tax Inquisitor Law. By T. N. Carver, Ph.D. Pp. 50. Price 50 cents.

No. 4 (Aug.). The American Federation of Labor. By Morton A. Aldrich, Ph.D. Pp. 54. Price 50 cents.

No. 5 (Oct.). Housing of the Working People in Yonkers. By Ernest Ludlow Bogart, Ph.D. Pp. 82. Price 50 cents.

No. 6 (Dec.). The State Purchase of Railways in Switzerland. By Horace Micheli; translated by John Cummings, Ph.D. Pp. 72. Price 50 cents.

VOLUME IV, 1899

No. 1 (Feb.). I. Economics and Politics. By Arthur T. Hadley, A.M.; II. Report on Currency Reform. By F. M. Taylor, F.W. Taussig, J.W. Jenks, Sidney Sherwood, David Kinley; III. Report on the Twelfth Census. By Richmond Mayo-Smith, Walter F. Willcox, Carroll D. Wright, Roland P. Falkner, Davis R. Dewey. Pp.70. Price 50 cents.

No. 2 (Apr.). Eleventh Annual Meeting: Hand-Book and Report. Pp. 126. Price 50 cents.

No. 2 (Apr.). Personal Competition: Its Place in the Social Order and Effect upon Individuals; with some Consideration upon Success. By Charles H. Cooley, Ph.D. Pp. 104. Price 50 cents.

No. 3 (Jun.). Economics as a School Study. By Frederick R. Clow, A.M. Pp. 72. Price 50 cents.

Nos. 4-5 (Aug.-Oct.). The English Income Tax, with Special Reference to Administration and Method of Assessment. By Joseph A. Hill, Ph.D. Pp. 162. Price $1.00.

No. 6. (Dec.) The Effects of Recent Changes in Monetary Standards upon the Distribution of Wealth. By Francis Shanor Kinder, A.M. Pp.91. Price 50 cents.

______________________

NEW SERIES

No. 1 (Dec., 1897). The Cotton Industry. By M. B. Hammond. Pp. 382. (In cloth $2.00.) Price $1.50.

No. 2 (Mar., 1899). Scope and Method of the Twelfth Census. Critical discussion by over twenty statistical experts. Pp. 625. (In cloth $2.50.) Price $2.00.

Tags AdamsHC, AldrichMA, Bogart, Bullock, Carver, ClarkJB, Clow, Cooley, Cummings, Dewey, DunbarWH, Falkner, Georgescu, Hadley, Halsey, Hammond, HillJA, HopkinsWR, Jenks, Kinder, Kinley, Lexis, Mayo-Smith, McVey, Micheli, Plehn, Sherwood, Swain, Taussig, TaylorFM, TaylorFW, TowneHR, WalkerFA, Willcox, Wright

AEA Bibliography

American Economic Association. Monographs: 1886-1896

Post author By Irwin Collier
Post date 2020-04-15

Besides transcribing and curating archival content for Economics in the Rear-view Mirror, I occasionally put together collections of links to books and other items of interest on pages or posts that constitute my “personal” virtual economics reference library. In this post you will find links to early monographs/papers published by the American Economic Association.

Links to the contents of the four volumes of AEA Economic Studies, 1896-1899 have also been posted.

A few other useful collections:

The virtual rare-book reading room (classic works of economics up to 1900)

The Twentieth Century Economics Library

Laughlin’s recommended teacher’s library of economics (1887)

_____________________

PUBLICATIONS OF THE AMERICAN ECONOMIC ASSOCIATION. MONOGRAPHS.
1886-1896

_____________________

General Contents and Index to Volumes I-XI.
Source: Publications of the American Economic Association, Vol XI (1896). Price 25 cents.

VOLUME I

No. 1 (Mar. 1886). Report of the Organization of the American Economic Association. By Richard T. Ely, Ph.D., Secretary. Price 50 cents.

Nos. 2 and 3 (May-Jul. 1886). The Relation of the Modern Municipality to the Gas Supply. By Edmund J. James, Ph.D. Price 75 cents.

No. 4 (Sep. 1886). Co-öperation in a Western City. By Albert Shaw, Ph.D. Price 75 cents.

No. 5 (Nov. 1886). Co-öperation in New England. By Edward W. Bemis, Ph.D. Price 75 cents.

No. 6 (Jan. 1887). Relation of the State to Industrial Action. By Henry C. Adams, Ph.D. Price 75 cents.

VOLUME II

No. 1 (Mar. 1887). Three Phases of Co-öperation in the West. By Amos G. Warner, Ph.D. Price 75 cents.

No. 2 (May 1887). Historical Sketch of the Finances of Pennsylvania. By T. K. Worthington, Ph.D. Price 75 cents.

No. 3 (Jul. 1887). The Railway Question. By Edmund J. James, Ph.D. Price 75 cents.

No. 4 (Sep. 1887). The Early History of the English Woolen Industry. By William J. Ashley, M.A. Price 75 cents.

No. 5 (Nov. 1887). Two Chapters on the Mediaeval Guilds of England. By Edwin R. A. Seligman, Ph.D. Price 75 cents.

No. 6 (Jan. 1888). The Relation of Modern Municipalities to Quasi-Public Works. By H. C. Adams, George W. Knight, Davis R. Dewey, Charles Moore, Frank J. Goodnow and Arthur Yager. Price 75 cents.

VOLUME III

No. 1 (Mar. 1888). Three Papers Read at Meeting in Boston: “The Study of Statistics in Colleges,” by Carroll D. Wright; “The Sociological Character of Political Economy,” by Franklyn H. Giddings; “Some Considerations on the Legal-Tender Decisions,” by Edmund J. James. Price 75 cents.

No. 2 (May 1888). Capital and its Earnings. By John B. Clark, A.M. Price 75 cents.

No. 3 (Jul. 1888) consists of three parts: “Efforts of the Manual Laboring Class to Better Their Condition,” by Francis A. Walker; “Mine Labor in the Hocking Valley,” by Edward W. Bemis, Ph.D.; “Report of the Second Annual Meeting,” by Richard T. Ely, Secretary. Price 75 cents.

Nos. 4 and 5 (Sep.-Nov. 1888). Statistics and Economics. By Richmond Mayo-Smith, A.M. Price $1.00.

No. 6 (Jan. 1889). The Stability of Prices. By Simon N. Patten, Ph.D. Price 75 cents.

VOLUME IV

No. 1 (Mar. 1889). Contributions to the Wages Question: “The Theory of Wages,” by Stuart Wood, Ph.D.; “The Possibility of a Scientific Law of Wages,” by John B. Clark, A.M. Price 75 cents.

No. 2 (Apr. 1889). Socialism in England. By Sidney Webb, LL.B. Price 75 cents.

No. 3 (May. 1889). Road Legislation for the American State. By Jeremiah W. Jenks, Ph.D. Price 75 cents.

No. 4 (Jul. 1889). Report of the Proceedings of Third Annual Meeting of the American Economic Association, by Richard T. Ely, Secretary; with addresses by Dr. William Pepper and Francis A. Walker. Price 75 cents.

No. 5 (Sep. 1889). Three Papers Read at Third Annual Meeting: “Malthus and Ricardo,” by Simon N. Patten; “The Study of Statistics,” by Davis R. Dewey, and “Analysis in Political Economy,” by William W. Folwell. Price 75 cents.

No. 6 (Nov. 1889). An Honest Dollar. By E. Benjamin Andrews. Price 75 cents.

VOLUME V

No. 1 (Jan. 1890). The Industrial Transition in Japan. By Yeijiro Ono, Ph.D. Price $1.00.

No. 2 (Mar. 1890). Two Prize Essays on Child-Labor: I. “Child Labor,” by William F. Willoughby, Ph.D.; II. “Child Labor,” by Miss Clare de Graffenried. Price 75 cents.

Nos. 3 and 4 (May-Jul. 1890). Two Papers on the Canal Question. I. By Edmund J. James, Ph.D.; II. By Lewis M. Haupt, A.M., C.E. Price $1.00.

No. 5 (Sep. 1890). History of the New York Property Tax. By John Christopher Schwab, A.M. Ph.D. Price $1.00.

No. 6 (Nov. 1890). The Educational Value of Political Economy. By Simon N. Patten, Ph.D. Price 75 cents.

VOLUME VI

No. 1 and 2 (Jan.-Mar. 1891). Report of the Proceedings of the Fourth Annual Meeting of the American Economic Association. Price $1.00.

No. 3 (May 1891). I. “Government Forestry Abroad,” by Gifford Pinchot; II. “The Present Condition of the Forests on the Public Lands,” by Edward A. Bowers; III. “Practicability of an American Forest Administration,” by B. E. Fernow. Price 75 cents.

Nos. 4 and 5 (Jul.-Sep. 1891). Municipal Ownership of Gas in the United States. By Edward W. Bemis, Ph.D. with appendix by W. S. Outerbridge, Jr. Price $1.00.

No. 6 (Nov. 1891). State Railroad Commissions and How They May be Made Effective. By Frederick C. Clark, Ph.D. Price 75 cents.

VOLUME VII

No. 1 (Jan. 1892). The Silver Situation in the United States. Ph.D. By Frank W. Taussig, LL.B., Ph.D. Price 75 cents.

Nos. 2 and 3 (Mar.-May 1892). On the Shifting and Incidence of Taxation. By Edwin R.A. Seligman, Ph.D. Price $1.00.

Nos. 4 and 5 (Jul.-Sep. 1892). Sinking Funds. By Edward A. Ross, Ph.D. Price $1.00.

No. 6 (Nov. 1892). The Reciprocity Treaty with Canada of 1854. By Frederick E. Haynes, Ph.D. Price 75 cents.

VOLUME VIII

No. 1 (Jan. 1893). Report of the Proceedings of the Fifth Annual Meeting of the American Economic Association. Price 75 cents.

Nos. 2 and 3 (Mar.-May 1893). The Housing of the Poor in American Cities. By Marcus T. Reynolds, Ph.B., M.A. Price $1.00.

Nos. 4 and 5 (Jul.-Sep. 1893). Public Assistance of the Poor in France. By Emily Greene Balch, A.B. Price $1.00.

No. 6 (Nov. 1893). The First Stages of the Tariff Policy of the United States. By William Hill, A.M. Price $1.00.

VOLUME IX

No. 1 (Supplement, Jan. 1894). Hand-Book and Report of the Sixth Annual Meeting. Price 50 cents.

Nos. 1 and 2 (Jan.-Mar. 1894). Progressive Taxation in Theory and Practice. By Edwin R.A. Seligman, Ph.D. Price $1.00, cloth $1.50.

No. 3 (May. 1894). The Theory of Transportation. By Charles H. Cooley Price 75 cents.

No. 4 (Aug. 1894). Sir William Petty. A Study in English Economic Literature. By Wilson Lloyd Bevan, M.A., Ph.D. Price 75 cents.

Nos. 5 and 6 (Oct.-Dec. 1894). Papers Read at the Seventh Annual Meeting: “The Modern Appeal to Legal Forces in Economic Life,” (President’s annual address) by John B. Clark, Ph.D.; “The Chicago Strike”, by Carroll D. Wright, LL.D.; “Irregularity of Employment,” by Davis R. Dewey, Ph.D.; “The Papal Encyclical Upon the Labor Question,” by John Graham Brooks; “Population and Capital,” by Arthur T. Hadley, M.A. Price $1.00.

VOLUME X

No. 3, Supplement, (Jan. 1895). Hand-Book and Report of the Seventh Annual Meeting. Price 50 cents.

Nos. 1,2 and 3 (Jan.-Mar.-May 1895). The Canadian Banking System, 1817-1890. By Roeliff Morton Breckenridge, Ph.D. Price $1.50; cloth $2.50.

No. 4 (Jul. 1895). Poor Laws of Massachusetts and New York. By John Cummings, Ph.D. Price 75 cents.

Nos. 5 and 6 (Sep.-Nov. 1895). Letters of Ricardo to McCulloch, 1816-1823. Edited, with introduction and annotations by Jacob H. Hollander, Ph.D. Price $1.25; cloth $2.00.

VOLUME XI

Nos. 1, 2 and 3 (Jan.-Mar.-May 1896). Race Traits and Tendencies of the American Negro. By Frederick L. Hoffman, F.S.S., Price $1.25; cloth $2.00.

No. 4 (Jul. 1896). Appreciation and Interest. By Irving Fisher, Ph.D., Price 75 cents.

Image Source: As of 1909 the former Presidents of the American Economic Association (S. N. Patten in the center, then clockwise from upper left are R. T. Ely, J. B. Clark, J. W. Jenks, F. W. Taussig.) in Reuben G. Thwaites “A Notable Gathering of Scholars,” The Independent, Vol. 68, January 6, 1910, pp. 7-14.

Tags AdamsHenry, Andrews, Ashley, Balch, Bemis, Bevan, Bowers, BreckenridgeRM, BrooksJG, ClarkFC, ClarkJB, Cooley, Cummings, Dewey, Ely, Fernow, FisherFM, Folwell, Giddings, Goodnow, Graffenried, Hadley, Haupt, HaynesFE, Hinshaw, HoffmanFL, Hollander, JamesEJ, Jenks, KnightGW, Mayo-Smith, Moore, Ono, Outerbridge, Patten, Pepper, Pinchot, ReynoldsM, Ross, Seligman, Taussig, WalkerFA, WarnerAmos, WebbS, William Hill, Willoughby, Woods, Worthington, Wright, Yager

AEA Bibliography Economists Johns Hopkins

Johns Hopkins. Life and career of economics Ph.D. (1901) alumnus, George Ernest Barnett

Post author By Irwin Collier
Post date 2019-12-22

The economist George E. Barnett (b. 19 February 1873; d. 17 June 1938) was briefly glimpsed in the previous post as one of three colleagues who covered the undergraduate course offerings in economics at the Johns Hopkins University in 1919-20. Unlike many an economics professor who has gone on to relative obscurity, Barnett actually served a term as President of the American Economic Association (1932) that should have been sufficient to double the half-life of his afterlife. Barnett even served on an advisory committee for the director of the national census.

To partially fill in the historical blank, today’s post provides a local obituary that reported Barnett’s suicide, presumably related to a severe, chronic illness. Links to books mentioned in his obituary and a Johns Hopkins’ bibiliography up through 1913 have been included as well. Apparently a more complete bibliography was prepared in 1938.

___________________________

J.H.U. Teacher Dies of Wound; Had Been Ill
Dr. George E. Barnett Is Found In Apartment, Pistol Near By
Succumbs at Hospital. Was Expert on Labor Problems, Statistics

Dr. George Ernest Barnett, 65 years old, professor of statistics at the Johns Hopkins University and an international authority on labor problems, was found fatally wounded in the bathroom of his third-floor apartment at 827 Park avenue early today. A .38-caliber revolver lay on the floor near by.

An ambulance was summoned and he was taken to the Johns Hopkins Hospital, where he was pronounced dead a short time later.

Found by Friend

The wounded professor was found by a friend, Dr. Lucien Brun, a dentist with offices on the first floor of the apartment building, and the latter’s secretary. Dr. Brun told Sergt. Lawrence Stevens, Central district officer who investigated the case, that he knew Dr. Barnett had been ill for some time.

The dentist said when he heard a shot from upstairs he and his secretary rushed up to find Dr. Barnett slumped on the floor, a bullet wound in his temple.

Born in Cambridge, Md.

A native of Cambridge, Md., Dr. Barnett graduated from Randolph-Macon College in 1891 with his bachelor’s degree, and was presented with his doctorate by the Johns Hopkins University in 1902 [sic, 1901 appears correct] after teaching school for some years in North Carolina.

He served as instructor, associate and associate professor in economics from 1901 to 1911. Made a full professor in 1911, he has made a special study of labor problems since that time. His studies of labor in the Antipodes were undertaken because he felt the federation type of government in these two countries was so similar to that of the United States that such studies would be appropriate and helpful.

Member of Faculty 37 Years

Dr. Barnett had been a member of the Hopkins faculty for thirty-seven years and had lived for many years at the Park avenue address. His brilliant conversational abilities and his amiable personality had won him hundreds of friends among students, colleagues and a wide circle of Baltimoreans.

His specialization in the field of labor, unionism, arbitration and other labor problems had made him widely known as a scholar and led to his final assignment—a trip to New Zealand and Australia to study the labor arbitration court systems in use in the antipodes.

Granted a year’s leave of absence from the university, he went to New Zealand to begin his studies. He was stricken with a fever, however, and upon medical advice returned to Baltimore to undergo treatment. He remained at the Hopkins Hospital for a time, then moved back into his apartment.

His portly figure was a familiar one as he walked along North Charles street between his residence, the University Club, and the Johns Hopkins University. For many years it was his custom to walk the distance daily, often stopping to talk to a wide range of acquaintances.

Active in Club’s Affairs

For many years, too, he had been a member of the University Club, having his meals there and taking an active part in the affairs of the club.

He was a member of the Hopkins Faculty Club, and the Academic Council of the university.

Dr. Barnett is survived by two brothers, D’Arcy Barnett, of Caldwell, N. J., and Charles Barnett, of Cambridge, Md.

A member of the American Economic Association, the American Statistical Association and the American Association for Labor Legislation, Dr. Barnett has published numerous books in his field.

Wrote Numerous Books

He was the author of “State Banking in the United States,” in 1902; “The Printers,” in 1909; “State Banks and Trust Companies,” in 1911; “Mediation, Investigation and Arbitration in Industrial Disputes,” in 1916, with D. A. McCabe, and “Machinery and Labor,” in 1926.

He also edited “A Trial Bibliography of American Trade Union Publications” in 1904 and was coeditor of “Studies in American Trade Unionism” in 1906. He was a member of the University Club.

Source: The Evening Sun (Baltimore, MD), June 17, 1938

___________________________

Barnett, George Ernest.
Bibliography through 1913

A. B., Randolph-Macon College, 1891; fellow in political economy, Johns Hopkins, 1899-1900; instructor in political economy, 1900-1904; Ph. D., 1902 [sic, 1901 appears to be the correct year]; associate in political economy, 1904-1907; associate professor of political economy, 1907-1911; professor of statistics, 1911 —; co-editor of Johns Hopkins Studies, 1908 —. Marshall Prize, Johns Hopkins, 1910.

State Banking in the United States since the Passage of the National Bank Act (J. H. U. Studies, ser. xx, nos. 2-3).

A Method of Determining the Jewish Population of Large Cities in the United States (Publications of the American Jewish Historical Society, 1902, no. 10, pp. 37-45).

The Jewish Population of Maryland (American Jewish Year Book, 1902-1903, pp. 46-62).

The Economic Position of Germany (J. H. U. Circular, p. 80, June, 1902).

The Maryland Workmen’s Compensation Act (Quarterly Journal of Economics, xvi, 591-594, August, 1902).

A Working Bibliography of Trade Unions (J. H. U. Circular, pp. 36-37, April, 1903).

Editor, A Trial Bibliography of American Trade-Union Publications (J. H. U. Studies, ser. xxii, nos. 1-2. Second edition, Baltimore: The Johns Hopkins Press. 1907. Pp.139).

Shop Rules of the International Typographical Union ( J. H. U. Circular, pp. 3-8, May, 1904).

The Introduction of the Linotype (Yale Review, xiii, 251-273, November, 1904).

________ and J. H. Hollander, editors. The Economic Seminary, 1904-1905, 1905-1906, 1906-1907, 1907-1908, 1908-1909, 1909-1910, 1910-1911 (J. H. U. Circular, June, 1905, March, 1906, April, 1907, May, 1908, April, 1909, April, 1910, April, 1911).

The End of the Maryland Workmen’s Compensation Act (Quarterly Journal of Economics, xix, 320-322, February, 1905).

The Origin of the Constitution of the Typographical Union (J. H. U. Circular, pp. 3-6, June, 1905). and J. H. Hollander, editors. Studies in American Trade Unionism (New York: H. Holt and Co. 1906. Pp. v, 380).

The Government of the Typographical Union (Studies in American Trade Unionism, pp. 13-41).

Collective Bargaining in the Typographical Union (Studies in American Trade Unionism, pp. 153-182).

The Standard Wage as a Bargaining Device (J. H. U. Circular, pp. 7-11, March, 1906).

The Budget of the Typographical Union (J. H. U. Circular, pp. 9-12, April, 1907).

Territorial Jurisdiction of the International Typographical Union (J. H. U. Circular, pp. 11-18, May, 1908).

The Printers; A Study in American Trade Unionism (American Economic Association Quarterly, third ser., vol. x, no. 3. Pp. vii, 387. Marshall Prize).

Labor Organization in the South (The South in the Building of the Nation, v, 144-146, vi, 36-40. Richmond, Va.: The Southern Historical Publication Society. [c1909-1913] ).

The State Finances of North Carolina (The South in the Building of the Nation, v, 529-532, vi, 507-511).

Economic Statistics in the South (The South in the Building of the Nation, v, 563-564, vi, 542-545).

The Piece System of Remuneration in the Printing Trade (J. H. U. Circular, pp. 5-11, April, 1909 ).

The Growth of State Banks and Trust Companies (Annals of the American Academy of Political and Social Science, xxxvi, 613-625, November, 1910).

The “One Man Office” and the Typographical Union (J. H. U. Circular, pp. 8-15, April, 1910).

State Banks and Trust Companies since the Passage of the National Bank Act (Publications of National Monetary Commission. 61st Cong., 3d sess. Sen. Doc. No. 659. Pp.366).

Recent Tendencies in State Banking Legislation (Proceedings of the Academy of Political Science in the City of New York, i, 270-284).

The Breaking Down of the Distinctions between the Classes of Banks in the United States (J. H. U. Circular, pp. 8-12, April, 1911).

National and District Systems of Collective Bargaining in the United States (Quarterly Journal of Economics, xxvi, 425-443, May, 1912).

A Documentary History of American Labor (Political Science Quarterly, xxvii, 298-304, June, 1912).

The Dominance of the National Union in American Labor Organization (Quarterly Journal of Economics, xxvii, 455-481, May, 1913).

Source: Publications of Members and Graduates of the Departments of History, Political Economy, and Political Science, 1901-1915 (Baltimore: Johns Hopkins Press, 1915), pp. 9-11.

Note: [have not consulted yet]
Lavarello, Angela. Bibliography of the writings of George E. Barnett (Baltimore: Typescript (7 leaves), 1938). Copy at the University of Illinois at Urbana Champaign.

Image Source: From a portrait of George Ernest Barnett at Johns Hopkins University graphic and pictorial collection.

AEA Economists Statistics

AEA. The Study of Statistics in College by Carroll D. Wright, 1887

Post author By Irwin Collier
Post date 2015-11-12

Carroll D. Wright can be counted among the founding fathers of official government statistics in the United States. H ere a few biographical details from an encyclopaedia published shortly after the paper below was presented. For impatient readers (sorry, he didn’t write with the Twitter-feeding generation in mind) my favorite quote:

“Know thyself” applies to nations as well as to men; and that nation which neglects to study its own conditions, or fears to study its own conditions in the most searching and critical manner, must fall into retrogression. If there is an evil, let the statistician search it out; by searching it out and carefully analyzing statistics, he may be able to solve the problem. If there is a condition that is wrong, let the statistician bring his figures to bear upon it, only be sure that the statistician employed cares more for the truth than he does for sustaining any preconceived idea of what the solution should be. A statistician should not be an advocate, for he cannot work scientifically if he is working to an end. He must be ready to accept the results of his study, whether they suit his doctrine or not. The colleges in this connection have an important duty to perform, for they can aid in ridding the public of the statistical mechanic, the man who builds tables to order to prove a desired result. These men have lowered the standard of statistical science by the empirical use of its forces.

The statistician writes history. He writes it in the most concrete form in which history can be written, for he shows on tablets all that makes up the Commonwealth…

Also worth reading are his admiring words for Ernst Engel’s statistical seminar in Berlin…yes indeed, the Engel-Curve Engel.

____________________

The Study of Statistics in College
By Hon. Carroll D. Wright

United States Commissioner of Bureau of Labor.

Paper read at the joint session of the American Economic and Historical Associations, at Cambridge, Mass., May 24, 1887.

America has no counterpart to the continental school of statisticians, whose members have entered their particular field of science after special training by a systematic course of instruction. We have our statisticians, to be sure, but they have taken up their work accidentally, and not as a profession. Men engaged in the practice of law or of medicine, or in the other learned professions, enter them only after careful preparation. Our government trains its soldiers and sailors; our colleges and higher institutions of learning fit men for various special scientific and professional labors, but we have not yet reached the advanced stage of educational work in this country which comprehends administration in its broadest terms. The European has an advantage over those engaged in statistical work in this country. Many of the leading colleges and universities of the continent make special effort to fit men to adopt statistical science as a branch of administration, or as a profession.

Körösi, Neumann-Spallart, Ernst Engel, Block, Böhmert, Mayr, Levasseur, Bodio, and their score or more of peers, may well excite our envy, but more deeply stimulate the regret that one of their number, [6] from his brilliant training and his scientific attainments, cannot present to you to-day the necessity of copying into the curricula of our American colleges the statistical features of the foreign school. For magnificent achievement the American statistician need not blush in the presence of the trained European, for, without conceit, we can place the name of our own Walker along with the names of those eminent men I have enumerated. With all the training of the schools, the European statistician lacks the grand opportunities which are open to the American. Rarely has the former been able to project and carry out a census involving points beyond the simple enumeration of the people, embracing a few inquiries relating to social conditions; such inquiries seldom extending beyond those necessary to learn the ages, places of birth, and occupations of the population. Such a census, compared with the ninth and tenth Federal enumerations of the United States, appears but child’s play.

Dr. Engel once said to me that he would gladly exchange the training of the Prussian -Bureau of Statistics for the opportunity to accomplish what could be done in our country. For with it all, he could not carry out what might be done with comparative ease under our government. The European statistician is constantly cramped by his government; the American government is constantly forced by the people. The Parliament of Great Britain will not consent to an industrial census, the proposition that the features of United States census-taking be incorporated in the British census being defeated as regularly as offered. Nor does any continental power yet dare to make extensive inquiries into the condition of the people, or [7] relative to the progress of their industries. The continental school of statisticians, therefore, is obliged to urge its government to accomplish results familiar to our people. The statistics of births, deaths, and marriages, and other purely conventional statistics, are substantially all that come to the hands of the official statisticians abroad. In this country, the popular demand for statistical information is usually far in advance of the governments, either State or Federal, and so our American statisticians have been blessed with opportunities which have given them an experience, wider in its scope, and of a far more reaching character than has attended the efforts of the continental school. Notwithstanding these opportunities which surround official statistics in this country, the need of special scientific training for men in the administration of statistical work is great indeed. This necessity I hope to show before I close.

It is not essential, in addressing an audience of this character, to spend a moment even upon definitions. The importance of statistics must be granted: the uses of the science admitted. But it may be well, before urging specifically the needs of this country for statistical training, to give a few facts relative to such work in European schools.¹

¹President Walker, of the Institute of Technology; Dr. Ely, of Johns Hopkins; Prof. R. M. Smith, of Columbia College; Dr. Dewey, of the Institute of Technology; and Dr. E. R. L. Gould, of Washington, have very kindly placed at my disposal information supplemental to that which was at hand.

The best school for statistical science in Europe is connected with the Prussian statistical bureau, and was established a quarter of a century ago by Dr. Ernst Engel, the late head of the bureau, probably [8] the ablest living statistician in the old world. The seminary of this statistical bureau is a training school for university graduates of the highest ability, in the art of administration, and in the conduct of statistical and other economic inquiries that are of interest and importance to the government. The practical work is done in connection with the government offices, among which advanced students are distributed with specific tasks. Systematic instruction is given by lectures, and by the seminary or laboratory method, under a general director. Government officers and university professors are engaged to give regular courses to these advanced students. It is considered one of the greatest student honors in Berlin for a university graduate to be admitted to the Statistical Seminary. One graduate of the Johns Hopkins University, a doctor of philosophy, is already under a course of instruction in the Prussian laboratory of political science.

The work of taking the Census of the Prussian population and resources is entrusted to educated men, many of them trained to scientific accuracy by long discipline in the Statistical Seminary, and by practical experience. (Circulars of Information, U. S. Bureau of Education. No. 1, 1887, by Prof. H. B. Adams.)

In this seminary there are practical exercises under the statistical bureau during the day time, with occasional excursions to public institutions, in addition to lectures held mostly in the evening. A recent programme of the seminary comprehends:

Theory, technique, and encyclopedia: once a week.
Statistics of population and of dwellings: once a week.
Medical statistics: once a week. [9]
Applied mathematical statistics: once a week.
Agrarian statistics: once a week.
Exercises in political economy, finance, and financial statistics: 2 hours a week.

The students assist in the work of the statistical bureau without compensation. This is a part of their training, and by it theory and practice are most successfully combined.

I believe there are courses in statistics in nearly all the universities in Germany, certainly in the more prominent institutions of that country, but there are no distinct chairs of statistics. Statistical science is considered a part of political economy, and professors of the latter science give the instruction in statistics.

The most prominent announcements for the leading European universities, for the year 1886-7, are as follows:

University of Leipzig: Professor W. Roscher lectures on agricultural statistics, this branch being a part of one course, taking one or two hours a week. One hour a week is also given to political economy and statistical exercises by Dr. K. Walker.

University of Tübingen: Prof. Gustav von Rümelin devotes three hours a week to social statistics, while Professor Lorey includes in his lectures a treatment of the statistics of forests.

University of Würzburg: Professor G. Schanz devotes four hours a week to general statistics.

University of Dorpat (a German institution in Russia): Professor Al. v. Oettingen teaches ethical statistics two hours each week.

University of Breslau: Professor W. Lexis uses one hour a week on the statistics of population.

University of Halle: Professor Conrad has a seminary of five hours a week, in which statistical subjects, among others, are carefully treated.

University of Kiel: Professor W. Seelig devotes four hours a week to general statistics, and statistics of Germany.

University of Königsberg: Professor L. Elster lectures two hours a week on the theory of statistics.

[10] University of Munich: Dr. Neuberg has a course of one to two hours a week on statistics.

University of Strasburg: Professor G. F. Knapp teaches the theory and practice of statistics three hours a week, and with Professor Brentano has a seminary two hours a week, in which, among other matters, they treat statistical subjects.

University of Prague: Professor Surnegg-Marburg teaches the statistics of European States three hours each week.

University of Vienna: Professor von Inama-Sternegg devotes two hours each week in a statistical seminary.

In addition to the university work outlined, much work is done in the technical schools, as, for instance, at the technical school in Vienna there are given regularly two courses of statistics:

First, ” General comparative statistics of European States ;” their surface, population, industries, commerce, education, etc.

Second, “Industrial statistics of European States;” methods and “technik” of industrial statistics.

These courses are given by Dr. von Brachelli, who is officially connected with the Government Bureau of Statistics.

At Dresden, Dr. Böhmert lectures at the Polytechnic on “The elements of statistics,” and has a statistical seminary. Böhmert is the director of the statistical bureau in the department of the interior. Part of the instruction is given at the bureau. Courses are also given at Zurich on the elements of statistics.

Some of the more important announcements connected with the Ecole Libre des Sciences Politiques, of Paris, for the year 1886-7, are as follows:

By Professor Levasseur, the theory of statistics, and the movement of population, one hour a week for the first quarter.
By M. de Foville, Chief of the Bureau of Statistics, one hour a week in the second quarter upon statistics, commerce, and statistics of foreign commerce.
By Professor Pigeonneau, one exercise each week, in which he treats, among other subjects, of commercial statistics.

[11] In the programme of the University of Brussels, for 1878 and 1879, an announcement for a course of political economy and statistics twice each week, by Professor A. Orts, was made.

Something is being done in Italy, but how much I am not at present able to learn.

These courses, it will be seen, are devised for special training in the practical statistics of the countries named.

A great deal of effort has been expended in Europe through statistical congresses since 1853 to secure uniform inquiries in census-taking, and it is to be regretted that the Congresses have not accomplished the results sought. It was unfortunate that the attention of the statisticians of the world, as brought together in the congresses, was given to the form of inquiry to the exclusion of the form of presentation. In tracing the discussions and deliberations of these congresses, the absence of the intelligent treatment of the presentation of facts, even when drawn out by uniform inquiries. becomes apparent. The art of the statistician in his administrative work found but little encouragement in the long discussions on forms of inquiry, and less was accomplished by these congresses, which are not now held, than has been accomplished through training in the universities of Europe. The great statistical societies abroad have done much in stimulating statistical science, and out of these societies there has now been organized the International Statistical Institute, the first session of which was held in Rome during last month; much is to be hoped from the labors of this Institute, for the men who compose it bring both training and experience to the great task of unifying statistical inquiries [12] and presentations, so far as leading generic facts are concerned, for the great countries comprehended under the broad term, “the civilized world.” For this great array of work, the outlines of which I have briefly and imperfectly given as carried on in Europe, America has no parallel.

Our colleges are beginning to feel that they have some duty to perform, in the work of fitting men for the field of administration, and specifically in statistical science. Dr. Ely is doing something at Johns Hopkins, giving some time, in one of his courses on political economy, to the subject of statistics, explaining its theory, tracing the history of the art or science, and describing the literature of the subject. He attempts, in brief, to point out the vast importance of statistics to the student of social science and to put his student in such a position that he can practically continue his study. Johns Hopkins, as soon as circumstances will admit, will probably secure teachers of statistics and administration, in addition to its present corps of instructors.

Dr. Davis R. Dewey, of the Massachusetts Institute of Technology, is also devoting some time, in connection with his other work, to statistical science. He has two courses:

First, A course of statistics and graphic methods of illustrating statistics, in which attention is chiefly given to the uses of official statistics of the United States. Students are directed to the limitations there are in this respect, what compilations have been and are made, and to the possible reconciliation of discrepancies which appear in official reports. This course is taken in connection with a course in United States finance, and the student is trained to [13] find and use the statistics which will illustrate the points taken up, and to present them graphically.

Second, An advanced course is given in statistics of sociology, in which social, moral, and physiological statistics are considered, in short, all those facts of life which admit of mathematical determination to express the “average man.” Some of Dr. Dewey’s actual problems may serve to illustrate the practical work of his course. Samples of the problems which he gives to his students are as follows:

Are the Indians increasing or decreasing in numbers?
Criticise by illustrations the statement that the value of the products of manufacture of the United States in 1880 was $5,369,325,442.
What margin of error would you allow, if called upon to test the accuracy of the returns of population under one year of age in the Federal census returns?
Can you devise a method to determine from the census reports on population, Table XXI., which is the healthier state, Massachusetts or Connecticut?
Is it true that Massachusetts has more crime per capita than Alabama or Georgia? Can you offer any explanation or facts modifying such a statistical conclusion? Do the census reports afford information as to the increase or decrease in crime?

Perhaps the most systematic teaching of the science of statistics in America is given at Columbia College, under the direction of Professor Richmond M. Smith. He has lectured on the subject of statistical science in the Columbia College School of Political Science since the year 1882. His course is an advanced one for the students of the second or third year of that school. In the first year of the work there were but three students of statistical science; at present there are about twenty-five. Professor Smith gives them lectures two hours per week through the greater part of the year. The theoretical lectures cover a brief history of statistics; a consideration of statistical [14] methods; of the connection of statistical science with political and social science; of the attempt to establish social laws from statistical induction; the doctrine of probabilities, etc., this part of the course being based on German and French writers, principally Mayr, Engel, Wagner, Knapp, Oettingen, Quetelet, Block, and others. The practical part of the Columbia course covers the ordinary topics of statistical investigation, and the statistics are taken, as far as possible, from official publications. These latter lectures are of course comments on the tables and diagrams themselves. Wall tables are used to a certain extent, but experience has found it more convenient to lithograph the tables and diagrams, giving a copy to each student, which he can place in his note-book, and thus save the labor of copying.

From a circular of information from the Columbia College School of Political Science I find the following, relating to the teaching of statistical science:

“Statistical science: methods and results. This course is intended to furnish a basis for a social science by supplementing the historical, legal, and economic knowledge already gained, by such a knowledge of social phenomena as can be gained only by statistical observation. Under the head of statistics of population are considered: race and ethnological distinctions, nationality, density, city and country, sex, age, occupation, religion, education, births, deaths, marriages, mortality tables, emigration, etc. Under economic statistics: land, production of food, raw material, labor, wages, capital, means of transportation, shipping, prices, etc. Under the head of moral statistics are considered: statistics of suicide, vice, crime of all kinds, causes of crime, condition of criminals, repression of crime, penalties and effect of penalties, etc. Finally is considered the method of statistical observations, the value of the results obtained, the doctrine of free will, and the possibility of discovering social laws.”

There may be other instances of the teaching of statistical science in American colleges, but those given are all that have come to my knowledge. At [15] Harvard, Dr. Bushnell Hart is teaching the art of graphically presenting statistics, while at Yale and other institutions the theory and importance of statistics are incidentally impressed upon ‘the students in political economy. It will be seen, therefore, that if there is any necessity for such a course as has been cited, the necessity is being met only in slight degree.

Is there such a necessity? Speaking from experience I answer emphatically, Yes. There has not been a single day in the fourteen years that I have devoted to practical statistics that I have not felt the need, not only in myself, but in the offices where my work has been carried on, of statistical training; training not only in the sense of school training, but in the sense of that training which has come to our American statisticians only through experience. My great regret on this occasion is that I can address you with the statistical bureau only as my alma mater, but perhaps the lack I have seen and felt of a different alma mater may give force to my suggestions.

The problems which the statistician must solve, if they are solved at all, are pressing upon the world. Many chapters of political economy must be rewritten, for the study of political economy is now brought under the historical and comparative method, and statistical science constitutes the greatest auxiliary of such a method. There is so much that is false that creeps into the popular mind, which can be rectified only through the most trustworthy statistical knowledge, that the removal of apprehension alone by it creates a necessity sufficient to command the attention of college authorities. The great questions of the day, the labor question, temperance, tariff reform, all great topics, demand the auxiliary aid of [16] scientific statistics, and a thorough training is essential for their proper use. But in the first place there should be a clear understanding of what is necessary to be taught. We read many chapters on the theory and practice of statistics. What is the theory of statistics? The use of the word theory, in connection with statistical science, is to my mind unfortunate, for the word theory, when used in connection with positive information, antagonizes the public mind. When you speak of the theory of statistics, the word theory meaning speculation, the popular feeling is that theoretical statistics are not wanted, but facts. Theory may be fact; statistics may substantiate theory or controvert it. All this we know, and yet I feel that the word is used unfortunately in this connection. If I understand it correctly, the theory of statistics is simply a statement of what it is desired to accomplish by statistics.

Every branch of social science serves to explain the facts of human life. There are some facts which can be explained only by statistics. For instance, it is asserted that there is an alarming amount of illiteracy in Massachusetts. Statistical inquiry shows that by far the greater number of these illiterates are of foreign birth, so that the fault is not with the public school system, but the evil is due to a temporary cause, namely, immigration.

Again, it has been freely asserted that in the United States women of native birth do not have as many children as women of foreign birth. The Census of Massachusetts will show that although American women do have a less number of children, on the average, yet a larger number survive. Common observation would never have shown these things, or would not have shown them accurately.

[17] So everywhere statistics attempt to explain the facts of human life, which can be explained in no other way, as for instance, the effect of scarcity of food on births, on marriages, or crime; the effect of marriage laws on the frequency of divorce, etc. The theory of statistics points out where the statistical method is applicable, and what it can and cannot accomplish. In my opinion, however, it would be better to avoid the use of the word theory entirely, and adopt a concrete term like statistical science, which has three branches: collection, presentation, and analysis. Statistics is a science in its nature, and practical in its working.

The science of statistics, practically considered, comprehends the gathering of original data in the most complete and accurate manner; the tabulation of the information gathered by the most approved methods, and the presentation of the results in com- pact and easily understood tables, with the necessary text explanations. It is the application of statistics which gives them their chief popular value, and this application may, therefore, legitimately be called a part of the science of statistics. The theoretical statistician is satisfied if his truth is the result of statistical investigation, or if his theory is sustained. The practical statistician is satisfied only when the absolute truth is shown, or, if this is impossible, when the nearest approximation to it is reached. But the belief that theory must be sustained by the statistics collected, or else the statistics be condemned, is an idea which gets into the popular mind when the expression, theory of statistics, is used. I would, therefore, avoid it, and I hope that should our colleges adopt courses in statistical science, they will agree [18] upon a nomenclature which shall be expressive, easily understood, and comprehensive in its nature.

The necessity of the study of statistical science would not be so thoroughly apparent if the science was confined to the simple enumeration and presentation of things, or primitive facts, like the number of the people; to tables showing crops, exports, imports, immigration, quantities, values, valuation, and such elementary statements, involving only the skill of the arithmetician to present and deal with them. The moment the combinations essential for comparison are made, there is needed something beyond the arithmetician, for with the production of averages, percentages, and ratios, for securing correct results, there must come in play mathematical genius, and a genius in the exercise of which there should be discernible no influence from preconceived ideas. The science of statistics has been handled too often without statistical science, and without the skill of the mathematician. Many illustrations of this point involving the statistics of this country could be given.

In collating statistics relating to the cost of production, the best mathematical skill is essential, even the skill which would employ algebraic formulae. So with relation to statistics of capital invested in production. To illustrate, the question may be asked, what elements of capital are involved in the census question of “capital invested?” Is it simply the cash capital invested by the concern under consideration, or is it all the money which is used to produce a given quantity of goods? If the members of a firm con- tribute the sum of $10,000, and they have a line of discounts of $100,000, the avails of which are used in producing $200,000 worth of completed goods, what [19] is the capital invested? What is the capital invested which should be returned in the census? If a man has $5,000 invested in his business as a manufacturer, and he buys his goods on 90 days, or four months, and sells for cash, or 30 days, what is his capital invested? This question is one among many of the practical problems that arise in a statistical bureau, but which has not yet been treated scientifically. What has been the result of the reported statistics relating to capital invested? Simply that calculations, deductions, and arguments based on such statistics have been, and are, vicious, and will be until all the elements involved in the term are scientifically classified. Another illustration in point arises in connection with the presentation of divorce statistics, especially when it is desired to compare such statistics with marriages, or to make comparisons to show the progress, or the movement of divorces. Shall the number of divorces be compared with the number of marriages celebrated in the year in which the divorces are granted, or with the population, or with the number of married couples living at the time? I need not multiply illustrations. The lies of statistics are unscientific lies.

The conditions of this country necessitate knowledge as to the parent nativity of the population, features not included in any foreign census, and need not be. Such features lead to what may be called correlated statistics; for instance, where there are presented three or more facts relating to each person in the population, the facts being coordinate in their nature. In this class of work skill beyond that which belongs to the simple operations in arithmetic becomes necessary. There must be employed [20] some knowledge of statistical science beyond elementary statistical tables, or the correlations will be faulty, all the conclusions drawn from them false, and harm done to the public. While the scientific statistician does not care to reach conclusions from insufficient data, he much less desires to be misled by the unscientific use of correct data, or from data the presentation of which has been burdened with disturbing causes. The analytical work of statistical science demands the mathematical man. While this is true, it is also true that the man who casts a schedule (for instance, to comprehend the various economic facts associated with production), should have the ability to analyze the tabulated results of the answers to the inquiries borne upon the schedule. In other words, the man who casts the schedule should not only be able to foresee the work of the enumerator, or the gatherer of the answers desired, but he should foresee the actual form in which the completed facts should be presented. Furthermore, he should foresee the analysis which such facts stimulate and not only foresee the detail, but foresee in a comprehensive way the whole superstructure which grows from the foundation laid in the schedule. He should comprehend his completed report before he gathers the needed information.

How can these elements in one’s statistical education be secured? The difficulties in the way of the best statistical work are not slight. Dr. Dewey, in a recent address upon average prices, before the American Statistical Association, gave an exceedingly valuable, and a very clear explanation of the difficulties which underlie all efforts to secure average prices ranging over a period of years; he pointed out the [21] different methods of securing such averages, and I can do no better than to use Dr. Dewey’s own words, as taken from the address referred to. He says:

“There is first the ordinary ‘index method ‘ introduced by Mr. Newmarch, and continued by the Economist and Mr. Jevons. In this there is no attempt to take account of the varying importance of the commodities where prices are averaged together, but equal consideration is given to all.

“A second method is to give each commodity, where price enters into the averages, a weight proportionate to the quantity of it sold during a fixed period of time.

“In the third method account is taken of the varying importance of the commodities by regarding the part each plays in the exports and imports of a country. This system has been used by Messrs. Giffen and Mulhall. Mr. Giffen’s process in detail is to find the average value of the different articles in the exports and imports; combine these in the proportions of the different articles to the totals of the exports and imports, and then reduce the totals for a series of years to the values they would have been equivalent to had prices remained unchanged.”

This simply indicates that no statistician has yet arrived at a method for securing average prices that shall be considered absolutely correct; that is, in other words, the science of average prices has not been reached, because, if it had been, there would be but one method of securing them. There is but one multiplication table; all men agree to it, because every part of it has been demonstrated to be true. The principle of the multiplication table in statistical operations indicates that science triumphs, for no scientific conclusion is reached so long as skilled men, men of experience and of training, differ relative to methods or results.

The teaching of statistical science in our colleges involves three grand divisions:

The basis of statistical science, or, as it has been generally termed in college work, the theory of statistics.

The practice of statistics, which involves the preparation of inquiries, the collection and examination of the information sought, and the tabulation and presentation of results. [22]

The analytical treatment of the results secured.

These three general elements become more important as the science of statistics becomes more developed; that is, while in conventional statistics, or official statistics if you prefer, meaning those which result from continuous entry of the facts connected with routine transactions, like custom house’ operations, the registration of births, deaths, and marriages, etc., these three elements may not be apparent. But when considered as regards the collection of information from original sources by special investigation through the census, through our bureaus of statistics of labor and kindred offices, and through the consular service, these three grand elements assume a vast importance, and statistical science demands that men be employed who comprehend thoroughly and clearly all the features of the three elements of the science, for the variety of facts to be collected suggests the variety of features connected with the work.

Last year I had the honor to address the American Social Science Association upon popular instruction in social science, advocating the teaching in the public schools of the elementary principles of social science, comprehending those things which are most essential in the conduct of life, in the preservation of health, and in the securing of good order. The Association discussed the practicability of teaching social science in our higher institutions of learning. The suggestion that the school and the college be utilized for propagating the science was met with but one [23] objection of any moment. This objection was that in the colleges and schools the whole time is now exhausted in teaching the branches of human knowledge already established as a part of the curricula of such schools; an excellent objection from a narrow point of view, but a thoroughly inadmissible objection from a point of view which takes in the development of the human race on the best basis, and on a high standard. It was met by the counter-statement that if there is no time in the ordinary college to teach all that the college now teaches, and devote a few hours per week to social science, and all that social science means, so far as teaching is concerned, then drop something else and introduce the social science. But nothing need be dropped in order to teach social science in the colleges and schools of the country. Now, the only objection which I anticipate to the teaching of statistics in our colleges is the same that was made to the proposition to teach social science generally in such institutions, that there is no room for the introduction of instruction in the new science. To my own mind this objection is not only trivial, but of no account whatever in the practical working of institutions of learning. Every well appointed college has its chair of political economy, and this department can be broadened sufficiently to take in statistical science, without impairing efficiency in this or any other department. If this cannot be done, then I would say to the colleges of America that the institutions which soonest grasp the progressive educational work of the day will be the most successful competitors in the race. That college which comprehends that it is essential to fit men for the best administrative duties, not only in government, but [24] in the great business enterprises which demand leaders of as high quality as those essential for a chief magistrate, will receive the patronage, the commendation, and the gratitude of the public. The college or the university which comprehends the demand of the day and institutes new forms of degrees to be conferred upon the men and women specially qualified in special science is in the van. Why should there not be a degree for sanitary science? Why should there not be a degree for social science? Doctor of Philosophy is not enough; it means nothing in popular estimation. The Doctor of Philosophy must understand various things; must be taught and thoroughly trained in the branches necessary to secure the degree of Doctor of Philosophy, but he may know nothing of other branches of human knowledge, except in the most incidental way, which are so essential to fit him for the best administrative duties. The organization of industry demands the very highest type of mind. I sometimes think that the great industrial chieftains of the world are far superior in their capacity, and in their general comprehensive ability, to the great statesmen, to the great leaders of politics, and the great lights that carry nations through crises even. The men who are the best trained, who have learned the practical work of special sciences, are the ones that are guiding the people, and so the colleges or the universities which grasp these things, introducing the teaching of statistical science along with all the other great features of social science, including the branches which bring knowledge nearest to the community itself, are the colleges which will secure success; and not only success in a pecuniary point of view, but success in that grander field of the best [25] work for the race. I urge, therefore, that our American colleges follow the example of European institutions. I would urge upon the government of the United States, and upon the government of the States, the necessity of providing by law for the admission of students that have taken scientific courses in statistics as honorary attachés of, or clerks to be employed in the practical work of, statistical offices. This is easily done without expenditure by the government, but with the very best economic results.

We take a census in the United States every ten years, but as a rule the men that are brought into the work know nothing of statistics: they should be trained in the very elementary work of census-taking and of statistical science. How much more economical for the government to keep its experienced statisticians busily employed in the interim of census- taking, even if they do no more than study forms, methods, and analyses, connected with the presentation of the facts of the preceding census. Money would be saved, results would be more thoroughly appreciated, and problems would be solved.

Our State and Federal governments should be vitally interested in the elevation of statistical work to scientific proportions; for the necessary outcome of the application of civil service principles to the conduct of all governmental affairs lies in this, that as the affairs of the people become more and more the subjects of legislative regulation or control, the necessity for the most accurate information relating to such affairs and for the scientific use of such information increases.

The extension of civil service principles must become greater and greater, and the varied demands [26] which will be created by their growth logically become more exacting, so that the possibilities within the application of such principles are therefore not ideal, but practical in their nature. And these potentialities in the near future will enhance the value of the services of trained statisticians.

The consular and diplomatic service, as well as other fields of government administration, come under this same necessity. The utilization of the consular service for original investigations creates in itself a wide reaching statistical force, and one which should be competent to exercise its statistical functions with all the accuracy that belongs to science. So government should supplement college training with practical administrative instruction, acquired through positive service in its own departments.

This appeal that statistical science be taught in our colleges comes to the Economic Association more forcibly than to any other. The beginning which has been made in this direction in this country is honorable indeed. Shall it be supplemented in the great universities and leading colleges of America? Do not think for a moment that if the teaching of statistical science be incorporated in our college courses the country will be flooded with a body of statisticians. There is enough work for every man who understands statistical science. He need not be employed by government. The most brilliant achievements of the European statisticians have been secured in a private or semi-official way. The demand will equal the supply, and the demand of the public for statistical knowledge grows more and more positive, and the supply should equal the demand.

[27] General Walker in a letter in 1874 said: “The country is hungry for information: everything of a statistical character, or even of a statistical appearance, is taken up with an eagerness that is almost pathetic; the community have not yet learned to be half skeptical and critical enough in respect to such statements.” He can add, Statistics are now taken up with an eagerness that is serious.

The statistician writes history. He writes it in the most concrete form in which history can be written, for he shows on tablets all that makes up the Commonwealth; the population with its varied [28] composition; the manifold activities which move it to advancement; the industries, the wealth, the means for learning and culture, the evils that exist, the prosperity that attends, and all the vast proportions of the comely structure we call State. Statistical science does not use the perishable methods which convey to posterity as much of the vanity of the people, as of the reality which makes the Commonwealth of to day, but the picture is set in cold, enduring, Arabic characters, which will survive through the centuries, unchanged and unchangeable by time, by accident, or by decay. It uses symbols which have unlocked to us the growth of the periods which make up our past—they are the fitting and never changing symbols by which to tell the story of our present state, that when the age we live in becomes the past of successive generations of men, the story and the picture shall be found to exist in all the just proportions in which it was set, with no glowing sentences to charm the actual, and install in its place the ideal; with no fading colors to deceive and lead to imaginative reproduction, but symbols set in dies as unvarying and as truthful in the future as in the past. The statistician chooses a quiet and may be an unlovely setting, but he knows it will endure through all time.

Source: Publications of the American Economic Association, Vol. 3, No. 1, (March 1888), pp. 5-28.

Image Source: Library of Congress Photograph Collection. Frank Leslie’s illustrated newspaper, 1894 Aug. 9, p. 86.

Tags Engel, WrightC

AEA Chicago Funny Business

Chicago Hotel Costs for the 1924 AEA Meeting

Post author By Irwin Collier
Post date 2015-10-11

Part of the cost-of-professors involves the costs of attending professional meetings. Just for a back-of-the-envelope calculation of how hotel rates have changed, we see that the headquarters hotel for the 1924 AEA meeting was The Congress where a double room (with private bath) cost $6.00 and up. (The rates quoted below appear to be day rates when one compares with rates quoted, e.g. for the La Salle Hotel, in The Official Hotel Red Book and Directory 1920.)

A quick check of Booking.com and Orbitz gives rates for today at The Congress Plaza Hotel “from $149”. I presume that rate is for double-occupancy-with-bath as well. We have an increase of $149/$6.00, a nearly 25-fold increase in the price over a 91 year period, about an average 3.5% annual rate of increase. OK, maybe the TV, phone and internet connections plus all that shampoo and conditioner should be adjusted for so this is an overstatement of hotel rate inflation.

Over the same period the Consumer Price Index for the U.S. has grown nearly 14-fold, about an average annual rate of increase of 2.9%. Of course there is room for discussion about how well this particular index handles the changing market baskets and quality differences over nearly a century.

More historical images of the Congress Hotel.

Postcard of the Auditorium Hotel.

Postcard of the Sherman Hotel.

Source: Announcement of the Thirty-Seventh Annual Meeting of the American Economic Association to be held at Chicago, Illinois, beginning Sunday Evening, December 38, and closing at Noon Wednesday, December 31. 1924. Issue of November 10. From the University of Chicago Archives. Department of Economics Records, Box 22, folder 8.

Tags NominalPrices

AEA Economists

AEA Twenty-fifth Anniversary Celebration, NYC 1909

Post author By Irwin Collier
Post date 2015-10-08

MAYOR McCLELLAN, OF NEW YORK, ADDRESSING THE CONVENTION OF HISTORIANS AND ECONOMISTS AT CARNEGIE HALL, DECEMBER 27.

Others on the platform, beginning at left, are: William Jay Schieffelin, Isaac N. Seligman, Davis R. Dewey, John B. Clark, Albert Bushnell Hart, William M. Sloane, Ambassador James Bryce, Governor Hughes, Nicholas Murray Butler, Frank A. Vanderlip, Waldo Lincoln and Edwin R. A. Seligman.

____________________________________

The last posting came from the 25^th anniversary celebration of the University of Chicago. It just so happens that I came across a clipping from the New York periodical The Independent in the John Bates Clark Papers in the Columbia University Archive that was about the joint 25^th anniversary celebration of the American Historical Association and the American Economic Association held in New York City from December 27-31, 1909. Political Science, Sociology and Labor Legislation Associations also participated in the meetings. The report includes several photos of the men who were the movers-and-shakers of their respective associations (though none from the “playlet” and tableaux provided by the “ladies’ reception committee of the Waldor Astoria”).

As I like to provide the visitors of Economics in the Rear-View Mirror both accurate transcriptions and interesting images from yore, I hunted down scanned copies of The Independent at www.archive.org and www.hathitrust.org to extract a rough text file and better images than my amateur photographs of those in John Bates Clark’s clipping to create this posting.

____________________________________

A Notable Gathering of Scholars

BY REUBEN G. THWAITES

[Dr. Thwaites is secretary and superintendent of the State Historical Society of Wisconsin. He was for ten years managing editor of the Wisconsin State Journal and is well known as an author and editor of historical works. He attended the recent convention in New York as a delegate from Wisconsin. — EDITOR.]

THE twenty-fifth anniversary celebration of the American Historical Association and the American Economic Association, held in New York City from December 27 to 31, brought together the largest and doubtless the most distinguished assemblage of students of the social sciences ever convened in this country. In addition to the meetings of the two principal societies, which thus rounded out the quarter-centenary of their existence, were conferences by seven closely-related organizations—the American Political Science Association, the American Statistical Association, the American Sociological Society, the American Association for Labor Legislation, the American Social Science Association, the Bibliographical Society of America, and the American Society of Church History. Eleven hundred persons, engaged either in teaching or studying these several specialties, were gathered here from nearly every State or important institution of learning in the Union, and meetings, either — singly or jointly, occupied four busy days.

The attendance of several representative scholars from both Europe and Asia, who took part in many of the discussions, some of whom presented formal papers, and whose presence was recognized by numerous receptions and other social functions in their honor, gave to the gathering much of the significance of an international congress. Most prominent among the foreigners was the British Ambassador, Mr. Bryce, whose appearance at any of the meetings was invariably greeted with spontaneous applause, and whose many impromptu responses to calls by chairmen and toastmasters were never happier than on this anniversary occasion, into whose buoyant spirit he appeared keenly to enter.

Among other prominent foreign guests were: G. W. Prothero, of London, editor of the Quarterly Review, and former president of the Royal Historical Society; Prof. Herbert A. L. Fisher, fellow of New College, Oxford; Camille Enlart, director of comparative sculpture, of the Trocadero; Eduard Meyer, professor of ancient history, University of Berlin, exchange professor of Harvard; Dr. Cellenbrander, advisory secretary of the Dutch commission on governmental historical publications; Prof. Rafael Altamira y Crevea, professor-elect in the University of Madrid; Dr. Higgs, representing the Royal Economic Society of Great Britain, and Signor Maffeo Pantaleoni, of Rome, attending the Economic convention.

On occasions such as this presidential addresses are generally didactic, and by many of the older habitués are scrupulously avoided. But President Hart, of the Historical Association; President Lowell, of the Political Science, and President Dewey, of the Economic, always have something worth saying, and did not lack large and interested audiences. Dr. Hart’s discussion of “Imagination in history” was keen in its penetration and aglow with humor; he dwelt on the practical importance of the imaginative faculty on the part of the historian, but pointed out its manifest dangers, arising from a disposition to overemphasize dramatic episodes that really are rare in the history of a nation, whereas the most vital factors in its development are generally slow moving and commonplace. Dr. Lowell discussed “The physiology of politics”; while not deprecating the importance of library collections in the study of political science, the most useful laboratory work is, he said, the observation of the practical workings of political institutions, about which we are still insufficiently informed. Dr. Dewey spoke of “Observation in economics”; his thought being much in line with that of President Lowell, that ﬁeld observation is of greater value than closet study, altho both are essential.

Ex-Presidents of the American Economic Association (S. N. Patten in the center, then clockwise from upper left are R. T. Ely, J. B. Clark, J. W. Jenks, F. W. Taussig.)

EARLY PRESIDENTS OF THE AMERICAN HISTORICAL ASSOCIATION Photograph by Brady, Washington, D. C. Beginning at left: William F. Poole, Justin Windsor, Charles Kendall Adams, George Bancroft, John Jay, Andrew D. White, Herbert B. Adams standing in rear. — EARLY PRESIDENTS OF THE AMERICAN HISTORICAL ASSOCIATION
Photograph by Brady, Washington, D. C.
Beginning at left: William F. Poole, Justin Windsor, Charles Kendall Adams, George Bancroft, John Jay, Andrew D. White, Herbert B. Adams standing in rear.

LIVING EX-PRESIDENTS OF THE AMERICAN HISTORICAL ASSOCIATION. (Clockwise from upper-left) James Ford Rhodes, Goldwin Smith, James Schouler, James Burrill Angell.

The programs of the nine associations were crowded with what the sporting gentry style “events,” but popular interest appeared chieﬂy to be with the joint sessions, some of which would have been noteworthy occurrences had they not jostled one another in this remarkable conference week. Wednesday morning’s joint session of the Historical and Economic associations called out a large and brilliant audience, with President Lowell in the chair. The general topic was “British constitutional and political development with special reference to the Gladstone centenary.” Professor Wrong, of Toronto, was hopeful concerning “Canadian nationalism and the imperial tie”; Professor Fisher, of Oxford, gave an exceptionally clear and informing account of the South African union, and Ambassador Bryce spoke forcefully on recent English history in its constitutional aspects.

Another excellent joint session was that held by the political scientists and the, association charging itself with scientiﬁc suggestion in the matter of labor legislation. The relation of the State to labor was interestingly and suggestively discussed by delegates from the Mississippi basin, where, perhaps, the best opportunities just now exist for trying out some of the theories of economic and sociological reformers.

The Historical Association, with its three thousand members, has of late years been doing its most effective work thru an admirable and impressive congerie of, commissions and conferences. This year’s meeting was chieﬂy noticeable for the variety and general success of these conferences, several of which were generally in session at one and the same time. One morning the topics were ancient, medieval, and American history and the treatment of archives. Later in the day the historians were conferring upon modern, European and American history, and relative to the methods and aims of State and local historical, a fertile theme, now engaging much attention in all parts of the country. One of the most interesting of the conferences was devoted to the consideration of “The contribution of the romance nations to the history of America,” in which Spain, France, Portugal and the Latin- American republics were represented either by scholars from those nations or by American specialists in the topics treated. A general session on Southern history brought out an interesting group of papers; while another on the work of historical societies in Europe was noticeable for careful reports from representatives of Great Britain, Germany, France. Holland and Spain, by the delegates from those countries.

The Economic Association has less varied interests, altho it also held a round-table conference on “Rural economics in relation to conservation.” At its ﬁrst general session economic theory was treated both from the stand of “dynamic economics” and that of “theory of wages.” It was plain from the vigor of the discussion that economic theory, as doubtless it always will be, is in a state of flux, few men agreeing as to any one cure for the existing ills of the body politic. Another general session was held at the Chamber of Commerce, in connection with the ﬁnancial magnates. Hereat was frankly considered “the causes and remedies for trusts,” in which the several divergent points of view, practical and theoretical, were squarely presented, presumably with mutual enlightenment.

For a young society, the Political Science people were exceptionally busy and vigorous. Ballot reform, the valuation of public service corporations (jointly with the economists), the relation of the State to labor (jointly with the labor legislation association), methods of instruction in municipal government and government of the Far East, were all duly considered, exhibiting a wide range of interest and possible future usefulness.

FRANK J. GOODNOW, Columbia University, ﬁrst president American Political Science Association.

The sociologists were concerned (jointly with the Statistical Association) in such topics as the next census, the standardizing of units in studying public administration under democratic conditions, and the social marking system; and, individually, in the problems of methods in teaching psychological sociology, and in the religious factor in social revolution.

FRANKLIN H. GIDDINGS, Columbia University, vice-president Sociological Society.

The labor legislation folk and the. statisticians chieﬂy held their sessions in conjunction with other bodies. For the most part the remainder of the participating societies confined themselves to listening to the usual presidential addresses and the transaction of necessary routine business.

HENRY W. FARNAM. Yale University, president of the American Association for Labor Legislation

The social side of the great conference was in every way notable. The entertainments offered to the thousand and more delegates ranged from receptions and breakfasts to formal dinners. The two most striking features of the daily and remarkably diverse program of hospitality were the great welcome meeting at Carnegie Hall, on Monday night, and the very attractive “historical playlet” and tableaux given by the ladies‘ reception committee at the Waldorf-Astoria (the headquarters of the several associations) on Wednesday night.

At Carnegie Hall the delegates were given the freedom of the city and State by Mayor McClellan and Governor Hughes. President Butler extended the welcome of Columbia University, and Mr. Joseph H. Choate and Professor Sloane spoke for the Committee of Arrangements. All were excellent addresses, but the Governor in particular rose to the occasion and earnestly commended the work of his hearers, who in their several ways are striving to find the correct principles underlying human society and seeking practically to apply these to the manifold problems of the State

In addition to the formal entertainments provided by the general committee were numerous unofficial attentions paid to various groups of visiting scholars. Among the most welcome of the unannounced gatherings of this character was the dinner given to fifty members of the American Antiquarian Society at the Metropolitan Club—the joyous forerunner, it was hoped, of annual banquets of these gentlemen at successive conferences of the American Historical Association. In all of these hospitalities practically every learned institution in the city, Columbia University properly leading, actively participated.

WALDO GIFFORD LELAND, A. M.,Carnegie Institution of Washington, secretary American Historical Association; THOMAS N. CARVER, Harvard University, secretary and treasurer, American Economic Association.

In every respect, professionally and socially, the great conference has been a marked success. The attendance was record-breaking, and the quality of the personnelle probably quite unexcelled in this country, even by the literary congresses at Chicago and St. Louis. The delegates, domestic and foreign, returned to their homes more than ever imprest [sic] by the hospitality, greatness and potentialities of America’s much favored metropolis.

Madison, Wis.

_______________________________

Source: Reuben G. Thwaites “A Notable Gathering of Scholars,” The Independent, Vol. 68, January 6, 1910, pp. 7-14.

Copy in John Bates Clark Papers, Series II.4, Box 9, Folder 11, Report on American Economic Association’s 25^th Anniversary, 1910”.
At www.archive.org the 68^th volume of The Independent. There I downloaded “Single Page Original JPS TAR” (warning: > 1 GB and then extracted the pages of the article, from which I have clipped the photos.

Haithitrust copy (that provided the rough text file).

Tags Carver, ClarkJB, DeweyDJ, Ely, Farnam, Giddings, Higgs, Jenks, Patten, Seligman, Taussig

NORTH AMERICAN REVIEW. FEBRUARY, 1887.

POLITICAL ECONOMY IN AMERICA. by RICHARD T. ELY

Other Biographical postings for John Bates Clark