Category: Economic History

Categories
Chicago Economic History Economist Market Economists Fields

Chicago. Report of the Bailey-Christ-Griliches Committee, 1957

 

Today’s artifact provides a collection of suggestions from three young faculty members of the University of Chicago department of economics in 1957 regarding (inter alia) thesis writing, linkages with business/law/statistics faculty, long-term staffing, and the creation of a working-papers series. After reading the report, I guess one should not be terribly surprised that all three of these young turks would ultimately end up spending the lion’s share of the rest of their working lives elsewhere than Chicago. Basically what we have below is a young insider’s view of how to proceed in promoting excellence at Chicago, though it does not really have the ring of a majority view of that faculty. For fans of Saturday Night Live, one might say Christ et al. wanted “less cowbell” but the “more cowbell” faction was stronger. [An alternate source for the SNL sketch]

The following report was written by Carl Christ who incorporated assessments by his fellow committee members Martin J. Bailey and Zvi Griliches.  These guys were only ca. 34, 30, and 27 years old, respectively, in 1957. One suspects that the acting chair of the department of economics at the University of Chicago, D. Gale Johnson, was hoping to tap the minds of the younger faculty members for some fresh ideas. Both Friedman and Stigler had already entered mid-life at 45 and 46 years of age, respectively. 

I have added footnotes to the text in square brackets, e.g. [1], where descriptions of the reader’s markings by T. W. Schultz are provided.

_______________________

T. S. Schultz’s handwritten notes attached to Report

I.  Christ-G-B

  1. dust off Master’s (hold)
  2. treatment of the weak
  3. rec[commend?] students with more enthusiasm
  4. more history (underway)
  5. combine workshops?

II. Business –Law-Statistics

O.K.     more cross listing of courses. List of faculties for use in assigning committees (underway)

III. Information

prong 1. Special seminar (tied to more visitors)
prong 2. more 1 & 2 year visitors
prong 3. dist our staff (2 v.G.
prong 4. reprint service (underway)

 

_______________________

copy of T. W. S.

REPORT OF THE BAILEY-CHRIST-GRILICHES COMMITTEE*

            *The committee was appointed by D. Gale Johnson, acting chairman of the Department, pursuant to a motion passed at a department meeting late in the spring quarter of 1957. The report was written by Carl F. Christ, chairman of the committee, and has been approved in substance by Martin J. Bailey and Zvi Griliches, the other two committee members.

 

The committee has met together several times. In addition, each of us has “held hearings” with colleagues on numerous informal occasions. Our original terms of reference centered on a long range view of the question of staffing the department. But in our discussions we have ranged very widely.

We have dealth [sic] with five broad topics, some of which are interconnected. The five are, loosely speaking:

  1. Instruction, training and placement of students.
  2. Relations with the business, law, and statistics faculties.
  3. Information about the department for its members, for the economics profession and for prospective students.
  4. The allocation of resources in economics research.
  5. Kinds of economists the department ought to try to hire.

On some of these topics we have concrete suggestions, on some we have vague suggestions, and on some we merely have questions. This report provides a brief account of our discussions, and in the course of it it the suggestions and questions will appear.

 

(1) Instruction, training and placement of students.

This topic has not been a major one in our discussions. However we have several points under it.

First, the M.A. degree ought to be dusted off and made more respectable and more meaningful to students, so that those who do not choose or are not able to continue for the Ph.D. can go away from here with the feeling that they have made a worthwhile investment, to our credit as well as theirs.

Second, we ought to do a better job with our relatively weak Ph.D. aspirants in two respects: First, in discouraging or prohibiting from Ph.D. work any student who, in our opinion, is not capable of success by our standards. Second, once a student has been permitted to go ahead on his thesis, in encouraging and assisting him so that he is able to finish within a reasonable period of time and to have the feeling that he has been treated fairly. The reason for mentioning this point is that we have come across reports of several students who worked long and hard on theses and went through several revisions, with the result that they felt we had been unreasonably exacting and had unnecessarily delayed their degrees. [1]  If the M.A. degree is made more respectable as suggested above, there should be less difficulty in maintaining our Ph.D. standards and at the same time avoiding long-drawn-out struggles with marginal Ph.D. students. [2]

Third, we ought to be more vigorous and more liberal in recommending our students for jobs. There appears to be some evidence that in making recommendations we typically assume that the prospective employer has standards as high as ours, and so sometimes fail to place some of our people in jobs that instead are filled by less qualified students from elsewhere. [3]

Fourth, we ought to give at least some of our students a better knowledge of history and inability to make use of it in economics. Too many of our students go away with only poor knowledge in this area. At the same time, in Earl Hamilton and John Nef, not to mention others, the department has access to some of the best historical talent that is to be found anywhere. Can it not be turned to the advantage of more students? [4]

Fifth, we ought to economize our resources a bit by combining into one the workshop appearance in the thesis seminar of those students whose workshop performances appear ex post to have served the purpose of the thesis seminar. It might also be possible to combine the Ph.D. oral examination with the seminar appearance in some cases, thus making a further saving.
Sixth, we ought to take more advantage of the resources in the business, law, and statistics faculties, and be prepared to let them do the same with us (see topic 2 below). [5]

 

(2) Relations with the business, law, and statistics faculties.

The committee met for an hour with Allen Wallis, James Lorie, and Arnold Harberger to discuss informally the probable future course of relations between the department and the school. From this it appeared that the school intends to continue to send many of its advanced students to the department for training in price theory and monetary and income theory, and also that the school will welcome students from the department who wish to study topics that are offered in the school. [6] It also appeared that the school intends to invest fairly heavily in staff in the areas of industrial and market organization in the public regulation of business (this interested us because we feel that one of the main weaknesses in the department’s coverage lies here; see topic 5 below). [7]

We discussed the fact that while relations between the department and the school have always been cordial, there has not been as much flow back and forth as desirable, and in particular that some of our students would be interested in the business school’s work fail to follow up this interest because our demands on their time are quite heavy. We concluded that if there were more cross-listing of courses in the catalog and time schedules (the business school now does a better job of this than we do), and if some of their faculty came to our seminars and oral examinations and vice versa, and if there were more preliminary examination committees and thesis committees with members from both the school and the department, then in the course of meeting their degree requirements, any interested economics department students will find it easier to draw on the resources of the business school and vice versa.[8]

A similar approach to law and statistics would appear promising.

 

(3) Information about the department for its members, for the economics profession, and for prospective students.

One of the most commonly recurring themes in our discussions with each other and with “witnesses” in our “hearings” was that we do not provide good enough information for each other and for outsiders about the kind of work that is going on here, and the advantages we believe we have. Our discussions on this point have led to one of the two major suggestions we have to offer (the other appears below in section 5).

The suggestion is to set up a four-pronged program something like the following. (We will quickly list the four prongs, and then return with some comments.) First, set up a sort of special seminar (which might be called the Economics Research Center Seminar) to meet more or less regularly about twice a month, at which the best work that students and faculty and guests are doing would be presented to the department and its guests. Second, have a larger number of one-year or two-year visitors from all over the U. S. and the world, either as post-doctoral fellows or research associates or the like, whose main responsibility here would be to work on their own research and participate in the special seminar, as well as to take part in one or more workshops and research projects. Third, distribute dittoed copies of our essentially finished work to a selected mailing list of economists in the US and abroad, as the Agricultural Economics group already does informally. And fourth, have a reprint series that would carry the best published articles and papers by our faculty, students, and guests.

It is clear that if such a special seminar is set up and no cut is made in the number of meetings of the other workshops and seminars, the faculty workload will increase. Since we feel that it is already pretty high, it seems sensible to suggest that each workshop skip one meeting each month. This should approximately compensate for the extra load created by the special seminar.*

*A crude survey of the faculty attendance at the Agricultural Economics Seminar and the Chile, Labor, Money, Public Finance, and Econometrics Workshops yields the estimate that about 40 faculty-hours (that is, about 20 man-seminars) per week go into these workshops. Assuming that about 10 faculty members would come to each special seminar, about every two weeks, this would require a weekly average of about 10 faculty-hours (or about 5 man-seminars), which would be released if the frequency of meetings of the workshops were reduced about 25%. Another economy measure in this direction is mentioned under topic (2), fifth item.

(In response to the special seminar idea, some colleagues have suggested that the important thing is to circulate advance notice of particularly good work that is about to be presented, so that interested faculty members and others can attend, and that if this can be done, there is no need to have a special seminar; the regular workshop sessions will suffice. If the idea is accepted that particularly good work ought to be publicized within the department before it is presented, then the question of whether to do this via notices of regular workshop meetings or via a special seminar can be discussed as a procedural matter.) [9]

The special seminar idea is tied in with the idea of more visitors, for one of the results we hope for is that the visitors will see our best work, and will spread the word about what kinds of things are being done here, when they leave and go elsewhere. [10]

The reprint series and the distribution of the dittoed manuscripts will, we hope, have a similar effect. Further, but dittoed manuscripts will enable some members of the profession at large to become familiar with our results many months before they can be brought out in published form. [11]

Other simpler measures that might improve the flow of information are the following: Putting out a special department circular or flyer describing the department, the workshops, the interchange of research among faculty and advanced students, and the large amount of faculty attention paid to students; returning to the practice of giving brief descriptions of courses in the catalog (and in the above-mentioned circular), instead of merely course titles as our department has been doing recently; and publishing an annual report for the Economics Research Center. [12]  The matter of job recommendations for our students, which is related to the topic of providing information, was touched on under topic (1) above.

 

(4) The allocation of resources and economics research.

The area of economics that is the most fully developed, the most systematic, the most firmly established, and probably the most reliable for understanding and controlling economic events is the more or less traditional theory of prices, distribution, and the allocation of resources, based on the tools of supply, demand, and marginal analysis. Because it’s postulates (including utility maximization, profit maximization, and a fairly widespread knowledge of market alternatives) appear to be rather unrealistic, this theory has the reputation among many people of being dry, abstract, and of little or no practical value. In the opinion of the committee and of many economists in our department and elsewhere, this theory is a powerful one and can lead to highly useful results when applied to real-world problems. Indeed, one of the most productive kinds of activity for economists appears to be to apply this theory to situations where public and private policies are inappropriate to the goals people have in mind. [13]

In our opinion, the main strength of our department lies in just this kind of activity. We have a group of people who are very devoted to and very good at discovering important, unsolved economic problems that can be solved with the aid of this kind of theory, and solving them. [14]

Our agricultural economists’ approach to the farm problem is one example. Their work on optimum storage rules and on the development of natural resources or others. Our department’s work on economic growth in a sense is another, since when we find that the growth in national product is not fully accounted for by inputs of labor and capital is usually measured, we begin to look for some missing input, either in the form of something that shifts the production function, or in the form of some quality improvements that we have missed in the labor and/or capital: knowledge in either case. This is related to work by Friedman, Becker, in the labor workshop on the value of education as an investment, and to Knight’s concept of human beings as a form of capital. Harberger’s work on depletion allowances, and on the welfare costs of the U.S. tax system, are other examples. Friedman’s and Cagan’s work on the demand and supply of money are examples too, in the sense that attention is focused on the behavior of economic units seeking to maximize their utility or profit in their holding of money and their borrowing and lending operations. Friedman’s and Reid’s consumption work is similar in that into rests on the same view of individual behavior. The whole Chile project is an example par excellence. Friedman’s suggestions for allowing the price system more scope in the fields of education, military recruiting, and the like, for which Friedman and indirectly, the department are so well known, are still others, as is Becker’s free banking scheme, though there is probably more disagreement among economists generally about questions like these that about the other work mentioned above.

While it is clear to us that applications of the familiar theory of allocation of resources very productive, it seems equally clear that the real frontiers of economics lies elsewhere. Some areas that have claimed attention so far are economic history, political science, sociology and social psychology and cultural anthropology, psychology (including learning theory), information theory, statistical decision theory, linear programming, the theory of games. It seems at least as likely that major advances in economics will come by one of these routes or some as-yet-unidentified route as they will come from applications of the familiar resource-allocation theory.

The foregoing statement is so broad that it is almost certain to be true, and almost useless as a guide to research workers interested in major advances. The committee polled itself as to where it thinks pay dirt lies, and where it does not lie, with results something like the following: Among the areas particularly likely to be fruitful are the borderland with learning theory and psychology concerning choice and decision-making  [15], the borderland with statistics concerning decision theory and game theory [16], the borderland with anthropology concerning culture and values [17], the borderland with political science concerning political institutions [18]. Also promising, we feel, are mathematical approaches generally, including mathematical approaches to some of the above mentioned borderlands. [19] None of us wanted to rule out linear programming, though none of us was enthusiastic about input-output.

In summary of this topic, we have two statements: First, the familiar resource allocation theory is a powerful tool and there remains a rich field for its application. Second, it seems to us that if some resources are invested in related but different areas such as those mentioned in the preceding paragraph, there is now a worthwhile chance of that substantial pay-off in the form of new knowledge relevant to economics.

 

(5) Kinds of economists the department ought to try to hire.

Over the past few years several members of the department (and a good many outsiders!) have expressed the view that our department is too homogeneous in several ways. [20] Most of us rely heavily on resource allocation theory, as suggested in the preceding section of this report, and do not emphasize peripheral and possibly frontier areas such as decision theory, learning theory, information theory, psychology, anthropology, and the like. [21] Most of us were trained at Chicago at some stage, are essentially anti-socialist, [22] have essentially similar views about monetary and fiscal policy, have similar views about how far public policy should rely on the price mechanism and how far it should interfere with it, and are primarily theoretically and analytically oriented as opposed to institutionally oriented.

In recent department meetings, our discussion of this matter has often gone something like this: First, we more or less agree that we ought to diversify by seeking a socialist, or an institutionalist, or something of the sort. [23]  Then we considered names of economists who might qualify, and one by one we reject them on the ground that they are not really good economists. The discussion ends when someone says, “There’s really nobody good in that category.”

Granted that we want to maintain a high level of quality in the department, there are at least two difficulties involved in any attempt to diversify. One is that in hiring people we like to feel that we know them pretty well, so as to make informed decisions. And the younger people whom we know the best, by and large, are our own former students and fellow-students. This creates and perpetuates a bias in favor of people trained at Chicago. [24] The bias is not so strong, of course, in the cases of people who have published and made reputations, but even here it appears to exist (look at the people who were brought here as associate professor from elsewhere, and ask how many have had training at Chicago).

A second difficulty is simply that it is hard to separate judgment about the quality of an economist from judgment about his position on questions of research strategy and of economic policy. We agree in principle that high quality is very important, and also that it is possible for powerful and prolific minds to disagree in good faith concerning research strategy and public policy. Still there is a temptation to feel that one’s own views sincerely arrived at are best, and that somehow an economist who disagrees strongly with them cannot really be a very good economist. [25]

It seems to the committee that the real issue is not diversification per se. We see the issue somewhat as follows: As we said in the foregoing section of the report, we believe that the real frontiers of economics lie in directions that are somewhat unorthodox by the lights of the department. [26] We also believe that there are high-quality economists who are unorthodox in the same sense. If these two premises are correct, then our interest as a department in pushing forward the frontiers of economics must prompt us to make a serious attempt to add a few such people to our staff. It is only in this sense the diversification seems to be a worthwhile aim.  [27]

The question of what sort of people the department ought to try to hire includes not only the problem of finding economists of high quality who appeared to have productive unorthodox approaches. [28] It also includes the problem of rounding out the subject-matter coverage of the department.

The committee pulled itself again, this time as to the subject matter areas that the department ought to pay special attention to, in seeking new faculty. The results were as follows.

For replacement of staff lost in recent years, the two high-ranking fields were mathematical economics-econometrics, and industrial and market organization in social control of business. [29]  (The second of these seems less urgent for us, in the light of the business school’s intention to invest in it; see topic 2 above.) Ranking almost as high was the history of economic thought. [30]

For expansion, we thought of business fluctuations, the economics of the firm, and American economic history (the latter mainly so as to free Earl Hamilton to give work in his real specialty, European economic history, without sacrificing our offering in the American field).

The last two sections of the report may be summarized thus (and here is the second major suggestion referred to earlier). It is the feeling of the committee (1) that we should place a high value on quality, and (2) that in view of our belief that the present composition of the department is weak in areas where the frontiers of economics are to be found, we should make a serious attempt to find high quality people whose interests and competence give promise of advancing the frontier, as suggested in the end of the preceding section of the report. We also suggest that the department pay special attention to the fields mentioned in the foregoing paragraph. In particular, we suggest that the department undertake to appoint a person in the mathematical economics-econometrics area beginning in the fall of 1958. [31]

There is no reason why one or more of these things should not be combined in the same person. And, of course, there is no reason why we should pass up opportunities to hire good economists who are essentially orthodox by our lights, if our resources will permit us to do that as well as meet our author needs.

 

Handwritten Markings and Remarks

[1] Vertical line in left margin marks the last two sentences of paragraph.

[2] Question mark in left margin for this sentence.

[3] “a good point” in left margin for second sentence of paragraph.  “need to ask[?] terms of the specific job + not general letters” in the right margin

[4] “good” in left margin. Vertical line in left-hand margin marks the entire paragraph.

[5] “OK” in left margin. Vertical line in left-hand margin marks the entire paragraph.

[6] “good” written in left margin next to this sentence.

[7] Vertical line in left margin marks the last sentence of the paragraph.

[8] “get list from these committees” in left margin for this sentence.

[9] “OK” in left margin for the last sentence of this paragraph.

[10] “OK” in left margin next to this paragraph.

[11] “OK” in left margin for the last sentence of this paragraph.

[12] underlined “merely course titles as our department has” and “publishing an annual report for the Economics”

[13] Four vertical lines in the left margin mark the last sentence of this paragraph.

[14] Vertical line in the left margin marks the entire paragraph.

[15]  Underlined: “borderland with learning theory and psychology concerning choice and decision-making”,  “(1)” in left margin.

[16] Underlined: “statistics concerning decision theory and game theory”,  “(2)” in left margin.

[17] Underlined: “anthropology concerning culture and values”,  “(3)” in left margin.

[18] Underlined: “political science concerning political institutions”,  “(4)” in left margin.

[19] “(5)” with a vertical line in the left margin marking “mathematical approaches generally, including mathematical approaches to some of the above mentioned borderlands.”

[20] “is too homogeneous in several ways” is underlined.

[21]  “decision theory, learning theory, information theory, psychology, anthropology” is underlined.

[22] “anti-socialist” is circled

[23] “socialist” and “institutionalist” are each circled.

[24] Vertical line in left margin marking the second, third, and fourth sentences of this paragraph.

[25] Vertical line in left margin marking this entire paragraph.

[26] “economics lie in directions that are somewhat unorthodox” is underlined.

[27]  Vertical line in left margin marking the last two sentences of this paragraph.

[28] “productive unorthodox approaches” is circled

[29] “mathematical economics-econometrics” is circled  “also Stigler” written in left hand margin with reference to “industrial and market organization”

[30] “history of economic thought” is underlined, connected with short line to bottom margin note “Stigler”.

[31] Curly vertical line in the left margin marks the entire paragraph.

 

Source: University of Chicago Archives. Department of Economics Records, Box 42, Folder 8.
Mimeograph copy without marginal notes also found in Harvard University Archives. Papers of Zvi Griliches, Box 129, Folder “Correspondence, 1954-1959”.

Image Source: Professor Carl F. Christ in Johns Hopkins University yearbook. Hullabaloo 1962.

 

Categories
Economic History Economists Harvard

Harvard. Ph.D. Economics Alumnus, Arthur Harrison Cole

 

Many Harvard Ph.D.’s in economics went on to careers across the Charles River at the Harvard Business School. The economic historian, Arthur Harrison Cole, is best known as having been the Librarian of the Business School’s Baker Library and also the executive director of the Research Center in Entrepreneurial History at the Business School. 

Arthur Harrison Cole’s doctoral examination fields can be found at this post. His dissertation is included in this list of Harvard economics Ph.D.’s through 1926.

__________________________

From the Report of the President of Harvard College, 1973-74

Arthur Harrison Cole, who died November 10, 1974 in his 85th year, was Professor of Business Economics, Emeritus and former Librarian of the Baker Library at the School of Business Administration. Called a “pivotal figure” in the growth of the Library, Cole boldly reorganized and reclassified its collections, transforming it into a distinguished, scholarly institution. He presented to the Library the records of the first cotton manufacturing concern in this country which he had discovered in Webster, Massachusetts while a doctoral student. From this experience came his long professional interest in the changing ways of American business. His two-volume work, The American Wool Manufacture (1926), is still an important source book on the subject, and the Research Center in Entrepreneurial History at the School of Business Administration was largely his project — he was executive director from 1948 to 1958. After graduation from Bowdoin College in 1911 Cole received the A.M. and Ph.D. degrees from Harvard in 1913 and 1916. In 1913 he was appointed Assistant in Economics in the Faculty of Arts and Sciences and in 1916 Instructor in Economics and Tutor in the Division of History, Government and Economics. He became an Assistant Professor in 1926 and Associate Professor in 1928. His service at the Business School commenced in 1929 when he was made Administrative Curator of the Baker Library. In 1932 he became Librarian of Baker and in 1933 was elected Professor of Business Economics. His activity in his field continued after his retirement in 1956. He was an editor and a prolific writer who published in many journals. A slight but charming evidence of his editorship was Charleston Goes to Harvard, the diary of a Harvard student from South Carolina during one term in 1831. Cole’s most recent book was The Birth of a New Social Sciences Discipline: The Achievements of the First Generation of American Business Historians, 1893-1974. A room in Baker Library devoted to corporate publications is scheduled to be dedicated to his memory this spring.

Source: Harvard University. Report of the President of Harvard College and Reports of Departments, 1973-74, pp. 32-3.

Image Source: Harvard Business School Yearbook 1930-1931, p. 39.

 

Categories
Economic History Gender Harvard Radcliffe

Radcliffe. Economics courses offered by Harvard professors with descriptions, 1893-94

 

Information about economics courses offered for women by Harvard professors before Radcliffe College officially came into existence (1879-1893) were included in an earlier post. Today’s post provides course descriptions for the four course offerings in economics in Radcliffe’s first year of existence. Besides the obvious interest for the intersection of gender and history of economics, the course descriptions turn out to be more detailed in these Radcliffe Presidential Reports at this time than what I can find in the corresponding Harvard catalogues.

__________________________

Radcliffe College, 1893-94
Economics

(Primarily for Undergraduates.)

PROFESSOR [EDWARD] CUMMINGS. — Outlines of Economics. — Mill’s Principles of Political Economy. — Lectures on Economic Development, Distribution, Social Questions, and Financial Legislation. This course gave a general introduction to Economic study, and a general view of Economics sufficient for those who had not further time to give to the subject. It was designed also to give intellectual discipline by the careful discussion of principles and reasoning.

The instruction was given by question and discussion. J. S. Mill’s Principles of Political Economy formed the basis of the work. At intervals lectures were given which served to illustrate and supplement the class-room instruction. In connection with the lectures, a course of reading was prescribed. The work of students was tested from time to time by examinations and other written work. — 16 students.

 

PROFESSOR [WILLIAM JAMES] ASHLEY. — The Elements of Economic History from the Middle Ages to Modern Times. The object of this course was to give a general view of the economic development of society from the Middle Ages to the present time. It dealt, among others, with the following topics: the manorial system and serfdom; the merchant gilds and mediaeval trade; the craft gilds and mediaeval industry; the commercial supremacy of the Italian and Hanseatic merchants; the merchant adventurers and the great trading companies; the agrarian changes of the sixteenth century; domestic industry; the struggle of England with Holland and France for commercial supremacy; the beginning of modern finance; the progress of farming; the great inventions and the factory system; modern business methods; and recent financial history.

During the earlier part of the course attention was devoted chiefly to England, but that country was treated as illustrating the broader features of the economic evolution of the whole of western Europe. Arrived at the 17th century, it was shown how English conditions were modified by transference to America; and from that point an attempt was made to trace the parallel movement of English and American affairs and their mutual influence. — 8 students.

 

(For Graduates and Undergraduates.)

PROFESSOR [EDWARD] CUMMINGS. — The Principles of Sociology. — Development of Modern State, and of its Social Functions. An introductory course in sociology, intended to give a comprehensive view of the structure and development of society in relation to some of the more characteristic ethical and industrial tendencies of the present day. The course began with a theoretical consideration of the relation of the individual to society and to the state, — with a view to pointing out some theoretical misconceptions and practical errors traceable to an illegitimate use of the fundamental analogies and metaphysical formulas found in Comte, Spencer, P. Leroy Beaulieu, Schaeffle, and other writers.

The second part followed more in detail the ethical and economic growth of society. Beginning with the development of social instincts manifested in voluntary organization, it considered the genesis and theory of natural rights, the function of legislation, the sociological significance of the status of women and of the family and other institutions, — with a view to tracing the evolution of certain types of society based upon a more or less complete recognition of the social ideas already considered.

The last part dealt with certain tendencies of the modern state, discussing especially the province and limits of state activity, with some comparison of the Anglo-Saxon and the continental theory and practice in regard to private initiative and state intervention in relation to public works, industrial development, philanthrophy, education, labor organization, and the like.

Each student selected for special investigation some question closely related to the theoretical or practical aspects of the course; and a certain amount of systematic reading was expected. — 4 students.

 

(Primarily for Graduates.)

PROFESSOR [WILLIAM JAMES] ASHLEY. — Seminary in Economic History. Two students were engaged in investigations under the guidance of the Professor. Of these, one was occupied in the study of the English Poor Law and its administration, and especially of the various attempts in the sixteenth, seventeenth and eighteenth centuries to deal with the “unemployed.” The other was studying the original materials for English manorial and agrarian history in the Middle Ages; and has prepared what is believed to be a fairly exhaustive list of such materials as are already in print, classified and arranged both chronologically and topographically. This list has been published by Messrs. Ginn & Co., under the authority of Radcliffe College, as Radcliffe College Monograph. No. 6. [Frances Gardiner Davenport, A. B., A Classified List of Printed Original Materials for English Manorial And Agrarian history during the Middle Ages, prepared under the direction of W. J. Ashley, M. A., Professor of Economic History in Harvard University.]

 

Source: Radcliffe College. Reports of the President, Regent, and Treasurer 1894, pp. 49-51.

Image Source: From the cover of the 1893 Radcliffe Yearbook.

 

 

Categories
Economic History Harvard Syllabus Williams

Harvard. American Industrial History. Readings and Paper Topics. John E. Sawyer, 1949-51

 

 

Some instructors play only briefly a part in an economics department’s regular program. Today we have the Harvard assistant professor John Edward Sawyer who taught undergraduate American economic history for a few years at mid-20th century before going on to teach at Yale and ultimately becoming the president of his alma mater, Williams College. I have provided a memorial minute for some additional biographical information about Sawyer. The minute is followed by a list of topics and recommended reading for his American economic history course term paper as well as the required reading list.

An obituary for John Edward Sawyer by Henry B. Dewey was published at the American Antiquarian Society Proceedings of the Semiannual Meeting (April 22, 1995).

____________________________

 

Sawyer, John Edward (1917-1995)
Williams College President 1961-1973
By Prof. J. Hodge Markgraf (Williams Class of 1952)

 

In this nation, in this century, Jack Sawyer was a giant among leaders of higher education, among executives of philanthropic foundations, and among the pioneers in environmental studies. To all of these endeavors he brought high intelligence, wide knowledge, humanistic values and keen analysis.

It is his impact on this college that brought him national prominence and it is that leadership which this memorial minute celebrates. Jack’s involvement with Williams started early. He came to campus with his father, Class of ’08, and his brother, Class of ’37, before his own matriculation here as a freshman in September 1935. By the time he graduated magna cum laude with Highest Honors in History (he was the first thesis student of President James Phinney Baxter), he had joined a fraternity, been elected to Phi Beta Kappa, sung in the Glee Club, worked on the Gul , served as a Junior Advisor, and helped edit the Purple Cow magazine. The Class of 1939 was unique in this century because it provided four distinguished members of this faculty: in addition to Jack, they were Jim Burns, Bill Gates, and Jack Savacool.

Jack Sawyer’s next official connection to Williams came in 1952, when he was appointed a permanent trustee at age 34. He was named our 11th president in 1961; at age 44 he was the youngest Williams president in this century. He served as president for 12 years and, when he left in 1973, every aspect of this college was transformed: students, faculty, curriculum, administration, trustees, alumni, finances, and physical plant. It is difficult to convey the scope and manner of these changes. Within days of his arrival here he appointed a committee to study the fraternity question, and he had its report in less than a year. The trustees’ decision to replace fraternities with a residential house system set the stage for the construction of housing and dining facilities. A new record for annual alumni giving that winter of 1962-1963 helped dispel the notion that alumni were upset over this bold move. It should come as no surprise that the Alumni Fund outdid itself. Behind the scenes, generous donors assured Jack the goal would be exceeded, an action that thwarted a pro-fraternity group calling for funds to be withheld. At the same time, Jack experimented with more flexible admissions criteria (the so called 10% program), ended compulsory attendance for the classroom and the chapel, instituted paid assistant professor leaves, created the offices of provost and dean of the faculty, and was persuaded by four science faculty (only one of whom was tenured) to build a science center for research and computing.

In mid-decade he took the lead in revising the curriculum to include non-western studies, changing the college calendar to create the Winter Study Program, establishing the first center for environmental studies at the college level, increasing the number of African-American students, expanding the recruitment of women and minorities for faculty and administration positions, and completing a capital campaign eight times the scale of the previous one.

At the end of the decade he helped create the Twelve College Exchange Program, he engineered the change to coeducation here more sensitively than any other institution undergoing the same transition, and he was one of the leaders in establishing the New England Small College Athletic Conference. His last curricular contribution was the Graduate Program in the History of Art. Throughout the decade he increased the diversity of trustee membership by including women, minorities, and young alumni.

These extraordinary changes, for the most part, met with ready acceptance and surprising harmony. Jack’s presidency, however, was not without stress. There was the expected hostility from some alumni over the demise of fraternities, and there were objections from similar quarters over the coeducation decision. Internally, younger faculty in 1968 were expressing displeasure with an entrenched committee structure that dominated faculty governance. The result was the Faculty Steering Committee, the introduction of term limits for committee assignments, the addition of students to most faculty committees, and limited attendance by students at faculty meetings. In 1969 black students occupied offices in Hopkins Hall to protest deficiencies in the curriculum, in social and cultural events, and in admissions as they related to Afro-American concerns. What followed were increased staffing, funding, and diversity in the Afro-American Studies Program, in social and cultural events, in admissions and administrative activities.

Finally, in May 1970 the U.S. government’s military actions in southeast Asia, especially the Cambodian incursion, resulted in protests on many campuses. The deep feelings expressed by students and faculty at Williams, shared by Jack, led to the canceling of the last two weeks of classes and the suspension or postponement of final exams. Those were the easy moves. He then organized delegations of students, faculty, and trustees to call on members of Congress to press the case for disengagement. It was characteristic of him to insist that a trustee be part of each delegation in order to demonstrate a consensus within this college community. These public crises were not easy for Jack because many of the college’s constituencies were neither shy nor uncertain about offering advice. The fact that we survived as well as we did is testimony to his leadership and that of many others.

Throughout his public career Jack’s leadership reflected his sense of stewardship. He was acutely aware that the institutions he led were entrusted to him for only a short time and that prior events implied both limitations and opportunities. Above all else, however, he aspired to lead a life that was useful and, in doing so here, his vision for Williams redefined this college. His multiple initiatives were all part of a larger schema. His horizon was further and his sight was clearer than most of his contemporaries. He was wise, compassionate, witty, gracious, and extraordinarily well read. He cared foremost about people and ideas. His desire to effect meaningful change and his ability to chart the clearest pathway sometimes resulted in an attention to detail that not everyone appreciated. In observing these situations, I was convinced that such micromanagement did not stem from pettiness or a need for power, but rather from an unavoidable desire to have everyone’s energies coherent and focused.

Sometimes his analytical prowess could not be restrained. During CAP interviews with faculty candidates, he occasionally became so engaged with their description of the doctoral thesis that he would redesign their expositions and suggest an additional chapter or two, citing the key primary literature that ought to be consulted. Applicants’ responses ranged from barely-concealed resentment to profound gratitude.

The biographical facts are these. John Edward Sawyer was born in Worcester, Massachusetts, on 5 May 1917. He attended Deerfield Academy, obtained an A.B. degree from Williams, and earned an A.M. degree from Harvard in 1941. He completed all requirements for a Ph.D. except the thesis before serving as an officer in the U.S. Navy from 1942 to 1946, assigned to the Office of Strategic Services in Washington, North Africa and Europe. He than returned to Harvard as a Junior Fellow in the Society of Fellows (1946-1949) and as an Assistant Professor (1949-1953). He was an Associate Professor at Yale University (1953-1961) before becoming President of Williams College (1961-1973). In 1974 he became Vice President of the Andrew W. Mellon Foundation and served as its President from 1975 until his retirement in 1987 at age 70.

His many honors included the U.S. Navy Bronze Star medal, thirteen honorary degrees, the National Academy of Sciences Public Welfare Medal, the Phi Beta Kappa Award for Distinguished Service to the Humanities, the Woods Hole Oceanographic Institution Chairman’s Award, and the Williams College Bicentennial Medal.

In June 1941 he married Anne Swift, who in 1984 was the first recipient of the college’s Ephraim Williams Medal. Jack Sawyer died in Woods Hole, Massachusetts, on 7 February 1995 at age 77.

His foremost legacy is this college. His life was splendidly useful.

Source: Markgraf, J. Hodge. “John Edward Sawyer.” 8 March 1995. Williams College Faculty Meeting Minutes. Williams College Archives. Also available online at Williams College, Special Collections, Williams History—Presidents.

____________________________

Course Announcement

Economics 136 (formerly Economics 36a). Economic History: The Growth of an Industrial Economy in the United States

Half-course (spring term). Mon., Wed., and (at the pleasure of the instructor) Fri., at 12. Assistant Professor Sawyer.

 

Source: Final Announcement of the Courses of Instruction Offered by the Faculty of Arts and Sciences During 1950-51. Official Register of Harvard University, Vol. XLVII, No. 23 (September 1950), p. 81.

____________________________

Course Enrollment
[1949-50]

[Economics] 136a. (formerly Economics 36a). Economic History: The Growth of an Industrial Economy in the United States. (Sp) Assistant Professor Sawyer.

Total 68: 1 Graduate, 18 Seniors, 25 Juniors, 15 Sophomores, 4 Radcliffe 5 Other.

 

Source: Harvard University. Report of the President of Harvard College, 1949-50, p. 73.

____________________________

1949-50
Economics 136

Undergraduate Papers

Each student will prepare a paper due not later than May 15 on a problem in American economic history since 1800.

The paper is to be 10-15 pages in length (3,000 – 4,000 words). It is to be based on an additional 300-500 pages of reading, usually from more than one book, on one of the topics suggested below; or on other topics or books of special interest to the student for which he has secured the approval of the instructors.

The paper is not to be a mere descriptive summary of the reading. The student should rather draw on the reading, and the sum of his work in history and economics, to discuss an important economic problem within the topic on which he has read.

Each student is responsible for getting his own books and for submitting as early as practical a one-paragraph statement of his reading plans and of the problem he expects to deal with (the latter may, of course, change as the reading progresses). The final paper should indicate the reading on which it is based and the sources (including other courses) on which the paper has drawn.

The following examples illustrate the kind of problems which a paper might treat within some of the different topics:

  1. The relationship between technological change and the growth of a particular industry.
  2. The factors that prevented the development of a Central Bank in the United States in the 19th
  3. The role of the railroad in the growth of a particular market area.
  4. The role of transportation and location in the economic growth of a given city.
  5. The role of Rockefeller (or any other business man) in the growth of large-scale enterprise, his attitudes towards competition and the economic conditions behind these attitudes.

1800 – 1880’s

Geography and Land

E.C. Semple, American History and Its Geographic Conditions
R.M. Robins, Our Landed Heritage
B.E. Hibbard; A History of the Public Land Policies
A.M. Sakolski, The Great American Land Bubble
P.W. Gates, The Wisconsin Pine Lands
K. Coman, Economic Beginnings of the Far West

Population

W.W. Thompson and P.K. Whelpton, Population Trends in the U.S.
Census Monograph, 1909, A Century of Population Growth, 1790-1900
M.L. Hansen, The Atlantic Migration
M.L. Hansen, The Immigrant in American History

Transportation

J.G.B. Hutchins, American Maritime Industries and Public Policy, 1789-1914
R.G. Albion, The Rise of the New York Port
W.J. Lane, From Indian Trail to Iron Horse
Cleveland and Powell, Railroad Promotion and Capitalization in the U.S.
P.W. Gates, The Illinois Central Railroad and its Colonization Policies
U.B. Philips, A History of Transportation in the Eastern Cotton Belt
R.C. Overton, Burlington West
R.F. Riegel, Story of the Western Railroads
E.C. Kirkland, Men, Cities and Transportation
W.F. Gephart, Transportation and the Development of the Middle West

Development of Markets

L.E. Atherton, The Pioneer Merchant in Mid-America
F.M. Jones, Middleman in the Domestic Trade of the U.S.
T.S. Berry, Western Prices before 1861, A Study of Cincinnati Market
R.G. Albion, The Rise of the Port of New York, 1815-1860
J.W. Livingood, The Philadelphia-Baltimore Trade Rivalry, 1780-1860
G.S. Callendar, The Early Transportation and Banking Enterprises of the States, Quarterly Journal of Economics, Vol. XVII

Technological Progress

Leo Rogin, Introduction of Farm Machinery in Relation to Productivity of Agriculture
F. McCormick, The Development of Farm Machinery
J.V. Roe, English and American Toolmakers
A.P. User, A History of Mechanical Inventions
S.C. Gilfilan, The Sociology of Inventions
[and] Inventing the Ship

Industrial Growth

V.S. Clark, The History of Manufactures in the U.S., Vols. I, II
R.M. Tryon, Household Manufacture in the U.S., 1640-1860
A.H. Cole, American Wool Manufacture, 2 vols.
C.F. Ware, The Early New England Cotton Manufacture
M.T. Parker, Lowell, A Study in Industrial Development
V. Schlakman, Economic History of a Factory Town
C.M. Green, Holyoke, Massachusetts
J.R. Commons, History of Labor in the U.S., Vols. I, II
N.J. Ware, The Industrial Worker, 2 vols.

Business Organization and Government Policy

Cochran and Miller, The Age of Enterprise
Oscar Handlin, Commonwealth: Massachusetts 1774-1861
Louis Hartz, Economic Policy and Democratic Thought
W.J. Lane, Cornelius Vanderbilt
Sidney Ratner, Social History of American Taxation
F.W. Taussig, Tariff History of the U.S.
J.S. Davis, Essays in the Earlier History of American Corporations, 2 vols.
J.W. Cadman, Jr., The Corporation in New Jersey: Business and Politics, 1791-1875

Role of Capital and Economic Growth

N.J. Silverling, The Dynamics of Business
W.B. Smith and A.H. Cole, Fluctuations in American Business, 1790-1860
L.H. Jenks, The Migration of British Capital to 1875
G.W. Van Vleck, The Panic of 1857
R.G. McGrane, Foreign Bondholders and American State Debts
R.A. Foulke, The Sinews of American Commerce

Money and Banking

M.S. Myers, The New York Money Market, Vol. I
D.R. Dewey, State Banking before the Civil War
R.A. Lester, Monetary Experiments
E.R. Tauss, Central Banking Functions of the Treasury
H.E. Miller, Banking Theories in the US. before 1860
A.B. Hepburn, A History of Coinage and Currency in the U.S.
R.C.H. Catterall, The Second Bank of the U.S., 2 vols.
N.S.B. Gras, The Massachusetts First National Bank of Boston, 1784-1934

Agricultural Expansion

L.B. Schmidt and Ross, Readings in the Economic History of American Agriculture
Bidwell and Falconer, History of Agriculture in the Northern States, 1620-1860
L.C. Gray, History of Agriculture in the Southern U.S. to 1860
E.E. Edwards, American Agriculture—the First 300 Years in Yearbook of Agriculture, 1940
A.W. Griswold, Farming and Democracy

The Social Impact of Economic Change

Joseph Dorfman, The Economic Mind in American Civilization
C.M. Green, Holyoke, Massachusetts
Oscar Handlin, Boston’s Immigrants
R.R. Russell, The Economic Aspects of Southern Sectionalism
P.S. Foner, Business and Slavery
T.D. Clark, Pills, Petticoats and Plows: The Southern Country Store

1880’s — 1940’s

Population

M.L. Hansen, The Immigrant in American History
Carter Goodrich and Associates, Migration and Economic Opportunity
National Resources Com., The Problems of a Changing Population

Land Policy

R.M. Robbins, Our Landed Heritage
B. H. Hibbard, A History of Public Land Policies

Transportation

Sidney L. Miller, Inland Transportation
Stuart Daggett, Railroad Reorganization
J.I. Bogen, The Anthracite Roads
J.E. Otterson, Foreign Trade and Shipping
W.Z. Ripley, Railroads: Rates and Regulation
W.Z. Ripley, Railroads: Finance and Organization
U.S. National Resources Planning Board, Transportation and National Policy, Part II, Section 1, Air Transport
K.T. Healy, The Economics of Transportation in America
C.E. Puffin, Air Transportation, 1941

Technological Progress

L.L. Corwin, TNEC Monograph 22, Technology in Our Economy
Harry Jerome, Mechanization in Industry
National Resources Planning Committee, Technological Trends and National Policy
N.R. Danielian, A.T.&T.
Holland Thompson, The Age of Invention
A.A. Bright, The Electric Lamp Industry
W.R. MacLaurin, Innovation and Invention in the Radio Industry

Industrial Growth

Solomon Fabricant, The Output of Manufacturing Industries
Ralph Epstein, The Automobile Industry
Rudolph Clemen, The American Livestock and Meat Industry
Victor Clark, History of Manufactures in the U.S., Vols. II, III
G.E. McLaughlin, Growth of Manufacturing Areas
H. Barger and S. Schwartz, The Mining Industries, 1899-1939
J.B. Walker, Epic of American Industry
Pearce Davis, Development of the Glass Industry
D.H. Wallace, Market Control of the Aluminum Industry
P.A. Rickard, A History of American Mining

Money and Banking

Margaret Myers, The New York Money Market
G.H. Edwards, The Evolution of Finance Capitalism
National Industrial Conference Board, The Banking Situation in the U.S., 1932
W.Z. Ripley, Main Street and Wall Street
W.C. Mitchell, History of Greenbacks
E.R. Tauss, Central Banking Functions of the Treasury
H.E. Miller, Banking Theories in the U.S. before 1860
A.D. Noyes, Forty Years of American Finance
B.U. Ratchford, American State Debts
W.G. Schultz and M.R. Caine, Financial Development of the U.S.

Income and Economic Growth

Simon Kuznets, National Income: A Summary of Findings
Colin Clark, The Conditions of Economic Progress
N.J. Silberling, The Dynamics of Business
National Industrial Conference Board, Studies in Enterprise and Social Progress
TNEC Monograph 37, Saving, Investment, and National Income
TNEC Monograph 12, Profits, Productive Activities and New Investment
Report of the Committee on Recent Economic Changes in U.S., 2 Vols, 1929

Agriculture

L.B. Schmidt and E.D. Ross, Readings in the Economic History of American Agriculture
U.S. Dept. of Agriculture, 1940 Yearbook of Agriculture
U.S. Dept. of Agriculture, 1940 Yearbook of Agriculture
Fred Shannon, The Farmer’s Last Frontier
H. Barger, and H.H. Landsbert, American Agriculture 1899-1939
R.P. Brooks, The Agrarian Revolution in Georgia 1865-1912
J.D. Black, Agricultural Reform in the U.S.
A.W. Griswold, Farming and Democracy
Geoffrey Shepherd, Marketing Farm Products

Labor

J.R. Commons, etc., History of Labor in the U.S., Vols III, IV, 1935
L.L. Lorwin, The American Federation of Labor
C.E. Bonnett, Employer’s Associations in the U.S., 1922
H. Millis and R. Montgomery, The Economics of Labor, 3 vols, 1945
Slichter, Union Policies and Industrial Management
Samuel Gompers, Seventy Years of Life and Labor, 1925
E.W. Bakke, The Unemployed Worker
P.F. Brissenden, The I.W.W., A Study in American Syndicalism

Business Organization and Government Policy

H.R. Seager and C.A. Gulick, Trust and Corporation Problems, 1929
M.W. Watkins, Industrial Concentration and Public Policy
A.H. Burns, The Decline of Competition, 1936
R.W. Brady, Business as a System of Power, 1941
B.H. Williams, The Economic Foreign Policy of the U.S.
F.W. Taussig, Tariff History of the U.S.
Keith Sward, The Legend of Henry Ford
A.T. Mason, Brandeis and the Modern State
A. Nevins, J.D. Rockefeller

The Social Impact of Economic Change

T.C. Cochran and W. Miller, The Age of Enterprise
Economic Growth, Journal of Economic History, Supplement to Vol. VII, 1948
T.W. Arnold, The Folklore of Capitalism, 1937
L.D. Brandeis, Other People’s Money, 1914
C.D. Thompson, Confessions of the Power Trust, 1932
R.S. and H.M. Lynd, Middletown, 1929; and Middletown in Transition, 1937
James West, Plainville, U.S.A., 1945
George Soule, Prosperity Decade, 1947
Broadus Mitchell, Depression Decade, 1947
A.M. Schlesinger, The Rise of the City
Ida Tarbell, The Nationalizing of Business, 1878-1898
H.U. Faulkner, The Quest for Social Justice, 1898-1914

 

Source: Harvard University Archives. Syllabi, course outlines and reading lists in Economics, 1895-2003. (HUC 8522.2.1) Box 4, Folder “Economics, 1949-1950 (2 of 3)”.

____________________________

 

Economics 136
Spring term
Required reading list — 1950-51

A textbook is used in this course to provide a comprehensive historical survey complementary to the more topically organized lectures. Each student will normally buy, along with other books marked with an asterisk below, one of the following texts:

Recommended for general undergraduate use:

Kirkland, E.C., A History of American Economic Life, Rev. Ed. (Crofts)

Recommended for graduate students and undergraduates seeking a more advanced text:

Williamson, H.F., The Growth of the American Economy (Prentice Hall)
Historical Statistics of the United States, 1789-1945 (Govt Printing Office)

Reading assignments up to the Hour Test (tentatively March 21)

Text: Kirkland, Chs. IV-XI or equivalent in Williamson (approximately the first half)

Other reading (in the order given):

*Franklin, Benj., Autobiography, any edition, entire, or equivalent to pp. 6-38, 75-149, 216-34 of the Modern Library edit.
Taylor, George R., ed., The Turner Thesis, Problems in American Civilization (Heath), sections 1, 4 – 9.
Taylor, George R., ed., Jackson vs. Biddle, Problems in American Civilization (Heath), sections 1- 10
Reading on capital formation
*Manning and Potter, Gov’t and the American Economy (Holt) pp. 35–73, 75-115

Reading assignments between the Hour Test and Reading Period

Text: Kirkland, Chs. XII-XVII or equivalent in Williamson (approximately second half)

Other readings (in order given):

Manning and Potter, ibid., 75-115, 8[?]-23
Reading on business cycles
Shannon, Fred A., The Farmer’s Last Frontier (Farrar and Rinehart). Chs. V-IX, XV
Millis and Montgomery, Organized Labor, Ch. II and III, and Manning and Potter, ibid., 117-60, 161-200
Berle and Means, The Modern Corporation and Private Property, selections

Reading period (tentatively)

Schumpeter, Capitalism, Socialism and Democracy. Parts II-IV

An essay of 10-15 pages on some problem in American economic history will be due approximately one week before the end of the reading period.

 

Source: Harvard University Archives. Syllabi, course outlines and reading lists in Economics, 1895-2003. (HUC 8522.2.1) Box 5, Folder “Economics, 1950-1951 (1 of 3)”.

____________________________

 

[Final] Reading Period Assignment
May 7-May 26, 1951

Economics 136:

J. A. Schumpeter, Capitalism, Socialism and Democracy. Preface to the Second Edition and Parts II and III
H. C. Simons, Economic Policy for a Free Society, Chapters I and II

 

Source: Harvard University Archives. Syllabi, course outlines and reading lists in Economics, 1895-2003. (HUC 8522.2.1) Box 5, Folder “Economics, 1950-1951 (1 of 3)”.

Image Source: John Edwards Sawyers in 1970.

 

Categories
Columbia Economic History Economists Harvard Illinois Johns Hopkins Minnesota Yale

Columbia. Seligman Recommends Three Harvard Colleagues for English Visiting Professorship, 1925

 

The Sir George Watson Chair of American History, Literature, and Institutions was administered by the Anglo-American Society for a distinguished visiting professor to lecture in several English universities. The inaugural lecture was given in 1921 by Viscount Bryce. That lecture, “The Study of American History” was published along with an account of the establishment of the Sir George Watson Chair. The first full course of lectures, “Economic Problems of Democracy” was given the following year by the economist and President-Emeritus of Yale University, Arthur T. Hadley. 

From the following exchange of letters between the president of Columbia University and economist, E.R.A. Seligman, we harvest Seligman’s ranking of four economics professors (three from Harvard and one from Johns Hopkins) regarded by Seligman to dominate the leading specialists in American economic history for this prestigious visiting position in “American History, Literature, and Institutions”. I have been unable at this time to determine who was actually appointed in 1925 or 1926

______________________________

Columbia President Butler Requests E.R.A. Seligman to Propose Names of Distinguished Economists for a British Chair in American History

Columbia University
in the City of New York
President’s Room

January 6, 1925

Professor E. R. A. Seligman
Department of Economics

My dear Professor Seligman

The electors to the Watson Chair of American History in British Universities contemplate acting upon a suggestion of mine and naming in the not distant future a competent American scholar to present the subject of our economic history and development. The topics that I have in mind include the migration West and the settlement of the large land areas there, the development of government aid in internal improvements, the building up of the railway and other transportation systems, the struggles over the tariff, the development, both industrially and geographically, of our manufacturing system, and the growth and character of foreign trade. There would, of course, also have to be treatment, although in general fashion, of the high points of our financial history.

Can you out of your wide acquaintance with American economists suggest a few names that I might send to the electors for consideration when they come to make their choice? The man ought to have enough standing at home to make his appointment abroad significant. He ought to be a good lecturer before a general academic audience and he ought to have a sufficiently philosophic cast of mind to avoid plunging into a morass of facts and statistics when what is needed is philosophic exposition of principles, happenings and trends of events.

With cordial regards an all the compliments of the season, I am

Faithfully yours
[signed]
Nicholas Murray Butler

______________________________

Copy of Seligman’s Response to Butler’s Request

January 7, 1925.

President Nicholas Murray Butler,
Columbia University.

My dear President Butler:

In reply to your letter of January 6th I would say that the professed economic historians are not of the very first rank. The best of them are Clive Day, of Yale, who is, I am afraid, a bit ineffective as a speaker; E. L. Bogart, of Illinois, who is a much more impressive personality and who is a fine fellow, although not a scholar of the first rank; and, finally, Professor Gras, of Minnesota, who is a younger man. It would be far better, it seems to me, to choose some prominent economist, many of whom either give courses in economic history as an incidental matter or who may be assumed to have a competent knowledge of American history. In this rank I should put first Professor E. L.(sic) Gay, of Harvard, with whom no doubt you are acquainted, and who was formerly editor of the Evening Post; then either Ripley or A. A. Young, of Harvard, would do very well, as they are both men of distinction and personality. Other men, like Hollander of Johns Hopkins, occasionally gives courses similar to the one that I give every few years, on economic and fiscal history. Taking it all in all, the order of my choice would be Gay, Young, Ripley, Hollander.

If you desire more detailed information about any of these and their characteristics or standing, I should be glad to talk it over with you.

Faithfully yours,
[E.R.A. Seligman]

 

Source: Columbia University Archives. Edwin Robert Anderson Seligman Collection, Box 37, Folder “Box 100, Seligman, Columbia 1924-1930”.

Image Source: E.R.A. Seligman portrait in  American Economic Review, 1943.

Categories
Courses Economic History Harvard Suggested Reading Syllabus

Harvard. Readings for Modern Economic History. Ashley, 1899-1900

 

The following course outline with reading assignments comes from one of the two year-long courses William J. Ashley taught at Harvard for nearly a decade around the turn of the 20th century. No copy of his reading list for Medieval Economic History of Europe is found in the Harvard Archive’s collections of course reading lists that include fewer and fewer courses as we move back to the earliest years of the 20th century and before. However there is the printed copy of the readings for the Economic History of Europe and the United States since 1500 that has been transcribed for this posting.

A biographical piece published in 1899 has already been posted in Economics in the Rear-view Mirror.

____________________________

From Taussig’s history of the department of economics:

“…The Department from the first gave attention to economic theory; and the slant which was thus given its work under Dunbar’s leadership persisted. It was always known in the country as giving much attention to the matters of principle which are indicated by the term ‘economic theory,’ and also to the history of the development of economic thought.

Another aspect, the historical, was emphasized by the appointment in 1892 of William J. Ashley* as Professor of Economic History. As in the case of Dunbar, this was an unprecedented move. Ashley’s appointment was evidence of a desire to promote the new current of thought for increased attention to history in its widest range: letters, law, morals, as well as economics. He remained in service for nearly 10 years, resigning to accept a chair in England. His place was soon taken by a scholar of no less distinction, Edwin F. Gay…”

________________

* Sir William Ashley, as he became in 1917, took a First in Modern History at Balliol in 1881, and in 1888 published his pioneer work, An Introduction to English Economic History and Theory.

 

Source: Chapter 9, “Economics” by Frank William Taussig in Samuel Eliot Morison (ed.), The Development of Harvard University since the Inauguration of President Eliot, 1869-1929. Cambridge: Harvard University Press, 1930.

___________________________

Course Announcement (from 1897-98)

[Economics] 11. The Modern Economic History of Europe and America (from 1500). Tu., Th., (and at the pleasure of the instructor) Sat., at 12. Professor Ashley.

This course, — which will usually alternate with Course 10 [The Mediaeval Economic History of Europe] in successive years, — while intended to form a sequel to Course 10, will nevertheless be independent, and may usefully be taken by those who have not followed the history of the earlier period. The main thread of connection will be found in the history of trade; but the outlines of the history of agriculture and industry will also be set forth, and the forms of social organization dependent upon them. England, as the first home of the “great industry,” will demand a large share of attention; but the parallel or divergent economic history of the United States, and of the great countries of western Europe, will be considered side by side with it.

Source: Harvard University, Faculty of Arts and Sciences. [Announcement of the] Division of History and Political Science Comprising the Departments of History and Government and Economics 1897-98, pp. 31-32.

___________________________

Course Enrollment

[Economics] 11. Professor ASHLEY.—The Modern Economic History of Europe. Lectures (2 or 3 hours).

Total 76: 15 Graduates, 21 Seniors, 26 Juniors, 6 Sophomores, 8 Others.

Source: Harvard University. Annual Report of the President of Harvard College 1899-1900, p. 69.

___________________________

ECONOMICS 11.
PRESCRIBED READING FOR THE FIRST HALF-YEAR

[Stamp: Harvard College Library, Cambridge, Mass. Jan 15, 1900]

(A supplement to, and not an alternative for, the lectures.)

* * * * *

  1. Warner, English Industrial History, to p. 208.
  2. Fiske, Discovery of America, I, pp. 256-334, 354-365,453-460; II, App. A and B.
  3. Hunter, History of British India, I, ch. 1-5.
  4. Marco Polo, Travels, ed. Yule; or pub. Cassell.
  5. Hakluyt, Discovery of Muscovy, pub. Cassell.
  6. Fox Bourne, English Merchants, 1886, pp. 13-149.
  7. Easterlings, Hanse of London, Hanse Towns, and Hanseatic League in Palgrave’s Dictionary of Political Economy; or Hanse in Say et Chailley, Nouveau Dictionnaire d’Économie Politique; or Hanse in Handwörterbuch der Staatswissenschaften; or Hanseatic League in Encyclopœdia Britannica.
  8. Pigeonneau, Histoire du Commerce de la France, I, pp. 211-218.
  9. Jacobs, Story of Geographical Discovery.

* * * *

  1. Seebohm, English Village Community, pp. 1-32; or Ashley, Economic History, I, §1; the former recommended.
  2. Jones, Peasant Rents, ch. 2, 3, §§4-6, App., pp. 172-190.
  3. Ashley, Economic History, II, ch. 4,5.
  4. Belfort Bax, German Society at the close of the Middle Ages, Intro., and ch. 1, 5-8.
  5. The Twelve Articles of the German Peasants in 1525; German text in Zimmermann, Geschichte des Bauernkrieges, Zweiter Theil, 1862, pp. 98 seq.; imperfect English translation in Belfort Bax, Peasants’ War, pp. 63 seq.
  6. More’s Utopia (Arber’s reprint recommended), bk. I; or Harrisons’s Description of England (in Elizabethan England, Camelot series), ch. 1, 2, 4, 7, 9, 10.
  7. Ashley, Economic History, II, ch. 1-3.
  8. Articles of the Spurriers and White-tawyers in Riley’s Memorials of London, pp. 226-228, 232-234, and of the Exeter Tailors in English Gilds, pp. 312-316; or all three in Penn. and Reprints, vol. II, no. I.
  9. Statute 5 Eliz. c. 4, in Statutes of the Realm, or in Prothero, Statutes and Constitutional Documents.
  10. Levasseur, Histoire des classes ouvrières, II, pp. 119-126; or Martin Saint-Léon, Histoire des corporations de métiers, pp. 247-253.
  11. Report of the Commission of the German Diet in 1522; text in Belfort Bax, German Society at the close of the Middle Ages, pp. 245-259; imperfect translation, ibid., pp. 231-245; together with the account of the Fuggers, , App. C.
  12. Defoe, Tour through the Eastern Counties, pub. Cassell.
  13. Defoe, From London to Land’s End, pub. Cassell.
  14. Schmoller, Mercantile System.

* * * * *

ADDITIONAL READING RECOMMENDED.

  1. Cunningham, Growth of English Industry and Commerce. I. Early and Middle Ages, Bk. III, ch. 4; Bk. IV, ch. 2-5; Bk. V, ch. 5. II. Modern Times, Bk. VI, ch. 4.
  2. Cunningham, Alien Immigrants to England, ch. 3 & 4.
  3. Pigeonneau, Histoire du Commerce de la France, Tome II, livre 1.
  4. Lindner, Die deutsche Hanse.
  5. Dixon, The Florentine Wool Trades, in R. Hist. Soc., 1898.
  6. Ruskin, The Stones of Venice, ch. 1, §§1-16.
  7. Hallam, Account of the Government of Florence, in Middle Ages, I, ch. 3, pt. 2.
  8. The Common Weal of this Realm of England, ed. Lamond.
  9. Cheyney, Social Changes in England in the 16th Century.
  10. Leadam, The Domesday of Inclosures, R. Hist. Soc.

 

 

ECONOMICS 11.
PRESCRIBED READING FOR THE SECOND HALF-YEAR

[Handwritten pencil note: “1899-1900”]

(A supplement to, and not an alternative for, the lectures.)

* * * * *

  1. Warner, English Industrial History, p. 209 to end.

* * *

  1. Text of the Navigation Acts, Amer. History Leaflets, No. 19.
  2. Text of the Poor Law of Elizabeth, 43-44 Eliz., cap. 2, in Statutes of the Realm, or Prothero Constitutional Documents.

* * *

  1. Hunter, History of British India, ch. 6-10.
  2. Noel, Histoire du Commerce du Monde, II, pp. 150-164, 270-274.
  3. Macaulay, Lord Clive, in Critical and Historical Essay.
  4. Adam Smith, Wealth of Nations, Bk. V, ch. 1, pt. 3, art. 1.
  5. Day, The Culture System, Yale Review, Feb. 1900.
  6. Seeley, Expansion of England, Course I, Lectures 1, 2, 6; Course 2, Lecture 3.
  7. Mahan, Influence of Sea Power, 1660-1783, ch. 1.
  8. Ashley, The Commercial Legislation of England and the American Colonies, 1660-1760, Quarterly Journal of Economics, Nov. 1899.

* * *

  1. Prothero, Pioneers and Progress of English Farming, pp. 29-103.
  2. Seeley, The Emancipating Edict of Stein, in his Life of Stein, Pt. 3, ch. 4; reprinted in Rand, Economic History.

* * *

  1. Fox Bourne, English Merchants, p. 150 to end.
  2. Sargent, The Economic Policy of Colbert.
  3. Hewins, English Trade and Finance, pp. 74-164.
  4. Toynbee, The Industrial Revolution, pp. 27-136.
  5. Fowle, The Poor Law, ch. 3, 4.
  6. Defoe, Essay on Projects, pub. Cassell; especially pp. 1-42, 77-80.
  7. Macpherson, Annals of Commerce. Account of the South Sea Company and the Mississippi Scheme, s. aa. 1711, 1713-1715, 1717-1720.
  8. Macaulay, Account of the
    East India Company (ch. 18 and elsewhere),
    Bank of England (ch. 20),
    Recoinage (ch. 21),
    Darien Company (ch. 24),
    in History of England.

* * * * *

SUGGESTED ADDITIONAL READING.

  1. Ashley, Tory Origin of Free Trade Policy, Quarterly Journal of Economics, July 1897.
  2. Baines, History of the Cotton Manufacture, pp. 79-244.
  3. James Mill, History of British India, Bk. 1, ch. 1-4.
  4. Macpherson, Annals of Commerce, for reference throughout.

* * * * *

The attention of members of the course who received a mid-year mark of C or below is recalled to Warner, ch. 2-11, Ashley, Economic History, II, ch. 1-3, and Hunter, British India, ch. 4.

 

Source: Harvard University Archives. Syllabi, course outlines and reading lists in Economics, 1895-2003. (HUC 8522.2.1) Box 1, Folder “Economics 1899-1900”.

Image Source:University and their Sons. History, Influence and Characteristics of American Universities with Biographical Sketches and Portraits of Alumni and Recipients of Honorary Degrees. Editor-in-chief, General Joshua L. Chamberlain, LL.D. Vol II (1899) , p. 595.

Categories
Economic History Exam Questions Harvard

Harvard. Final exam for E.E. Lincoln’s US Economic History, 1921

 

 

Edmund E. Lincoln taught a two-term economic history course at Harvard. The first term was Economics 2a, European industry and commerce in the nineteenth century [already two postings here (1) Economics 2a course outline and bibliography; (2) Economics 2a course description and final examination questions]. Below a short course description and the final examination questions for the second term course, Economics 2b, Economic History of the United States. I still need to edit the long second term bibliography to include in a later posting. But those who can’t wait can still go to the copy of the List of References in Economics 2 at archive.org. 

_____________________________

 

Course Announcement and Description [1919-20]

[Economics] 2b 2hf. Economic History of the United States. Half-course (second half-year). Tu., Th., Sat., at 9.
Dr. E. E. Lincoln.

The aim will be to trace and explain the economic progress of the United States from the late colonial period to the present. The following are some of the topics that will be discussed: the development of agriculture and of the chief manufacturing industries; the change in foreign and domestic commerce; the history of transportation, including the early canal enterprises of the states, the various phases of railway building, and the establishment of public regulation of railways; the growth and decline of the merchant marine; banking and currency experiences; the history and significance of the protective tariff policy; the movement toward industrial combination.

Source: Division of History, Government, and Economics 1919-20 (2nd edition) published in Official Register of Harvard University, Vol. XVI, No. 45 (October 30, 1919), p. 61.

_____________________________

 

Final Examination
Economic History of the United States
Dr. E. E. Lincoln

1920-21
HARVARD UNIVERSITY

ECONOMICS 2b

Choose any eight questions.
Answer questions in order. Plan your answers carefully before writing.

  1. Justify if possible, from the economic point of view, the following statement: “The Constitution of the United States was not based solely upon high ideals or upon abstract theories, but was a practical compromise between many conflicting interests.”
  2. Trace carefully the effect of wars upon the development of the American mercantile marine from 1789 to the present time.
  3. Show a clear knowledge of at least three state banking systems before the Civil War.
  4. Give a critical summary of the Government’s policy toward railroad labor from 1888 to the present time.
  5. Discuss in outline the chief movements in the eras outlined in the following extracts from Carver’s “Principles of Rural Economics”: “The agricultural as well as the political history of the United States is divided into two eras. The first is the Colonial era lasting from 1607 to 1776. The second is the era of national development, lasting from 1776 to our own time. This era of national development, however, is divisible into four distinct periods: first, from 1776 to 1833; second, from 1833 to 1864; third, from 1864 to 1888; and fourth from 1888 to the present time.”
  6. Explain and comment upon the statement that “the Tariff Act of 1913 manifested a great change of purpose and attitude and embodied a reversal of policy unique since the Civil War.”
  7. Write brief notes upon the following topics: The Navigation Acts, The Stamp Duties, the “Crédit Mobilier,” the Plumb Plan, the Webb Act.
  8. Explain the methods of operation and the economic significance of the “Anthracite Coal Combination.”
  9. Show a clear knowledge of the development of any one industry in the United States.

 

Source: Harvard University Archives. Harvard University. Final Examinations, 1853-2001 (HUC 7000.28, 63 of 284). Faculty of Arts and Sciences, Papers Set for Final Examinations: History, Church History, … , Economics, … , Fine Arts, Music, June, 1921. pp. 55-56.

Image Source: Edmund E. Lincoln from Harvard Class Album 1920.

Categories
Economic History Exam Questions Harvard

Harvard. E. E. Lincoln’s final exam in European economic history, 1921

 

The final examination questions for Edmund E. Lincoln’s course on 19th century European economic history taught during the first half-year at Harvard in 1920-21 plus the description of that course from the previous year’s announcement are transcribed below. The corresponding course syllabus and ca. 30 page (!) course bibliography have been posted earlier.

In light of the current U.S. debate about “alternative facts”, question 8 of the exam is particularly interesting!

 

_____________________________

 

Course Announcements and Description [1919-20]

[Economics] 2a 1hf. European Industry and Commerce in the Nineteenth Century. Half-course (first half-year). Tu., Th., Sat., at 9.
Dr. E. E. Lincoln.

Course 2a undertakes to present the general outlines of the economic history of western Europe since the Industrial Revolution. Such topics as the following will be discussed: the economic aspects of the French Revolution and the Napoleonic régime, the Stein-Hardenberg reforms, the Zollverein, Cobden and free trade in England, nationalism and the recrudescence of protectionism, railways and waterways, the effects of trans-oceanic competition, the rise of industrial Germany.
Since attention will be directed in this course to those phases of the subject which are related to the economic history of the United States, it may be taken usefully before Economics 2b.

 

Source: Division of History, Government, and Economics 1919-20 (2nd edition) published in Official Register of Harvard University, Vol. XVI, No. 45 (October 30, 1919), p. 61.

_____________________________

 

Final Examination
European Industry and Commerce in the Nineteenth Century
Dr. E. E. Lincoln

1920-21
HARVARD UNIVERSITY

ECONOMICS 2a1

  1. “The unsettled question in the matter of the Swiss Federal Railways is that of their financial standing.”
    Summarize Holcombe’s conclusions on this matter.
  2. “What is notable among British consolidations and associations is not their rarity or weakness so much as their unobrusiveness. There is not much display in the window, but there is a good selection inside.”
    Discuss in outline the achievements of combinations and associations of the different sorts in England.
  3. “Although the principle of most-favored-nation treatment has continued in force, the practical effect of favored-nation pledges has been limited very decidedly by increased specialization of tariff schedules.”
    Explain clearly, and indicate the significance of this statement as it bears upon modern European tariff history.
  4. Contrast the social and economic position of the English Agricultural laborer in recent years with the situation of “the peasant under the old system” (as discussed by Prothero).
  5. “Hitherto it is questionable if all the mechanical inventions yet made have lightened the day’s toil of any human being.” (Mill, “Principles of Political Economy” Book 4, Ch. V, 6th)
    Do you agree that this was true about 1860? State your arguments clearly.
  6. Indicate Russia’s relative position in the world’s economic resources, and summarize the causes of her retarded industrial development.
  7. Give the reasons for Germany’s rapid foreign trade development during the generation preceding the war.
  8. In Carlyle’s edition of Cromwell’s letters the following statement is made: “The Irish have never let the Fact tell its own harsh story to them. They have said always to the harsh Fact, ‘Thou art not that way, thou art this way.’” Do you agree or disagree with Carlyle so far as the economic aspects of Irish history are concerned? State your case with care.

 

 

Source: Harvard University Archives. Harvard University. Final Examinations, 1853-2001 (HUC 7000.28, 63 of 284). Faculty of Arts and Sciences, Papers Set for Final Examinations: History, Church History, … , Economics, … , Fine Arts, Music, June, 1921. pp. 54-5.

Image Source: Edmund E. Lincoln from Harvard Class Album 1920.

 

Categories
Economic History Exam Questions Harvard

Harvard. Final Exam Questions for Usher’s European Economic History, 1922

 

Returning to the curatorial work of matching final exams to postings of course syllabi/reading lists for economics at Harvard, I have transcribed the final examination questions below that correspond to the course taught by A. P. Usher “European Industry and Commerce in the Nineteenth Century” during the first semester of 1921-22.

 

_____________________________

 

 

Final Examination
European Industry and Commerce in the Nineteenth Century
Professor Abbott Payson Usher

1921-22
HARVARD UNIVERSITY

ECONOMICS 2a1

  1. What problems were created by the Industrial Revolution? To what extent have they been solved?
  2. Compare and give a critical estimate of the ways in which England and Denmark attempted to deal with the problems of the reform of land tenures, field systems, and rural organization?
  3. What were the contributions of Sir Robert Peel and Richard Cobden: (a) to the repeal of the Corn Laws? (b) to the general establishment of the Free Trade policy?
  4. What was meant about 1836 by the phrase “the railway is by nature a monopoly”?
    What was the general policy of the English government on the issue of monopoly of railway facilities? How did this policy affect the development of the railway network in England?
    Discuss the condition of the fundamental industries in England between 1870 and 1914. What are the prospects for the future!
  5. What was the role played by the German banks in industrial combinations?
  6. Comment or explain: chartism; the Newcastle coal vend; the Bradford Conditioning House; multiple tariff schedule; the basic process.

Final. 1922.

 

Source: Harvard University Archives. Harvard University. Final Examinations, 1853-2001 (HUC 7000.28, Box 64 of 284). Faculty of Arts and Sciences, Papers Set for Final Examinations: History, Church History, … , Economics, … , Social Ethics, Education, June, 1922.

Image Source: Harvard Class Album, 1923.

 

Categories
Economic History Exam Questions Harvard

Harvard. Recent Economic History, Final Exam. 1935

 

 

The course outline and readings for the two-semester graduate course on recent economic history taught at Harvard by Edwin Francis Gay were posted earlier. We can now add the questions from the final examination given at the end of the Spring term.

This is thus far the most recent examination I’ve seen that has matter-of-factly given a quotation in a foreign language.  Exams for Young’s course on modern economic theories taught at Harvard in the mid-1920s sometimes had quotations in French and German.

_____________________________

Final Examination
Recent Economic History
Professor Edwin Francis Gay

1934-35
HARVARD UNIVERSITY

ECONOMICS 23

Write an essay (not more than half your time) discussing one of the quotations or topics in this paper, and comment concisely on three others.

  1. “It is believed that, had it not been for the free-trade policy of Great Britain, the manufacturing system of America would at the present time have been much more extensive than it is.” (Ellison, 1858.)
    “There is some truth in the view of the cynical British exporter who thanked God for the American tariff, but for which American manufacturers would have driven him out of the world markets.” (London “Economist,” 1912.)
    “In my belief, both Free Trade of the laissez-faire type and Protection of the predatory type are policies of Empire, and both make for War.” (H. J. Mackinder, 1919.)
    Do you find any confirmation for these views in your reading of American tariff history? Illustrate from the cotton or iron industry.
  2. “On voit apparaître chaque jour davantage tout ce que l’Angleterre, depuis cent ans, devait à des circonstances que les contemporains avaient cru permanentes et qui n’étaient que passagères.
    L’hégémonie économique anglaise coïncide dans l’histoire avec le règne de la machine à vapeur; la période victorienne, apogée de prospérité et de puissance, évolue tout entière sous le signe du charbon….C’est ainsi qu’a pu s’édifier, sur la base étroite d’un territoire plus que médiocre, cette paradoxale superstructure manufacturière, e parallèlement s’épanouir cette population aujourd’hui trop dense, si dangereusement dépendante, pour sa subsistance, des produits importés….
    Dans ces conditions, le jeu parfaitement agencé de la doctrine libre-échangiste paraissait avoir été conçu tout exprès pour l’Angleterre, par les soins d’une Providence attentive et partiale.” (Siegfried, 1931.)
  3. The National Banking system is “not only a perfectly safe system of banking, but it is one that is eminently adapted to our political institutions.” (Hugh McCulloch, 1863.)
    “American banking has not yet distinguished between solvency after an interval, and readiness to meet demands at once and without question…. At present the characteristics of the American business man seem to fit him to do most things better than banking.” (Harley Withers, 1909.)
    “Everybody will agree to-day that it would be difficult to imagine a banking system more cruel and inefficient that that prevailing in the United States at the beginning of the twentieth century—a system which, instead of scientifically regulating the flow of credit and money so as to secure the greatest possible stability, was designed automatically to produce instability.” (Paul Warburg, 1930.)
  4. “The technological revolution of the last hundred years furnishes the ultimate explanation of agricultural progress and of agrarian discontent both in Europe and America.” (ca. 1925)
    “Though the mechanization of industrial processes is almost universal, the great majority of farmers throughout the world are content with the simple instruments used by their forefathers.” (“World Agriculture,” 1932.)
    “The significant fact is that the periods of prosperity and the great depressions in agriculture have coincided with periods of monetary expansion and monetary contraction. Though other factors must not be ignored, the agricultural history of the last hundred years shows that favorable monetary conditions are essential to recovery.” (“World Agriculture,” 1932.)
  5. “The Merchant Marine of the United States is not a burden upon the tax-payer’s back, but an economy of the first water, keeping millions in the country, giving employment to thousands of persons, aiding in the development of foreign markets and backing up the nation’s forces in any contingency that may arise.” (Senator Royal S. Copeland, 1934.)
    “Our own vessels carry only about 40 per cent of our foreign trade. We are dependent on our competitors to carry 60 per cent of our trade to market. Of course, the result is that they help themselves and hamper us. Parity in merchant ships is only less important than parity in warships. We ought to make the necessary sacrifices to secure it.” (Calvin Coolidge, 1930.)
  6. D. H. Robertson, writing in 1923, concerning the American Railroad Act of 1920 and the increased powers of the Interstate Commerce Commission, says:
    “The home of free enterprise has furnished us with experiments in positive State control on a scale which finds no parallel outside Communist Russia.”
    Louis D. Brandeis in 1912 wrote: “The success of the Interstate Commerce Commission has been invoked as an argument in favor of licensing and regulating monopoly.” This argument, he held, was not valid. Do you agree? Why or why not?
  7. In a period when traditional standards have broken down and when the legal system is supported by laissez-faire theory, the movement toward industrial combination is “a remorseless sort of profit-seeking.” (M. W. Watkins, 1928.)
    “The only argument that has been seriously advanced in favor of private monopoly is that competition involves waste, while the monopoly prevents waste and leads to efficiency. This argument is essentially unsound. The wastes of competition are negligible. The economies of monopoly are superficial and delusive. The efficiency of monopoly is at the best temporary.” (L. D. Brandeis, in Harper’s Weekly, 1913.)
    “Our evidence goes to show that most of the Trusts and Cartels have been, in their origin at any rate, defensive movements.” (D. H. MacGregor, 1912.)
    Industrial combinations must be recognized as “steps in the greater efficiency, the increased economy, and the better organization of industry.” (Minority Report of the Parliamentary Committee on Trusts, 1918.)
  8. Write on the topic which, in your reading for this course, has most interested you.

Final. [May or June] 1935.

 

Source: Harvard University Archives. Harvard University. Examination Papers—Finals, 1935 (HUC 7000.28, 77 of 284).

Image Source: Edwin Francis Gay in Harvard Class Album 1934.