Category: Harvard

Categories
Harvard Radical Stanford UMass

University of Massachusetts. Hiring a flock of “radical economists”, 1973

 

One wonders what exact path was taken by the following memorandum from the Dean of the Faculty of Social and Behavioral Sciences at the University of Massachusetts, Amherst for us to find a copy that landed the files of George Stigler at the University of Chicago. Anyhow it is fairly clear that Dean Dean Alfange, Jr. (not a typo, his first name is really “Dean”), a political scientist and then acting department head of the economics department, felt sufficient local push-back for his wholesale acquisition of the cream of academic radical economics that he put together a full paper-defense for the deal, including letters of support by Harvard’s John Kenneth Galbraith and Stanford’s John Gurley. 

Still, Chicago had no dog in this fight so I am modestly surprised that Stigler would have received and even kept his copy of the memo. I guess without academic gossip, faculty clubs would have one less excuse to serve booze to the senior and junior ranks of academic barflies.

A friend of Economics in the Rear-view Mirror writes:

“The most plausible reason the memo on U Mass hiring found it’s way to Stigler’s files is James Kindahl, a U Mass economist mentioned in the dean’s memo. He was Stigler’s PhD student, friend and co-author.”

____________________________

The U-Mass Dean’s Apologia

University of Massachusetts
Memorandum

Date: February 26, 1973

From: Dean, Faculty of Social and Behavioral Sciences
To: Members of the Department of Economics
Subject: Recruitment

Offers of appointment have now been formally extended to the following persons:

Rank

 Effective Date

Term
Robert Coen

Professor

1973

Tenure
Richard Wolff

Associate Professor

1973

Tenure
Samuel Bowles

Professor

1974

Tenure
Richard Edwards

Assistant Professor

1974

3 years
Herbert Gintis

Associate Professor

1974

Tenure

I believe that you have already been notified that offers of appointment have also been extended to Stephen Resnick as Professor with tenure, effective September, 1973, and to Leonard Rapping as Visiting Professor for the Fall semester, 1973-74. The latter offer has been accepted. Earlier, offers were made to, and accepted by, Ronald Oaxaca, Thomas Russell, and Josephine Gordon at the Assistant Professor/Instructor level. An offer to Marilyn Manser as Assistant Professor/Instructor was extended, but has been declined.

If the offers currently outstanding are accepted, I do not think it would be either immodest or inaccurate for me to suggest that this will have been the most successful and effective recruiting year in the history of the department. We will have filled our long standing gaps in macroeconomics and monetary economics with excellent appointments, we will have added some very promising younger economists in applied fields, and we will have brought in a group of “radical” economists who are, by general agreement, the very best representatives of that school of economists in the United States.

I should have thought that these recruiting efforts needed no justification or defense. However, on the day when the five most recent offers listed above were sent out, I received a memorandum from Jim Kindahl suggesting certain reservations about the recruitment of the “radicals,” and asking me to explain my actions to the department. The remainder of this memorandum is written in response to that request.

First of all, it was suggested that the recruitment of the “radical” group was somehow carried on clandestinely. I am left rather puzzled by that because I hardly thought that the matter was a secret. Each of the members of this group visited the campus and spoke openly and frankly with many members of the department. I have also had occasion over the past few months to speak with a substantial number of the members of the department, and I found no one who was unaware of my recruiting intentions. Those members of the department who chose not to discuss personnel matters with me did so despite the fact that I invited discussion of such matters with faculty individually or in groups. Moreover, the question arose in the department meeting in January, and no one present seemed to me to be in the dark. It is true that I made no formal announcement of recruiting plans to the department, but it should be remembered that the department has no personnel committee, that it rejected my desire to establish an advisory committee on personnel matters, and that it certainly has not been the practice in the recent past to publicize and to encourage broad discussion of recruitment plans within the department as a whole.

Second, it was indicated that a substantial number of department members either have reservations regarding, or are definitely opposed to, the recruitment of the “radical” group. I suppose that to be true. The Department of Economics has not been known in the past for its ability to establish a broad consensus on significant personnel matters, and I assume that no meaningful step in any direction could be taken that a substantial number of members of the department would not either have reservations regarding or be opposed to. With knowledge of this circumstance, the department practice in the recent past has been deliberately to ignore this lack of consensus and to move ahead in the direction thought most advisable by the department leadership. While my strongest desire both as Dean and as acting department head is to establish a departmental consensus on fundamental issues, and my hope is that the work of the department head search committee can be an important vehicle in this regard, it nevertheless seems to me necessary, in the short run, to accept the lack of consensus as a given, and not to allow it to bring the development of the department to a standstill.

It was not my original intention to serve this year as acting department head, nor was it my intention to act without a personnel committee. I had hoped to appoint a member of the department to serve as acting head, but Vice-Chancellor Gluckstern prevailed upon me to act in that capacity after some members of last year’s personnel committee persuaded him that that arrangement would be preferable to having an acting head from within the department. The decision not to have a personnel committee was, of course, an action taken by an almost unanimous vote of the department with full knowledge that I would be serving as acting head. Following that vote, I sought to establish an informal advisory committee to assist me on personnel matters, but I abandoned that plan after protests arose within the department that such a committee would be, in effect, a de facto personnel committee, whose establishment would contravene the department vote not to have such a committee. The point is that I did not maneuver myself into the position that I have been in with relation to the Department of Economics this year. Instead, it would be accurate to say that I was maneuvered into it by departmental action. However, having found myself thrust into the position, I resolved to act vigorously in the area of recruitment in order to dispel the possible image of this department as one so riven by internal disagreement that it could not move forward.

It was obvious to me that the previous recruiting posture of the department—that one hired the best economists one could find, irrespective of field, and presumably also irrespective of whether the person hired would want to teach anything that any students would have any interest in taking—was arrant nonsense, and that it would have to be abandoned before it led to the creation of a department so totally out of balance that it would be incapable of, and uninterested in, meeting the needs of both graduate and undergraduate students. At the start of the year, it seemed to me apparent that there were four pressing recruiting needs to be addressed. First, it was necessary to seek to fill the persistent gaps in macroeconomics and monetary economics that had continued to exist despite the report of the visiting committee and despite the urging of many members of the department that special efforts be made to recruit in these areas in order to meet vital teaching needs. Second, it was necessary to strengthen the department in applied fields, where faculty were spread so thin that it was difficult for individuals to find colleagues with whom effectively to interact. Third, it was absolutely essential that the department become sensitive and responsive to the Affirmative Action program of the university, and that a concerted effort be undertaken to identify and recruit qualified female and minority group candidates. Fourth, it seemed to me impossible for the department to continue to remain insensitive to the ferment taking place within the discipline of economics, in which a substantial number of economists—including some of the most prestigious members of the profession—were challenging the dominant neo-classical paradigm, and calling into question the ability of the profession, utilizing that paradigm, adequately to deal with many of the most urgent social problems in the nation and the world. It is hardly for me to argue that the alternative Marxian paradigm of the “radical” economists is sound and potentially fruitful, and to seek to add “radicals” on that premise. However, it is equally inappropriate to seek to exclude the proponents of that paradigm from appointment in the department on the premise that their approach is demonstrably unsound. As James Tobin explained to me, it is not clear whether the “radicals” can devise the tools adequate to the task of coming to grips with the social problems on which they wish to work, but, on the other hand, it is manifest that conventional economists have as yet been unable to devise tools adequate to this task. In the meantime, an increasing number of younger economists and students have been gravitating toward the “radical” paradigm as more relevant and useful. In this context, a healthy department should, in my view, contain some proponents of the “radical” perspective.

My recruiting efforts this year have been focused in each of these four areas. Robert Coen, to whom an offer has now been extended, was identified by the visiting committee as typical of the macroeconomist that we lacked and needed. Thomas Russell, who has accepted a position in monetary economics, was recommended to me, in the strongest terms, by Dwight Jaffee of Princeton, among others. Additional strength in applied fields will be provided by the appointment of Ronald Oaxaca in labor economics and Josephine Gordon in urban economics, both of whom will also broaden the department from the standpoint of Affirmative Action. In the Affirmative Action area, I have, of course, been strongly assisted by the departmental committee that I appointed to identify female and minority group candidates. The work of this committee is by no means done, particularly since our offer to Marilyn Manser has not been accepted, and continued efforts toward the achievement of Affirmative Action goals may still be anticipated.

It is my manner of seeking to meet the fourth department need, however, that appears to have occasioned the controversy to which Jim Kindahl referred in his memorandum. I was, of course, never unaware that the appointment of “radical” economists to the department would be a controversial matter. I decided to proceed to recruit in this area despite this.  My experience with certain personnel issues in the department over the past couple of years, including the question of a visiting appointment for Sam Bowles this year, has satisfied me—although I know that others involved would conscientiously contend for differing interpretations—that what was occurring was a manifestation of what John Kenneth Galbraith described in his AEA presidential address in December as a “new despotism,” which “consists in defining scientific excellence as whatever is closest in belief and method to the scholarly tendency of the people who are already there. This is a pervasive and oppressive thing not the less dangerous for being, in the frequent case, both self-righteous and unconscious.” Because of this, I had no doubt that the department needed to be broadened and balanced in order to reflect more widely the professional views that are held in the discipline at large.

Sam Bowles, who was, of course, on the campus during the Fall semester, if not in the Department of Economics, assisted me in identifying potential appointees. I was immensely gratified when he himself expressed a willingness to be considered for a position, and his interest led to a similar interest on the part of others of the most outstanding “radical” economists in the United States. I had not initially contemplated the recruitment of a group of “radical” economists, as such, but when the quality of the individuals we might be able to attract became apparent to me, it was obvious that an unparalleled opportunity was at hand to make a major step forward in terms of the professional excellence of the department. As one very traditional member of the department said to me, “Who could have thought that persons of this ability would simply drop in our laps?” The idea of hiring a “radical” group was one that I found to have support among a number of prominent economists, and letters I received from two of these—John Kenneth Galbraith and John Gurley—are reproduced and appended to this memorandum. Still another economist of gigantic national reputation—who could certainly not be described as a “radical”—called me on his own initiative to commend me for my insight into the nature of the economics discipline and to praise me for my courage in going forward with my recruiting plans. While I was most flattered by these encomia, I did not feel that I had displayed either insight or courage, simply common sense. I was also equally aware, that, in the light of the intense divisions within the profession, a substantial number of extremely prominent economists might look with disfavor upon the recruitment of a “radical” group, but, as no attempt seems to have been made in the past to follow a course of recruitment that would have support across the spectrum of prominent economists, I was not deterred by that realization from following a course that I looked upon as a means of redressing the imbalance of the past. I sought, however, to insure that recruitment here would take into consideration the fields in which faculty could be most effectively utilized, and, thus, the “radical” group will add to our resources in the following fields in which added strength can readily be justified: economic development, economic history, industrial organization, and the economics of education.

I have spoken about the “radical” recruitment with a variety of members of the department, including some who would not want to be described as among my supporters. There were some expressions of uneasiness about the size of the group because of the fear that it might come to dominate the department and establish its own orthodoxy from which others would dissent only at their peril. Reservations were also expressed about one of the members of the group whose credentials were less conventional that those of the others. But, by and large, I received indications of support as long as standards of professional quality were maintained. I believe that the sentiments and concerns that were expressed to me were sincere and proper. I have tried to heed them. There is no question in my mind but that customary standards of professional quality have not only been met, but have been far surpassed in these cases. Of the four appointments at the two higher ranks, two, from every indication I received, had widespread support within the department and were extraordinarily well recommended by outstanding traditional economists. The third, although less well known to members of the department, received brilliant letters of recommendation and is regarded as a superb economist by those who have worked closely with him. Because of the reservations expressed with regard to the fourth member of the group, his credentials were subjected to exacting scrutiny, and I am fully satisfied that, despite his less conventional background, his, too, is a distinguished appointment. He has had an active and ongoing program of research; his publications have been well received by those who are most familiar with them, and, perhaps most importantly, the evidence is clear and uncontradicted that he is an extraordinary and gifted teacher.

There remains to be discussed the concern that was expressed regarding the establishment of a possible “radical” orthodoxy. I do not see how it would be possible for a relatively small minority of the department to gain control and establish an orthodoxy without my support, and I want to take this opportunity unequivocally to assure all members of the department that I do not intend to permit that to occur. I am committed as a matter of principle to the establishment of a balanced department and to the maintenance of an atmosphere of toleration for differing methodologies so that theorists and applied economists, neo-classicists and “radicals” can work together and flourish undisturbed by fears that their work will be judged, not by its quality, but by whether or not others in the department would do it in the same way. Education, at both the graduate and undergraduate levels, becomes merely indoctrination unless students are allowed to be exposed to all approaches and perspectives that are widely held within a discipline, and given the opportunity to select among them. It is my fervent hope that education, in the best sense of that term, can be given to students in economics at this institution.

Now that the offers discussed above have been formally extended on behalf of the university, it remains only for them to be accepted, and I have been led to believe that these acceptances may be expected. Since that is the case, I will suggest to all members of the department who do not share my enthusiasm over the success of this year’s recruitment that, at this stage, accommodations would be far more fruitful than recriminations. The Department of Economics at the University of Massachusetts is now “on the map.” We are in a situation in which we can compete far more effectively with the most outstanding departments in the recruitment of faculty. I have been told that there are a sizeable number of graduate students at Harvard who are waiting only for word of the actual appointments of Sam Bowles and Herb Gintis before applying for transfer here, and that is only symptomatic of what may safely be expected to be an enormous increase in the number and quality of the applicants for admission to our graduate program. A corresponding increase in the undergraduate interest in our economics may also be anticipated. In short, I believe that if our outstanding offers are accepted, we will have reached the point at which the frustrations and the miseries of the past can at long last be put behind us. I have little doubt that, within a relatively few years, we will deservedly have the reputation of being one of the genuinely outstanding departments of economics in the United States.

[signed]
Dean Alfange, Jr.
Dean, Faculty of Social
and Behavioral Sciences

DA,Jr/jhg

Source:  University of Chicago Archives. George Stigler papers. Box 3, Red Folder “U of C Econ., Miscellaneous”.

____________________________

The U-Mass Dean
Requesting Cover from Galbraith

The Commonwealth of Massachusetts
University of Massachusetts
Amherst 01002

College of Arts and Sciences
Faculty of Social and Behavioral Sciences
Office of the Dean

February 2, 1973

Professor John Kenneth Galbraith
Chalet Bergsonne
Gstaad, Switzerland

Dear Professor Galbraith:

I would like to express to you my very deep appreciation for your indirect encouragement of my effort to bring to the Economics faculty of the University of Massachusetts a group of “radical” economists to broaden the base of what has heretofore been an extremely narrowly focused department. I was particularly gratified by the kind words of support that you included in the letter of reference that you sent me on Herb Gintis.

By this time, Sam Bowles will probably have spoken to you about the possibility of your sending me a general letter of support for the appointment of the five-man group that we hope to recruit over the next two years—Steve Resnick and Rick Wolff in 1973, and Sam Bowles, Herb Gintis, and Rick Edwards in 1974. So that your memory may be refreshed on the accomplishments of this group, I am enclosing a vita for each of them.

I am now reasonably satisfied that my proposal will be supported at the campus level by the Provost and the Chancellor, and, while I have no reason to expect that any objections will be forthcoming from either President Robert Wood or the Board of Trustees, I believe that a letter from you could be instrumental in persuading people that this is a respectable venture, should any questions be raised in the President’s office or at the Board of Trustees. I have heard, indirectly, that a member of either the Harvard or MIT faculty has already written to President Wood advising him to be cautious in giving his approval to my proposal, and your letter would serve as a vital counterweight to that point of view.

I think it would be most useful if you could address the letter to me, rather than to President Wood, because it would then allow me to present it to him at the most propitious time, but I would certainly bow to your preference on this matter.

Once again, I am deeply appreciative of your support.

Sincerely yours,
[signed]
Dean Alfange, Jr.
Dean, Faculty of Social
and Behavioral Sciences

DA,Jr/smr

 

Source: John F. Kennedy Presidential Library. John Kenneth Galbraith, Personal Papers. Series 5. Harvard University File, 1949-1990. Box 526, Folder “Harvard Dept. of Economics. Discussion of appointments. Outside interests and reorganization, 1972-1973 (1 of 2)”.

____________________________

Galbraith Obliges

John Kenneth Galbraith
Harvard University
Cambridge, Massachusetts

February 13, 1973

Dean Dean Alfange, Jr.
Faculty of Social and Behavioral Sciences
College of Arts and Sciences
South College
University of Massachusetts
Amherst, Massachusetts 01002

Dear Dean Alfange:

I was enormously impressed to hear of the proposed appointments—Sam Bowles and Herb Gintis together with Resnick, Wolff and Edwards—at the University of Massachusetts. I have always been proud of my association with the University—including that of an honorary alumnus—but never more than now. With one step you are putting the Amherst campus in the forefront of progressive economic thought in the United States. And this is at a time when discontent with the established modalities in economics—its divorce from reality, its commitment to small refinement—is notably strong among students, the aware public and within the profession itself.

As you surely know, Bowles and Gintis had the strong backing at Harvard of (with others) Kenneth Arrow, Wassily Leontief and myself—together we are three of the last four presidents of the American Economic Association and the only members of the Department to have held this position. Arrow, of course, is our currently active Nobel Prize winner. I know Renick and Wolff only by reputation—and their impressive vitaes—and Edwards only as one of our younger staff members, but they are all obviously men of interest and promise. All of them are concerned with breaking new ground—with bringing a searching and critical attitude to bear on existing ideas and institutions. At the same time all are committed to a rigorous methodology and all are strong defenders of the civil and tolerant tradition in our university and academic life. These matters seem to me important and especially, perhaps, the commitment to hard, diligent and rigorous work. There has been a dissenting tradition in university life in these last years which would liberate man from both physical and mental toil. These men have no part of such nonsense. And, in the end, it is always the critical, not the routine and sycophantic, work which wins respect and attention.

You will understand why, along with others, I regret that we will not have these scholars at Harvard. (I am especially disappointed about Gintis whose promotion the Department supported and who, I thought, would be ours.) I have found association with members of this group exceedingly agreeable, stimulating and specifically useful in recent years, and my own writing has benefited greatly therefrom. In case this seems like casual praise, may I say that I would personally welcome some opportunity for continued association with the seminar work which these men will be doing at Amherst or—better still—which they might be persuaded to offer at the Boston campus, if that is a practical possibility.

Let me again affirm my admiration for your initiative and congratulate you on your good fortune. As one of the most liberal states in the Union, it seems to me clear that Massachusetts and its University are worthy of each other.

Yours faithfully,
[signed]
John Kenneth Galbraith

JKG: mjh

Source:  Photocopy:  University of Chicago Archives. George Stigler papers. Box 3, Red Folder “U of C Econ., Miscellaneous”.
Carbon copy: John F. Kennedy Presidential Library. John Kenneth Galbraith, Personal Papers. Series 5. Harvard University File, 1949-1990. Box 526, Folder “Harvard Dept. of Economics. Discussion of appointments. Outside interests and reorganization, 1972-1973 (1 of 2)”.

____________________________

Handwritten Note in Support of the U-Mass Hiring from Gurley

Stanford University
Stanford, California 94305

Department of Economics

January 28, 1973

Dear Dean Alfange:

I have recently heard that the economics department at your university is considering hiring a group of younger economists—Bowles, Gintis, Woolf [sic], Resneck [sic], and Edwards—all of whom have contributed greatly to refashioning economics from its neo-classical form into a social science that has much more relevance to the present-day world. I admire the work of these young economists, some of which has already revolutionized certain areas of economics, and so I hope that they will in fact come to U. of M. as a group. If they do, the economics department there will soon become of the leading ones in the country so far as the younger generation of economists and graduate students are concerned.

I wish you and this undertaking the very best of luck.

Sincerely,
[signed] John G. Gurley
Professor of Economics

Source:  University of Chicago Archives. George Stigler papers. Box 3, Red Folder “U of C Econ., Miscellaneous”.

Image Source: Sam Bowles and Herb Gintis at the Sydney Radical Education Conference,  Copy of “Education for Liberation” by Robert Mackie.

Categories
Chicago Economists Harvard

Chicago. Milton Friedman visits the Harvard Young Conservative Club, 1964

 

At the time of Milton Friedman’s talk at Harvard, reported below in the Harvard Crimson, the 1964 Republican Presidential primaries and conventions were running hot and Senator Barry Goldwater was taking a lot of flak for his opposition to the Civil Rights Act of 1964. Milton Friedman can be seen here flying wingman for Goldwater on the issue.

________________________

Friedman Cautions Against Rights Bill
The Harvard Crimson, May 5, 1964

Milton Friedman, professor of economics at the University of Chicago and bogeyman of Ec 1, last night defended the “free-market principles” of “unanimity without conformity” against encroachments by the “coercive mechanism” of “the political method.”

In a talk sponsored by the Young Conservative Club, Friedman spent most of the evening criticising the Civil Rights Bill. “The majority in this country are prejudiced,” he stated, “and it is naive–no, it’s undemocratic,–to suppose you’re going to get people to vote against themselves.”

But he also found time to consider the tax cut (“naive”), legislation guaranteeing equal wages to women (“antifeminist”) the Federal Reserve Board (“it has never worked”), the draft (“an invasion of privacy”), legislation in general (“in case after case, laws have had the opposite effect of what was intended”), and the market mechanism (“protects the interests of minoriy groups”).

The Civil Rights Bill, said Friedman, is “wrong in principle,” because it attempts to make people “conform to the values of the majority.”

This bill is made worse, he said, because in actually there is only the “appearance of a majority” in favor of passing it. “The only reason the bill has a ghost of a chance,” he said, is that Northerners will vote for it thinking it applies to the “regional problem” of the South.

“It is extraordinary to see how naive one can be in this area” of legislation, he declared. “If we pass a law saying that race shall not be a factor in employment, then what grounds do we have for opposing a law that race shall be a factor?”

The most valid grounds, he continued, are “the general principle that the state shall not interfere in these matters.”

“The Negro is undoubtedly hurt” by segregation, said Friedman, and “the appropriate recourse is to try to persuade people that they are wrong.”

However, “the most important” solution is to eliminate “barriers” to equality, specifically, fair employment practices legislation. If the free market is allowed to operate, said Friedman, prejudice will result in lower wages for Negroes.

“Each of us separately,” he said, can then “try to offset the actions of others through our own economic activity.” By being unprejudiced and hiring Negroes, “we get things at less cost,” he said. “Not only does virtue triumph–it is even rewarded.”

Source: The Harvard Crimson Archive.

Image Source: University of Chicago Photographic Archive, apf1-06231, Hanna Holborn Gray Special Collections Research Center, University of Chicago Library.

Categories
Harvard

Harvard. Leontief scores five Rothko murals for Harvard, 1963

 

The online archive of the Harvard Crimson is a digital treasure chest of personal anecdotes of life in that great university. Today I learned the story of how it came to pass that Harvard University acquired five murals, a gift of the artist, Mark Rothko.

Leontief asked Rothko to do the murals last in 1961, when Holyoke Center was being completed, because he felt that “the University lacked real modern art.”

Of course it helped that somehow Wassily Leontief was “Rothko’s personal friend”. It’s who you know.

_________________________

How it started…

Rothko Gives University Five Murals
The Harvard Crimson, October 26, 1963

Five large murals valued at more than $100,000, the gift of abstract artist Mark Rothko, have been installed in the private dining room on the tenth floor of Holyoke Center. The newly-decorated room was used for the first time last night.

The University commissioned Rothko to do the paintings for the dining room through Rothko’s personal friend Wassily W. Leontief, Henry Lee Professor of Economics, and John P. Coolidge ’35, Director of the Fogg Art Museum.

Leontief asked Rothko to do the murals last in 1961, when Holyoke Center was being completed, because he felt that “the University lacked real modern art.” Rothko agreed to accept the commission after he had surveyed the room and conferred with several college officials.

Contacted at his New York City home last night, Rothko said that he had agreed to do the murals only on the grounds that they be accepted without payment. “This is the first time I have been able to deliver commissioned work that I am satisfied with,” he said. None of his work has ever been displayed at Harvard before.

The paintings–each about 10 feet square–were first tried in the room early last spring. At Rothko’s request. Harvard then loaned them to the Guggenheim Museum in New York, where they were exhibited for about two months.

Green Material

Coolidge pointed out that it took considerable renovation of the dining room to meet Rothko’s specifications. The oak-panelled walls had to be covered with green material, and new lighting developed. Rothko was in Cambridge Thursday to supervise the finishing touches.

One of Rothko’s conditions was that the public be allowed to view the paintings as much as possible. The dining hall is a private one which was always kept locked previously, and there is a charge of $50-$100 for groups that wish to use its services. Coolidge said it would be some time before students would be able to view the murals, since security measures must first be taken.

Jose Luis Sert, Dean of the Faculty of the Design School and architect of Holyoke Center, said he had been consulted by Rothko “very pleased” with the paintings.

Howard F. Gillette ’35, who chaired a meeting last night of the directors of the Harvard Alumni Association and the Associated Harvard Clubs in the Rothko room, said his group reacted most favorably.

A Holyoke Center cleaning woman was slightly less fond of the murals. “I suppose when he painted them, he was feeling something, but I don’t,” she said.

_________________________

…How it’s going.

Conservation Contemporary Art Exhibitions
In a New Light

The inaugural special exhibition at the Harvard Art Museums this November will propose an exciting new presentation of Mark Rothko’s Harvard Murals, which have not been seen by the public for many years. The American abstract expressionist artist installed the specially commissioned set of five large canvas murals in January 1964 in a dining room on the 10th floor of Harvard’s Holyoke Center (now called the Richard A. and Susan F. Smith Campus Center). However, the high levels of light coming through the dining room’s floor-to-ceiling windows ultimately caused Rothko’s rich colors to fade over time. One of the murals was removed in March 1974, and the remaining murals were removed in April 1979. The five paintings of the commission showed differing patterns of color loss. Deemed unsuitable for exhibition, the murals entered storage and were largely overlooked in the past half-century of Rothko scholarship.

The problem of the murals’ faded colors spurred new scholarship and findings, presented in an exhibition at the Arthur M. Sackler Museum in 1988. It was determined that one factor in the fading was the presence of Lithol Red, an unstable organic pigment the artist used on all five panels. While Harvard conservators now understood why the panels faded so quickly, they continued to seek a means to restore the original hues. The hope was that these important, rare murals might be returned to public view.

In recent years, a team of art historians, conservation scientists, and conservators from two research centers at the Harvard Art Museums—the Straus Center for Conservation and Technical Studies and the Center for the Technical Study of Modern Art—worked with the MIT Media Lab’s Camera Culture research group to come up with a solution: a custom-made software program that controls a digital projector that is used as one of the light sources to compensate for the faded colors on the canvas, pixel by pixel. The original, unfaded colors of the canvases were determined through the use of three sources: faded Ektachrome slides from 1964 that were digitally restored in collaboration with the Imaging and Media Lab (now Digital Humanities Lab) at the University of Basel, Switzerland; a vintage color reference card; and direct color measurements taken from a sixth panel painted by Rothko for the Harvard Murals cycle, which was brought to Cambridge but not installed by the artist in the Holyoke Center.

The exhibition that opens at the museums in November will feature this innovative, noninvasive conservation approach. Light will be projected to “color correct” the paint surface, so that Rothko’s murals will resemble their original state. The exhibition is a proposition; the museums hope it will encourage lively debate and discussion about the introduction of light-based technology as a conservation tool. In addition, the exhibition explores Rothko’s artistic process by presenting more than 30 of his related studies on paper and canvas along with the sixth panel. This will mark the first time that the murals and these studies from the Harvard commission are examined together.

Mark Rothko’s Harvard Murals will be on display November 16, 2014 through July 26, 2015, in the special exhibitions gallery of the new Harvard Art Museums. In conjunction with the museums’ Rothko exhibition, Harvard’s Graduate School of Design will host an installation in the Frances Loeb Library at Gund Hall that addresses the dialogue between art and architecture over the last century, paying particular attention to works and spaces around the Harvard campus.

The research, technical analysis, and conservation treatment on Mark Rothko’s Harvard Murals have been made possible in part through the generous support of the AXA Art Insurance Corporation, the Bowes Family Foundation, InFocus Corporation, the Andrew W. Mellon Foundation, Ezra and Lauren Merkin, Novartis International AG, Lief D. Rosenblatt, and the NBT Charitable Trust. Early exhibition funding has been provided by the Graham Gund Exhibition Fund and the Rosenblatt Fund for Post-War American Art. Modern and contemporary art programs are made possible in part by generous support from the Emily Rauh Pulitzer and Joseph Pulitzer Jr. Fund for Modern and Contemporary Art, Harvard Art Museums.

 

Image Source: Digitally restored scan of a 1964 Ektachrome transparency of Panel One (Harvard Mural Triptych). Harvard Art Museums website. Exhibitions/Marth Rothko’s Harvard Murals. Internet archive copy (April 15, 2021).

Categories
Economics Programs Economists Harvard Socialism Wing Nuts

Harvard. Veritas investigating Keynesian economics, 1960

 

It’s that time again to venture into the loony-fringe. There once were (ahem) woke Harvard alumni who wished to save the world from “Keynesism” among other dangers. They had their own modest foundation founded by the son of President Theodore Roosevelt and John Bircher, Archibald B. Roosevelt of the class of 1917. This post shares reports from the Harvard Crimson as well as a transcription of a four page pamphlet put out by the Veritas foundation with the title “Keynesism-Marxism at Harvard.”

In an earlier draft, I unfortunately confounded father with son, both Harvard alums, both Archies. I still include the obituary for President Theodore Roosevelt’s grandson, Archibald B. Roosevelt, Jr. who had quite a  C.I.A. career, if for no other reason than to offer some anecdotal evidence regarding the proposition that apples don’t fall far from their respective trees.

There is also some archival irony in the fact that the copy of the pamphlet “Keynesism-Marxism at Harvard” comes from the W.E.B. Du Bois papers at the University of Massachusetts.

__________________________

Veritas Foundation Given $10,000 For Probe of Economics Teaching
Pamphlet Raises Funds

By Michael Churchill, The Harvard Crimson, January 13, 1960.

The Veritas Foundation has raised “around $10,000” towards its goal of $25,000 in order to investigate the teaching of Economics at Harvard, according to Archibald B. Roosevelt [Sr.] ’17.

The money has come in response to a pamphlet circulated recently by the Foundation, “Keynesism-Marxism at Harvard” which charges that “the teaching of Economics has been abandoned at Harvard, and a political-Marxian-Keynesian-socialist propaganda has been substituted.”

A major portion of the pamphlet is devoted to attacking Keynesian theory as un-American and totalitarian. “Even a cursory analysis reveals that Keynesism is not an economic science, but is a political credo which in its main essentials coincides with the communist teachings of Karl Marx.” It specifically contends that “Keynesians attack the principle of individual thrift and personal savings” in order to undermine American initiative and freedom.

“The fountain-head of Keynesian socialism in America has been, and still is, Harvard University,” the Foundation claims, adding that its center within the University lies in the Economics Department.

“Professor Seymour E. Harris is probably the leading propagandist of Keynesism in the United States today. He has been backed by such well known economists as J.K. Galbraith, Alvin H. Hansen and Paul M. Sweezy. Other supporters of Keynesism are some remnants of the now defunct Socialist Party and a larger number of miscellaneous ‘left-wingers’ of the ADA stripe, including certain known partisans of the Soviet system,” the pamphlet declares.

Harris and Galbraith were the only active Harvard professors mentioned, Roosevelt said, because of space limitations in the four page article.

Roosevelt refused to disclose the names of the persons who prepared the preliminary report, saying that due to the battle between Keynesians and anti-Keynesians it would jeopardize the jobs of the two outside economists who contributed to its preparation.

The Foundation circular notes “Keynesian ideas enjoy almost a monopoly” in American colleges. The effect of this monopoly is that “pessimism, discouragement and the credo of despair have been skillfully instilled into the minds of our youth. It has been done with planned premeditation.”

“The prestige of Harvard University has been used to promote a destructive ideology,” it charges. Followers of the doctrine include “the whole gamut of the totalitarian world. Socialists, Nazis, Fascists, Argentine Peronistas, followers of Nehru and those in the United States who yearn for a ‘man on horseback’ have embraced the socio-economic thinking of Keynes.”

__________________________

‘Veritas’ Report To Reach 30,000

The Harvard Crimson, January 17, 1961.

A Veritas Foundation report accusing the Harvard faculty of left-wing activities will be circulated to 20,000 additional alumni, according to Kenneth D. Robertson, Jr. ’29, one of the founders of the Foundation.

The second printing will boost to 30,000 the number of copies of the study, which is called Keynes at Harvard, and is subtitled “Economic Deception as a Political Credo.”

Left wingers–“Fabians and Keynesians” have turned the Economics Department into a “virtual Keynesian monopoly,” the report claims. Citing Seymour E. Harris, Alvin H. Hansen, and other professors of Economics by name, the study points to the Department as “the breeding ground of much of the leftism in Harvard.”

A form letter was sent to thousands of Alumni urging them to buy the 114 page pamphlet, Robertson said.

The $25,000 report was financed by Alumni in response to a letter sent out by the Foundation. “Veritas” is headed by three Harvard graduates: Arthur B. Harlow ’25, William A. Robertson ’31, and Archibald Roosevelt ’31 [sic, should be class of ’17]

__________________________

KEYNESISM-MARXISM AT HARVARD

In the brief span that the Veritas Foundation has been in existence it has received an unusual number of complaints from alumni, parents, students and others who are disturbed by the twisted economic and social thinking of growing numbers of graduates and undergraduates of our colleges and universities. Large numbers of graduates entering into adult society were found to be obsessed with the concept that our free enterprise society is doomed. For years many of them have felt that it is of little use to enter into private enterprises, since such institutions are only surviving relics of the dying capitalist system which is not worth the political efforts necessary to save it.

Much of today’s college thinking reflects the following premises:

  1. The private enterprise system of the United States is full of basic contradictions and fundamental flaws which inevitably will relegate it to the scrap heap. At best, some of the useful features of the private enterprise system will be tolerated but only under government control and domination until a transition to something different is evolved.(1)
  2. Manufacturers, merchants, bankers and the host of corporate executives of the country are hopelessly reactionary and incapable of understanding the need of the “new order”.(2) These same “leaders” are somehow not so “good” or not so “kind of heart” as are those who belong to the ranks of “organized” labor. They are incapable of concern for the “social good”.
  3. Thrift, savings, ownership and accumulation of private property are harmful to society and are not socially compatible with the “new order” which is rising out of the ashes of the “old capitalist” system throughout the, world. In fact, the new Welfare State will handle entirely the basic security of the individual by dominating and regimenting all segments of society so that there will always be “full” employment and “maximum” production. This will eliminate the need for a personal nest egg for the future and thus savings and accumulations of wealth become unnecessary to the individual, who becomes a “ward” of the state.(3)
  4. Society is composed of classes and these classes are consciously banded together to protect their overall group interests. Persons who possess property, operate industry, direct the banks, and own stocks and bonds, as well as those who engage in transport and exchange goods and services are members of the capitalist class. This class is more selfish, grasping, hard hearted, calculating and reactionary than the rest of the population. This class also bands together in a conscious plot to keep the rest of society in economic and political subjection.(4)
  5. The scope of government must be expanded to stand as a “third force”, gradually expropriating or redistributing the wealth of existing capitalists through unrestricted powers of taxation and at the same time preventing the accumulation of any new capital. This philosophy is represented as essential to any “progressive” or “liberal” society. The process of gradual taking over by government of all productive enterprise, accompanied by less and less private saving and unlimited national debt will somehow eliminate recurring cycles of mass unemployment and depression, followed by short lived prosperity. Government must control all fiscal and monetary policies as well as all production, distribution of goods and services.(5)
  6. College and university graduates can insure their personal future by attaching themselves to government bureaucracy, which is destined to expand indefinitely. Other alternatives presented are large corporate “bureaucracies” which are destined to socialization by government, or the huge tax-free foundations which are considered mere precursors of future government agencies.

The above philosophy may sound like communist Marxist propaganda, but it isn’t. It is a basic pattern for “sneaking into socialism”. It is a type of thinking which is identified as Keynesism after an English economist, the late John Maynard Keynes. It was this pattern that the Labor Party in Great Britain followed in its efforts to convert that nation into a Welfare State.

The type of thinking and planning that goes under the “Keynesian” label represents one of the slickest and most deceptive economic and political philosophies in the free world today. Keynesian propaganda is usually prefaced by the claim that its purpose is to “save” the free enterprise system from itself. Almost every book written by Keynesians opens with that theme. However, the remedies suggested represent some form of “creeping” socialism which will by degrees bring about a regimented society in which the government becomes the sole controlling and directing force.(6)

Since Keynes wrote his sensational work “General Theory of Employment, Interest and Money” — (1936), the socialist movements in the United States, Great Britain and Germany have adopted his economic and social theories as the theoretical sinews of the “new” socialism”.(7)

The campaign to picture Keynes as the outstanding economist of “private enterprise” is a gross misrepresentation. For a number of years (prior to his 1936 book) Keynes’ ideas were considered as an important theoretical bulwark for the older doctrine of Fabian socialism. The Fabian movement was, however, the chief impetus behind the theory and early planning of British socialism, with overtones in the communist direction. Some Fabians were later identified as part of the Soviet espionage apparatus. Another (Sir Oswald Mosley) later led a movement in support of Nazism as a totalitarian prototype for the western world to follow. A book officially endorsed by Mussolini stated flatly that Keynesian principles were in operation under Fascism.

Keynesism has been accepted in the whole gamut of the totalitarian world. Socialists, Nazis, Fascists, Argentine Peronistas, followers of Nehru and those in the United States who yearn for a “man on horse­back” have embraced the socio-economic thinking of Keynes. Even Communists (who are supposed to be wedded only to Marx) have espoused the Keynesian dogma. Earl Browder, former head of the U. S. Com­munist Party was an open advocate of Keynes’ principles.(8)

The spread of Keynesian concepts throughout American colleges and universities has been phenomenal. It has grown to such dimensions that today in both the graduate and undergraduate fields of political economy the Keynesian ideas enjoy almost a monopoly. Except in our schools of Business Administration, the classical concepts of capitalism, private property, and the market economy have either been completely excluded from our colleges or are given a twisted and perverted presentation by Keynesian advocates. Sound economic principles are pictured as obsolete and inadequate for a modern industrial society.(9)

In tracing the growth of these ideas it soon becomes obvious that the fountain-head of Keynesian socialism in America has been, and still is, Harvard University. Harvard, on account of its academic prestige, was chosen the “launching pad” for the Keynesian rocket in America. Although the Keynesian concepts have spread throughout various departments of Iearning at Harvard the source and center of this ideology can be traced to the economics department of the college and its graduate school. The current chairman of this department, Professor Seymour E. Harris, is probably the leading propagandist of Keynesism in the United States today. He has been backed by such well known economists as J. K. Galbraith, Alvin H. Hansen and Paul M. Sweezy. Other supporters of Keynesism are some remnants of the now defunct Socialist Party and a larger number of miscellaneous “left-wingers” of the ADA stripe, including certain known partisans of the Soviet system.

In spite of some differences as to how to reach their goal, the advocates of Keynesism, like all the “left­wing” groups, belong to what may be called a political underworld. In the criminal underworld the various elements may cheat, shoot and kill one another, but they nevertheless present a general united front against their common foe, the police. The “left-wing” political underworld is likewise composed of elements that can fight each other, even unto death, but they consistently present a united front against the capitalist system.

The roster of those who have joined the Keynesian band wagon ranges from moderate socialistic “liberals” to the most ardent pro-soviet protagonists. The bulk of them, while claiming to be non-communists, eagerly join in the chorus against those who investigate communism, be they Congressional Committees, independent organizations or private individuals. The Keynesian crowd, in large measure, furnish support for the defense of those accused as Soviet spies and militantly uphold the right of communists to practice their subversion.(10)

Even a cursory analysis reveals that Keynesism is not an economic science, but is a political credo which in its main essentials coincides with the communist teachings of Karl Marx. Official communist publications accuse the Socialists of plagiarizing Karl Marx by offering Marxian theories under a Keynesian coating. Essentially the communist complaint against Keynesism is correct. Keynesism is basically Marxist in content. It is the same old wine in the same old bottles, but the labels are different.(11)

Keynesism, however, has a more subtle and deceptive approach than Marxism. Marxism openly announces its intent to overthrow the capitalist system. Keynesism gives lip service to the saving of capitalism, while its covert policies are calculated to make capitalism unworkable.

Marxism uses the regularly recognized economic terms in propounding its theory while Keynesism has invented an entire new nomenclature to replace the accepted terminology used in our classical economics.(12) Thus, in one fell swoop, the Keynesians have attempted to side track, by-pass and confuse, all minds previously educated in economic thinking, relegating them, so to speak, to the scrap heap. The new terms which are more abstract and vague than the time tested old ones, make it possible to indoctrinate an entire generation of college students exclusively with Keynesian dogma; while leaving it totally ignorant of the workings and benefits of our classical economic society. Keynesism (with its accompanying partner Marxism) dominates the sociological thinking in the academic world today. Students today cannot even understand the language of the pre-Keynesian treatises.(13)

A whole generation of college trained youth has been infected with the virus of Keynesism and Marxism.

Tens of thousands of young minds have been taught to lose faith in the economic system that has made the United States what it is today. Thousands of our future leaders have been discouraged from applying their personal initiative and talents towards the strengthening and perfection of the private enter­prise system. Pessimism, discouragement and the credo of despair have been skillfully instilled into the minds of our youth. It has been done with planned premeditation.

Keynesians attack the principle of individual thrift and personal savings. Their policy is fundamentally contrary to a “peoples capitalism” which encour­ages the small investors to become the owners of American corporations on an ever-increasing scale.

Tyrannies of all kinds, in the course of history, have always stifled individual savings. It is the savings of millions of Americans that have made it possible for our people to remain free. Corporations and governments that depend on the contributions of citizens to maintain operations must be the servants and not masters of these millions.

The modern political “left-wing” is fully aware of this fact. That is why they are so unanimous in branding the thrifty as “anti-social” and “producers of panics.” All collectivists are deathly afraid that, if the principle of saving is allowed to continue, a genuine “peoples capitalism” will continue to improve, expand and strengthen our modern American society.

Preliminary research has uncovered a mass of evidence in support of the thesis outlined above. The prestige of Harvard University has been used to promote a destructive ideology which has spread into practically every great American university. Entire departments, bureaus, and other agencies of government on the federal, state and local level have been flooded with personnel steeped in Keynesian and Marxist thinking.(14)

Banking and business institutions, industrial corporations, trade associations and labor unions have found it increasingly difficult to employ economists that are not infected with the destructive and dangerous social philosophy of Keynesism. Some of them have been forced to train their own economists to insure the sound, productive, realistic and constructive thinking necessary for the operation and preservation of the private enterprise system.

Educational institutions that train our economics instructors, at the graduate level, have been for some thirty (30) years almost exclusively devoted to the Keynesian theory. Consequently this country is faced with the tragic fact that teachers of economics  throughout the nation are predominantly Keynesian or Marxist. For years, these Keynesian professors have infected, yearly, several hundred students who in turn became instructors and indoctrinated thousands more. Thus the process snow-balls on.

Marxism-Keynesism in our academic institutions has thus far been winning by default. There has been a lack of factual exposure. Keynesians keep repeating, in their text books, the theme that their theories are too deep and complex for the ordinary layman to understand. They lay exclusive claim to a profundity which builds a “Chinese Wall” around their dogmas. This is obviously done to discourage people outside their own inner circle from probing into their motives and intentions. The whole miasma of Keynesism is given the protective cover of “science.”(15)

The Veritas Foundation is not overawed by such claims of omniscience on the part of a group of would­be-bosses over all of society.

The text books, treatises, lectures and articles of those who run the economics department at Harvard represent the backbone of the Keynesian forces in the United States.

With your help we can get the true facts before the American people. We will unmask the methods by· which the Keynesian revolutionary virus is being injected, by degrees, into the life blood of our free society.

STATEMENT OF PURPOSE OF VERITAS FOUNDATION
AS GIVEN IN ITS DECLARATION OF TRUST

To educate the officials, teaching staffs, governing bodies, under-graduates and graduates of American colleges and universities, upon the subject of communism, the international communist conspiracy and its methods of infiltration into the United States.

[NOTES]

  1. Financing American Prosperity (A symposium of Economists) published by The Twentieth Century Fund (1945) Chapter no. 4 by Professor Howard S. Ellis.

  2. The National Debt and The New Economics by Seymour E. Harris, published by McGraw-Hill Book Co., Inc. (1947).

  3. Ibid.

  4. Saving American Capitalism edited by Seymour E. Harris Chapter XXXI (1948).

  5. Ibid. Chapter XIII.

  6. The Failure of the New Economics by Henry Hazlitt, published by D. Van Nostrand Co., Inc., (1959).

  7. Outline of the Political History of the Americas by William Z. Foster published by International Publishers.Socialists Abandon Marx (U.S. News and World Reports, October 12, 1959).

  8. Fabianism in the Political Life of Britain, 1919-1931, published by The Heritage Foundation, lnc., (1954) by Sister M. Margaret Patricia McCarran, Ph.D. The Universal Aspects of Fascism, by James Strachey Barnes, F.R.G.S., published by Williams and Norgate, Ltd., 0928). Outline of the Political History of the Americas by William Z. FosterJawaharlal Nehru by Frank Moraes, published by The MacMillan Co. (1956).The Twenty-Year Revolution by Chesly Manly.

  9. The Failure of the New Economics by Henry Hazlitt.

  10. Saving American Capitalism, edited by Professor Seymour E. Harris. Chapter 11 by Chester Bowles.

  11. Political Economy by John Eaton, published by the International Publishers (1949)

  12. The Failure of the New Economics by Henry Hazlitt. Chapter XXlX.

  13. Ibid.

  14. Financing American Prosperity (A Symposium of Economists) published by The Twentieth Century Fund (1945). Chapter no. 2 by Benjamin M. Anderson.

  15. The National Debt and The New Economics by Seymour E. Harris. Chapter II.

Source: UMassAmherst.  W.E.B. DuBois Papers/ Series 1. Correspondence/Keynesism-Marxism at Harvard, ca. February 1961.

__________________________

HON. MARY ROSE OAKAR
in the House of Representatives
WEDNESDAY, JUNE 6, 1990

Ms. OAKAR. Mr. Speaker, I was saddened by the recent passing of Archibald Roosevelt, Jr. Mr. Roosevelt lived a full life and spent 27 years as a public servant to our country. I include in the Record his obituary, which recently appeared in the Washington Post.

The article follows:

(BY J.Y. SMITH)

Archibald B. Roosevelt Jr., 72 a retired intelligence officer who served as chief of the Central Intelligence Agency’s stations in Istanbul, Madrid and London, died yesterday at this home in Washington. He had congestive heart failure.

A grandson of President Theodore Roosevelt and a soldier, scholar, linguist and authority on the Middle East, Mr. Roosevelt viewed his calling–and its faceless, anonymous half-world of nuance and seemingly random fact–with a hard-headed realism leavened by a kind of romanticism that that has echoes of an earlier time.

After retiring from the CIA in 1974, he became a vice president of Chase Manhattan Bank and director of international relations in its Washington office. Well known in Washington social circles in his own right, he was particularly active on the diplomatic circuit during the Reagan administration, when his wife, Selwa Showker ‘Lucky’ Roosevelt, was chief of protocol at the State Department.

In 1988, he published a memoir called ‘For Lust of Knowing: Memoirs of an Intelligence Officer,’ in which he adhered so strictly to this oath to keep the CIA’s secrets that he did not even identify the countries where he had served. And although he was happy to tell interviewers that they could figure it out from his entry in ‘Who’s Who in America,’ he also was quick to explain that some Americans have forgotton what an oath is and that he would not break his even if the government told him to.

Instead, he gave his views on such questions as the nature of the CIA and why it attracted him, and on what intelligence officers should be and how they should see themselves in relation to their own country and the rest of the world.

‘We in the CIA were always conscious of having a special mission, of being the reconaissance patrols of our government,’ he wrote. Despite such vicissitudes as the Bay of Pigs disaster in Cuba in 1961, he said, the agency kept its esprit de corps even though with the passage of time it `was no longer a band of pioneers, but an organization.’

As for intelligence officers, Mr. Roosevelt said he thought of them in ‘the old-fashioned sense, perhaps best exemplifed in fiction by Kipling’s British political officers in India.’

His notion embodied a high ideal, indeed, for the intelligence officer ‘must be able to empathize with true believers of every stripe in order to understand and analyze them. …. He must, like Chairman Mao’s guerrillas, be able to swim in foreign seas. But then he must be able to pull himself to shore, and look back calmly, objectively, on the waters that immersed him.’

Most important, he said, the intelligence officer ‘must not only know whose side he is on, but have a deep conviction that he is on the right side. He should not imitate the cynical protagonists of John Le Carre’s novels, essentially craftsmen who find their side no less by his own account, the product of a ‘conventional, Waspish, preppy world’ and was destined for a conventional career on Wall Street. He managed to escape this fate, he said, because he `lived in another world of my imagination.’

Archibald Bulloch Roosevelt Jr. was born in Boston on Feb. 18, 1918. He graduated from Groton School and then went to Harvard, where he graduated in the class of 1940. While an undergraduate, he was chosen as a Rhodes Scholar, but was not able to accept because of the outbreak of World War II in Europe. His first job was working for a newspaper in Seattle.

During the war, he became an Army intelligence officer. He accompanied U.S. troops in their landing in North Africa in 1942 and soon began to form views on the French colonial administration and the beginnings of Arab nationalism. Later in the war he was a military attache in Iraq and Iran.

In 1947, he joined the Central Intelligence Group, the immediate forerunner of the CIA. From 1947 to 1949, he served in Beirut. On that and on all of his subsequent assignments abroad, he was listed in official registers as a State Department official.

From 1949 to 1951, he was in New York as head of the Near East section of the Voice of America. From 1951 to 1953, he was station chief in Istanbul. From 1953 to 1958, he had several jobs at CIA headquarters in Washington. In 1958, he was made CIA station chief in Spain. From 1962 to 1966 he held the same job in London. He finished his career in Washington.

Through it all he pursued an interest in languages. A Latin and Greek scholar when he was a boy, he had a speaking or reading knowledge of perhaps 20 languages, including French, Spanish, German, Russian, Arabic, Hebrew, Swahili and Uzbek.

Mr. Roosevelt’s marriage to the former Katherine W. Tweed ended in divorce.

In addition to Selwa Roosevelt, to whom he was married for 40 years, survivors include a son by his first marriage, Tweed Roosevelt of Boston, and two grandchildren.

Source:  https://web.archive.org/web/20200525140528/https://fas.org/irp/congress/1990_cr/h900607-tribute.htm

Categories
Economists Harvard

Harvard. Life of accounting professor William Morse Cole, A.M. 1896

 

In preparing the previous post, “Harvard final exams in political economy and ethics of social reform, 1889-1890“, I saw that the Harvard Business School accounting professor, William Morse Cole, got his professional start in the department of political economy as Frank Taussig’s side-kick for Political Economy 1, the principles course of its time. Answering the call of due diligence, I decided to put together a biographical post on the man. To be honest, I did not feel at all inspired about the prospect of checking out the career of this early Harvard Business School professor. While I confess to loving national income and product accounts (and especially deflating them with theoretically appropriate price indexes), I’ve never warmed to the nuts-and-bolts of actual economic accounting. Literally, go figure. Still, I overcame my nasty prejudice enough to track down Professor Cole and so we “Meet a Harvard A.M. alumnus…”

Cole wrote a battery of accounting textbooks that one could logically expect from a professor of accounting. These are listed below with links. Three other books by Cole were definitely composed outside his accounting lane. Cole’s first book was a romance written under a pseudonym, his mid-life tome “An American Hope” offered his readers a series of meaning-of-life reflections, and towards the end of his career he even published a high-school elementary economics textbook (encouraged by no less a mover-shaker in the economics profession than Richard Ely).

 

_________________________

Harvard University, in memoriam

WILLIAM MORSE COLE, Professor of Accounting, Emeritus, died December 15, 1960, in his ninety-fifth year. A graduate of Harvard College in 1890, Mr. Cole first offered a non-credit course in accounting in the Department of Economics in 1900-01 as a vocational aid for seniors. Five years later the course achieved credit status, and when the Business School was founded in 1908, Mr. Cole became an Assistant Professor there and teacher of one of the first required courses. He was made a full Professor in 1916 and continued to teach accounting until his retirement in 1933. A highly respected teacher known for his strict intellectual discipline, he was the originator of one of the major types of accounting statements, the “source and application of funds statement,” used extensively by professional accountants, and his books on accounting were highly regarded. A gracious and thoughtful person, he continued alert and interested in Harvard affairs until his death.

Source: Harvard University. Report of the President of Harvard College, 1959-1960, p. 26.

_________________________

Life of William Morse Cole in Dates

1866. Born February 10 in Boston, Massachusetts.

Family moved to Portland, Maine. High school and Portland Business College.

1890. A.B. Harvard College

1890-93. Instructor in political economy, Harvard College.

1894-95. Secretary, Massachusetts Commission on Unemployed.

1896. A.M. Harvard.

1896-98. American University Extension Society, Lecturer.

1898-1901. High school teacher of English literature and composition in Fall River, Massachusetts.

1900-08. Harvard Instructor in Principles of Accounting.

1901-08. High School teacher of English literature and composition at South High School, Worcester, Massachusetts.

1908-13. Assistant Professor, Harvard Business School.

1913-16. Associate Professor, Harvard Business School.

1917-1919. Served twenty months as captain in the Quartermaster Corps.

1916-1933. Professor of Accounting, Harvard Business School.

1931. Visiting Instructor at University of California, Berkeley Summer Session.

1933. Professor Emeritus of Accounting, Harvard.

1960. Died December 15 at age 94 in New Britain, Connecticut.

Sources:

“William Morse Cole” in John J. Kahle, American Accountants and Their Contributions to Accounting Thought, (Reprinted Routledge).
University of California. Intersession and Summer Session 1931 at Berkeley (1931), p. 4.
Harvard Business School Yearbook 1924-25, p. 13.
Harvard University. Report of the President of Harvard College, 1959-1960, p. 26.

_________________________

Life of William Morse Cole in Books

1895. An Old Man’s Romance, a Tale. (Pseudonym “Christopher Craigie”). Boston: Copeland and Day.

1908. Accounts. Their Construction and Interpretation for Business Men and Students of Affairs. Boston: Houghton Mifflin Company.

“The first issue of this book was brought out at a time when no general, non -technical, non-professional treatise on accounting had been published . The author had then been giving for eight years a course of instruction to seniors in Harvard College on the principles of accounting, and believed that many business men and students of affairs would be interested to see briefly but comprehensively how accounts are constructed and interpreted.”

Revised and enlarged edition, 1915.

1910. Accounting and Auditing. Minneapolis: Cree Publishing Company.

1910. The American Hope. New York: D. Appleton.

“The academic point of view is apt to be out of joint with real life and may be said to be a disease to be gotten rid of at all hazards, but once in a while from academic circles comes forth a book filled with a knowledge of both the real and the ideal. The study of the use of the possessive by Shakspeare or the dative by Virgil has been supplanted by study of life understood and depicted so well by both Shakspeare and Virgil and the result is a book of real worth, as in this book on the American Hope by a Harvard teacher.

‘The fundamental ground of American hope,’ says Mr. Cole, ‘is the prevailing idealism of the American character.’ Not money or things in themselves, but power, life, and the ideal are behind our material development. Business on a large scale is the child of the ideal. The chapter on the power of choice is a pretty exposition of the responsibility of the irresponsible, and, like all essays concerning the freedom of the will, finds an escape from both heredity and surroundings by the pursuit of truth and life. The marriage tie is a great spring of progress and the ideal is brought out quite strongly. ‘It is doubtless true that if the only marriages contracted were those classed in this chapter as perfect, the marriage rate would decline rapidly. This might not be a calamity. Few parts of the world are today suffering from lack of population. What the world needs is not at all more people, but more people begotten and trained In ideal conditions.’

The Training of Powers, The Fraternal Bond, The Still, Small Voice, The Will of the Community and the Attitude Toward Life are the titles of various chapters and a reflection of the character of the book. Economic Freedom is discussed in a separate chapter and the root of progress is clearly brought out. The pressure of population on subsistence, thrift, sobriety, and industry are discussed. Civilisation in every one of its aspects is a struggle against the animal instincts.’ The book is a thoroughly readable one from beginning to end and it is not too high praise to say that it is a rare one.”  Boston Evening Transcript, 22 June 1910, p. 22.

1913. Cost Accounting for Institutions. New York: Ronald Press Company.

1914. Bookkeeping, Accounting and Auditing. Racine: National Institute of Business.

1915. Problems in the Principles of Accounting. Cambridge, Massachusetts: Harvard University Press.

“These problems have been designed for use with the author’s Accounts: Their Construction and Interpretation, published by Houghton Mifflin Company, of Boston.”

1921. The Fundamentals of Accounting. With the collaboration of Anne Elizabeth Geddes, A.B. Boston: Houghton Mifflin.

1926. Economic Success. New York: Macmillan.

“This book is an attempt to present fundamental economic principles in form and content comprehensible by young people of the age of the highest grades in elementary and intermediate schools.” Thanks Richard T. Ely “for the original suggestion that this book be written, and for helpful criticism both of its proposed content and of the form which the manuscript took.” (p. xii).

Image Source: Harvard Class Album 1916.

Categories
Exam Questions Harvard

Harvard. Exams for Political Economy Courses and Ethics of Social Questions, 1890-1891

 

With the academic year 1890-91, a new instructor joined the Harvard political economy team, William Morse Cole who co-taught Political Economy 1 with Frank Taussig and  Political Economy 8, History of Financial Legislation in the United States. Cole went on to have a successful career as professor of accounting at Harvard Business School. 

The previous year’s exams have been transcribed and posted earlier:

Harvard. Final exams in political economy and ethics of social reform, 1889-1890

_________________________

1890-1891. Philosophy 14.

Enrollment

[Philosophy] 11. Professor F. G. Peabody. — The Ethics of Social Questions. — The questions of Charity, Divorce, the Indians, Temperance, and the various phases of the Labor Question (Socialism, Communism, Arbitration, Cooperation, etc.), as questions of practical Ethics. — Lectures, essays, and practical observations. 3 hours.

Total 103: 4 Graduates, 53 Senior, 28 Juniors, 4 Sophomores, 3 Freshmen, 11 Others.

Source: Harvard University. Annual Report of the President of Harvard College 1890-1891, p. 57.

 

 

PHILOSOPHY 14.
THE ETHICS OF THE SOCIAL QUESTIONS.
Mid-year examination (1890-91)

[Omit one question.]

  1. The attitude of political economy toward the questions of social reform.
  2. Consider the possible relations in which your own life may stand to the life of society, and their ethical significance.
  3. Examine a special case of moral heroism and state what, in your opinion, was its motive.
  4. What, according to Professor Sumner, are the duties toward others of “a free man in a free democracy”? Why? And with what result, in your opinion, to society?
  5. Enumerate and illustrate some of the practical rules of good charity which issue from the philosophy of charity.
  6. The relation of the labor question in France and England to the political history of those countries.
  7. Compare the conditions of wealth and the possibilities of revolution in England and in this country.
  8. Consider Carlyle’s doctrine of the “Captain of Industry” as a solution of the modern labor question.
  9. What does Ruskin mean by: Roots of honor; veins of purple; non-competitive just exchange; ad valorem?
  10. What is there in religion which encourages the Socialist and what is there which repels him, and what relation between socialism and religion is, in your judgment, likely to be the result?

 

Source: Harvard University Archives. Harvard University, Mid-year examinations, 1852-1943. Box 2. From bound volume Examination Papers, 1890-91.

 

 

 

PHILOSOPHY 14.
THE ETHICS OF THE SOCIAL QUESTIONS.
Year-end examination (June 1891)

[Omit one question.]

  1. “All wealth is due to labor; therefore to labor all wealth is due.” What, in your opinion, is the economic importance, and the justice, of this proposition?
  2. Compare the views of the Socialist, the Individualist and the “Opportunist” as to the tendency toward State interference. What is your own view of the merits of this kind of legislation?
  3. “Well may Prince Bismarck display leanings toward State Socialism.” Why does Mr. Spencer make this remark, and with what justice?
  4. On what principle would a Professor be paid, under the Socialist programme?
  5. Consider the commercial advantages and hindrances of an establishment like the Hebden Bridge Fustian Mill.
  6. Compare the principle of profit-sharing formerly used in the American Fisheries with that represented by the firm of Billon et Isaac.
  7. Describe the general features and the main intention of the Dawes Indian Bill; and the supplementary legislation now proposed.
  8. What is meant by the “Philosophy of the Family,” and what is its relation to the modern Divorce Question?
  9. If you should enter the retail liquor business in Boston, what legal restrictions would you find hampering the freedom of your trade?
  10. Apply the doctrine of the “Social Organism” to the question of Temperance.

 

Source: Harvard University Archives. Harvard University, Examination papers, 1873-1915. Box 3.  Papers Set for Final examinations in Philosophy, Political Economy, History, Roman Law, Fine Arts, and Music in Harvard College (June, 1891) in bound volume Examination Papers, Mid-Year 1890-91.

_____________________________

1890-91
POLITICAL ECONOMY 1.

Enrollment.

[Political Economy] 1. Professor [Frank W.] Taussig and Mr. [William Morse] Cole. —

First half-year: —

Mill’s Principles of Political Economy. 3 hours

Second half-year: —

Division A (Theoretical): Mill’s Principles of Political Economy. — Cairnes’s Leading Principles of Political Economy. 3 hours.

Division B (Descriptive): Lectures on Finance, Labor and Capital, Coöperation. — Hadley’s Railroad Transportation. —  Laughlin’s Bimetallism. 3 hours.

Total 201:

A: 10 Seniors, 53 Juniors, 50 Sophomores, 2 Freshmen, 19 Others.
B: 12 Seniors, 31 Juniors, 15 Sophomores, 2 Freshmen, 7 Others.

Source: Harvard University. Annual Report of the President of Harvard College 1890-1891, p. 58.

 

Student notes available at the Harvard Archives

Kennedy, Frank Lowell, Notes on lectures by Frank W. Taussig and William M. Cole on Political Economy 1, 1890-1891. Harvard University Archives HUC 8890.371.1

 

1890-91.
POLITICAL ECONOMY 1.
Mid-year examination.

[Divide your time equally between the two parts of the paper.]

I.
[Omit two.]

  1. “Whether men like it or not, the unproductive expenditure of individuals will pro tanto tend to impoverish the community, and only their productive expenditure will enrich it.”
    “It would be a great error to regret the large proportion of the annual produce which in an opulent country goes to supply unproductive consumption.”
    Can you reconcile these two statements of Mill’s?
  2. “Hardly any two dealers in the same trade, even if their commodities are equally good and equally cheap, carry on their business at the same expense, or turn over their capital in the same time. That equal capitals give equal profits, as a general maxim of trade, would be as false as that equal age or size give equal bodily strength, or that equal reading or experience give equal knowledge.” Can you reconcile this statement of Mill’s with the doctrine of the tendency of profits to an equality?
  3. How far is it true that a general rise or fall in wages would not affect values?
  4. Suppose a country having a metallic currency to issue inconvertible paper to one-half the amount of the coin, and trace the effects on prices and on the circulating medium (1) in an isolated country, having no international trade; (2) in a country having international trade.
  5. On the same supposition, trace the effects, in the country having international trade, on the foreign exchanges, on the course of international trade, and on the terms of international exchange.
  6. “If consumers were to save and covert into capital more than a limited portion of their income, and were not to devote to unproductive consumption an amount of means bearing a certain ratio to the capital of the country, the extra accumulation would be merely so much waste, since there would be no market for the commodities which the capital so created would produce.” Is this true?

II.
[Answer all.]

  1. “Capital is not the result of saving; it is not an accumulation. Its nature is that it should be consumed almost as fast as it is produced. … Saving or accumulation would necessarily defeat the end of its existence. How can materials or tools be saved?” Answer the question.
  2. Explain why rent is not an element in the cost of production of the commodity which yields it.
  3. Connect the law of the increase of labor with the law of production from land.
  4. What is the effect of gratuitous education for a profession on the wages of those engaged in it?
  5. Why does the durability of the precious metals give stability to their value?
  6. What are the laws of value applicable to (1) iron ore, (2) watch-springs, (3) wool and mutton, (4) patented bicycles?
  7. How does the rate of interest bear on the price of land and of securities?

Source: Harvard University Archives. Harvard University, Mid-year examinations, 1852-1943. Box 2. From bound volume Examination Papers, 1890-91.

 

POLITICAL ECONOMY 1.
Year-end examination (June 1891)
Division A.

Arrange your answers strictly in the order of the questions.

  1. Wherein is the effect of a change in the demand for commodities on the wages-fund different (1) if competition among laborers is effective? (2) if it is not effective?
  2. On what grounds does Cairnes reach the same conclusions, as to the possible effects of Trades Unions on general wages, for England and for the United States?
  3. Examine Cairnes’s reasoning as to the possibility of maintaining the accumulation of capital in a socialist community.
  4. Why are the wages of women, according to Mill, lower than the wages of men? Accepting Mill’s explanation, what would Cairnes say as to the laws of value applicable to the exchange of the products of women’s labor with the products of men’s labor?
  5. What is the error in saying that high wages make high prices?
  6. “Gold may be cheap, and prices at the same time be low.” Explain.
  7. Is it true that the benefit of foreign trade lies in its affording an outlet for the surplus produce of the community?
  8. Suppose the people of the United States to borrow annually large sums from Europe; and suppose them also to have large interest payments to make on loans contracted in previous years; would you expect our foreign trade to show an excess of imports or of exports?
  9. Mill says that an emission of inconvertible paper money, equal in amount to the specie previously circulating, will drive out the whole of the metallic money; “that is, if paper be issued of as low a denomination as the lowest coin; if not, as much will remain as convenience requires for the smaller payments.” What light is thrown on this statement by the experience of the United States in 1862?
  10. Why did the circumstance that an exceptionally large part of the country’s business was done for cash in the period immediately after the civil war make the time favorable for a speedy contraction of the currency?
  11. Is payment for capital sunk in the soil, rent, or profit?

Division B.

[Arrange your answers strictly in the order of the questions.]
[One question may be omitted.]

  1. Why have pools and traffic agreements been more stable in England than in the United States?
  2. Why does a railroad charge more per ton per mile on cotton goods than on coal?
  3. “A government enterprise may be managed on any one of four principles: 1. as a tax; 2. for business profits; 3. to pay expenses; 4. for public service, without much regard to the question of expenses.” Explain, giving an example under each head.
  4. Wherein is there a resemblance between the legislation of France as to railways and as to banking?
  5. Arrange in proper order the following items of a bank account: Capital, 300; Loans, 1150; Bonds and Stocks, 50; Surplus, 85; Undivided Profits, 10; Cash, 110; Cash items, 90; Notes, 90; Real Estate, 25; Other Assets, 20; Deposits, 960.
    Do you see any reason for believing this bank to be or not to be a national bank of the United States? To be a city or a country bank?
  6. Suppose the national banks of the United States ceased to issue notes, their other operations remaining as now; how great would be the effect of the change on the circulating medium of the community? Compare the effect with that which would ensue in Germany if the note issue of the German banks were to cease.
  7. Under the national bank act, how does the action of our banks, when their reserves are suddenly lowered, differ from that of the Bank of England in like case?
  8. Wherein is the mode of dividing profits among members of the coöperative stores in England different from that of the coöperative building associations of the United States?
  9. Wherein does bimetallism as now practiced in France differ from bimetallism as it was in France in 1850? Wherein does it differ from bimetallism as it is in the United States now?
  10. Compare the legislation of Germany on coinage in 1873 with that of the United States in 1853.
  11. Mill divides commodities into three classes, according to the laws of value applicable to them. In which class would you put silver bullion?
  12. Describe carefully the act for the resumption of specie payments, stating when it was passed, when it went into effect, and how far it was successful in accomplishing the desired object.
  13. Will a general rise in wages affect values? prices? profits?

 

Source: Harvard University Archives. Harvard University, Examination papers, 1873-1915. Box 3. Papers Set for Final examinations in Philosophy, Political Economy, History, Roman Law, Fine Arts, and Music in Harvard College (June, 1891) in bound volume Examination Papers, 1890-92.

_____________________________

1890-91
POLITICAL ECONOMY 2.

Enrollment.

[Political Economy] 2. Professor [Frank W.] Taussig and Mr. [John Graham] Brooks. — History of Economic Theory. — Examination of selections from Leading Writers. — Socialism. 3 hours.

Total 23: 4 Graduates, 10 Seniors, 8 Juniors, 1 Other.

Source: Harvard University. Annual Report of the President of Harvard College 1890-1891, p. 58.

 

Previously Posted

https://www.irwincollier.com/harvard-history-of-economic-theory-final-exam-questions-taussig-1891-94/

Fun fact: W.E.B. Dubois was enrolled in Economics 2 in 1890/91 as a graduate student and was awarded a grade of A (one of six awarded to the twenty-two who received grades,  as recorded in Taussig’s scrapbook).

1890-91.
POLITICAL ECONOMY 2.
Mid-year examination.

[Divide your time equally between the two parts of the paper.]
[Omit one question.]

  1. It has been suggested that the real source from which wages are paid is not the product of the laborer, nor the capital of the employer, but the income of the consumer. What should you say?
  2. To which of the following cases, if to any, is the reasoning of the wages fund theory applicable? (1) The farmer tilling his own land with his own capital; (2) the fisherman working for a share of the catch; (3) the independent artisan working on his own account with borrowed capital; (4) the employer who habitually sells his product before pay-day, and pays his laborers with the proceeds.
  3. Wherein does President Walker’s view of the source from which wages are paid differ from George’s?
  4. “The extra gains which any producer or dealer obtains through superior talent in business, or superior business arrangements, are very much of a similar kind [to rent.] If all his competitors had the same advantages, and used them, the benefit would be transferred to the consumers, through the diminished value of the article; he only retains it for himself because he is able to bring his commodity to market at a lower cost, while its value is determined by a higher…. Wages and profits represent the universal elements in production, while rent may be taken to represent the differential and peculiar; any difference in favor of certain producers, or in favor of production in certain circumstances, being the source of a gain, which, though not called rent, unless paid periodically by one person to another, is governed by laws entirely the same with it.”—Mill, Political Economy, book iii., ch. v., §4.
    What has President Walker added to this in his discussion of business profits?
  5. “It is true that money does not beget money; but capital does manifestly beget capital. If a man borrows a thousand ducats and ties them up in a bag, he will not find any little ducats in the bag at the end of the year; but if he purchases with the ducats a flock of sheep, he will, with proper attention, have lambs enough at the end of the year to make a handsome interest on the loan, and make a handsome profit for himself. If the turns the ducats into corn, he will find it bringing forth, some thirty, some sixty, some an hundred fold…Very seldom does a man borrow money to use it, as money, through the term of his loan. When he does so, as brokers for example sometimes do, he may to Antonio’s question, ‘Is your gold and silver rams and ewes?’ return Shylock’s answer, ‘I cannot tell; I make it breed as fast.’”
    Discuss this explanation of interest. Whom do you suppose to be the writer of the extract?
  6. “The natural history of the notion on which it [the wages-fund doctrine] rests, is not obscure. It grew out of the conditions which existed in England during and immediately subsequent to the Napoleonic wars. Two things were then noted. First, capital had become accumulated in the island to such an extent that employers found no (financial) difficulty in paying their laborers by the month, week, or day, instead of requiring them to await the fruition of their labor in the harvested or marketed product. Second, the wages were, in fact, generally so low that they furnished no more than a bare subsistence, while the employment offered was so restricted that an increase in the number of laborers had the effect to throw some out of employment or to reduce the wages for all. Out of these things the wages-fund theory was put together.”
    Examine this account of the rise of the wages-fund doctrine.
  7. Discuss the method of reasoning followed by Adam Smith, and illustrate by his treatment of two of the following topics: (1) the causes which bring about high wages; (2) the effects on domestic industry of restraints on importation; (3) the origin and effects of the division of labor.
  8. Explain how Ricardo’s conception of wages bears on his conclusions as to the effects of taxes on wages, and as to the net income of society.
  9. What can be said in justification of the views of the writers of the mercantile school?

Source: Harvard University Archives. In Harvard University, Mid-year examinations, 1852-1943. Box 2. From bound volume Examination Papers, 1890-91.

 

Second semester taught by John Graham Brooks.

POLITICAL ECONOMY 2.
Year-end examination (June 1891)

  1. From Rousseau to the Fabians, what have been the chief historic changes in the Philosophy of Socialism?
  2. In detail, state the differences between the Marx type of Socialism and that of the Fabians.
  3. With reference to the “three rents” what are the most important objections to Socialism?
  4. What reasons can you give to show that Socialism is likely to have much further development in our society?

Source: Harvard University Archives. Harvard University, Examination papers, 1873-1915. Box 3. Papers Set for Final examinations in Philosophy, Political Economy, History, Roman Law, Fine Arts, and Music in Harvard College (June, 1891) in bound volume Examination Papers, 1890-92.

_____________________________

1890-91
POLITICAL ECONOMY 3.

Enrollment.

[Political Economy] 3. Mr. [John Graham] Brooks. Investigation and Discussion of Practical Economic Questions. — Social Questions. — Short theses. 1st half-year. 3 hours.

Total 10: 1 Graduate, 7 Seniors, 1 Junior, 1 Other.

Source: Harvard University. Annual Report of the President of Harvard College 1890-1891, p. 58.

 

1890-91
POLITICAL ECONOMY 3.
Mid-year examination

  1. State the general objects of the German State Insurance, with reasons why it is likely, or not likely, to reach its objects.
  2. State in detail the strong points and the weak points of Trades Unions.
  3. What is the effect of Trades Unions upon their own wages, as distinguished from wages in general?
  4. What advantages has Profit Sharing over the present forms of the wages system?
  5. Are there reasons to believe that Profit Sharing will have much larger influence in the future?
  6. With special reference to the work of the half year, what “social remedies” appear to you most promising?

Source: Harvard University Archives. In Harvard University, Mid-year examinations, 1852-1943. Box 2. From bound volume Examination Papers, 1890-91.

_____________________________

1890-91
POLITICAL ECONOMY 4.

Enrollment.

[Political Economy] 4. Professor [Charles Franklin] Dunbar. — Economic History of Europe and America since the Seven Years’ War. —Lectures and written work. 3 hours.

Total 103: 29 Seniors, 28 Juniors, 25 Sophomores, 4 Freshmen, 17 Others.

Source: Harvard University. Annual Report of the President of Harvard College 1890-1891, p. 58.

Other course material available at the Harvard Archives

Topics and references in political economy IV [1891?]. Student’s copy belonging to C. King Morrison, ’91. with manuscript notes. Harvard University Archives HUC 8890.371

Larrabee, Ralph Clinton (A.B. 1893). Notes in Political Economy 4: lectures by Prof. Dunbar, 1890-1891. Harvard University Archives HUC 8890.371.4.48

Principle text for Political Economy 4

From the prefatory note to Benjamin Rand’s (ed.) Selections illustrating economic history since the Seven Years’ War (Cambridge, MA: Waterman and Amee, 1889):

These selections have been made for use as a text-book of required reading to accompany a course of lectures on economic history given at Harvard College.

1890-91
POLITICAL ECONOMY 4.
Mid-year examination

Lay out your time carefully, reserving 15 minutes for review and correction.

A.
Give half of your time (say 80 minutes) to A, omitting one question.

  1. Make a careful statement of the leading provisions of the English navigation and colonial system.
  2. Adam Smith’s reasons for saying that the policy of Great Britain towards her colonies had, upon the whole, been less illiberal and oppressive than that of other countries towards theirs. [Rand, pp. 12-26.]
  3. Contrast the effects of the French revolutionary period upon the holding and distribution of land, in France and Germany respectively.
  4. Describe the current of opinion and the industrial conditions which made free trade inevitably the policy for England.
  5. State the reasons for the logical and political importance of the corn laws in the English free trade movement.
  6. The essential differences between the French and the Anglo-American methods of managing railway construction and ownership, and the effect and advantages of each.

B.
Give 80 minutes to B, omitting two questions.

  1. The trade between the United States and the British West Indies, before our revolution, and after.
  2. The inventions or improvements which made the development of the cotton States possible.
  3. The condition of commerce and manufactures in the United States in the two periods, 1794-1808, and 1808-1815.
  4. The successive enterprises for opening communication with the territory north of the Ohio, and their importance.
  5. The English legislation respecting cotton goods in the last century and the reasons for it.
  6. What was the effect of the Napoleonic wars upon the introduction of manufactures on the continent of Europe?
  7. The comparative state of preparation of England, France, Germany, and the United States for undertaking the modern industries when the peace of 1815 came.
  8. Give what account you can of the career and opinions of Turgot, with dates.
  9. The contributions of Stein and Hardenberg respectively to the reform in the Prussian system of land-holding.
  10. On what plan was the Zollverein organized?
  11. What are the differences in industrial characteristics which make it natural for England and France to adopt different policies as to protection and free trade?

Source: Harvard University Archives. In Harvard University, Mid-year examinations, 1852-1943. Box 2. From bound volume Examination Papers, 1890-91.

 

1890-91
POLITICAL ECONOMY 4.
Year-end examination (June 1891)

Lay out your time carefully, reserving 15 minutes for review and correction

A.
Give half of your time to A. omitting one question.

  1. The establishment of the Zollverein is spoken of [Rand, page 138] as “the first step towards what is called the Germanization of the people” and to have “prepared the way for a political nationality.” Show how it had this effect.
  2. Cairnes, in his discussion of the new gold, [Rand, page 197] shows that “a given addition to the metallic stock of Great Britain and the United States … will cause a greater expansion of the total circulation, and therefore will support a greater advance in general prices, that the same addition to the currency of … France … and that again, the effect in countries like France will be greater than in countries like India or China.” Why is this, and how much effect did this difference in sensitiveness produce in the years after 1850?
  3. Cairnes lays down [Rand, page 209] that “every country is interested in raising as rapidly as possible the prices of its productions,–in other words, in the most rapid possible depreciation in the local value of its gold.” What are the grounds for this proposition?
  4. The writer in Blackwood’s, [Rand, page 228] says that the most important point in the payment of the French indemnity is “How came it that £170,000,000 [4,250,000,000 francs] of bills could be got at all”? What is the explanation of this fact?
  5. What are the reasons for looking upon Italy as a possible serious competitor in ocean navigation, and what are her great drawbacks in such competition?

B.

  1. What are the marked differences between the great change in the production and value of the precious metals in the sixteenth century, and that in the nineteenth?
  2. Why was an additional supply of gold especially important to the world in the years 1850-60?
  3. How does the mere saving of time in transportation, or in the transmission of intelligence, produce an effect upon commerce?
  4. How far was the civil war the cause of the decline of American shipping after 1860?
  5. What reasons made the breaking out of a financial crisis in the United States in 1873 easier than usual?
  6. Why did the payment of the French indemnity disturb the financial quiet of other countries than France and Germany?
  7. What are the great cases of resumption of specie payment in the years 1875-85, and how were they brought about respectively?
  8. Why is the trade between countries so often “triangular,” and why is England so generally one of the parties concerned?
  9. How does the modern theory of the utility of colonies differ from that of a century or two ago?

Source: Harvard University Archives. Harvard University, Examination papers, 1873-1915. Box 3. Papers Set for Final examinations in Philosophy, Political Economy, History, Roman Law, Fine Arts, and Music in Harvard College (June, 1891) in bound volume Examination Papers, 1890-92.

_____________________________

1890-91
POLITICAL ECONOMY 6.

Enrollment.

[Political Economy] 6. Professor [Frank W.] Taussig. — History of Tariff Legislation in the United States. 2 hours. 2d half-year

Total 43: 1 Graduate, 28 Seniors, 12 Juniors, 2 Others.

Source: Harvard University. Annual Report of the President of Harvard College 1890-1891, p. 58.

 

 

1890-91
POLITICAL ECONOMY 6.
Year-end examination (June 1891)

[Arrange your answers strictly in the order of the questions. Answer all questions.]

  1. Explain wherein France and the United States were in similar positions, as regards customs policy, in 1814-15; and state briefly the legislation to which these situations led in the two countries.
  2. What was the argument, discussed in Hamilton’s Report on Manufactures, which rested on the supposed exceptions productiveness of agriculture? What was Hamilton’s answer? What is the sound view?
  3. How did Gallatin propose in 1831 to fix customs duties without regard to their protective effect? Walker in 1845?
  4. Was there any ground in 1832 for saying that the duties on imports were equivalent to duties on exports? Is there now?
  5. How did the general fall in prices after 1819 affect the growth of manufactures in the United States?
  6. “The climate, soil, and conditions generally in the Northwest, are very favorable to the cultivation of flax fibre as well as of the seed. After a short experience as to the primary manipulation and handling of the flax fibre, our farmers would produce flax which would compare favorably with the best varieties of the fibre. It seems strange that a practical people like ourselves should for years have been satisfied to cultivate seed for flax at a value of about $15 per acre, and at the same time allow 600 pounds of flax fibre per acre to rot on the ground, this fibre having a value, after being manipulated, of $186 per ton.”
    Can you explain the anomaly?
  7. Describe the process by which the duties on woollen cloths, as they stand in the act of 1890, were arrived at.
  8. What ground is there for saying that the protective movement in the United States is part of a general reaction towards protection which has appeared in most civilized countries in recent years?
  9. It has been said that the tariff act of 1789 began the protective policy of the United States; that the act of 1816 was the first giving serious protection; that the act of 1824 was the first strictly protective act. Which statement, if any, do you think true?
  10. Which of the important tariff acts between 1835 and 1859 were passed quite without regard to financial considerations?
  11. What does the continued importation of clothing wool indicate as to the effect of the duty on the domestic price? of pig iron? of silks?

Source: Harvard University Archives. Harvard University, Examination papers, 1873-1915. Box 3. Papers Set for Final examinations in Philosophy, Political Economy, History, Roman Law, Fine Arts, and Music in Harvard College (June, 1891) in bound volume Examination Papers, 1890-92.

_____________________________

1890-91
POLITICAL ECONOMY 7.

Enrollment.

[Political Economy] 7. Professor [Charles Franklin] Dunbar. — Public Finance and Taxation. — Cohn’s Finanzwissenschaft. 3 hours.

Total 7: 2 Graduates, 4 Seniors, 1 Junior.

Source: Harvard University. Annual Report of the President of Harvard College 1890-1891, p. 58.

 

1890-91
POLITICAL ECONOMY 7.
Year-end examination (June 1891)

It is recommended that at least a third of the time be given to B.

A.

  1. Accepting the usual reasoning that a tax under some circumstances, by diminishing the income from property, diminishes its selling value, and so ceases to be felt by subsequent purchasers, should you say,—
    1. That the French impôt foncier is a tax on present landholders?
    2. That the English income-tax under Schedule A. is a tax on present landholders?
      The reason for the difference, if any exists.
  2. What is your final conclusion as to the sale of bonds or annuities at a discount, — is it defensible or not, and on what grounds?
  3. Explain the English method of using terminable annuities for the reduction of the public debt, as in 1867 and 1883, and discuss its advantages and drawbacks.
  4. “The administrator of local finances is permitted to found a sinking-fund at the time of issuing bonds, a permission, it will be remembered, contrary to sound rules of national financiering.”
    Does the distinction here made between local and national finances give solid ground for difference of treatment? Are the propositions as to the propriety of establishing sinking-funds in the two cases respectively tenable?
  5. Say remarks that the French government, in providing for the indemnity, bought any kind of foreign bills of exchange, “prenant tous les changes qu’elle pouvait acquérir sur quelque pay que ce fût.” How did this purchase of a bill, say upon Russia, facilitate the payment of the indemnity any more than the purchase of a bill upon Marseilles would have done, seeing that in either case the government had to collect the proceeds in order to use them?

B.

  1. In 1872 Herr Bamberger, in his pamphlet die Fünf Milliarden, regretted that Germany had not been allowed more time to absorb the indemnity, so as to avoid the risk of over-stimulated enterprise, rise of prices, and speculation.
    Discuss the probably effects, in Germany or elsewhere, (1) of longer time allowed to France; (2) of more cautious introduction of the wealth into Germany, effected

    1. By longer deposit (say) in London,
    2. By payment in securities, to be sold by Germany by degrees.

Source: Harvard University Archives. Harvard University, Examination papers, 1873-1915. Box 3. Papers Set for Final examinations in Philosophy, Political Economy, History, Roman Law, Fine Arts, and Music in Harvard College (June, 1891) in bound volume Examination Papers, 1890-92.

_____________________________

1890-91
POLITICAL ECONOMY 8.

Enrollment.

[Political Economy] 8. Mr. [William Morse] Cole. — History of Financial Legislation in the United States. 2 hours. 1st half-year.

Total 46: 1 Graduate, 29 Seniors, 13 Juniors, 3 Others.

Source: Harvard University. Annual Report of the President of Harvard College 1890-1891, p. 58.

 

1890-91
POLITICAL ECONOMY 8.
Mid-year examination

I.

  1. “That the public credit was much better during the Civil War than during the War of 1812 is proved by the fact that during the former war the bulk of the loans were sold at par, whereas during the latter the larger part were sold below par.”
    Comment on this statement.
  2. Under what authority does the Secretary of the Treasury purchase bonds in the market? Why does he not redeem them at par?
  3. Explain: “Five-twenties”; “Seven-thirties”; and tell why they were made seven-thirties; “Deferred sixes,” “5% redemption fund.”
  4. When were the first legal tenders under the present constitution authorized?
  5. What have been the express legal exemptions of government obligations from taxation since the outbrake of the Civil War?
  6. In what different capacities was each of the following men connected with the finances of the nation: Hugh McCulloch, Levi Woodbury, William Pitt Fessenden, John Tyler?

II.
(Omit two.)

1, 2. [Counts as two questions.] Compare the causes of the suspensions of 1814, 1837, and 1861.

3, 4. [Counts as two.] Mention the different systems which have been in vogue since 1789 for caring for public funds, and tell why each change was made.

    1. It was said that the bill which finally became the act for resumption in 1875 really provided for nothing in particular, and therefore ought not to be put upon the statute book. Did the provisions of the bill warrant the remark? Did subsequent history justify the remark?
    2. In what way were the French Spoliation Claims connected with the Second-Bank Struggle?
    3. Hamilton wished to have a system of internal taxation in working order as a resource in case of emergency. Does history throw any light upon the wisdom or folly of such a policy?
    4. What were the causes of Gallatin’s retirement from the Treasury?
    5. What history would you cite as an argument upon a proposition to replace bonds exempt from all taxation by bonds taxed to a moderate extent, and to distribute the receipts from the tax among the States according to the federal ratio?
    6. In a speech on the refunding bill it was said that the government made no threat, but merely promised certain privileges to those who presented bonds to be refunded at a lower rate. “No one proposes…the alternative adopted by our own Government under Hamilton’s plan of reducing the interest.”
      Is this implication regarding Hamilton’s funding justified by the facts?

11, 12. [Counts as two.] Mention as many as possible of the kinds of obligations which have been contracted by the government; i.e. character of obligation (bond or what), length of time to run, and rate of interest. Give one example under each kind,—giving period of issue, but not necessarily the exact date.

Source: Harvard University Archives. In Harvard University, Mid-year examinations, 1852-1943. Box 2. From bound volume Examination Papers, 1890-91.

_____________________________

1890-91
POLITICAL ECONOMY 9.

Enrollment.

[Political Economy] 9. Professor [Frank W.] Taussig. — Railway Transportation. —Lectures and written work. 3 hours. 2d half-year

Total 20: 14 Seniors, 4 Juniors, 2 Others.

Source: Harvard University. Annual Report of the President of Harvard College 1890-1891, p. 58.

 

1890-91.
POLITICAL ECONOMY 9.
Year-end examination (June 1891)

[Answer all the questions, and arrange your answers strictly in the order of the questions.]

  1. Can it be fairly said that the early experience of the States of the Union supplies strong arguments against State ownership of railways? Can it be fairly said of the experience of France since 1878?
  2. State the salient events in the history of the federal land grants to railways.
  3. How do you explain the rapidity with which the Union Pacific and Central Pacific railroads were completed?
  4. Wherein did the so-called Granger legislation on railway rates resemble the “natural” system advocated in Germany after 1871? Wherein did it differ from it?
  5. Sketch the history and machinery of the Southern Railway and Steamship Association.
  6. Explain the difference in the working of the Trunk Line Association before and after the passage of the Interstate Commerce Act.
  7. What ground is there for saying that the prohibition of pooling in the Interstate Commerce Act is inconsistent with its prohibition of discrimination between individuals?
  8. Suppose a railway to be built and used exclusively for coal traffic; would its rates be arranged on a plan essentially different from that in use with ordinary railways, having a varied traffic?
  9. It has been said that the principle of tolls, or rates based on cost of service, makes it necessary that each item of business should pay its share of the fixed charges. Why, or why not?
  10. Sketch the history of government management of railways in Italy.
  11. “Property has reached an ideal perfection. It is felt and treated as the national lifeblood. The rights of property nothing but felony and treason can override. The house is a castle which the King cannot enter. The Bank is a strong box to which the King has no key. Whatever surly sweetness possession can give is tasted in England to the dregs. Vested rights are awful things, and absolute possession gives the smallest freeholder identity of interest with the duke.”—Emerson, English Traits.
    Wherein does the trait here described make the railroad situation in England different from that in the United States?

Source: Harvard University Archives. Harvard University, Examination papers, 1873-1915. Box 3. Papers Set for Final examinations in Philosophy, Political Economy, History, Roman Law, Fine Arts, and Music in Harvard College (June, 1891) in bound volume Examination Papers, 1890-92.

Categories
Economists Harvard Policy

Harvard. Paul Volcker’s A.M. Transcript for Graduate School of Public Administration, 1949-1951

 

Paul Volcker’s entry into Economics in the Rear-view Mirror was celebrated as the 45th member of the tongue-in-cheek page “Economists Wearing Bowties”.  

But seriously now, Paul Volcker’s biographer, William L. Silver (Volcker The Triumph of Persistence, New York: Bloomsbury Press, 2012), included an image of a hand-written copy of Paul Volcker’s Harvard University A.M. course transcript that I  have transcribed into a digital artifact for this post. Two Volcker quotes from the book have been added to show the power of academic scribblers from a few years back (and not necessarily in a good way) to provoke frenzy in the minds of those in authority. 

Incidentally, for a couple of the courses Economics in the Rear-view Mirror already provides copies of the course outlines, reading lists, and final exams (see below for links).

________________________

Too late for a tuition refund
(from Princeton)

“I don’t think I heard the name of John Maynard Keynes until I got to Harvard. At Princeton they taught the famous quantity theory of money as though they heard it directly from David Hume in 1750….Friedrich Lutz was about forty at the time, but from the perspective of an eighteen-year-old, he might as well have been two hundred and forty. He taught us that too much money created inflation.”

Source: William L. Silber, Volcker The Triumph of Persistence, New York: Bloomsbury Press, 2012, pp. 33-34.

________________________

But what if your detector is defective?

“Every man should have a built-in automatic crap detector operating inside him. It also should have a manual drill and a crank handle in case the machine breaks down.”

Ernest Hemingway 1954

*  *  *  *  *  *  *  *  *  *  *

Volcker recalling Roosa’s arranging a presidential appointment for him as deputy undersecretary of the treasury for monetary affairs so that he could serve as Treasury’s point man in confronting the [Kennedy Administration’s] CEA:

“It all sounded too easy. Push this button twice and out pops full employment. Equations do not work as well on people as they do on rocket. I remember sitting in class at Harvard listening to [the fiscal policy expert] Arthur Smithies say, ‘A little inflation is good for the economy.’ And all I can remember after that was a word flashing in my brain like a yellow caution sign: ‘Bullshit.’ I’m not sure exactly where that came from…but it’s a thought that never left me.”

Source: “William L. Silber, Volcker The Triumph of Persistence, New York: Bloomsbury Press, 2012, pp. 33-34.

________________________

Handwritten copy of Volcker’s
Harvard transcript:

Harvard University. Graduate School of Public Administration
Littauer Center, Cambridge, Mass.

July 26, 1951.

Transcript of Harvard Record of Paul Adolph Volcker

Course

 Grade
½ Course

Full Course
1949-50

Ec. 201

 Economic Theory A
Ec. 241 Principles of Money and Banking

A-

Ec. 243a

 International Trade A

Gov. 250a

Govt. Admin. & Public Policy

A

Ec. 243b

 International Trade A

Gov. 250b

 Govt. Admin. & Public Policy A-
1950-51

Gov. 106b

 History of Political Thought A
Ec 202 Advanced Economic Theory

Excused

Ec. 251

 Public Finance A
Ec. 350 Reading & Research/half
Prof. Hansen

Satisfactory

Gov. 300

 Reading & Research/half
Prof. Fainsod		 Satisfactory

 
Gov. 300 Reading & Research/half
Prof. Neumanns

Satisfactory

Degree awarded: A.M., Harvard Univ., June 1951

The established grades are A, B, C, D, and E.

A grade of A, B, Credit, Satisfactory or Excused indicates that the course was passed with distinction. Only courses passed with distinction may be credited toward a higher degree.

Robert G. McCloskey
Secretary

Source: Image from William L. Silber, Volcker — The Triumph of Persistence, New York: Bloomsbury Press, 2012, p. 308.

________________________

Volcker’s Harvard Course Instructors

1949-50

Ec 201. Economic Theory. Professor Chamberlin.

Ec 241. Principles of Money and Banking. Professor J. H. Williams (Fall); Professor Hansen (Spring).

Ec 243a. International Trade. Professor Haberler.

Ec 243b. International Economic Policy. Professors Haberler and Smithies.

Gov 250a. Government Administration and Policy. Professor Fainsod.

Gov 250b. Government Administration and Policy.  Professor Gaus.

1950-51

Ec 251. Public Finance. Professor Burbank.

Gov 106b. History of Political Thought II. Probably Prof. Friedrichs.

Source: Harvard University. Report of the President of Harvard College, 1949-1950. [Note: course enrollment information was not provided in the President’s Report for 1950-51.]

 

Image Source: 2020 Princeton Reunions Virtual Talk: Honoring the Remarkable Legacy of Paul Volcker ’49.

Categories
Exam Questions Harvard Suggested Reading Syllabus

Harvard. International Trade Theory and Policy. Haberler, 1952-1953

 

Gottfried Haberler was a teaching triple threat in the Harvard economics department in his heyday: he covered courses in theory, business cycles, and international trade. Here’s a list of posts at Economics in the Rear-view Mirror using the “haberler” tag.

This post provides the course outlines and final exams for Haberler’s two term graduate sequence in international trade (& finance) and policy from 1952-53.

_____________________

Course Announcement

Economics 243a. International Trade

Half-course (fall term). Mon., Wed., and (at the pleasure of the instructor) Fri., at 12. Professor Haberler.

Economics 243b. International Economic Policy

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

 Properly qualified undergraduates will be admitted to this course.

Source: Harvard University Archives. Courses of Instruction, Box 6,  Announcement of the Courses of Instruction offered by the Faculty of Arts and Sciences for the Academic Year 1952-53, p. 104.

_____________________

Course Enrollment

 Note: the 1952-1953 Report of the President of Harvard College does not provide course enrollment statistics.

_____________________

Syllabus, Fall 1952-53

Economics 243a
Professor Haberler, Fall Term, 1952-53
International Trade — Theory

The first semester of the course will be devoted to the Theory of International Trade. The first topic will be the balance of payments mechanism, the determinants of foreign exchange rates. Later the so-called “pure theory” of international trade will be discussed, including the welfare aspects (theory of international economic policy.)

The subject of the second term will be a brief historical sketch of the evolution of commercial policy from the late eighteenth century to the present time and selected topics in the field of international economic policy with greater emphasis than in the first term on historical, institutional, political, and administrative aspects of the various problems.

Outline for First Half-Year

  1. International Trade and National Income
    Various relations between the two
    The importance of trade for various countries and its measures
  2. International Trade in the National Accounts
    International transactions of the national economic budget
    The balance of payments, various forms of presentation and interpretation
    Balance of international indebtedness
  3. Foreign Exchanges and the Balance of Payments Mechanism
    The foreign exchange market
    Demand and supply for exports and imports and for foreign means of payments
    Changes in the exchange rate, the balance of payments and the terms of trade
    Price effects and income effects
    The foreign trade multiplier
    The transfer problem
  4. Theory of International Division of Labor
    The theory of comparative cost
    Modern developments of the theory of comparative cost
    Marshallian theory of reciprocal demand and supply curves
    Ohlin’s general equilibrium theory
  5. Welfare Implications of International Trade
    Factor prices and international trade
    Income distribution and international trade
    Theory of protection and tariffs
    Monopoly and monopolistic competition in international trade

Reading Assignments and Suggestions

  1. General

Every student should have worked through one of the existing general texts or monographs:

Brown, A. C., Industrialization and Trade, 1943.
Ellsworth, International Economics, 1938.
Ellsworth, The International Economy, 1950.
(The first book of Ellsworth is shorter and theoretical; the second much longer and historical.)
Enke and Salera, International Economics.
Haberler, Theory of International Trade.
Harrod, International Economics (3rd edition, 1939).
Meade and Hitch, Introduction to Economic Analysis and Policy, (Part V).
Marsh, World Trade and Investment.
Taussig, International Trade.
Whale, International Trade.

A short discussion of recent developments will be found in Metzler, “The Theory of International Trade,” Chapter 6 in Survey of Contemporary Economics.

There are two very useful Reading Volumes:

Readings in the Theory of International Trade (edited by H. S. Ellis and Lloyd Metzler), 1949, and
Selected Readings in International Trade and Tariff Problems (ed. Taussig), 1921.

  1. Assignments and Suggestions to Subjects Listed Above (in addition to relevant chapters in general texts).
    1. There is hardly any specific reading on this subject. But every student should have some idea of basic facts and orders of magnitude.
      The Post-War Foreign Economic Policy of the United States. 6th Report of the House Special Committee on Post-War Economic Policy and Planning. House Report No. 541. Washington, 1945. (This report was written by Lloyd Metzler.)
      The United States in the World Economy, U. S. Department of Commerce, 1943.
      Buchanan, and Lutz, Rebuilding the World Economy, 1947.
      A. J. Brown, Applied Economics, 1948; Chapter VI:
      Readings, Chapters 21 and 22, by D. H. Robertson and J. Viner.
    2. Every student should study the U.S. balance of payments and that of one or two other countries in order to get a feeling of the magnitudes involved and to familiarize himself with the methods of presentation which vary not only from country to country but often also from one year to the other for the same country.
      Balance of Payments Yearbook (I.M.F.)
      The United States in the World Economy, 1943.
      The Balance of International Payments of the U.S., 1946-48 (1950).
      Hicks, The Social Framework of the American Economy, Chapter XII, “Foreign Payments and the National Income” (a theoretical discussion).
      Marsh, World Trade and Investment, Chapters 9, 10, 11, 12.
    3. In addition to relevant chapters in general texts, see the following:
      Haberler, “The Market for Foreign Exchange and the Stability of the Balance of Payments”, Kyklos, Vol. III, 1949.
      Harris (ed.), Foreign Economic Policy for the U.S., Part V, Chs. 20, 21 22.
      Harris (ed.), The New Economics, Part V, especially essays by Bloomfield and Nurkse.
      Iversen, International Capital Movements, 1935.
      Keynes and Ohlin on German Reparations in Economic Journal, 1929; and Readings, Chapters 6 and 7.
      Machlup, International Trade and the National Income Multiplier, 1943.
      Machlup, “The Theory of Foreign Exchanges,” Economica, 1939 (two articles), Readings, Chapter 5.
      Meade, J. E., The Balance of Payments, 1951.
      Metzler, op. cit.
      Nurkse, R., International Currency Experience (League of Nations, 1944).
      Pigou, “The Foreign Exchanges,” Quarterly Journal of Economics, November, 1922, reprinted in Essays in Applied Economics (1927).
      Robinson, J., “Beggar-My-Neighbor Remedies for Unemployment”, Readings, Chapter 17.
      Robinson, J., “Foreign Exchanges,” Essays on the Theory of Employment(1st ed., 1938; 2nd ed., 1947), Part III; reprinted in Readings, Ch. 4.
      Williams, Post-War Monetary Plans and Other Essays (3rd, 1947).
    4. and 5. In addition to general texts, see:
      Edgeworth, Papers Relating to Political economy, Vol. II, p. 3-60.
      Ellsworth, “A Comparison of International Trade Theories,”American Economic Review, June, 1940.
      Haberler, “Some Problems in the Pure Theory of International Trade”, Economic Journal, June, 1950.
      Leontief, “The Use of Indifference Curves in the Analysis of Foreign Trade,” Quarterly Journal of Economics, May, 1933; Readings, Ch. 10.
      Mill, Principles (relevant chapters reprinted in Selected Readings).
      Ohlin,  cit. Parts I, II, and possibly III.
      Readings, Chs. 12, 13, 15, by J. H. Williams, E. Heckscher, and W. Stolper and P. Samuelson.
      Ricardo,  Principles, (relevant chapters reprinted in Selected Readings).
      Robinson, J., “The Pure Theory of International Trade”, Review of Economic Studies, Vol. XIV, 1946-47.
      Taussig, International Trade.
      Viner, Studies in the Theory of International Trade (last two chapters).

Source:  Harvard University Archives. Syllabi, course outlines and reading lists in Economics, 1895-2003, Box 5, Folder “Economics, 1952-1953 (2 of 2)”.

_____________________

1952-1953
HARVARD UNIVERSITY
ECONOMICS 243a
[Final exam. January 1953]

Answer 5 questions. Write legibly.

  1. Suppose the international transactions of a country are as follows (in hundred million dollars):
Commodity exports 18
Commodity imports 20
Net tourist receipts 1
Other services exported 1
Gold exports 1
Debt to IMF repaid 1
New long-term securities sold abroad 1
Long-term securities redeemed ½
Short-term balances accumulated abroad 1
Marshall aid received 1

Write down the balance of payments, inserting if necessary an “errors and omissions” item.

Discuss whether the balance of payments shows a deficit or surplus, giving reasons for your answer. If you like, state alternative criteria.

  1. How does depreciation influence the balance of payments and the terms of trade? Discuss question in terms of relevant elasticities.
  2. Balance of payments adjustments in the pre-World War I era were often so rapid that they surprised the classical theorists. Show how “income effects” may help to explain these phenomena.
  3. List some arguments for protection and examine one of these in some detail. (Append a graphical analysis if possible).
  4. Compare the classical theory of comparative cost and Ohlin’s general equilibrium theory that is based on the relative scarcity of factors of production.
  5. Discuss J. H. Williams’ strictures against the classical theory and compare them with those of Ohlin.
  6. Is it possible, and if so under what conditions, that international trade changes the income distribution against a major factor of production, say, labor? Discuss policy implications.
  7. Show graphically how reciprocal demand curves can be used to analyze changes in the terms of trade that result from the imposition of tariffs on imports or exports.

Source: Harvard University Archives. Harvard University, Final examinations 1853-2001. (HUC 7000.28, vol. 96 [Social Sciences]). Papers Printed for Final Examinations [in] History, History of Religions, Government, Economics,…” January 1953.

_____________________

Syllabus, Spring Term, 1952-53

Harvard University
Department of Economics
Economics 243b
International Economic Policy

  1. Historical Introduction
    Commercial Policy of the major countries from the beginning of the 19th century until 1914.

Great Britain
France
Germany
United States
Other Countries

The Inter-war period and postwar developments.

Modern methods of trade control
Quantitative controls

Quotas
Exchange control

Other methods and controls.

  1. Free Trade and Protection: Theoretical Economics and Practical Social Policies

The case for free trade and the free trade movement

Arguments for protection

“Non-economic” arguments
Unemployment
Balance of Payments

“Dollar shortage”

Infant industry argument and development of underdeveloped countries
Terms of Trade
International trade under planning

  1. Current Issues in Trade Policy
    Liberalization of trade

Universal vs. regional approach
Most-favored-nation principle and discrimination
Currency convertibility
Customs Union

READING SUGGESTIONS

  1. General

Most treatises on International Trade discuss policy questions.

Ellsworth: The International Economy
D. March: World Trade and Investment
Haberler: Theory of International Trade
J. Viner: International Economics
J. Viner: International Trade and Economic Development
Readings in the Theory of International Trade (Blakiston)
S. E. Harris (editor): Foreign Economic Policy of the U.S. (Harvard, 1946)
N. Buchanan and F. Lutz: Rebuilding the World Economy
H. S. Ellis: The Economics of Freedom. The Progress and Future of Aid to Europe (Harper 1950)
Selected Readings in International Trade and Tariff Problems, (ed. Taussig)
J. H. Williams: Economic Stability in a Changing World. 1953.
J. H. Williams: Stamp Lecture (Harvard University Press)

  1. Special Subjects
    1. History of Commercial Policy
      Condliffe: The Commerce of Nations
      Ellsworth: The International Economy [stresses the historical approach]
      F. W. Taussig: U.S. Tariff History
      F. W. Taussig: Some Aspects of the Tariff Question
      P. Ashley: Modern Tariff History. 1904
      R. F. Mikesell: United States Economic Policy and International Relations (Economic Handbook Series, 1952)
      Dictionary of Tariff Information (U. S. Tariff Commission, 1924)
      H. Heuser: Control of International Trade. 1939
      Margaret Gordon: Barriers to World Trade. 1941
    2. Free Trade and Protection
      [See General Treatises mentioned above]
      R. Triffin: “National Central Banking and the International Economy,” Review of Economic Studies, 1946-47. Also, in same issue, three comments by Balogh, Henderson, and Harrod
      J. R. Hicks: Free Trade and Modern Economics (Manchester Statistical Society, 1951)
      Selected Readings in International Trade and Tariff Problems (ed. Taussig, 1921) (contains useful excerpts from A. Smith, J. S. Mill, F. List, etc.)
      A. Henderson, “The Restriction of Foreign Trade,” in The Manchester School January 1949
    3. Reading will be announced later.

Source:  Harvard University Archives. Syllabi, course outlines and reading lists in Economics, 1895-2003, Box 5, Folder “Economics, 1952-1953 (2 of 2)”.

_____________________

1952-1953
HARVARD UNIVERSITY
ECONOMICS 243b
[Final Exam. May 1953]

Answer five questions. Write legibly!

  1. Discuss the customs union issue and evaluate the chances of this approach to furthering the international division of labor.
  2. List at least four concepts of “terms of trade” and discuss whether or not these concepts are “operational” (statistically observable). Also discuss the concept of “terms of trade” implied in the Marshallian reciprocal demand curve analysis.
  3. Cite some methods of discrimination and examine the argument that discriminatory controls are less destructive of trade and therefore more desirable than non-discriminatory controls.
  4. Is the phrase “dollar shortage” absurd? Discuss possible causes and cures of “dollar shortage” consistent with your evaluation of why a “dollar shortage “may exist.
  5. How do payments unions or clearing unions operate? What are the main problems and difficulties? State arguments for and against such arrangements.
  6. What is meant by “convertibility” and why is it often held to be of paramount importance?
  7. Tariffs, Quotas, and Exchange Control are alternative methods of controlling imports. Compare their modes of operation and discuss their comparative advantages and disadvantages.

Source: Harvard University Archives. Harvard University, Final examinations 1853-2001. (HUC 7000.28, vol. 99 [Social Sciences]). Papers Printed for Final Examinations [in] History, History of Religions, Government, Economics,…” June 1953.

Image: Radcliffe Archives. Portrait of Gottfried Haberler. (1965).

Categories
Brown Columbia Curriculum Harvard Pedagogy Teaching Undergraduate

Harvard. Argument for more political economy in a liberal education. President Eliot, 1884

Harvard course offerings in political economy were increased significantly in the 1883-84 academic year. This expansion was consistent with President Charles W. Eliot’s vision of a Harvard education fit for the twentieth century as seen in the following paragraphs from his 1884 commencement speech at Johns Hopkins University.

The state of instruction in political economy at Harvard ca. 1870 was mentioned in his book Harvard Memories, pp. 70-71.

_________________________

Excerpt from “What is a Liberal Education?”

Commencement speech at Johns Hopkins University
22. February 1884 by Charles W. Eliot

[…] Closely allied to the study of history is the study of the new science called political economy, or public economics. I say the new science, because Smith’s “Wealth of Nations” was not published until 1776; Malthus’s “Essay on the Principle of Population” appeared only in 1798; and Ricardo’s “Political Economy and Taxation,” in 1817. The subject is related to history, inasmuch as it gleans its most important facts by the study of the institutions and industrial and social conditions of the past; it is the science of wealth in so far as it deals with the methods by which private or national wealth is accumulated, protected, enjoyed, and distributed; and it is connected with ethics in that it deals with social theories and the moral effects of economic conditions. In some of its aspects it were better called the science of the health of nations; for its results show how nations might happily grow and live in conformity with physical and moral laws. It is by far the most complex and difficult of the sciences of which modern education has to take account, and therefore should not be introduced too early into the course of study for the degree of Bachelor of Arts; but when it is introduced, enough of it should be offered to the student to enable him to get more than a smattering.

When we consider how formidable are the industrial, social, and political problems with which the next generations must grapple, — when we observe how inequalities of condition increase, notwithstanding the general acceptance of theories of equality; how population irresistibly tends to huge agglomerations, in spite of demonstrations that such agglomerations are physically and morally unhealthy; how the universal thirst for the enjoyments of life grows hotter and hotter, and is not assuaged; how the relations of government to society become constantly more and more complicated, while the governing capacity of men does not seem to increase proportionally; and how free institutions commit to masses of men the determination of public policy in regard to economic problems of immense difficulty, such as the problems concerning tariffs, banking, currency, the domestic carrying trade, foreign commerce, and the incidence of taxes, — we can hardly fail to appreciate the importance of offering to large numbers of American students ample facilities for learning all that is known of economic science.

How does the ordinary provision made in our colleges for the study of political economy meet this need of students and of the community? That I may not understate this provision, I will describe the provisions made at Columbia College, an institution which is said to be the richest of our colleges, and at Brown University, one of the most substantial of the New England colleges. At Columbia, Juniors must attend two exercises a week in political economy for half the year, and Seniors may elect that subject for two hours a week throughout the year. At Brown, Juniors may elect political economy two hours a week for half the year, and Seniors have a like privilege. The provision of instruction in Greek at Brown is five and a half times as much as the provision in political economy, and seven elevenths of the Greek is required of all students, besides the Greek which was required at school; but none of the political economy is required. Columbia College makes a further provision of instruction in history, law, and political science for students who are able to devote either one or two years to these subjects after taking the degree of Bachelor of Arts, or who are willing to procure one year’s instruction in these subjects by accepting the degree of Bachelor of Philosophy instead of the degree of Bachelor of Arts — a very high price to pay for this one year’s privilege. If this is the state of things in two leading Eastern colleges with regard to instruction in political economy, what should we find to be the average provision in American colleges? We should find it poor in quality and insignificant in amount. In view of this comparative neglect of a subject all-important to our own generation and to those which are to follow, one is tempted to join in the impatient cry, Are our young men being educated for the work of the twentieth century or of the seventeenth? There can be no pretense that political economy is an easy subject, or that it affords no mental discipline. Indeed, it requires such exactness of statement, such accurate weighing of premises, and such closeness of reasoning, that many young men of twenty, who have been disciplined by the study of Greek, Latin, and mathematics for six or eight years, find that it tasks their utmost powers. Neither can it be justly called a material or utilitarian subject; for it is full of grave moral problems, and deals with many questions of public honor and duty.

Source: Charles W. Eliot, “What is a Liberal Education”, Commencement address read 22 February 1884 at Johns Hopkins University, reprinted in his Educational Reform, Essays and Addresses. New York: Century (1901), pp. 106-109.

Image Source: Harvard University Archives. Hollis Image Collection. President Charles W. Eliot.

 

 

Categories
Economists Harvard Teaching Undergraduate

Harvard. Political Economy à la Francis Bowen, 1870

From time to time one digs up a nugget in the secondary literature that deserves its own post. Harvard President Charles W. Eliot (from 1869 to 1909), an advocate of putting more political economy into the curriculum, trash talks the quality of economics instruction when he took office.

Here two textbooks that had been inflicted upon Harvard College students in the pre-Dunbar days.

Francis Bowen (1856). The Principles of Political Economy Applied to the Condition, the Resources, and the Institutions of the American People. Boston: Little, Brown, and Company, 1856.

Francis Bowen (1870). American Political Economy, including Strictures on the Management of the Currency and the Finances since 1861. New York: Charles Scribner’s Sons.

________________________

Harvard’s retired president,
Charles W. Eliot, looking back at economics instruction à la Bowen

In respect to the teaching of political economy, or economics, I can perhaps give you some notion of the great change which has taken place since 1869 by describing the work done by Professor Francis Bowen, the only Harvard professor who then dealt at all with the subject of political economy. He gave only about a quarter of his time to that subject, because he had so many other subjects to deal with. His idea of teaching political economy was to write an elementary book on the subject, and to require the senior class — it was a required subject of the senior year — to read that book. He gave no lectures; he sometimes commented upon those pages of the book which had been assigned as the lesson of the day, to be repeated in the recitation room by those students who had studied the lesson. It is a long way from that condition of things to the present organization of the Department of Economics.

Source:  Charles William Eliot (1923), Harvard Memories. Cambridge, Mass.: Harvard University Press, pp. 70-71.

Image Source: Harvard University. Hollis Images. Portrait (1891) of Francis Bowen by Edwin Tryon Billings.