Categories
Economics Programs Harvard Undergraduate

Harvard. Undergraduate economics concentrators dropped over 50% in 1950s.

 

This post provides some backstory to the next post that features the reading lists for Harvard’s junior year tutorial in macroeconomics (Arthur Smithies) and microeconomics (Edward Chamberlin) used in 1960-61. The following Harvard Crimson article describes the undergraduate program in crisis (as seen in the massive drop in economics concentrators). The fall in numbers was attributed to the observation that economics “instruction gyrates widely from verbal triviality to mathematical incomprehensibility”.  Now one might say that much economics instruction gyrates from verbal incomprehensibility to mathematical triviality.

Alfred Marshall tried to design his own Cambridge Curriculum to address two classes of students, those needing general economics training for leadership careers in business and government and those needing advanced training for research careers in economics. Integrated training of the two classes within a single program at Harvard appears to have reached its limits by the second half of the twentieth century. 

Marshall, Alfred. The New Cambridge Curriculum in EconomicsLondon: Macmillan, 1903.

________________________

Economics: Undergraduate Program Undergoes Extensive Re-Evaluation
By Michael Churchill

The Harvard Crimson, November 14, 1959

C. P. Snow, British scientist and author, recently called attention to what he termed the problem of two cultures in our society–the gap in understanding between the traditional humanities and social sciences on the one hand and modern science and technology on the other. Both exist side by side, yet remain intellectually divorced in our modern society. This dichotomy serves well in considering the difficulties surrounding the discipline of economics, for its midway position in such a scheme is indicative of its problems.

The subject matter of economics is the productive system, with all its relations to the world of technology. The concern of economics, however, is this system’s role in society and its effect on men, their livelihood, and their institutions. Not an integrator of the two cultures, nevertheless it must span the separation.

The Economics Department is currently undergoing a crisis. It has failed up to now to accommodate both elements in a coherent program. The result is strikingly demonstrated by the flight of undergraduate concentrators from the field. In less than a decade the number has declined by over half; from 709 in 1949 to 340 in 1958. Although the decline may partially reflect a nationwide tendency, it also is the result of the confusion and frustration attending the undergraduate program here, as the instruction gyrates widely from verbal triviality to mathematical incomprehensibility.

Though economics stands mid-way between two cultures, it is its similarity to the natural sciences that causes the greatest problems. Professional economics shares with the sciences an analytic technique “remote from the common experience of the layman and a language that is principally mathematical,” to use the words the Bruner Committee applied to the natural sciences. And to judge from the current trend this will become increasingly so.

Another similarity with science is that the study of economics is often cumulative, thereby necessitating an extensive introduction to provide the requisite basic knowledge. These are the same problems with which the Bruner Report was concerned in the teaching of natural sciences in a liberal arts program. That report dealt primarily with the problem of the non-concentrator in science–the General Education courses in natural sciences. The Economics Department, however, because of the interest of its concentrators, encounters the same problems throughout its program.

Some of the concentrators are presumably economists, and the Department little wishes to discourage their interests. The vast majority, however, will be lawyers, doctors, and even, despite the Department’s hostility, businessmen.

A final similarity with the sciences lies in the difficulty both areas have in getting the proper senior faculty to teach undergraduate courses. Because of the vast gap between the level of professional work and the elementary nature of undergraduate work–a gap so great that the difference is not only of degree of sophistication but of content–many professors are either reluctant to teach undergraduates or incapable of making the transition.

The combination of the inherent difficulties in teaching economics in a liberal arts college plus the almost total neglect of the undergraduate program in past years has resulted in the precipitous decline in concentrators. The hope of halting that decline lies at the bottom of the Department’s plans to re-design the undergraduate program, which are now under way.

Arthur Smithies, Chairman of the Department, met frequently this summer and again this fall with a Department Committee on Undergraduate Education appointed last spring. Headed by Professor Dunlop, members of the group are Professors Chamberlin, Duesenberry, and Meyer, Assistant Professors Gill and Lefeber, and instructors Baer and Berman.

The results of this increased attention are already apparent in changes made this year in Economics 1 and Junior tutorial, Ec. 98. Historical and topical subjects have gained emphasis at the expense of some of the more theoretical and analytical material, which is now consigned to Sophomore tutorial. In former years economic theory was presented in a historical vaccum without any consideration of the evolution of the economic system from a local medieval subsistence economy to the modern international productive system. The first month of Economics 1 is now devoted to filling this gap. Other changes include an increased emphasis upon the problem of underdeveloped countries and the substitution of a three-week study of the economy of the Soviet Union for the former week’s survey of comparative economic systems.

Along with these changes in content have come those of organization. Gone is the “parade of stars” which formerly masqueraded as lectures. Instead there are now blocs of integrated lectures covering single aspects of the course, for example the series of lectures the first month that Professor Gill gave on economic history. Another long-standing distinguishing trait of the course, its extensive use of teaching fellows, is also on the way out.

The changes are clearly tending to make the course less an introduction into the Department and more a General Education course in the social sciences. The stress, in the attempt to interest the non-concentrator through presentation of historical and topical issues, is now upon political economy rather than upon economics. In a liberal arts college such a solution to the problems affecting the discipline seems to be the most logical and rewarding for an introductory course.

Faced, however, with the task of teaching its concentrators some of the methods and techniques of the economist, the department has moved towards increasing utilization of Sophomore and Junior tutorial for this purpose. The analytic material ejected from Ec. 1 has found refuge in Sophomore tutorial, while Ec. 98 (Junior tutorial) although heavily biased towards the empirical is the only course in the Department offering an overall view of the field.

But there is this year, in addition, an increased amount of attention towards policy questions and topical economic issues in both courses, a reflection of the prevalent belief that meaningful economics on the undergraduate level should relate, as Smithies said, “to the great public issues of the day.” In practice these two elements–the analytical tools and the social framework in which they must fit–still remain divorced in these courses, but at least the attempt is being made to integrate them.

The most perplexing problems facing the Department occur in the area of the middle group courses. To some extent they are aggravated by the Department’s quantative approach to the number of concentrators, with its concern to retain the marginally interested student within the Department. And again the nature of the field, with its disparity between advanced professional techniques and an undergraduate approach, intensifies the problem that confronts many other departments in the College–that of withstanding the polar attractions of pre-professional orientation or of superficiality. Concerning the middle course group area, Dunlop’s committee has only just begun its discussions, but the major alternatives are well known.

There is general agreement, according to Dunlop, that the undergraduate program as part of a liberal arts program should not be a pre-professional training. Disagreement, however, becomes manifest quickly after that statement. Many members of the department, for instance, feel that the best concentrators, the potential future economists, should be allowed to take courses on the graduate level, and indeed should be encouraged to do so. In effect these students would be obtaining a pre-professional training, but the supporters of this proposal feel that this is the only way whereby the interest of the economics-oriented student can be prevented from obstruction by the triviality of normal undergraduate economics courses. At present many undergraduates already take graduate level courses, but the new plan would make a sharper distinction between those who do and do not.

Another group in Department, however, voices the opinion that the College student should not clutter his schedule with pre-professional courses, but rather use his time to study such fields as music, literature, and mathematics. If a student does do graduate work later in economics he will have no trouble picking up whatever advanced analytic tools he needs at that time, while if he does not intend to do so there is no sense in wasting his time with a lot of specialized technique, this bloc maintains.

One proposal, approved by nearly all and sorely needed, is to introduce a greater flexibility into the program through increased use of half-year courses. Presently over half of the seventeen courses offered run from September to June. Many of these, it is admitted, could be pared down to a half-year.

This leads to the proposal for a new type course to replace the far-flung surveys. They would probe smaller areas, but penetrate deeper. Based on the combined desire to attract more students, and the premise that the goal is a more intelligent understanding of the public issues of the past and present, the courses would be designed around the topical approach. Examples would be courses on the corporation, on the economic impact of government activity, the present course on the Soviet Union, a half-year course on underdeveloped countries. In discussing this approach, Dunlop stressed that these would not be “watered down versions of the analytic approach but a new crosscut.” It should be noted that, while not analytical, these courses would still include some quantitative analysis or even simple economic models, but these methods would not become ends or major concerns of the courses.

Another proposal is to set up a core program in the Department. There is, in fact, almost one already. Ec. 141–Money and Banking, Ec. 161–Industrial Organization, and Ec. 181–Industrial Relations, cover the major areas of the field and at least two of them are necessary to handle Generals well. A real core program where all concentrators would progress from one level of the next has many advantages; it provides a common background which the lecturer can assume, gives a common training, and insures that a student will not neglect a vital aspect of the field. But it also has disadvantages, the primary one being the difficulty of handling non-concentrators who have not had this core. Separate sections in a course might be a simple answer here. A more difficult problem is that of time. Ec. 1, 98, and 99 already constitute three-fifths of the required courses. A central core program of another three semesters would aggravate the present lack of flexibility.

For the Economics Department this is a time of discussion, but it must soon reach the hour of decision. Certainly the present situation is not tolerable. By its over-concern with theoretical models and tools, the Department has separated itself from the true materials of a liberal arts education in economics. It should not, however, allow itself to reach the other extreme, in its quest for concentrators, of reducing the content of the courses to a point where an economics student is no more qualified to discuss and solve an issue of political economy than an intelligent government concentrator.

There is little question of the importance of economics today, with its strategic position between the technological productive system and the literary tradition of the social sciences, and with its unique combination of the empirical and theoretical. It remains only to be taught well.

 

 

Categories
Chicago Exam Questions Socialism Suggested Reading Syllabus Undergraduate

Chicago. Readings and exam for “Wage-labor and capital”, 1970

The following set of course materials from the University of Chicago was included in a folder for “Comparative Economic Systems” in Martin Bronfenbrenner’s papers at Duke University. According to his c.v. he would have still been a professor at Carnegie Tech at that time and there is no mention of a visiting professorship at Chicago. As it turns out, I was correct in presuming that this was not a course taught by Bronfenbrenner. The Head of Research and Instruction of the Special Collections Research Center at the University of Chicago Library, Catherine Uecker, consulted the course timetable for the spring quarter 1970 and found that the instructor was Professor Gerhard Emil Otto Meyer.

_______________________

Social Sciences 273
Spring 1970

“Wage-Labor and Capital” in
Marxian and Modern Theory

GRADE REQUIREMENTS:

a) term paper
b) final examination

TENTATIVE READING LIST (subject to some changes)

Note: All readings except those labelled as “optional” (Opt.) are required. Each student is expected to read, in addition to all required readings, some agreed-upon optional readings which may, but need not, be taken from the list below. The following readings are more or less systematically listed, not in the order they will be assigned.

  1. Karl Marx

Capital, vol. I, chs. 4-9; 11-12; 15 (sec. 1-7); 16-19; 25 (sec. 1-4); 32 (chs. 10 and 24 optional).

The Communist Manifesto
Wage-Labor and Capital
Value, Price and Profit
Critique of the Gotha Programme
[These four readings are available in many editions; conveniently combined in K. Marx and F. Engels, Selected Works (paperback, International Publishers)]

The Economic and Philosophic Manuscripts of 1844, trans. By M. Milligan (International Publishers), pp. 65-91, 106-131 (pp. 132-164 optional)

Marx’s “Enquête Ouvrière” (mimeographed)

  1. Interpretive Materials on Marx’ Theory (in general, and on Labor-Capital Relations in particular)

Sweezy, Paul M., The Theory of Capitalist Development, Introduction and chs. 1-5 (optional, recommended for those who need a general survey of Marxian “economics”)—or

Ernest Mandel, Marxist Economic Theory (2 vols.), ch. 1-5 (optional-alternative to Sweezy)

Sowell, Thomas, Marx’s “Increasing Misery Doctrine” (mimeographed)

Avineri, Shlomo, The Social and Political Thought of Karl Marx chs. 2-4 and 6 (opt.)

Lefebvre, Henri, The Sociology of Marx, ch. 4 (opt.)

Dahrendorf, Ralph, Class and Class Conflict in Industrial Society, ch. I (opt.)

  1. Modern Economic Theory (especially Wage and Employment Theory):

Hicks, J.R., Theory of Wages (selections) (opt.)

Douglas, Paul H., Theory of Wages (selections) (opt.)

Robertson, D.H., Lectures on Economic-Principles, vol. II, (selections) (opt.)

  1. Modern Sociological Theory with special regard to Problems of Class, Work and Alienation)

Dahrendorf, Ralph, (see above under B), ch. 2 ff. (opt.)

Bendix, R. and S.M. Lipset, Reader on Class, Status and Power (First and Second Editions) (selections) (opt.)

Arendt, Hanna, The Human Condition (selections) (opt.)

Bell, Daniel, The End of Ideology, esp. chs. 12 and 16 (Opt.)

Ruitenbeck, H.M. (ed.), Varieties of Modern Social Theory (selections) (opt.)

Blauner, Robert, Alienation and Freedom (selections) (opt.)

Josephson, E. & M., (ed.), Man Alone. Alienation in Modern Society. (selections) (opt.)

  1. Marxian and Modern Theory Confronting Each Other

Horowitz, David. (ed.), Marx and Modern Economics, pp. 68-116 (other essays opt.)

Robinson, Joan, An Essay on Marxian Economics (opt.)

Lange, Oskar, Political Economy, vol. I (selections) (opt.)

Schumpeter, Joseph, Capitalism, Socialism and Democracy, part I (opt.)

Aron, Raymond, Main Currents in Sociological Thought, vol. I, pp. 107-180 (opt.)

Kerr, Clark, Marshall, Marx and Modern Times (opt.)

Wolfson, Murray, A Reappraisal of Marxian Economics, ch. 1-3 (opt.) (Penguin Bks.)

Samuelson, Paul, “Wages and Interest: Marxian Economic Models” Am. Ec. Review, Dec. 1957) (opt.)

Selected theoretic and empirical materials on technological unemployment and automation (to be announced).

*  *  *  *  *  *  *  *  *  *  *  *

Social Sciences 273
Spring 1970

“Wage-Labor and Capital” in
Marxian and Modern Theory

Supplementary List of Optional Readings

1) to Section B:

Solow, Robert, “The Constancy of Relative Shares” in American Economic Review, September 1958.

Ossowski, S., Class Structure in the Social Consciousness

Wesolowski, W., “Marx’s Theory of Class Domination” in: Lobkowitz, H., ed., Marx and the Western World

2) to Section C:

Dobb, M, Wages

Rees, R., The Economics of Trade Unions (both these books are published in ‘Cambridge-Chicago Economic Handbooks’ series)
Hicks, J.R., Theory of Wages has been published in a second edition with important additions and commentary

3) to section D:

Bottomore, T.B., Classes in Modern Society (paperback)

4) to section E:

Robinson, Joan, Economic Philosophy, ch. II

Adelman, Irma, Theories of Economic Growth and Development, ch. 5

5) on technological unemployment and automation:

Lederer, Emil, Technical Progress and Unemployment (International Labour Office) 1938

Woytinsky, W., Three Sources of Unemployment (International Labor Office) 1935

Kaehler, Alfred, “The Problem of Verifying the Theory of Technological Unemployment” in Social Research, vol. II, 1935

Neisser, Hans P., “Permanent Technological Unemployment” in Am. Economic Review, March 1942, pp. 50-71

“The Triple Revolution” in Fromm, E., ed., Socialist Humanism, pp. 441-461

Marcuse, H., Five Lectures, esp. lecture V, “The End of Utopia”

Brunner, Karl, “The Triple Revolution and a New Metaphysics” in New Individualist Review, Spring 1966 (vol. 4, no. 3)

Silberman, Charles E., and the edition of Fortune, The Myth of Automation

Brozen, Yale, Automation: The Impact of Technological Change (1963)

*  *  *  *  *  *  *  *  *  *  *  *

Social Sciences 273
Spring 1970

“Wage-Labor and Capital” in
Marxian and Modern Theory

Take-home Examination:

Directions: Write two essays, one from group A (topics 1-5) and one from group B (topics 6-11). Devote approximately one hour on each essay. Return the examination to Gates-Blake 431 or 428 not later than Thursday, June 11, at 12:30 P.M. Indicate on your examination a) which kind of grade you expect (P., I. or letter grade) and b) topic of oral report or term paper you have completed or intend to write. If a member of the class wishes to obtain a letter grade (i.e. grade other than P or I) this quarter, the term paper should be handed in not later than Friday, June 12, at 5 P.M. (in G-B 431).

(In none of the topics listed below, will you be graded on the basis of the position taken by you, but rather with regard to the quality of your analysis or argument).

Group A (Choose one topic)

Topic 1. Explain (as far as possible in your own terms) what Marx means by the “wage-labor system” as distinguished from other types of social-economic organization.

Topic 2. In what respects did Marx modify (or retain) his views concerning increasing working class misery (as expressed in the Communist Manifesto) in his later writings?

Topic 3. How do, according to Marx, different kinds of capitalistic accumulation processes affect the position of wage-laborers and the general wage-labor system?

Topic 4. How does Marx conceive the end of the capitalistic system?

Topic 5. Explain the relationship between alienation, exploitation and class domination in Marx (i.e. the younger or more mature one; or both).

Group B (Choose one topic)

Topic 6. Characterize broadly the major differences in the general approach (or “method”) of Marxian theory and “modern” social science.

Topic 7. In what substantive respects do major Marxian theories appear to be paralleled (or confirmed) or contradicted by results of ‘modern’ social sciences?

Topic 8. Does the abandonment of Marx’ labor-theory of value (and the consequent particular theory of surplus value and exploitation) necessarily imply a stand in support of private property and private enterprise?

Topic 9. Assuming that Marxian (classical and present-day) and non-Marxian (“modern”) social analysis are both live options and both faced with new difficulties, problems, and tasks, how would you broadly assess the most fruitful directions(s) of “praxis”-oriented social enquiry?

Topic 10. (If you did not choose topic 5 in Group A): Restate Marx’s conception of “freedom” (with regard to its most relevant social-historical dimensions and stages) in brief contrast with alternative conceptions of freedom.

Topic 11. Choose one of the optional readings not used by you for term paper or oral report and use it either as basis for comment on Marx’ views (concerning the condition of wage-labor) or, vice versa, as object of comments from a “Marxian” point of view.

 

Source: Duke University. David M. Rubenstein Rare Book and Manuscript Library. Economists’ Papers Archive. Martin Bronfenbrenner Papers, Box 23, Folder “Comparative Economic Systems a.d.”.

Image Source: From the 65th birthday dinner honoring Gerhard Meyer at Hutchinson Commons. University of Chicago Photographic Archive, apf1-04472, Special Collections Research Center, University of Chicago Library.

Categories
Harvard Teaching Undergraduate

Harvard. Grading system. Hard subjects: political economy and mathematics, 1886

 

There are two things I learned in preparing this post. The first (and what initially caught my eye) was the complaint that economics, like mathematics, already in the 1880’s was considered a subject that demanded relatively hard-work to get a good grade. The second was that the Harvard reform of introducing elective courses undermined the percentile precision of the old marking system and led to the adoption of the grading system. It apparently did not occur to anyone that a grade point average (G.P.A.) based on the less granular grading bands would arise from the ashes of the marking system.

______________________

RANKS AND MARKS AT HARVARD.

AN IMPORTANT REFORM PROPOSED IN THE PERCENTAGE SYSTEM.

Cambridge, Mass., Jan. 16 [1886]. — Ever since its establishment last Fall, the conference committee, a joint organization of Faculty and students, has been steadily losing favor with the students of the university until it has at last earned the name of the “Misplaced Confidence Committee,” bestowed upon it by several of the college papers. This result, however, might easily have been anticipated. The college expected too much of the new organization and was naturally disappointed at the non-fulfillment of its expectations. It did not realize that the experiment of intrusting a certain part of the government of the college to the student members must proceed slowly and carefully. The conference committee, however, in spite of the remarks of disapproval which have been frequently bestowed upon it, has been steadily at work on the greatest evil which to-day exists in the university — the marking system. All possible information in regard to the marking systems of other colleges was obtained, and on these data the committee proceeded to work out the solution of the Harvard question of ranks and marks. Finally, after a number of meetings, the conference committee has come to a decision and has adopted the following resolutions:

Resolved, That the members of the conference committee deem the marking system, now in use at Harvard, unsuited to the elective system, and that they strongly recommend a change.

Resolved, That it is desired that by this change the inequalities of marks arising from different degrees of work required in different courses, and from different standards of marking pursued by different instructors, as far as possible, be removed.

The system which the committee recommends is what is known as the “grade system,” i.e., the students are divided up as to rank into certain classes or grades. The first grade represents those who have passed with distinction; the second those who have passed, and the third those who have failed. If necessary more grades can be easily introduced and finer distinctions made between the upper classes of marks. These changes now go before the whole faculty for final action, and although they may not be adopted in toto they will undoubtedly receive due consideration, and will at least, lead to important modifications in the present system of marking by percentage.

The question of the adoption of a grade system for a percentage system was not the only one discussed by the committee. The evil which lies at the root of the whole matter is in the inequalities of marks arising from the different amount of work required in different courses. Under the elective system there are about 200 courses from which the undergraduate is required to take four yearly. Now, it is perfectly obvious that it is impossible to make all these courses require an equal amount of work. But aside from that there are many inequalities which might be done away with. Some of the professors are notoriously hard markers, others are the very reverse. Some require extra work in their courses, others rely entirely on the examination papers to prove to them the amount of work done by the students. There are ordinarily two examinations yearly in each subject. Some of the instructors, however, hold hour examinations every month or two, and count these in as a part of the percentage for the year. Some take no account of the attendance, while others allow a constant attendance to go a long way toward making up a defective examination paper. Notwithstanding such a diversity of marking as this, the students of each class are grouped together, and comparisons are drawn as if they all stood on the same footing, as if they all took the same courses. To this the students, and to a great extent the Faculty, object. There are certain courses in college, in natural history and in the fine arts, in which an average student with very little application can easily obtain a high mark. A student of the same ability may take some of the most difficult courses, those in political economy or mathematics, and with double the application receive about half the marks obtained by this leisure-loving friend. Yet these two students are ranked together, and to the outside world the former is by far the brighter. Had the relative rank been determined by the amount of work the result would have been somewhat different.

The only distinction made by the college authorities between the courses of instruction is by dividing them into two groups — half courses and full courses — two of the former being considered equivalent to one of the latter. Of the 200 courses only a few are half courses. Thus while there is practically one grade in the courses, or at most two grades, there is no limit to the grades in the rank of the students, for the exact standing of every student to the smallest fraction can be ascertained. The names of all who obtain 70 per cent. or over in every course are printed with the per cent. attached and the list sent to every man in college. Those who receive a mark below 70 per cent. are informed privately. To lessen the evils which attend such a fine system of grading, the conference committee has recommended a substitution of broader grades. Seeing, however, that the real trouble extended beyond this, the committee has gone further, and has recommended that as the grades in marks grew broader the grades in the courses should grow finer. That both of these recommendations are in the spirit of reform seems evident. As the committee has among its members five of the Faculty, there is reason to believe that these members will be enabled to convince the rest of the Faculty of the desirability of some important changes, both in the system of marking by percentage and in the system which allows but two grades of courses.

Source: The New York Times, 17 January, 1886.

______________________

New Regulations by the Faculty.

November 24, 1886

The new “Regulations of the Faculty of Harvard College” are out and present many new and entertaining features. A hasty comparison of the last year’s “codex” with the present one may be of interest to those who have not time to make the comparison for themselves.

The first regulation on the list we find changed. Absences are no longer returned to the Dean, but to the secretary, who enters them on each student’s record. Petitions to the faculty may now be handed in up to 10 o’clock on the day of the faculty meeting. The new Rule (5) with regard to the time of changing electives, limiting such changes to Nov. 1 and March 1, are well known already. Rule 7 and 8 is new. Instructors are to report to the Dean from time to time the names of students who have failed to satisfy them in the performance of the work of the course. Any instructor, with the approval of the Dean, may exclude a student from his course for neglect of work, and the fact shall be reported to the faculty at the next meeting.

The scale of scholarship has been changed from the old percentage system to a system of five grades, A, B, C, D, E. Students who fail in a course will be assigned to E. Last year this grade was fixed at two-fifths of the maximum mark. Failure on the work of the year is changed from “failure to get one half the maximum mark,” to those who “stand below grade E.” As the regulation previously read, a student who failed on the year’s work as a whole, although he passed on all his studies, could make up the deficiency by taking one or more electives in addition to those regularly required for a degree. The marks on these courses would be substituted for the lowest marks he received in the previous year’s work. Now, a student may regain his standing “by attaining in some subsequent year such grades, that the average number of courses in which he stands below grade C is not more than three for each of the two years.”

The penalty for dishonesty in examination has been withdrawn from the rules, pending probably the invention of some more terrible scheme. Under the “Degree of Bachelor of Arts,” rule 26 reads: “above group D.” This is changed from “one half of the total maximum.” In rule 27, grade A is substituted for 90 per cent.

The magna cum is now obtained by one “who has stood in grade A in one half of his college work and has not fallen below C in any study. This is changed from the old rule of “80 per cent. for the whole college course, or 85 per cent. for the last three years.” The cum laude cannot be received by anyone who has fallen below grade C in any study.

There are some changes in the requirements for Honors in English; and the assignments of honorable mention and of Degrees with Distinction will be made through standing committees of the Faculty. Application for scholarships must be handed in before the last Monday in May. The establishment of a committee to overlook the work of special students was announced last spring, and needs no additional comment.

Source: The Harvard Crimson archive. 24 November, 1886.

Categories
Exam Questions Harvard Undergraduate

Harvard. Undergraduate General Examination in Economics, 1956

 

 

Other undergraduate Harvard divisional/departmental  general exams that have been transcribed and posted earlier:

General Division Exam 1916

General Division Exam 1917

Division Exams 1939

Economics General Exam 1953

______________________

HARVARD UNIVERSITY
DEPARTMENT OF ECONOMICS
GENERAL EXAMINATION — May 2, 1956
(Three hours)

Please be sure to use a separate bluebook for each Section, noting on the cover of each book the numbers of the questions discussed therein, and HONORS or NON-HONORS.

 

PART I
(One hour)
Economic Analysis

All candidates answer ONE question.

  1. It is often said that investment is one of the principal determinants of national income. On the other hand it is also claimed that national income is one of the principal determinants of investment. In what sense is each of these statements true? What are the implications of these propositions for the theory of business cycles?
  2. “Almost no one would select the industries which are distinguished by a close approach to the competitive model as a showpiece of American industrial achievement. The showpieces are, with rare exceptions, the industries which are dominated by a handful of large firms. The foreign visitor, brought to the United States by the Economic Cooperation Administration, visits the same firms as do attorneys of the Department of Justice in their search for monopoly.” Discuss.
  3. Wages and profits perform important functions in the economic system. To what extent are these functions the same and to what extent do they differ?
  4. Ricardo considered savings as the basis of economic growth. Some modern common economists on the other hand have argued that a high propensity to save reduces the rate of economic growth. Explain the reasons for each of these views.
  5. Agriculture is an excellent example of the failure of the competitive system to allocate resources efficiently. Discuss.

 

PART II
(Two hours)

Part II consists of five sections: A. Industrial Organization; B. Labor Economics; C. Economic History; D. Money, Economic Fluctuations, and International Trade; and E. Statistics. Each student must answer FOUR questions from Part II, distributed among the sections as follows:

Either

(1) TWO questions each from TWO different Sections chosen from A, B, C, D.

Or

(2) ONE question from Section E; and three other questions, TWO chosen from any ONE of A, B, C, D, and ONE from ANOTHER of these Sections.

A. Industrial Organization

  1. “The diversity of behavior revealed by a study of particular oligopolies in the United States helps explain why economists have been unable to produce a unique theory of oligopoly.” Discuss.
  2. Evaluate the evidence for and against the thesis that monopoly has increased during the last half-century in American manufacturing industries.
  3. With respect to either electric power or railroads, what do you think have been the chief achievements and shortcomings of the regulatory process in the United States?
  4. Discuss the problem of resale price maintenance laws, commenting on
    1. The historical circumstances from which resale price maintenance agreements evolved;
    2. The characteristics of goods most commonly sold under resale price maintenance agreements and why the producers of these goods prefer to operate under such agreements;
    3. The economic effects of resale price maintenance.

 

B. Labor Economics

  1. The following are recently released figures by the Bureau of Labor Statistics showing production, man hours, and output per man hour in the bituminous coal industry since 1935. Selected years are shown as follows; 1947-49 is the base in each case.
Year Production Man hours Output per man hour
1935 67.0 89.0 75.3
1938 62.7 73.8 85.0
1941 92.5 100.5 92.0
1945 103.9 111.5 93.2
1948 107.8 109.0 98.9
1950 92.9 82.1 113.2
1954 70.4 47.3 148.8

(a) What factors would you advance to explain the movement in output per man hour? (b) Is the 100 percent rise in output per man hour in this twenty year period a consequence of, or a reason for, substantial wage rate increases?

  1. How do you praise be consequences of the merger between the AFL and CIO? Indicate the consequences for organizing campaigns and union growth, internal union government, legislative and political action, collective bargaining, and the movement of wages. Consider the consequences both within the labor movement and for the economy generally.
  2. “The growing importance collective-bargaining cannot be reconciled with the view that unions may be considered as private organizations or ‘clubs’.” Discuss. What types of public policy would you advocate with respect to governmental intervention in the internal affairs of unions?
  3. Explain the meaning of “marginal productivity” to a friend who is never studied economics. Explain further whatever degree of relation you believe exists between marginal productivity and wages.

 

C. Economic History

  1. It has been said that “mercantilism” has always been the dominant economic philosophy in American politics. Discuss.
  2. How does the development of the corporation as an institutional form for organizing business activity different in United States and Great Britain? What accounts for and what have been the consequences of these developments?
  3. Contrast ante- and post-bellum Southern Agriculture.
  4. What light does [sic] the depression experiences of 1873, 1920, 1929, cast on business cycle theories and policies?

 

D. Money, Economic Fluctuations, and International Trade

  1. What actions could the Federal Reserve authorities take to check an inflationary movement? What objections might be raised against the use of any combination of these actions?
  2. Suppose the trade unions force up money wages. Discuss the effect of the change on employment and prices in terms of (a) the Quantity Theory of Prices (b) the Keynesian theory of the price level.
  3. Supposed that aggregate income were to remain constant for the next six months while unemployment slowly rose. What budgetary and monetary policies would you recommend?
  4. In a recent statement to the Associated Press, Mr. T. Coleman Andrews, Commissioner of Internal Revenue for the first three years of the present administration until his resignation last Spring, declared his complete opposition to the taxation of personal income. He advocated completely doing away with the individual income tax and substituting “less burdensome” taxes.
    1. What reforms, if any, would you advocate in the taxation of individual income? Explain.
    2. Are there any “less burdensome” taxes than the individual income tax? Explain.
      Note: throughout your discussion keep in mind the fiscal policy aspects of taxation as well as considerations of the effects on incentives, equity, etc.
  5. With few exceptions output per worker is much higher in American industries (including agriculture) than in other countries. How is it possible under these circumstances to maintain equilibrium between exports and imports?

 

E. Statistics

  1. Summarize and discuss critically two quantitative studies dealing with one or more phases of household behavior.
  2. Discuss the relative advantages and disadvantages aggregative time series data, cross sectional data, and re-interview data on identical households for purposes of estimation and testing of hypotheses.
  3. Discuss various ways in which statistics may be of use in economic research. In formulating your answer give consideration to some or all of the following: formation of hypotheses, testing of hypotheses, estimation of population parameters, and design of experiments.

 

Source:  John F. Kennedy Presidential Library. John Kenneth Galbraith Personal Papers, Harvard University File, 1949-1965, Box 528, Folder “Tutorial 9/15/51-9/57”.

Image Source: Duster House Tower, Harvard College. Library of Congress, Prints and Photographs Division.

Categories
Exam Questions Harvard Socialism Suggested Reading Syllabus Undergraduate

Harvard. Readings and Final Exam for Normative Aspects of Economic Policy. Bergson, 1960

 

The reading list and final exam questions from 1959 for Abram Bergson‘s Harvard undergraduate course “Normative Aspects of Economic Policy” have been posted earlier. This post provides material for the same course taught in the spring term of 1960. The reading lists are completely identical, but this time I have gone to the trouble of providing links to most of the course readings.  The exam questions for the 1960 do indeed differ from those of 1959 while covering broadly the same material.

_________________

Enrollment

[Economics] 111a. Normative Aspects of Economic Policy. Professor Bergson. Half course. (Spring)

Total 36: 3 Graduates, 14 Seniors, 7 Juniors, 7 Sophomores, 1 Freshman, 3 Radcliffe, 1 Other.

Source: Harvard University. Report of the President of Harvard College, 1959-1960, p. 82.

_________________

HARVARD UNIVERSITY
Department of Economics

Economics 111a
Normative Aspects of Economic Policy
Spring Term: 1959-60

  1. The concept of economic efficiency.

Scitovsky, Welfare and Competition, Chicago, 1951, Chapter I.

  1. Consumers’ goods distribution and labor recruitment: the efficiency of perfect competition: other forms of market organization.

Scitovsky, Chapters II-V, XVI (pp. 338-41), XVIII, XX (pp. 423-427).
A. P. Lerner, Economics of Control, New York, 1946, Chapter 2.

  1. Conditions for efficiency in production.

Scitovsky, Chapters VI-VIII.
Lerner, Chapter 5.

  1. Production efficiency under perfect competition; monopolistic markets.

See the readings under topic 3.
Scitovsky, Chapter X, XI, XII, XV, XVI (pp. 341-363), XVII, XX (pp. 428-439).
Lerner, Chapters 6, 7.

  1. The optimum rate of investment.

Scitovsky, Chapter IX (pp. 216-228).
A. C. Pigou, Economics of Welfare, fourth ed., London, 1948, pp. 23-30.”Wa

  1. Price policy for a public enterprise.

Lerner, Chapter 15.
I. M. D. Little, A Critique of Welfare Economics, 2nd ed., Oxford, 1957, Chapter XI.
O. Eckstein, Water Resource Development, Cambridge, 1958, pp. 47-70, pp. 81-109.

  1. Socialist economic calculation.

O. Lange, On the Economic Theory of Socialism, Minn., 1938, pp. 55-141.
F. Hayek, Socialist Calculation: Economica, May 1940
A. Bergson, Socialist Economics, in H. Ellis, ed., A Survey of Contemporary Economics, Philadelphia, 1948.
M. Dobb, Economic Theory and Socialism, New York, 1955, pp. 41-92.

  1. Economic calculation in underdeveloped countries.

A. Datta, Welfare versus Growth Economics, Indian Economic Journal, October 1956.
T. Scitovsky, Two Concepts of External Economics, Journal of Political Economy, April 1954.
J. Tinbergen, The Design of Development, Balto., Md., 1958.

  1. The concept of social welfare.

The writings of Bergson and Dobb under topic 7.
Pigou, Economics of Welfare, Chapters I, VIII.
Lerner, Chapter 3.
J. R. Hicks, Foundations of Welfare Economics, Economic Journal, December 1939.
Arthur Smithies, Economic Welfare and Policy, in A. Smithies et al., Economics and Public Policy, Washington, 1955.

 

Other References on the Concept of Social Welfare and Optimum Conditions

M. W. Reder, Studies in the Theory of Welfare Economics, New York 1947.

P. A. Samuelson, Foundations of Economic Analysis, Cambridge, 1947, Chapter VIII.

K. Boulding, Welfare Economics, in B. Haley, A Survey of Contemporary Economics, Homewood, Illinois, 1952.

H. Myint, Theories of Welfare Economics, Cambridge, Mass., 1948.

J. A. Hobson, Work and Wealth, London, 1933.

J. M. Clark, Guideposts in Time of Change, New York, 1949.

J. de V. Graaf, Theoretical Welfare Economics, Cambridge, 1957.

F. M. Bator, The Simple Analytics of Welfare Maximization, American Economic Review, March 1957.

A. Bergson, A Reformulation [of Certain Aspects] of Welfare Economics, Quarterly Journal of Economics, February 1938.

P. A. Samuelson, Evaluation of Real National Income, Oxford Economic Papers, January 1950.

A. C. Pigou, Some Aspects of Welfare Economics, American Economic Review, June 1951.

T. Scitovsky, The State of Welfare Economics, American Economic Review, June 1951.

J. E. Meade, Trade and Welfare, New York, 1955, Part I.

[Note: no additional assignment for the reading period]

Source:  Harvard University Archives. Syllabi, course outlines and reading lists in Economics, 1895-2003. Box 7, Folder “Economics, 1959-60”.

_________________

HARVARD UNIVERSITY
Department of Economics

Economics 111a
Final Examination

June 2, 1960

Answer four and only four of the following six questions.

  1. Explain the “price-consumption” curve for a single household in a perfectly competitive consumers’ goods market. What determines the shape of the curve? By use of this curve, show how the household’s consumption might be affected by a percentage sales tax on one commodity. What determines the total taxes paid by the household?
  2. In an economy which otherwise is perfectly competitive, a trade union arbitrarily limits entry of workers into a single industry. In equilibrium, what conditions for an economic optimum are violated?
  3. “Under ‘free’ competition it is true that individual firms have monopoly power and hence charge prices above marginal costs. But since there is free entry, there hardly can be any serious economic waste on this account, for prices cannot long exceed average cost.” Discuss.
  4. For purposes of fixing prices for a public enterprise, what arguments might be advanced for and against acceptance of each of the following theoretic principles:
    1. Maximization of profits;
    2. Pricing at average cost, including a “normal” competitive return on invested capital;
    3. Pricing at marginal cost;
    4. Pricing at minimum average costs.
  5. Explain briefly:
    1. Parametric function of prices;
    2. “Technological” versus “pecuniary” external economies;
    3. “Accounting prices” in economics of development;
    4. “Defective telescopic faculty.”
  6. Discuss the different approaches employed in welfare economics to the problem of income distribution.

 

Source:  Harvard University Archives. Papers Printed for Final Examinations: History, History of Religions, …, Economics, …,Naval Science, Air Science. June 1960. In Social Sciences, Final Examinations, June 1960 (HUC 2000.28, No. 128).

Portrait of Abram Bergson. See Paul A. Samuelson, “Abram Bergson, 1914-2003: A Biographical Memoir”, in National Academy of Sciences, Biographical Memoirs, Volume 84 (Washington, D.C.: 2004).

Categories
Exam Questions Johns Hopkins Undergraduate

Johns Hopkins. Undergraduate Economics Exams, 1920

 

Even at the Johns Hopkins University, one of the pioneers in academic economics in the United States, there were only six semesters worth of undergraduate economics actually offered in 1919-20. This post provides transcriptions of the six semester final examinations for that year.

The final examinations for the 1922-23 academic year have been transcribed for an earlier post.

Note:

Political Economy 2(b) Money and Banking was scheduled to be taught by Professor Barnett in 1919-20. However in the announcement for 1920-21 Dr. Weyforth was listed as course instructor which is consistent with the ex post report for 1919-20 for instruction in the department of political economy.

Political Economic 4(b) was scheduled as Public Finance to be taught by Professor Hollander in 1919-20, but from the exam below it is clear that the course matches “Corporation Finance” found in the course announcements for 1920-21 which was taught by Professor Barnett.

___________________

Instructors of Undergraduate Courses
1919-20

George Ernest Barnett, Ph.D., Professor of Statistics.
A. B., Randolph-Macon College, 1891; Fellow, Johns Hopkins University, 1899-1900, and Ph.D., 1901.
Appointment to professor, 1911.

Broadus Mitchell, Ph.D., Instructor in Political Economy.
A.B., University of South Carolina, 1913; Fellow, Johns Hopkins University, 1916-17, and Ph. D., 1918. Appointment to instructor, 1919.

William Oswald Weyforth, Ph.D., Associate in Political Economy.
A. B., Johns Hopkins University, 1912, and Ph.D., 1915; Instructor, Western Reserve University, 1915-17. Appointment to instructor, 1919.

___________________

UNDERGRADUATE COURSES
1919-20

  1. (a) Economic History.
    The economic development of England and the industrial experience of the United States are studied.
    Three hours weekly, first half-year. Weyforth and Dr. Mitchell.
    (b) Elements of Economics.
    Particular attention is given to the theory of distribution and its application to leading economic problems.
    Three hours weekly, second half-year. Dr. Weyforth and Dr. Mitchell.
  2. (a) Statistical Methods.
    After a preliminary study of the value and place of statistics as an instrument of investigation, attention is directed to the chief methods used in statistical inquiry.
    Three hours weekly, first half-year. Professor Barnett.
    (b) Money and Banking.
    The principles of monetary science are taught with reference to practical conditions in modern systems of currency, banking, and credit.
    Three hours weekly, second half-year. Dr. Weyforth.
  3. (a) Insurance.
    The principles of insurance are taught with reference to existing systems of property, personal, and social insurance.
    Three hours weekly, first half-year.
    (b) Transportation.
    The history and theory of transportation are taught with particular reference to conditions in the United States.
    Three hours weekly, second half-year.
    [Course 3 will not be given in 1919-1920.]
  4. (a) Labor Problems.
    The problems growing out of modern industrial employment will be studied.
    Three hours weekly, first half-year. Dr. Mitchell.
    (b) Corporation Finance.
    The theory and practice of corporation finance are considered, with particular reference to the problems presented in the United States.
    Three hours weekly, second half-year. Professor Barnett.

NOTE—Undergraduate Course 2 is open only to such students as have completed or are pursuing Course 1: Courses 3, 4, and 5 only to students who have completed 1 and 2.

 

Sources: Johns Hopkins University, University Register 1918-1919 with Announcements for 1919-20. Circular, Vol. 38, No. 314, (Baltimore: Johns Hopkins Press, April 1919), p.222.

Johns Hopkins University, Annual Report of the President 1919-20, Circular, Vol. 39, No. 327, (Baltimore: Johns Hopkins Press, April 1919), p. 66.

___________________

THE JOHNS HOPKINS UNIVERSITY
POLITICAL ECONOMY I
[Economic history]

February 5, 1920, 9 – 12 A.M.

  1. Describe the manor system.
  2. How were the gilds organized, and what were the circumstances of their dissolution? What were the economic consequences of the Black Death?
  3. Discuss the Industrial Revolution, giving its causes and main effects. What results did it have for the manual worker in England?
  4. What is the doctrine of laissez faire, and how did it come to have such vogue, particularly in the first years of the 19th century?
  5. Discuss the Factory Acts. What tendency in social thinking did they represent?
  6. What are chief social and economic advantages and disadvantages of the division of labor?
  7. Do you think our present method of securing entrepreneurs a good one? How might it be improved?

*  *  *  *  *  *  *

THE JOHNS HOPKINS UNIVERSITY
POLITICAL ECONOMY I
[Elements of economics]

June 3, 1920, 9 A.M. – 12 M.

  1. Name and discuss as many theories of wages as you know.
  2. Explain, with the assistance of a diagram, the differential principle of rent. How does the argument of the Single Tax rest on this law?
  3. What is the distinction between interest and profits? Explain the economic justification of each.
  4. Describe the functions of credit. Show how the Federal Reserve System has remedied defects in the National Bank System.
  5. Comment upon the following statement: “We are coming to be more interested in promoting the health of nations than the wealth of nations. The aim of political economy is humanistic.”
  6. Using your economic knowledge, supplemented by conversation with a man of affairs, give an estimate of the present financial and business situation.
  7. What are the theoretical foundations and practical proposals of socialism?
  8. What advantage have you gained from studying political economy?

*  *  *  *  *  *  *

THE JOHNS HOPKINS UNIVERSITY
POLITICAL ECONOMY II
[Statistical methods]

February 2, 1920, 2 – 5 P.M.

  1. Explain how a “refined” death rate is calculated. Illustrate.
  2. What kinds of questions can not properly be asked in taking a census?
  3. Define “average” and “measure of dispersion.”
  4. Discuss the significance of different averages.
  5. Calculate Pearson’s coefficient of correlation, the probable error, and the ratio of variation for the following:

X

Y
1

2

2

5

3

3

4

8
5

7

  1. Define an index number.
  2. Discuss the relative advantages of the “aggregate” and the “relative” methods of computing index numbers.
  3. Under what conditions is “weighting” necessary?

*  *  *  *  *  *  *

THE JOHNS HOPKINS UNIVERSITY
POLITICAL ECONOMY II
[Money and banking]

TUESDAY June 1, 1920, 2 – 5 P.M.

  1. Describe the various forms of money in use in the United States.
  2. What are the essential features of a system of bimetallism? Explain the advantages and disadvantages of such a system.
  3. Give a brief history of the greenbacks.
  4. What is a bill of exchange? An acceptance? A promissory note? What are the advantages of trade acceptances?
  5. What are the principal ways in which deposits originate in commercial banks? Explain the connection between loans and deposits.
  6. Describe the defects of the old national banking system.
  7. Outline the organization of the Federal Reserve System.
  8. Explain the quantity theory of money, showing the effect of both money and deposits on prices.

*  *  *  *  *  *  *

THE JOHNS HOPKINS UNIVERSITY
POLITICAL ECONOMY IV

[Labor problems]

February 3, 1920, 2 – 5 P.M.

  1. Did trade unionism in England originate in the gilds? Did the American labor movement grow out of gild organizations? Give reasons for your answer.
  2. How did the Industrial Revolution affect British working-men?
  3. Discuss the Combination Acts. Who was Francis Place and what part did he play in the labor movement?
  4. What facts as to the Knights of Labor are indicated by the motto “an injury to one is the concern of all”?
  5. Discuss the closed shop.
  6. Is there any justification for the policy of restriction of output as employed by unions? By employers?
  7. What are the chief causes of strikes? How have unions affected the causes of strikes?
  8. What did you learn from the steel strike and the coal strike?

*  *  *  *  *  *  *

THE JOHNS HOPKINS UNIVERSITY
POLITICAL ECONOMY IV

[Corporation finance]

June 2, 1920, 2 – 5 P.M.

  1. Discuss the relative advantages of the various legal forms of the business unit.
  2. Trace briefly the history of the corporation.
  3. Define “preferred stock” and describe the varieties of such stock.
  4. Why are ordinary business corporations frequently over-capitalized? Is this justifiable?
  5. State the principles of capitalization adopted by public service commissions.
  6. Explain the difference between “treasury stock” and “authorized but not issued” stock.
  7. Discuss the legal relations of the persons participating in a syndicate.
  8. How are corporate securities usually marketed? Why?
  9. Explain and discuss the principle of “trading on the equity” as applied in the capitalization of corporations.
  10. Under what conditions would the issue of common stock only be desirable?

Source: Johns Hopkins University. The Ferdinand Hamburger, Jr. Archives, Eisenhower Library. Department of Political Economy, Series 5/6. Box: 6/1. Folder: Department of Political Economy, Exams, 1907-1924.

___________________

Image Sources: Johns Hopkins University graphic and pictorial collection.

George Ernest Barnett (1873-1938), ca 52 years of age
William Oswald Weyforth (1889-1983), ca 36 years of age
John Broadus Mitchell (1892-1988), ca 30 years of age

 

 

Categories
Economists Harvard Suggested Reading Syllabus Undergraduate

Harvard. Syllabus and final exam for National Income and its Distribution. Conrad, 1958

 

 

For this post I have transcribed the syllabus with reading assignments together with the final exam questions for Alfred H. Conrad’s undergraduate semester course, “National Income and its Distribution,” taught at Harvard during the 1958-59 academic year. As utterly important as the national income accounts have proven themselves to be, the data from these accounts are generally just taken for granted by the overwhelming majority of economists and woe be the instructor who tries to introduce such material in more than one or two sessions in their macroeconomics course. But I have always liked the stuff and so this course enters the Economics in the Rear-view Mirror collection.

While I can recall having heard of his pioneering econometric work on American slavery with John R. Meyer in an American economic history course I took many decades ago at Yale, I really knew nothing about Conrad’s career, other work, or his personal life. The biographical data from the members’ survey of the American Economic Association are undoubtedly the truth, but not the whole truth, which is why I have provided the link to his New York Times obituary and a story about his wife, the poet Adrienne Rich. Suicide sadly cut his career short but I am happy to enter these few artifacts into the historical record in his memory.

_______________

On Alfred H. Conrad and his wife, poet, Adrienne Rich

New York Times obituary for Alfred H. Conrad: October 20, 1970.

The Guardian article “Poet and Pioneer” by John O’Mahoney (15 June 2002) that provides a review of the work of Conrad’s wife, the poet Adrienne Rich, with a dozen paragraphs about their lives together.

_______________

American Economic Association
Member Biographic Entry, 1969

CONRAD, Alfred Haskell, academic; b. New York City, 1924; A.B., Harvard, 1947, M.A., 1949, Ph,D., 1954.

DOC. DIS. The Redistribution of Income and the Matrix Multiplier, 1953.

FIELDS 2ab, 3ab, Ic.

PUB. The Economics of Slavery and other studies in econometric history (with John R. Meyer), 1964; The Impact of Education and Research on Efficiency in CES Production Relations (with Murray Brown), 1967; Econometric Models and Development Planning, 1968.

RES. The Diffusion of Technological Innovations.

Asst. prof., Northwestern, 1955-56; asst. prof. econ., Harvard, high, 1956-59, mem. sr. research staff, Econ. Research Project, 1952-59, lectr. bus. adm., 1959-61, asso. prof. bus. adm., Grad. Sch., 1962-66; vis. prof., Netherlands Sch. Econ., 1961-62; prof. econs., City Coll., City U. of New York since 1966, exec. officer of Grad. Program since 1969.

Source: American Economic Association. Biographical Listings of Members. The American Economic Review, Vol. 59, No. 6, 1969. Handbook of the American Economic Association (Jan., 1970), p. 84.

_______________

Course Description

Economics 124. National Income and its Distribution

Half course (fall term). M., W., F., at 10. Assistant Professor Conrad.

Measurement of national income and income inequality; theories of distribution among factors and individuals; factor-shares and inequality in a general equilibrium explanation; inequality and growth in mature and in underdeveloped economies; government redistribution; testing the hypotheses.

Source: Official Register of Harvard University, Vol. LV, No. 24 (November 28, 1958), General Catalogue Issue, 1958-1959, p. 123.

_______________

Course Enrollment

[Economics] 124. National Income and its Distribution. Assistant Professor Conrad. Half course (Fall).

Total, 12: 3 Seniors, 7 Juniors, 1 Sophomores, 1 Other.

Source: Harvard University. Report of the President of Harvard College, 1958-59. Page 71.

_______________

Economics 124
NATIONAL INCOME AND ITS DISTRIBUTION
Fall, 1958

  1. National Income and Social Accounting.
    1. Introduction; conceptual framework for income accounting.

The definition and measurement of national income. Income inequality, growth, and ethical norms. The production accounts of the firm and the income accounts of the economy.

Readings:

Readings in the Theory of Income Distribution, Kuznets, “National Income,” pp. 3-33.
Ruggles and Ruggles, National Income Accounts and Income Analysis, Chs. 1-4, pp. 3-68.
Hicks, Hart, and Ford, Social Framework of the American Economy, Chs. 16, 17, pp. 209-234.

    1. The construction of the national income accounts.

The problems of valuation and aggregation.

Readings:

Ruggles and Ruggles, Chs. 5-8, pp. 69-186.
U.S. Dept. of Commerce, National Income, 1954 Edition, pp. 30-60, 160-165.
Hicks, Hart, and Ford, Ch. 15, pp. 198-208.

    1. Two special problems.

Maintaining capital intact.
The product of government.

Readings:

Hicks, Hart, and Ford, Ch. 10 and Appendix Note C, pp. 117-130, 296-300, and Ch. 13, pp. 173-185.

Reference:

Income and Wealth, Series I, ed. E. Lundberg, “Government Product and National Income” (Kuznets), pp. 178-245.

    1. A review of aggregate income trends and analysis.

Readings:

Ruggles and Ruggles, Chs. 10-12, pp. 213-303.
Income and Wealth, Series II, ed. S. Kuznets, “Long-Term Changes in the National Income of the United States Since 1870” (Kuznets), pp. 29-241. This study should be read by the time we reach section 8, below—not later than November 14.

  1. The Theory of Income Distribution.
    1. Introduction; income distribution in economic analysis.

Readings:

Readings, J. M. Clark, “Distribution,” pp. 58-71.
M. A. Copeland, “Social and Economic Determinants of the Distribution of Income,” AER, March 1947, pp. 56-75.

    1. The distribution of the product among the factors of production.

The classical descriptions and Marx.
The marginalists.
Market position and monopoly; the effectiveness of unions.
General equilibrium and employment theories.

Readings:

Ricardo, Principles of Political Economy, Chs. 4, 5, 6, pp. 88-127 (Sraffa edition).
Sweezy, Theory of Capitalist Development, Chs. 4, 5, pp. 56-95.
Hicks, Theory of Wages, Chs. 1-5, pp. 1-111.
The Impact of the Union (ed. Wright), Samuelson, Ch. 15, pp. 312-342, and Friedman, Ch. 10, pp. 204-234.
Readings, R.A. Gordon, “Enterprise, Profits, and the Modern Corporation,” pp. 558-570.
L. C. Reynolds, “Impact of Collective Bargaining on Wage Structure,” Theory of Wage Determination, ed. J. T. Dunlop, pp. 194-221.

Reference:

Dalton, The Inequality of Incomes, esp. Parts II and III.
Douglas, Theory of Wages, esp. Part I and Ch. 8.
Wootton, The Social Foundations of Wage Policy.
Readings in the Theory of Income Distribution.

    1. The distribution of income among individuals.

The possession of skills and property.
Normal curves, Pareto’s Law, and chance.

Readings:

Studies in Income and Wealth, Volume XV, Garvy, “Inequality of Income; Causes and Measurement,” pp. 25-47.
A. D. Roy, “The Distribution of Earnings and of Individual Output,” Econ Journal, Sept. 1950, pp. 489-505.
A. D. Roy, “Some Thoughts on the Distribution of Earnings,” Oxford Econ Papers, 1951, pp. 135-

Reference:

Dalton, Part IV.

    1. The data on functional and personal distribution of income in the U.S.

Readings:

D. G. Johnson, “Functional Distribution of Income in the U.S.,” RES, May 1954, pp. 175-183.
G. H. Moore, “Secular Changes in the Distribution of Income,” AER, Papers and Proceedings, May 1952, pp. 527-544.
E. F. Denison, “Income Types and the Size Distribution,” AER, Papers and Proceedings, May 1954, pp. 254-269.
S. Goldsmith, et al, “Size Distribution of Income since the Mid-Thirties,” RES, February 1954, pp. 1-32.
H. Miller, Income of the American People, Chs. 3, 8, 9, pp. 16-33, 97-123.

References:

U. S. Dept. of Commerce, Income Distribution in the United States, Washington, 1953.
Kuznets, Shares of Upper Income Groups in Income and Savings.
M. J. Bowman, “A Graphical Analysis of Personal Income Distribution in the United States,” Readings, pp. 72-99.

III. [No section title]

    1. Income Inequality and Growth

Income, consumption and investment.
Technical change, capital formation, and income shares.
Income shares and industrial structure.

Readings:

Baumol, Economic Dynamics, Chs. 2, 3, pp. 11-35.
Duesenberry, “Income-Consumption Relations and their Implications,” in Income, Employment, and Public Policy, pp. 54-81.
Kurihara, “Distribution, Employment, and Secular Growth,” in Post-Keynesian Economics, Ch. 10, pp 251-273.
Kuznets, “Economic Growth and Income Inequality,” AER, March 1955, pp. 1-28.
Hicks, Theory of Wages, Ch. 6, pp. 112-135.
E. H. Phelps-Brown, “The Long-Term Movement of Real Wages,” in Theory of Wage Determination, ed. J. T. Dunlop, pp. 48-65.

Reference:

F. A. Hanna, “Contribution of Manufacturing Wages to Regional Differences in Per-Capita Income,” RES, February 1951.

    1. Inflation and Income Inequality.

Readings:

Keynes, “Social Consequences of Changes in the Value of Money,” Essays in Persuasion, pp. 80-104.
Bach and Ando, “Redistributional Effects of Inflation,” RES, February 1957, pp. 1-13.

Reference:

D. Seers, Changes in the Cost of Living and the Distribution of Income, Oxford, 1949.
Joint Committee on the Economic Report, Low-Income Families and Economic Stability, 1949.

    1. The State and the Distribution.

Who pays the taxes?
Redistribution through public expenditures.

Readings:

Conrad, “Redistribution through Government Budgets in the U.S.,” in Income Redistribution and Public Policy, pp. 178-267.
Conrad, “On the Calculation of Tax Burdens,” Economica, November 1955, pp. 342-348.

    1. Conclusion.

Readings:

Kuznets, in Studies in Income and Wealth, Volume XV, pp. 203-213.
Tinbergen, “Welfare Economics and Income Distribution,” AER, Papers and Proceedings, May 1957, pp. 490-503.

Reference:

Lampman, “Recent Thoughts on Egalitarianism,” QJE, May 1957, pp. 234-266.

 

Source: Harvard University Archives. Syllabi, course outlines and reading lists in Economics, 1895-2003. Box 7. Folder “Economics, 1958-1959 (1 of 2)”.

_______________

HARVARD UNIVERSITY
ECONOMICS 124
FINAL EXAMINATION
January 16, 1959

Answer Question 1 and any four others.

  1. (a) or (b):

(a) The Council of Economic Advisers, in their report to the President in January, 1953, stated:

“…the preferable general formula—once wages, prices and profits are in a workable relationship—is for money wages to increase with productivity trends in the whole economy.”

Discuss this suggestion in the light of your reading period assignment, bringing in relevant recent data on the effect of inflation upon factor shares to illustrate your argument.

(b) Describe briefly the law of proportional effect and discuss its application to the income generating process. Be careful to consider the economic relevance of the conditions and results of the statistical model.

  1. Describe the tendencies toward a falling rate of profit in (1) the “classical”, (2) the Marxian, and (3) neo-classical description of capital accumulation. How would the possibility of technological change affect this tendency?
  2. Who are the poor in the post-World War II United States?
  3. You are hired as a technical expert on national income accounts to advise a country in which economists, among other basic resources, are in short supply. In detail, discuss the statistics you will need to answer the following questions: (1) who saves? (2) what has been the trend the savings/income ratio?
  4. “One might thus assume a long swing in the inequality characterizing the secular income structure: widening in the early phases of economic growth when the transition from the pre-industrial to the industrial civilization was most rapid; becoming stabilized for awhile; and then narrowing in the later phases.” Write a concise explanation, in outline form if you like, for the declining inequality suggested here.
  5. How would you reconcile the marginal productivity theory of wages (as presented, say, by Hicks) with the collective bargaining explanation of Lloyd Reynolds or the inertia-displacement theory of Phelps Brown? You may include in your argument any other readings that seem to be relevant.

 

Source: Harvard University Archives. Social Sciences. Final Examinations, January 1959. (HUC7000.28, 122 of 284). Papers Printed for Final Examinations. History, Government, Economics, …, Naval Science, Air Science. January, 1959.

Image Source: Simon Guggenheim Memorial Foundation. Fellows page for Alfred Haskell Conrad.

Categories
Exam Questions Harvard Undergraduate

Harvard. Division Exams for the economics A.B., January 1917

 

The philosophy behind the use of division examinations for undergraduate history, government, and economics majors at Harvard was documented in an earlier post providing excerpts from relevant passages in annual reports of the President of Harvard College. This post adds to the growing stock of division exams from Harvard collected here at Economics in the Rear-view Mirror. Links to other exams are provided in the post along with the questions for four exams from the division examinations given in January 1917.

__________________

Background

A significant event of the year [1915-16] was the inauguration by the Division of History, Government, and Economics of its new examination of candidates for the Bachelor’s degree who have concentrated in the Division. This examination was devised “not in order to place an additional burden upon candidates for the A.B., but for the purpose of securing better correlation of the student’s work, encouraging better methods of study, and furnishing a more adequate test of real power and attainment.” In their preparation students have from the beginning of the Sophomore year special tutorial instruction. The examination embraces three tests: first, a general paper, with a large number of alternative questions, treating comprehensively the subjects of the Division; second, a special paper, covering a chosen specific field; and lastly, a supplementary oral examination which may relate to either the general or the special paper, but ordinarily bears upon the specific field. The results of the first examination, taken by a comparatively small group of men graduating in three years, are in no way conclusive. The members of the examining committee, however, think them distinctly encouraging. Twenty-four candidates appeared, of whom twenty-two passed and two failed. Their selection of questions from the general paper indicated breadth of preparation and their bearing at the oral examination showed more than a little clearness and independence of thought.

Source: Harvard University. Report of the President of Harvard College, 1915-16, pp.75-76.

__________________

April 1927 Division Examinations Not Included in Cole’s Volume of Exams

Handwritten note added to the Arthur H. Cole volume of collected division examinations, 1916-1927:

“This volume contains the January exams for 1916-17. The April 1917 exams are shelved separately”.

Source: Harvard University Archives. Divisional and general examinations, 1915-1975 (HUC 7000.18). Box 6, Bound Volume (stamped “Private Library Arthur H. Cole”) “Divisional Examinations 1916-1927”.

__________________

Other Harvard division exams transcribed and posted:

Division Examinations for the Degree of A.B.
Division of History, Government and Economics.

April/May 1916

History of Economic Thought, Public Finance, Labor 1931

Economic Theory 1939
Money and Government Finance 1939
Economic History (since 1750) 1939
Labor and Social Reform 1939

__________________

DIVISION OF HISTORY, GOVERNMENT AND ECONOMICS
FOR THE DEGREE OF A.B. DIVISION EXAMINATIONS
1916-17

DIVISION OF HISTORY, GOVERNMENT AND ECONOMICS
DIVISION GENERAL EXAMINATION
[January 6, 1917]

Part I

The treatment of one of the following questions will be regarded as equivalent to one-half of the examination and should therefore occupy one and one-half hours. Write on one question only.

  1. How does the federal form of government affect the life of a nation?
  2. Discuss the arguments for and against universal manhood suffrage.
  3. What influences have been exerted by the Catholic Church on political development since 1500?
  4. Sketch the life and work of two or three of the following: (a) Calvin, (b) Cavour, (c) Hildebrand, (d) Jefferson, (e) Kant, (f) Marx, (g) J. S. Mill, (h) Sir Thomas More, (i) Theodosius.
  5. What were the political and economic effects before 1750 of the discovery of America?
  6. How has the physiography of the states of Europe influenced (a) their economic development? (b) their political organization, and (c) their present problems?
  7. What has been the influence of France in the Western hemisphere?
  8. Discuss the merits and defects of lawyers as statesmen?
  9. Explain the reasons for the differences in British foreign and colonial policy in the eighteenth and nineteenth centuries.
  10. What have been the consequences of the guarantee of freedom of contract?
  11. Do periods of internal and external national greatness tend to coincide?
  12. Discuss sectionalism in the United States since the Civil War.

 

Part II

Three questions only from the following groups, A, B, and C, are to be answered, of which not more than two may be from one group.

A

  1. What were the chief features of the economic life of New England prior to the nineteenth century?
  2. Trace and explain the development of American agriculture since 1860.
  3. What have been the causes and results of the growth of cities?
  4. State the case for and against a federal income tax in the United States.
  5. In what ways and by what means does war affect government regulation of industry?
  6. Indicate points at which British economic policy has influenced German policy.

B

  1. Compare the characters and careers of Philip II of Spain, Louis XIV of France, and William II of Germany.
  2. How does the history of Holland and of Portugal illustrate the principle of balance of power?
  3. Should the French Revolution be regarded as the beginning or as the end of a period?
  4. “…With the governments who have declared their independence and maintained it, and whose independence we have, on great consideration and on just principles acknowledged, we could not view any interposition for the purpose of oppressing them, or controlling in any other manner their destiny, by any European power, in any other light than as the manifestation of an unfriendly disposition toward the United States.”
    From what document is this quotation taken? Give a brief account of the subsequent applications of this principle.
  5. In how far was the navy responsible for the victory of the North in the Civil War?
  6. Give an account of the political and economic relations of Germany and the United States, since the Declaration of American Independence.

C

  1. Compare the powers exercised by the President of the United States in 1800, in 1850, and in 1916.
  2. Why should Europe dominate Africa?
  3. What are the arguments for and against centralization and decentralization of political power?
  4. Should members of cabinets sit and vote in national legislative bodies?
  5. To what causes has the expansion of the United States since 1800 been due?
  6. Why has the status of Turkey been a matter of importance in international affairs?

*  *  *  *  *  *  *  *  *  *  *

DIVISION SPECIAL EXAMINATION
ECONOMIC THEORY
[January 10, 1917]

Answer six questions.

A

Take from this group at least two and not more than four.

  1. “The difference between producer’s and consumer’s goods is at bottom only a difference of degree.” Explain. What is the essential difference between these two classes of goods?
  2. Define and analyze: (a) consumer’s surplus; (b) producer’s surplus. Under what conditions of cost does producer’s surplus arise? How is monopoly profit to be distinguished from producer’s surplus? Illustrate throughout by diagram.
  3. What is meant by “overinvestment”? “overaccumulation”? How does over-investment in particular industries “bring its own remedy”? How does a tendency toward overaccumulation?
  4. “The exchanges between different countries are analogous to the exchanges between non-competing groups within a country.” Explain.
  5. Discuss the more important difficulties in the way of socialism.
  6. What methods of investigation may be employed in economic theory? Give an illustration of the use of one of these methods.

B

Take from this group at least one and not more than two.

  1. Sketch and criticize the attitude of the English and American courts during the nineteenth century toward collective bargaining by labor.
  2. Trace the development of interest theories.
  3. To what extent were changes in the tariff policy of the United States during the nineteenth century based upon changes in the prevailing opinion concerning free trade and protection?

C

Take from this group at least one and not more than two.

  1. Contrast the concepts of justice in taxation and justice in the distribution of wealth.
  2. What is the case for and against the Single Tax?
  3. To what extent and by what means can trade-unions influence (a) the wages paid in a given occupation? (b) the general level of wages?
  4. What has been the importance of the “American frontier” in the distribution of wealth in the United States?

*  *  *  *  *  *  *  *  *  *  *

DIVISION SPECIAL EXAMINATION
MONEY AND BANKING
[January 10, 1917]

Answer six questions.

A

Take from this group at least one and not more than two.

  1. Analyze the relation of the value of gold to its cost of production. In what measure, if at all, is the indicated relation peculiar to gold?
  2. Discuss index numbers of prices with reference to (a) the purposes they may serve; (b) the various methods of construction; (c) the best index numbers for wholesale prices in the United States.
  3. Below is a combined statement of the 12 Federal Reserve Banks at a recent date.
    Explain the several items of the statement, and comment upon the more significant conditions disclosed.

RESOURCES

LIABILITIES

(all items in thousands of dollars)

Gold coin and certificates in vaults

$283,730

Capital paid in

$55,711

Gold settlement fund

$174,801

Government deposits

$26,319

Gold redemption fund

$1,404

Member bank deposits

$637,072

Legal tender notes, silver, etc.

$17,974

Federal Reserve notes—net

$14,296

5 per cent redemption fund

$470

Federal Reserve bank notes

$1,028

Bills discounted for members

$20, 501

Other liabilities

$634

Bills bought

$102,092

United States bonds

$39,427

One-year Treasury notes

$11,167

Municipal warrants

$22,166

Federal Reserve notes—net

$15,414

Due from other Federal Reserve Banks—net

$43,263

Other resources

$2,651

$735,060

$735,060

B

Take from this group at least one and not more than two.

  1. What were some of the forms of primitive money? What functions were performed by each form?
  2. Describe the economic cycle culminating in the crisis of 1837.
  3. Trace and explain the inflationist movement in the United States from 1865 to 1900.
  4. What connections have existed since 1830 between the financial administration of the Federal Government and banks in the United States?

C

Take from this group at least two and not more than four.

  1. Would universal bimetallism conduce to a stable market ratio between gold and silver? to a stable price level? What have been the chief obstacles to universal bimetallism? Are these obstacles increasing or decreasing?
  2. When prices are rising how are the following affected: (a) farmers; (b) factor operatives; (c) manufacturers; (d) stockholders; (e) owners of gold mines?
  3. Give a detailed account of silver since 1890.
  4. Wherein is the Federal Reserve System like the banking system recommended by the National Monetary Commission? Wherein is it different? Discuss the differences.
  5. Trace and explain the course of foreign exchange rates since the beginning of the European War.
  6. What is meant by “agricultural credit”? Describe briefly and criticize the existing facilities for agricultural credit in the United States.

    *  *  *  *  *  *  *  *  *  *  *

DIVISION SPECIAL EXAMINATION
CORPORATE ORGANIZATION, INCLUDING RAILROADS
[January 10, 1917]

Answer six questions.

A

Take from this group at least one and not more than two.

  1. Define “monopoly.” In what ways, if at all, is monopoly price affected by (a) cost of production per unit? (b) potential competition? (c) an elastic demand for the product? (d) the existence of satisfactory substitutes for the product?
  2. What official statistics throw light upon industrial organization in the United States? Criticise the available statistics of this subject.
  3. Describe the general features of the uniform accounting system now prescribed for railroads by the Interstate Commerce Commission. Why was the Commission given power to prescribe and supervise such a uniform accounting system?
  4. Enumerate the principal sources of railway statistics at the present time, and show the content, importance, and deficiencies (if any) of each.

B

Take from this group at least one and not more than two.

  1. Trace any connections between the corporate form of organization and the later stages of the Industrial Revolution.
  2. Sketch the history of the Sherman Anti-Trust Law and its enforcement.
  3. Give a brief account of the Granger movement.
  4. “Railways have been the most important agents in increasing the disparities of wealth in modern times.” Explain.

C

Take from this group at least two and not more than four.

  1. If a corporation regularly earns 5 per cent on all its outstanding securities, can it be said to be overcapitalized? What constitutes overcapitalization? How, if at all, should the law attempt to deal with overcapitalization?
  2. Analyze the present policy of the Federal Government in its regulation of industrial combinations in the United States.
  3. What connections exist between banks and industrial combinations in the United States? Contrast the situation here with that in France.
  4. In railroading in the United States, what is the significance of the following: (a) large plant; (b) joint cost; (c) physical valuation; (d) competition of water routes; (e) division of powers between state and Federal governments?
  5. Discuss the forms and significance of discriminations in railway rate-making. Which of the discriminations, if any, tend to persist under government ownership?
  6. What provisions should be made for the settlement of wage disputes on interstate railroads in the United States?

*  *  *  *  *  *  *  *  *  *  *

DIVISION SPECIAL EXAMINATIONS
[not transcribed for this post]

MODERN HISTORY SINCE 1789, INCLUDING AMERICAN HISTORY
[January 10, 1917]

AMERICAN GOVERNMENT
[January 10, 1917]

 

Source: Harvard University Archives. Divisional and general examinations, 1915-1975 (HUC 7000.18). Box 6, Bound Volume (stamped “Private Library Arthur H. Cole”) “Divisional Examinations 1916-1927”.

Image Source:  Harry Elkins Widener Memorial Library. Harvard Class Album 1920, p. 65.

 

Categories
Economists Teaching Undergraduate Williams

Williams. Leading Author of Political Economy Textbooks, Arthur Lathan Perry (1830-1905)

 

An earlier post mentioned the late 19th century economics textbook writer, Arthur Latham Perry, whose writings in the United States were rated by leading publishers in third/fourth place (behind Adam Smith and John Stuart Mill) in 1876. This post provides some biographical information, links to most editions of his three textbooks and two prefaces that describe his personal intellectual development as an economist. 

More about the economics professor Arthur Latham Perry:

Joseph Dorfman. Economic Mind in American Civilization, vol. 3 1865-1918. New York: 1949. pp. 56-63.

Stephen Meardon. A Tale of Two Tariff Commissions and One Dubious “Globalization Backlash”. Inter-American Development Bank, Research Department Working Paper 476 (November 2002), pp. 14-19.

________________________

Perry, Arthur Latham (1830-1905)
By Patrick J. McCurdy (Class of 2002)

Arthur Latham Perry, Williams Class of 1852, was born on February 27, 1830 and died on July 9, 1905. He was raised in poverty in New Hampshire but was able to attend Williams College, where he was one of the founders and charter members of the Alpha Delta Phi Fraternity.

After graduating, he taught in Washington for a year but returned immediately when offered a position at Williams as professor of history and political economy. He taught these subjects from 1854 to 1891. While at the college he also taught German language and literature 1854-1868. As a professor of Political Economy, 1859-1899, he wrote many textbooks and monographs and was considered a leading expert in the field of free trade.

For several years he toured the country during his summer holidays, giving lectures on the principle of free trade for The American Free Trade League. He also wrote important history books on Williamstown and Williams College, Origins of Williamstown (1894) and Williamstown and Williams College (1898).

In 1891 Professor Perry retired and acted as a consultant to the governors of Vermont, Massachusetts, New Hampshire and Connecticut. It was for his great devotion to Williams College that the Alpha Delta Phi fraternity house was named in honor of him.

Perry married Mary Brown Smedley, whose ancestors were some of the first settlers of Williamstown and famous leaders of the Revolutionary War.  With her he had five sons and one daughter: Bliss, Arthur, Walter, Carroll, Lewis and Grace.  Papers for years to come would describe the brothers as a member of an old and distinguished Williamstown family.”

Source: Williams College. Special Collections Website: Perry, Arthur Latham (1830-1905) webpage.

Image Source: Arthur Latham Perry. Miscellanies. Williamstown, Mass.: Published by the Author, 1902).

________________________

Arthur Latham Perry
Links to Editions of his Three Text-books in Political Economy

Perry, Arthur Latham. Elements of Political Economy (New York: Charles Scribner and Company). 1st ed. (1866); 2nd ed. (1867); 4th ed. (1868); 5th ed. (1869) ; 6th ed. (1871); 7th ed. (1872); 10th ed. (1873); 11th ed. (1874); 13th ed. (1875); 14th ed. (1877);  15?th ed. (1878);
Title shortened to Political Economy: 18th ed. (1883); 19th ed. (1887); 20th ed. (1888); 21st ed. (1892); 22nd ed. (1895).

Perry, Arthur Latham. An Introduction to Political Economy (New York: Scribner, Armstrong, & Company). 1st ed. (1877); 2nd ed. (1880).

Perry, Arthur Latham. Principles of Political Economy. (New York: Charles Scribner’s Sons). 1st ed. (1891);

________________________

Arthur Latham Perry, LL.D.
Orrin Sage Professor of History and Political Economy in Williams College

PREFACE
14th edition (1877) of Elements of Political Economy

THE good reception given to my book in its previous editions by many practical teachers, as well as by the general public, has prompted me to subject it to another thorough revision, by verifying former statements of fact and introducing many new ones to bring the book abreast of the present time, and by enlarging the discussion of principles at some points and curtailing it at others in the interest of symmetry and completeness; and prompts me also to write, even at this late day, a preface to the book, since I have grounds for believing that some of its friends may be pleased to learn of the circumstances under which it was originally written.

I had taught Political Economy in this Institution [Williams College] for ten or twelve years without ever forming any purpose to try my hand at a treatise on the subject. I had used for my teachers and guides the English writers, particularly Smith, Ricardo, Senior, and Mill; and had familiarized myself also with the American writers, particularly Carey, Wayland, Bowen, and Bascom. Almost from the outset of my studies, however, and increasingly as the years went by, I felt a dissatisfaction with what seemed to me to be the lack of scientific generality common to nearly all these writers. I could see no solid reason why economical discussions should be confined to tangible commodities, and not include as well personal services rendered for pay, and also credits of all kinds. I discussed this point repeatedly with Professor Bascom, at that time my colleague, and my mind had almost reached the conclusion in which it has now rested for many years, when my late friend Amasa Walker, who was even then a political economist of reputation, although he had not yet published his “Science of Wealth,” recommended to me Bastiat’s “Harmonies of Political Economy.” I had scarcely read a dozen pages in that remarkable book, when, closing it, and giving myself to an hour’s reflection, the field of Political Economy, in all its outlines and landmarks, lay before my mind just as it does to-day. I do not know how much I brought to this result, and how much towards it was derived from Bastiat. I only know that from that hour Political Economy has been to me a new science; and that I experienced then and thereafter a sense of having found something, and the cognate sense of having something of my own to say. This was in 1863.

Subsequently I learned much from Bastiat. It is a pleasure to acknowledge, in the amplest manner, one’s indebtedness to such a quickening writer as he is; and whoever will compare carefully with his book the following chapters on Value and Land, will see how much I have profited by his discussions; and he will also see that I have made an independent, not a servile, use of them. I dare to hope that the relations of utility to value are even more clearly and ultimately put than he has put them. Not to have availed myself of the truths which he has actually established would be as unjust to science, as not also to have endeavored, in the chapters on Exchange and Foreign Trade to execute the commission which he left to his readers in these words:

I hope yet to find at least one among them who will be able to demonstrate rigorously this proposition: the good of each tends to the good of all, as the good of all tends to the good of each ; and who will, moreover, be able to impress this truth upon men’s minds by rendering the proof of it simple, lucid, and irrefragable.
[Sterling’s Translation of the Harmonies, page 92.]

Under the impression that I could now say something about Political Economy that the public might be willing to hear, I wrote over my initials a series of articles for the “Springfield Republican,” which attracted attention, and brought me letters alike from friends and from entire strangers, – notably from the late Sidney Homer of Boston, whose name I shall always hold in grateful remembrance for this and other reasons, – urging me to continue to write on this subject, and suggesting that a formal treatise might be acceptable to the public. Thus solicited and encouraged, – Mr. Bowles kindly adding his voice to the rest, — I ventured with diffidence upon the composition of this book. It was not at all the primary purpose to prepare a text-book for the use of college students. I thought, indeed, that I might use the book with my own classes; but the general public was in my eye throughout. The supposed needs of merchants’ clerks and farmers’ sons, for example, influenced the matter and form much more than those of people intellectually further advanced. Indeed, there was, for this reason, in the first edition, a familiarity of phrase and illustration which justly elicited criticism, and which has since been gradually eliminated. While the original design, to be intelligible to all classes of readers, may doubtless have betrayed me at times into too familiar a style, it has continued, nevertheless, to control the form of every new and every altered paragraph.

That which is original in my book is perhaps rather to be sought for in the book as a whole than in the specific parts of it. The entire plan is different from that of any book published prior to 1865. I attempted a self-consistent and symmetrical development of the one idea of Value in each of the three forms in which it manifests itself. That the outline at least is complete, is confirmed by the fact that I have found no occasion since for any other chapters than the sixteen originally sketched. I dropped entirely the long-maintained distinctions between the Production, Distribution, and Consumption of Wealth. So far as I know, I was the first to drop the technical use of the term Wealth, – a term that has always proved an invincible foe to every one trying to wrestle with it scientifically: even Bastiat, athlete as he was, was floored in this encounter. I believe that new light has been thrown on the value of land, on the delicate relations between money as a medium and money as a measure, on the whole line of objections to free trade, and on the nature of property as related to every form of taxation. The historical chapters of the book cost me very great labor. In sketching the history of American tariffs, I had not before me the tracks of even a solitary pioneer. The same remark applies in the same degree to the chapter on Currency in the United States, – a subject that has since been worthily developed into a volume by my friend Professor Sumner of Yale College. In the opening chapter on the History of the Science, I was aided somewhat by the Introductory Discourse prefixed by Mr. McCulloch to his edition of Adam Smith, and also somewhat by the article “Political in the New American Cyclopedia; but all the quotations from the classical writers, as well as those from Locke, Hume, and Bastiat, were made at first hand.

Two or three editions of the present treatise had been issued before I had seen any of the books of Henry Dunning Macleod, and to the numerous points of our independent coincidence have been added, in my later editions, many points of information in matters of fact, and some distinctions in matters of science, for which I wish here to express in general my obligations to him. Mr. Macleod, in the first volume of his “Principles of Economical Philosophy.” has done me the great honor to associate my name with Condillac, Whately, Bastiat, and Chevalier, — the heads of the third great school in Political Economy. His own name is more worthy than mine, and more likely than mine, to stand permanently in that distinguished list.

The most recent writers, whom I have consulted, and to whom I feel under obligations, – and every writer who is both competent and earnest puts his readers under obligations of some sort, — are ,Governor Musgrave of South Australia, Professors Price and Jevons of England, and General Walker of New Haven; the points of the latter in respect to the so called wages-fund have led me to modify my previous views on that subject.

I can not conclude this preface without expressing my sense of indebtedness to the successive classes of intelligent young men, to whom I have presented, and with whom I have discussed, now for almost a quarter of a century, the facts and principles of this fascinating science. It seems to me as if every possible objection to the leading points in this book has been raised, at one time or another, in my own lecture-room. Sometimes I have been convicted of error in minor points, and many times been fortified in the truth, through an attempt to remove objections started thus by students. Nearly every one of the objections to free exchange answered in the chapter on Foreign Trade was broached in this way; and I deem it of the greatest advantage to any political economist, — an advantage to which Adam Smith himself was much indebted, – to have the opportunity to test views and theories over and over again in the presence of fresh and bright minds. It has not infrequently happened in my experience that new light has been thrown out upon a subject by a young man just grasping the thought for the first time.

A. L. P.

Williams College,
July 4, 1876.

Source: Arthur Latham Perry. Elements of Political Economy, 14th edition (1877), pp. v-xi.

________________________

Arthur Latham Perry, LL.D.
Orrin Sage Professor of History and Political Economy in Williams College

PREFACE.
Principles of Political Economy (1891)

It is now exactly twenty-five years since was published my first book upon the large topics at present in hand. It was but as a bow drawn at a venture, and was very properly entitled “Elements of Political Economy.” At that time I had been teaching for about a dozen years in this Institution the closely cognate subjects of History and Political Economy; cognate indeed, since Hermann Lotze, a distinguished German philosopher of our day, makes prominent among its only five most general phases, the “industrial” element in all human history; and since Goldwin Smith, an able English scholar, resolves the elements of human progress, and thus of universal history, into only three, namely, “the moral, the intellectual, and the productive.”

During these studious and observant years of teaching, I had slowly come to a settled conviction that I could say something of my own and something of consequence about Political Economy, especially at two points ; and these two proved in the sequel to be more radical and transforming points than was even thought of at the first. For one thing, I had satisfied myself, that the word “Wealth,” as at once a strangely indefinite and grossly misleading term, was worse than useless in the nomenclature of the Science, and would have to be utterly dislodged from it, before a scientific content and defensible form could by any possibility be given to what had long been called in all the modern languages the “Science of Wealth.” Accordingly, so far as has appeared in the long interval of time since 1865, these “Elements” were the very first attempt to undertake an orderly construction of Economics from beginning to end without once using or having occasion to use the obnoxious word. A scientific substitute for it was of course required, which, with the help of Bastiat, himself however still clinging to the technical term “Richesse,” was discerned and appropriated in the word “Value” ; a good word indeed, that can be simply and perfectly defined in a scientific sense of its own; and, what is more important still, that precisely covers in that sense all the three sorts of things which are ever bought and sold, the three only Valuables in short, namely, material Commodities, personal Services, commercial Credits. It is of course involved in this simple-looking but far-reaching change from “Wealth” to “Value,” that Economics become at once and throughout a science of Persons buying and selling, and no longer as before a science of Things howsoever manipulated for and in their market.

For another thing, before beginning to write out the first word of that book, I believed myself to have made sure, by repeated and multiform inductions, of this deepest truth in the whole Science, which was a little after embodied (I hope I may even say embalmed) in a phrase taking its proper place in the book itself, — A market for Products is products in Market. The fundamental thus tersely expressed may be formulated more at length in this way: One cannot Sell without at the same instant and in the same act Buying, nor Buy anything without simultaneously Selling something else; because in Buying one pays for what he buys, which is Selling, and in Selling one must take pay for what is sold, which is Buying. As these universal actions among men are always voluntary, there must be also an universal motive leading up to them; this motive on the part of both parties to each and every Sale can be no other than the mutual satisfaction derivable to both; the inference, accordingly, is easy and invincible, that governmental restrictions on Sales, or prohibitions of them, must lessen the satisfactions and retard the progress of mankind.

Organizing strictly all the matter of my book along these two lines of Personality and Reciprocity, notwithstanding much in it that was crude and more that was redundant and something that was ill-reasoned and unsound, the book made on account of this original mode of treatment an immediate impression upon the public, particularly upon teachers and pupils; new streaks of light could not but be cast from these new points of view, upon such topics especially as Land and Money and Foreign Trade; and nothing is likely ever to rob the author of the satisfaction, which he is willing to share with the public, of having contributed something of importance both in substance and in feature to the permanent upbuilding of that Science, which comes closer, it may be, to the homes and happiness and progress of the People, than any other science. And let it be said in passing, that there is one consideration well-fitted to stimulate and to reward each patient and competent scientific inquirer, no matter what that science may be in which he labors, namely, this: Any just generalization, made and fortified inductively, is put thereby beyond hazard of essential change for all time; for this best of reasons, that God has constructed the World and Men on everlasting lines of Order.

As successive editions of this first book were called for, and as its many defects were brought out into the light through teaching my own classes from it year after year, occasion was taken to revise it and amend it and in large parts to rewrite it again and again; until, in 1883, and for the eighteenth edition, it was recast from bottom up for wholly new plates, and a riper title was ventured upon, — “Political Economy,” — instead of the original more tentative “Elements.” Since then have been weeded out the slight typographical and other minute errors, and the book stands now in its ultimate shape.

My excellent publishers, who have always been keenly and wisely alive to my interests as an author, suggested several times after the success of the first book was reasonably assured, that a second and smaller one should be written out, with an especial eye to the needs of high schools and academies and colleges for a text-book within moderate limits, yet soundly based and covering in full outline the whole subject. This is the origin of the “Introduction to Political Economy” first published in 1877, twelve years after the other. Its success as a text-book and as a book of reading for young people has already justified, and will doubtless continue to justify in the future, the forethought of its promoters. It has found a place in many popular libraries, and in courses of prescribed reading. Twice it has been carefully corrected and somewhat enlarged, and is now in its final form. In the preface to the later editions of the ” Introduction ” may be found the following sentence, which expresses a feeling not likely to undergo any change in the time to come: — “I have long been, and am still, ambitious that these books of mine may become the horn-books of my countrymen in the study of this fascinating Science.”

Why, then, should I have undertaken of my own motion a new and third book on Political Economy, and attempted to mark the completion of the third cycle of a dozen years each of teaching it, by offering to the public the present volume? One reason is implied in the title, “Principles of Political Economy.” There are three extended historical chapters in the earlier book, occupying more than one-quarter of its entire space, which were indeed novel, which cost me wide research and very great labor, and which have also proven useful and largely illustrative of almost every phase of Economics ; but I wanted to leave behind me one book of about the same size as that, devoted exclusively to the Principles of the Science, and using History only incidentally to illustrate in passing each topic as it came under review. For a college text-book as this is designed to become, and for a book of reading and reference for technical purposes, it seems better that all the space should be taken up by purely scientific discussion and illustration. This does not mean, however, that great pains have not been taken in every part to make this book also easily intelligible, and as readable and interesting as such careful discussions can be made.

A second reason is, to provide for myself a fresh text-book to teach from. My mind has become quite too thoroughly familiarized with the other, even down to the very words, by so long a course of instructing from it, for the best results in the class-room. Accordingly, a new plan of construction has been adopted. Instead of the fourteen chapters there, there are but seven chapters here. Not a page nor a paragraph as such has been copied from either of the preceding books. Single sentences, and sometimes several of them together, when they exactly fitted the purposes of the new context, have been incorporated here and there, in what is throughout both in form and style a new book, neither an enlargement nor an abridgment nor a recasting of any other. I anticipate great pleasure in the years immediately to come from the handling with my classes, who have always been of much assistance to me from the first in studying Political Economy, a fresh book written expressly for them and for others like-circumstanced; in which every principle is drawn from the facts of every-day life by way of induction, and also stands in vital touch with such facts (past or present) by way of illustration.

The third and only other reason needful to be mentioned here is, that in recent years the legislation of my country in the matter of cheap Money and of artificial restrictions on Trade has run so directly counter to sound Economics in their very core, that I felt it a debt due to my countrymen to use once more the best and ripest results of my life-long studies, in the most cogent and persuasive way possible within strictly scientific limits, to help them see and act for themselves in the way of escape from false counsels and impoverishing statutes. Wantonly and enormously heavy lies the hand of the national Government upon the masses of the people at present. But the People are sovereign, and not their transient agents in the government; and the signs are now cheering indeed, that they have not forgotten their native word of command, nor that government is instituted for the sole benefit of the governed and governing people, nor that the greatest good of the greatest number is the true aim and guide of Legislation. I am grateful for the proofs that appear on every hand, that former labors in these directions and under these motives have proven themselves to have been both opportune and effective; and I am sanguine almost to certainty, that this reiterated effort undertaken for the sake of my fellow-citizens as a whole, will slowly bear abundant fruit also, as towards their liberty of action as individuals, and in their harmonious co-operation together as entire classes to the end of popular comforts and universal progress.

A. L. PERRY.

Williams College,
November 25, 1890.

Source: Preface to Arthur Latham Perry, Principles of Political Economy (New York: Charles Schribner’s Sons), pp. vii-xii.

 

 

Categories
Columbia Suggested Reading Syllabus Undergraduate

Columbia. Syllabus and reading assignments from economic affairs course, 1931-36

 

 

One fine research day when I was working in the splendid reading room of the New York Public Library, I came across a ninety page syllabus for a junior year course at Columbia College “The Organization of Economic Affairs” published in 1930. From two articles in the student newspaper “The Columbia Daily Spectator” it looks like this course had a five-year run from 1931-32 through 1935-36 (see below). I was struck by the deliberate sidestepping of “economic principles”, i.e. theory, and was less than impressed by the preface to the syllabus that I have nonetheless transcribed for the digital record. In addition I have transcribed the 73 reading assignments along with the list of required reading for the course (with links to the books that I could find).  For those interested in more, there are indeed 54 pages of detailed questions and commentary for the reading assignments in the published syllabus.

Of some interest for a modern instructor is that this syllabus includes absolutely no discussion of course requirements, grading or policies. The Columbia Daily Spectator description of the course has introduced me to the concept of “Wallop Courses” which in my day at Yale (early 1970s) were referred to as “Gut Courses” and at Harvard (ca. 1910) such courses attracted “snappers”.

___________________

Reform of Columbia College Economics Course Offerings for 1931-32.

“Contemporary Civilization 3-4 has been dropped from the schedule. The entire Economics and Social Science department’s presentation has been reorganized with many sweeping changes indicated.”

Source: Columbia Daily Spectator, Vol. LIII, No. 122 (15 April 1930), p. 1.

 ___________________

Wallop Courses

         This series outlines courses in the University generally considered by students as easy, either because of the nature of the material or—the chief point—the absence of rigid study and assignment requirements. The purpose of the series is to determine, after investigation how such courses function; the attitude and methods of the instructors; the attitude of students toward course and instructor.

Merely because a course is a “wallop,” does not prevent students from deriving much benefit from it, or from doing unassigned readings if the spirit of the course can move them to it. The question is, What happens in “easy” courses? If a course is invaluable no one is to be blamed because it can be considered a “wallop.”

         Economic 3-4—The organization of economic affairs. Two points each session, and two maturity credits each session. Drs. [Addison T.] Cutler, [George S.] Mitchell and [Robert] Valeur.

This course is not a “wallop” in the strict sense of this rather vague word. It is rumored about the place that if the course is easy, (which it is not, according to some statements,) that it is due more to the ability of the instructors to get the material across than to facility of the material. There is a considerable list of assigned readings, but by paying attention in class it is deemed possible to make a fair grade with a minimum of reading.

The material studied consists of surveys of various important U. S. industries, and of studies of governmental policies toward industry and labor under the New Deal. The material is said to be about 25 per cent repetition of Contemporary Civilization B. Two term papers are required during the year, and grading of these papers is generally considered to be fairly liberal.

Fortunately, or otherwise, the course will be dropped at the conclusion of this year. The material will be included in a new course, to be known as Economics 7-8, which will combine the material of Eco. 3-4 and 5-6, a course in economic theory.

This change is expected to meet general approval of students, as, at present there is some overlapping of material between the two Courses, and both are usually taken by students specializing in Economics.

Source: Columbia Daily Spectator, Volume LIX, No. 81 (21 Feb. 1936), p. 2.

___________________

COLUMBIA UNIVERSITY
IN THE CITY OF NEW YORK

THE ORGANIZATION OF ECONOMIC AFFAIRS
ECONOMICS 3-4

A SYLLABUS PREPARED AND EDITED BY THE STAFF OF THE DEPARTMENT OF ECONOMICS IN COLUMBIA COLLEGE

PREFACE

ASSIGNMENT NO. 1

To the Students of Economics 3-4:

You have completed the two-year course called “An Introduction to Contemporary Civilization.” It is assumed that you wish to explore in more detail than was possible there the problems of “Economics”. You are not unacquainted with economic affairs, for, in addition to your daily observations, you have examined to a certain extent the development of man’s ways of making a living, his ways of living with his fellow men and his ways of interpreting the world. You have also considered some of the difficult problems centering around modern industry as it expands and affects more and more all phases of life.

What then, will be the content of this course? Shall it consist of the “principles” of economics, or a study of many economic problems, or a perusal of the theoretical contribution of some authoritative economist, or something else? For better or for worse “something else” has been chosen, and that choice is roughly indicated by the title of the course, “The Organization of Economic Affairs.” The reasons for this choice and the manner of executing the task have been dictated by a number of considerations, which have to do broadly with three sorts of things: the nature of your previous experience; other curricular offerings both in and out of the field of economics; and modern descriptive and analytical trends in the study and teaching of economics. In no genuine sense will you be “specializing” even here. You will be given other opportunities for particular study: the curriculum offers courses in money and banking, labor problems, public finance, business cycles and the like.

This course will center about economic organization today. But “economic organization” is huge, sprawling and complex. The term itself is subject to considerable ambiguity. Unfortunately it is not possible to picture economic organization with the same degree of precision as might be attained in describing the layout of a given steel mill, or the organization of the United States Steel Corporation, or the organization of the steel industry. The latter type of task is puzzling enough, as you will observe in the first section of the course. But economic organization in the large is infinitely more complex and bothersome. In a hundred courses dealing with economic organization which might be offered in as many universities, it is probable that one hundred different plans of procedure would be invented. This is true of the approach to most bodies of subject matter. It is abundantly and poignantly true in the present case.

Economic affairs are in process of change. Even though this course is intended to be concerned strictly with the contemporary, rather than with the historical, it will in no sense be addressed to fixed or static conditions. It would be strange indeed, after spending a good part of two years in studying developing institutions, to assume that institutions have ceased changing. They must be caught on the wing. Changes are immediately behind us, around us, and before us. We shall probably not have frequent occasion to go back of 1920. And the impossibility of isolating a static “present” may force us into some slight projection of the future.

Another characteristic of the course is its use of quantitative data. Many, although not necessarily all, economic phenomena are matters of “more” or “less”. Quantitative tools are an increasingly important part of the equipment for the study of social phenomena. We can hardly fail to recognize this fact, whatever our private convictions as to the ultimate value of “statistics” in general, or whatever our like or dislike for playing with figures. Our quantitative data will not be used for exercises in statistical technique (there are other opportunities for that), but rather for the direct purpose of coming face to face with economic institutions in operation and discovering their meaning, or at least suggested interpretations of meaning. In this, there are two apparent dangers: (1) the student may not be able to interpret the data; (2) he may over-estimate its significance. The latter may be a real danger if a reader accepts too readily a conclusion drawn from statistical data or accepts even the elements of a statistical series, when ignorant of the methods that have been used by the statistician. We shall make our way with at least a forewarning of these dangers. Some comfort may be had from the avoidance of highly specialized and refined statistical procedures. It will be found that in many cases the authors of the materials used have shown a commendable candor in describing the limitations of their own methods.

A word as to the materials used. An emphasis on change, and the use of quantitative data, will be found to characterize the book which will provide about half the reading material: Recent Economic Changes. This is a two-volume work prepared by the National Bureau of Economic Research. It is the product of many minds. It is admittedly not perfect for our purposes; but it does present the most comprehensive and incisive picture available concerning American economic organization on the move. We present it as the best raw material for the purpose at hand. Supplementing this book various other materials appear in the outline of the course.

The outline does not follow the order of topics in Recent Economic Changes. A three-fold division of another sort is employed. First comes an analysis of a small number of important industries, in each case dealing with the industry’s technology, its business organization, and its leading problems and trends. This is for the purpose of providing specific materials for a concrete and realistic background. The classification by “industries”, rather than by topics which are common to all industries, is followed especially because the economic activities of everyday life are usually centered about some particular industry. Recent Economic Changesis not used in this section.

The second section deals with “industrial relationships”. Here we take leave of the boundaries between the specific industries such as steel and textiles, and begin to consider the institutions and practices which industries have in common, and which, taken together, provide consumers with goods and services. Included here are recent trends in industrial technology, transportation, marketing, labor, finance and especially the price system. Each of these topics is studies in its own terms and usually without confinement to any one industry. In this section the use of Recent Economic Changesas text prevails.

The third section deals with the income, the standards of living, and the consumption levels of the various groups of the population; and a consideration of desirable public policy toward the organization and conduct of industry. This study of policy will include not only some familiar current issues such as farm relief, tariff-making and trust policy, but also some larger questions of planned as against unplanned production. Here Recent Economic Changesassumes a somewhat subordinate place in the reading list.

The course centers about economic life as it is found in the United States today; but this does not imply a narrowly nationalistic viewpoint, or a total exclusion of international features of industrialism. These appear inevitably at various points and especially toward the latter part of the third section where planned and unplanned production are discussed with reference to the Russian five-year economic plan and the long-range economic program devised by the British Liberal Party, with reference as well to our own planning and control of industry during the emergency of the World War.

The fact that many or most of the topics listed are already familiar to college Juniors may cause the course to appear repetitive. Any annoyance on this score should be short-lived. The similarities in names of topics often conceal real differences. Since the course is built upon the foundations of the two-years’ study of “Contemporary Civilization”, a more concentrated and intense piece of study may be expected than would be if the extended survey had not already been made.

 

LIST OF REQUIRED READINGS

Recent Economic Changes in the United States.McGraw-Hill, 1929 (text).

Berglund, A. and Wright, P. G.: The Tariff on Iron and Steel. The Brookings Institution, Washington, 1929.

Black, J. D.: Agricultural Reform in the United States. McGraw-Hill, 1929.

Britain’s Industrial Future. Benn, 1928.

Chase, S., Dunn, R., and Tugwell, R.G.: Soviet Russia in the Second Decade. John Day, 1928.

Commons, J.R. and Andrews, J.B.: Principles of Labor Legislation(second edition). Harper, 1927. [First edition, 1920]

Ellingwood, A.R. and Coombs, W.: The Government and Labor. McGraw-Hill, 1926.

Foster, W.Z.: The Great Steel Strike and Its Lessons. Viking Press, 1920.

Garrett, P.W.: Government Control over Prices. (Price Bulletin No. 3, War Industries Board.) Government Printing Office, Washington, 1920.

Keezer, D.M. and May, S.: Public Control of Business. Harper, 1930.

Lewisohn, S.A., Draper, C.S., Commons, J.R., and Lescohier, D.D.: Can Business Prevent Unemployment?Knopf, 1925.

Page, T.W.: Making the Tariff in the United States. McGraw-Hill, 1924.

Seager, H.R. and Gulick, C.A., Jr.: Trust and Corporation Problems. Harper, 1929.

Stocking, G.W.: The Oil Industry and the Competitive System. Houghton Mifflin, 1925.

Tugwell, R.G.: Industry’s Coming of Age. Harcourt, Brace, 1927.

Tugwell, R.G., Munro, T., and Stryker, R.E.: American Economic Lifeand the Means of Its Improvement(third edition). Harcourt, Brace, 1930.

Warshow, H.T., Representative Industries in the United States. Holt, 1928.

ARTICLES

Hartl, E.M., and Ernst, E.G.: “The Steel Mills Today,” The New Republic, February 19, 1930

“Steel’s Empire is Restless.” The Business Week, February 12, 1930.

Tugwell, R.G.: “Farm Relief and a Permanent Agriculture,” Reprinted from The Annals of the American Academy of Political and Social Science, March 1929.

Tugwell, R.G.: “Experimental Control in Russian Industry,” Reprinted from the Political Science Quarterly, Vol. XLIII, No. 2, June 1929.

SCHEDULE OF ASSIGNMENTS

I. SOME IMPORTANT AMERICAN INDUSTRIES

    1. Preface to the course.
      Introduction to Section I.
    2. Berglund and Wright: The Tariff on Iron and Steel, 10-40, 75-103.
    3. Seager and Gulick: Trust and Corporation Problems, 216-242.
    4. Seager and Gulick, 243-262.
      “Steel’s Empire is Restless,” The Business Week, Feb. 12, 1930.
    5. W. Z. Foster: The Great Steel Strike, Introduction, 1-7, 16-27, 50-67, 162-175.
      Hartl and Ernst: “The Steel Mills Today,” The New Republic, Feb. 19, 1930.
    6. Reading to be assigned.
    7. Reading to be assigned.
    8. Reading to be assigned.
    9. G. W. Stocking: The Oil Industry and the Competitive System, 1-35.
    10. Stocking, 83-114.
    11. Stocking, 115-164.
    12. Stocking, 165-210.
    13. Stocking, 238-265, 303-314.
    14. H. T. Warshow: Representative Industries, 3-44.
    15. Warshow, 44-71.
    16. Meat Packing. Warshow, 440-469.

II. INDUSTRIAL RELATIONSHIPS

    1. Introduction to Section II.
      Changes in new and old industries. Recent Economic Changes, 79-95.
    2. Technical changes in manufacturing industries. Recent Economic Changes, 94-146.
    3. Technical Changes in manufacturing industries. Recent Economic Changes, 147-166.
    4. Suggested theories to account for increased productivity. R.G. Tugwell: Industry’s Coming of Age, 29-64.
    5. The changing structure of industry. Recent Economic Changes, 167-194.
    6. The changing structure of industry. Recent Economic Changes, 194-218.
    7. Recent Economic Changes, 425-462.
    8. Recent Economic Changes, 462-490.
    9. Proceedings, 1928 Convention of the American Federation of Full Fashioned Hosiery Workers.
    10. Excerpts from the Proceedings of the 1929 Special Convention of the American Federation of Full Fashioned Hosiery Workers (see Appendix).
    11. Transportation: railways. Recent Economic Changes, 255-279.
    12. Transportation: railways. Recent Economic Changes, 279-308.
    13. Transportation: shipping. Recent Economic Changes, 309-319.
    14. Recent Economic Changes, 321-343.
    15. Recent Economic Changes, 343-374.
    16. Recent Economic Changes, 374-402.
    17. Recent Economic Changes, 402-421.
    18. Money and credit and their effect on business. Recent Economic Changes, 657-679.
    19. Money and credit and their effect on business. Recent Economic Changes, 680-707.
    20. Foreign markets and foreign credits. Recent Economic Changes, 709-725.
    21. Foreign markets and foreign credits. Recent Economic Changes, 725-756.
    22. The system of prices. Tugwell, Munro, and Stryker: American Economic Life (third edition), 368-378.
      Excerpt from W. C. Mitchell: Business Cycles, the Problem and its Setting (see Appendix).
    23. Price movements and related industrial changes. Recent Economic Changes, 602-623.
    24. Price movements and related industrial changes. Recent Economic Changes, 623-655.

III. THE FRUITS OF INDUSTRY AND SOCIAL POLICY

    1. Introduction to Section III.
      Consumption and the standard of living. Recent Economic Changes, 13-51.
    2. Consumption and the standard of living. Recent Economic Changes, 51-78.
    3. The national income and its distribution. Recent Economic Changes, 757-774.
    4. The national income and its distribution. Recent Economic Changes, 774-813.
    5. The national income and its distribution. Recent Economic Changes, 813-839.
    6. Farm relief policy. J.D. Black: Agricultural Reform in the United States, 232-270.
    7. Farm relief policy. Black, 321-366.
    8. Farm relief policy. Black, 368-405.
    9. Farm relief policy. R.G. Tugwell: “Farm Relief and a Permanent Agriculture,” The Annals of the American Academy of Political and Social Science, March 1929.
    10. Tariff policy. T. W. Page: Making the Tariff in the United States, 41-99.
    11. Tariff policy. Page, 100-170.
    12. Tariff policy. Page, 171-239.
    13. Social legislation. Commons and Andrews: Principles of Labor Legislation, 1-34.
      Ellingwood and Coombs: The Government and Labor, 20-26.
    14. Social legislation. Ellingwood and Coombs, 443-450, 461-467.
      Reprint of Lochner vs. New York (see Appendix).
    15. Social legislation. Ellingwood and Coombs, 559-579, 516-537.
    16. Social legislation. Lewisohn, Draper, Commons, and Lescohier: Can Business Prevent Unemployment? 152-210.
    17. Public policy toward large businesses. Keezer and May: Public Control of Business, 40-84.
    18. Public policy toward large businesses. Keezer and May, 85-120.
    19. Public policy toward large businesses. Keezer and May, 121-148.
    20. Public policy toward large businesses. Keezer and May, 149-183.
    21. Public policy toward large businesses. Keezer and May, 184-229.
    22. Planned production in Russia. Chase, Dunn, and Tugwell: Soviet Russia in the Second Decade, 14-54.
    23. Planned production in Russia. Chase, Dunn, and Tugwell, 189-215, 55-66.
    24. Planned production in Russia. R.G. Tugwell: “Experimental Control in Russian Industry,” Political Science Quarterly, June 1929.
    25. Planned production in Great Britain. Britain’s Industrial Future, the report of the Liberal Industrial Inquiry, v-vii, xvii-xxiv, 3, 14-20, 61-92, 116-120.
    26. Planned production in Great Britain. Britain’s Industrial Future, 139-141, 205-225, 265-279, 341-366.
    27. War-time planning and control in the United States. Excerpt from American Industry in the War (see Appendix).
      W. Garrett: Government Control Over Prices, 23-39.
    28. War-time planning and control. Garrett, 40-87.
    29. War-time planning and control. Garrett, 151-194.
    30. War-time planning and control. Garrett, 195-244.
    31. War-time planning and control. Garrett, 350-360, 380-414.
    32. A review of recent economic changes. Recent Economic Changes, 841-874.
    33. A review of recent economic changes. Recent Economic Changes, 874-910.

Source: Copy of The Organization of Economic Affairs–A Syllabus (1930) at the New York Public Library.

Image Source: The New York City Public Library Reading Room. Library of Congress Prints and Photographs Division Washington, D.C.