Categories
M.I.T. Regulations Teaching Undergraduate

M.I.T. Dean’s request for writing requirements for elective subjects in economics department, 1953

 

The following exchange between the M.I.T. Dean of Humanities and Social Studies (John E. Burchard) and the representative of the chairperson of the Economics Department (Charles A. Myers covering for Ralph E. Freeman) gives us a short list of undergraduate courses that would have regularly had non-economics B.S. students attending to satisfy their distributional requirements in 1953. Dean Burchard’s informational request seems to be a fishing expedition with the hope of landing any evidence that some instructor in some course was helping to improve M.I.T. undergraduate writing skills. It is also interesting to see that sociology, psychology, and political science were all subjects  administered by the economics department.

____________________________

Dean Reminding Economics Department about Information Request

May 6, 1953

Memorandum to Professor [Charles Andrew] Myers:

I asked Ralph [Evans Freeman] a while ago to get me some information but have not heard from him and imagine it got left and wonder if you could undertake this survey for me in the near future and give me an answer.

The problem is that those of us who were worried about the English style of our students at M.I.T. are pretty certain that we will never get a good overall performance on the mere basis of instruction in the first two years where writing is required and read and criticized. The burden of continuously upholding the standard obviously is going to rest with the professional departments and I have no doubt there are great inconsistencies in this throughout the Institute, and I also have no doubt most of them are pretty remiss in this obligation.

Before starting any campaign on this question, however, it is obvious that I need to know whether the house of my own School is in point of fact in order, or if not how far it is out of order.

I accordingly asked Professor [Howard Russell] Bartlett and Professor [Ralph] Freeman to get me an indication of the amount of writing required in the various subjects which might be elected by students in the School. In the History Department this was obviously limited to non-professional subjects and for the moment I am more interested in the general electives in the Department of Economics than I am in what policing you do of your own majors. It would be more helpful to know about both.

What Professor Bartlett did was write me a general answer which told me how many papers were required each semester, the approximate length, and how many written examinations. I wonder if it would be possible for you to dig out the same information for the various appropriate subjects in the Department of Economics and report to me fairly soon. I would like to be thinking about this problem during the summer.

Sincerely yours,
[unsigned]
John E. Burchard
Dean of Humanities and Social Studies

Jeb/h

*  *  *  *  *  *  *  *  *  *  *  *  *  *  *  *

Economics Department’s First Response to Dean’s Request for Information

Massachusetts Institute of Technology
Industrial Relations Section
Department of Economics and Social Science
Cambridge, Massachusetts

May 11, 1953

Memorandum to Dean John E. Burchard

Dear John:

This is in answer to your memorandum of May 6th. I guess this is something Ralph was unable to compete before he left and I thought I should get done promptly since I will be leaving tomorrow for the annual research meeting of the Committee on Labor Market Research of the Social Science Research Council in Minneapolis. George Shultz is one of the invited guests.

Perhaps the best way to answer your question is to list what the various people in charge of the various undergraduate subjects reported:

14.01 [Economic Principles I] ([Robert Lyle] Bishop) — 3 or 4 written hour examinations, mostly of the essay type
14.02 [Economic Principles II] ([Edgar Carey] Brown) — 4 written hour examinations, no term papers
14.03 [Prices and Production] ([Robert Lyle] Bishop) — 2 to 3 hour examinations; no term papers
14.09 [Economic Problems Seminar] ([Paul Anthony] Samuelson) — no written exams, but 2 written papers, one long and one short, plus oral presentation of the content of the paper prior to the submission of the written paper
14.51 [International Relations] ([Norman Judson] Padelford) — 8 written quizzes of 35 to 40 minutes in length; no term paper, except that sometimes there are written projects.
14.61 [Industrial Relations] (Doug [Douglass Vincent] Brown and [John Royston] Coleman) — 3 hour examinations and 3 written case reports
14.63 [Labor Relations] ([George Pratt] Shultz) — 3 written hour examinations and one term paper
14.64 [Labor Economics and Public Policy] ([George Benedict] Baldwin) — 3 hour examinations and one written term paper
14.70 [Introductory Psychology] ([George Armitage] Miller) — 2 or 3 written hour examinations, partly objective in character; no term paper
14.72 [Union-Management Relations] ([Joseph Norbert] Scanlon) — 2 hour examinations and a special paper on a particular case
14.73 [Organization and Communications in Groups] ([Alex] Bavelas and [Herbert Allen] Shepard) — 2 objective-type examinations and one written essay-type examination
14.75 [Experimental Psychology] ([Joseph Carl Robnett] Licklider) — no examinations, but a written paper on the experiment, suitable for publication — this latter test is never quite met but students are expected to write with that end in view
14.77 [Psychology of Communication] ([George Armitage] Miller) — 3 objective-type examinations
14.91 and 14.92 [The American Political System;
Comparative Political and Economic Systems]
([Jesse Harris] Proctor and [Roy] Olton) — 3 written hour exams, no term paper in the first term — 3 written hour exams plus a written term paper in the second term
15.30 [Personnel Administration] ([Paul] Pigors) — 4 written cases, one term paper and one hour examination

 

I think this pretty well covers the principal courses which are taken by undergraduate students in other departments. I think my own experience in teaching such undergraduate courses as 14.61 and 14.63 is similar to that of most of the staff, in that I have called attention to students of misspelled words, poor grammar, and generally poor organization and expression of written answers and papers. I really doubt if we can do much more or should do much more. It would be quite a task to go over each written examination with each student in detail, or even to do this after they have submitted a term paper. From time to time I have done this with some theses but not as a general rule, since the student is warned in advance that his grade will depend not only on content, but on expression.

I hope this gives you the information you need.

Sincerely
[signed] Charlie
Charles A. Myers

m:g

*  *  *  *  *  *  *  *  *  *  *  *  *  *  *  *

Follow-up Request by Dean

May 12, 1953

Memorandum to Professor Myers

Dear Charlie:

Your memorandum of yesterday answers my question about the writing in part.

I guess I agree, though I wish I didn’t have to, that people in the department cannot be expected to act as writing critics for students who are still defective in their English. Though I wish more people required papers and fewer examinations, this is obviously a matter of individual teachers’ methods.

The remaining question which I think is not answered is I believe a critical one, namely, does poor writing really result in a lower grade, and if it does is that single comment written on to the paper when it is returned with the grade to the student?

I hate to trouble you further but wonder if you would be able to explore this with the same group of people.

Sincerely yours,
[unsigned]
John E. Burchard
Dean of Humanities and Social Studies

Jeb/h

*  *  *  *  *  *  *  *  *  *  *  *  *  *  *  *

Economics Department’s Response to Follow-up Request by the Dean

Massachusetts Institute of Technology
Industrial Relations Section
Department of Economics and Social Science
Cambridge, Massachusetts

June 1, 1953

Memorandum to Dean John E. Burchard

Dear John:

These are some further thoughts on your memo of May 12th, asking me to check again on whether poor writing really results in a lower grade in our courses and whether comments are written on the papers when they are returned with grades to the students.

Nearly everyone with whom I have talked here agrees that poor writing does result in a lower grade, if by “poor writing” is meant poor organization, hasty sentence construction, and confusing or fuzzy thinking as expressed in written words. Poor spelling apparently does not count so much, although Bob Bishop and I specifically do encircle misspelled words on written exams and papers. Comments on poor organization, etc., are specifically written on papers and exams when returned to students, and I know that many of us have stressed to students before writing exams and papers that their grades will depend in part on the way in which their material is organized and presented.

One further experience might be of interest in connection with your comment that you wish more people would require papers and fewer examinations. During the past term Jim Baldwin gave term papers in 14.64 and found that the pressure of senior theses on the students was so great that they did a very poor job on the papers. His grades reflect this, but he is bothered about the apparent conflict between the senior thesis and the term paper requirement in senior Humanities and Social Studies courses. Maybe we ought to place more emphasis on good writing in the senior thesis in the Department and in other Departments.

Sincerely,
[signed] Charlie
Charles A. Myers

CAM:dg

Source: M.I.T., Institute Archives and Special Collections, School of Humanities and Social Sciences. Office of the Dean, Records, 1934-1964. Box 3, Folder “103, Economics Department, General, March 1951-1956”.
For [first and middle names of instructors] and [course titles]: Course Catalogue of the Massachusetts Institute of Technology, 1952-53.

Image Source: (Left) John Burchard ; (Right) Charles A. Myers. MIT Museum Legacy Website (People Collection).

Categories
Exam Questions Harvard Principles Suggested Reading Syllabus Teaching Undergraduate

Harvard. Principles of Economics. Reading assignments, Exams, 1928

 

Partial course outlines from Harvard’s principles of economics course from 1927-28 and 1928-29 were found filed with the economics course outlines for 1938-39 in the Harvard Archives. The principal instructors for the courses in both years were Harold Hitchings Burbank and Edward Hastings Chamberlin, so combining the first semester outline from 1928-29 with the second semester outline from 1927-28 as transcribed below gives us a synthetic syllabus for the 1927-29 years. This post also includes enrollment figures for the two academic years as well as the corresponding semester final exams for the course. Links to the assigned textbooks have been added to complete the package.

____________________________

Course Announcement and Description

ECONOMICS
GENERAL STATEMENT

Course A is introductory to the other courses. It is intended to give a general survey of the subject for those who take but one course in Economics, and also to prepare for the further study of the subject in advanced courses. It may not be taken by Freshmen without the consent of the instructor. Students concentrating in Economics should elect Course A in their Sophomore year, except in unusual cases. History 1 or Government 1, or both of these courses, will usually be taken to advantage before Economics A…

INTRODUCTORY COURSES
Primarily for Undergraduates

A. Principles of Economics

Tu., Th., Sat., at 11. Professor [Harold Hitchings] Burbank, Dr. [Edward Hastings] Chamberlin, Dr. [Charles Holt] Taylor, and Messrs. [John Bever] Crane, [Melvin Gardner] de Chazeau, [Edgar Jerome] Johnson, [Delmar] Leighton, [Talcott] Parsons, [Carl Johann] Ratzlaff, [James Harold] Shoemaker, [Samuel Sommerville] Stratton, [John Phillip] Wernette, [Harry Dexter] White and [Earle Micajah] Winslow; with lectures on selected subjects by Professor [Frank William] Taussig and other Members of the Department.

Course A gives a general introduction to economic study, and a general view of Economics for those who have not further time to give to the subject. It undertakes an analysis of the present organization of industry, the mechanism of exchange, the determination of value, and the distribution of wealth.

The course is conducted entirely by oral discussion in sections. Taussig’s Principles of Economics is used as the basis of discussion.

Course A may not be taken by Freshmen without the consent of the instructor.

SourceOfficial Register of Harvard University, Vol. XXV, No. 29 (May 26, 1928). Division of History, Government, and Economics 1928-29, pp. 63-64.

____________________________

Enrollment in Economics A, 1928-29

[Economics] A. Professor Burbank and Dr. Chamberlin, Dr. Taylor and Messrs. Leighton, Stratton, Winslow, O.H. Taylor, E.J. Johnson, de Chazeau, Parsons, Wernette, H.D. White, and Ratzlaff, Crane and Shoemaker. — Principles of Economics.

Total 477: 55 Seniors, 127 Juniors, 242 Sophomores, 26 Freshmen, 27 Others.

Source: Harvard University. Report of the President of Harvard College, 1928-29, p. 71.

 

____________________________

EXHIBIT D
First Half

OUTLINE OF STUDY FOR ECONOMICS A
1928-29

Hubert D. Henderson. Supply and Demand. (New York: 1922).

D. H. Robertson. The Control of Industry (London: 1923).

Frank W. Taussig. Principles of Economics, Vol. I, 3rd edition, (New York: 1921).

Sept. 27
Sept. 29
Lecture.
Lecture.
Oct. 1 – 6 Taussig, Principles 1. Wealth and Labor.
2. Labor in Production.
3. Division of Labor and Development of Modern Industry.
Oct. 8 – 13


Robertson
4. Large Scale Production.
5. Capital.
6. Corporate Organization of Industry.
1 – 3. Control of Industry.
Oct. 15 – 20 Taussig

8. Exchange, Value, Price.
9. Value and Utility.
10. Market Value. Demand and Supply.
Oct. 22 – 27

17. Coinage.
18. Quantity.
19. Secs. 2, 3, 4: History of Prices.
Oct. 29 – Nov. 3

20. Bimetallism.
22. Changes in Prices.
23. Government Paper Money
Nov. 5 – 10
24. Banking and Medium of Exchange.
25. Banking Operations.
Nov. 12 – 17

27. Banking System of United States
28. Crises.
29. Panics.
Nov. 19 – 24

Hour Exam
30. Prices.
31. Reform.
Nov. 26 – Dec. 1


Henderson
Review 8, 9, 10.
12. Constant Cost.
13. Diminishing Returns.
Demand and Supply (Nov. 26 to Dec. 15).
Dec. 3 – 8 Taussig
14. Varying Cost.
15. Monopoly.
Dec. 10 – 15
Henderson:
16. Joint Cost and Joint Demand.
Ch. 5. Demand and Supply.
Dec. 17 – 22 Taussig 32. The Foreign Exchanges
RECESS Dec. 23 to Jan. 2
Reading Period Jan. 2 to 16  [No additional reading requirements]
Jan. 2 – 7 Taussig
33. International Payments.
34. International Trade.
Jan. 9 – 14
36. Protection.
37. Free Trade.
MIDYEARS:

Source:  Harvard University Archives. Syllabi, course outlines and reading lists in Economics, 1895-2003. Box 2; Folder “Economics, 1938-1939 [sic].”

____________________________

1928-29
HARVARD UNIVERSITY
ECONOMICS A
[Mid-Year Examination, 1929]

  1. Many business men are hoping for a period of rising prices; some financial writers are prophesying that it is inevitable. Assuming no change in our existing monetary and banking laws, what causes might lead to an increase in prices? How would such rising prices tend to affect the holders of various types of securities?
  2. “Some people argue that price is determined by cost of production; and yet they admit that producers with too high costs have to drop out. Thus it is clear that in reality a producer’s cost is determined by the price he can get, consequently price cannot be determined by cost of production.” Comment on this statement.
  3. What influence has the existence of joint cost upon the development of large scale production?
  4. It has been stated that with the Federal Reserve System in operation there will never be a recurrence in the United States of such (a) crises and (b) panics as occurred in 1893 and 1907. Do you agree?
  5. What attitude toward the tariff would you expect to be taken by a banker who has made large loans abroad, by a manufacturer of woolen cloth, by a professor of economics, by a Louisiana politician?
  6. Explain briefly:
    1. The principles of subsidiary coinage.
    2. The relation between markets and the division of labor.
    3. The distinction between consumers’ goods and producers’ goods.
    4. The significance of the following: “The plentifulness of money is in itself a matter of indifference.”

Source: Harvard University Archives. Mid-Year examinations, 1852-1943. Box 11, Bound volume: Examination Papers: Mid-Years 1929, Papers Printed for Mid-Year Examinations [in] History, New Testament, Government, Economics….Military Science, Naval Science. January-February, 1929.

____________________________

Enrollment in Economics A, 1927-28

[Economics] A. Professor Burbank and Dr. Chamberlin and Messrs. K.W. Bigelow, [Theodore John] Kreps, Stratton, Winslow, O.H. Taylor, E.J. Johnson, de Chazeau, Parsons, Wernette, H.D. White, and D.V. Brown, with lectures on selected subjects by Professor Taussig and other Members of the Department. — Principles of Economics.

Total 532: 61 Seniors, 165 Juniors, 258 Sophomores, 20 Freshmen, 28 Others.

Source: Harvard University. Report of the President of Harvard College, 1927-28, p. 74.

____________________________

OUTLINE OF ASSIGNMENTS FOR ECONOMICS A
1927-28, 2nd. Half year.

Thomas Nixon Carver. The Distribution of Wealth (New York: 1921).

Hubert D. Henderson. Supply and Demand. (New York: 1922).

D. H. Robertson. The Control of Industry (London: 1923).

Frank W. Taussig. Principles of Economics, 3rd edition, (New York: 1921). Volume I, Volume II.

Feb. 6

Feb. 11

Review
Value
Diminishing Returns
Carver:

Distribution of Wealth
Ch. I. Value
Ch. II. Diminishing Returns
Feb. 13

Feb. 18

Rent Carver:
Taussig:
V. Rent
Ch. 44. Rent (esp. Capitalization)
Ch. 43. Urban Site Rent
Feb. 20

Feb. 25

Interest Carver:
Taussig:
Ch. VI. Interest
Ch. 40. Interest
Feb. 27

Mar. 3

Wages Carver:
Taussig:
Ch. IV. Wages
Ch. 47. Social Stratification
Mar. 5

Mar. 10

Profits, Population Carver:
Taussig:
Ch. VII. Profits
Ch. 53. Population
Ch. 54. Population, continued
Mar. 12

Mar. 17

Inequality Taussig:


Ch. 7. Productiveness
Ch. 45. Monopoly
Ch. 51. Great Fortunes
Ch. 55. Inequality
Mar. 19

Mar. 24

Land, Risk, Labor, etc. Henderson:



Ch. VI. Land
Ch. VII. Risk Bearing Enterprise
Ch. VIII. Capital
Ch. IX. Labor
Ch. X. Real Costs of Production
Mar. 26

Mar. 31

Labor Taussig:

Ch. 56. Wages system
Ch. 57. Labor Unions
Ch. 58. Labor Legislation
Apr. 2

Apr. 7

Labor

Ch. 59. Industrial Peace
Ch. 60. Workmen’s Insurance
Ch. 61. Coöperation
RECESS April 8-14
Apr. 16

Apr. 21

Railways
Ch. 62. Railways
Ch. 63. Railway Problems, continued.
Apr. 23

Apr. 28

Public Ownership & Combinations
Ch. 64. Public Ownership & Control
Ch. 65 Combinations & Trusts
Apr. 30

May 5

Industry and Capitalism Robertson:


Review
Ch. V. Capitalism of Industry
Ch. VI. Finance and Industry
Ch. VII. Survey of CapitalismCh. X. Workers’ Control
May 7
READING PERIOD BEGINS
May 12
Socialism Taussig:
Ch. 66. Socialism
Ch. 67. Socialism, continued.
May 14

May 19

Social Reform Robertson:

Ch. IX. Collectivism
Ch. X. Workers Control
Ch. XI. Joint Control
May 21

May 26

Taxation

Taussig:

Ch. 68. Principles Underlying Taxation
Ch. 69 Income and Inheritance Taxes
REVIEW
EXAMINATIONS

Source:  Harvard University Archives. Syllabi, course outlines and reading lists in Economics, 1895-2003. Box 2; Folder “Economics, 1938-1939 [sic].”

____________________________

1927-28
HARVARD UNIVERSITY
ECONOMICS A
[Final End-year Examination]

Allow one hour and one-half for the first question.

  1. Explain how the distribution of wealth is affected by the following:
    1. Large and rapid changes in the supply of money.
    2. Labor saving inventions.
    3. A rise in the standard of living of the wage earning classes.
    4. The opening for settlement of new areas of good agricultural land.
    5. The government regulation of public utilities.
  2. Discuss the accuracy of the following statements:
    “Three generations from shirt sleeves to shirt sleeves.”
    “The rich are becoming richer and the poor poorer.”
    “To abolish wage slavery we must abolish the wages system; only through socialism can the wages system be forced to disappear.”
    “The one way a union can help its members is by limitation of the supply of hands.”
  3. What does each of the following propose: collectivism, single tax, producers’ coöperation, syndicalism?
  4. Explain briefly the case for and against minimum wage laws, unemployment insurance, progressive taxation of incomes, the restriction of immigration.

Source: Harvard University Archives. Examination papers, Finals (HUC 7000.28). Bound Volume 70 (1928). Papers Printed for Final Examinations [in] History, Church History,…Economics,…Military Science, Naval Science, June 1928.

Image Source: Harold Hitchings Burbank from Harvard Class Album 1934.

Categories
Columbia Economists Harvard NBER Stanford

Columbia. Economics Ph.D. alumnus. Moses Abramovitz, 1939

 

 

The professional career of Moses Abramovitz shows what a blend of Harvard and Columbia training in economics crowned by an NBER post-doc could get you back in the day. His contributions to the study of long-term growth and to the Stanford economics department’s rise to prominence are truly important legacies.

The first item of the post gives us Abramovitz’s personal quarter-century report to his Harvard classmates of 1932. This is followed by excerpts from Abramovitz’s memoir for his family that provide a rich account of his economics training at Harvard and then Columbia. A link to download the entire memoir is provided below. The post closes with a memorial resolution written by Abramovitz’s Stanford colleagues. But the real treat, is found in Moses Abramovitz’s description of his economics education and economists important for his development. Among other things we learn, the chairman of the Harvard economics department, Harold Burbank, was indeed anti-Semitic enough for Abramovitz not to have dignified him by name. Also we learn that in 1934 “Milton [Friedman] was much less ideological then than he later became, so he was a very pleasant and agreeable companion.”

_______________________

From the 25th reunion report of the Harvard Class of 1932

MOSES ABRAMOVITZ

Home address: 543 W. Crescent Drive, Palo Alto, Calif.
Office address: Dept. of Economics, Stanford University, Stanford, Calif.
Born: Jan. 1, 1912, Brooklyn, N.Y.
Parents: Nathan Abramovitz, Betty Goldenberg.
Prepared at: Erasmus Hall High School, Brooklyn, N.Y.
Years in College: 1928-1932.
Degrees: A.B. summa cum laude, 1932; Ph.D. (Columbia Univ.), 1939.
Married: Carrie Glasser, June 13, 1937, Brooklyn, N.Y.
Child: Joel Nathan, July 19, 1950.
Occupation: Professor of economics, Stanford University; member research staff, national Bureau of Economic Research.
Offices Held: Member editorial board, American Economic Review, 1951-54.
Member of: American Economic Association; American Statistical Association; American Economic History Association; Royal Economic Society; American Association for the Advancement of Science.
Publications: Price Theory for a Changing Economy; Inventories and Business Cycles; The Economics of Growth; “Capital Formation and Economic Growth,” editor; The Growth of Public Employment in Great Britain (with Vera Eliasberg).

I LEFT Harvard supported by a Sheldon Fellowship and exhilarated by the prospect of a year in Europe—no small piece of luck at any time and a pot of good fortune in 1932. Together with Dave Popper, I saw Paris and the Rhine country as they were before the second deluge. We saw our first Storm Trooper rallies in Heidelberg and, if we were not too innocent, we were certainly too full of good spirits to be greatly disturbed. But those charming days were suddenly cut short. From Nuremberg, I was called home by my father’s death.

Back in New York I began graduate work in economics at Columbia and continued there until 1935. In 1936, I was lucky enough to be brought back to Harvard as an instructor for two years and had the fun and satisfaction of being again in Cambridge as a teacher while my memories of life at college were still warm. At Columbia I had met another young economist whom I had known years before. I shall stick to the essentials. The young economist was a woman. We were married in 1937, so Carrie has had a year at Harvard, too.

In 1938, we were back in New York again, this time to work at the National Bureau of Economic Research. In the years that followed I learned what I know about scientific investigation from Wesley Mitchell and Arthur F. Burns. Together they were in the midst of their wide-ranging investigation of business cycles. They set me to work studying inventory fluctuations. In the fullness of time I got some results and published a book, a hefty volume called Inventories and Business Cycles. It got some notice and caused some controversy, and a certain number of copies continue to serve as ballast for bookcases that might otherwise be disturbed by a fresh breeze.

Early in 1942, I went to Washington to help Bob Nathan and the W.P.B. Planning Committee, first to goad the military into laying out programs big enough to make use of a national productive capacity they could not believe existed, and then to keep them from losing the munitions they really needed under the load of programs too large for even our capacity. A year later I was at O.S.S. working for Professor Langer and Dean Mason on German economic intelligence. My particular job was probably of little use during the war itself, but it produced a collection of materials and a few more or less knowledgeable individuals, and both were needed after the German defeat. I became involved in the negotiations about German reparations and in that way came to see Moscow in the months right after V-E Day. Our work, as we all now know, foundered in the general wreck of American-Soviet relations. Together with many other stalemated delegations on many other subjects, ours eventually came to Potsdam to be witnesses at the beginning of the partition of Germany and Europe.

Since 1948 I have been a professor at Stanford. We have one child, a boy now six. We think living here near San Francisco as comfortable and delightful as it can be; so I rush back east as often as I can to disgorge the lotus and discharge my guilt.

My chief activity is still, as it has been for many years, research in economics—a stubborn, unyielding, frustrating and altogether exasperating subject from which I don’t know how to shake loose. What do I believe? One’s bent of mind is shaped by one’s work. Mine is inclined to skepticism, not beliefs, still less belief. Very likely I have much to learn. Oh yes! I believe both parties are right – in what each says about the other.

Source:  Harvard Class of 1932, Twenty-fifth Anniversary Report (1957), pp.6-8.

_______________________

Undergraduate and graduate student days: memories of Harvard and Columbia

…My fourth course [freshman year at Harvard] was different. It was elementary economics. I was lucky. I drew an excellent instructor named Bigelow. Using Frank W. Taussig’s Principles, he introduced us to the general logic of the neoclassical theories of relative prices of commodities and of the factors of production, land, labor, and capital, to the distribution of income among these primary factors, to the theory of international trade, and to the virtues of free markets. He offered us a list of supplementary readings, one of which was called simply Supply and Demand, by an English economist, H.D. Henderson. It was a thin book, but it was a notable example of the lucid presentation of the logic of the economics of value and distribution. One could see all around one examples in ordinary life of the validity and importance of the theory. The way in which the various parts of the subject hung together in an interdependent system seemed not only analytically deep; it emerged as a beautiful structure, an aesthetic as well as a logical and tested structure. More than any other experience, it was this little book that drew me to go on with economics. When I returned to Harvard in September 1929, therefore, I chose economics as my field of concentration. And, indeed, when the economy began its collapse in October of that year, it confirmed me in my choice. It was a decisive experience.

Concentrating in Economics

Having chosen to concentrate in economics, I was assigned a tutor. Here again I was lucky. He was Edward S. Mason, then a still young assistant professor. But he was destined for both academic leadership and, as my story unfolds, for a real influence on practical affairs. Even more important for me, however, was the fact that this young man was already recognizably “wise,” a man of good judgment in both scholarly decisions and practical matters. He took a liking to me, and he remembered his friends! He was due to turn up with support and help at several critical junctures in my story.

My very first meeting with Mason was an exciting moment. It was late September or early October in 1929, that fateful year. We chatted, and then, more brash than usual, I said, “Well, Professor, when is the stock market going to break?” He answered, without hesitation, “Almost immediately.” And when I returned for our second meeting, it had happened. And then, still brash, I said, “Well, Professor, you must have made a mint of money.” And then I learned something about him and perhaps most academics of the time. He said, “Are you crazy? I have never owned a share of stocks in my life.”

… Like many, but not all, of the young economists of the time, who had no deep commitment to mainstream economics, I saw clearly enough that mainstream theory offered us no guidance in understanding the Great Contraction and Depression, and it was consequently a poor basis for public policy. Something new was needed, a theory that dealt more adequately with recurrent recessions and expansions of business and particularly with the very serious depressions and eventual recoveries which in the U.S. had succeeded one another at intervals of about 15 to 20 years since the 1830s. For the moment, I did not get beyond dissatisfaction with the older wisdom, Real enlightenment came only in 1936 with the publication of J.M. Keynes’s General Theory of Employment, Interest and Money. When I had absorbed Keynes’s reasoning, I became an enthusiasticKeynesian and I remain so to this day.

There was also a quite personal effect of these developments on my own work history. They prepared me to join the National Bureau of Economic Research when the chance came in 1937 and to do empirical research on business cycles under the direction of Wesley Mitchell and Arthur Burns, the most notable people doing such work at that time.

Still an undergraduate in 1929, however, at the beginning of the economic contraction and depression, I still had three years of undergraduate work to do. Guided by Mason and later by Douglas V. Brown, I took Taussig’s famous course in price theory at both the undergraduate and graduate levels. Taussig was then the leading American price theorist of his time and by far the most influential person in the Economics Department. In these courses, conducted by Socratic methods, he clearly formed a good opinion about me. I am sure he was of help to me behind the scenes at several junctures. I also remember two enlightening courses, Sumner Slichter on Labor Economics and John Williams on Money and Banking. In Williams’s course, I read Keynes’s earlier books and began to become familiar with his way of thinking. Anyhow, I did well in all these courses and in others in economics, history, and in one really interesting course in literature. That was Irving Babbett on Rousseau and Romanticism. I was apparently a natural-born good student and exam taker. The upshot was that I was graduated summa cum laude and I was given a Sheldon Traveling Fellowship.

For me, this last was more than an honor and more than a year of support and European travel and study at a time when money was so scarce and jobs for new college graduates almost nonexistent. My tutors and professors, including the influential Taussig, had already been encouraging me to think about going on to graduate study in economics and to an eventual academic career. To my parents and my brother, such a course was strange and uncertain. Abe began to call me “meshugana Moishele.” But it was clear that in the end they would support me in any decision I made. And the fellowship, which was tangible proof of the good opinion of the Harvard faculty, confirmed me in a career choice I had already more than half made: It was a decisive event.

[late June of 1932 left for Europe but Moses Abramovitz’s father died in September 1932]

… I resigned my scholarship and in that September of 1932 walked along Nostrand Avenue to Eastern Parkway and took the subway (IRT, Broadway and 7th Avenue Line) to Broadway and 116th Street. Half a block away, one entered Columbia. I walked in and registered and began three years of graduate work in economics. This was a big departure from the program I had thought lay before me, but I cannot remember any feeling of distress or resistance. I was glad to provide some degree of solid continuity for my mother, and I felt confident about the future. Columbia would also be a good start.

 

Columbia as a School of Economics

By forgoing Vienna, Cambridge, and Harvard, I had made a bigger change than I realized when I started in Columbia. Vienna, Cambridge, and Harvard were all centers in which understanding of the domestic economy of a country and of its international economic relations was squarely based on theoretical economics. This, in turn, was a doctrine logically derived from certain basic primary assumptions: that economic agents (consumers, savers, business firms, investors generally) were well informed, foresighted, and rational, and acted to promote their own individual interests, that they faced competitive markets and, as business firms, acted under the pressures of competition; they operated subject to the constraints of income and wealth and of market prices which they could not by their own actions significantly influence. Actions in this context were perceived as leading to an equilibrium of prices, wages, profits, etc., and of consumer satisfactions in which change might be harmful to some but would be more than offset by benefit to others. Thus, there was no room or occasion for public action except such as was necessary to enforce contracts, maintain competition, prevent or punish fraud and generally keep the peace. Changes in technology and in consumer tastes would lead to a new equilibrium of prices, rewards, incomes, etc., but such changes were viewed as “exogenous,” not the result of economic action or motivation and beyond the ken of economics.

The Columbia economists, however, rejected this structure of theory or, at least, its general application. They conceded its usefulness in explaining very simple matters: why a grand piano cost more than a pair of shoes, and, in general, why there is a rough association between the prices of commodities and their costs of production. They were skeptical, however, about the theoretical assumptions that agents were foresighted, well-informed, and rational. They saw markets as characterized by various degrees of monopoly power, with business firms capable not only of profiting by constraining production and raising prices more than costs alone would justify; they also often had the power to shape consumer tastes, for example by advertising, and, most important, to invest in research and development and so to advance and sometimes to retard—technological progress. They tended to see the economy as a whole, not as tending to an equilibrium, but as generating long-term growth of productivity, income, and wealth. This tendency did not, however, emerge continuously and at a stable rate but subject to recurrent fluctuations, loosely called “cyclical,” in which advance was sometimes fast,sometimes slow, and sometimes negative.

As I absorbed all this, I saw the justice of the Columbia outlook and came to appreciate its radical departure from the economics in which I had been trained as a Harvard undergraduate. Columbia economics, as it stood in the Thirties, however, had its own serious limitations. It was well advanced in its understanding of two subjects. One was in the study of the behavior of firms that had acquired and enjoyed various kinds and degrees of monopoly power. This was the province of Arthur Robert (“Columbia”) Burns—not the Arthur Frank (“Bureau”) Burns with whom I later did research on business cycles.

The other subject was another sphere of monopoly power, that of labor unions. Why were they so much less important in the U.S.A. than in Europe? What activities were successfully unionized and which not? And why? This was the area over which Leo Wolman ruled. Wolman later played a considerable role in the Roosevelt Administration, especially in connection with the disorders in the labor market stemming from the organizing drives of the AFL/CIO. He worked as chairman of the Automobile Labor Board, where he tried to keep the peace in that important industry—an effort that won him no friends in the unions. Wolman’s teaching, however, was as far from academic as can be imagined. It came directly from his own experience with labor unions. Although a professor at Columbia, he also worked as the economic advisor of Sidney Hillman, the president of the Amalgamated Clothing Workers, the men’s clothing union. Wolman learned as much as he advised. He saw clearly that in the flexible and mobile population conditions of the American continent, the only unions that could exercise strong and stable monopoly power were those operating in industries frozen in location. The newsprint industry was an example. The book print industry was not. Where the industry could move, it could flee from a union whose wage and other demands were excessive. Such a condition faced the Amalgamated, and Wolman used his influence to restrain labor’s demands. Even so, the industry moved from New York City to upstate New York, then down South, then to Chicago and on to California. It was the barrier to movement posed by small nation-states that made European unions stronger and more stable than America’s.

These subjects then were well taught at Columbia, and I felt I learned much from A.R. Burns and Leo Wolman. The basic academic tone of the faculty, however, stemmed from Wesley Mitchell. He had been the dominating influence on the faculty since he joined it just before the First World War. According to Mitchell’s own view of himself, his outlook stemmed in part from his early Midwestern origins. He was the son of a physician who was a small town practitioner in central Illinois. The down-to-earth pragmatism of the neighboring family farmers ran strongly in his personality. It was quite natural, therefore, that he should have been drawn to the philosophical schools of William James and John Dewey when these became prominent. Experience, not the logical implications of some generalized ideal, had to be our guide to life. He told about teasing his good Baptist grandmother and her conception of a God of Love who could yet condemn unbaptized infants to the torments of Hell.

[…]

Mitchell carried out his scheme and reported his findings, together with his evidence, in a large book with the simple title, Business Cycles. The book began with a summary of earlier work relevant to the subject together with the “speculations” (one of Mitchell’s favorite characterizations of largely theoretical but inadequately verified ideas). He used these as suggestions of subjects needing investigation. There followed Mitchell’s own quantitative studies of these and other subjects: production (agricultural and other), income, sales, retail, wholesale, manufacturing, etc., commodity prices, the prices of stocks and bonds, and the profits and interest rates they paid. Mitchell’s quantitative descriptions involved tracing the fluctuations of the behavior in these activities and of their long-term trend and seasonal fluctuations so that the fluctuations connected with business cycles could be seen free of the influence of trends and seasonal factors. The book ended with a statement of Mitchell’s views of how the concatenation of the behavior of the separate activities led to expansions of business activities in general followed by similarly general contractions, which in turn produced the conditions that generated another business expansion.

Mitchell’s book made a notable impression on economists. This was partly because now, for the first time, students of economics could base their attempts to explain business cycles and to develop a theoretical model based on definite quantitative information about the typical behavior of the major business activities. But it was partly, perhaps mainly, because it gave economists at large a new vision of how economic research could be carried on. It need not mainly consist of logical deductions from a set of preannounced assumptions. It could instead take the form of observed behavior, together with empirical tests of the hypotheses so formed based on fresh observations independent of those from which the hypotheses originally proposed had been drawn. It was this vision of an empirically based economics that was the spirit of the Columbia program, and it stood in sharp contrast to the program at Harvard, where I was introduced to the subject, and, indeed, with the economics then taught in the other leading universities.

I did not give up my allegiance to Harvard easily. Two episodes illustrate my resistance. Mitchell gave a course on business cycles. I chose to take it. It was a course that, in a sense, was a duplicate of his 1913 book, refreshed by data not available in 1913. But as I listened to Mitchell’s “analysis” of one time series after another—amplitude, lead or lag relative to the “reference” peak or trough (that is, relative to the peak or trough of the general business cycle), rates of expansion or contraction in successive thirds of the fluctuations, and more—I could make nothing of it. After some weeks I dropped the course. Mitchell signed the necessary form without demur and, apparently, never held it against me—a characteristic of his liberal and tolerant attitude.

In other respects, my year was pleasant and rewarding. I found Eli Ginzberg and began a lifelong friendship, the closest and most intimate in my life. Like other graduate students, I occupied a “cubicle” on the top floor of the new Butler Library—just enough space for a table, chair, and file cabinet. A friend said: “It’s all right if I am in there alone, but if I get an idea, I have to move into the corridor.” One day, there was a knock on my door, and in walked Eli. He had just returned from a scholarship, traveling the country and interviewing business executives, union bosses, politicians, etc. On his return, he asked Mrs. Stewart, the all-knowing department secretary, what new people were interesting. She mentioned me, and there he was. He sat down and began to tell me about his travels, the first of many sessions on the same subject.

One early reward of my new friendship was to come to know his parents. They occupied an eighth-floor apartment on 114th Street, directly behind the Butler Library. Eli’s father, Louis Ginzberg, was a professor in the Jewish Theological Seminary at 120th Street. He was perhaps the most notable Jewish scholar of his time, a specialist in Talmudic history and interpretation based on a wide knowledge of ancient Middle Eastern languages and in the history of its peoples. Eli began to bring me to their Friday evening suppers. I found old Louis to be a wise and humorous man, a fine companion and host for a pleasant evening.

On one of my first visits, Eli took me into Louis’s study to show me a lampshade that one of Louis’s students had made. The parchment shade was decorated. All around the shade were drawn the spines of books, and on each spine there appeared the title of one of Louis’s books, perhaps 14 or 15 in all. And then the student had an inspiration. He added one more spine and on it drew the title of Eli’s first book, his Ph.D. dissertation, The House of Adam Smith. At the time, we wondered whether Eli could duplicate his Father’s achievement. In fact, he did so many times over, in quantity at least, if not always in depth—something to which Eli did not aspire.

[…]

Now back to my struggle between Harvard and Columbia economics. In that second year at Columbia, the internal conflict found two new exponents. On the Columbia side was Eli. He was someone of great personal interest to me, but as an economist, he was an eccentric. He was a skeptic about anything theoretical and served mainly as an exemplar of Columbia’s tolerance for talent in whatever way it showed itself. On the Harvard side, there now appeared a powerful supporter. He was Milton Friedman, who had come to Columbia on a scholarship for a year of graduate work. We soon became good friends. It emerged that we two were the only Columbia students who had had a real training in neoclassical price theory, the very bedrock of the economics of the time. The faculty, moreover, refused to sanction a course in the subject, and the students realized what they were missing. Milton and I undertook to do something to fill the gap. We organized a student-run seminar, worked out a list of topics, assigned students to prepare papers, and guided the presentation and discussion. The other students benefitted and so did we. We were having our first teaching experience. For the moment, however, it helped keep my mind running in the grooves of my Harvard training

My friendship with Milton was solidified when a Columbia classmate invited us to join him in a long holiday in his family’s fishing camp on the French River in Northern Ontario, still a wild and unsettled area. It turned out, however, that our friend was ordered to work in his family’s business concern for the summer. We were invited to use the camp ourselves, and we did. So we spent a wonderful six weeks together. We drove north in my Model A Ford roadster until we reached a tiny settlement on the French River called Bon Air. There we parked the car at a general store where we hired some cots, some cooking utensils, a gasoline cookstove, and a canoe, and where we bought some canned and packaged foods as well as eggs and Canadian back bacon. The general store owner piled all these objects in his motorboat and, with the canoe in tow, took us out to our camp 3½ miles down the river on a tiny island in the stream. We were the only inhabitants. There he literally threw our stuff on the shore and took his leave. From now on, we had to depend on our canoe to get back and renew supplies at Bon Air.

Neither of us at first knew anything about canoeing, but we had good teachers by example in the Indians from a reservation across the river. Watching them, we soon learned the J stroke and became fairly competent. We canoed to Bon Air twice weekly and soon organized our camp. We had a privy some 50 yards away. We had the usual first experience trying to cook rice, but we learned to get along. We swam twice a day, and, as we gained confidence in the canoe, took overnight canoe trips down the river. These were fun, especially because of occasional rapids which we could run going down the river but had to portage around on the way back. The one thing we did not try was fishing. In fact, we became known along the river as those strange boys who did not fish, so many men returning in the late afternoon would throw us a fish or two. We had a valuable supplement to our diet of canned goods.

The thing we did do all day long, every day, was talk—about everything, but mostly economics. Milton was much less ideological then than he later became, so he was a very pleasant and agreeable companion; that was especially important in 1934, in the depths of the Depression when Roosevelt’s New Deal was just taking shape, when it included so much that was controversial, and when the menace of Hitler was becoming clearly visible.

As things turned out, however, the most important thing for me in that academic year of 1933-34 was the advent of Carrie [whom he would marry]. But that belongs in a chapter of its own.

…When I finished my graduate course work in 1935, I was given an instructorship at Harvard, I owed it to the sponsorship of Ed Mason, my old tutor. With all this arranged, we determined to get married. I was to have a first year to get started at Harvard, and Carrie was to have a year to complete her Columbia course. We would marry in June 1937. We told our parents and friends. Everyone was pleased.

…You will recall that on completing my graduate work at Columbia, I returned to Harvard as an instructor and tutor in 1936. I spent the first year on my own; then, following our marriage, Carrie joined me there. We lived in a comfortable little apartment at 31 Concord Avenue, near the RadcliffeYard.

It turned out to be an unsatisfactory time, which brought each of us into our only serious confrontations with discrimination. For Carrie it was a brush with what would now be called “sexism.” She heard that Wellesley was looking for a young instructor. She thought correctly that her graduate work and teaching experience qualified her. She appeared for an interview, which was conducted by John Dunlop, a Harvard professor. They reviewed her background, and, he conceded, she was qualified. And then he told her, with expressions of regret, that her application could go no further. Wellesley, a women’s college, wanted only a male.

My own problem was an example of that anti-Semitism that still infected Harvard and most other universities. During my time back at Harvard, I had taught Ec A and a course in Labor Market Economics, and I had tutored a full quota of economics majors in my tutorial rooms in Dunster House. I thought it had gone pretty well.

To this I should add the tale of an amusing development. When I returned to Cambridge in September 1937 together with Carrie, I was told by the department chairman that my salary, then $2,500 a year, would be raised by $200. And then he carefully explained that that was not because, as a married man, my expenses were higher. It was because I was married that he could add Radcliffe girls to my list of tutees. Needless to say, the relation of women to men has since changed radically. Harvard and Radcliffe are now fully merged. Women and men are now equally Harvard professors and Harvard students. The days when Radcliffe girls were thought to be at special and intolerable risk if they met an unmarried tutor have long gone.

In the spring of 1938, I received another summons from the chairman [Harold Burbank]. He received me cordially, and after the usual preliminary politenesses, he explained that it was time we discussed my future at Harvard. His opening was itself a warning about what was to come. “Now, Moe, we are both men of the world.” And then he went on to say that I had done well. I had a promising future. “But you must understand; we could not promote Jakey, so you must not expect to stay on here.” I had formed no such expectation, but I understood perfectly. “Jakey” was Jacob Viner, a truly notable economist. He had done brilliant theoretical work early. He was Taussig’s favorite student. Clearly, Harvard’s president at the time was a bar. He would not accept the appointment of Jews, something widely whispered. They might be scholars, but, by Lowell’s Boston Brahmin standards, they could not be gentlemen. So all this was hardly a complete surprise. But my chairman’s quiet but open expression of anti-Semitism was a shock.

I have often wondered whether it was not really a subtle way of ending my appointment without saying that I simply had not measured up. Perhaps, but that could hardly apply to Viner, who went on to do brilliant work, and who ended his career as a colleague of Einstein at the Institute for Advanced Study at Princeton. Had a Nobel Prize for Economics existed at the time, he would certainly have been a Nobel laureate.

So I left the interview knowing that I had to make plans to move. My opportunity was not long in coming. Later that same spring, I appeared again at Columbia for the defense of my dissertation, the last step on the way to the doctorate. The committee was chaired by Wesley Mitchell, the man whose course on business cycles I had dropped six year earlier. It made no difference to the examination. Apparently, I passed easily. Indeed my thesis won the Seligman Prize for the best of the year. When the committee adjourned, Mitchell asked me to stay behind. He wanted to ask me whether I would be willing to join the National Bureau to work with him on the Bureau’s business cycles project. My salary would be $3,500 year, a thousand dollars above my Harvard salary. In my circumstances it did not take me long to decide. In a couple of days he had my answer. I would be delighted. So now, after our first summer in Maine, Carrie and I moved to New York. I can guess now how the Bureau appointment had come about. My friend Milton Friedman (see Chapter Six), had just joined the Bureau with an appointment like my own, but to work on another subject. Milton was a friend and also the favorite student of Arthur F. Burns, at the time Mitchell’s chief assistant, who was already the really effective head of the business cycles work. My guess is that Milton became aware of Burns’s interest in finding an associate for business cycles to work especially on the cyclical role of inventories. My dissertation included a chapter on inventories. So he probably told Burns, and then events took their course.

 

Source:  Moses Abramovitz, Days Gone By: A Memoir for my Family (2001), pp. 32-34, 41-49, 77-79. (Link to download the memoir as .pdf)

_______________________

Stanford Faculty Memorial Resolution

MOSES ABRAMOVITZ
(1912-2000)

Moses Abramovitz, William Robertson Coe Professor of American Economic History Emeritus, died December 1, 2000, at Stanford University Hospital, just one month before reaching his eighty-ninth birthday.

Known by his family, friends, and colleagues as “Moe,” Abramovitz was one of the primary builders of Stanford’s Department of Economics. He taught at Stanford for almost thirty years, taking leave only during 1962-63 to work as economic advisor to the secretary general of the Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development in Paris. He served as chair from 1963 to 1965, and from 1971 to 1974, both critical junctures in the department’s history. During his tenure at Stanford and after his retirement in 1976, Moe gained international renown and admiration for his pioneering contributions to the study of long-term economic growth.

Moe was born in Brooklyn, New York, to a Romanian Jewish immigrant family. After graduating from Erasmus Hall High School, he entered Harvard in 1928. Like many of his generation, Moe’s interest in economics was stimulated by the experience of the Great Depression. So, in 1932 he continued his undergraduate studies of the subject at Columbia University, where he received his Ph.D. in 1939. At Columbia, Moe began a lifelong friendship with Milton Friedman. In later years, Moe liked to joke that he had been debating with Friedman for more than fifty years, and consistently winning — except when Milton was present. Columbia connections also led Moe to join the National Bureau of Economic Research in 1937, where he helped to launch the business cycle studies for which the Bureau became famous, working with such figures as Wesley Mitchell, Simon Kuznets and Arthur Burns.

Also at Columbia, Moe became re-acquainted with his Erasmus classmate Carrie Glasser, who was also working for her doctoral degree in economics. Moe and Carrie were married in June of 1937, and were devoted to each other until Carrie’s death in October 1999. When Moe came to Stanford in 1948, Carrie began what became a highly satisfying and successful career as a painter, sculptress and collage artist. Their only son, Joel, born in 1946, is a practicing neurosurgeon in Connecticut.

During World War II, Moe served first at the War Production Board, working with Simon Kuznets to analyze the limits of feasible production during wartime. He then moved to the Office of Strategic Services as chief of the European industry and trade section. During 1945 and 1946, he was economic advisor to the United States representative on the Allied Reparations Commission. Moe’s modest but strong character was well displayed in an episode during the postwar reparations debate. Treasury Secretary Henry Morgenthau had proposed a plan to deindustrialize the German economy. An OSS research team headed by Moe wrote a memorandum arguing that this plan would destroy Germany’s capacity to export, leaving it unable to pay for food and other essential imports. At a meeting with Moe and two other OSS economists, Ed Mason and Emile Despres, Morgenthau angrily asked: “Who is responsible for this?” Moe recalled: “Mason looked at Despres, and Emile looked at me. I had no one else to look at. The buck stopped with me. So, rather meekly, I said I was responsible.”

This anecdote and many others may be found in a charming memoir that Moe completed shortly before his death, “Days Gone By,” accessible on the Stanford Economics Department website.

At Stanford Moe began the studies of long-term economic growth that established his reputation among professional economists. A 1956 paper provided the first systematic estimates showing that forces raising the productivity of labor and capital were responsible for approximately half of the historical growth rate of real U.S. GDP, and close to three quarters of the growth rate of real GDP per capita. Subsequently he made seminal contributions in identifying the factors promoting and obstructing convergence in levels of productivity among advanced and developing countries of the world. For these studies and others, Moe received many academic honors. He was elected to the presidency of the American Economic Association (1979-80), the Western Economic Association (1988-89), and the Economic History Association (1992-93). From abroad came honorary doctorates from the University of Uppsala in Sweden (1985), and the University of Ancona in Italy (1992); he took special enjoyment from an invitation to become a fellow of the prestigious Academia Nazionale de Lincei in 1991 — “following Galileo with a lag,” he said, with a characteristic self-deprecatory twinkle.

Committee:

Paul A. David
Ronald McKinnon
Gavin Wright

Source: Stanford Report, July 9, 2003.

Image Source: Harvard Class of 1932, Twenty-fifth Anniversary Report (1957).

 

 

Categories
Exam Questions Harvard

Harvard. Trade-unionism and allied problems. Exams, 1913-32

 

The course for undergraduates and graduates “Trade Unionism and Allied Problems” (Economics 6a) was a staple in the Harvard economics department offerings for the two decades that include the first world war, the roaring ‘twenties and the early years of the Great Depression. This post follows up on the previous post that provided lists of readings used in the courses on “trade unions” and “labor problems” from the second half of the 1920s.

I have provided early and late course descriptions to indicate the continuity of course content. These are followed by the annual enrollment data when available along with transcriptions of the final exams for all but three years not found in the collections of printed examinations in the Harvard archives or in the hathitrust.org digital archive. Biographical information about Professor William Z. Ripley who regularly taught Economics 6a was included in an earlier post for this course in 1914-15.

The Fall term 1947 Harvard course outline and reading list for John Dunlop’s course “Trade Unionism and Collective Bargaining” has been transcribed and posted earlier. 

________________________________

Early Course Description (1913-14)

[Economics] 6a 1hf. Trade Unionism and Allied Problems. Half-course (first half-year). Tu., Th., Sat., at 10. Professor RIPLEY, assisted by —.

This course will deal mainly with the economic and social relations of employer and employed. Among the topics included will be: the history of unionism; the policies of trade unions respecting wages, machinery, output, etc.; collective bargaining; strikes; employers’ liability and workmen’s compensation; efficiency management; unemployment, etc., in the relation to unionism, will be considered.

Each student will make at least one report upon a labor union or an important strike, from the original documents. Two lectures a week, with one recitation, will be the usual practice.

Source: Harvard University. Division of History, Government, and Economics, 1913-14. Official Register of Harvard University, Vol. X, No. 1, Part X (May 19, 1913), p. 63.

 

Late Course Description (1932-33)

[Economics] 6a 1hf. Labor Problems.
Half-course (first half-year). Tu., Th., Sat., at 10. Dr. Brown

This course will deal mainly with the economic and social relations of employer and employed. Among the topics included will be: the history of unionism; the policies of trade unions respecting wages, machinery, output, collective bargaining,  strikes, the legal status of unionism, closed shop, efficiency management, unemployment, and labor legislation.

Source: Harvard University. Division of History, Government, and Economics, 1913-14. Official Register of Harvard University, Vol. XXIX, No. 32 (June 27, 1932), p. 73.

________________________________

1912-13

Enrollment, 1912-13

6a 1hf. (formerly 9a 1hf) Professor Ripley, assisted by Mr. [Lloyd Morgan] Crosgrave. — Trade-Unionism and Allied Problems.

Total 72: 3 Graduates, 44 Seniors, 19 Juniors, 4 Sophomores, 2 Others.

Source: Harvard University. Report of the President of Harvard College 1912-13, p. 57.

 

ECONOMICS 6a
Final examination, 1912-13

Answer the first five briefly

  1. What is sabotage?
  2. What is the “extended” closed shop?
  3. What is the principal practical difficulty in the “general strike”?
  4. Is it met by the adoption of any positive policy in France by the “syndicates “?
  5. In the syndicalist programme what is to be the unit in the reorganized state?
  6. Contrast collective bargaining under sanction of the law with its adoption by private arrangement; (a) from the point of view of advantage to the employer; (b) from that of the workman.
  7. What are the four main features of the New Zealand legislation. (Each in a sentence.)
  8. What is the principal demonstrated weakness in the above legislation?
  9. What are three disabilities of the individual workmen in negotiating a wage contract?
  10. Wages for women in domestic service and in manufactures seem out of line with one another. What main difference helps to explain this?
  11. What is the present condition of affairs respecting the closed shop in the United States? Outline the course of events for two decades.
  12. How does the law of conspiracy enter into the decision by courts in labor disputes? How has Great Britain settled it?

 

Source: Harvard University Examinations. Papers Set for Final Examinations in History, History of Science, Government, Economics, Philosophy, Psychology, Social Ethics, Education, Fine Arts, Music in Harvard College (June, 1913), p. 45.

________________________________

1913-14

Enrollment, 1913-14

6a 1hf. Professor Ripley, assisted by Mr. [Louis August] Rufener. — Trade-Unionism and Allied Problems.

Total 71: 4 Graduates, 31 Seniors, 25 Juniors, 6 Sophomores, 5 Others.

Source: Harvard University. Report of the President of Harvard College 1913-14, p. 55

 

ECONOMICS 6a
Final examination, 1913-14

  1. Outline the principal phases of development of organized labor in the United States, with especial reference to conditions at the present time. In conclusion name five or six of the most significant events which define the present situation.
  2. What are the three most essential features of a collective bargain between workmen and employers?
  3. What is the feature in common of all minimum wage laws, as in Victoria and of compulsory arbitration statutes like those of New Zealand? Wherein does the policy differ most profoundly from ours?
  4. Name in a sentence in each of as many of the following cases as possible, the essential point at issue.

(a) The Danbury hatters.
(b) Allen v. Flood.
(c) New York Bakeshop law.
(d) Bucks Stove Co. case.
(e) Taff Vale Railway.
(f) Holden v. Hardy. (Utah.)

  1. How, other than by incorporation, is a greater measure of legal responsibility of trade unions to be attained?
  2. Discuss scientific management from the viewpoint of organized labor.
  3. What is the significant feature of the new type of state labor bureau, like the Wisconsin Industrial Commission?
  4. Compare the present legal status of the non-union man in England and the United States.

 

Source: Harvard University Examinations. Papers Set for Final Examinations in History, History of Science, Government, Economics, Philosophy, Psychology, Social Ethics, Education, Fine Arts, Music in Harvard College (June, 1914), p. 44.

________________________________

1914-15 

Enrollment, 1914-15

6a 1hf. Professor Ripley, assisted by Mr. [Louis August] Rufener. — Trade-Unionism and Allied Problems.

Total 76: 45 Seniors, 21 Juniors, 4 Sophomores, 6 Others.

Source: Harvard University. Report of the President of Harvard College 1914-15, pp. 59-60.

 

ECONOMICS 6a1
Final examination, 1914-15

Answer in order; but cover only as many as the time limit permits.

  1. Speaking of English conditions, the Webbs on p. 707 say:
    “Hence old-fashioned family concerns with sleepy management and obsolete plant, find the Trade Union regulations a positive protection against competition.” What do they mean? Show how it works out.
  2. Describe and discuss the recent decision of the U. S. Supreme Court in the Danbury Hatters case, especially in its bearing upon incorporation.
  3. Under any of the plans for eliminating labor contests which expressly prohibit striking, what offset is given to the employees for this limitation upon their freedom of action?
  4. The Philadelphia Rapid Transit Co. assures its operatives a fixed percentage of gross receipts as a wage fund. What is the object? Criticize the plan.
  5. What advantages may be expected to flow to a union from the adoption of a positive system of high dues and liberal benefits?
  6. The Eastern Engineer’s Arbitration Award of 1912 says:
    “Therefore, considering the uncertainty of many of the factors involved, the arbitrators feel that they should not deny an increase of compensation to the engineers merely on the ground that the roads are unable to pay. They feel that the engineers should be granted a fair compensation. … In making their award they therefore eliminate the claim of the railroads that they are unable to pay an increased compensation.” Discuss the principle advanced.
  7. Is the closed-shop policy essential to successful trade unionism? Illustrate your argument.
  8. Theoretically, the Standard Wage is merely the minimum wage for the trade. How does it work out in practise?
  9. How do the efficiency engineers deal with restriction of output? Give imaginary examples, if you can?
  10. Where has insurance against unemployment been tried; and with what success?

 

Source: Harvard University Examinations. Papers Set for Final Examinations in History, History of Science, Government, Economics, Philosophy, Psychology, Social Ethics, Education, Fine Arts, Music in Harvard College (June, 1915), pp. 49-50.

________________________________

1915-16

Enrollment, 1915-16

6a 1hf. Professor Ripley, assisted by Mr. Weisman. — Trade-Unionism and Allied Problems.

Total 61: 24 Seniors, 29 Juniors, 1 Sophomore, 7 Others.

Source: Harvard University. Report of the President of Harvard College 1915-16, pp. 60-61.

 

ECONOMICS 6a1
Final examination, 1915-16

  1. Illustrate by a sketch the interrelation between the constituent parts of the American Federation of Labor.
  2. Criticise the following premium wage plans for mounting “gem” electric lamp bulbs.
Wage per thousand
Output under 900 daily $1.03
Output 900-1000 daily $1.07
Output 1000-1100 daily $1.12
Output over 1100 daily $1.17
  1. Have you any impression whether Webb favors craft or industrial unionism? What instances does he cite?
  2. Define (a) Federal union; (b) Device of the Common Rule? (c) Jurisdiction dispute.
  3. Is there any real difference between an “irritation strike” of the I.W.W. and the British “strike in detail”?
  4. Contrast the British and American policies of trade union finance, showing causes and results.
  5. Describe the Hart, Schaffner and Marx plan of dealing with its employees.
  6. Is the Standard Wage merely the minimum for a given trade or not? Discuss the contention that it penalizes enterprise or ability.
  7. Is there any relation logically between the attitude of labor toward piece work and the relative utilization of machinery?
    What is the nature of the business transacted at the annual convention of the American Federation of Labor?

 

Source: Harvard University Examinations. Papers Set for Final Examinations in History, History of Science, Government, Economics, Philosophy, Psychology, Social Ethics, Education, Fine Arts, Music in Harvard College (June, 1916), pp. 54-55.

________________________________

1916-17

Enrollment, 1916-17

6a 1hf. Professor Ripley, assisted by Mr. Lewis. — Trade-Unionism and Allied Problems.

Total 49: 3 Graduates, 20 Seniors, 22 Juniors, 4 Others.

Source: Harvard University. Report of the President of Harvard College 1916-17, pp. 56-57.

 

ECONOMICS 6a1
Final examination, 1916-17

  1. Discuss, with illustrations, the proposition to avoid judicial interference with labor legislation, by means of constitutional amendment.
  2. In how far do the Industrial Commissions of several states exemplify the ideals and necessities in the field of labor legislation?
  3. “The minimum scale does not reduce all workmen to a ‘deal level’ as it is so often asserted. It is true that it protects the average man when he is employed. But in dull seasons it will invariably be found that the less efficient men are out of work. A lower wage scale for the less efficient would not create more work and furnish them employment. It would, however, pull down the wages of the more efficient, who would still continue to do the work, but at a lower rate of pay.
    “If the unions did not set a minimum scale of wages, the minimum would be set by the necessity of the idle men in the street and standards of living would be lower.” Did the author apparently have piece or time wages in mind in the above quotation, or would the reasoning be applicable equally to either sort?
  4. How does the New Zealand program differ from our American practices as respects,
    1. Status of the non-union man?
    2. The standard wage?
    3. Strikes?
  5. With what feature of the labor problem does scientific management seek primarily to cope? What obstacles confront its introduction?
  6. Give as many reasons as you can for the apparently deep-seated distrust of the courts among the working classes in the United States?
  7. Discuss the proposition that equal wages should be paid for the same work regardless of sex.
  8. Two slogans are common among the working classes in America; “An injury to one is an injury to all” and “A fair day’s pay for a fair day’s work.” With what important organizations, respectively, would you naturally associate them and why?
  9. What are the three crucial features of a collective agreement as to wages and working conditions?
  10. As between England and the United States which, on the whole, is the more advanced in the matter of trade union policy and labor legislation? Cite examples.

 

Source: Harvard University Examinations. Examination Papers 1917 (HUC 7000.28, 59 of 284) Papers Set for Final Examinations in History, History of Religions, …, Economics, …, Fine Arts, Music in Harvard College (June, 1917), pp. 56-57.

________________________________

1917-18

Enrollment, 1917-18

6a 1hf. Professor Ripley. — Trade-Unionism and Allied Problems.

Total 19: 1 Graduate, 10 Seniors, 8 Juniors.

Source: Harvard University. Report of the President of Harvard College 1917-18, p. 54.

ECONOMICS 6a1
Final examination, 1917-18

[not included in published volume of exams]

________________________________

1918-19

Enrollment, 1918-19

[Course not included in the annual report of President of Harvard College]

________________________________

1919-20

Enrollment, 1919-20

6a 1hf. Professor Ripley, assisted by Mr. [Richard Stockton] Meriam. — Trade Unionism and Allied Problems.

Total 97: 30 Seniors, 37 Juniors, 5 Sophomores, 25 Others.

Source: Harvard University. Report of the President of Harvard College 1919-20, p. 90.

 

ECONOMICS 6a1
Final examination, 1919-20

  1. Outline the recent coal strike, noting explicitly the novel points involved in the settlement.
  2. The National War Labor Board declared specifically that in the determination of wages for street railway employees it would not admit evidence concerning the financial necessities of the companies.. Was this presumably because they were public utilities or is the principle applicable to all classes of employers?
  3. What are the disabilities of the individual laborer in bargaining for wages, according to Webb?
  4. How is the closed shop issue treated in the Australian colonies?
  5. Discuss labor “as a commodity,” indicating how and why the question was raised?
  6. In the discussion of incorporation of trade unions in Commons, two entirely distinct lines of objection are brought out. Outline them.
  7. Where have the W.W. been most in evidence? Suggest reasons.
  8. Give as many reasons as you can for the wide difference in labor legislation between the several American commonwealths. Number each one and be brief.
  9. Discuss the proposition that the standardization of wages is beneficial to the community as well as to the individual worker.
  10. Draw up a brief industrial code to govern the relation between employers and workmen as to collective bargaining. State what principles you personally approve.

 

Source: Harvard University Examinations. Examination Papers 1920 (HUC 7000.28, 62 of 284) Papers Set for Final Examinations in History, History of Religions, …, Economics, …, Fine Arts, Music in Harvard College (June, 1920), p. 51.

________________________________

1920-21

Enrollment, 1920-21

6a 1hf. Professor Ripley, assisted by Mr. [Richard Stockton] Meriam. — Trade Unionism and Allied Problems.

Total 94: 2 Graduates, 41 Seniors, 34 Juniors, 1 Sophomore, 16 Others.

Source: Harvard University. Report of the President of Harvard College 1920-21, p. 96.

 

ECONOMICS 6a1
Final examination, 1920-21

Answer the questions in order. Begin each question on a new page. Answer all questions.

  1. a. What are the elements of a collective bargain?
    b. Does collective bargaining adequately describe the aim of trade unionism? Why, or why not?
  2. “A living wage is a first charge on industry.” If you were an arbitrator, would you accept this as a basic principle and rule out other considerations as irrelevant? If not, what other facts would you demand, and what use would you make of them?
  3. “If the fundamental object of trade unionism…has any justification at all, the principle of the Standard Rate must be conceded, and if a Standard Rate is admitted, the subsidiary regulations which we have described follow as a matter of course.”—(Webb, p. 320.)
    Explain and discuss.
  4. Outline the history of British experience respecting rights of trade unionists in the conduct of strikes.
  5. Write briefly on five of the following topics:
    1. “Lowering the dyke.”
    2. Priestly v. Fowler.
    3. The Osborne Case.
    4. The Strike in Detail.
    5. The preamble of the I.W.W.
    6. Jurisdictional disputes.
  6. What is the legal status of the secondary boycott in the United States? Why is the matter taken so seriously by both parties?
  7. What principles as to wages and working conditions have been applied in the New Zealand Compulsory Arbitration Law?
  8. Cite instances by name of the two leading types of employers’ organizations, and outline their respective tactics.
  9. Describe some of the factors or industrial circumstances which favor or discourage union organization in industry. Illustrate by concrete examples.
  10. Why was 1903, or thereabouts, a critical period in the American labor movement?

 

Source: Harvard University Examinations. Examination Papers 1921 (HUC 7000.28, 63 of 284) Papers Set for Final Examinations in History, Church History, …, Economics, …, Fine Arts, Music in Harvard College (June, 1921), pp. 60-61.

________________________________

1921-22

Enrollment, 1921-22

[Enrollments not in the annual report of President of Harvard College]

Note: according to Announcement of the Courses of Instruction for 1921-22 (3rd edition) course was listed to be taught by W. Z. Ripley.

ECONOMICS 6a1
Final examination, 1921-22

  1. Show by a sketch the structure of the American Federation of Labor.
  2. If the A. F. of L. is a creation of its constituent members, what are the sources of its power over them?
  3. The so-called Cleveland plan of collective bargaining in the women’s clothing industry deals with restriction of output by two novel proposals. Describe one or both.
  4. Discuss the proposed bills to empower trade unions to sue and to be sued; setting forth their advantages and defects in principle.
  5. What is the greatest disadvantage of a minimum wage law under the particular industrial conditions now prevalent? What line of action is proposed for meeting it?
  6. What are the two main arguments for a national system of employment agencies in place of the existing practice?
  7. Lenin in his Address to the Proletariat (in Commons) announces certain new policies respecting production under the Soviet government. What are they?
  8. What is the usual method nowadays of dealing with strikes in the United States? Describe briefly and name alternative plans proposed or adopted.
  9. Rowntree’s so-called “price of peace” contains the following five items of an industrial program:
    1. A fair wage.
    2. Reasonable working hours.
    3. Protection against unemployment.
    4. The status of the worker must yield to leadership. We must cultivate in the factory worker the greatest possible maximum of cooperation, self-reliance self-government and enthusiasm, and the lowest practical minimum of discipline and overhead supervision. The democracy and freedom prevailing outside of the factory must not stand out in too great contrast with dictation within the factory. To this end machinery must be adopted for common counsel and mutual understanding relative to conditions under which the worker is employed.
    5. Profit-sharing.
      Criticise this program (a) from the standpoint of production; and (b) as affording satisfaction to the aspirations of the workers.

Final. 1922

 

Source: Harvard University Examinations. Examination Papers 1922 (HUC 7000.28, 64 of 284) Papers Set for Final Examinations in History, Church History, …, Economics, …, Social Ethics, Education in Harvard College (June, 1922).

________________________________

1922-23

Enrollment, 1922-23

6a 1hf. Professor Ripley. — Trade Unionism and Allied Problems.

Total 89: 3 Graduates, 44 Seniors, 27 Juniors, 6 Sophomores, 2 Freshmen, 7 Others.

Source: Harvard University. Report of the President of Harvard College 1922-23, p. 92.

 

ECONOMICS 6a1
Final examination, 1922-23

  1. What are principal functions of the:
    (a) National Founders’ Association; (b) the National Manufacturers’ Association; (c) National Bottle Manufacturers’ Association; (d) San Francisco Building Trades Council?
  2. Who have been the leading proponents of incorporation of trades unions? What are the main objections of the opponents?
  3. What did the Clayton Act in its labor clauses seek to do, and with what success? Explain fully.
  4. What were the differences between the Coronado Coal Co. case, and that of the Danbury Hatters?
  5. What is the gist of the Canadian Industrial Disputes Act of 1907? How does it differ from the British Trades Disputes Act of 1906?
  6. What have been some of the results of the plan for settling disputes in the anthracite coal industry?
  7. Compare the various types of unemployment insurance.
  8. Concerning Workmen’s Compensation in the United States:
    1. What is the best proof of its success?
    2. What has been the attitude, respectively, of employers and workers?
    3. Who pays for it?
    4. What has been its principal indirect, as distinct from its direct effect?
    5. What are some outstanding defects?
  9. What renders the Hart, Schaffner and Marx labor policy so distinctive? What great industry stands most flatly opposed to its prime features?
  10. What has been the most significant survival in the field of labor relationships of the war period? Show wherein it differs from conditions prevalent commonly in the building trades.

Final. 1923.

 

Source: Harvard University Archives. Examination Papers 1923 (HUC 7000.28, 65 of 284). Papers Printed for Final Examinations. History, History of Religions,…, Economics,…, Social Ethics, Anthropology, June, 1923.

________________________________

1923-24

Enrollment, 1923-24

6a 1hf. Professor Ripley. — Trade Unionism and Allied Problems.

Total 63: 6 Graduates, 25 Seniors, 22 Juniors, 6 Sophomores, 1 Freshman, 3 Others.

Source: Harvard University. Report of the President of Harvard College 1923-24, pp. 106-07.

 

ECONOMICS 6a1
Final examination, 1923-24

Develop each question fully, regardless of whether you complete the paper or not.

  1. Define, each in a sentence, the following:
    1. preferential shop:
    2. time study;
    3. sabotage;
    4. “ca’canny”;
    5. the truck system;
    6. one big union;
    7. “open shop”;
    8. workmen’s compensation.
  2. What has been our experience with Federal child labor regulation?
  3. Describe in outline the structure of the American Federation of Labor, indicating, each in a sentence, the prime function of the several units. Show their relation one to another.
  4. Criticize the policy proposed by Bullard in the second assigned Atlantic Monthly article dealing with solutions for labor unrest.
  5. Trace in outline the development of British legislation dealing with trade unionism. Indicate wherein we have anything resembling it in the United States.
  6. How are strikes dealt with in Canada? What success has attended the experiment?
  7. Merely name the issue involved in the following Supreme Court decisions:
    1. Coronado Coal Co.
    2. Hitchman Coal Co.
    3. Duplex Printing Press Co.
  8. Name as many important events, as you can recall, since the Armistice, which have any bearing upon the matter of industrial relations, again showing in a word what was the significance of each.
  9. What do you, personally, think of minimum wage legislation? Not the opinion, whatever it be, but the reasons adduced therfor, are of importance.

Final. 1924.

 

Source: Harvard University Archives. Examination Papers, Finals 1924 (HUC 7000.28, 66 of 284). Papers Printed for Final Examinations. History, History of Religions,…, Economics,…, Psychology, Social Ethics, June, 1924.

________________________________

1924-25

Enrollment, 1924-25

6a 1hf. Professor Ripley. — Trade Unionism and Allied Problems.

Total 66: 4 Graduates, 37 Seniors, 18 Juniors, 1 Sophomore, 6 Others.

Source: Harvard University. Report of the President of Harvard College 1924-25, pp. 75-76.

 

ECONOMICS 6a1
Final examination, 1924-25

  1. Outline concisely the history of trade unionism in the United States, indicating the predominant type of each period and the factors responsible for its development.
  2. Hoxie devotes a good deal of attention to the “fixed group demand” or “lump of labor” doctrine as explaining certain phases of trade union policy. Describe it, and show how it manifests itself in practice; indicating also whether it deserves condemnation, wholly or only in part.
  3. In May 1910, Waddell made 31 trips over his division and hauled 38,000 tons. His compensation was $180. In May 1912, he made 26 trips and hauled 46,000 tons, and his pay was $181.
    State the pros and cons of the argument that because the instruments utilized were more productive, assuming that the actual individual effort remained the same, he was entitled to a substantial increase in wages.
  4. Is there any difference in principle between profit sharing and the bonus or premium system of wages employed in scientific management?
  5. What conditions, other things being equal, favor the use of piece wages; and under what conditions would day or time wages yield better results? [Note. This is purely a “Reasoning” question, not based upon any particular reading.]
  6. “The position given in England to trade unions and employers’ associations violates that concept, fundamental in law, that he who is responsible for a wrong must answer therefor.”
    Do you think the above statement is an accurate description of the situation in England at the present time? Could the same remark be applied to conditions as they now exist in the United States? In both cases, state your reasons as fully as possible.
  7. Attack or defend, as you please, one or more of the following propositions, stating the case as fully and concisely as possible, and anticipating, where it seems advisable, the arguments which might be urged in opposition to your stand:
    1. A system of compulsory investigation such as the one now in force in Canada should be adopted in the United States.
    2. Trade unions in the United States should be made legally responsible through some form of incorporations.
    3. The closed non-union shop is in the best interests of the consuming public.
    4. Compulsory arbitration, contrary to the workers’ belief, would be to their interests both as union members and as wage-earners.
    5. Restriction of immigration tends to improve the economic position of the American wage-earner.

Final. 1925.

 

Source: Harvard University Archives. Examination Papers, Finals 1925 (HUC 7000.28, 67 of 284). Papers Printed for Final Examinations. History, History of Religions,…, Economics,…, Anthropology, Military Science, June, 1925.

________________________________

1925-26

Enrollment, 1925-26

6a 1hf. Professor Ripley. — Trade Unionism and Allied Problems.

Total 53: 1 Graduate, 22 Seniors, 21 Juniors, 4 Sophomores, 5 Others.

Source: Harvard University. Report of the President of Harvard College 1925-26, pp. 77-78.

 

ECONOMICS 6a1
Final examination, 1925-26

  1. “The labor of a human being is not a commodity or an article of commerce.” In what law was this phrase employed? Why? Did it probably serve its purpose, as intended?
  2. President Wilson in his war message to Congress, April, 1917 said: “We shall fight…for democracy, for the right of those who submit to authority to have a voice in their own governments.” In your opinion is the principle as applicable to industrial as to political affairs? What constitutes the difference, if any?
  3. Criticize the theory of the factory owner’s right to a “free flow of labor.” How is it applied under the Constitution?
  4. The United States Railroad Labor Board in the Shopmen’s case in 1920 said: “The Board has endeavored to fix such wages as will provide a decent living and will procure for the children of the wage-earners opportunity for education; and yet to remember,…” How do you think they went on with the decision? Complete one as you work it out in your mind.
  5. Hart, Schaffner & Marx once proposed to change the system of delivery of paper patterns to cutters, using boys instead of cutters to hunt them up in the files. So the firm petitions the neutral board for a compensatory increase in the number of cuts in a standard day’s performance, because of the relief afforded by employing pattern boys. The cutters object as pattern delivery is cutters’ work. To employ boys will decrease the jobs for the cutters. Company contended it was wasteful to have high-priced men doing boys’ work. As arbitrator how would you reason it out and render decision? Any validity in cutters’ contention?
  6. Relate briefly the history of the Clayton law, the “Magna Carta” of labor, exclusive of the point covered in question one.
  7. Why have the so-called “Co-union” types of employers’ associations flourished in particular trades in the United States? Analyze the situation in such trades.
  8. Sketch under distinct headings, some of the reasons for the antagonism of organized labor to stimulation, as applied in scientific management.
  9. What are some of the causes of the distrust and suspicion of organized labor towards the courts in America?

Final. 1926.

Source: Harvard University Archives. Examination Papers, Finals 1926 (HUC 7000.28, 68 of 284). Papers Printed for Final Examinations. History, History of Religions,…, Economics,…, Social Ethics, Military Science, June, 1926.

________________________________

1926-27

Enrollment, 1926-27

6a 1hf. Professor Ripley. — Trade Unionism and Allied Problems.

Total 63: 1 Graduate, 23 Seniors, 30 Juniors, 3 Sophomores, 6 Others.

Source: Harvard University. Report of the President of Harvard College 1926-27, p. 75.

 

ECONOMICS 6a1
Final examination, 1926-27

  1. Name some positive factors in industrial situations which have directly contributed to the development of unionism in particular trades, explaining why some are well organized and others not so at all.
  2. “The American labor movement is strongly in favor of the five day work week wherever it is possible…this policy has a sound economic basis. As their leisure time increases, men and women develop more numerous and more discriminating wants. They buy more of the world’s goods and therefore, purchasing demand is increased.”
    The above argument for the five day week was recently advanced by the President of the A. F. of L. Do you agree that the proposal in question is economically sound, especially with reference to all branches of industry?
  3. What is a major factor, purely political, which affects the course of labor legislation in some of the states. Cite a concrete case.
  4. Define sabotage. What are some of the other tactics used by the organization which is identified with it?
  5. Outline the course of developments affecting growth of the American Federation of Labor in the decade to 1910.
  6. Why have co-union agreements with employers’ organizations been so persistent in a certain industry in the United States? Explain fully how things are expected to work out.
  7. How would you decide the Statler Hotel case; and why?
  8. “Scientific management attempts to substitute in the relations between employers and workers the government of fact and law for the rule of force and opinion. It substitutes exact knowledge for guess work and seeks to establish a code of natural law equally binding upon employers and workmen.”
    From what you know of scientific management in practice, which of the above claims of Mr. Taylor would you call in question and why?
  9. Name, if possible, three distinct devices which have been adopted since the World War which have militated against unionism in the United States.

Final. 1927.

 

Source: Harvard University Archives. Examination Papers, Finals 1927 (HUC 7000.28, 69 of 284). Papers Printed for Final Examinations. History, History of Religions,…, Economics,…, Social Ethics, Military Science, June, 1927.

________________________________

1927-28

 Enrollment, 1927-28

6a 2hf. Professor Charles E. Persons (Boston University), assisted by Mr. Joslyn. — Trade Unionism and Allied Problems.

Total 31: 15 Seniors, 14 Juniors, 1 Sophomore, 1 Other.

Source: Harvard University. Report of the President of Harvard College 1927-28, pp. 74-75.

 

ECONOMICS 6a2
Final examination, 1927-28

GROUP I

Answer one. Forty minutes to one hour

  1. When and under what circumstances were the first unions formed? Sketch the development of labor organizations before 1850. What special conditions did they meet in the United States?
  2. What, according to the Webbs, are the methods used by trade unions in actual operation? Discuss the Standard Rate and more briefly other trade union policies, stating your own conclusions.
  3. What are the special methods of scientific management in dealing with labor? How are wages determined? Are Trade Unionism and Scientific Management necessarily incompatible?
    State the general features of Profit-sharing plans as applied in the United States. Contrast this plan with that applied in Scientific Management plants.
  4. Contrast the methods of strike control applied by the United States Railroad Labor Board and The Canadian Industrial Disputes Investigation Act. Were these plans successful in operation? What features of either act do you think worthy of adoption in the United States?

GROUP II

Answer ALL questions; follow the order given

  1. Describe the organization of the present union groups in the United States.
  2. A western state enacts a law providing:
    1. Children under 18 years of age shall not work more than seven hours a day, nor forty hours a week. These hours must be included between 7 a.m. and 5 p.m.
    2. Females over 18 years of age shall not be employed more than eight hours a day and forty hours a week. These hours must be included between 7 a.m. and 5 p.m.
    3. Males over 18 years of age shall not be employed over eight hours a day nor forty-four hours a week.
      The act is attacked as unconstitutional. State the probable line of attack and defense. What do you think the present supreme court would decide on each of the three articles?
  3. To what extent can unemployment be prevented? Which of the methods proposed for the prevention of unemployment seem to you most practical and effective? Outline and justify a program for dealing with such unemployment as is not preventable.
  4. In 1923 the receiver of a certain railroad petitioned the Railroad Labor Board for authority to reduce wages below those paid by the railroads generally under rulings by the Board. It was shown that the railroad was not earning enough to cover operating expenses, that the stock and bond holders had received no return for several years, “That the necessity of a discontinuance of operations had been greatly threatened for some time,” and that “such shutdown of the carrier would be disastrous for the 31 counties of Kansas, Oklahoma and Texas through which its lines ran.” The workers decline to accept any reduction in pay and show that their incomes do not suffice to cover the cost of a living wage on a health and comfort standard. As a member of the railroad labor board render decision on this issue.
  5. (a) Suppose all workers were persuaded to join unions giving us a complete system of closed shops. What would be the effect on wages, and social conditions generally?
    (b) Suppose the Open Shop drive should be completely successful and trade unionism reduced to local and partial organization. What results would follow?
  6. In what respects does a shop committee afford less adequate protection to the workers than does a trade union? What, if any, useful functions may a shop committee perform which are not now performed by trade unions?

Final. 1928.

 

Source: Harvard University Archives. Examination Papers, Finals 1928 (HUC 7000.28, 70 of 284). Papers Printed for Final Examinations. History, History of Religions,…, Economics,…, Military Science, Naval Science, June, 1928.

________________________________

1928-29

Enrollment, 1928-29

6a 1hf. Dr. C. E. Persons. — Trade Unionism and Allied Problems.

Total 50: 1 Graduate, 22 Seniors, 21 Juniors, 3 Sophomores, 3 Others.

Source: Harvard University. Report of the President of Harvard College 1928-29, p. 72.

ECONOMICS 6a1
Final examination, 1928-29

Group I
Answer one. Forty minutes to one hour.

  1. Write brief essays on two of the following subjects:
    1. The origin of trade unionism in Great Britain.
    2. Trade Unionism under the Combination Laws.
    3. The “New Model” and its importance in trade union history.
  2. Write a summary history of the development of national trade unions in the United States. This should include the formation and development of the American Federation of Labor.
  3. Discuss the method of Collective Bargaining as practiced by the trade unions of Great Britain. Follow the exposition of the Webbs but do not fail to state your own conclusions.
    On what grounds have trade unions based their claims of a “right to a trade”? Discuss the attempts of the unions to settle demarcation disputes and the solution offered by the Webbs for dealing with this problem.
  4. (a) State definitely how scientific management proposes to handle questions which concern wage earners. Are these proposals necessarily incompatible with trade unions? What is to be said by way of critical comment of the following quotation: “(Scientific management) substitutes exact knowledge for guess work and seeks to establish a code of natural laws equally binding upon employer and workman.”
    (b) What are the essential features of profit sharing plans? What is, and what should be, the attitude of trade unions toward such proposals? How large is the promise of such plans regarded as aids in solving the labor problem?
  5. State, with some precision, the provisions of the Canadian Industrial Disputes Investigation Act. In what respect has the administration of the act departed from the intent of the authors? What is to be said of its success or failure? Its constitutionality? And its standing in the opinions of the wage earners, employers and the general public?
  6. State the important features of the law establishing the Railroad Labor Board, and of the act of 1926 which superseded it.
    Briefly summarize the work of the Railroad Labor Board, pointing out its successes and failure. What conclusions do you draw from this experience with governmental control of labor conditions.

Group II
Answer all questions: follow the order given

  1. Contrast the Knights of Labor and the American Federation of Labor. Include in your answer a clear statement of: plans of organization; program for the attainment of results; governing philosophy; and effectiveness as agencies to advance the interest of wage earners.
  2. A strike was declared against the Mills restaurants in Arizona by the Amalgamated Cooks and Waiters Unions. The strikers maintained pickets who appealed to cooks and waiters not to accept employment or to leave it if employed, and to customers not to patronize the restaurants. The pickets allege that the proprietors are “unfair to organized labor,” that hours are excessive and wages below the living standard. They picket in groups of six and employ vigorous, but generally peaceful, persuasion. There are minor cases of coercion and intimidation. The state has enacted laws declaring picketing legitimate and denying to the state courts the power to issue writs of injunction in labor disputes. The employers enter suits for damages against the union and attack the constitutionality of the law in both state and federal courts.
    Discuss these issues from the standpoint of legality, governmental policy and the legitimate exercise of trade union functions.
  3. Discuss the use of writs of injunction in labor disputes. Why has the employment of such writs become increasingly common and why have the trade unions vigorously opposed their use? What issues were involved in the Buck’s Stove case? The Bedford Stone decision?
  4. Does the introduction of machinery, e.g., the linotype machine or the automatic glass bottle machine benefit or injure: the wage earner, the capitalist and the consuming public? Answer both as to the immediate and the “long run” effect, and analyze the long run process of adjustment.
  5. A certain national building trade’s union established the following rules:
    1. Apprenticeship shall not begin before the age of 16 years and shall be four years long. The ratio of apprentices shall be: “one to each shop irrespective of the number of journeymen employed, and one to every five members thereafter.”
    2. A generally understood standard for a day’s work is in effect, which union members are expected not to exceed. This is based upon the average output of the union members when working without restriction.
    3. The introduction of new machines and processes is not opposed. However, the union insists that its members be given preference on the new machines, and that full union wages be paid. The industry pays to journeymen a straight time wage of 85 cents per hour; runs open shop though the great majority of the workers are union men and has been largely reorganized because of the invention and introduction of labor saving machinery.
      * *  *  *  *  *  *  *  *  *  *  * * *  *  *  *  *  *  *  *  *  *  *
      Discuss these union practices from the standpoint of industrial efficiency and social welfare. If in your opinion some of them are unsound or unreasonable, what steps would you recommend with a view of having them modified?
  6. Discuss the general subject of compulsory arbitration. Has it been successful in operation? Does it eliminate strikes? Strengthen or weaken trade unionism? Mean an increase or decrease in governmental control of industry? To what extent would you think it desirable that such a policy be adopted by our federal and state governments?
  7. What conclusion do you draw from your study of trade unionism? Is the movement worthy of support on its past record? Would you suggest modification of its plans or purposes? Do alternative plans such as company unionism seem to you of greater promise?

Source: Harvard University Archives. Mid-year Examinations, 1852-1943 (HUC 7000.55). Box 11: Examination Papers Mid-Years 1929. Papers Printed for Mid-Year Examinations [in] History, New Testament, … , Economics, … , Military Science, Naval Science, January-February, 1929.

________________________________

1929-30

Enrollment, 1929-30

6a 2hf. Mr. Douglas Brown. — Trade Unionism and Allied Problems.

Total 25: 13 Seniors, 11 Juniors, 1 Other.

Source: Harvard University. Report of the President of Harvard College 1929-30, pp. 77-78.

 

ECONOMICS 6a2
Final examination, 1929-30

Answer the first question and any three of the others.

  1. (About one hour.) Write upon one of the following topics:
    1. Unemployment as a problem of industry;
    2. Causes of unemployment:
    3. Remedies for unemployment.
  2. “Viewing the situation from the point of view of the practical results, the conclusion is reached that the law to-day seriously restricts labor in its collective action, while it does not interfere with the parallel weapons of the employers.” Discuss.
  3. “An unmodified closed shop, with the conditions of membership in the control of the union, creates a distinct monopoly of labor, leaving the employer helpless in any wage dispute and enabling the union to enforce its every demand regardless of the competitive conditions of the labor-market for that class of services.” Discuss.
  4. “Arbitration in industrial disputes, whether by governments or by private agencies, is ineffectual in the absence of strong organizations on both sides; where such organizations exist, arbitration becomes either a hindrance or a dead letter.”
  5. Discuss briefly any two of the following:
    1. Parasitic trades;
    2. Minimum wage legislation;
    3. Knights of Labor;
    4. Jurisdictional disputes.

Final. 1930.

Source: Harvard University Archives. Examination Papers, Finals 1930 (HUC 7000.28, 72 of 284). Papers Printed for Final Examinations. History, New Testament,…, Economics,…, Military Science, Naval Science, June, 1930.

________________________________

1930-31

Enrollment, 1930-31

6a 1hf. Mr. D. V. Brown. — Trade Unionism and Allied Problems.

Total 41: 18 Seniors, 17 Juniors, 4 Sophomores, 2 Other.

Source: Harvard University. Report of the President of Harvard College 1930-31, pp. 76-7.

 

 

ECONOMICS 6a1
Final examination, 1930-31

  1. (Reading Period question. Allow about 45 minutes.)
    Discuss one of the following:”

    1. Influences affecting the development of the American Federation of Labor;
    2. Wage rates and unemployment;
    3. Insurance as a preventive of unemployment.
  2. “In so far as the machine displaces skill and reduces the craftsman to the level of the semi-skilled or unskilled, thereby lowering his bargaining power, the effect on wages is bound to be adverse.” Discuss.
  3. “Strikes do not benefit the laboring class.” Discuss.
  4. “The trade union is an outgrown form of labor organization. With the development of employee-representation plans and profit-sharing, labor finds that it can secure more through cooperation with the employer than through mere aggression.”
  5. To what extent would legislation with regard to hours of labor be held constitutional?

Final. 1931.

 

Source: Harvard University Archives. Examination Papers, Finals 1931 (HUC 7000.28, 73 of 284). Papers Printed for Final Examinations. History, History of Religions,…, Economics,…, Military Science, Naval Science, January-June, 1931.

________________________________

1931-32

Enrollment, 1931-32

6a 1hf. Mr. D. V. Brown. — Trade Unionism and Allied Problems.

Total 61: 34 Seniors, 22 Juniors, 3 Sophomores, 2 Others.

Source: Harvard University. Report of the President of Harvard College 1931-32, pp. 71-72.

 

ECONOMICS 6a1
Final examination, 1931-32

Answer the first question and four of the others

  1. (Reading period question. Allow about one hour.)
    Discuss one of the following:

    1. The application of the anti-trust laws to labor, and the validity of this application.
    2. “Technological change” and unemployment.
    3. Difficulties of unemployment insurance, with particular reference to British experience.
    4. The economic significance of “fatigue and unrest.”
  2. “Several solutions for jurisdictional disputes among trade unions have been attempted.” Discuss.
  3. “That the establishment of a minimum wage can increase the rate of pay per unit of work done is clear.” Discuss.
  4. “When we consider the American labor movement, we naturally think of craft unionism as dominant. We are too apt to neglect other programs of working-class advance which have been prominent in the past and still offer a challenge.” Discuss these “other programs.”
  5. “Employers sometimes detach workers from their unions by organizing their own company unions, which are strictly amenable to their wishes and constitute a supposed substitute for independent labor organizations.” Discuss.
  6. Discuss either (a) or (b).
    1. The measurement of unemployment.
    2. The advantages of workmen’s compensation.

Final. 1932.

 

Source: Harvard University Archives. Examination Papers, Finals 1932 (HUC 7000.28, 74 of 284). Papers Printed for Final Examinations. History, History of Religions,…, Economics,…, Military Science, Naval Science, January-June, 1932.

Image Source: Cigar box label from the collections of the Museum of the City of New York.

Categories
Chicago Funny Business M.I.T.

M.I.T. Christmas skit “God and Keynes at M.I.T.”, 1951

 

The title of the Christmas skit presented by the Graduate Economic Association players at MI.T. in December 1951 , “God and Keynes at M.I.T”, is a clear reference to the political screed, God and Man at Yale (1951), by the young and future conservative pundit, William F. Buckley, Jr. This is one of many MIT skits found in the papers of Robert M. Solow and has been graciously shared for ERVM transcription by Roger E. Backhouse of, most recently, Becoming Samuelson, 1915-1948 fame.

One of the signs you are dealing with truly academic humor is the use of footnotes to provide proper attribution. In particular we find here seven items borrowed (and sometimes modified) from the University of Chicago Political Economy Club repertoire. Thus we see not only were some of the Greatest-Hits of Chicago skit humor “remastered” in the Windy City but also that the G.E.A. of M.I.T. was not above performing “covers” of Freshwater Hits. ERVM has already transcribed a few of these and for the sake of completeness will soon complete this list with the Chicago originals:

There is still plenty of original material in the following skit, and the few modifications worth noting include a key substitution of Keynes (MIT) for Marshall (Chicago)  and another substitution of “psychology and sociology” (MIT) for “Macroeconomics and Probability” (Chicago).

________________________

THE GRADUATE ECONOMICS ASSOCIATION
present
The G. E. A. Players
in
GOD AND KEYNES AT M. I. T.
15 December 1951

*Items so marked are modified versions borrowed from the University of Chicago, Political Economy Club.

 

 

PROLOGUE

(the scene is set to reveal the young college graduate relaxing in his home. He has made application to M.I.T. for entry to Course XIV. We hear the door-bell ring, and the letter arrives. He reads:)

An economics department great in dignity
In fairest Cambridge, where we lay our scene
Offers to disturb you, from present peace
To come to our proximity.

From forth of this great and new transition
A host of new subjects will take their position;
Econometrics, propensities, and laboristic relations;
Matrices, consumption, and similar sensations.

And if you will survive the economic pains
We’ll make of you another John Maynard Keynes.
So won’t you please say that you will come and stay;
Let me know real soon, signed sincerely, C. P. K.

(the student arrives at Tech, finds the library, and enters the elevator. On the way up to the third floor he hears:)

 

FIRST EPISTLE UNTO NEW STUDENTS*

  1. To all who enter through the Gate of Admissions unto the sanctity of the Department, heed ye well one who is wiser and older than thou. For verily I have dwelt in the land of Keynes for many years, and have felt the curse of Generals on my brain.
  2. Beware the courses called 121 and 122, for they will tax thee sorely. They have been devised that the supply may be known from the demand.
  3. Present thyself upon the appointed hour, lest the social cost exceed the private gain and the wrath of the Master fall upon thee mightily.
  4. Shun thou the geometer, for he seeks to seduce thee with curves. His siren song is pleasant but he lacketh rigor.
  5. Shun thou also the temple of the twin gods, psychology and sociology, for therein dwell the Philistines who worship not the calculus. There wilt thou be set upon with all manner of strange things and thou shalt feel the lash of the complex verbage, and thy head shall whirl with cultural patterns and institutional mores.
  6. Treasure thy Keynes, for verily all manner of mysteries are set down therein. Read it well and carefully, but say not that thou hast understood.
  7. Take to thine own bosom the demand curve lest it desert thee in thine hour of need.
  8. Attend well the lectures called innovation, for there if thou learnest nothing else, shalt thou learn at least one thing and it shall be a contribution to thy general education.
  9. Shun thou the industrial economist when he is at his data, for he loveth them dearly and will defend them as a lioness her cubs.
  10. Beware also the statistician who will leave the witless with a pair of dice.
  11. Shun the welfare economist, for he loveth mightily to stick out his neck and will teach thee his evil ways.
  12. Shun thou the coffee hour, but study diligently in Dewey lest thou and thy end thy days in Course XV.
  13. There is a time to speak and a time to be silent. Be thou silent in the presence of the Master, for he shall reveal to thee the secrets of Keynes and there shalt thou solve the riddle of the Sphinx.

 

(the student steps out of the elevator into the third floor hall. He sees before him many doors, all with different names on them. He decides to investigate each one. First, he comes to:)

“John Maynard Keynes”

(he knocks. The door opens, and out steps an angel, wings, white sheet, and all. The angel says:)

‘He ain’t here; but you’ll meet him in the long run!’

(on to the next door:)

“Paul A. Samuelson”

(the door opens, and the chorus sings:)

THE KEYNESIAN SONG*
(to the tune “They Call me Little Buttercup”)

They call me a Keynesian, a Keynesian economist
That I can never deny
For I am a heretic, a classicist critic—
Bold little Keynesian, I.

I’ve equations and functions, and marginal assumptions
All here in my little kit bag.
I’ve tricky proposals for income disposals
All lest the economy sag.

To deficit spending and government lending
I give a hearty “Huzzah”.
I distrust automaticity despite its simplicity—
I doubt it would work at all.

For I am a Keynesian, a Keynesian economist
That I can never deny
For I’m a heretic, a classical critic—
Bold little Keynesian, I.

When faced with deflation or misallocation
I feel that the former is worse
I abominate waste with Ricardian distaste
But first things always come first.

And yet they deplore me, criticize and abhor me
For I am the standard straw man
But blows I don’t heed—Oh, I’ll stick to my credo
That a plan is a plan is a plan.

For I am a Keynesian, a Keynesian economist
That I can never deny
For I’m a heretic, a classical critic—
Bold little Keynesian, I.

 

“Robert Solow”

(scene, his classroom, where the students are singing:)

 

WE MUST BE RIGOROUS*
(to the tune of “The American Patrol”)

We must be rigorous,
We must be rigorous,
We must fulfill our role;
If we hesitate
Or equivocate,
We won’t achieve our goal.
We must investigate
Our system, complicated
To make our models whole;
Econometrics brings about
Statistical control.

Our esoteric seminars
Bring statisticians by the score.
But try to find economists
Who don’t think algebra a chore.
O, we must urge them all emphatically
To become inclined mathematically
So that all that we’ve developed, may
Someday be applied.

(repeat first 11 lines)

 

 

“Charles P. Kindleberger”

(the door opens, and we hear a voice say:)

Intuition is the basis
on which decisions should be made;
These are really the foundations
On which economics has been laid.

All that’s mathematical
Definitely is tabled;
Even the little diagrams
Never have been labeled.

Be careful, however
That you never neglect
The varied use
Of the Kindleberger effect.

Art or skill
or merely a quirk
This man’s intuition
Does the work.

 

 

“Robert L. Bishop”

(the door opens, and we find snow falling. The chorus is on a toboggan, singing:)

(to the tune of Jingle Bells)*

Maximize, maximize, that’s the crucial key;
Allocate resources by their productivity.
Equalize V.M.P.’s with their prices, and
Your production function is the finest in the land.

 

(voice) In the course of industrialization men have observed the alternating rises and falls of economic activity. And, lo, see what befell us:

“Walt W. Rostow”

(the voice continues:)

To shoot, or overshoot, ah, there’s the cycle;
Whether ‘tis nobler from underinvestment to suffer
Than to prolong the period of gestation
And, by consumption end it?

To history! No more of economics; and by the use of it
To end the confusion and million little theories
That economics left us;
That’s the solution we plan to introduce.

 

“E. Cary Brown”
(to the tune of “Deep in the Heart of Texas”)

(chorus)

To fill the gap
On the Keynesian map
We must again raise taxes;
The prices rise
If we don’t equalize
Savings, investment and taxes.

(solo)

Income grows
In ever rising flows
We must again raise taxes;
In government spends
There seem no ends
Up must go the taxes.

(solo)

dC/dY
Is all awry
We must raise those taxes
The propensity
It’s a calamity
Up must go those taxes.

(chorus)

The interest rate
Is out of date
So we must raise those taxes;
Though bonds recede
We must proceed
To raise again those taxes.

(solo)

The crystal balls
In the third floor halls
Say raise those taxes;
Or you will fret
And long regret
If you don’t raise those taxes.

(solo: and how!)

Flexibility
Cries the C.E.D.
Boys, raise those taxes
Says the N.A.M.
It’s all a sham
Don’t raise those taxes

(chorus)

But God and Keynes
Have the true refrains
Up must go the taxes;
At M.I.T.
We all agree
More savings and more taxes.

(by now, our student has traveled one-half the length of the hall. He approaches the other half, where a voice speaks:)

 

Friend; first year man; lend me your ear.
I come to convince you that industrial relations
Occupies a so much higher station
That economics—while ’t is good and fine
Must of necessity bow under our sign.
The evil that me do lives after them;
The good is oft interred within their books;
So let it be with economics.

We offer to show you the extent of cooperation
Between management and labor in every relation,
And prove to you that what’er your belief
Our unique methods will give either side full relief.

Economists, you know, often speak of productivity;
But that’s a matter of total relativity
Since our writers—Shultz, Myers, Coleman and Brown
Are the most productive in a many a college town.

 

“Charlie Myers”

(the door opens, and we see Myers writing vigorously and adding stacks of manuscripts to already huge piles labeled “To Prentice Hall,” “To McGraw-Hill,” and “Rejects—to Technology Press.” Secretary enters:)

Secretary: “Prof. Myers, here’s that book you asked me to write for you.”

Myers: “Good; don’t forget to start on that other one for me.”

(enter George Shultz carrying a manuscript)

Myers: “Hello, George. I see we’ve written another book. Mind if I look at it?”

Shultz: “Not at all, Charlie. I’ve already begun on the other one for us. You know, though, I think we’re getting a bit too abstract. We ought to go down to a level where it’s good and dirty.”

Myers: “In that case, let’s call in Joe Scanlon. Hey, Joe. Come here.”

(the chorus enters, dressed as bums; they sing:)

THE JOE SCANLON SONG
(to the tune of “Union Maid”)

There once was a bright young man
Who thought he had a plan
He studied cost
And jobs he lost
His name is Joe Scanlan

He soon met a man named Phil
Whose work gave him a thrill
He organized and compromised
He always fought up-hill.

This made of him a wreck
And so he came to Tech.
He sells his plan
To all the clan;
You ought to see his check.

CHORUS:
O you can’t scare us, we’re sticking with Scanlon,
Sticking with Scanlon, sticking with Scanlon;
Oh you can’t scare us, we’re sticking with Scanlon,
Sticking with Scanlon, until we die.

 

When the bosses have no dough
They always call for Joe;
They shed their tears
And buy him beers
And up their profits go—

(repeat CHORUS)

 

(as the final chorus ends, the door opens, and we see a body on the table)

Bishop: “What’s the matter with him, Morrie Adelman?”

Adelman: “He’s just been brought in; he’s suffering from a severe case of elephantiasis.”

Bishop: “Oh, don’t worry; I’ve got a classical solution. It contains some of Euler’s serum.” (pull up a jug so labeled and apply to patient’s arm)

Adelman: “Well, what do you expect that to accomplish?”

Bishop: “It’ll create perfect competition among the disease germs. What could be better?”

Adelman: (pause) “Well, I don’t see him recovering.”

Bishop: “But it’s not a pure case. Perhaps we should call in Dr. D. V. Brown. He’s had medical experience. (enter D.V.B.)

Brown: “Hi-ja.” (looks at body, and shows surprise) “My goodness, Charlie! I always knew he’s work too hard.” (looks at body more closely) “Looks to me like an impure case of oligopoly.”

Adelman: “O-o-o-oh! Let me see!” (goes over to feel arm) “No, there’s no concentration here. But even if there were, there’s really no harm in it.”

Brown: “Well, I’d like to stay, but I have to dash off to a court case.”

 

COURT SCENE

Judge: “The court is now in session. Bring in the first case.”

Prosecutor: “Your honor, this man is accused of attempting to overthrow the neo-classical Chicago School.”

Judge: “What’s your name?”

Coleman: “Sir, my name is Jack Coleman.”

Judge: “Prosecutor, define more explicitly what the charge is against this man.”

Prosecutor: “This man is presently collaborating with a well-known group of collectivists.”

Judge: “What proof have you of this?”

Prosecutor: “I have here my star witness.”

Judge: “What is your name?”

Buckley: “Your honor, sir, my name is Ludwig von Buckley.”

Judge: “Speak.”

Buckley: “I have here a book written by Paul A. Samuelson, and it says here on page.–., Oh, well, let’s not bother with the page number now. It says: “…know…conclusively…that…Karl Marx…is…(turn pages back towards front)…correct.”

Judge: “Speak no more. Any man collaborating with the author of such a book must be guilty of attempting to overthrow the Chicago School. I hereby sentence you to six months of solitary confinement, with a copy of Hazlitt’s “Economics in One Lesson.” Next case.”

(Coleman leaves; enter Herb Shepard)

Prosecutor: “Your honor, this man is accused of playing marbles with the fabulous Alex Bavelas.”

Judge: “What is your name?” (say it aggressively)

Shepard: “Say, you’re unusually aggressive today. Has your wife stopped beating you? How’s your libido?”

Judge: “Now that you mention it, I have been feeling rather despondent.”

Shepard: “Judge, I’m a Freud…you’re tending toward a psycho-social orientation that no longer promotes an optimization of gratification.”

Judge: “Noooooo—I’m too JUNG to die!….But what am I saying! Herbert Shepard, for this circumlocutionist behavior, I hereby sentence you to the marble pits in ex-communication.”

 

(the student next comes to a door marked “reserved for Chicago U. delegates to the A.E.A. Convention.” He knocks, the door opens, and he hears:)

 

HIS RULES GO MARCHING ON*
(to the tune of the Battle Hymn of Republic)

If you want to pass your prelims
You must listen now to me;
You must learn your catechism
If you want to get your ‘B’
They have flunked the finest people
The department ever had
And they never said ‘too bad.’

CHORUS:

Stick, stick, stick with Henry Simons;
Henry is the man to see you through;
He’s the most consistent [man]
With an economic plan;
His rules go marching on.

 

He would nationalize the railroads,
He would atomize the firm,
He would then repeal the tariff
And the “E” bonds he would burn;
He would cleanse the banking system
Of the Federal Reserve;
His rules go marching on.

[Repeat] CHORUS:

He is the man who’d fix up
The progressive income tax;
He would fill in every item that
The present structure lacks;
He’d repeal the excise levies
And forget the margarine tax;
His rules go marching on.

[Repeat] CHORUS:

 

(by now the student will have reached the end of the hall; but questions linger in his mind. He wonders how the student takes all this. And as if in answer, he hears this song between students and faculty:* (to the tune of the ‘Sergeant’s Song’ from the Pirate[s] of Penzance)

Grad Students:

From nine around to nine—Tarantara! tarantara!
We remain in that salt mine—Tarantara!
-Our eyes are growing dim–Tarantara! tarantara!
Our hair is getting thin—Tarantara!
As we while away our youth—Tarantara! tarantara!
In sedate pursuit of Truth—Tarantara!!
Searching stacks and aching backs,
Third degree for a PhD—Tarantara! tarantara! tarantara!

 

Faculty: (to the tune of “Mabel’s Song” from the Pirate[s] of Penzance)

Go, you students, you’ll not be sorry.
You’ll contribute to MY great story.
You shall live in footnote glory.
Go to immortality!

Go to work and hold off suicide,
For if your work with our needs coincide,
Our reluctance to grant degrees we’ll override.
Go, you heroes, go and work!

 

(finally, as our student reaches the end of his journey, he meet the one ‘older and wiser than thou’, and listens as he tells of the ‘impending doom’.)

Twas the night before Orals
When all through the room
A feeling forecast
The impending doom.
The facts were placed
In each head with care
In hopes that when needed
They’d surely be there.
The victims then nestled
All snug in their beds
While visions of cost curves
Danced in their heads.
I soon fell asleep
And began to dream
I sat in a room
All filled with steam.
When out in the yard
There arose such a clatter
I sprang from the chair
To see what was the matter.
Over to the window
I flew like a flash
Tore open the shutters
And threw up the sash.
When what to my wondering
Eyes there appears
A miniature sleigh
And eight tiny examineers.
Instead of the four
They usually required
They sent me four more
If the others got tired.
As I drew in my head
And was turning around
In through the window
They came with a bound.
They were dressed all in black
From their head to the toe;
Whose funeral, I asked,
Someone I know?
A wink of their eyes,
A twist of each head
Soon gave me to know
I had plenty to dread.
They spoke not a word
But went straight to their work
Of filling the blackboards
Then turned to the jerk.
The questions commenced
Like machine gun fire;
I couldn’t keep straight
The seller from buyer.
Now sir, please listen
One of them said
Try to imagine
All this in your head.
Nansen and Johansen
Have only one sled;
They’re at the North pole
And have not bread.
Suddenly there appears
A giant Tartar
Coming from Siberia
Looking to barter.
They can bake some bread
At increasing cost
Yet without a compass
They’ll certainly be lost.
He has a compass
And they have bread
And without exchange
They all will be dead.
They started to bargain
Until he did tell you
That the Russians decided
The ruble to devalue.
Only Sterling is recognized,
So they start to bake
Instead of the bread
A large pound cake.
Then suddenly Nansen
Thought to remember
That neither of them
Was a union member.
Closed shops were enforceable
As a matter of fact
For this was before
The Taft-Hartley Act.
They went ahead anyway,
They didn’t give a hoot;
It was so cold
They needed a union suit.
Before they acted
Or did anything drastic
They examined their demand curve
To see if it was elastic.
Their cost curve was unknown–
It had never been seen;
How lucky they were
That Nansen was really Joel Dean.
Their consumption function told them
Just how to behave;
They knew what to consume
And how much to save.
Please consider the theories
of Tibor Scitovsky
And the two fisted cowboy
two-gun Baranowsky.
If you remember these facts
And keep them in mind,
The right answer, I know
You certainly should find.
I shivered and shook,
In the chair I did writhe;
Now the question, they said
Who was Adam Smythe?
The leader then yelled
For a decision it’s time;
This man has suffered,
He has paid for his crime.
And laying a finger
Aside of his nose
Out of the window
All eight of them goes.
It was the leader then
That I heard exclaim
As he shouted and whistled,
And called them by name:
Now Myers, now Bishop
Now Shultz and C.P.K.
On Coleman, on Solow,
Let’s now dash and dash away.
They sprang to their sleigh
And away they flew
Like they were speeding
To another rendezvous.
Although some details
Of this horrible nightmare
Still seem a bit hazy
I certainly would swear,
Before I awoke
I heard them say
Merry Christmas to all,
And to all a good day.

 

EPILOGUE

As disproved by classical economics
All good things much reach an end;
And so we must leave our attempt at comics,
Hoping we’ve pleased both foe and friend.

‘Tis true enough that our little parody
Has given economics unusual clarity,
And that our writers if circumstances permit it
Will prefer to have their names omitted.

So then, since ours must be the last say,
a real Merry Christmas from the G.E.A.

 

Source: Duke University. David M. Rubenstein Rare Book & Manuscript Library. Economists’ Papers Archive. Robert M. Solow Papers, Box 83, Folders “Economic Skit Parties”.

Image: Cover art from “God and Keynes at M.I.T.” December 15, 1951. Ibid.