Tag: Giddings

Categories
Barnard Columbia Economics Programs Gender Undergraduate

Columbia. Splitting the costs. Department of Economics v. Barnard College, 1906-9

 

The growing pains of the modern university can be seen in attempts to mould ad hoc understandings made earlier into long-term, binding, and explicit rules and regulations. We see this in E. R. A. Seligman’s untiring reminders to the Columbia University central administration and to Barnard College deans as to how to manage the legacy of having first hired John Bates Clark to fill a Barnard position while swapping Clark Barnard hours with the Department of Economics in the Faculty of Political Science hours, either by having department professors offer courses in Barnard College or by allowing Barnard women to take Columbia College or graduate courses. It was complicated, leaving plenty of room for misunderstandings. Seligman can be seen in the following memo and letters to have been one smooth intra-university operator. Still we come away (at least hearing his side of the story) that he would neither give nor take an inch. His motto apparently: Pacta sunt servanda.

____________________

MEMORANDUM AS TO PROPOSED CHANGES IN THE FINANCIAL ARRANGEMENT BETWEEN BARNARD COLEGE AND COLUMBIA UNIVERSITY IN RESPECT TO THE DEPARTMENT OF ECONOMICS. [Carbon copy, 1906]

I. HISTORICAL STATEMENT.

In 1895 a friend of Barnard College established for three years the Professorship of History and the Professorship of Economics, on the understanding that each of these departments should offer a corresponding amount of separate instruction to Barnard seniors and graduates, and that the Barnard Corporation would endeavor to maintain these Professorships after the expiration of such term. It was arranged that these professors should lecture at Columbia as well as at Barnard, and that for every course given by them at Columbia, a course should be given at Barnard by them or their departmental associates. The normal number of lectures by a professor was fixed at six; so that the Professor of Economics gave 2 hours at Barnard, the other four being supplied by his colleagues.

In 1898 Barnard College agreed to continue those professorships; and as a recognition of the action of the Barnard Trustees, the Faculty of Political Science decided to open to women holding a first degree, the graduate courses in History and Economics.

When Barnard College was incorporated into the educational system of the University, this arrangement was perpetuated. The 5th and 6th Sections of the Agreement of June 15, 1900, read in part, as follows:

“On and after January 1st, 1904, all of the instruction for women leading to the degree of B.A. shall be given separately in Barnard College……Barnard College will assume as rapidly as possible all of the instruction for women in the Senior year ****** and undertakes to maintain every professorship established thereof or an equivalent therefor shall be rendered in Barnard College; and when means allow, establish additional professorships in the University which shall be open to men and women, to the end that opportunities for higher education may be enlarged for both men and women.

The University will accept women who have taken their first degree on the same terms as men, as students of the University and as candidates for the degree of M.A. and Ph.D. under the Faculty of Philosophy, Political Science and Pure Science, in such courses as have been or may be designated by those Faculties, with the consent of those delivering the courses.

From the foregoing it is clear that so far as the Faculty of Political Science is concerned the opening of the University courses to women was in return for the establishment and maintenance of the professorships, and Barnard College thus declared itself ready to pay one-third of the salary of the professors of Economics, at that time three in number. In addition, Barnard College paid for the Junior work under the Department of Economics.

On this basis the whole system has reposed and has been continued. Changes in the personnel have been made in the mean time, and the instruction given to Juniors by the Department of Economics has been strengthened. Two professors, (or as during this year a professor and an instructor) have taken the place of what was originally an assistant. These changes, which called for an additional outlay on the part of Barnard College, were made with the consent of Barnard.

The Department of Economics and Social Science as it existed up to last spring, has kept strictly to the letter of the agreement. At an earlier period Professor Giddings had agreed to give at Barnard College a course in sociology in return for a suitable compensation. In 1900, however, he ceased to be paid an additional sum and his two hours were counted with the consent of Barnard College toward the six due from the Department, the other four being provided by Professors Seligman and Clark. In 1902 two additional hours were given at Barnard College by the new instructor, Professor Moore. Since then the Department has provided six hours of instruction at Barnard College, (two hours by Professor Clark, two by Professor Seager, and two by Professor Giddings.) It has given an additional two hours by Professor Moore to the Seniors, and it has put the Junior work in the hands of Professors Moore and Johnson (this year [word torn off from corner] Moore and Dr. Whitaker.) Every course given to the Columbia College undergraduates is duplicated at Barnard College, with the exception that it seemed unwise to the Barnard authorities to give the course on Taxation and Finance as being somewhat too remote from the interests of the Barnard undergraduates. The substance of this course is however included in that given by Professor Seager. This explains the fact that 12 hours are given at Barnard College whereas 14 hours are given at Columbia College. This arrangement was made with the consent of the Barnard authorities. In 1906 again with the consent of Barnard College, Barnard Seniors were admitted to the course of Prof. Giddings at Columbia, the Barnard course being discontinued. This arrangement has, however, not yet received the permanent sanction of the Faculty of Political Science.

Although Barnard College is not only getting all that was bargained for at the time, and although it has in addition the services of a full professor for both Senior and Junior work (Prof. Moore.), and although the proportion of the original expense of the Department of Economics paid by Barnard College was at the outset considerably over e4%,–being one-third of the salaries of the professors plus a payment for the Junior work, the proportion of the total expense of the Department of Economics and Social Science borne by Barnard College has now been reduced to 29.19%, Barnard paying at present $8350 out of a total budget of $28,600.

 

Barnard pays:

Columbia pays:
Seligman $5000
Giddings $5000
Seager $3500
Moore $1750
Clark $5000 Devine $3500 University Courses
Moore $1750 Simkhovitch $500
Whitaker $1600 Tenney $1000
$8350 $20250 Total $28600

 

In other words Barnard College receives more than it originally did and pays proportionately less.

 

II. WHAT SHOULD BE THE SHARE OF BARNARD COLLEGE.

Up to the year 199[blank] Barnard College made a money contribution to Columbia for each of the women graduate students enrolled, under the Faculties of Political Science, Philosophy, and Pure Science. In that year the money contribution was abandoned, and since then women graduate students have paid their fees directly to Columbia. It might be claimed by Barnard College that this new arrangement absolved it in future from all financial responsibility for or interest in the purely university (graduate) work. This claim is however, negatived by the provisions of the agreement of June 15, 1900 still in force, whereby Barnard College obligated itself to “maintain every professorship established at its instance” and to “establish additional professorships in the University upon foundations providing for courses which shall be open to men and women.” These contractual obligations are in no wise impaired or weakened by the modification subsequently introduced in the method of payment of fees by women students.

It might again be claimed that the financial obligations of Barnard are reduced whenever a Senior course, hitherto repeated at Barnard, is given only at Columbia, but open to Barnard Seniors. This claim, however, is likewise inadmissible if the change be made by and with the consent of Barnard College. For as long as the Barnard undergraduates receive the instruction, and as long as the Barnard authorities consent for any reason, that this instruction be given at Columbia, the financial obligation cannot be deemed to be impaired. As a matter of fact, this situation has not permanently arisen in the department of Economics and Social Science. In only one case, that of the Senior course by Professor Giddings, has a purely provisional arrangement been made for the year 1906-’07, with the understanding and the express statement on the part of the Barnard authorities that this would make no difference whatever in the financial arrangement for the year. It was on this understanding that the scheme was provisionally ratified by the Faculty of Political Science.

No opinion is here expressed by the Department of Economics as to the desirability of opening Senior courses at Columbia to Barnard students. It may be that for pedagogical reasons it is desirable in some cases to repeat courses at Barnard, or in other cases to admit Barnard Seniors to the Columbia courses. It may also be desirable to utilize the services of a professor, hitherto repeating a Senior course at Barnard for instruction in one of the lower classes at Barnard. But whatever decision may be reached by the Barnard authorities in conjunction with the Department of Economics, it is clear that this will not change the financial obligations of Barnard, as long as the Barnard undergraduates receive the same amount of instruction as before.

If it be maintained that the existing contract should be abrogated, the question arises: What share should Barnard College in equity contribute to the expenses of the Department? This question may be discussed on the basis of the number of hours given by the members of the department at Barnard College, at Columbia College, and in the University courses which are open to men and women graduates.

In any such computation it must be recognized that some part of the cost of the graduate instruction should be borne by Barnard College. For, irrespective of the existing contract, it cannot be claimed that women ever possessed a right to share in the advantages offered by an institution, originally established and endowed for the instruction of men without making some proportionate contribution to the support of that institution. The force of this argument is strengthened when it is remembered that every student costs the University more than he or she pays and that every increase in the student body entails the necessity of increasing the teaching course and of providing additional lecture rooms, educational appliances and library facilities.

It is for this reason that in any estimate of the share of the University expenses which is to be borne by Barnard College, a proportionate share of the expense of graduate instruction should be allotted to that institution.

On this assumption, the figures would be as follows:

 

Hours given

Barnard College

 Columbia College

University
Clark

2

 2 (109-110)

3 (205-6 & 291)
Seligman

—

 3 (1 & 101-102)

3 (203-4 & 292)
Seager

2

 2 (105-106)

2 (233 & 289)
Moore

3

 1 (104)

2 (210 & 255)
Whitaker

3

 4 (1-2)

—
Giddings

2

 2 (151-152)

3 (251-2 & 279)

12

 14

13

 

For undergraduate instruction

For Professors giving undergraduate instruction

Barnard pays:

Columbia pays:
Seligman

$5000
Clark

$5000

 Moore

$1750
Moore

$1750

 Seager

$3500
Whitaker

$1600

 Giddings

$5000

$8350

$15250

 =Total $23600
In addition Columbia pays for Purely University work

$5000
Grand Total

$28600

Total hours given as above by Professors giving undergraduate instruction = 41.

There is thus chargeable to:

The University 15/41 of $23600 = $8635 + $5000 = $13,635
Columbia College 14/41 of $23600 = $8,058
Barnard College should pay 12/41 of $23,600= $6907
                                                + 1/3 of $13,635= $4543[sic]
$11450

 

Barnard gets 12 hours to Columbia’s 14 and both share equally in the University work, although Barnard is here charged with only 1/3, not ½ of the purely university expenses. Yet Barnard pays $8350 instead of $11,450.

In the above computation Barnard College is charged with 1/3 of the purely university instruction because this was the proportion as arranged when the original professorship was established. On the basis, however, of the actual enrolment of women students the obligation of Barnard College would be slightly less. In the year 1906-07 there re-enrolled (not counting duplicates) in the purely university courses 60 women out of 251 students or 23.90%, i.e. roughly ¼. The contribution of Barnard College on this basis ought then to be: 12/41 of $23,600 = $6,907 + ¼ of $13,635 = $3,490 [sic, should be $3409] or a total of $10,316 in lieu of $8350, the present payment.

 

III. THE REDUCTION CONTEMPLATED BY BARNARD COLLEGE.

Although the authorities of Barnard College have not yet formulated any definite scheme it is understood that they have in contemplation a plan which calls on the one hand for a considerable reduction of the contribution, and on the other hand, the opening to Barnard Seniors of several Senior courses at Columbia College to make good the reduced facilities at Barnard College. In other words, Barnard College does not propose more opportunities with the same contribution as hitherto, nor does it demand the same opportunities with a smaller contribution; but it suggests more opportunities with a smaller contribution.

In considering the contemplated proposition of Barnard College it must finally be remembered that the Department of Economics has been built up on the assumption that the original scheme would be adhered to. All the instructors giving courses in Barnard College have been called with the advice and consent of Barnard College. Some of them have been put in part on the Barnard salary list. The contractual obligation “to maintain the professorships established at its instance” clearly attaches to the new professorships, which were established in 1902 in the department of Economics at the joint instance and expense of Barnard and Columbia. Any financial comparison between the Department of Economics and other departments on the basis of relative hours of instruction given at Barnard College is not pertinent in view of the contractual obligations hereinbefore recited. Barnard College entered at the outset into a definite contractual relation which has been perpetuated by the agreement of 1900 and which has not been impaired by the minor changes of 190[blank] hereinbefore referred to. Above all, the admission of women to university courses was arranged as a quid pro quo, and is specifically restricted in the agreement of 1900 to such courses “as have been or may be designated by these Faculties, with the consent of those delivering the courses”.

It is sincerely hoped that no action will be taken that might imperil this arrangement and that Barnard College may see its way, if not to make what it here suggested as an equitable contribution, at all events to maintain the status quo so that on the one hand Columbia may not be made to assume a still heavier burden, or that on the other hand the department of Economics may not be seriously crippled in its endeavor to provide adequate instruction at Columbia and Barnard alike.

Source:  Columbia University Libraries, Manuscript Collections. Papers of Edwin Robert Anderson Seligman. Box 36, Folder “Barnard 36-37”.

____________________

Letter of Seligman to Gill [carbon copy]

New York, December 30, 1906.

Miss Laura D. Gill, Dean,
Barnard College, Columbia University
New York City.

My dear Miss Gill:

Your letter of December 13th was received shortly before the Holidays. In reply, I would say that several weeks ago, at the request of the University authorities I submitted to the Committee on Education of Columbia University a detailed memorandum giving facts and suggestions as to the financial arrangements between Barnard College and Columbia University so far as the Department of Economics is concerned. That matter has now passed out of my hands entirely.

Let me however call your attention to the fact that these suggestions contained in your letter will require action not alone by the Department of Economics, but also by the Faculty of Political Science, as well as by the Faculty of Columbia College. If the recommendation contained in my memorandum to the Trustees were carried out, I think that I could urge the Department of Economics to prevail upon the Faculties concerned to take action in accordance with your wishes; but I am quite decidedly of the opinion that until some definitive financial arrangement is entered into between Barnard College and Columbia University, so far as the Department of Economics is concerned, it will be hopeless for the Department of Economics to expect any action whatever on the part of the Faculties concerned; and without such action nothing could of course be done.

Again assuring you of my readiness to co-operate with you and to take up the matter with the Department and with the respective Faculties as soon as we can learn from the Committee on Education what the financial arrangements are for next year,

I remain
Very respectfully yours

[E.R.A. Seligman]

 

Source:  Columbia University Libraries, Manuscript Collections. Central Files 1890-. Box 338, Folder 13 “Seligman, Edwin Robert Anderson 7/1904-12/1910”.

____________________

President Butler to Seligman [carbon copy]

December 28, 1908

Professor E. R. A. Seligman,
324 West 86 Street,
New York

My dear Professor Seligman:

I beg to hand you for your information an important letter which I have received today from the Acting Dean of Barnard College. Mr. Brewster points out that Barnard, under the present arrangement, is not securing its just due in the matter of economics teaching. Will you give this matter your attention and offer such suggestions as seem to you appropriate as to how the situation can be bettered?

Very truly yours,
President

 

Source:  Columbia University Libraries, Manuscript Collections. Central Files 1890-. Box 338, Folder 13 “Seligman, Edwin Robert Anderson 7/1904-12/1910”.

____________________

Seligman to President Butler

Columbia University
in the City of New York
School of Political Science

January 4, 1909

President Nicholas Murray Butler,
Columbia University, City.

My dear President Butler:

In reply to your letter of December 24th, 1908, I take pleasure in stating that I had a very satisfactory talk with Acting Dean Brewster a few days ago. I am enclosing to you herewith copy of the letter which I have sent to him as to the historical development, and which explains itself.

As to the new scheme, permit me to state that in my Budget letter I assumed that there would be hereafter in the second term in the Junior course at Barnard, four sections, as is now the case in the first term. It was on that assumption that I made the recommendations as to assistants.

I quite agree with Acting Dean Brewster that if the situation is to remain as at present, namely, nine hours in the first term and five hours in the second term, the new Adjunct Professor will be entirely competent to take charge of this. That would mean an average of seven hours per week, and as he is to do three hours’ work at Columbia that would mean a total of ten hours per week, which is not excessive. This would, however, reduce the Budget at Barnard from $2,700 to $2,500.

On the other hand, if, as there now seems to be some possibility, the Committee on Instruction of Barnard College decides to make the second term work nine hours (with four sections) the Acting Dean of Barnard agrees with me that the work will be a little too much for one man, and that he ought to have the aid of at all events the part time of an assistant.

Upon the decision to be reached, however, depends therefore the final recommendation of the Department for the assistants in the University as a whole. If no assistance is required at Barnard College the Department of Economics will be able to get on, although with some difficulty, with one high-class tutor, for his work will be to take charge not only of three of the four sections at Columbia, but also of the three new sections in the School of Mines, and this would mean the assumption by Columbia of his salary of $1,000. On the other hand, if the additional work is taken up at Barnard, it will be imperative to have a second man as assistant, at a salary of $500., as the amount of work to be done will be entirely too much for one tutor. We should then arrive at the final conclusion reached in my original Budget letter, which is the employment of two men, at a joint salary of $1,500., in addition to the new Adjunct Professor. What part of this salary of $1,500 is to be paid by Barnard, is, of course a matter on which I am not asked to express an opinion.

Permit me to say in conclusion that I am deeply sensible of the cordial way in which the Acting Dean of Barnard has accepted the propositions of the Department for the improvement of the work. Under the scheme as outlined not only will the work be, I think, entirely satisfactory to the authorities of Barnard College, but it will also be a considerable improvement at Columbia. The Department of Economics will be very glad indeed to adjust itself to whichever of the two alternative schemes may be adopted by Barnard: the one being the maintenance of the present situation calling for an appropriation for assistants of $1,000., to be paid entirely by Columbia, the other—involving additional work at Barnard—calling for an appropriation of $1,500 for assistants, to be defrayed in part by Barnard College.

Respectfully submitted,
[signed]
Edwin R. A. Seligman

Source:  Columbia University Libraries, Manuscript Collections. Central Files 1890-. Box 338, Folder 13 “Seligman, Edwin Robert Anderson 7/1904-12/1910”.

____________________

Seligman to Brewster [carbon copy]

January 4, 1909

Professor William T. Brewster,
Acting Dean, Barnard College, City.

My dear Sir:

I have the honor to acknowledge receipt of a letter of December 24, 1908, from President Butler, enclosing your letter of December 23, 1908, in which you refer to the courses offered by the Department of Economics at Barnard College.

As the existing situation is the result of steps taken by the administrative authorities of Barnard College and Columbia University, and as these agreements and instructions were never embodied in formal written documents, I venture to send you a written statement of the history of the case, in the hope that this letter may be put on file with the original agreement, in order that the question as to the interpretation of the original agreement may be settled, if it should again arise in the future.

The original agreement made with Professor Clark and the Faculty of Political Science, when he was called to the University in 1895, was to the effect that for every hour given by him at Columbia a member of the existing Columbia staff should give an hour at Barnard College. Under this agreement it was arranged that Professor Clark should give two hours at Barnard and four hours at Columbia. Of the four exchange hours due to Barnard, two were given by Professor Giddings and two by Professor Seligman. Several years later, when Professor Seager was called to Columbia, he took the courses previously given by Professor Seligman.

In the year 1905 when the Chair of the History of Civilization was founded at Columbia University, an arrangement was effected between the Dean of Barnard and the President of Columbia University, whereby the two hour course of Professor Giddings, given at Barnard, was transferred to Columbia, the Columbia course being now, however, open to Barnard students. This was recognized as a substantial equivalence, and since that time the Barnard students have been coming to Professor Giddings’ course at Columbia.

When Professor Henry L. Moore was called to the University in 1902 an arrangement was made whereby a portion of his work was to be done at Barnard in return for the payment of aa portion of his salary b Barnard College. Under this arrangement Professor Moore offered a two hour course to the Seniors at Barnard College, and took general supervision of the Junior work in Economics, which was, however, actually carried on by assistants. Several years later, as the Junior work at Barnard was not entirely satisfactory, the Dean of Barnard College suggested that Professor Moore give up his Senior course and in exchange take an active part in the lecturing and teaching of the Juniors at Barnard. This suggestion was adopted, and as the number of sections gradually increased at Barnard the work was finally divided between Professor Moore and two assistants, the class being divided into four sections in the first term and into two sections in the second term. As a compensation for the Senior course which was now dropped by Professor Moore, the Dean of Barnard College suggested that courses 107-108, given by Professor Seligman at Columbia University be open to Barnard students. This suggestion was adopted by the Department, and ratified by the Columbia Faculty, and has continued ever since.

What I desire especially to emphasize is the fact that in no case did the initiative for any of these changes come from the Department of Economics, but that in every case the initiative came either from the Dean of Barnard College or from the President of Columbia University in conjunction with the Dean of Barnard College. The Department of Economics has been at all times willing and anxious to live up to the terms of the original and supplemental agreements, and has in every case been glad to adopt the suggestions of the authorities of Barnard College. It so happens that during the present year Professor Seager is on his Sabbatical leave of absence, and that Courses 107-108 were not given at Columbia; but this is an exceptional situation, including the $5,000 salary of Professor Clark, with the corresponding work given in exchange at Barnard, the number of hours of instruction given at Barnard are economics A, 9 hours, Economics 4, 5 hours, or an annual average of seven hours per week. The salary list has been $2,700.,–$1,700 for Professor Moore and $1,000 for two assistants. This is an average of less than $400 per hour, and if we include Courses 107-108 at Columbia, which were open to the Barnard students when the supplemental agreement was made, it would reduce the cost per year to considerably less than $400, which I understand is the average in other Departments.

The new scheme of courses which has been elaborated by the Dean of Barnard College to take effect next year, meets with the entire approval of the Department of Economics, and is outlined in another letter a copy of which I have the honor of submitting herewith. I venture to hope, however, that this statement of the historical development of the situation may be put on file, in order to show that the Department of Economics has at all times endeavored to abide loyally by the spirit of the agreement between Barnard College and Columbia University.

Respectfully submitted,
[stamped signature: Edwin R. A. Seligman]

 

Source:  Columbia University Libraries, Manuscript Collections. Central Files 1890-. Box 338, Folder 13 “Seligman, Edwin Robert Anderson 7/1904-12/1910”.

Image Source:  Barnard College, Columbia University. Boston Public Library, The Tichnor Brothers Collection.

 

 

 

Categories
Bryn Mawr Sociology Suggested Reading

Bryn Mawr. Readings for Graduate Course in Sociology. Franklin H. Giddings, 1893

 

 

From 1891-94 Franklin H. Giddings held overlapping appointments at Bryn Mawr College and Columbia University. In 1894 he was appointed professor of sociology at Columbia. Most economists today are not aware that academic economics and sociology were much closer to being siblings than kissing-cousins back in 1893 and even for several decades into the twentieth century. Giddings taught economics, political science, and sociology while at Bryn Mawr.

After several years of service as a vice-president of the American Economic Association, Franklin H. Giddings  went on to become a president of the American Sociological Association. 

Frank H. Hankins wrote the entry on Franklin H. Giddings for the International Encyclopedia of the Social Sciences (1968).

Economics in the Rear-view Mirror is happy to provide links to all but one of the items listed in Giddings’ printed Readings in Sociology that can be found in his papers at Columbia University. He writes “In the following bibliographical notes and directions for reading only the most essential things are included. No attempt is made to offer a bibliography for advanced or special students.”

________________

Graduate Course
Bryn Mawr College

Sociology, Mr. Giddings.
Once weekly throughout the year.

A course of thirty lectures will be given on General Sociology. The various attempts that have been made to construct a philosophical science of society as an organic whole will be examined, and the field of sociology, as a study distinct from history, politics, and economics, will be defined. The causes and laws of social change will be sought, and the lectures will then lead up to the problem of progress, its conditions and limits. The different types of progressive and unprogressive societies will be studied comparatively. Statistical methods will be employed to show the reactions of civilisation that take such forms as insanity, suicide, crime, pauperism, and changes in birth-rates and A death-rates. Fellows and graduate students expecting to do advanced work in this course must have, besides their equipment in history and political-economy, a general knowledge of the history of philosophy, and some acquaintance with the literature of modern biology and empirical psychology. A reading knowledge of French and German is requisite.

 

Source:  Program. Bryn Mawr College. 1893.   Philadelphia: Sherman & Co., Printers, p. 72.

________________

READINGS IN
SOCIOLOGY

To accompany lectures given by
FRANKLIN H. GIDDINGS.
1893.

General or Philosophical Sociology

The word “sociology” was first used by Auguste Comte, in the Cours de Philosophie Positive, as a name for that part of a positive, or verifiable, philosophy, which should attempt to explain the phenomena of human society. It was exactly equivalent to “social physics,” for the task of sociology was to discover the nature, the natural causes, and the natural laws of society, and to banish from history, politics, economics, etc., all appeals to the metaphysical and the supernatural, as they had been banished from astronomy and from chemistry. Comte argued also that society should be studied as a whole, as a unit or organism, and objected to political economy, for example, as unscientific, because it was partial or fragmentary in its view of the social organization and process.

Since Comte the evolutionist explanation of the natural world has made its way into social interpretations, and from this point of view sociology has become an attempt to explain society in terms of natural causes, working themselves out in a process of evolution.

Christian thinkers, on the other hand, have adopted the term, and, so far as it goes, the conception, but have insisted on the recognition of a divine, providential, and final cause back of, or co-operating with efficient or natural causes, in working out human destinies.

In either case, general or philosophical sociology is a broad but penetrating and thorough scientific study of society as a whole; a search for its causes, for the laws of its structure and growth, and for a rational view of its purpose, function, meaning or destiny.

General sociology cannot be subdivided into special social sciences, such as economics, law, politics, etc., without losing its distinctive character. It should be looked upon as the foundation or ground-work of those sciences, rather than as their sum, or as their collective name.

But the general sociology of those savage and barbarian peoples who are organized in hordes, clans, and tribes, should be in a measure familiar to the student before he attempts the sociology of the great modern populations which are politically organized in national states. The former may be called ethnographic, the latter demographic, sociology. The data of ethnographic sociology are found mainly in the works of ethnologists. Among its most important problems are those of the origins and development of the forms of social intercourse and pleasure, the origins and early forms of the family, the relation of the clan to the family and to the tribe, and the development of tribal into national life. The data of demographic sociology are for the most part statistical. Among its chief problems are those of the characteristics and the conditions of progress, of the growth and limitations of population, of the vast and complex development of the division of labor, and of the growth and mutual relations of the so-called social classes.

In working his way through these problems the student finds that, at any given time and in given circumstances, certain social relations and conditions may be described as normal, while others are unmistakably abnormal. In like manner, certain elements in the population are normal and others most clearly abnormal in character and conduct. The latter are the so-called defective, dependent, and delinquent classes. He perceives that, for both practical and theoretical purposes, the thorough study of abnormal phenomena is so important that the problems here presented may be conveniently grouped under the separate head, social pathology.

Theoretically, social pathology has for the sociologist the same importance that physical or mental abnormality or illness has for the physiologist or the psychologist. The abnormal reveals and defines the normal. Many sociologists would maintain that a constructive general sociology can be built up only on the basis of researches in social pathology.

In the following bibliographical notes and directions for reading only the most essential things are included. No attempt is made to offer a bibliography for advanced or special students.

The student of sociology should begin his readings, if possible, with a concise but comprehensive work. The best book for this purpose is:

Grundriss der Sociologie, von Dr. Ludwig Gumplowicz, Vienna, 1885.

The first 50 pages are a history of sociological theories and literature to the present time. The remaining 195 pages are a compact outline of sociological principles. Starting with a search for the elements of social life. Professor Gumplowicz insists that “the true social element is neither an institution nor an idea nor a biological process. it is a concrete social group of living men with all their feelings and habits; in short, the primitive horde or tribe. Social structure, industrial organization, government, and intellectual progress all begin when these elements are bound together in lordship and subordination; some groups having subdued others, established government over them, and set them at enforced labor.”

This work is now being translated into English. [English translation by Frederick Douglas Moore (1899) ]

The student should next become acquainted with the beginnings of sociological philosophy in Comte, and with the evolutionist sociology of Spencer. Read, therefore, as follows:

The Positive Philosophy of Auguste Comte, freely translated and condensed by Harriet Martineau. Third edition. London, 1893.

Volume I., Introduction. Chapters I. and II.
Volume II., first six chapters.

Social Statics. By Herbert Spencer. Revised edition. New York, 1892.

Chapter on “General Considerations.”

An Epitome of the Synthetic Philosophy [of Herbert Spencer]. By F. Howard Collins. New York, 1889.

Chapter II. (a summary of Part II. of First Principles).
Chapter III., first six sections. (A summary of the first six chapters of The Principles of Biology.)
Chapter VIII. (A summary of Part VI. of The Principles of Biology.)
Chapter XI. (A summary of Part III. of The Principles of Psychology.)

The Principles of Sociology. By Herbert Spencer.

Part I., first eight chapters, and Chapter XXVII.
Part II. entire.

Comte attempted to interpret society in terms of physical forces. His knowledge of physical science and his grasp of social relations were inadequate.

Spencer actually does carry the physical interpretation a long way. His shortcoming is an inadequate recognition and an imperfect treatment of the psychical, especially the volitional aspects of the social process. He is best in his exposition of social evolution as a consequence of an equilibration of energies in accordance with the Newtonian laws of motion, and as a phase of the progressive adjustment of organism to environment. But only a small part of this portion of his work is found in those of his books that bear sociological titles. For this reason it is absolutely necessary for the student to read either the First Principles, the Biologyand the Psychology, or Mr. Collins’ epitomes, as above.

 

Walter Bagehot and John Fiske lay much emphasis on the combined workings of imitation and volition on the subjective side, with natural selection on the objective side. Read:

Physics and Politics. By Walter Bagehot. New York, 1876.
Outlines of Cosmic Philosophy. By John Fisk. Boston, 1874-1891.

Chapters XVI.—XXII., inclusive.

The most adequate treatment of the psychic forces in social evolution is found in the writings of Lester F. Ward, who argues that artificial selection gradually supplements natural selection, and that society, becoming self-conscious, can and should volitionally shape its own destiny. Read:

Dynamic Sociology. 2 volumes. By Lester F. Ward. New York, 1883.

Volume I., Chapter VII.

The Psychic Factors of Civilization. By Lester F. Ward. Boston, 1893.

As yet there are no systematic and comprehensive treatises on sociology from a distinctly Christian or theistic point of view. The following works are recommended:

An Introduction to Social Philosophy. By John S. Mackenzie. London and New York, 1890.

The philosophy is neo-Hegelian.

Social Aspects of Christianity. By Brooke Foss Westcott. London, 1887.

The Nation. By Elisha Mulford. Boston, 1881.

 

The following works should be referred to:

Gedanken über eine Socialwissenschaft der Zukunft. Von Paul von Lilienfeld. Mitau, 1873.
Bau und Leben des socialen Körpers. Dr. A. Schäffle, Tübingen, 1875. [Vol. I ; Vol II]
Der Mensch in der Geschichte. Zur Begründung einer Psychologischen Weltanschauung. By Adolf Bastian. Leipzig, 1860. [Vol. I ; Vol. II; Vol. III]
Introduction à la Sociologie. Par Dr. Guillaume de Greef. Bruxelles. Première partie, 1886.  Deuxième Partie, 1889.
Éléments de Sociologie. Par Combes de Lestrade. Paris, 1889.

The foregoing expository reading should be supplemented by two or three critical works on the province, aims and methods of sociological science. The best are:

The Study of Sociology. By Herbert Spencer. New York, 1875.
La Science Sociale Contemporaine. Par Alfred Fouillée. Deuxième édition. Paris, 1885.
La Sociologie. Par E. Roberty. Deuxième édition. Paris, 1886.

 

The following works are the best introduction to ethnographic sociology, demographic sociology, and social pathology.

Ethnographic Sociology.

La Sociologie d’après l’Ethnographie. Par Dr. Charles Letourneau. Troisième édition. Paris, 1892.

An English translation of the first edition was published in London in 1881.

An Epitome of the Synthetic Philosophy. (Collins, as above.) .

Chapters XX., XXI., XXII., XXIII. (A summary of Part III., “The Domestic Relations;” Part IV., “Ceremonial Institutions;” Part V., “Political Institutions;” and Par VI., “Ecclesiastical Institutions,” of The Principles of Sociology.)

The History of Human Marriage. By Edward Westermarck. London, 1891.

This is the most comprehensive, and, on the whole, the most judicious treatment of this warmly debated question.

Ancient Society. By Lewis H. Morgan. New York, 1878.

Read especially Part II.

The Early History of Institutions. By Sir Henry Sumner Maine. Fifth edition. London and New York, 1889.

Read especially Chapters II.-V., inclusive.

 

As works of reference consult:

Studies in Ancient History.By John Ferguson McLennan, London and New York, 1886.
The Patriarchal Theory. By John Ferguson McLennan. London and New York, 1885.
Kinship and Marriage in Early Arabia. By W. Robertson Smith. Cambridge, University Press, 1885.
The Primitive Family. By Dr. C. N. Starcke. New York, 1889.
Studien zur Entwicklungsgeschichte des Familienrechts. Von Dr. Albert Hermann Post.   [This hathitrust.org item is not available online]
The Evolution of Marriage. By Dr. Charles Letourneau. New York, 1891.
L’Évolution Juridique dan des Diverses Races Humaines. Par Dr. Charles Letourneau. Paris, 1891.

 

Demographic Sociology.

Read:

National Life and Character. By Charles H. Pearson. London, 1893.

Chapters I. and II.

Introduction à la Sociologie. Par Guillaume De Greef. Paris, 1889.

Deuxième Partie.

Or:

Principles of Economics. By Alfred Marshall. London, 1890.

Book IV., Chapters VIII.-XII.

Marshall, as above:

Book IV., Chapters IV.-VI.

Studies in Statistics. By G.B. Longstaff. London, 1891.

Chapters I.-XII.

Statistics and Economics. By Richmond Mayo-Smith. The American Economic Association, 1888.
Emigration and Immigration. By Richmond Mayo-Smith. New York, 1892.
Labour and Life of the People. Edited by Charles Booth. London, 1891.

Vol. I., Part I. and Part III., Chapter II.

Études Pénales et Sociales. Par G. Tarde. Paris, 1892.

Last four papers

 

Consult:

Journal of the Royal Statistical Society
Publications of the American Statistical Association.

 

Social Pathology

 

Read:

Philanthropy and Social Progress. Edited by Henry C. Adams. Boston, 1893.

Chapter VI.

An Introduction to the Study of the Dependent, Defective, and Delinquent Classes. By Charles R. Henderson. Boston, 1893.
The Jukes: A Study in Crime, Pauperism, Disease, and Heredity. By R. L. Dugdale. New York, 1884.
Suicide. By Henry Morselli. New York, 1882.
Crime and its Causes. By W. D. Morrison. London, 1891.

Or:

La Criminalité Comparée. Par G. Tarde. Paris, 1890.
The Criminal. By Havelock Ellis. London, 1892.
Illegitimacy, and the Influence of Seasons Upon Conduct.  By Albert Leffingwell. London, 1892.

 

Source: Columbia University Rare Book & Manuscript Library. Franklin Henry Giddings papers, 1890-1931. Box 4.

Image Source:  University and their Sons. History, Influence and Characteristics of American Universities with Biographical Sketches and Portraits of Alumni and Recipients of Honorary Degrees. Editor-in-chief, General Joshua L. Chamberlain, LL.D. Vol. II, p. 454.

Categories
Columbia

Columbia. Alvin S. Johnson recounts exams with Franklin Giddings, 1951

 

Perhaps I lived a blessed student life. I never felt that I had been particularly ill-treated in an examination, though I should add that I have fortunately been spared the trauma of an oral examination, except for matters involving my dental health. I once spoke with Kenneth Arrow, on the day before his 90th birthday, and was surprised to hear just how salient a memory was of an injustice that had been inflicted upon him by John Maurice Clark in an oral examination some seven decades earlier. Apparently Alvin Johnson nursed an analogous decades-long grudge as a result of his oral exam at the hands of the sociologist Franklin Giddings. In his letter to Joseph Dorfman transcribed in this post, we see that he was later able to leverage a poor exam performance of a Giddings’ student into a sweet payback of sorts. 

____________________

Letter from Alvin Johnson to Joseph Dorfman

THE NEW SCHOOL
66 West 12th St. New York 11
[Tel.] Oregon 5-2700

August 21, 1951

Dear Joe:

You haven’t answered my query as to whether it wouldn’t suit your purpose better to substitute for the piece I sent you on the School of Political Science my experience of the economics department proper.

I think my second minor was in Constitutional History under Burgess. At my doctor’s exam Burgess asked me three questions, but to be fair he elaborated them so much that he answered them himself, and I had only to nod assent.

Not so with Giddings. He was having a feud with Seligman and set about taking it out of my hide. I had attended a course with him on the English Poor Laws, a course that bored Giddings stiff. He came to my exam with a sheet of details he couldn’t have remembered himself.

“What was the Statute of Laborers? What year of what reign?
“What law was enacted in the third year of Edward VI?
“What was the ‘Speenhamland Act?’ What year of what reign?”

            About forty such questions. After I had retired for the Faculty to vote[,] Giddings, who after all was my friend, came out first, slapped me on the back and said:

“Well you passed. But by God, I made you sweat.”
“I’d have made you sweat yourself if I had had the written sheet and you hadn’t loaded up for me.”
“You bet.”

            I had my revenge a few months later, when one of Giddings’ protégés came up with a thesis on Puerto Rico. He was a theologue [sic], savagely Protestant, who ascribed all the woes of Puerto Rico to the Catholic Church. His book was full of fishy figures, the worst on the food situation. The Puerto Ricans were starved; they produced practically no food but lived on imported rice, the figures for which the thesis gave. I used my arithmetic and found that the figures gave fifty pounds of rice daily per capita.

“And you say they are underfed,” I added, not very humanely.

            When the candidate had retired Goodnow moved, first that the candidate be flunked; second that Giddings be censured for bringing such a fool before the Faculty; third that I be censured for making a Faculty member laugh right out in meeting. All three votes carried.

Sincerely,
[signed]
Alvin Johnson

Dr. Joseph Dorfman
Columbia University
Faculty of Political Science
New York 27, N.Y.

aj:ar

 

Source:  Columbia University Libraries, Manuscript Collections. Joseph Dorfman Collection, Box 13, Folder “C.U. Dept.al history”.

Image Source: From the cover of Alvin S. Johnson’s 1952 autobiography.

Categories
Amherst Chicago Columbia Economists

Columbia. John Maurice Clark. Autobiographical notes, 1949

 

The following recollections of John Maurice Clark of his earliest contacts with economic problems is found in a folder of his papers containing notes about his father, John Bates Clark. The hand-written notes are fairly clear until we come to a clear addition on the final page. Abbreviations are used there and the handwriting is not always clear. Still the pages together provide a few nice stories and short lists of J.M. Clark’s teachers and students.

______________________

June 8, 1949

J.M.C.’s recollections of his earliest contacts with economic problems.

I think my earliest contact with an economic problem came on learning that the carpenter who sometimes came to do odd jobs for us at 23 Round Hill got $2.00 a day. I had a special interest in that carpenter. He was a tall man, with a full, dark beard; and it had been my imprudent interest in his operation with the kitchen double-windows (putting on? taking off?) that led me to lean out of a hammock and over the low rail of our second-story porch, to watch him (I was between two and three at the time). Mechanical consequences—I descended rapidly, landing on my head, but apparently suffering no injury except biting my tongue. Subjective consequences – maybe it pounded a little caution into me at an early age; but the present point is that it fixed that carpenter in my memory as “the man who picked me up.” It was some time later I learned that he got $2.00 a day.

I don’t remember whether I took the initiative and asked, or not. The cost of things was often discussed in our house, and my mother often talked of the difficulty of making both ends meet. I knew my father’s salary, though I can’t be sure now whether it was $3,500 or less. Anyhow, it was maybe eight or ten times the carpenter’s pay; and I began wondering how he made both ends meet, and remarked to my father that $2.00 a day wasn’t much to live on. He answered that it was pretty good pay for that kind of work. So I learned there were two ways of looking at a daily stipend—as income to live on and as the price of the service you gave your employer. Or perhaps simply the standpoints of the recipient and the payer. But especially I learned there were people who had to adjust their ideas of what they could live on, to a fraction of the income we found skimpy for the things we thought of as necessary. In short, I had a lesson in classes and their multiple standards to ponder over; without reaching any very enlightening conclusions.

I don’t think I connected this with our friends the Willistons (of the family connected with Williston seminary in Easthampton) who lived in the big house above us and from whom we rented ours. They were evidently much richer than we. They had gone to Europe (and been shipwrecked on the way, and had to transfer at sea to a lumber-schooner, which threw its deckload of lumber overboard to enable it to take on the people from the helpless steamship. — but that’s another story.)

To return to the carpenter. I suppose today he’d get perhaps $16, more?, and a Smith College salary, for a full professor, might be $7,000 or $8,000. The discrepancy has shrunk to maybe 2/5—certainly less than half—of what it was then. That puzzling discrepancy was my first lesson in economics—the first I remember.

There was another lesson—if you could call it that—the summer we spent a while at the Stanley House (now gone) in Southwest Harbor, on Mt. Desert. The rich people went to Bar Harbor. At Southwest, there was Mr. Brierly who had a yacht. We took our outings in a rowboat, sometimes with the help of a spritsail. One time we were going up Somes Sound, and were passed by one of the biggest ocean-going steam yachts—the “Sultana”. It was a very impressive sight, in those narrow waters, and looked about as big as the “Queen Mary” would to me now. I don’t remember anybody doing any moralizing; but if they did, the impression it left was that we, in our fashion, were doing the same kind of thing they were.

My first contact with economic literature (not counting the subversive economics of Robin Hood, which we boys knew by heart, in the Howard Pyle version) was at 23 Round Hill, so I must have been less than nine. I found a little book on my father’s shelves that had pictures in it – queer pictures done in pen and ink, which puzzled me. There was a boy not much bigger than I was, in queer little knee-britches, acting as a teacher to a class of grown men (including I think a Professor Laughlin, under whom I later taught at the University of Chicago.) And there were classical females being maltreated by brutal men, and other queer things. I was curious enough to read some of the text, to find out about the pictures. It was “Coin’s Financial School,” the famous free-silver tract.

I read enough to become a convinced free-silverite. And then I had the shock of discovering that my beloved and respected father was on the wrong side of that question. I decided there must be more to it than I’d gotten out of the queer picture-book. I suppose that was my first lesson in the need of preserving an open mind and holding economic ideas subject to possible reconsideration. Davenport and Veblen gave me more extensive lessons, fifteen or twenty years later, only this second time it was my father’s ideas I had to rethink, after reluctantly admitting that these opposing ideas represented something real, that needed to be reckoned with. One had to do something about it, though the something didn’t mean substituting Veblen for my father. It was a more difficult and discriminating adjustment that was called for.

To return to my boyhood. It may have been about this time that I learned something about mechanical techniques, when my father took me to see the Springfield Arsenal. They had a museum, with broadswords that had been used in battle—one was so nicked up that its edge had disappeared in a continuous series of surprisingly deep nicks—but the mechanical process that impressed me was a pattern-lathe, rough-shaping the stocks of Krags. On one side was a metal model of the finished stock revolving, with a wheel revolving against it. On the other side was the wooden blank revolving, and a wheel like the one on the model, and linked to it so as to copy its movements, and armed with knives. So the machine could make complicated shapes following any model you put into it, and do it faster and more accurately that a hand worker.

Incidentally (and as a digression) that was our first military rifle with smokeless powder, more powerful than black; our first regular military magazine rifle of the modern kind with a bolt action and a box magazine. The regulars were just getting them. The militia still had the black-powder 45-70 Springfields at the time of the Spanish War, and a Massachusetts regiment had to be ordered off the firing-line at El Caney because their smoke made too good a target. Teddy Roosevelt had pull enough to get Krag carbines for his Rough Riders plus the privilege of using their own Winchesters if individuals preferred, and, if they had the 30-40-220, which took the Krag cartridge.

But my regular education in economic theory began at the age of 9 or 10, in our first year at Amherst, when we lived on Amity Street, opposite Sunset Ave. My father had in mind James Mill’s training of his son, John Stuart Mill, and he copied the techniques of explaining something during a walk, but he didn’t follow James Mill’s example by making me submit a written report for criticism and revision. All he did was to explain about diminishing utility and marginal utility—using the illustration of the oranges. And he was satisfied that I understood it, and concluded that the simple fundamentals of economics could be taught to secondary school or “grammar-school” students. Later, my friend and former graduate student, Leverett Lyon, pithily remarked that I probably understood it better then than I ever had since. Maybe he was right. I know when I met Professor Fetter, the year the Ec. Ass. met in Princeton, he told me I didn’t understand the theory, because I had said (in print, I think) that there were some dangers about the concept of “psychic income.” I didn’t say it was wrong, but I did think it was likely to be misleading to use a term that was associated with accountants’ arithmetic. So I did probably understand the theory “better” at the age of 9 or 10. Twenty ears later, it didn’t look so simple. This was long before I disagreed with Fetter about basing-point pricing and the rightness of the uniform FOB mill price, as the price “true” competition would bring about.

______________________

J.M.C. later history.

Amherst, C in Ec tho 85 on exam, & written work not credited. (cf French A from Wilkins, C from [William Stuart] Symington (father of present (1951) W. Stuart Symington, head of nat security Resources Board). Symie sized my attitude up as that of a gentleman & gave me a gentleman’s mark)ache Crook said he “didn’t get hold” of me. He was correct.

 

Columbia: Giddings, A. S. Johnson, H.L. Moore, Seligman, Seager, Hawkins [?], Chaddock, Agger, Jacobstein. indoctrinated: J. B. C. orthodoxy modified by overhead costs (catalogued as “dynamics”) Dynamics (defined as) everything statics leaves out. & much induction. Take “Essentials” on slow dictation.

Veblen: slow infiltration of its logical & progre[?] rel. to the abstractions of J.B.C.: reverse normalizing might make[?] an arguable claim to equal legitimacy.

1912 ed. of Control of Trusts

“Contribution to theory of competive price” [QJE, August 1914] forerunner of “mon-comp”, largely empirical basis.

Germs of social & inst. ec. Rich-poor, Freedom as val in ec.[??] B. M. Anderson cf. Cooley

Revs of Hobson?, Pigou, Davenport Economics of Enterprise [Political Science Quarterly, Vol 29, no. 2]

 

To Chi. 1915 Changing basis of economic responsibility [JPE, March 1916] on moving to Chi. open declar[ation] of non-Laughlinism: backfire to an Atlantic article of Laughlin’s.

Modern Psych.

1917-18. War-ec. (“basis of war-time collectivism.”)

Students: Garver oral. Slichter, Lyon, Innis, Martin [?], Goodrich, Copeland, O’Grady [John O’Grady ?]

Ayres, Knight on faculty.

Ov. C. [Studies in the Economics of Overhead Costs]

Social Control [of Business]

 

Columbia. Students, Friedman, Ginzberg, Salera, Kuznets’ oral

 

Source: Columbia University Archives. John M. Clark Collection. History of Economic Thought. Box 37, Folder “J. B. Clark, 1847-1938”.

Image Source: John Maurcie Clark. University of Chicago Photographic Archive, apf1-0171.  Special Collections Research Center, University of Chicago Library.

Categories
Barnard Columbia Courses Curriculum

Columbia. Economics Courses with Descriptions, 1905-07

 

 

From time to time I mistakenly repeat the preparation of an artifact, as is the case with this list of instructors and courses offered in economics and social sciences by the Columbia University Faculty of Political Science in 1905-07. Still, I am getting better with respect to formatting, so I am replacing the V1.0 with this V2.0 today.

________________________________

OFFICERS OF INSTRUCTION
FACULTY OF POLITICAL SCIENCE
[Economics and Social Sciences (1905-07)]

EDWIN R. A. SELIGMAN, Ph.D., LL.D., McVickar Professor of Political Economy
[Absent on leave in 1905-06.]
FRANKLIN H. GIDDINGS, Ph.D., LL.D., Professor of Sociology
JOHN B. CLARK, Ph.D., LL.D., Professor of Political Economy
HENRY R. SEAGER, Ph.D., Professor of Political Economy, and Secretary
HENRY L. MOORE, Ph.D., Adjunct Professor of Political Economy
VLADIMIR G. SIMKHOVITCH, Ph.D., Adjunct Professor of Economic History
EDWARD THOMAS DEVINE, Ph.D., LL.D., Professor of Social Economy

OTHER OFFICERS

ALVIN S. JOHNSON, Ph.D., Instructor in Economics
GEORGE J. BAYLES, Ph.D Lecturer in Ecclesiology [A.B., Columbia, 1891; A.M., 1892; LL.B., 1893; Ph.D., 1895.]
ELSIE CLEWS PARSONS, Ph.D., Lecturer in Sociology in Barnard College

________________________________

GROUP III—ECONOMICS AND SOCIAL SCIENCE

GRADUATE COURSES

It is presumed that students who take economics, sociology or social economy as their major subject are familiar with the general principles of economics and sociology as set forth in the ordinary manuals. Students who are not thus prepared are recommended to take the courses in Columbia College or Barnard College designated as Economics 1 and 2 (or A and 4) and Sociology 151-152.

The graduate courses fall under three subjects: A—Political Economy and Finance; B—Sociology and Statistics; C—Social Economy.

Courses numbered 100 to 199 are open to Seniors in Columbia College.

Courses numbered 200 and above are open to graduate women students upon the same terms as to men.

All the courses are open to male auditors. Women holding the first degree may register as auditors in Courses numbered 200 and above.

Subject A—Political Economy and Finance

ECONOMICS 101-102—Taxation and Finance. Professor SELIGMAN.
M. and W. at 1.30. 422 L.

This course is historical, as well as comparative and critical. After giving a general introduction and tracing the history of the science of finance, it treats of the various rules of the public expenditures and the methods of meeting the same among civilized nations. It describes the different kinds of public revenues, including the public domain and public property, public works and industrial undertakings, special assessments, fees, and taxes. It is in great part a course on the history, theories, and methods of taxation in all civilized countries. It considers also public debt, methods of borrowing, redemption, refunding, repudiation, etc. Finally, it describes the fiscal organization of the state by which the revenue is collected and expended, and discusses the budget, national, state, and local. Although the course is comparative, the point of view is American. Students are furnished with the current public documents of the United States Treasury and the chief financial reports of the leading commonwealths, and are expected to understand all the facts in regard to public debt, revenue, and expenditure contained therein.

Given in 1906-07 and in each year thereafter.

ECONOMICS 103—Money and Banking. Professor H. L. MOORE.
Tu. and Th. at 10.30, first half-year. 415 L.

The aim of this course is (1) to describe the mechanism of exchange and to trace the history of the metallic money, the paper money, and the banking system of the United States; to discuss such questions as bi-metallism, foreign exchanges, credit cycles, elasticity of the currency, present currency problems, and corresponding schemes of reform; (2) to illustrate the quantitative treatment of such questions as variations in the value of the money unit, and the effects of appreciation and depreciation.

ECONOMICS 104—Commerce and Commercial Policy. Dr. JOHNSON.
Tu. and Th. at 10.30, second half-year. 415 L.

In this course the economic bases of modern commerce, and the significance of commerce, domestic and foreign, in its relation to American industry, will be studied. An analysis will be made of the extent and character of the foreign trade of the United States, and the nature and effect of the commercial policies of the principal commercial nations will be examined.

ECONOMICS 105—The Labor Problem. Professor SEAGER.
Tu. and Th. at 11.30, first half-year. 415 L.

The topics considered in this course are: The rise of the factory system, factory legislation, the growth of trade unions and changes in the law in respect to them, the policies of trade unions, strikes, lockouts, arbitration and conciliation, proposed solutions of the labor problem, and the future of labor in the United States.

Given in 1906-07 and in alternate years thereafter.

ECONOMICS 106—The Trust Problem. Professor SEAGER.
Tu. and Th. at 11.30, second half-year. 415 L.

In this course special attention is given to the trust problem as it presents itself in the United States. Among the topics considered are the rise and progress of industrial combinations, the forms of organization and policies of typical combinations, the common law and the trusts, anti-trust acts and their results, and other proposed solutions of the problem.

Given in 1906-07 and in alternate years thereafter.

[ECONOMICS 107—Fiscal and Industrial History of the United States. Professor SELIGMAN.
M. and W. at 3.30, first half-year. 415 L.

This course endeavors to present a survey of national legislation on currency, finance, and taxation, including the tariff, together with its relations to the state of industry and commerce. The chief topics discussed are: The fiscal and industrial conditions of the colonies; the financial methods of the Revolution and the Confederation; the genesis of the protective idea; the fiscal policies of the Federalists and of the Republicans; the financial management of the War of 1812; the industrial effects of the restrictive and war periods; the crises of 1819, 1825, and 1837; the tariffs of 1816, 1824, and 1828; the distribution of the surplus and the Bank war; the currency problems before 1863; the era of “free trade,” and the tariffs of 1846 and 1857; the fiscal problems of the Civil War; the methods of resumption, conversion and payment of the debt; the disappearance of the war taxes; the continuance of the war tariffs; the money question and the acts of 1878, 1890, and 1900; the loans of 1894-96; the tariffs of 1890, 1894, and 1897; the fiscal aspects of the Spanish War. The course closes with a discussion of the current problems of currency and trade, and with a general consideration of the arguments for and against protection as illustrated by the practical operations of the various tariffs.

Not given in 1905-07.]

[ECONOMICS 108— Railroad Problems; Economic, Social, and Legal. Professor SELIGMAN.
M. and W. at 3.30, second half-year. 415 L.

These lectures treat of railroads in the fourfold aspect of their relation to the investors, the employees, the public, and the state respectively. A history of railways and railway policy in America and Europe forms the preliminary part of the course. The chief problems of railway management, so far as they are of economic importance, come up for discussion.

Among the subjects treated are: Financial methods, railway constructions, speculation, profits, failures, accounts and reports, expenses, tariffs, principles of rates, classification and discrimination, competition and pooling, accidents, and employers’ liability. Especial attention is paid to the methods of regulation and legislation in the United States as compared with European methods, and the course closes with a general discussion of state versus private management.

Not given in 1905-07.]

ECONOMICS 109 — Communistic and Socialistic Theories. Professor CLARK.
Tu. and Th. at 2.30, first half-year. 406 L.

This course studies the theories of St. Simon, Fourier, Proudhon, Rodbertus, Marx, Lassalle, and others. It aims to utilize recent discoveries in economic science in making a critical test of these theories themselves and of certain counter-arguments. It examines the socialistic ideals of distribution, and the effects that, by reason of natural laws, would follow an attempt to realize them through the action of the state.

ECONOMICS 110 — Theories of Social Reform. Professor CLARK.
Tu. and Th. at 2.30, second half-year. 406 L.

This course treats of certain plans for the partial reconstruction of industrial society that have been advocated in the United States, and endeavors to determine what reforms are in harmony with economic principles. It treats of the proposed single tax, of the measures advocated by the Farmers’ Alliance, and of those proposed by labor organizations, and the general relation of the state to industry.

ECONOMICS 201—Economic Readings I: Classical English Economists. Professor SEAGER.
Tu. and Th. at 11.30, first half-year. 415 L.

In this course the principal theories of the English economists from Adam Smith to John Stuart Mill are studied by means of lectures, assigned readings and reports, and discussions. Special attention is given to the Wealth of Nations, Malthus’s Essay on Population, the bullion controversy of 1810, the corn law controversy of 1815, and the treatises on Political Economy of Ricardo, Senior, and John Stuart Mill.

Given in 1905-06 and in alternate years thereafter.

ECONOMICS 202—Economic Readings II: Contemporary Economists. Professor SEAGER.
Tu. and Th. at 11.30, second half-year. 415 L.

In this course the theories of contemporary economists are compared and studied by the same methods employed in Economics 201. Special attention is given to Böhm-Bawerk’s Positive Theory of Capital and Marshall’s Principles of Economics.

Given in 1905-06 and in alternate years thereafter.

ECONOMICS 203-204—History of Economics. Professor SELIGMAN.
M. and W. at 3.30. 415 L.

In this course the various systems of political economy are discussed in their historical development. The chief exponents of the different schools are taken up in their order, and especial attention is directed to the wider aspects of the connection between the theories and the organization of the existing industrial society. The chief writers discussed are:

I. Antiquity: The Oriental Codes; Plato, Aristotle, Xenophon, Cato, Seneca, Cicero, the Agrarians, the Jurists.

II. Middle Ages: The Church Fathers, Aquinas, the Glossators, the writers on money, trade, and usury.

III. Mercantilists: Hales, Mun, Petty, Barbon, North, Locke; Bodin, Vauban, Boisguillebert, Forbonnais; Serra, Galiani ; Justi, Sonnenfels.

IV. Physiocrats: Quesnay, Gournay, Turgot, Mirabeau.

V. Adam Smith and precursors: Tucker, Hume, Cantillon, Stewart.

VI. English school: Malthus, Ricardo, Senior, McCulloch, Chalmers, Jones, Mill.

VII. The Continent: Say, Sismondi, Cournot, Bastiat; Herrmann, List, von Thünen.

VIII. German historical school: Roscher, Knies, Hildebrandt.

IX. Recent Development—England: Rogers, Jevons, Cairnes, Bagehot, Leslie, Toynbee, Marshall; Germany: Wagner, Schmoller, Held, Brentano, Cohn, Schäffle; Austria: Menger, Sax, Böhm-Bawerk, Wieser; France: Leroy Beaulieu, Laveleye, Gide, Walras; Italy: Cossa, Loria, Pantaleoni; America: Carey, George, Walker, Clark, Patten, Adams.

Given in 1906-07 and in alternate years thereafter.

ECONOMICS 205—Economic Theory I. Professor CLARK.
M. and W. at 2.30, first half-year. 406 L.

This course discusses, first, the static laws of distribution. If the processes of industry were not changing, wages and industry would tend to adjust themselves according to certain standards. A study of the mechanism of production would then show that one part of the product is specifically attributable to labor, and that another part is imputable to capital. It is the object of the course to show that the tendency of free competition, under such conditions, is to give to labor, in the form of wages, the amount that it specifically creates, and also to give to capital, in the form of interest, what it specifically produces. The theory undertakes to prove that the earnings of labor and of capital are governed by a principle of final productivity, and that this principle must be studied on a social scale, rather than in any one department of production. The latter part of this course enters the field of Economic Dynamics, defines an economic society and describes the forces which so act upon it as to change its structure and its mode of producing and distributing wealth.

ECONOMICS 206—Economic Theory II. Professor CLARK.
M. and W. at 2.30, second half-year. 406 L.

This course continues the discussion of the dynamic laws of distribution. The processes of industry are actually progressing. Mechanical invention, emigration and other influences cause capital and labor to be applied in new ways and with enlarging results. These influences do not even repress the action of the static forces of distribution, but they bring a new set of forces into action. They create, first, employers’ profits, and, later, additions to wages and interest. It is the object of the course to show how industrial progress affects the several shares in distribution under a system of competition, and also to determine whether the consolidations of labor and capital, which are a distinctive feature of modern industry, have the effect of repressing competition. It is a further purpose of the course to present the natural laws by which the increase of capital and that of labor are governed and to discuss the manner in which the earnings of these agents are affected by the action of the state, and to present at some length the character and the effects of those obstructions which pure economic law encounters in the practical world.

ECONOMICS 207—Theory of Statistics. Professor H. L. MOORE.
Tu. and Th. at 1.30, first half-year. 418 L.

The aim of this course is to present the elementary principles of statistics and to illustrate their application by concrete studies in the chief sources of statistical material. The theoretical part of the course includes the study of averages, index numbers, interpolation, principles of the graphic method, elements of demography, and statistical principles of insurance. The laboratory work consists of a graded series of problems designed to develop accuracy and facility in the application of principles. (Identical with Sociology 255.)

ECONOMICS 208—Quantitative Economics I: Advanced Statistics. Professor H. L. MOORE.
W. and F. at 11.30, second half-year. 418 L.

Quantitative Economics I and II (see Economics 210) investigate economics as an exact science. This course treats economics from the inductive, statistical side. It aims to show how the methods of quantitative biology and anthropology are utilized in economics and sociology. Special attention is given to recent contributions to statistical theory by Galton, Edgeworth, and Pearson. Economics 207, or an equivalent, is a prerequisite.

Given in 1905-06 and in alternate years thereafter.

ECONOMICS 210—Quantitative Economics II: Mathematical Economics. Professor H. L. MOORE.
W. and F. at 11.30, second half-year. 418 L.

This course treats economics from the deductive side. It aims to show the utility of an analytical treatment of economic laws expressed in symbolic form. The work of Cournot is presented and used as a basis for the discussion of the contributions to the mathematical method by Walras, Marshall, and Pareto. Economics 207, or an equivalent, is a prerequisite.

Given in 1906-07 and in alternate years thereafter.

ECONOMICS 241—The Economic and Social Evolution of Russia since 1800. Professor SIMKHOVITCH.
M. and F. at 9.30, first half-year. 418 L.

This course describes the economic development of the country, the growth of slavophil, liberal and revolutionary doctrines and parties, and the disintegration of the autocratic régime. (Identical with History 281.)

ECONOMICS 242—Radicalism and Social Reform as Reflected in the Literature of the Nineteenth Century. Professor SIMKHOVITCH.
M. at 9.30 and 10.30, second half-year. 418 L.

An interpretation of the various types of modern radicalism, such as socialism, nihilism, and anarchism, and of the social and economic conditions on which they are based.

ECONOMICS 291-292—Seminar in Political Economy and Finance. Professors SELIGMAN and CLARK.
For advanced students. Tu., 8.15-10.15 P.M. 301 L.

 

Subject B—Sociology and Statistics

SOCIOLOGY 151-152—Principles of Sociology. Professor GIDDINGS.
Tu. and Th. at 3.30. 415 L.

This is a fundamental course, intended to lay a foundation for advanced work. In the first half-year, in connection with a text-book study of theory, lectures are given on the social traits, organization, and welfare of the American people at various stages of their history and students are required to analyze and classify sociological material of live interest, obtained from newspapers, reviews, and official reports. In the second half-year lectures are given on the sociological systems of important writers, including Montesquieu, Comte, Spencer, Schäffle, De Greef, Gumplowicz, Ward, and Tarde. This course is the proper preparation for statistical sociology (Sociology 255 and 256) or for historical sociology (Sociology 251 and 252).

SOCIOLOGY 251—Social Evolution—Ethnic and Civil Origins. Professor GIDDINGS.
F. at 2.30 and 3.30, first half-year. 415 L.

This course on historical sociology deals with such topics as (1) the distribution and ethnic composition of primitive populations; (2) the types of mind and of character, the capacity for coöperation, the cultural beliefs, and the economic, legal, and political habits of early peoples; (3) early forms of the family, the origins, structure, and functions of the clan, the organization of the tribe, the rise of the tribal federations, tribal feudalism, and the conversion of a gentile into a civil plan of social organization. Early literature, legal codes, and chronicles, descriptive of the Celtic and Teutonic groups which combined to form the English people before the Norman Conquest, are the chief sources made use of in this course.

SOCIOLOGY 252—Social Evolution—Civilization, Progress, and Democracy. Professor GIDDINGS.
F. at 2.30 and 3.30, second half-year. 415 L.

This course, which is a continuation of Sociology 251, comprises three parts, namely: (1) The nature of those secondary civilizations which are created by conquest, and of the policies by which they seek to maintain and to extend themselves; (2) an examination of the nature of progress and of its causes, including the rise of discussion and the growth of public opinion; also a consideration of the policies by which continuing progress is ensured,—including measures for the expansion of intellectual freedom, for the control of arbitrary authority by legality, for the repression of collective violence, and for the control of collective impulse by deliberation; (3) a study of the nature, the genesis, and the social organization of modern democracies, including an examination of the extent to which non-political associations for culture and pleasure, churches, business corporations, and labor unions, are more or less democratic; and of the democratic ideals of equality and fraternity in their relations to social order and to liberty. The documents of English history since the Norman Conquest are the chief sources made use of in this course.

SOCIOLOGY 255—Theory of Statistics. Professor H. L. MOORE.
Tu. and Th. at 1.30, first half-year. 418 L.

This course is identical with Economics 207 (see [above]).

SOCIOLOGY 256—Social Statistics. Professor GIDDINGS.
Tu. and Th. at 1.30, second half-year. 418 L.

Actual statistical materials, descriptive and explanatory of contemporaneous societies, are the subject-matter of this course, which presupposes a knowledge of statistical operations (Sociology 255) and applies it to the analysis of concrete problems. The lectures cover such topics as (1) the statistics of population, including densities and migrations, composition by age, sex, and nationality, amalgamation by intermarriage; (2) statistics of mental traits and products, including languages, religious preferences, economic preferences (occupations), and political preferences; (3) statistics of social organization, including families, households, municipalities, churches, business corporations, labor unions, courts of law, army, navy, and civil service; (4) statistics of social welfare, including peace and war, prosperity, education or illiteracy, vitality, and morality, including pauperism and crime.

SOCIOLOGY 259—Ecclesiology. Dr. BAYLES.
Tu. and F. at 4.30, first half-year. 405 L.

The purpose of this course is to define the present relations of the ecclesiastical institutions to the other institutions of American society: the state, the government, marriage, family, education, and public wealth. An analysis is made of the guarantees of religious liberty contained in the federal and commonwealth constitutions; of the civil status of churches in terms of constitutional and statute law; of the methods of incorporation, of the functions of trustees, of legislative and judicial control; of denominational polity according to its type; of the functional activity of churches in their departments of legislation, administration, adjudication, discipline, and mission; of the influence of churches on ethical standards; of the distribution of nationalities among the denominations, of the territorial distribution of denominational strength, of the relation of polity to density of population, and of the current movements in and between various organizations tending toward changes of functions and structure.

SOCIOLOGY 279-280—Seminar in Sociology. Professor GIDDINGS.
W. at 3.30 and 4.30, bi-weekly. 301 L.

The Statistical Laboratory, conducted by Professors GIDDINGS and H. L. MOORE, is equipped with the Hollerith tabulating machines, comptometers, and other modern facilities.

Subject C—Social Economy

SOCIAL ECONOMY 281—Poverty and Dependence. Professor DEVINE.
Th. and F. at 4.30, first half-year. 418 L.

The purpose of this course and of Social Economy 282, which follows, is to study dependence and measures of relief, and to analyze the more important movements which aim to improve social conditions. An attempt is made to measure the extent of dependence, both in its definite forms, as in charitable and penal institutions, and in its less recognized and definite forms, as when it results in the lowering of the standard of living or the placing of unreasonably heavy burdens upon children or widows. Among the special classes of social debtors which are studied, besides the paupers, the vagrants, the dissipated, and the criminals, who require discipline or segregation as well as relief, are: Orphans and other dependent children; the sick and disabled; the aged and infirm; the widow and the deserted family; the immigrant and the displaced laborer; the underfed and consequently short-lived worker.

Given in 1905—06 and in alternate years thereafter.

SOCIAL ECONOMY 282—Principles of Relief. Professor DEVINE.
Th. and F. at 4.30, second half-year. 418 L.

In this course the normal standard of living is considered concretely to secure a basis from which deficiencies may be estimated. A large number of individual typical relief problems are presented, and from these, by a “case system,” analogous to that of the modern law school, the principles of relief are deduced. Among the larger movements to be considered are: Charity organization; social settlements; housing reform; the elimination of disease; the restriction of child labor; and the prevention of overcrowding, and especially the congestion of population in the tenement-house districts of the great cities.

Given in 1903-06 and in alternate years thereafter.

SOCIAL ECONOMY 283—Pauperism and Poor Laws. Professor SEAGER.
M. at 3.30 and 4.30, first half-year. 418 L.

This is an historical and comparative course intended to supplement Social Economy 281 and 282. Lectures on the history of the English poor law are followed by discussions of farm colonies, the boarding-out system for children, old-age pensions, and other plans of relief currently advocated in England. On this basis the public relief problems of New York State and City and the institutions attempting their solution are studied by means of excursions, lectures, and discussions.

SOCIAL ECONOMY 285—The Standard of Living. Professor DEVINE.
Th. and F. at 4.30, first half-year. 418 L.

A concrete study of the standard of living in New York City in the classes which are above the line of actual dependence, but below or near the line of full nutrition and economic independence. While this course will not be given in the year 1905-06, assignments will be made in the School of Philanthropy for research in such portions of this field as suitably prepared students may elect to undertake.

Given in 1906-07 and in alternate years thereafter.

SOCIAL ECONOMY 286—The Prevention and Diminution of Crime. Professor DEVINE.
Th. and F. at 4.30, second half-year. 418 L.

This course will deal with the social function of the penal and police systems. Special attention will be given to such subjects as juvenile courts; the probation system; indeterminate sentence; treatment of discharged prisoners; the system of local jails; segregation of incorrigibles, and prison labor.

Given in 1906-07 and in alternate years thereafter.

SOCIAL ECONOMY 290—Crime and Criminal Anthropology. Professor GIDDINGS.

Students desiring to make a special study of crime, criminal anthropology, and the theory of criminal responsibility may take the lectures of Sociology 256 or of Social Economy 286 and follow prescribed readings under the direction of Professor GIDDINGS.

SOCIAL ECONOMY 299-300—Seminar in Social Economy. Professor DEVINE.
Two hours a week. Hours to be arranged.

The work of the Seminar for 1905-07 will be a study of recent developments in the social and philanthropic activities of New York City; e. g., the social settlements; parks and playgrounds; outside activities of public schools; children’s institutions; relief societies; agencies for the aid of immigrants, and the preventive work of organized charities.

COURSES IN THE SCHOOL OF PHILANTHROPY

The School of Philanthropy, conducted by the Charity Organization Society, under the direction of Professor Devine, offers courses* aggregating not less than ten hours a week throughout the academic year, and also a Summer School course of six weeks in June and July. These courses are open to regular students of Columbia University who satisfy the director that they are qualified to pursue them with profit, and are accepted as a minor for candidates for an advanced degree.

The program of studies for 1905-06 is as follows:

            A—General survey (forty lectures) ; B—Dependent families (fifty lectures); C—Racial traits and social conditions (thirty-five lectures); D—Constructive social work (fifty lectures) ; E—Child-helping agencies (forty lectures); F—Treatment of the criminal (thirty lectures); G—Administration of charitable and educational institutions (thirty lectures); H—The State in its relation to charities and correction (forty lectures).

* These courses are given in the United Charities Building, corner Fourth Avenue and 22d Street.

 

COURSES IN COLUMBIA COLLEGE

ECONOMICS 1-2—Introduction to Economics—Practical Economic Problems. Professors SELIGMAN and SEAGER, and Dr. JOHNSON.
Section 1, M. and W. at 9.30, and F. at 11.30. Section 2, M., W., and F. at 11.30. M. and W. recitations in 415 L. F. lecture in 422 L.

 

COURSES IN BARNARD COLLEGE

ECONOMICS A—Outlines of Economics. Professor MOORE and Dr. JOHNSON.
Three hours, first half-year.
Section 1, Tu., Th., and S. at 9.30. Section 2, Tu. and Th. at 11.30, and S. at 9.30.

ECONOMICS 4—Economic History of England and the United States. Professor MOORE and Dr. JOHNSON.
M., W., and F. at 10.30, second half-year.

ECONOMICS 105—The Labor Problem. Professor SEAGER.
Tu. and Th. at 1.30, first half-year.

The topics treated in this course are the rise of the factory system, factory legislation, the growth of trade unions and changes in the law in respect to them, the policies of trade unions, strikes, lockouts, arbitration and conciliation, proposed solutions of the labor problem, and the future of labor in the United States.

ECONOMICS 120—Practical Economic Problems. Professor SEAGER.
Tu. and Th. at 1.30, second half-year.

The topics treated in this course are the defects in the monetary and banking systems of the United States, government expenditures and government revenues, protection vs. free trade, the relation of the government towards natural monopolies, and federal control of trusts.

ECONOMICS 121—English Social Reformers. Professor MOORE.
W. and F. at 1.30, first half-year.

A critical study of the social teachings of Carlyle, Ruskin, John Stuart Mill, Kingsley, and Thomas H. Green.
Open to students that have taken Course A or an equivalent.

ECONOMICS 122—Economic Theory. Professor MOORE.
W. and F. at 1.30, second half-year.

A critical study of Marshall’s Principles of Economics. The principal aim of this course is to present the methods and results of recent economic theory.
Open to students that have taken Course A or an equivalent.

ECONOMICS 109—Communistic and Socialistic Theories. Professor CLARK.
Tu. and Th. at 11.30, first half-year.

In this course a brief study is made of the works of St. Simon, Fourier, Proudhon, Owen, and Lassalle, and a more extended study is made of Marx’s treatise on capital. Recent economic changes, such as the formation of trusts and strong trade unions, are examined with a view to ascertaining what effect they have had on the modern socialistic movement.

ECONOMICS 110—Theories of Social Reform. Professor CLARK.
Tu. and Th. at 11.30, second half-year.

In this course a study is made of modern semi-socialistic movements and of such reforms as have for their object the improvement of the condition of the working class. Municipal activities, factory legislation, the single tax, recent agrarian movements and measures for the regulation of monopolies are studied.

SOCIOLOGY 151-152—Principles of Sociology. Professor GIDDINGS.
Tu. and Th. at 2.30.

This is a fundamental course, intended to lay a foundation for advanced work. In the first half-year, in connection with a text-book study of theory, lectures are given on the social traits, organization, and welfare of the American people at various stages of their history, and students are required to analyze and classify sociological material of live interest, obtained from newspapers, reviews, and official reports. In the second half-year, lectures are given on the sociological systems of important writers, including Montesquieu, Comte, Spencer, Schäffle, De Greef, Gumplowicz, Ward, and Tarde.

SOCIOLOGY 153-154 —Family Organization. Dr. ELSIE CLEWS PARSONS.
Tu. at 3.30, bi-weekly.

Field work in the study of family groups. Consultations.
Open to Seniors.

In connection with the lectures and field work of this course opportunities are given to students to become acquainted with the more important private institutions for social betterment in New York City, and to study the organization and activity of the various public agencies charged with the welfare of the community.

 

COURSES IN THE SUMMER SESSION

sA—Economic History of England and America. Lectures, recitations, and essays. Dr. JOHNSON.
Five hours a week at 1.30. 501 F. Credit I
(Equivalent, when supplemented by prescribed reading, to Economics 4.)

sB—Principles of Economics. Lectures and class discussions. Dr. JOHNSON.
Five hours a week at 2.30. 501 F. Credit I.
(Equivalent, when supplemented by prescribed reading, to Economics 1.)

sA1—Principles of Sociology. Descriptive and theoretical. Professor GIDDINGS.
Five hours a week at 10.30. 415 L. Credit I, II.
(Equivalent to Sociology IS1-)

sA2—Principles of Sociology. History of sociological theory. Professor GIDDINGS.
Five hours a week at 9.30. 415 L. Credit I, II.
(Equivalent to Sociology 152.)

Source: Columbia University. Bulletin of Information. Courses Offered by the Faculty of Political Science and the Several Undergraduate Faculties. Announcement 1905-07. pp. 3, 24-36.

Image Source: Roberto Ferrari, Unveiling Alma Mater [Sept 23, 1903]. Columbia University Libraries. July 15, 2104.

Categories
Barnard Columbia Economists

Columbia. Budgeting John Bates Clark’s Salary After His Retirement, ca. 1911

 

The following undated memorandum comes from Prof. E.R.A. Seligman’s papers in a folder of Columbia related material for 1911-1913. From the Bulletin of the Faculty of Political Science we know that Prof. Simkhovitch took over Clark’s course on socialism in 1908 (Seligman below writes that Simkhovitch gave a similar course “at Columbia for the last two or three years”). Robert E. Chaddock took up the statistics assistant professorship mentioned in the memo in 1911. So it is pretty clear that this memorandum was written to motivate the economics department decision not to seek a senior professor with the funds released by Clark’s retirement but instead divided the funds between hiring someone for statistics, additional compensation for Henry Roger Seager to continue his teaching a labor course at Barnard and additional compensation for Professor Vladimir Simkhovitch to take over Clark’s course on Socialism at Barnard.

_____________________________

MEMORANDUM in reference to PROFESSOR CLARK’S RETIREMENT.

Professor Clark’s retirement is a serious loss to the Department of Economics and to Barnard College. Ordinarily the withdrawal of such a distinguished member of the faculty should lead to the appointment of a successor of equal prominence. In this case, however, there is no one of equal distinction available, and after making a thorough and impartial survey of the field, the department is convinced that it will be wiser to call the most promising younger man to be found as assistant professor then to call in a full professor who might prove disappointing. This plan has the advantage, moreover, of permitting a readjustment of the courses in economics to be open to Barnard students that would be highly advantageous for the College.

It will be remembered that when the original arrangement was entered into the trustees of Barnard agreed to provide the sum of $5,000 toward the higher or university work in economics at Columbia, on condition that certain courses at Columbia be open to women graduates, and on the further understanding that the Department of Economics should provide six hours a week of lectures in economics to Barnard Seniors at Barnard College. Later on, by special arrangement with Dean Gill, as ratified by the trustees, it was provided that two of these six hours might be given at Columbia instead of Barnard. It is now proposed to readjust the courses so as to provide ampler opportunities for Barnard students.

In considering the interests of Barnard, three facts should be held in view. First, experience has shown that merely throwing open courses given at Columbia to Barnard students fails adequately to meet their needs. The plan adopted when Professor Clark was called here of having six hours advanced work in economics given at Barnard ought to be reintroduced. Second, the number of students desiring to take advanced work in economics is steadily increasing and for their benefit every opportunity should be seized which will open to them additional courses at Columbia. Third, the most important field of economics study not now covered by the courses offered at Barnard is that of economic and social statistics. Not only does the ordinary student need a knowledge of statistical methods to apply economic theories to the facts of every day life, but Barnard graduates are concerned to an ever increasing extent with different forms of social service. Some become the paid agents of settlement, charitable societies or municipal departments concerned with social work. Others become officers in reform and charitable organizations. For both classes, training in the manipulation and interpretation of statistics would be of great value.

Having regard to these three facts the plan which the Department of Economics recommends is as follows: –

(1) that $2,500 of the $5,000 released by Professor Clark’s withdrawal be used to pay the salary of an assistant professor, who shall give a course on social and economic statistics to Barnard Seniors. While this professor under the terms of the original agreement, is to be primarily a graduate professor, he may, if so desired, be asked temporarily to relieve Professor Mussey of one of the Junior sections in Economics A1–A2 in exchange for a university course by Professor Mussey. It is also proposed that in further recognition of a similar course to be given by the new instructor at Columbia and of supervising work in the statistical laboratory at Columbia, which might be open to Barnard students for research work, the Department of Economics should admit Barnard Seniors to Columbia courses given by Professors Seligman, Giddings, Seager, and Mussey, that is, Sociology 151-152, Economics 101-2, Economics 107-108, Economics 106, and Economics 104.

(2) That Professor Seager be asked to continue his course on the Labor Problem at Barnard and that a contribution of $1,500 towards his salary be paid out of the $5,000 released. Professor Clark’s withdrawal will add to Professor Seager’s burdens at Columbia and his natural inclination would be to meet the situation by discontinuing his course at Barnard. If he continues his course it seems but fair that a contribution toward his salary should be paid out of Barnard funds.

(3) That Professor Simkhovitch be asked to give at Barnard the course on Socialism and Social Reform formerly given by Professor Clark and that the remaining $1,000 of the $5,000 fund be contributed to his salary. Fortunately Professor Simkhovitch is specially qualified to give such a course acceptably, having given a similar course at Columbia for the last two or three years.

By carrying out this plan the Barnard trustees will not only secure a reintroduction of the six hours of advanced instruction in economics for the special benefit of Barnard Seniors, courses even better adapted to the present needs of such Seniors than those previously given, but will also secure admission for Barnard students to eight of the most valuable courses in economics and social science offered at Columbia, without any increase in the appropriation for economic instruction. Inasmuch as at the present time only four hours are given to Barnard Seniors, and only five Columbia courses are open to them, we believe that the plan is fair to all concerned and that it will prove highly advantageous to Barnard College.

 

Source: Columbia University Libraries, Manuscript Collections. Seligman, Edwin Robert Anderson Collection. Box 98a, Folder “Columbia (A-Z) 1911-1913”.

Image Source:  Barnard College student council. Library of Congress Prints and Photographs Division Washington, D.C. 20540.

Categories
Courses Harvard Suggested Reading Syllabus

Harvard. Syllabus for Money, Banking & Commercial Crises. Anderson, 1917-18.

Benjamin McAlester Anderson (1886-1949) was awarded a Ph.D. in economics from Columbia University in 1911. His dissertation, Social Value–A Study in Economic Theory Critical and Constructive was published in the Hart, Schaffer & Marx Prize Essays series. From 1913-18 he held the rank of Assistant Professor of Economics at Harvard University. Today I post his syllabus for the course “Money, Banking and Commercial Crises” from 1917-18 that is wonderfully detailed  both with respect to topics and detailed reading assignments. The final examination questions for the second-term of the two-term course have been transcribed and posted too. I have included Anderson’s c.v. as of the publication of his dissertation in November, 1911 below. I’ll next post the University of California’s brief biography of Anderson published in its “In Memoriam” series.

_______________________

VITA
[Benjamin M. Anderson 1911]

The author was born in Columbia, Missouri, May 1, 1886. He was prepared for college in the high
school in Columbia, and attended the State University of Missouri, receiving the A. B. degree from that institution in 1906. His work in economics at Missouri was chiefly with Professor J. E. Pope. He was made a member of Phi Beta Kappa, Alpha of Missouri, in 1905. He filled a temporary vacancy in the chair of history at the State Normal School in Cape Girardeau, Missouri, during the summer session of 1905. He was Professor of Political Economy at Missouri Valley College, Marshall, Missouri, 1906-7, and from 1907 to 1911 was Head of the Department of History and Political Economy in the State Normal School at Springfield, Missouri, though on leave of absence during the years 1909-10 and 1910-11. He was Fellow in Economics at the University of Illinois during the term 1909-10, working in the seminars of Dean Kinley and Professor E. L. Bogart, and, in philosophy, in the seminar of Professor B. H. Bode. He received the A. M. degree at Illinois in 1910. As Garth Fellow in Political Economy at Columbia University, 1910-11, he studied under Professors Seligman, Seager, H. L. Moore, Giddings and John Dewey, doing seminar work with Professors Seligman, Seager and Giddings. He was appointed in 1911 Instructor in Political Economy at Columbia University. In May, 1909, he was married to Miss Margaret Louise Crenshaw, at St. Louis, Mo.

Source: Benjamin M. Anderson, Social Value–A Study in Economic Theory Critical and Constructive, p. i.

_______________________

Course Enrollment

[Economics] 3. Asst. Professor Anderson, assisted by Mr. Laporte.—Money, Banking, and Commercial Crises.

Total 38: 13 Seniors, 15 Juniors, 4 Sophomores, 6 Other.

 

Source: Harvard University. Reports of the President and the Treasurer of Harvard College, 1917-18, p. 54.

_______________________

 

HARVARD UNIVERSITY
1917-18

SYLLABUS FOR ECONOMICS 3

(Money, Banking, and Commercial Crises)
Assistant Professor Anderson

Required reading is marked with an asterisk

 

Part I. MONEY

  1. FUNDAMENTAL CONCEPTS.
    1. Definitions: money; specie; currency, etc.
    2. Origin of money; origin of gold and silver money; gold as a commodity.
    3. Functions of money; common measure of values; medium of exchange; legal tender; standard of deferred payments; store of value; bearer of options; reserve for credit operations.
    4. Standard and subsidiary money; Gresham’s law and monometallism; the gold standard.
    5. Value of money: preliminary statement.

Reading.

Anderson, Value of Money, pp. 397-427.*
Phillips, Readings in Money and Banking, pp. 1-26.*
Moulton, Money and Banking, Pt. I, pp. 45-62.*
Laughlin, Principles of Money, passim.
Menger, art. “Geld” in Handwörterbuch der Staatswissenschaften.

  1. GOVERNMENT PAPER MONEY.
    1. Colonial and Revolutionary Paper Money.
    2. The French Assignats.
    3. The Greenbacks.
    4. Causes governing the value of inconvertible paper.
      1. Gold premium and index numbers.
    5. Financial results of inconvertible paper.
    6. Social and industrial consequences of inconvertible papers.

Reading.

Moulton, Pt. I, pp. 134-162; 168 (chart); 178-209, 260-66.*
Horace White, Money and Banking, chs. on Revolutionary Bills of Credit, and Greenbacks.*
Phillips, pp. 26-70, 115-120.*
Mitchell, W. C., History of the Greenbacks, and Gold, Wages and Prices under the Greenback Standard.

  1. THE STANDARD QUESTION.
    1. Early history of metallic money.
    2. History of bimetallism.
      1. Mediaeval and early modern times.
      2. England
      3. France
      4. United States.
    3. Theory of bimetallism:
      1. Theory of the ratio:
        1. Gresham’s Law.
        2. The compensatory principle.
      2. The standard of deferred payments: justice between debtor and creditor:
        1. Index numbers: of commodity prices; of wages.
        2. The commodity standard upheld by bimetallists.
        3. The labor standard by monometallists.
      3. Theory of exchanges between gold and silver countries.
    4. The monetary system of the United States.

Reading.

Phillips, Chs. VI and VII.*
Moulton, Pt. I, pp. 66-68, Chs. IV, VI, and VIII.*

    1. The gold exchange standard, and the triumph of the gold standard.
      1. India.
      2. Philippines.
      3. Mexico.
      4. Straits Settlement.
      5. Gold standard in 1914.

Reading.

Phillips, Chs. XII and XIV.*
Kemmerer, Modern Currency Reforms.

  1. THE VALUE OF MONEY.
    1. Economic Value.

Reading.

Anderson, Ch. I.

    1. Must the value of money rest on a commodity basis? Quantity theory doctrine that inconvertible paper may be sustained in value by limitation in supply.
    2. The quantity theory v. Gresham’s Law.

Reading.

Anderson, Chs. VII and XVII.
Fisher, Purchasing Power of Money, pp. 14-32.*

  1. STABILIZING THE GOLD DOLLAR.

Reading.

Moulton, Pt. I, pp. 258-60; 266-71.*
Phillips, Ch. XIII.*

PART II. CREDIT AND BANKING

  1. NATURE OF CREDIT.
    1. Kinds of credit instruments.
    2. Definitions of credit.
    3. Bank-credit—analysis of bank statement.
    4. The mechanism of the modern bank.

Reading.

Moulton, Pt. II, pp. 12-37.*
Anderson, Ch. XXIII.*
Dunbar, Theory and History of Banking, Chs. I-V.*
Fiske, The Modern Bank, pp. 25-260, omitting Chs. XXI, XXVIII, XXX.*
Horace White, ch. on Bank Statement.*

    1. The use of checks in payments in the United States.

Reading.

Phillips, pp. 150-58.*
Kinley, The Use of Credit Instruments in Payments in the United States, National Monetary Commission Report.

    1. The volume of money and credit and the volume of trade,—trade and speculation.

Reading.

Anderson, Ch. XIII.*

  1. BANK-NOTES AND BANK DEPOSITS: “CURRENCY SCHOOL” v. “BANKING SCHOOL.”
    1. Currency School and the quantity theory.
    2. Essential identity of notes and deposits under “assets banking.”
    3. Systems of bank-note issue: Suffolk system; Canada; England; France; Germany; Austria; United States national banking system.

Reading.

Anderson, Ch. XIV.*
Mill, J. S., Principles of Political Economy, Bk. III, Ch. XXIV, pars. 1 and 2.*
Moulton, Pt. II, pp. 225-58.*
Conant, Modern Banks of Issue, passim.

  1. THE ENGLISH BANKING SYSTEM.
    1. History.
    2. Analysis of present system in London: Bank of England; Joint Stock Banks; branches of foreign banks; discount houses; acceptance houses; bill brokers; Stock Exchange; commodity speculation; warehousing system and commission houses; insurance; foreign exchange.

Reading.

Withers and Palgrave, English Banking System, National Monetary Commission Report, pp. 3-110.*
Phillips, pp. 435-442; 464-473.*
Withers, The Meaning of Money.
Bagehot, Lombard Street.
Conant, Modern Banks of Issue.

  1. FOREIGN EXCHANGE.

Reading.

Escher, Foreign Exchange.*
Anderson, Ch. XVI, and Appendix to Ch. XIII.*
Weekly article in Annalist on foreign exchange market.

  1. SPECULATION ON THE STOCK AND PRODUCE EXCHANGES.
    1. Theory of speculation.
    2. The New York Stock Exchange.
      1. Methods of doing business.
      2. Contrasted with London, Paris, and Berlin exchanges.
    3. Investment bankers and underwriters.
    4. Chicago Board of Trade; New York Cotton Exchange.

Reading.

Emery, Speculation on the Stock and Produce Exchanges.
Pratt, Work of Wall Street.
Van Antwerp, The Stock Exchange from Within.
Passages to be assigned.
Weekly articles in Annalist on stock and bond markets.

  1. “COMMERCIAL BANKING” AND SPECULATION; BANK ASSETS AND BANK RESERVES.

Reading.

Fisher, Purchasing Power of Money, pp. 47-54.*
Anderson, Ch. XXIV, and pp. 363-81, and 177-85.
Moulton, Pt. II, pp. 66-89.*

  1. CLEARING HOUSES.
    1. Methods.
    2. Extraordinary functions.
    3. The interpretation of “clearings.”

Reading.

Phillips, Ch. XIX.

  1. THE “MONEY MARKET.”
    1. “Money” v. money.
    2. “Money rates” v. interest rates.
    3. Analysis of causes governing money rates:
      1. General causes.
      2. Causes affecting special types of “paper.”

Reading.

Scott, W. A., Money and Banking, ch. on “Money Market.”* (1910 or later editions.)
Anderson, pp. 375-79; 425-32; 453-58;495-97; 516-27; 529-44.*
Moulton, Pt. II, pp. 120-136.*
Weekly article on “Money” in the Annalist.

  1. BANKING IN GERMANY.

Reading.

Phillips, Ch. XXV.*

  1. BANKING IN CANADA.

Reading.

Phillips, Ch. XXI.*

  1. BANKING IN FRANCE.

Reading.

Phillips, Ch. XXIV.*

  1. BANKING IN THE UNITED STATES.
    1. Before the Civil War.
      1. The two National Banks.
      2. State and private banks.
    2. Origin of the national banking system.
    3. State banks and trust companies; private banks; savings banks, etc.
    4. Comparative growth and present status of different classes of institutions. Geographical distribution.

Reading.

Horace White, Chs. on First and Second National banks, The Bank War, The Suffolk Bank System, The Safety Fund System, The Free Bank System, The National Bank System.*
Phillips, Chs. XV and XX.*
Barnett, State Banks and Trust Companies.

 

PART III. CRISES AND PANICS

  1. THEORY OF CRISES.
  2. FINANCIAL PANICS.

Reading.

Phillips, pp. 644-71.*

  1. HISTORY OF CRISES UNDER THE NATIONAL BANKING ACT.

Reading.

Sprague, History of Crises under the National Banking System, National Monetary Commission Report, pp. 153-320.*

  1. THE ENGLISH BANKING SYSTEM DURING THE FIRST YEAR OF THE WAR. OTHER EUROPEAN COUNTRIES.
  2. NEW YORK AND THE CRISIS OF 1914.

Reading.

Phillips, Ch. XXXII.*

  1. REMEDIES FOR CRISES AND PANICS. BUSINESS BAROMETERS.

 

PART IV. THE FEDERAL RESERVE SYSTEM

Reading.

Moulton, Pt. II, pp. 259-337.*

 

PART V. MISCELLANEOUS

  1. AGRICULTURAL CREDIT.

Reading.

Phillips, Ch. XXVII.*

  1. THE “MONEY TRUST.”

Reading.

Phillips, Ch. XXVIII.*
Anderson, pp. 516-20.*
Moulton, Pt. II, pp. 471-95.

 

Source: Harvard University Archives. Syllabi, course outlines and reading lists in Economics, 1895-2003, Box 1, Folder “Economics 1917-1918”.

Image Source: Benjamin M. Anderson in Harvard Album, 1915.

Categories
Columbia Curriculum Germany

Columbia. Political Economy Courses Compared to Courses at the University of Berlin, 1897

___________________

 

An excerpt from a newspaper report comparing political economy as taught in New York at Columbia University with political economy as taught in Berlin was published in the Columbia University Bulletin in 1897.  The unnamed author of the report concluded that “the primacy which Germany enjoyed a few years ago has passed away”. Compare this to a report (1884) overflowing with praise for the research “seminary” of  German universities.

___________________

In the Evening Post of October 25, 1897, will be found an interesting discussion of the value of German university degrees in comparison with similar honors in American universities. The writer, who is apparently a student in the University of Berlin, holds that the requirements for the degree of Ph. D. are higher in several American institutions than in the average German university. His points are, first, that it takes a shorter time to obtain the degree in Germany than from any of the reputable American universities; and second, that the average size and value of the dissertations of Harvard and Columbia doctors of philosophy are certainly greater than those of the German universities, with the exception, probably, of Berlin. Indeed, he concludes, “the progress of American universities has been so rapid in recent years, and the entrance requirements have been so largely increased, that the bachelor’s degree is actually approaching the German doctorate in essential worth.” A few selections from the body of the article, comparing the instruction in political science at Columbia with that given at Berlin, are of special interest.

“Further light on the question will be thrown by a comparison of the courses of lectures in American and German universities. Confining attention to the various studies in the domain of political economy and social science, we may select Berlin as the strongest representative of German Institutions.* * * * Of the American schools of political science, it is not easy to select the strongest. Columbia is usually regarded as the best equipped, although several others are but little inferior. Let us compare, then, the courses offered at Columbia and Berlin in political economy.

“At Berlin, Professor Wagner gives three courses, aggregating ten hours, that cover the field of general and theoretical economics, and practical economics, including money and banking, etc. At Columbia, almost precisely the same field is covered by Professor Mayo-Smith’s “Historical and Practical Economy,” running through three semesters and aggregating nine hours. Almost the only difference is that Professor Wagner devotes more time to agricultural economics, a subject that has as yet received little attention in American schools of political economy. In finance Professor Wagner offers a four-hour course for one semester. Professor Seligman at Columbia covers the same ground, with more discrimination, in a two-hour course running two semesters. He also offers in alternate years a two-hour course on the financial history of the United States.

“In economic or industrial history Columbia stands the comparison very well. It has an introductory course on the economic history of Europe and America conducted by Professor Seligman and Mr. Day, and an advanced course on the industrial and tariff history of the United States by Professor Seligman. The two courses aggregate the same number of hours as Professor Schmoller’s “practical political economy,” which is nothing but industrial history, and history of Prussia at that—a course valuable to the specialist, but not of great value to the average American student. Professor Meitzen also gives a course on the history of agriculture, but it concerns the early land systems of Europe and other subjects that can have no application to American conditions. The essential forms of land tenure are described at Columbia in Professor Mayo-Smith’s historical political economy.

“In the field of statistics, the subject of demography or population statistics is treated at Berlin by Professor Boeckh in a two-hour course, and at Columbia by Professor Mayo-Smith in a similar course. Economic statistics are treated by Professors Meitzen and Mayo-Smith in much the same manner, while the history, theory, and technique of statistics receives attention in both institutions.

“At Berlin, Professor Wagner reads a critique of socialism and Dr. Oldenburg gives its history. The two courses aggregate the same number of hours as Professor Clark’s course on socialism at Columbia. Professor Clark’s criticism of “scientific socialism” is at least equal to that of any German professor, and it proceeds from the Anglo-Saxon point of view. In a second semester Professor Clark deals with projects of social reform, especially those of American origin. Somewhat similar is Dr. Oldenburg’s course on Socialpolitik at Berlin, and Dr. Jastrow reads in addition a course on labor legislation.

“In social science Columbia is clearly in advance of Berlin. Sociology is scarcely recognized at the German universities, but at Berlin Dr. Simmel, privat-docent, offers a two-hour course on sociology and political psychology. This is the nearest approach to a study of the growth and structure of society that one finds at Berlin. Columbia, on the other hand, offers a course on the evolution of society and social institutions, with a review of the principal theoretical writers, and another course on sociological laws. These are both given by Professor Giddings, who also reads courses on crime and pauperism. No such practical study of these problems is made in Berlin.

“Several minor courses are offered at each university—as, for example, railway problems—and all of the professors conduct seminars for the purpose of encouraging and supervising original investigations. The only subject in which Berlin offers superior advantages is agricultural economics, while Columbia is doing much more work in both theoretical and practical social science. Two courses remain to be mentioned. One of these is a course by Dr. Jastrow at Berlin on the literature and methodology of all the political sciences, an introductory course of considerable value to freshmen, which has no parallel in any other German or American university known to the writer. But Columbia offers a course that can scarcely be duplicated in Germany, namely, the abstract theory of political economy given by Professor Clark, one of the acutest and most original thinkers of our day. It is a course that is taken by not more than a dozen or fifteen men, but they are advanced students who can appreciate such a course. Professor Clark’s power of inspiring young men to do theoretical work of high quality is evidenced by the writings of such men as the late Dr. Merriam, of Cornell, and Professor Carver, of Oberlin College. But in Germany pure theory has been neglected since the time of Hermann. Only now, as the result of an impulse proceeding from Austria, is theory regaining its place in German economic circles. Professor Dietzel and some of the other younger scholars are doing good work in this line, which is hardly comparable, however, with that of Professors Clark, Patten, etc., in the United States, and Marshall in England. German economists are making valuable contributions to economics in other ways, but the primacy which Germany enjoyed a few years ago has passed away.”

 

Source: Columbia University Bulletin, Vol. XVIII (December, 1897), pp. 67-69.

Image Source: The University of Berlin between ca. 1890 and ca. 1900. Library of Congress Prints and Photographs Division Washington, D.C. Digital ID: ppmsca 00342.

 

Categories
Columbia Curriculum Economists Fields

Columbia. Paul Douglas petitions to allow sociology courses for his second minor. 1916

The minutes of this meeting of the Columbia Faculty of Political Science’s Committee on Instruction caught my eye because of Paul Douglas‘ petition to substitute  a pair of sociology courses offered by Professor Franklin Giddings for a couple of intellectual history courses that would satisfy the distribution requirements for the second minor.

It appears that Douglas thus managed to have his major and both minors all in Group III (i.e., political economy and finance; sociology and statistics; social economy).

 

_____________________________________

Minutes of Committee on Instruction, February 21, 1916

A meeting of the Committee on Instruction of the Faculty of Political Science was held in Professor Seligman’s office on Monday, February 21, 1916.

Present: Professors Seligman, Giddings, Dunning, Shotwell and Dean Woodbridge.

The Chairman presented the following petitions, which were approved and referred by the Committee to the Dean for further action:

Petition from Miss Dorothy Stimson to divide her second minor for the doctor’s degree between Public Law and Politics.

Petition from Mr. Paul H. Douglas to offer Sociology 257 and 258, under the heading History of Thought and Culture, as a second minor for the Ph.D.

A statement from Mrs. H. L. Hollingworth, submitting the courses which she is offering for the Ph. D. Degree in Sociology, as follows:

Sociology 251-252 (2 full courses) Taken in 1912-13.
Psychology 263 (1 full course)        Taken in 1912-13.
(Social Psychology)
Educational Sociology 107-8 (2 half courses) Taken in 1912-13.
Sociology 257 (1 full course)           Taken in 1913-14
Sociology E1 43-4 (24 courses)       Taken in 1915-16
One more full course in Sociology to be taken next semester.

The statement was accepted as satisfactory.

A petition of Mr. Ahmed Shukri to substitute Arabic in place of Latin was granted.

The Chairman read the letter from the Secretary of the Faculty concerning the routine to be followed in the reporting of changes of courses vt [sic] students. After consider[ation] of the matter, it was decided that only those cases which involve changes of subjects, with their regular combinations, should be reported to the Faculty, and that they should be reported by the Dean, not by the Committee, the Committee in every case referring the petition to the Dean.

The Committee then took up the changes in courses for the following year as attached:

[…]

            The change in Economics is as follows:

PROFESSOR MITCHELL

Course on “Types” changed from one-term to two-term course.
Course on “Crises” withdrawn

[…]

Source: Columbia University Archives. Department of Economics Collection. Box 1, Folder “Committee on Instruction”.

 

_____________________________________

 

Catalogue Listings of Sociology Courses Petitioned by Paul Douglas

Sociology 257—The Evolution of Progressive Society. Professor Giddings.

Full or half course. F. at 2.10 and 3.10 515 K.

Factors of social evolution in Western Europe. Elements of progressive society; English civilization as example of evolution of progressive society; its ethnic elements; economic factors; folk thought, folk ways and mores; early family and tribal organization; development of a people with distinctive habits and characteristics.

(Identical with History 257.)
Given in 1915-16 and in alternate years thereafter.

 

Sociology 258—The Evolution of Progressive Society. Professor Giddings.

Full or half course. F. at 2.10 and 3.10 515 K.

Achievement of civil liberty in combination with social order; rise of industrial democracy; problems of social justice; individualism; collective responsibility for human progress.

(Identical with History 258.)
Given in 1915-16 and in alternate years thereafter.

Source:   Columbia University. Bulletin of Information (July 3, 1915). History, Economics, and Public Law: Courses offered by the Faculty of Political Science, 1915-16, p. 36.

 

_____________________________________

 

From the 1915-16 Regulations for the Degree of Doctor of Philosophy

Doctor of Philosophy. — Each student who declares himself a candidate for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy shall designate one principal or major subject and two subordinate or minor subjects. Candidates are expected to devote about one-half of their time throughout their course of study to the major subject, and about one-quarter to each minor subject. Except by vote of the Executive Committee of the University Council, upon the recommendation of the Dean and the head of the department concerned, no candidate may choose his major and both minor subjects under one department. Major and minor subjects may not be changed except by permission of the Dean, on the approval of the head of the departments concerned. Both the professor in charge of the major subject and the Dean must pass upon the student’s qualifications for the course of study he desires to pursue, and approve his choice of subjects before registration can be effected. The subjects from which the candidate’s selection must be made are:

Under the Faculty of Political Science

Group I. — History and political philosophy: (1) Ancient and oriental history; (2) medieval history and church history; (3) modern European history from the opening of the 16th century; (4) American history; (5) history of thought and culture.

Group II. — Politics, public law and comparative jurisprudence: (1) Politics; (2) Constitutional Law and Administrative Law; (3) International Law; (4) Roman Law and Comparative Jurisprudence.

Group III. — Economics and social science: (1) Political economy and finance; (2) sociology and statistics; (3) social economy.

            A candidate for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy whose major subject lies within the jurisdiction of this Faculty must select one minor subject outside of the group which includes his major subject, and one minor subject within the group which includes his major subject. He must take, in his major subject, courses occupying at least four hours weekly during each required year of residence (provided that this number of hours be offered in the subject), and must also attend a Seminar during the period of residence. In each minor subject he must take courses occupying at least two hours weekly during each required year of residence.

Source: Columbia University, Catalogue, 1915-16, pp. 214-5.

Image Source: Paul H. Douglas’ college yearbook entry. The Bowdoin Bugle (1913).

Categories
Columbia Economists

Columbia. Franklin H. Giddings, short biographical sketch. 1899

Academic economics and sociology were much more like siblings than kissing-cousins at the turn of the twentieth century. Long a vice-president of the American Economic Association, Franklin H. Giddings  went on to become a president of the American Sociological Association. 

Frank H. Hankins wrote the entry on Franklin H. Giddings for the International Encyclopedia of the Social Sciences (1968).

___________________

GIDDINGS, Franklin Henry, 1855-

Born in Sherman, Conn., 1855; prepared for College at the High School at Great Barrington, Mass.; two years at Union College, 1873-75; left College to take charge of the Goshen ( Conn.) Academy; entered newspaper life in 1876, and continued as editor and editorial writer on various journals until 1888; A.B. (Union College) with reference back to the Class of 1877, 1888; A.M. 1889; Ph D., 1897; Lecturer on Political Science at Bryn Mawr, 1888; Associate, 1890; Associate Professor, 1891; Professor, 1892; Lecturer on Sociology at Columbia, 1890-93; Professor of Sociology, 1894-

FRANKLIN HENRY GIDDINGS, Ph.D., Professor of Sociology at Columbia, was born in Sherman, Connecticut, March 25, 1855. He is a son of the Rev. Edward Jonathan Giddings, a well-known Congregational clergyman of Massachusetts, the author of American Christian Rulers. The family goes back in this country to George Giddings, who came from St. Albans, England, in 1635, and settled in Ipswich, Massachusetts. The Rev. Edward J. Giddings married Rebecca Jane Fuller, a descendant of Edward Fuller, one of the Mayflower pioneers. Franklin Henry Giddings received his early training and education under the strict guidance of his mother and father, and was also instructed in surveying and drafting by his grandfather, a prominent citizen of Great Barrington, Massachusetts. After a preparatory course at the High School at Great Barrington, he entered Union College in 1873. He left College in 1875 to take charge of the Academy at Goshen, Connecticut, but continued his studies in private, covering much more ground than was required for graduation. In 1888 he received from Union College the degree of Bachelor of Arts, with reference back to the Class of 1877 in full standing. While at College he took in addition to the required studies a portion of the engineering course. In 1876 he entered newspaper life as Associate Editor of the Winsted (Connecticut) Herald. During 1878 he was an editorial writer on the Republican of Springfield, Massachusetts, and his work there, coupled with excess of private study, resulted in a year’s enforced rest from active labor, which was spent in studying political economy and law. He resumed newspaper work in 1879 on the Staff of the Berkshire Courier, and remained there for two years, when he became Editor of the New Milford, Connecticut, Gazette. During 1882 he served on the Town School Committee of Great Barrington. In 1884 he returned to Springfield as editorial writer and literary critic of the Union. He was a strong supporter of Mr. Cleveland’s candidacy during the campaign of 1884, and at the risk of losing position and salary positively refused to write editorials favoring the candidacy of James G. Blaine. In 1885 he conducted an investigation and reported to the Massachusetts Bureau of Statistics of Labor on profit-sharing, and in the following year left the Union to become the Editor of Work and Wages at Springfield. During his years of newspaper work his leisure time had been occupied in study. His first appointment as Instructor came in 1888, when Bryn Mawr College appointed him Lecturer on Political Science. In 1889 he was made Associate, in the following year Associate Professor, and in 1892 Professor. Since 1890 he had also been Lecturer on Sociology in the Faculty of Political Science at Columbia, and in 1894 he left Bryn Mawr on a call from Columbia to its Chair of Sociology. He published between 1885 and 1895 many articles and monographs on economic and sociological theory. In 1896 appeared his first book, The Principles of Sociology [1896 edition; reprint with corrections from 1913], which met with instant success, and has been translated into French, Spanish and Russian. This was followed in 1897 by The Theory of Socialization, which also met with immediate recognition and has been translated into Italian; and in 1898 by The Elements of Sociology [reprint published in 1918], Professor Giddings married, November 8, 1876, Elizabeth Patience Hawes of Great Barrington. They have three children. He is a member of the American Academy of Political and Social Science, of which he has been Vice-President since 1890, the Authors, Barnard and Century Clubs, the Academy of Natural Sciences of Philadelphia, the American Economic Association, of which he was first Vice-President in 1896-1897, and L’Institut International de Sociologie of Paris. He is a sound-money Democrat in politics.

 

Source: University and their Sons. History, Influence and Characteristics of American Universities with Biographical Sketches and Portraits of Alumni and Recipients of Honorary Degrees. Editor-in-chief, General Joshua L. Chamberlain, LL.D. Vol. II, pp. 453-5.

________________________

Giddings Bibliography by Robert Bannister

12/29/00

Bannister, Robert C. Sociology and Scientism (Chapel Hill: University of North Carolina Press, 1987), chs.4. 5

Camic, Charles, “The statistical turn in American social science: Columbia University, 1890 to 1915,” American Sociological Review 59 (Oct. ’94): 773-805

Davids, Leo. “Franklin H. Giddings: Forgotten Pioneer.” Journal of the History of the Behavioral Sciences 4 (1968): 62-73.

Gillin, John L. “Giddings,” American Masters of Social Science, ed. Howard Odum, pp. 191-230. New York, 1927

Hankins, Frank. “Franklin H. Giddings.” AJS 37 (1931): 349-67.

Lichtenberger, James P. “Franklin H. Giddings.” Sociology and Social Research 16 (1932): 316-21.

Northcott, Clarence H. “Giddings,” An Introduction to the History of Sociology, ed. Harry E. Barnes. Chicago, 1948.

Northcott, Clarence H. “Sociological Theories of Franklin H. Giddings.” AJS 24 (1918): 1-23.

Tenney, Alvin. “Franklin H. Giddings.” Columbia University Quarterly 23 (1931): 319-21.

Source:  Written by Robert Bannister, Swarthmore College (emeritus).