Categories
Cornell Curriculum Economists

Cornell. Frank Knight’s Cornell Coursework, 1913-1917

Almost fourteen years ago I was in the University of Chicago archives where I came across three boxes in Frank H. Knight’s papers containing his hand-written, three-by-five inch index card notes that covered presumably most, if not all, of his coursework at Cornell for the academic years 1914-15, 1915-16, and 1916-17. For some reason, I presume a time-constraint for that archival visit was involved, I did not copy the notes from his first year at Cornell (1913-14) to have a complete record of his graduate studies. This post provides an overview of the courses taken by Frank Knight and those professors who taught him. For his first year, we are all quite fortunate to have the story of Knight’s ex ante oeconomica life as told by Ross B. Emmett (2015) in his excellent, Frank H. Knight Before He Entered Economics (1885-1914).

The official Cornell course announcements were published in the Spring before the academic year began. This means there are a few discrepencies between the actual instructors identified by Knight and those found in the printed announcements. For example, Alvin Saunders Johnson left the Cornell faculty and was replaced by Thomas Sewell Adams and Herbert J. Davenport during the academic years 1915-16 and 1916-17.

Hopefully there will be time and energy later to provide summaries of course content from Knight’s detailed notes. Visitors are encouraged to sign up to receive future postings via email (see below).

____________________________

1913-14

Source: Announcement of the College of Arts and Sciences, 1913-14. Official Publications of Cornell University. Volume IV (May 15, 1913) Number 11.

Philosophy 11. Philosophical Results and Applications. First term, credit one hour. Prerequisite at least one course in philosophy. Professor [James Edwin] Creighton. S, 12, Goldwin Smith 225.

Professor James Edwin Creighton

The purpose of the course is to show how philosophical ideas enter into other departments of thought and have a bearing on concrete problems of life and society. This will be illustrated by a consideration of certain aspects of the movement of thought and civilization in the nineteenth century.

Philosophy 19. The Development of Modern Philosophical Problems. First term, credit two hours. Prerequisite either course 1, 3, 5, 7, 17, 20, or 21. Professor [James Edwin] Creighton. T Th, 12, Goldwin Smith 225.

A review and an interpretation of the leading philosophical ideas of modern schools and systems, with the purpose of tracing the evolution of philosophical conceptions, especially during the nineteenth century, in the light of the various scientific, social, and religious problems with which they are connected.

Philosophy 20. History of Ethics, Ancient, Medieval, and Renaissance. First term, credit two hours. Professor [William Alexander] Hammond. M W, 11, Goldwin Smith 220.

Professor William Alexander Hammond

Lectures and assigned readings. A history of moral ideals and reflection in antiquity, the Middle Ages, and the Renaissance, treated in connection with social and political institutions. Primarily for seniors and graduates.

Philosophy 21. History of Modem Ethics. Second term, credit two hours. Professor [Ernest] Albee. M W, 11, Goldwin Smith 220.

Professor Ernest Albee

The history of modern ethics with special reference to the development of the commonly recognized methods of ethics. The history of British ethics will receive particular attention, as illustrating the gradual differentiation of ethics as an independent science of philosophical discipline. Primarily for graduates.

Philosophy 30. Empiricism and Rationalism. First term, credit three hours. Professor [Ernest] Albee. T Th S, 11, Goldwin Smith 220.

Lectures, discussions, and essays. The empirical movement as represented by Locke, Berkeley, and Hume, and the rationalistic movement as represented especially by Descartes, Spinoza, and Leibniz, with reference to their distinctive methods. Locke’s Essay (Bohn edition, 2 vols.), Hume’s Treatise of Human Nature (Clarendon Press), and Leibniz’s Philosophical Works (Duncan’s translation, Tuttle, Morehouse & Taylor, New Haven). Primarily for graduates.

Political Science 87. The History of Economic Theory. Throughout the year, credit three hours a term. Professor [Alvin Saunders] Johnson. T Th S, 9, Goldwin Smith 264.

Professor Alvin Saunders Johnson

It is the purpose of this course to trace the main currents of economic theory from the mercantilists writers to the present day. Chief emphasis will be laid upon the development of the individualistic economic doctrines in 18th century France and England; the conditions, economic and social, upon which they were based; the consolidation of the doctrines in classical economics; and the modifications they have undergone through the influence of historical and social political criticism.

Political Science 88. Value and Distribution. Throughout the year, credit two hours a term. Professor [Alvin Saunders] Johnson. Th, 2.30, Political Science Seminary.

This course is devoted to a study of the chief problems of current economic theory, including the nature, the value, and the laws of its growth, valuation of capital and capitalization, the interest problem, wages, profits, competition, and monopoly. The works of the chief contemporary authorities will be critically studied with a view to disclosing the basis of existing divergencies in point of view.
It is desirable that students registering for this course should have a reading knowledge of German and French.

“The course description for Value and Distribution dated back several years, to the period when Frank Albert Fetter had taught the course. Fetter had completed his doctorate at the University of Halle, and was deeply engaged with economic ideas emerging from the Austrian School of Economics. Carl Menger, often considered the founder of Austrian economics, had initiated a Methodenstreit with the historicist orientation of the German Historical School, whose work had deeply influenced American economists of the late 19th century (many of whom, like Fetter, had completed Ph.Ds. in Germany). When Fetter joined Cornell’s faculty in 1901, there was an existing course on distribution, but not one on price theory generally. There had been, however, a course in reading German economic literature from the Historical School. The course was designed to enable economics students to meet the foreign language requirements Cornell had established for doctoral candidates. Fetter introduced a course in economic theory (eventually called Value and Distribution) that required students to read significant texts by French, German, and Austrian economists such as Leon Walras, Werner Sombart, Eugene Böhm-Bawerk, and Friedrich Wieser in their original language, thereby satisfying simultaneously the Graduate School’s foreign language requirement. When Alvin Johnson arrived at Cornell in 1913 (at the same time as Frank did), he inherited Fetter’s course. But Johnson, a mid-westerner educated at Columbia by John Bates Clark, was aligned more with the Anglo-American tradition of economic theorizing than he was with either the German Historical School or the Austrian School. Thus, he ignored the language requirement. Frank’s notes from Johnson’s course on the History of Economic Theory (which did not have a foreign language requirement) tell us that, one day in class, Johnson said, ‘American and English books [on economics] may contain logical fallacies, but their facts are reliable. Facts and fiction [are] indistinguishable in books like Sombart’s.’ Johnson then suggested that the doctoral requirements for economics at Cornell (and elsewhere, presumably) should state ‘that student[s] should not read German’ (from the Frank Knight Papers, Box 2, Folder 1, quoted in Howey 1983, 169, emphasis in the original).

Source: Ross B. Emmett,Frank H. Knight Before He Entered Eonomics (1885-1914). 2015.

Not registered, but audited.

Philosophy 26. Advanced Ethics. Throughout the year, credit three hours a term. Professor [Frank] Thilly. Lectures, reading, discussion, and essays. M W F, 10, Goldwin Smith 220. Primarily for graduates.  [Knight’s notes end in February]

Professor Frank Thilly

Political Science 54b. State Administration. Second term, credit three hours. Prerequisite courses 53a, 53b. Professor [Samuel Peter Orth]. M W F, 11, Goldwin Smith 256.

A study of the American state; the county and the township; the powers and functions of administrative organs, boards, and commissions; judicial control. Lectures, readings, and reports. Each student will be required to make a detailed study of some particular state. [Ross Emmett believes this course corresponds to Knight’s notes that he examined]

Professor Samuel Peter Orth

1914-1915

Source: Announcement of the College of Arts and Sciences, 1914-15. Official Publications of Cornell University. Volume V (May 1, 1914) Number 10.

Philosophy 40. Seminary in Logic and Metaphysics. T, 3-5, Goldwin Smith 231. Professor [James Edwin] CREIGHTON and Dr. [William Kelley] WRIGHT.

Dr. William Kelley Wright

[Portrait of William Kelley Wright from the 1926 Darmouth yearbook “Aegis”.]

The subject for 1914-15 will be a study of certain leading metaphysical problems in the light of recent investigations.

Philosophy 37. Seminary in Ethics. Investigation of special problems. Throughout the year, credit two hours a term, Professor [Frank] THILLY. Hours and room to be arranged.

Political Science 66a. The Labor Problem. First term, credit three hours. Prerequisite course 51. Professor [Alvin Saunders] JOHNSON. T Th S, 11. Goldwin Smith 264.

This course will present a systematic view of the progress and present condition of the working class in the United States and in other industrial countries; sketch the history and analyze the aims and methods of labor organizations; study the evolution of institutions designed to improve the condition of the working class; and compare the labor legislation of the United States with that of European countries.

Political Science 66b. Socialism. Second term, credit three hours. Prerequisite course 51, Professor [Alvin Saunders] JOHNSON. T Th S, 11, Goldwin Smith 264.

Due attention will be given in this course to the various forms of socialistic theory. Its main object, however, is to describe the evolution of the socialist movement and the organization of socialistic parties, to measure the present strength of the movement, and to examine in the concrete its methods and aims.

Political Science 76a. Elementary Statistics. First term, credit three hours. Prerequisite course 51. Professor [Walter Francis] WILLCOX. T Th S, 9, Goldwin Smith 256. Laboratory, W, 2-4, Goldwin Smith 259.

Professor Walter Francis Willcox

An introduction to census statistics with especial reference to the federal census of 1910, and to registration statistics with especial reference to those of New York State and its cities. The course gives an introduction to the methods and results of statistics in these, its best developed branches.

Political Science 76b. Economic Statistics. Second term, credit three hours. Prerequisite course 51. Professor [Walter Francis] WILLCOX. T Th S, 9. Goldwin Smith 256. Laboratory, W, 2-4, Goldwin Smith 259.

A continuation of course 76a, dealing mainly with the agricultural and industrial statistics of the United States. Mature students that have not already had course 76a or its equivalent may be admitted by special permission. The course is an introduction to statistics in its application to more difficult fields, such as production. wages, prices, and index numbers.

Political Science 90. Research in Statistics. Throughout the year, credit to be arranged. Professor [Walter Francis] WILLCOX.

[Knight describes this as “afternoon session for Grad studs.”

Political Science 65a. The Industrial Revolution in England, 1700 to 1850. First term, credit three hours. Prerequisite course 51, previously or concurrently, or work in European history. Assistant Professor [Abbott Payson] USHER. M W F, 12. Goldwin Smith 264.

Assistant Professor Abbott Payson Usher

The topography and resources of England, the Industrial Revolution, commercial expansion in the 18th century. the history of the Bank of England, the rise of London as a world metropolis.

Political Science 65b. Social and Economic Problems of the 19th Century in England. Second term, credit three hours. Prerequisite course 51, previously or concurrently. Professor [Abbott Payson] USHER. M W F, 12. Goldwin Smith 264.

The course can be followed most profitably by students who have taken course 65a, but it may be elected independently. The history of English agriculture, 1700 to 1907; the poor laws, 1834 and 1909; the coming of free trade. 1776 to 1846; railroads and rate-making; Germany and the industrial supremacy of England.

1915-1916

Source: Announcement of the College of Arts and Sciences, 1915-16. Official Publications of Cornell University. Volume VI (May 1, 1915) Number 10.

Political Science 87. Principles of Economics. Throughout the year, credit three hours a term. Professor [Alvin Saunders] JOHNSON [Apparently taught by Thomas Sewall Adams]. M W F, 11, Goldwin Smith 264. Prerequisite course 51 or its equivalent.

Professor Thomas Sewall Adams

[Photo of T. S. Adams from the University of Wisconsin Badger of 1916]

An advanced course in general economics, based upon Marshall’s Principles of Economics as a text. Especial attention will be given in this course to the laws of value and price, of wages, interest, and profit.

Political Science 64. Money and Banking. Throughout the year, credit three hours a term. Prerequisite course 51. Professor [Allyn Abbott] Young. T Th S, 10, Goldwin Smith 142.

Professor Allyn Abbott Young

A discussion of the more important phases of the theory of money and credit is followed by a consideration of selected practical problems, including the revision of the American banking system. Practical work is required in the analysis of the controlling conditions of the money market, of organized speculation in securities, and of foreign exchange.

Political Science 55a. Elementary Social Science. First term, credit three hours. Course 51 should precede or be taken with this course. Professor [Walter Francis] WILLCOX. T Th S, 9, Goldwin Smith 256.

An introductory course upon social science or sociology, its field and methods, with special reference to the human family as a social unit, to be studied by the comparative, the historical, and the statistical methods.

Political Science 55b. Elementary Social Science. Second term, credit three hours. Course 51 should precede or be taken with this course. Professor [Walter Francis] WILLCOX. T Th S, 9, Goldwin Smith 256.

A continuation of the preceding course but with especial reference to the dependent, defective, and delinquent classes. Open to all who have taken 55a and by special permission to others.

Knight’s note cards for lectures on “Valuation” are dated for either Monday or Tuesday meetings, but no more than one meeting per week. Notes for 21 meetings twelve on Mondays, nine on Tuesdays. So presumably his notes on valuation come from the following scheduled seminar courses.

Political Science 92. Research in Finance. Throughout the year, credit two or three hours a term. Professor [Allyn Abbott] YOUNG [and Thomas Sewall Adams]. T, 2.30. Goldwin Smith 269.

Individual or coöperative investigations of selected problems in money, banking, and corporation finance, in connection with lectures upon the sources of information and upon the use of appropriate methods of investigation.

Political Science 99. General Seminary. Throughout the year, credit two hours a term. Conducted by members of the department. M., 2.30-4.30, Political Science Seminary. Open only to graduate students

1916-1917

Source: Announcement of the College of Arts and Sciences, 1916-17. Official Publications of Cornell University. Volume VII (April 15, 1916) Number 10.

[1916-17 announcement] Political Science 51. Elementary Economics. Throughout the year, credit three hours a term. One lecture and two recitations each week Lectures, M, 9; repeated M, 11. Barnes Auditorium. Assistant Professor TURNER. Recitations, T Th, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12; W F, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12. Assistant Professor [Abbott Payson] USHER, Mr. CAMPBELL, Dr. WOODBURY, Mr. [Charles Roland] HUGINS and Mr. [Clarence Cameron] KOCHENDERFER. Section assignments made at the first lecture.

From the Proceedings of the Cornell Board of Trustees Meeting of May 20, 1916 “J.R. Turner, Assistant Professor of Economics resigned effective June 30”. Also note resignations of Mr. Campbell and Dr. Woodbury. So they are struck out above. Comparing this to the announcement for the staffing of the course in 1917-1918. We see that Davenport was named as lecturers with assistant professor Reed, instructor Knight, and assistant Working appearing as well. Knight’s notes for the 1916-1917 lectures explicitly mention Davenport.

[1917-18 announcement] Political Science 51. Elementary Economics. Throughout the year, credit three hours a term. One lecture and two recitations each week. M, 9; M, 11. Barnes Auditorium. Professor [Herbert Joseph] DAVENPORT. Recitations, T Th, 8, 9, 10,11, 12; W F, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12. Assistant Professors [Abbott Payson] USHER and [Harold Lyle] REED, Dr. [Frank Hyneman] KNIGHT, Mr. [Charles Roland] HUGINS, Mr. [Clarence Cameron] KOCHENDERFER, and Mr. [Holbrook] WORKING. Section assignments made at the first lecture.

Professor Herbert Joseph Davenport

An introduction to economics including a survey of the principles of value, money, banking, and prices; international trade; free trade and protection, wages and labor conditions; the control of railroads and trusts; socialism, principles and problems of taxation.

Political Science 57b. Lectures on Citizenship. Second term, credit two hours. M W, 12, Goldwin Smith B.

A lecture each Monday by a non-resident lecturer and each Wednesday by a member of the Department. The course has been arranged by a committee of Alumni who are actively engaged in civic and social work and who are coöperating in this way with the Department. It will follow the same general plan as last year, but the speakers and most of the subjects treated will be changed.
The course will be under the general charge of Professor Orth. Reading, reports, and essays will be required.

Political Science 88. Value and Distribution. Throughout the year, credit two hours a term. Professor [Alvin Saunders] JOHNSON. F, 2.30, Political Science Seminary.
[Johnson had resigned from the faculty, notes indicate that Davenport led the seminary that Knight has notes from October 21, 1916 through February 3, 1917.]

A study of the chief problems of current economic theory. The works of the chief contemporary authorities will be critically studied with a view to disclosing the basis of existing divergencies in point of view. It is desirable that students registering for this course should have a reading knowledge of German and French.

Political Science 89. Mathematical Economics. Throughout the year, credit two hours a term. Professor [Allyn Abbott] YOUNG. Hours to be arranged.

The use of mathematics in economic analysis, with special reference to the work of Cournot, Jevons, Edgeworth, Walras, Pareto, Auspitz and Lieben, and Fisher. Primarily for graduates.

Political Science 63a. Corporation Finance. First term, credit three hours. Prerequisite course 51. Professor [Allyn Abbott] YOUNG. T Th S, 11, Goldwin Smith 256.

A study of the business corporation, with special reference to its economic significance and effects and to the problems of its legal control, including an  analysis of the financial operations of railroads, public utilities, and industrial corporations.

History 54. Economic History of the Colonies, 1600 to 1800. First term, credit three hours. Professor [Charles Henry] HULL. T Th S, 9, Goldwin Smith 234.

Professor Charles Henry Hull

Colonization and settlement as business enterprises: the agricultural conquest of the coast: the competition between slave, indentured, and free labor; the commerce of the British Empire and its relation to the American Revolution. Textbooks, reading. reports, and lectures.

History 55. Economic History of the United States, since 1800. Second term, credit three hours. Professor [Charles Henry] HULL. T Th S, 9, Goldwin Smith 234.

Commerce during the European wars; the introduction of manufactures; the westward movement; industrial differentiation of the sections; agriculture for export; the amalgamation of railways and the combination of industries. Textbooks, reading, reports, and lectures.

Philosophy ??. Seminary of Professor [James Edwin] Creighton.

[Note cards for eight sessions in April and May 1917]

Image Source: Portrait of Frank Knight (1930 Fellow) at the John Simon Guggenheim Foundation website. Most of the professors’ portraits were found in the Cornell Classbook (various years). Many of the portraits have been digitally enhanced by Economics in the Rear-view Mirror.

Categories
Chicago Economists

Chicago. Alvin Johnson remembers Robert Hoxie and his relationship to Veblen, 1906-16.

 

Labor economist Robert Hoxie (1868-1916) taught at the University of Chicago from 1906 to 1916. From the autobiography of Alvin S. Johnson we learn that Hoxie’s suicide would probably have come as no surprise to someone who knew him at all well.

_____________________________

Alvin S. Johnson on his personal and professional friendship with Robert Hoxie

Of all the faculty I most enjoyed Robert Hoxie. He specialized in labor problems and had the enterprise to bring before his class all types of labor leaders, to state their aims and unfold their hopes. He had in unexampled degree the art to bring even the most stubborn-tongued labor leader to an adequate expression of his views.

Hoxie was square built and well poised, of ruddy complexion and bright eyes, well equipped with wit and humor, and, you’d have said, here, anyway, was a scholar well adjusted to life. But the fact was he was subject to terrible nervous crises. He imputed his condition to an attack of poliomyelitis in his childhood, which, while it did not cripple his limbs, impaired permanently his nervous structure. I questioned the validity of his explanation until I came to know him.

He was my good friend, and we saw a lot of each other. Whenever he could get free from his office he’d come to mine and insist that we go for a walk, even if the cold wind was blowing at forty miles an hour. However busy I was I would comply, for if I did not he would fall into a lamentable fit of depression, asserting that I no longer found him interesting.

When he was scheduled for a seminar paper I had a choice of unattractive alternatives. If I did not attend, he put this down as my judgment that he had nothing to say. If I attended, he felt sure that I detected all the points where the author of a seminar paper sidesteps difficulties.

Matters were simpler when we were alone together, on our walks or over the beer at the White City, where we could argue to the accompaniment of an orchestra playing with great éclat the scores of Traviata or Aïda. So far as I could, I kept away from contentious economic subjects.

One subject of contention would, however, inevitably intrude: Veblen. Hoxie loved Veblen with a love that passeth understanding. I admired Veblen’s genius, but Veblen and I could never get nearer each other than arm’s length. He regarded me as a plodding Dane; I regarded him as a romantic Norwegian. Whenever we found ourselves together in company we spoiled each other’s style. On occasion friends would urge me to remain away from a Veblen party, for Veblen never made himself interesting when I was around.

I considered Veblen good reading for the scholar who knew how to discriminate, but a singularly dangerous guide for anyone who followed him blindly. I asserted that Veblen’s Theory of the Leisure Class was really a satirical essay, with literary potency and scientific intent closely parallel to Carlyle’s Sartor Resartus. Both authors counted on the pleasure a reader gets out of judiciously worded insults to himself. Both liked to make use of the principle that two half-truths make a whole truth.

Such observations filled Hoxie with indignation, but pleasant indignation, for they proved to him that I fell far short of him in the understanding of the man he considered the greatest economist of all time. Hoxie boasted that his whole system of thought came from Veblen. It was Veblen who had taught him that all ideas of reconciling the interests of labor and the employer were a fantastic delusion. For the minds of labor and of the employer were built out of completely different philosophic elements. The philosophy the worker had hammered into him by his job ran in terms of cause and effect — the efficient cause. The employer thought in terms of values, purposes, final causes. As well try to mate a sheep with a tunny fish as try to bring efficient cause and final cause to an agreement.

I argued that this contrast was just a hocus-pocus. The employer, in considering the properties of a machine he is tempted to buy, or in considering how to cut the waste of material, is thinking in terms of cause and effect. The worker in demanding an enlarged take-home is thinking in terms of values.

I refused to concede that there are impermeable septa between the thinking of any two classes, indeed, between any two individuals. Business conceptions, labor conceptions, wander afield. Does one not encounter the divine who calculates on the “unit cost of saving souls”?

Years later Hoxie visited New York and asked me to come to his hotel for the evening. He was frightening in his appearance.

“Johnson,” he said, “I’m finished. I can see now, all my work has been bunk. All my writing, every lecture I have ever given, has been bunk.”

“What in heaven’s name has happened to you, Hoxie?”

“I’ve come to see through Veblen. You partly saw through him, but not the way I do.”

In an evening that extended until four in the morning — for I did not dare to leave him — Hoxie unfolded the rather inconsequential course of his deconversion from Veblen. They had disagreed on a personal matter and Veblen had treated Hoxie rudely. But Hoxie had always known that Veblen could glory in rudeness.

Such an incident could have been effective only as a catalyst. Hoxie had been working for months with Frey, a distinguished labor leader, on a book, Industrial Management and Labor. [sic, Scientific Management and Labor is the correct title] Undoubtedly he had been unconsciously accumulating cases that exhibited the shortcomings of Veblen’s theories.

“I got to thinking,” Hoxie said, “how could a man be so great a scientist and such a damn fool? And the more I thought, the more the idea rode my mind: how great a scientist is he? Johnson thought his science was phony.”

“No,” I said, “I never thought that. I thought you had to watch him. His equations didn’t solve, and he patched them up by rhetorical ‘by and large,’ for the most part.’ Almost all economists do something of the kind sometimes.”

“Veblen knew his equations didn’t solve, but he used them just the same. And his class dope; he pretended it was psychology. It was pure abstractions; no, not pure, but with a purpose.”

“We’re all purposive, Hoxie.”

“I wouldn’t care if it was just the matter of my finding out a phony I had taken for okay. But Veblen has been the premise of all my work. My work is all rotten with Veblenism.”

“Hoxie, I’ve read about everything you ever wrote. Your work stands on its own feet. Sometimes you’re wrong–not often.”

“Johnson, you know the basis of my labor theory. Two philosophies, the employer’s and the laborer’s. The first based on the final cause. the other on the efficient cause. You called that bunk the first time we met, when we were both on the American Economic Association program.”

“It is bunk,” I agreed. “But all that enormous amount of concrete investigation you have done is quite independent of any such premise. It stands.”

“No, it doesn’t. It’s all diseased, from that premise.”

I argued with Hoxie for eight hours at a stretch. Our positions were reversed, Hoxie was attacking Veblen, I was defending him. I marshaled as many telling and meaningful passages as I held in my memory, from Veblen’s Theory of Business Enterprise, Imperial Germany, The Engineers and the Price System, even from Veblen’s most sardonic and least sincere book, The Higher Learning. Finally Hoxie seemed to be calmed down enough, or wearied enough, for sleep. I left him, promising to visit him in Chicago and renew the discussion.

But before I could get around to a Chicago trip Hoxie killed himself.

Source: Alvin Saunders Johnson. A Pioneer’s Progress. New York: Viking Press, 1952. Pages pp. 204-207.

Image Source: University of Chicago Photographic Archive, apf1-02878, Special Collections Research Center, University of Chicago Library. Potrait colorized by Economics in the Rear-view Mirror.

Categories
Columbia Economists

Columbia. Alvin S. Johnson’s impressions of Edwin R.A. Seligman, 1898-1902

Alvin Saunders Johnson’s 1952 autobiography, A Pioneer’s Progress, provides us a treasure chest of granular detail regarding his academic and life experiences. This co-founder of the New School for Social Research in New York City went on to live another 19 years after publishing his autobiography to reach the age of 96.

Economics in the Rear-View Mirror will clip personal and departmental remembrances of Johnson’s own economics training and teaching days. This post shares a transcription of his impressions of Edwin R. A. Seligman.

Previously posted Johnson observations: John W. BurgessFranklin H. Giddings.

_________________________

Other posts with
E.R.A. Seligman content

_________________________

Alvin Johnson reminisces
about Seligman

[p. 123] Edwin R. A. Seligman was head of the Department of Economics.

He was a strikingly handsome figure, with his thick dark beard, wavy in structure, with mahogany overtones. We called it an ambrosial beard; I doubt great Zeus had a handsomer.

No economist living had read so widely in the literature of the social sciences as Seligman. He had a catholic mind and found some good in every author, no matter how crackbrained. A man of large income, he was the foremost academic advocate of progressive income and inheritance taxes at a time when all regular economists abominated the idea of the income tax as a Populist attack on the wealthy and cultured classes. He was a staunch supporter of trade unionism and government regulation of railway rates. It was hard for me to distinguish between Seligman’s populism and mine.

As a lecturer he was systematic and eloquent. He never appeared before a class without thorough preparation, and in the seminar meetings at his house he was always primed with all the facts and ideas that might supplement the students’ papers. He was a great teacher, and most of the graduate students turned to him for direction…

*  *  *  *  *  *

[p. 137]…As the doctoral examinations approached in the spring of 1901, three of our group of students — Jesse Eliphalet Pope, Allan Willett, and I — spent much time together cramming. We were to be examined on the entire literature of our major economics — and on the courses in the minors for which we had registered, in my case sociology under Giddings. It goes without saying that we hadn’t a chance to load ourselves up for the particular questions we might be asked in a three-hour oral examination. Still we boned manfully.

Our Columbia professors were as a rule very humane. If a student seemed to be floored by a question the examiner made haste to substitute another and easier question. I felt I was getting on very satisfactorily under the questioning of Seligman and Clark. But then Giddings pounced on me with blood in his eye. He was having a feud with Seligman at the time and meant to take it out of my hide. He did, and I resented it, for he was my friend.

After the examination I waited in the corridor to hear the results of the examiners’ deliberations. Soon Seligman came out and announced that I had passed with flying colors….

We were all three candidates for teaching positions, and Seligman had a powerful reach out into the colleges of the country. Three openings came to his jurisdiction: an associate professorship at New York University, which he awarded to Pope, the faculty favorite; an instructorship at Brown University, which went to Willett; and a position as Reader at Bryn Maw College, which he reserved for me. I was [p. 138] so very young, he said — all through my undergraduate life I had felt reprehensibly old. At Bryn Maw I would give only one three-hour course and have nearly all my time for finishing my doctor’s thesis.

*  *  *  *  *  *

[p. 151] … [At] Columbia and Barnard, in the fall of 1902, instruction presented problems quite new to me. Sometimes the problems were perplexing, often annoying, but usually capable of some sort of solution. By the end of my four years at Columbia I had been whipped into the shape of a fairly good teacher, although I was quite incapable of rising to the quizmaster heights many heads of departments at that time regarded as ideal.

My principal function was to drill classes of juniors, at Columbia and Barnard, in Bullock’s Introduction to Economics. At Columbia, Professor Seligman would lecture one hour to the assembled classes.

At Barnard, Professor Henry L. Moore would likewise assemble all the students for a general lecture. Then I would take over the students in smaller, though still large, groups and try to polish them off by quizzing them. It was on the whole a bad method.

*  *  *  *  *  *

 

Source: Alvin Saunders Johnson. A Pioneer’s Progress. New York: Viking Press, 1952.

Image Source: E.R.A. Seligman in Universities and their Sons, Vol. 2 (1899), pp. 484-6. Colorized by Economics in the Rear-View Mirror.

 

 

Categories
Columbia Sociology

Columbia. Alvin S. Johnson’s impressions of Franklin H. Giddings, 1898-1902

 

Alvin Saunders Johnson’s 1952 autobiography, A Pioneer’s Progress, provides us a treasure chest of granular detail regarding his academic and life experiences. This co-founder of the New School for Social Research in New York City went on to live another 19 years after publishing his autobiography to reach the age of 96.

Economics in the Rear-View Mirror will clip personal and departmental remembrances of Johnson’s own economics training and teaching days. This post shares a transcription of his impression of the sociologist Franklin H. Giddings and his experience with him as one of his doctoral examiners. Economist readers are gently reminded that at the turn of the twentieth century sociology was still regarded by many economists (and sociologists) as a subfield of economics. 

Trigger warning: Giddings appears to have been both an academic bully and one who spoke fluent anti-semitic speech.

Previously posted Johnson observation: John W. Burgess.

_________________________

Other posts with
Franklin H. Giddings’ content

_________________________

Alvin Johnson reminisces
about Giddings

[p. 122] …Columbia men swore by Franklin H. Giddings as the greatest living sociologist. He was a large, genial man, with bluntly pointed red beard and a markedly dolichocephalic skull, of which he was very proud. In his view, all distinction in the world, all energy, all genius, were carried by the dolichocephalic blonds Aryans, we called them then. Other peoples might acquire merit by imitation.

“Look at the Jews,” he would say in the privacy of the Sunday evening meetings at his house. “They are middlemen in economic life and middlemen in the world of ideas.”

Down the corridor from Giddings’ office was the office of Franz [p. 123] Boas, anthropologist. Logically he belonged in the School of Political Science, and in scholarly attainment, originality, and intellectual leadership he ranked with the best of them. Years later, when I was a member of the faculty, I urged the annexation of Franz Boas, then recognized throughout the world as the foremost anthropologist. Giddings vetoed the idea with the vigor of a Gromyko. Anthropology was either a natural science, having no proper place in a School of Political Science, or an amateurish sociology we could not afford to recognize…

*  *  *  *  *  *  *  *  *  *  *

[p. 137] … the doctoral examinations approached in the spring of 1901 …. We were to be examined on the entire literature of our major economics — and on the courses in the minors for which we had registered, in my case sociology under Giddings. It goes without saying that we hadn’t a chance to load ourselves up for the particular questions we might be asked in a three-hour oral examination. Still we boned manfully.

Our Columbia professors were as a rule very humane. If a student seemed to be floored by a question the examiner made haste to substitute another and easier question. I felt I was getting on very satisfactorily under the questioning of Seligman and Clark. But then Giddings pounced on me with blood in his eye. He was having a feud with Seligman at the time and meant to take it out of my hide. He did, and I resented it, for he was my friend.

After the examination I waited in the corridor to hear the results of the examiners’ deliberations. Soon Seligman came out and announced that I had passed with flying colors. Giddings followed, jovially slapped me on the back, and said, “Well, Johnson, I made you sweat. I knew it wouldn’t hurt you. Seligman would have bulled you through if you had flunked every question. But say, you knew more of the answers than I’d have known if I hadn’t loaded up for you.

So it was just good, clean fun, like pushing an absent-minded companion off an embankment…

*  *  *  *  *  *  *  *  *  *  *

[pp. 163-164] … There was, to be sure, a certain amount of personal friction, particularly between Giddings and Seligman. It was aired in the offices, not at faculty meetings. Giddings would encounter Seligman in the Political Science Quarterly office, where I was working, and would roar out his discontent with some plan of Seligman’s. Seligman always remained imperturbably courteous.Once I asked Giddings what he really had against Seligman.

“What I’ve got against him? I can’t get under the skin of that infernal Christian. You know, Johnson, I sometimes think only Jews can really behave like Christians. The Jews created that religion, and it suits their temperament. It doesn’t suit the temperament of us Aryans.”…

Source: Alvin Saunders Johnson. A Pioneer’s Progress. New York: Viking Press, 1952.

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, pp. 453-5. Portrait colorised by Economics in the Rear-View Mirror.

 

 

Categories
Columbia Economists

Columbia. Alvin S. Johnson’s impressions of Dean John W. Burgess, October 1898

 

Alvin Saunders Johnson’s 1952 autobiography, A Pioneer’s Progress, provides us a treasure chest of granular detail regarding his academic and life experiences. This co-founder of the New School for Social Research in New York City went on to live another 19 years after publishing his autobiography to reach the age of 96. In his New York Times obituary that starts on page one of the June 9, 1972 edition one reads:

“When he retired from the New School, Dr. Johnson did not leave the academic world. He came to the school each morning, and served as its elder statesman.”

What a way to go!

Economics in the Rear-View Mirror will clip personal and departmental remembrances of Johnson’s own economics training and teaching days. This post  includes his  first encounter with the founder of the Columbia School of Political Sciences, John W. Burgess, together with a tiny capsule of Burgessian Weltanschauung.

__________________________

Earlier Posts dealing with
John W. Burgess

__________________________

From Alvin S. Johnson’s Autobiography

[p. 120] … So here was I [in October 1898], a provincial, bound to Columbia for life by the calm magnificence of the Seth Low Library.

Entering, I met a janitor who directed me to the dean’s office on the third floor. The dean, John W. Burgess, looked classic too, with the classicism of highbred British stock, or rather, of the cavalier stock that first settled in Virginia. Though he had enlisted in the Northern cavalry from Tennessee, he was Virginian in his melodiously fluent speech. He treated even the rawest student or a janitor’s assistant with high courtesy and consideration….

I exhibited my Bachelor’s and Master’s degrees [from the University of Nebraska] — the latter won without examination by the patriotic action of the state legislature, which voted the appropriate degrees for all volunteers who were approaching the conclusion of their requirements. He glanced at the diplomas and asked me what I wanted to study.

International relations, I said, political science, economics.

Then, he said, it would be best for me to major in economics, the strongest department. I’d need to make sociology one of my minors, according to the rules of the faculty. I could later decide what other minor I might like to take. He’d advise me to browse around freely the first year. Everybody ought to have some philosophy, and there was a famous course given by Professor Nicholas Murray Butler. Also, a course in literature might be useful.

He gave me some blanks to fill out, accepted them, and sent me to the bursar, who collected my semester’s tuition and minor fees for privileges I didn’t need.
So I was a registered graduate student in the School of Political Science. No question had been raised as to my antecedent scholarly preparation. Of course, I thought, the faculty would discover soon enough my ignorance of the field. They never did. I must have hidden it well…

[p. 122] …The Columbia School of Political Science, under which I was to work for three years, was manned by professors too distinguished to be called anywhere, except to university presidencies or high administrative office. Naturally I could not work under all of them in my first year, but I could visit all their classes and judge for myself what men of top distinction were like.

Foremost stood the dean, John W. Burgess, gentleman and scholar, reputed first authority on American constitutional history and constitutional law. He was an imperialist. At the time the problems of war and peace occupied my mind, and I classified men’s positions accordingly. Burgess had a grandiose idea of a permanent coalition among the three vital nations, America, England, and Germany, to rule the world. The decadent Latin nations were to be thrust into the role of charming museum pieces; the colored peoples and the half-Tartar Slavs were to be ruled with the firmness and justice of British rule in India…

Source: Alvin Saunders Johnson. A Pioneer’s Progress. New York: Viking Press, 1952.

Image Source: John W. Burgess in Universities and their Sons, Vol. 2. Boston: R. Herndon Company, 1899,  p. 481. Colorized by Economics in the Rear-view Mirror.