Tag: MarshallLC

Categories
Chicago Economics Programs Economist Market Economists NYU

Chicago. Chester Wright recounts J. Laurence Laughlin to Alfred Bornmann in 1939

 

 

In 1939 a NYU graduate student, Alfred H. Bornemann, wrote to the University of Chicago economic historian Chester W. Wright requesting any of the latter’s personal memories of the first head of the Chicago Department of Political Economy, J. Laurence Laughlin. Bornemann’s letter and Wright’ response are transcribed below. Results from Bornemann’s project were published in 1940 as J. Laurence Laughlin: Chapters in the Career of an Economist. I have added Bornemann’s AEA membership data from 1948 and his New York Times obituary to round out the post.

Reading Wright’s letter it is easy to convince oneself that any oral history interview is more likely to extract something from a witness than is an open-ended request for a written statement. Still, an artifact is an artifact and Wright’s response is now entered into the digital record.

________________________________

1948 Listing in the AEA Membership Roll

BORNEMANN, Alfred H., 1618 Jefferson Ave., Brooklyn 27, N. Y. (1939). Long Island Univ., teach., res.; b. 1908; B.A., 1933, M.A., 1937, Ph.D., 1941, New York. Fields 7 [Money and Banking; Short-term Credit; Consumer Finance], 6 [Business Fluctuations].

Source:   “Alphabetical List of Members (as of June 15, 1948).” The American Economic Review 39, no. 1 (1949): 1-208. .p. 20.

________________________________

Alfred Bornemann, 82, Economist and Author
New York Times Obituary of May 3, 1991

Alfred H. Bornemann, an economist who taught at several colleges and who wrote extensively on economics, died on Friday at his home in Englewood, N.J. He was 82 years old.

He died of liver and colon cancer, his family said.

Dr. Bornemann was a professor at Norwich University and chairman of its department of economics and businness administration from 1951 to 1958. He taught at C. W. Post College of Long Island University from 1960 to 1966 and at Hunter and Kingsborough Colleges of the City University of New York from 1967 to 1974.

He wrote, among other books, “Fundamentals of Industrial Management,” published in 1963; “Essentials of Purchasing” (1974) and “Fifty Years of Ideology: A Selective Survey of Academic Economics” (1981).

Dr. Bornemann was born in Queens and received bachelor’s, master’s and doctoral degrees from New York University. He was an accountant with Cities Service and with the American Water Works and Electric Company before beginning his teaching career at N.Y.U. in 1940.

He is survived by his wife, the former Bertha Kohl; a son, Alfred R., of Bayonne, N.J., and a brother, Edwin, of Liberty, N.Y.

Source: New York Times Obituaries, May 3, 1991.

________________________________

Bornemann’s book and doctoral thesis about J. Laurence Laughlin

Alfred Bornemann. J. Laurence Laughlin: Chapters in the Career of an Economist. Introduction by Leon C. Marshall. (Washington,: American Council on Public Affairs,1940).

Chief sources: Agatha Laughlin’s recollections of her father; Letters from numerous colleagues and students; Laughlin papers in the University of Chicago and in the Library of Congress. His 300 odd books and articles published, 1876-1933.

Source: FRASER. Committee on the History of the Federal Reserve System. Biographies, Memoirs, Personal Reminiscences: American: U. Economists (Date 1956).

Downloadable doctoral thesis

Bornemann’s 1940 NYU PhD thesis (degree awarded in 1941) on J. Laurence Laughlin. 420 typewritten leaves (LOC: LD3907/.G7/1941/.B6). Downloadable pdf copy of the dissertation for libraries with access to ProQuest Dissertations & Theses Global!

________________________________

Handwritten letter from Alfred Borneman to Chester W. Wright requesting personal observations of J. L. Laughlin and the Department of Political Economy of the University of Chicago

1618 Jefferson Ave.,
Brooklyn, NY.
Jan 12, 1939.

Professor C. W. Wright,
University of Chicago,
Chicago, Illinois.

Dear Professor Wright,

I am writing a thesis on J. Laurence Laughlin, as I believe Professor Mayer has already told you. What I am trying to do, among other things, is to write a chapter on “Faculty, Fellows and Students” in Laughlin’s Department at Chicago. In this chapter, I hope to tell as much as I can about the background in the Department and about the men connected with it.

As I understand it, you were appointed instructor in 1907, assistant professor in 1910, and associate professor in 1913. Can you tell me anything of interest in connection with your original appointment, that is, where you were teaching and where you got the Ph.D.? Marshall, I think, was also appointed in 1907, but even though he did not have the Ph.D. he was made a professor in 1911. Can you suggest the reason for his more rapid advancement?

On the other hand, I may suggest that apparently you and Marshall and Field were the first to be advanced so rapidly. In any event you seem to have been advanced more rapidly than Veblen and Hoxie. It is possible that in the early days he had a different attitude.

Of course there is so much which you experience under Laughlin that would be of value to me to know about that I scarcely know how to ask you anything. Alvin Johnson has suggested that Laughlin was a neurotic and he would explain him in psychological terms, which, of course, I shall not do. But his characterization may suggest some thoughts to your mind. Moulton, incidentally, says Johnson could never have known Laughlin well enough to arrive at his conclusion, because Laughlin had few intimate friends.

I do not know, of course, how much interest you had in Laughlin’s public work or his theories, so that what I am asking you largely concerns his Department. If you care to give me any observations with respect to these two phases, however, I should naturally greatly appreciate your doing so.

But I believe you could give me most invaluable information by your recollections of your years under Laughlin and how he saw the Department, as well as possibly some of the background.

For anything which you can find the time to tell me I shall be grateful.

Cordially yours,

Alfred Borneman

 

Carbon copy of Chester W. Wright’s reply to Alfred Borneman

February 27, 1939

Mr. Alfred Borneman
1618 Jefferson Avenue
Brooklyn, New York

My dear Mr. Borneman:

I am sorry to have been so long in replying to your inquiry, but have been very rushed the last few weeks and assumed there was no need for an immediate answer.

I presume Professor Laughlin’s attention was called to me by the staff at Harvard as it seems to have been his policy to make inquiries there when he had positions to be filled. I received my Ph.D. degree at Harvard in 1906 and during the following year taught at Cornell University. It was while I was there that I received a request from Professor Laughlin to meet him for an interview in Philadelphia, following which he offered me the appointment at Chicago which I decided to accept.

Professor Marshall came to Chicago at the same time. As I recollect, he had been teaching at Ohio Wesleyan for several years after completing two or three years of graduate work at Harvard, though he did not remain there to write a thesis and get his Ph.D. degree. Since he was recognized as an excellent teacher and very competent in administrative work, the fact that he did not have a Ph.D. degree was never considered an obstacle to his promotion any more that in the case of J. A. Field, who only held a Bachelor’s degree. I presume the explanation for the more rapid advancement of the men who came to the Department at Chicago about this time is that they proved to be more of the type in whom Laughlin had confidence. President Judson, I believe, had unusual confidence in Laughlin, so the latter was able to get his recommendations approved.

Of the men already in the Department when I came, Cummings and Hill were not conspicuous successes either as teachers or productive scholars. I suspect there was no pressure either to promote them or to keep them when they had chances to go elsewhere. Just why Davenport left, I never knew. Hoxie was eventually made a full professor on the strength of his recognized success as a teacher and a student of labor problems despite views on these problems which must have seemed rather questionable to one of Laughlin’s conservatism.

Professor Laughlin was very much a gentleman of the old school and placed considerable emphasis on what he called “a sense of form.” Possibly the fact that he thought the men coming into the Department about my time and later had more of this sense of form may have been a factor in their advancement. It has never occurred to me that Laughlin was of the neurotic type, though Hoxie was.

As Laughlin’s theoretical and public work was entirely outside of my field of special interest, I cannot very profitably discuss it.

In his conduct of the Department, I had no feeling that he was autocratic or unreasonable. My recollection is that most matters of general interest were discussed among the members of the Department and commonly acted upon as decided by the group. I suspect that this may have been more generally the case after about the time I came to the Department here than it had been formerly, but I have no definite knowledge on this point.

Sincerely yours,

Chester W. Wright

CWW-W

Source: University of Chicago Archives. Department of Economics, Records. Box 41, Folder 12.

Image Source:  Dr. Alfred Bornemann in C. W. Post College Yearbook, 1966.

Categories
Chicago Fields Regulations

Chicago. L. C. Marshall Memos Regarding Doctoral Field Committees and Advising, 1926-27

 

 

The following set of memoranda from the head of the department of economics at the University of Chicago provides us with an academic administrator’s perspective of the organization of a doctoral program and the departmental structure by fields. We see to which fields different economics professors were associated (consigned?), none of which we couldn’t guess, but memoranda like these help to nail these things down for sure. It is dull reading, and perhaps next time I make it to the University of Chicago archives, I’ll be able to find some of the actual written responses by field which should provide us more content. Still I find it interesting to see just how underwhelming was the prompt response to the chair’s request to his colleagues to meet with each other and write something up as seen in his three part reminder/nudge/nag memorandum dated about a half-year after his first requests! 

 

__________________________________

Memo #1. Formalizing Academic Advising

THE UNIVERSITY OF CHICAGO
DEPARTMENT OF ECONOMICS

Memorandum to: P. H. Douglas, H. A. Millis, Jacob Viner C. W. Wright

from L. C. Marshall

October 13, 1926

I am inclined to think it would be a good plan if we arranged for a somewhat decentralized system of advice for our students who are preparing for the doctorate. I refer particularly to their four fields.

When a man has decided that he wishes to use fields a, b, c, d (let us say) for the doctorate, would it not be a good plan for someone in each field to take him in hand and talk the whole situation over with him? What formal previous training has he had? What informal? What practical experience? What courses in Economics here would be useful to him? What courses in other Departments would be useful? What informal reading might wisely be covered, etc., etc.

If such a scheme were carried out there ought to be some sort of formal written record of the comments and recommendations of the group advisor, so that there could be no future misunderstanding and so that a temporary absence of the advisor would not cause any embarrassment.

It would be easy to provide a memorandum pad that would provide an original for the candidate, a duplicate for the registering representative and a triplicate for the group advisor.

Won’t you give me suggestions of the kind of thing that ought to appear on a pad of this kind?

__________________________________

Memo #2. Coordinating Fields within Common Economics & Business Doctoral Program

 

November 22, 1926

Memorandum to all persons mentioned herein:

The problem attacked in this memorandum is that of carrying through effectively the legislation which has established the single Ph.D. degree for work in our group.

The particular aspect of that problem which is taken up below is the matter of securing competent advice and counsel (not compulsion) in the fields in which candidates present themselves for written examinations.

Will the person whose name in underscored in each group undertake (within the next week, if reasonably possible) the responsibility of calling a meeting of the members of his group with the idea of

(a) listing the resources (mainly courses) available in our own offerings
(b) listing the resources (mainly courses) available in other divisions of the University
(c) listing fruitful lines of practical endeavor or outside experience
(d) and in particular, developing any other fruitful lines of counsel and suggestion for candidates in the field.

And will each leader of these group discussions please put the outcome in writing and send it to the undersigned? It is possible that (d) above will yield results that will cause all of us to get together for further discussion.

FIELDS FOR THE SINGLE DEGREE

  1. Economic Theory and Principles of Business Administration

(a) Viner, Douglas, Cox, Nerlove, Kyrk [in pencil: “Edie, Schultz, Knight”]
(b) McKinsey, Meech, Stone, Barnes

  1. Statistics and Accounting: Theory and Application of Quantitative Method

(a) Cox, Schultz, Nerlove
(b) Rorem, McKinsey, Daines

  1. Economic History and Historical Method

Wright, Sorrell, Viner, Palyi

  1. The Financial System and Financial Administration

Mints, Cox, Meech, Palyi

  1. Labor and Personnel Administration

Millis, Douglas, Stone

  1. The Market and the Administration Marketing

Duddy, Palmer, Barnes, Dinsmore

  1. Risk and its Administration

Nerlove, Cox, Millis, Mints

  1. Transportation, Communication and Traffic Administration

Sorrell, Wright, Duddy, Douglas

  1. Resources, Technology and the Administration of Production

Mitchell, Marshall, Schultz, Sorrell

  1. Government Finance

Viner, Millis, Douglas, Stone

  1. Social Direction and Control of Economic Activity

Spencer, Wright, Millis, Christ, Pomeroy

  1. Population and the Standard of Living

Kyrk, Douglas, Viner

  1. Field proposed by the candidate

L. C. Marshall

 

__________________________________

Memo #3. Advanced General Survey Courses by Field

November 30, 1926

Memorandum from L. C. Marshall to All Persons Mentioned Herein:

 

The problem attacked in this memorandum is that of carrying through effectively our arrangements with respect to our advanced general survey courses—courses that in the past we have sometimes referred to as “Introduction to the Graduate Study of X,” although we are not now following this terminology.

The following background facts will need to be kept in mind:

  1. We are to have introductory point of view courses designed to give an organic view of the Economic Order. These courses are numbered 102, 103, 104.
  2. Our next range of courses is designed primarily to deal with method. This range includes: 1. Economic History; 2. Statistics; 3. Accounting; 4. Intermediate Theory.
  3. The foregoing seven courses are the only courses for which we assume responsibility as far as the ordinary [pencil: “Arts & Literature] undergraduate is concerned. It may well be that from time to time some member of the staff will be interested in giving for undergraduates a course on some live problem of the day, but this is an exceptional matter and not a matter of our standard arrangement.
  4. Our best undergraduates may move on to the type of courses referred to above in the first paragraph, such as courses 330, 340, 335, 345, etc. In general the prerequisites for admission to these courses (as far as undergraduates are concerned) would be a certain number of majors in our work plus 27 majors with an average of B. Under the regulations which the Graduate Faculty has laid down, students who have less than 27 majors could not be admitted to these courses except with the consent of the group and Dean Laing.

It is highly essential that our work in these advanced survey courses such as 330, 340, 335, 345, etc. shall:

  1. Really assume the method courses mentioned above: really be conducted at a level which assumes that the student possesses certain techniques
  2. Really assume an adequate background of subject-matter content.

Will the person whose name is underscored in each group undertake (as promptly as reasonably may be) the responsibility of conducting conferences designed

  1. To lead to explicit definite arrangements looking toward the actual utilization of the earlier method courses in these advanced survey courses.
  2. To prepare a bibliography that can be mimeographed and placed in each student’s hands who enters one of these advanced survey courses. This bibliography is not to be a bibliography of the course (that is a separate matter) but a bibliography of what is assumed by way of preparation for the course. Whether a somewhat different bibliography should be made for the Economics course and the Business course in a given field is left for each group to discuss. Personally I hope that it will be a single bibliography for the two. Mr. Palyi suggests the desirability of a bibliographical article (worthy of pulication) for each field. This seems to me an admirable suggestion—one difficult to resist.

Will each leader of the group referred to below please put the outcome of your discussion in writing and send to the undersigned? It is to be hoped that you will find other matters to report upon in addition to the foregoing.

GROUPS

  1. The Financial System and Financial Administration

Meech, Mints, Cox, Palyi

  1. Labor and Personnel Administration

Douglas, Millis, Stone, Kornhauser

  1. The Market and the Administration Marketing

Palmer, Duddy, Barnes, Dinsmore

  1. Risk and its Administration

Nerlove, Cox, Millis, Mints

  1. Transportation, Communication and Traffic Administration

Sorrell, Wright, Duddy, Douglas

  1. Government Finance

Viner, Millis, Douglas, Stone

  1. Population and the Standard of Living

Kyrk, Douglas, Viner

  1. Resources, Technology and the Administration of Production

Mitchell, Daines, McKinsey

The following fields are not included in this memorandum either because of specific course prerequisites or because of obvious difficulties in the case:

  1. Economic Theory and Principles of Administration
  2. Statistics and Accounting
  3. Economic History and Historical Method
  4. Social Direction and Control of Economic Activity

__________________________________

Memo #4. Written Field Examinations

THE UNIVERSITY OF CHICAGO
THE WORK IN ECONOMICS AND BUSINESS

Memorandum to:
Members of the Instructing Staff from L. C. Marshall, January 27, 1927

This communication is directed toward carrying one step farther the work of the various groups which are preparing for the effective administration of the single doctorate.

You will remember that in each functional field an analysis has been made of our resources. This looks in the direction of more competent advice to students concentrating in the various fields. You will also remember that in each functional field certain steps have been taken looking toward the more effective operation of the courses that in the past we have sometimes referred to as “Introduction to the Graduate Study of X.”

The primary purpose of this present memorandum is to suggest to each functional group that it now examine carefully the matter of the written examination in that field; giving attention to the character of the standards which should be insisted upon, the number and type and grouping of questions which should be asked, and any other significant issues. After each group has examined the issues and difficulties in its particular field it may prove necessary to have a general meeting of all groups to determine general policies in these matters. It seems unnecessary to hold a general meeting in advance of the special meeting since we can assume our existing standards and practices as at least a point of departure for the group discussions.

Will the person whose name is underscored undertake as promptly as reasonably may be the responsibility of conducting group conferences on this matter of written examinations for the doctorate.

  1. Economic Theory and Principles of Administration (Here is the only really difficult problem in the whole matter. This field is to be required of all candidates and the outstanding problem is how to formulate an examination that will properly cover the case. Probably there will be little or no difficulty in the case of economic theory for students who are primarily interested in Business Administration for they would certainly have covered 301, 302, 309 and they would almost certainly have covered a theoretical course in some special field, e.g., Wages, in the field of Labor. The case is different in the matter of the Business Administration requirement for persons who are primarily interested in orthodox Economics, since Business Administration courses are confessedly not as well organized as courses in Economic Theory. The difficulty may, however, be exaggerated in our minds. Under our new groupings most candidates will automatically have come into contact with an administrative course in one or more functional fields. Probably a little practical wisdom in arranging requirements for a brief transition period will leave us with few problems in this matter after the transition is over.)
    Douglas, Viner, Millis, Cox, Nerlove, Spencer, McKinsey, Meech, Stone
  2. Statistics and Accounting; theory and application of quantitative method. (Our general standard has been general knowledge of both fields and detailed knowledge of one in case this field of work is offered.)
    Daines, Wright, Cox, Schultz, Nerlove, Rorem, McKinsey
  3. Economic History and Historical Method (Since no particular change is occurring in this field the leader of the group may be able to cover the case by informal conversations.)
    Wright, Sorrell, Viner, Palyi
  4. The Financial System and Financial Administration.
    Cox, Mints, Meech, Palyi, Wright
  5. Labor and Personnel Administration.
    Stone, Millis, Douglas, Kornhauser
  6. The Market and Market Administration
    Barnes, Duddy, Palmer, Dinsmore
  7. Risk and its Administration
    Nerlove, Cox, Millis, Mints (Since no particular change is occurring in this field the leader of the group may be able to cover the case by informal conversations.)
  8. Transportation, Communication and Traffic Administration. (Since no particular change is occurring in this field the leader of the group may be able to cover the case by informal conversations.)
    Sorrell, Wright, Duddy, Douglas
  9. Resources, Technology and Administration of Production. . (Since no particular change is occurring in this field the leader of the group may be able to cover the case by informal conversations.)
    Mitchell, Daines, Schultz, Sorrell
  10. Government Finance. . (Since no particular change is occurring in this field the leader of the group may be able to cover the case by informal conversations.)
    Millis, Viner, Douglas, Stone
  11. Social Direction and Control of Economic Activity. (Although no great change is taking place in this field, the problem is sufficiently difficult to justify a conference.)
    Pomeroy, Spencer, Wright, Millis, Christ
  12. Population and the Standard of Living. (In Mr. Field’s absence let us omit discussion of the written examination.)

__________________________________

Memo #5. Please Respond to Memos #2-#4

May 25, 1927

Follow up Memorandum to persons mentioned herein from L. C. Marshall

On November 22, 1926, a memorandum was sent to certain groups of committees dealing with the problem of securing competent advice and counsel in the fields in which candidates present themselves for written examinations. The committees were asked to list the resources available in the University in each field; to list fruitful lines of practical endeavor or outside experience; and to indicate other fruitful lines of counsel and suggestion for candidates.

It was hoped that data would become available in time to make the circular for 1927-28 more attractive and in time to prepare mimeographed sheets for the use of students this year.

Below is a statement of the committees, with their chairmen. The asterisk indicates that the committee has reported. Will those who have not yet reported please do so as soon as possible.

Theory, Viner
Administration, McKinsey*
Statistics, Cox*
Accounting, Rorem*
Econ. Hist. etc. Wright
Finance etc. Mints
Labor etc. Millis*
Market etc. Duddy*
Risk etc. Nerlove*
Transportation etc. Sorrell
Resources etc. Mitchell*
Govt. Finance, Viner
Social Direction etc. Spencer*
Population etc. Kyrk

* * * * * *

On November 30, 1926, a memorandum was sent to certain groups of committees dealing with the problem of carrying through effectively our arrangements with respect to our advanced general survey courses. Each committee was asked to indicate what definite things can be done in the way of making certain that the preparatory method courses will eventually be utilized; what can be done in the way of mimeographed bibliography indicating what is assumed by way of preparation for each advance survey course; what other things can be done.

It was hope that the data would be available in time to enable us to take quite a long step forward in this matter in connection with the 1927-28 advanced survey courses.

Below is a statement of the committees with their chairmen. The asterisk indicates that the committee has reported. Will those who have not yet reported please do so as soon as possible.

Finance etc. Meech*
Labor etc. Douglas
Market etc. Palmer*
Risk etc. Nerlove*
Transportation etc. Sorrell
Govt. Finance, Viner
Population etc. Kyrk
Resources etc. Mitchell

* * * * * *

On Feb. 3, 1927 a memorandum [Probably the memorandum was that dated January 27, 1927] was sent to certain groups of committees dealing with the problem of the character of the written examination in each functional field.

It was hoped that we could start the year 1927-28 with a clearer view of what should be our positions with respect to these examinations.

Below is a statement of the committees with their chairmen. The asterisk indicates that the committee has reported. Will those who have not yet reported please do so as soon as possible?

Economic Theory and Principles of Business Administration, Douglas
Statistics and Accounting: Theory and Application of Quantitative Method, Daines
Economic History and Historical Method, Wright
The Financial System and Financial Administration, Cox
Labor and Personnel Administration, Stone
The Market and the Administration Marketing, Barns*
Risk and its Administration, Nerlove
Transportation, Communication and Traffic Administration, Sorrell
Resources, Technology and the Administration of Production, Mitchell
Government Finance, Millis
Social Direction and Control of Economic Activity, Pomeroy*

Source: The University of Chicago Archives. Department of Economics. Records. Box 22, Folder 6.

Categories
Chicago Fields

Chicago. Doctoral Examination Committees by Fields 1923-24

____________________________

Three memos that propose the faculty members in Political Economy (and Commerce and Administration) to prepare the written doctoral examination questions by fields, 1923-1924 along with a list of the names of the examinees by fields for the summer quarter of 1925.

____________________________

October 24, 1923

MEMORANDUM to the PERSONS mentioned below
SUBJECT:       Written Examinations for the Doctorate. Autumn Quarter, 1923.

  1. New questions will need to be prepared in the fields indicated below.
  2. It has been customary to have the questions cover a very broad territory and to give a considerable number of options. Each examination lasts for three and a half hours.
  3. Will Mr. Clark and Mr. Viner assume joint responsibility for the questions in “Economic Theory”.
  4. Will Mr. Wright and Mr. Clark assume joint responsibility for the questions in “Capitalistic Organization”.
  5. Will Mr. Barnes and Dr. Duddy assume joint responsibility for the question in “The Manager’ Relationship to the Market”.
  6. Will Mr. Wright prepare the questions in “The Historical Evolution of Industrial Society”.
  7. Will Mr. Millis and Mr. Douglas assume joint responsibility for the questions in “Labor”.
  8. Will Mr. Field and Mr. McKinsey assume joint responsibility for the questions in “Statistics and Accounting”.
  9. Will Mr. Viner assume responsibility for the questions in “Economics of Government Administration”, conferring with such other persons as seems to him appropriate.

W. H. Spencer, for Commerce and Administration
C. W. Wright, for Political Economy

WHS:EL

____________________________

 

January — 1924

Memorandum to the persons mentioned below
Subject:          Written Examination for the Doctorate. Winter Quarter, 1924.

 

  1. New questions will need to be prepared in the fields indicated below. Please remember that the examinations are in fields and not in courses.
  2. It has been customary to have the questions cover a very broad territory and to give a considerable number of options. Each examination lasts for three and a half hours.
  3. Will Mr. Clark prepare a paper on “Economic Theory”, consulting with Mr. Viner?
  4. Will Mr. Christ prepare a paper on “Social Direction and Control of Economic Activity”, conferring with Messrs. Wright, Spencer, and Clark?
  5. Will Mr. Marshall prepare a paper on “The Pecuniary and Financial System” and the “Manager’s Relationship to Finance”?
  6. Will Mr. Douglas assume the responsibility for the paper on “Capitalistic Organization”, consulting with Messrs. Marshall, Viner, and Wright?
  7. Will Mr. McKinsey and Mr. Field assume joint responsibility of preparing a paper in “Statistics and Accounting”?
  8. Will Mr. Millis, Chairman, and Mr. Douglas prepare a paper on “Labor and the Manager’s Relationship to Personnel”?
  9. Will Mr. Viner prepare a paper on “The Economics of Government Administration”, consulting, perhaps, with Messrs. Merriam and Millis?
  10. Will Mr. Wright prepare a paper on “Historical Evolution of Industrial Society”, conferring with such other persons as seems to him appropriate?

____________________________

 

WRITTEN EXAMINATION FOR THE DOCTORATE, SPRING QUARTER 1924

Memorandum to the persons mentioned below:

  1. New questions will need to be prepared in the fields indicated below. Please remember that the examinations are in fields and not in courses.
  2. It has been customary to have the questions cover a very broad territory and to give a considerable number of options. Each examination lasts for three and a half hours.
  3. Will Mr. Clark prepare a paper on “Economic Theory”, consulting with Mr. Viner?
  4. Will Mr. Christ prepare a paper on “Social Direction and Control of Economic Activity”, conferring with Messrs. Wright, Spencer, and Clark?
  5. Will Mr. Marshall prepare a paper on “The Pecuniary and Financial System” and the “Manager’s Relationship to Finance”?
  6. Will Mr. Viner prepare the paper on “Capitalistic Organization”, consulting with Messrs. Millis, Douglas, and Wright?
  7. Will Mr. McKinsey and Mr. Field assume joint responsibility of preparing a paper in “Statistics and Accounting”?
  8. Will Mr. Millis, Chairman, and Mr. Douglas prepare a paper on “Labor and the Manager’s Relationship to Personnel”?
  9. Will Mr. Viner prepare a paper on “The Economics of Government Administration”, consulting, perhaps, with Messrs. Merriam and Millis?
  10. Will Mr. Wright prepare a paper on “Historical Evolution of Industrial Society”, conferring with such other persons as seems to him appropriate?

THIS MATTER NEEDS TO BE RUSHED THIS CURRENT QUARTER; WE NEED TO HAVE ALL EXAMINATION PAPERS IN SOME CONSIDERABLE TIME AHEAD OF THE BEGINNING OF THE EXAMINATION PERIOD. SEVERAL COLLECTIONS OF PAPERS HAVE TO GO TO OUTSIDE PARTIES TO ADMINISTER THE EXAMINATIONS. WE OUGHT TO SEND THESE EXAMINATIONS IN ONE BUNCH.

LCM: EL

____________________________

 

SUMMER QUARTER, 1925

August 1.       Economic Theory

Mr. [S. E.] Beckett
Mr. [Clifford Austin] Curtis
Mr. [Harold Amos] Logan
Mr. [Royal Ewert] Montgomery
Mr. [H. V.] Olson
Mr. [Christian] Van Riper

August 8.       Govt. Finance

Mr. [Harold Amos] Logan
Miss [Mabel] Magee

August 8.       Social Direction and Control

Mr. [Christian] Van Riper

August 15.     Labor

Mr. [S. E.] Beckett
Mrs. [Helen] Homan
Miss [Leila] Houghteling
Mr. [Harold Amos] Logan
Mr. [H. V.] Olsen

August 22.     Economic History

Mr. [S. E.] Beckett
Mrs. [Helen] Hohman
Mr. [H. V.] Olsen

 

Source: University of Chicago Archives. Department of Economics. Records, Box 26, Folder 9.

Image Source: University of Chicago Photographic Archive, apf4-01703, Special Collections Research Center, University of Chicago Library.

Categories
Chicago Regulations

Chicago. Memo to M.A. candidates on deadline for theses, 1924

 

 

By itself such an archival artifact from 1924 is just another boring piece of paper. But it is evidence that the search for an optimal deadline to balance the interests of thesis writers with the interests (and capacities) of professors did seem to require an explicit memorandum from the University of Chicago department head to M.A. candidates regarding both deadlines and numbers of copies. This was a time when three copies meant typing with carbon paper, so having the copies due on the day of the oral examination gives us a sense perhaps of just how (ahem) deeply read the M.A. theses were, at least by the non-principal-advisor members of the committees.

______________________________

 

MEMORANDUM TO CANDIDATES FOR THE MASTER’S DEGREE IN THE DEPARTMENT OF POLITICAL ECONOMY
SPRING QUARTER 1924

  1. Theses should be in the hands of the reading committee not later than May 15. An earlier date is much to be preferred since the committee should have ample time for reading the thesis and the candidate should then have time for making any needed corrections. If three copies of the thesis are made available for the reading committee action will, of course, be expedited.
  2. Three typewritten copies of the thesis in its final form are due on the day of the oral examination.
  3. May 30 is the final date for oral examinations. Please arrange an hour with my office.
  4. The committee on your thesis is indicated below:

[blank space: to be filled in]

L. C. Marshall

 

Source: University of Chicago Archives. Economics Department. Records & Addenda. Box 22, Folder 8. Cf. Folder 8 (includes names for committees)

 

Categories
Business School Chicago Economists

Chicago. Problem of Faculty Turnover, 1923

The Special Collections Research Center of the University of Chicago Library is putting scans of records from the respective administrations of Presidents Harper, Judson and Burton (1869-1925)  on-line (52 boxes of 91 boxes thus far!).  For today’s posting I have transcribed the introduction and conclusions of a summary “of the most imperative needs of the Graduate School of Arts and Literature” written in October 1923 as well as the section for the Department of Political Economy. Additionally I provide c.v. data for the economists named published in the Annual Register 1921-22 for the University of Chicago and additional biographical information (obituaries/memorials) to follow their post-Chicago careers.

 

____________________________________

The University of Chicago
The Graduate School of Arts and Literature

Office of the Dean

October 30, 1923.

Dean J. H. Tufts,
The University of Chicago.

Dear Dean Tufts:

I enclose a summary of the most imperative needs of the Graduate School of Arts and Literature. I have drawn it up only after a most careful examination of the condition of the Departments. I am convinced that it is only by making the new appointments which I have listed and providing the increases I have indicated that the School can hope to make any appreciable contribution to graduate studies in America or even to hold its own with the other Graduate Schools in the country. In the case of some departments the situation is almost inconceivably bad. It is so bad that it is only by making new appointments of strong men—major appointments that would command attention—and by increasing the salaries of many members of the teaching staff who are being tempted away that we can hope to regain our prestige. I hope that this will not sound like an exaggeration. It is not. It is a lamentable fact that some of the departments that ten or fifteen years ago were famous and attracted graduate students from all parts of the continent are now deplorably weak, while some of the others, though still doing efficient work, have recently suffered serious losses in their teaching staff and are threatened with still more. Let me speak of these in detail.

 

I. The Weak Departments:

  1. The Department of Psychology…
  2. The Department of the History of Art…
  3. The Department of German….
  4. The Department of Latin…
  5. Another notable example of weakness is found in Anthropology…
  6. The Department of General Literature…

 

[II.] The Other Departments:

  1. Romance Languages…
  2. History…
  3. Political Economy

The situation here is especially precarious. The instructional staff is an efficient one but extremely difficult to hold. Within recent years three men have gone: Moulton, Hardy and Lyon. Some of the men here now have received tempting offers of positions wither in government bureaus or in industries. The new appointment in Money and Banking is to fill the vacancy caused by Moulton’s going to Washington two years ago. Viner has had more than one call. Good men in Political Economy seem to be increasingly hard to get.

May I remind you also of the fine contribution that this Department, under Mr. Marshall’s inspiration, has made to that cooperative study of economic, social, and political conditions in Chicago that is being carried on by all the departments in the Social Science Group. This whole piece of work is, as you yourself know, a most interesting experiment, and in its detailed analysis of the characteristics of the Chicago community, will in all probability prove to be a model for the study of any large metropolitan area.

I hope you will pardon my writing at such length, but the situation seems to me to be critical. We cannot afford to delay remedial measures. The money that I am asking for is not simply for the University of Chicago, it is for Graduate Studies in the whole Middle West, which looks to Chicago for its teachers. Of all the new appointments that I have urged there is not one that would not influence higher education throughout the Mississippi Valley.

 

Yours very truly,

[signed]
Gordon J. Laing

 

Source: University of Chicago. Office of the President: Harper, Judson and Burton Administrations Records 1869-1925. Box 47, Folder 6 “Graduate schools, development, 1914-1924”.

 

____________________________________

 

Charles Oscar Hardy, Ph.D., Assistant Professor of Financial Organization in the School of Commerce and Administration. [Resigned]

A.B., Ottawa University, 1904; Professor of History and Economics, ibid., 1910-18; Dean of the College, ibid., 1916-18; Ph.D., University of Chicago, 1916; Lecturer in the School of Commerce and Administration, ibid., 1918-19; Assistant Professor, ibid., 1919-22.

 

Harold Glenn Moulton, Ph.B., Ph.D., Professor of Political Economy. [Resigned]

Ph.B., University of Chicago, 1907; Assistant in Political Economy, ibid., 1910-11; Instructor, ibid., 1911-14; Ph.D., ibid., 1914; Assistant Professor, ibid., 1914-18; Associate Professor, ibid., 1918-1922; Professor, ibid., 1922.

 

Leverett Samuel Lyon, A.M., LL.B., Ph.D., Assistant Professor of Commercial Organization in the School of Commerce and Administration.

Ph.B., University of Chicago, 1910; LL.B., Chicago Kent College of Law, 1915; Assistant in Commercial Organization in the School of Commerce and Administration, ibid., 1916-17; Instructor, ibid., 1917-19; A.M., ibid., 1918; Assistant Professor, ibid., 1919—; Ph.D., ibid., 1921.

 

Jacob Viner, Ph.D., Assistant Professor of Political Economy.

B.A., McGill University, 1914; A.M., Harvard University, 1915; Instructor in Political Economy, University of Chicago, 1916-19; Assistant Professor, ibid., 1919—; Ph.D., Harvard University, 1922.

 

Leon Carroll Marshall, A.M., LL.D., Professor and Chairman of the Department of Political Economy; Dean of the School of Commerce and Administration and of the Graduate School of Social Service Administration.

A.B., Ohio Wesleyan University, 1900; A.B., Harvard University, 1901; A.M., ibid., 1902; Assistant, ibid., 1902-3; Professor of Economics, Ohio Wesleyan University, 1903-7; Assistant Professor of Political Economy, University of Chicago, 1907-8; Associate Professor, ibid., 1908-11; Dean of the School of Commerce and Administration, ibid., 1909—; Professor of Political Economy, ibid., 1911—; Dean of the Senior Colleges, ibid., 1911-20; LL.D., Ohio Wesleyan University, 1918; Dean of the Graduate School of Social Service Administration, University of Chicago, 1920—.

 

 

Source: University of Chicago, Annual Register, 1921-1922, pp. 38, 40, 54, 57.

 

____________________________________

 

Life after the University of Chicago

“In Memoriam: Charles Oscar Hardy, 1884-1948”. American Economic Review, Vol. 39, No. 3 (May, 1949), pp. 478-480.

“Harold Moulton, Economist, Dead. Ex-President of Brookings Institution in the Capital,” The New York Times, December 15, 1965, p. 48.

Engle, N. H., “Leverett Samuel Lyon”, Journal of Marketing, Vol 24, No. 1 (July, 1959), pp. 67-69.

“Dr. Jacob Viner, Economist, Dead: Princeton Professor was U.S. Adviser 4 Decades,” The New York Times, September 13, 1970.

Marshall, Leon Carroll, 1879-1966. Biographical notes. Social Networks and Archival Context (SNAC). [Webpage].

 

Image Source: Leon C. Marshall. University of Chicago Photographic Archive, apf1-04113, Special Collections Research Center, University of Chicago Library.

Categories
Columbia Economists Harvard

Harvard. Invitations for guest lectures by Schumpeter and Rathgen, 1913

This exchange of letters between Frank Taussig and President Lowell of Harvard involves two pieces of business. The first is Taussig’s request for approval to use department lecture funds to invite Joseph Schumpeter and Karl Rathgen, who were both visiting Columbia University, to give lectures at Harvard. The second piece of business concerns a recommendation of two men to be considered for the presidency of the University of Washington, one of whom (L. C. Marshall who was the Dean of the University of Chicago Business School) the other, James Rowland Angell who would go on to become President of Yale and who also happened to be the father of the Columbia University economist James Waterhouse Angell.

__________________________________

 

HARVARD UNIVERSITY
DEPARTMENT OF ECONOMICS

CAMBRIDGE, MASSACHUSETTS
October 22, 1913.

F. W. Taussig
T. N. Carver
W. Z. Ripley
C. J. Bullock
E.F. Gay
W. M. Cole
O. M. W. Sprague
Q. E. Rappard
E. E. Day
B. M. Anderson, Jr.
H. L. Gray
Dear Lawrence:

Two Germans are in this country, both at the present moment lecturing at Columbia, to whom we might appropriately show a little attention. One is J. Schumpeter, an Austrian with whom I have had correspondence, and a very well-known and highly respected scholar; the other is K. Rathgen of Hamburg, also well-known in the profession. Our friends at Columbia write that these men would be glad to look at this institution, and we are more than willing to show them a little civility. Would you authorize us to ask each of them to give a lecture, possibly more than one, the fee to be charged to the fund for lectures on Political Economy? Schumpeter speaks excellent English, and could certainly give an acceptable lecture. Rathgen might possibly have to speak in German, in which case we should ask him simply to talk to our Seminary.

You remember our talk about the presidency of the University of Washington. I enclose a letter from L. C. Marshall of Chicago about young Angell, the psychologist, who deserves to be considered among the possibilities. I enclose also a memorandum of my own about Marshall himself, who seems to me at least the equal of Angell. Make such use of these papers as you can, either for this opening or for others that may appear in the future. When inquiring of Marshall about Angell, I gave no intimation of the reason for asking him.

Sincerely yours,
[signed]
F. W. Taussig

President A. Lawrence Lowell.

 

__________________________________

October 23, 1913.

Dear Professor Taussig:—

We should certainly be very glad to have either Schumpeter or Rathgen, or both, speak to the students in economics, at the expense of the fund for lectures in political economy. I do not know whether you want an appointment by the Corporation for this purpose, or merely an invitation by the department.

Thank you for the suggestions of presidents of Washington University. I am transmitting them.

Very truly yours,
[stamped]
A. Lawrence Lowell

Professor F. W. Taussig
2 Scott Street,
Cambridge, Mass.

__________________________________

 

Source: Harvard University Archives. President Lowell’s Papers, 1909-1914 (UAI.5.160), Box 15, Folder 413 “1909-14”.

Image Source: Karl Rathgen: Fotosammlung des Geographischen Institutes der Humboldt-Universität Berlin.    Schumpeter: Ulrich Hedtke, Joseph Alois Schumpeter. Archive.

 

 

Categories
Chicago Economists

Chicago. 25th anniversary of Dept of Political Economy, 1916

In 1916 the department of political economy of the University of Chicago celebrated its 25th anniversary (coinciding with that of the university) with a privately printed pamphlet in which were listed the names of the 38 members of the instructional staff, 12 assistants, 98 fellows, 637 graduate students and 31 Ph.D.’s of its first quarter century. Note: some names are listed in more than a single category. Appended to the end of the pamphlet is a statistical record of instructional staff, graduate students and political economy course registrations annually for the period.

___________________________________

If you find this posting interesting, here is the complete list of “artifacts” from the history of economics I have assembled. You can subscribe to Economics in the Rear-View Mirror below. There is also an opportunity for comment following each posting….

___________________________________

TWENTY-FIVE YEARS OF THE
DEPARTMENT OF POLITICAL ECONOMY

DEPARTMENT
OF
POLITICAL ECONOMY.
1892-3.

OFFICERS OF INSTRUCTION:

J. LAURENCE LAUGHLIN, Ph. D.,

Head-Professor of Political Economy.

ADOLPH C. MILLER, A. M.,

Associate-Professor of Political Economy.

WILLIAM CALDWELL, A. M.,

Tutor in Political Economy.

___________________________________

 

TWENTY-FIVE YEARS
OF THE
DEPARTMENT OF POLITICAL ECONOMY
UNIVERSITY OF CHICAGO

 

JAMES LAURENCE LAUGHLIN
Professor and Head of the Department of Political Economy
1892-1916

 

CHICAGO
PRIVATELY PRINTED
MCMXVI

___________________________________

 

JAMES LAURENCE LAUGHLIN
Professor and Head of the Department of Political Economy, 1892-1916.

* * *

Edith Abbott

Special Lecturer in Political Economy, 1909-10.

William George Stewart Adams

Lecturer on Finance and Colonial Policy, 1901-2.

Trevor Arnett

Lecturer in Accounting, 1909-13.

John Graham Brooks

University Extension Lecturer in Political Economy, 1893-97.

William Caldwell

Instructor in Political Economy, 1892-94.

John Bennet Canning

Special Assistant in Political Economy, 1914; Assistant, 1914-15; Instructor, 1915-

John Maurice Clark

Associate Professor in Political Economy, 1915-

Carlos Carleton Closson

Instructor in Political Economy, 1895-96.

John Cummings

Reader in Political Economy, 1893-94; Assistant Professor, 1903-10.

Herbert Joseph Davenport

Instructor in Political Economy, 1902-4; Assistant Professor, 1904-7; Associate Professor, 1907-8.

Ernest Ritson Dewsnup

Professorial Lecturer on Railways and Curator of the Museum of Commerce, 1904-7.

Garrett Droppers

Professorial Lecturer, 1906-7.

Carson Samuel Duncan

Instructor in Commercial Organization, 1915-

Jay Dunne

Assistant in Accounting, 1913-14; Instructor, 1914-

James Alfred Field

Instructor in Political Economy, 1908-10; Assistant Professor, 1910-13; Associate Professor, 1913-

Worthington Chauncey Ford

Lecturer on Statistics, 1898-1901.

Frederic Benjamin Garver

Assistant in Political Economy, 1911-13; Instructor, 1913-14.

Elgin Ralston Lovell Gould

Professor of Statistics, 1895-96.

Stuart McCune Hamilton

Instructor in Political Economy, 1914-16.

Walton Hale Hamilton

Assistant Professor of Political Economy, 1913-15.

Henry Rand Hatfield

Instructor in Political Economy, 1898-1902; Assistant Professor, 1902-4.

Frank Randal Hathaway

Reader in Statistics, 1892-93.

William Hill

Associate in Political Economy, 1893-94; Instructor, 1894-97; Assistant Professor, 1897-1908; Associate Professor, 1908-12.

Isaac A. Hourwich

Docent in Statistics, 1892-94.

Robert Franklin Hoxie

Instructor in Political Economy, 1906-8; Assistant Professor, 1908-12; Associate Professor, 1912-

Alvin Saunders Johnson

Associate Professor of Political Economy, 1910-11.

John Koren

Professorial Lecturer on Statistics (Political Economy and Sociology), 1909-10.

Leon Carroll Marshall

Assistant Professor of Political Economy, 1907-8; Associate Professor, 1908-11; Professor of Political Economy, 1911-

Hugo Richard Meyer

Assistant Professor of Political Economy, 1903-5.

Adolph Caspar Miller

Associate Professor of Political Economy, 1892-93; Professor of Finance, 1893-1902.

Wesley Clair Mitchell

Assistant in Political Economy, 1900-1; Instructor, 1901-2.

Robert Morris

Instructor in Political Economy, 1904-7.

Harold Glenn Moulton

Assistant in Political Economy, 1910-11 ; Instructor, 1911-14; Assistant Professor, 1914-

Frederic William Sanders

Lecturer in Statistics, 1896-97.

Frederick Myerle Simons

Assistant in Industrial Organization, 1913- 15; Instructor, 1915-

Thorstein B. Veblen

Reader in Political Economy, 1893-94; Associate, 1894-96; Instructor, 1896-1900; Assistant Professor, 1900-06.

Chester Whitney Wright

Instructor in Political Economy, 1907-10; Assistant Professor, 1910-13; Associate Professor, 1913-

*   *   *

[Assistants]

Clarence Elmore Bonnett

Assistant in Political Economy, 1910-11.

Ezekiel Henry Downey

Assistant in Political Economy, 1909-11.

John Franklin Ebersole

Assistant in Political Economy, 1909-10.

Edith Scott Gray

Assistant in Political Economy, 1915-

Homer Hoyt

Assistant in Political Economy, 1915-

Edgar Hutchinson Johnson

Assistant in Political Economy, 1909-10.

John Curtis Kennedy

Assistant in Political Economy, 1908-11.

Robert Russ Kern

Assistant in Political Economy, 1908-9.

Hazel Kyrk

Assistant in Political Economy, 1913-14.

Duncan Alexander MacGibbon

Assistant in Political Economy, 1912-13.

Ernest Minor Patterson

Assistant in Political Economy, 1910-11.

Leona Margaret Powell

Assistant in Political Economy, 1915-

___________________________________

 

FELLOWS

Edith Abbott (1903-05)

William Harvey Allen (1897-98)

Eugene Charles deAndrassy (1913-14)

Charles Criswell Arbuthnot (1901-03)

Leon Ardzrooni (1910-13)

Trevor Arnett (1899-1900)

Edward Martin Arnos (1912-13)

Otho Clifford Ault (1913-14)

Edward Donald Baker (1912-14)

Sturgeon Bell (1906-07)

Clarence Elmore Bonnett (1912-13)

Donald Elliott Bridgman (1905-07)

Howard Gray Brownson (1906-07)

Francis Lowden Burnet (1912-13)

George Chambers Calvert (1894-95)

John Cummings (1893-94)

Rajani Kanta Das (1914-16)

Herbert Joseph Davenport (1897-98)

Katharine Bement Davis (1897-98; 1899-1900)

William John Alexander Donald (1911-12)

James Alister Donnell (1902-03)

Ezekiel Henry Downey (1908-09)

Ephraim Edward Erickson (1911-12)

Katharine Conway Felton (1895-96)

Albert Lawrence Fish (1899-1900)

Ralph Evans Freeman (1915-16)

Hamline Herbert Freer (1892-93)

Frederic Benjamin Garver (1910-11)

Marshall Allen Granger (1915-)

Homer Ewart Gregory (1915-)

Gudmundur Grimson (1905-06)

Willard Neal Grubb (1908-09)

Charles Kelly Guild (1911-12)

William Buck Guthrie (1900-01)

William Fletcher Harding (1894-95)

Sarah McLean Hardy (1893-95)

Henry Rand Hatfield (1897-98)

Chauncey Edward Hope (1912-13)

Albert Lafayette Hopkins (1905-06)

John Lamar Hopkins (1899-1900)

Earl Dean Howard (1903-05)

Robert Franklin Hoxie (1893-95; 1902-03)

Homer Hoyt (1913-15)

Howard Archibald Hubbard (1909-12)

Walter Huth (1912-13)

John Curtis Kennedy (1907-09)

Robert Russ Kern (1907-08)

Benjamin Walter King (1913-14)

William Lyon Mackenzie King (1896-97)

Delos Oscar Kinsman (1898-99)

Hazel Kyrk (1912-13)

Manuel Lippitt Larkin (1911-12; 1913-14)

William Jett I.auck (1903-05)

Ferris Finley Laune (1915-)

Stephen Butler Leacock (1900-02)

Mary Margaret Lee (1907-08)

Svanto Godfrey Lindholm (1900-02)

Simon James McLean (1896-97)

James Dysart Magee (1909-10)

Basil Maxwell Manly (1909-10)

Howard Sherwood Meade (1897-98)

Albert Newton Merritt (1905-06)

Frieda Segelke Miller (1912-15)

John Wilson Million (1892-93; 1894-95)

Harry Alvin Millis (1898-99)

Wesley Clair Mitchell (1896-99)

James Ernest Moffat (1915-)

Harold Glenn Moulton (1909-11)

Walter Dudley Nash (1901-02)

Robert Samuel Padan (1900-01)

Eugene Bryan Patton (1905-08)

Clarence J. Primm (1908-10)

Yetta Scheftel (1913-14)

D. R. Scott (1911-12)

Frederick Snyder Seegmiller (1909-10)

George Cushing Sikes (1893-94)

Selden Frazer Smyser (1901-02)

Lewis Carlyle Sorrell (1915-)

George Asbury Stephens (1908-09)

Worthy Putnam Sterns (1897-1900)

Henry Waldgrave Stuart (1894-96)

Laurence Wardell Swan (1914-15)

William Walker Swanson (1905-08)

Archibald Wellington Taylor (1909-12)

John Giffin Thompson (1903-04)

George Gerard Tunell (1894-97)

Helen Honor Tunnicliff (1893-94)

Victor Nelson Valgren (1911-12)

Cleanthes Aristides Vassardakis (1911-12)

Thorstein B. Veblen (1892-93)

Merle Bowman Waltz (1895-96)

Samuel Roy Weaver (1911-12)

Victor J. West (1908-09)

Henry Kirke White (1893-94)

Murray Shipley Wildman (1901-04)

Henry Parker Willis (1895-98)

Ambrose Pare Winston (1893-94; 1896-97)

Anna Pritchett Youngman (1905-06; 1907-08)

___________________________________

GRADUATE STUDENTS

Abbott, Edith

Agate, William Richard

Akers, Dwight La Brae

Allen, William Harvey

Alvord, Clarence Walworth

Andrassy, Eugene Charles de

Apel, Paul Herman

Appell, Carl John

Apps, Elizabeth

Arbuthnot, Charles Criswell

Ardzrooni, Leon

Arnett, Trevor

Arnos, Edward Martin

Atcherson, Lucile

Ault, Otho Clifford

Bacon, Margaret Gray

Baker, Edward Donald

Balch, Emily Greene

Baldwin, James Fosdick

Ball, Ernest Everett

Barden, Carrie

Barnes, Jasper Converse

Barnes, Mabel Bonnell

Baron, Albert Heyen Nachman

Barrett, Don Carlos

Barrett, Roscoe Conkling

Bassett, Wilbur Wheeler

Bealin, Nella Ellery

Beall, Cornelia Morgan

Belknap, William Burke, Jr.

Bell, Hugh Samuel

Bell, James Warsau

Bell, Spurgeon

Bender, Christian Edward

Bengtson, Caroline

Benson, Madison Hawthorne

Berghoff, Lewis Windthorst

Bernstein, Nathan

Beyle, Herman Carey

Bischoff, Henry J.

Blachly, Clarence Day

Black, John Donald

Blankenship, Harry Alden

Bliss, George Morgan

Blotkin, Frank Ernest

Board, Willis Marvin

Bolinger, Walter Allen

Bond, William Scott

Bonnett, Clarence Elmore

Borden, Edwin Howard

Bosworth, William Baeder

Bournival, Phillippe

Bouroff, Basil Andreevitch

Boyce, Warren Scott

Boyd, Carl Evans

Boyd, Charles Samuel

Boyd, William Edington

Bozarth, Maud

Bradenburg, Samuel Jacob

Bradley, Frederick Oliver

Bramhall, Frederick Dennison

Brandenberger, William Samuel

Breckinridge, Roeliff Morton

Breckinridge, Sophonisba Preston

Bridgman, Donald Elliott

Bridgman, Isaac Martin

Briggs, Claude Porter

Brister, John Willard

Bristol, William Frank

Bristow, Oliver Martin

Brooks, Samuel Palmer

Brown, Fanny Chamberlain

Brown, Samuel Emmons

Brownson, Howard Gray

Bryant, William Cullen

Buchanan, Daniel Houston

Buchanan, James Shannon

Buechel, Fred A.

Bulkley, Herman Egbert

Bullock, Theodore Tunnison

Burnet, Francis Lowden

Burnham, Smith

Bushnell, Charles Joseph

Butts, Alfred Benjamin

Byers, Charles Howard

Byram, Perry Magnus

Cable, Joseph Ray

Calhoun, Wilbur Pere

Calvert, George Chambers

Cammack, Ira Insco

Canning, John Bennet

Capitsini, George Peter

Carlton, Frank Tracy

Carmack, James Abner

Carroll, John Murray

Carroll, Mollie Ray

Cartwright, Lawrence Randolph

Cassells, Gladys May

Catterall, Ralph Charles Henry

Chamberlain, Elizabeth Leland

Chapin, Lillian

Chen, Huan Chang

Chen, Po

Cheng, Pekao Tienton

Cheu, Beihan H.

Church, Clarence Cecil

Church, James Duncan

Clark, Fred Emerson

Clark, Henry Tefft

Clarkson, Matthew Alexander

Cleveland, Frederick Albert

Clifford, Wesley Nathaniel

Cole, Warren Bushnell

Collicott, Jacob Grant

Collins, Laurence Gerald

Colton, Ethan Theodore

Colvin, David Leigh

Colvin, William Elmer

Conover, William Bone

Cordell, Harry William

Cox, William Edward

Craig, Earl Robert

Cross, William Thomas

Crowther, Elizabeth

Cummings, John

Curran, James Harris

Cutler, Ward Augustus

Daniels, Eva Josephine

Darden, William Edward

Das, Rajani Kanta

Davenport, Frances Gardiner

Davenport, Herbert Joseph

Davidson, Margaret

Davis, Blanche

Davis, Katharine Bement

Davison, Leslie Leroy

Davison, Madeline

Dawley, Almena

Day, James Frank

DeCew, Louisa Carpenter

Dies, William Porter

Dodd, Walter Fairleigh

Dodge, LeVant

Donald, William John Alexander

Donnell, James Allister

Downey, Ezekiel Henry

Duncan, Carson Samuel

Duncan, George Edward

Duncan, Marcus Homer

Duncan, Margaret Louise

Dunford, Charles Scott

Dunlap, Arthur Beardsley

Dunn, Arthur William

Durand, Alice May

Durno, William Field

Duval, Louis Weyman

Dye, Charles Hutchinson

Dyer, Gustavus Walker

Dymond, Edith Luella

Dyson, Walter Mitchell

Easly, Walter Irving

Easton, William Oliver

Ebersole, John Franklin

Edwards, Anne Katherine

Eidson, Lambert

Ellis, Charles Hardin

Ellis, Mabel Brown

Elmore, Edward Bundette

Engle, John Franklin

Erickson, Ephraim Edward

Eslick, Theodore Parker

Eyerly, Elmer Kendall

Felton, Katharine Conway

Fine, Nathan

Fish, Alfred Lawrence

Fitzgerald, James Anderson

Fleming, Capen Alexander

Fleming, Herbert Easton

Fleming, William Ebenezer

Flocken, Ira Graessle

Foley, Roy William

Forrest, Jacob Dorsey

Fortney, Lorain

Foucht, Pearl Leroy

Francis, Bruce

Franklin, Frank George

Frazier, Edgar George

Freeark, Frederick Aaron

Freeman, Helen Alden

Freeman, Ralph Evans

Freer, Hamline Herbert

Galloway, Ida Gray

Galloway, Louis Caldwell

Gamble, George Hawthorne

Gardner, Emelyn Elizabeth

Gardner, William Howatt

Garver, Frederic Benjamin

Gebauer, George Rudolph

Geddes, Joseph Arch

Genheimer, Eli Thomas

Gephart, William Franklin

Glover, Ethel Adelia

Going, Margaret Chase

Goodhue, Everett Walton

Goodier, Floyd Tompkins

Graham, Theodore Finley

Granger, Marshall Allen

Granger, Roy T.

Grant, Laura Churchill

Gray, Edith Scott

Gray, Helen Sayr

Gray, Victor Evan

Green, Martha Florence

Gregg, Eugene Stuart

Gregory, Homer Ewart

Griffith, Elmer Cummings

Grimes, Anne Blanche

Grimson, Gudmundur

Griswold, George C.

Gromer, Samuel David

Grubb, Willard Neal

Guice, Herman Hunter

Guild, Charles Kelly

Guildford, Paul Willis

Guthrie, William Buck

Hagerty, James Edward

Hahne, Ernest Herman

Hall, Arnold Bennett

Hamilton, John Bascom

Hamilton, Robert Houston

Hammond, Alva Merwin

Hand, Chester Culver

Hanks, Ethel Edna

Harding, William Fletcher

Hardy, Eric West

Hardy, Sarah McLean

Hargrove, Pinkney Settle

Harris, Estelle

Harris, Ralph B.

Hastings, Cora Walton

Hatfield, Henry Rand

Haynes, Fanny Belle

Hearon, Cleo Carson

Hedrick, Wilbur Olin

Herger, Albert August Ernst

Herndon, Dallas Tabor

Herron, Belva Mary

Hewes, Amy

Hidden, Irad Morton

Hill, Harvey Thomas

Hinton, Vasco Giles

Hitchcock, William

Hodgdon, Mary Josephine

Hodge, Albert Claire

Hodgin, Cyrus Wilbur

Holman, Guy

Holmes, Marion

Honska, Otto James

Hope, Chauncey Edward

Hopkins, Albert Lafayette

Hopkins, John Lamar

Horner, John Turner

Hotchkiss, Irma Helen

Hourwich, Isaac A.

Howard, Earl Dean

Howe, Charles Roland

Howerth, Ira Woods

Hoxie, Robert Franklin

Hoyt, Homer

Hubbard, Howard Archibald

Hughes, Elizabeth

Humble, Henry William

Humphries, Louis Kyle

Hunt, Duane Garrison

Hunter, Estelle Belle

Huntington, Ellery Channing

Huth, Walter

Ito, Jiniro

Jacobson, Henry Anthony

Jalandoni, Jose Ledesma

Johnson, Edgar Hutchinson

Johnson, Edna Margaret

Jones, Austin Franklin

Jordan, Elijah John

Juchhoof, Frederik

Jude, George Washington

Kaiser, Arthur

Kammeyer, Julius Ernest

Karsten, Eleanor G.

Keeney, George Albert

Kelley, James Herbert

Kellor, Frances Alice

Kelly, Arthur Caryl

Kennedy, John Curtis

Kern, Robert Russ

Kerr, Robert Floyd

Kester, Roy Bernard

Kibler, Thomas Latimer

Kilpatrick, Elizabeth Smith

King, Benjamin Walter

King, Harriet Gertrude

King, James Alexander

King, James Stanhope

King, William Lyon Mackenzie

Kinsman, Delos Oscar

Kirkham, Francis Washington

Kling, Henry Frank

Kobayashi, Kaoru

Koepke, Frank Oswald

Kyrk, Hazel

Lamar, Clyde Park

Lamborn, William Henry

Landis, George Butts

Lane, Elmer Burr

Lang, Ellen Flora

Lange-Wilkes, Friedrich Fred

Larkin, Manuel Lippitt

La Rowe, Eugene

Latourette, Lyman Ezra

Lauck, William Jett

Lauder, Charles Edward

Laune, Ferris Finley

Lavery, Maud Ethel

Leacock, Stephen Butler

Learned, Henry Barrett

Leavitt, Orpha Euphemia

Le Drew, Henry Herbert

Lee, Mary Margaret

Leff, Samuel

Lefler, Shepherd

Legh, Sydney Cornwall

Lenhart, Harry Hull

Lennes, Nels Johan

Leonard, Walter Anderson

Lewis, Henry

Lewis, Neil Madison

Lindholm, Svanto Godfrey

Lippincott, Isaac

Lipsky, Harry Alexander

Lobdell, Charles Walter

Logan, Harold Amos

Logan, John Lockheart

Loomis, Milton Early

Loveless, Milo James

Lowry, Russell

Lucas, William Hardin

Luehring, Frederick William

Lurton, Freeman Ellsworth

McAfee, Lowell Mason

McClintock, Euphemia E.

MacClintock, Samuel Sweeny

McCord, Robert Bryan

McCrimmon, Abraham Lincoln

McCurdy, Raymond Scott

McCutchen, George

McDonald, Julius Flake

McDonald, Neil C.

McElroy, Charles Foster

McGaughey, Hester Grier

McGee, Walter Scott

MacGibbon, Duncan Alexander

Machen, John Gresham

McIntosh, Donald Howard

McKenzie, Floyd Stanley

McKinley, Alexander Daniel

McKinley, Gertrude

Kinney, Winfield Scott

McLean, Earl

MacLean, Murdoch Haddon

McLean, Simon James

Maclear, John Fulton

McMullen, Samuel

MacQueary, Thomas Howard

Magee, James Dysart

Magee, James Edward

Mangold, George Benjamin

Manly, Basil Maxwell

Mann, Albert Russell

Marsh, Benjamin Clarke

Martin, Asa Earl

Martin, William Chaille

Marxen, William Bartenick

Matheny, Francis Edmund

Mather, Arlen Raymond

Matlock, Ernest

Maw, Vung Tsoong

Maynard, Archibald Benton

Meade, Edward Sherwood

Meek, James Rariden

Menge, George John

Merrell, Oscar Joe

Merritt, Albert Newton

Merry, Paul Horace

Miller, Christian A.

Miller, Clarence Heath

Miller, Edmund Thornton

Miller, Frieda Segelke

Miller, Roy Newman

Miller, Wiley Austin

Million, John Wilson

Millis, Harry Alvin

Mills, Florence Howland

Mitchell, James Ennis

Mitchell, Wesley Clair

Moffat, James Ernest

Monroe, Paul

Montgomery, Louise

Montgomery, Stafford

Moore, Blaine Free

Moore, Stephen Halcut

Morris, Robert

Mosser, Stacy Carroll

Moulton, Harold Glenn

Mumford, Eben

Munn, Glenn Gaywaine

Nagley, Frank Alvin

Nash, Walter Dudley

Naylor, Augustine Francis

Neff, Andrew Love

Neill, Charles Patrick

Nesbitt, Charles Rudolph

Newton, John Reuben

Nida, William Lewis

Niece, Ralph Harter

Northrup, John Eldridge

Norton, Elvin Jensen

Norton, Grace Peloubet

Nourse, Edwin Griswold

Noyes, Edmund Spencer

O’Brien, Charlotte Louise

O’Dea, Paul Montgomery

O’Hara, Frank

Okada, George F.

Olin, Oscar Eugene

Padan, Robert Samuel

Paden, Thomas Hosack

Parker, Bertrand De Rolph, Jr.

Parker, Norman Sallee

Parker, Robert Lincoln

Parker, Ulysses Simpson

Parish, Charles O.

Paschal, Rosa Catherine

Patterson, Ernest Minor

Patton, Eugene Bryan

Pattrick, John Hezzie

Payne, Walter A.

Peabody, Susan Wade

Pease, Theodore Calvin

Pease, William Arthur

Perrine, Cora Belle

Peterson, Otto Edward

Phillips, Ulrich Bonnell

Pierce, Paul Skeels

Polzin, Benzamin Albert

Porter, Nathan Tanner

Potts, Charles Shirley

Powell, Bert Eardly

Powell, Leona Margaret

Prescott, Arthur Taylor

Price, Maude Azalie

Primm, Clarence J.

Putnam, James William

Putnam, Mary Burnham

Quaintance, Hadley Winfield

Rabenstein, Matilda Agnes

Radcliffe, Earle Warren

Rainey, Alice Hall

Reasoner, Florence

Reed, Ralph Johnston

Refsell, Oscar Norton

Reighard, John Jacob

Remick, Mary Ethel

Remp, Martin

Renninger, Warren Daub

Reticker, Ruth

Rice, Dorothy Lydia

Richardson, Russell

Richey, Mary Olive

Richter, Arthur William

Riley, Elmer Author

Ristine, Edward Ransom

Robertson, James Rood

Rogers, May Josephine

Rosenberg, Edwin J.

Rosseter, Edward Clark

Rygh, George Taylor

Sanderson, Dwight

Sandwich, Richard Lanning

Schafer, Joseph

Scheftel, Yetta

Schloss, Murray L.

Schmidt, Lydia Marie

Schmidt, Otto Gustave

Schmitt, Ella

Schoedinger, Fred H.

Schroeder, Charles Ward

Scott, D. R.

Scott, Edward Lee

Scott, James M.

Seegmiller, Frederick Snyder

Selian, Avedis Bedros

Sellery, George Clark

Senseman, Ira Roscoe

Seward, Ora Philander

Shaw, George Washington

Shelton, William Arthur

Shepherd, Fred Strong

Shoemaker, Lucile

Shue, William Daniel

Sikes, George Cushing

Simons, Frederick Myerle

Sinclair, James Grundy

Singer, Martin

Skelton, Oscar Douglas

Slemp, Campbell Bascom

Smith, Almeron Warren

Smith, Gerard Thomas

Smith, Guy Carlton

Smith, Roy

Smith, Walter Robertson

Smyser, Seldon Frazer

Snavely, Charles

Sorenson, Alban David

Sorrell, Lewis Carlyle

Sparks, Edwin Erle

Spencer, Simpson Edward

Splawn, William Marshall Walter

Sproul, Alexander Hugh

Stark, William Belle

Stearns, Tilden Hendricks

Steiner, Jesse Frederick

Stephens, George Asbury

Stephenson, George Malcolm

Sterns, Worthy Putnam

Stevens, William Spring

Stone, Raleigh Webster

Stoneberg, Philip John

Stoner, Thurman Wendell

Stowe, Frederick Arthur

Stuart, Henry Waldgrave

Styles, Albert Frederick

Sullivan, Margaret Veronica

Sundstrom, Ingeborg

Sutherland, Edwin Hardin

Swan, Laurence Wardell

Swanson, William Walker

Swift, Elizabeth Andrews

Sydenstricker, Edgar

Tajima, Kazuyoshi

Takimoto, Tanezo

Tan, Chang Lok

Tanner, Alvin Charles

Tarr, Stambury Ryrie

Taylor, Archibald Wellington

Taylor, William G.

Temple, Frances Congdon

Teng, Kwangtang

Textor, Lucy Elizabeth

Thomas, David Yancey

Thompson, Carl William

Thompson, Charles Sproull

Thompson, Edwin Elbert

Thompson, John Giffin

Thorne, Florence Calvert

Thornhill, Ernest Algier

Thurston, Henry Winfred

Tiffany, Orrin Edward

Tilton, Howard Cyrus

Towle, Ralph Egbert

Towne, George Lewis

Treleven, John Edward

Tunell, George Gerard

Tunnicliff, Helen Honor

Turner, Mary

Updegraff, Elizabeth

Valgren, Victor Nelson

Varkala, Joseph Paul

Vassardakis, Cleanthes Aristides

Veblen, Thorstein B.

Vernier, Chester Garfield

Vogt, Paul Leroy

Vondracek, Olga Olive

Waldo, Karl Douglas

Waldorf, Lee

Waldron, George Burnside

Walker, Edson Granville

Walling, William English

Walrath, Albert Leland

Waltz, Merle Bowman

Wardlow, Chester Cameron

Ware, Richard

Warren, Henry Kimball

Warren, Worcester

Watson, Robert Eli

Watts, Cicero Floyd

Weaver, Samuel Roy

Webster, Arthur Ferdinand

Webster, William Clarence

Weisman, Russell

Wells, Emilie Louise

Wells, Oliver Edwin

West, Max

West, Victor J.

Westlake, Ruby Moss

Weston, Jessie Beatrice

Wethington, Joseph Francis

Whipple, Elliot

Whitaker, Hobart Karl

Whitcomb, Adele

White, Francis Harding

White, Henry Kirke

White, Laura Amanda

Whited, Oric Ogilvie

Wilcox, William Craig

Wildman, Murray Shipley

Willard, Laura

Williams, Arthur Rowland

Williams, Charles Byron

Williams, Frank North

Williams, John William

Williams, Pelagius

Willis, Henry Parker

Wilson, Eugene Alonzo

Winans, Clarence Henry

Winston, Ambrose Pare

Winston, James Edward

Wirt, William Albert

Witmer, John Earl

Woods, Erville Bartlett

Woolley, Edwin Campbell

Wright, Helen Russell

Yahn, Harold George

Yeisaku, Kominami

Youngman, Anna Pritchett

Zaring, Aziel Floyd

Zee, Treusinn Zoen

Zimmerman, John Franklin

___________________________________

 

DOCTORS OF PHILOSOPHY OF THE UNIVERSITY OF CHICAGO
DEPARTMENT OF POLITICAL ECONOMY

Edith Abbott (1905)

A Statistical Study of the Wages of Unskilled Labor in the United States, 1830-1900.

Charles Criswell Arbuthnot (1903)

The Development of the Corporation and the Entrepreneur Function.

Donald Elliott Bridgman (1907)

Economic Causes of Large Fortunes.

John Cummings (1894)

The Poor Law System of the United States.

Herbert Joseph Davenport (1898)

The French War Indemnity.

Katharine Bement Davis (1900)

Causes Affecting the Standard of Living and Wages.

William John Alexander Donald (1914)

The History of the Canadian Iron and Steel Industry.

Henry Rand Hatfield (1897)

Municipal Bonding in the United States.

Earl Dean Howard (1905)

The Recent Industrial Progress of Germany.

Robert Franklin Hoxie (1905)

An Analysis of the Concepts of Demand and Supply in Their Relation to Market Price.

Edgar Hutchinson Johnson (1910)

The Economics of Henry George’s Progress and Poverty.

Stephen Butler Leacock (1903)

The Doctrine of Laissez Faire.

Isaac Lippincott (1912)

The Industrial History of the Ohio Valley to 1860.

Duncan Alexander MacGibbon (1915)

Railway Rates and the Canadian Railway Commission.

Simon James McLean (1897)

The Railway Policy of Canada.

James Dysart Magee (1913)

Money and Prices: A Statistical Study of Price Movements.

Albert Newton Merritt (1906)

Federal Regulation of Railway Rates.

Harry Alvin Millis (1899)

History of the Finances of the City of Chicago.

Wesley Clair Mitchell (1899)

History of the United States Notes.

Harold Glenn Moulton (1914)

Waterways versus Railways.

Edwin Griswold Nourse (1915)

A Study in Market Mechanism as a Factor in Price Determination.

Robert Samuel Padan (1901)

Studies in Interest.

Eugene Bryan Patton (1908)

The Resumption of Specie Payment in 1879.

Oscar Douglas Skelton (1908)

An Examination of Marxian Theory.

George Asbury Stephens (1909)

Influence of Trade Education upon Wages.

Worthy Putnam Sterns (1900)

Studies in the Foreign Trade of the United States.

William Walker Swanson (1908)

The Establishment of the National Banking System.

George Gerard Tunell (1897)

Transportation on the Great Lakes of North America.

Murray Shipley Wildman (1904)

The Economic and Social Conditions Which Explain Inflation Movements in the United States.

Henry Parker Willis (1898)

A History of the Latin Monetary Union.

Anna Pritchett Youngman (1908)

The Economic Causes of Large Fortunes.

___________________________________

 

A STATISTICAL RECORD OF GROWTH
1892-1916

1916_UCRecordGrowth

 

Source: James Laurence Laughlin, Twenty-Five Years of the Department of Political Economy, University of Chicago. Chicago: Privately printed, 1916.

Image Source: “JLL” initials from the title page, ibid.

 

 

Categories
Chicago Courses Suggested Reading Syllabus

Amherst. Honors Section of Introductory Economics. Paul H. Douglas, 1925

Paul H. Douglas left the University of Chicago to take a job at Amherst in the mid-1920s because his wife Dorothy was unable to get a job at the University of Chicago due to nepotism rules of that time and she found a job for herself at Smith College in Massachusetts. There he began his collaboration with the mathematician Charles Wiggins Cobb that resulted in the statistical fitting of the specification of the production function now named after them. See Cobb and Douglas,  “A Theory of Production”, AER 1920.

 I found the following carbon copy of the report Douglas wrote about his pedagogic experiment with an honors section of introductory economics at Amherst during the second semester of the 1924-25 academic year in the papers of the head of the economics department at the University of Chicago in 1925. Besides the reading list of supplemental reading for his honors section, Douglas includes “teaching evaluations” written by the students.

 _______________________________________

The University of Chicago
The School of Commerce and Administration

September 26, 1925

 

Professor L. C. Marshall
University of Chicago
Chicago, Illinois

Dear Professor Marshall:

I am enclosing a report of the Honors Section which I conducted in Economics I last year, which you may find of interest, even at this late date.

Faithfully yours,
[signed]
Paul H. Douglas

PHD:EPR

 

_______________________________________

Amherst, Mass.
June 18, 1925

 

Report to the President and the Instruction Committee of Amherst College on the Special Honors Section given in Economics I during the year 1924-1925.

I. Composition of Group

With the consent of the President and the Dean, the Special Honors Section was set up in Economics I immediately after New Years 1925. The first men invited to join were Messrs. W. B. Carter, Jr. [William Harrison Carter, Jr. (Class of 1926) from Woodhaven, N.Y.], Sperry Butler [Sperry Butler (Class of 1926) from Hubbard Woods, Illinois], O. R. Pilat [Oliver Ramsey Pilat (Class of 1926) from New York, N.Y.], M. O. Damon [Mason Orne Damon (Class of 1926) from Ft. Dodge, Iowa], W. J. Kyle [William Joseph Kyle, Jr. (Class of 1926) from Waynesburg, Pennsylvania], and E. S. Nole [sic. Everett Stearns Noble (Class of 1926) from Coconut Grove, Florida]; these men were all on the Dean’s List. A few weeks later Douglas Tomkins [Douglas Tomkins (Class of 1926) from Brooklyn, N.Y.] was added with the approval of the Dean. These men were excused from attending the regular class exercises and met one evening a week in the Economic Seminar room with the instructor. These sessions ranged from two to three and one-half hours in length.

 

II. Work Covered

The group read the text used by the ordinary section in the course, namely, Taussig’s Principles of Economics, 2 volumes, but the chief reading was done in additional assignments amounting on the whole to approximately one book a week. These other readings were in the main the cream of the literature on the economic topics considered. The list of supplementary reading covered was as follows:

First week Bagehot, “Lombard Street;” Kemmerer, “The A B C of the Federal Reserve System.”
Second Week Selected chapters from Mitchell, “Business Cycles.”
Third Week Fisher, “Stabilizing the Dollar;” Keynes, “A Tract on Monetary Reform.”
Fourth Week One of the following: Withers, “Money Changing;” Clare, “A B C of Foreign Exchange;” Cross, “Domestic and Foreign Exchange: Theory and Practice.”
Fifth Week Viner, “Dumping;” and discussion of text of McNary-Haugen Bill
[JPE 1922, part I, JPE 1922, part II]
Sixth Week Adam Smith, “Wealth of Nations,” Book IV, Chapter 2.
Seventh Week Taussig, “Some Aspects of the Tariff Problem” Chapter I or II, and “Tariff, Free Trade, and Reciprocity.”
Eighth Week Wolfe, “[Savers’] Surplus and the Interest Rate,” Quarterly Journal of Economics 1920; Selected Chapters from Clark, “Distribution of Wealth.”
Ninth Week Hobson, “Economics of Unemployment.”
Tenth Week Ricardo. “Principles of Political Economy,” Chapter 2.
Selected Chapters from Henry George, “Progress and Poverty.”
Eleventh Week Adam Smith on Differences in Wages, Book I, Chapter 10, part 1.
Twelfth Week The Basic Rate of Wages; Selected chapters from Clark, “Distribution of Wealth.”
Thirteenth Week Population—Malthus, “Essay on Principle of Population. Comparative chapters from the 1st and 2nd editions. [first edition, sixth edition]
Also one of the following: Carr-Saunders, “The Population Problem,” or J. R. Smith, “The World’s Food Resources.”
Fourteenth Week Profits—Either Hardy, “Risk and Risk Bearing,” or Knight, “Risk, Uncertainty and Profit.”
Fifteenth Week Mitchell, King and Knauth; “Incomes in the United States.” [Vol. I Summary] [Vol. II Detailed Report]
Sixteenth Week (1) Webb, “Industrial Democracy.” Chapter on “Higgling on the Market;” and (2) Fitch, “Causes of Industrial Unrest;” or Hoxie “Trade Unionism in the United States.”
Seventeenth Week Douglas, “Wages and the Family.”
Eighteenth Week Ripley, “Railway Problems, “ 1st volume; or Acworth, “Elements of Railway Economics.”
Nineteenth Week Either Haney, “Business Organization and Combination,” or Jones, “The Trust Problem.”
Twentieth Week Selected Chapters from Seligman, “Essays in Taxation.”

The members of the group seemed to read virtually all the assignments and to canvas the field thoroughly.

 

III. Personal Appraisal of Work

Personally I was very much pleased with the results of the work. The group seemed to me to cover several times as much ground as the men in the three ordinary sections of the class; and the work was much more thoroughly treated than it would have been had they been compelled to move in the lock-step of the ordinary sections. As a by-product of the work one of the men, Mr. Butler, worked out an algebraic statement of the Ricardian Theory of Distribution; to my knowledge, this has never before been done in the literature of Economics. In conjunction with Mr. Carter, he also worked out a graph of various elasticities of demand representing them on both an absolute and logarithmic scale. The group as a whole did brilliant work on the final examination which was fare more severe than that given to the rest of the class. Four men secured a grade of ninety-five or better, even with the stringent marking that I applied. Two of the men received low nineties, one of these men having been handicapped by illness. The seventh member, who was the weakest person in the group passed the final with only a grade of 78.

 

IV. Appraisal by Members of the Class

I asked the various members of the class to give me their criticisms of the work done and I am attaching those written statements.

 

Question One: Have you enjoyed meeting with the group more than you did as a member of an ordinary section? Do you think you have gained a greater knowledge of economics as a result?

“Meeting in the smaller section has been far more enjoyable than the regular class, and I believe that I have gained a greater knowledge of economics as a result. I believe that being able to talk freely with the instructor and members of a small group such as ours gives a student a chance not only to clarify himself on doubtful points, but to get the opinion of others on topics in which he is especially interested. This is impossible in the large classes, where discussion has to be conducted for the benefit of the whole section.
“Moreover, the longer classes must necessarily be retarded, by their very size, and by the fact that the class as a whole can go no faster (that is, cover no more ground) than the least capable or least industrious members. I think this is often a cause for lack of interest among the men who are able to do advanced work.”

“I have not only enjoyed meeting with the group more than the regular classes, but feel that I have derived greater benefit thereby.”

“I am very glad to have an opportunity to express myself on the matter of the honors section in Economics 1. I feel that it has been the most instructive and interesting course that I have taken at Amherst. In the first place, the group has been small enough so that each of us could have the difficulties which he encountered, explained and discussed by the remainder of the group. Then too, the group was not only small, but uniform, so that it was unnecessary for some members to be held back by other slower members, as is the case in the ordinary section. Undoubtedly we have covered more ground, and covered it more thoroughly, than we could have in the regular class.”

“My time in the honor section has been more thoroughly utilized and consequently more enjoyable than in the regular class. I feel certain that I have learned more economics, as a result.”

“The answer is emphatically yes—both in knowledge and enjoyment the honors section has far surpassed the ordinary class meeting-to this I attribute the attitude of the instructor which I think in any such course must be decisive.”

“I feel sure that as a result of the meetings with the group I have gained a much clearer and more comprehensive knowledge of Economics. This was the result partly of the discussions on the various topics and partly of a heightened interest in the course. A true interest in the subject was aroused which is impossible in the regular class meetings.”

“That I have enjoyed meeting with the group more than with the ordinary section is beyond question. Being an ardent advocate of the honors system I am delighted to find it as agreeable and valuable in practice as in theory. Before this morning (the time of the examination) I was a bit doubtful whether I actually knew more economics than if I had stayed in the regular section. While there were parts of the examination which were very complicated, I didn’t once feel that I was completely at a loss although I am aware of mistakes I may have made. As to the factual knowledge of the course I believe that probably exact definitions and the details of various parts may at this moment be better known by those in the regular division, although I would wager I have a better grasp of the fundamentals, and a clearer idea of the relation of the various factors than most of the regular members. Moreover I believe they will stick whereas the definitions and details will quickly fade from the memories of those who did not have the opportunity to tie up these principles by their application to present day conditions as we did. Therefore I feel that I know more real economics than I would have otherwise.”

 

Question Two: What is the relative amount of work which you have done in the honors section as compared with that which you did before you entered it?

“It was necessary to do more work in the honor section, for the reasons which are stated in the answer to question one. Also, there is considerable of the element of pride involved; I found that if I didn’t know a thing that others members of the section did, I was, ashamed of myself. Then, too, the honor section, with its freedom of discussion, is conducive to thinking, which is, after all, rather rare among Amherst students. More men in regular classes drop the subject as soon as they have left the class room. I believe that a little thought is particularly valuable in economics, for after the principles are grasped, a little consideration permits them to be developed and applied. I consider this “studying” of a sort more valuable than the perusal of textbooks, though the latter is essential to the former.”

“I have done considerably more reading after having been placed in the group division.”

“I have certainly done more work than I did in the regular section. Since we have not been forced to follow a fixed plan or outline of work, many interesting topics have come up which would have passed by otherwise. In general I have done the work assigned to the regular class plus reading in at least one other book. Since all the members of the group have been able to cover more work than is give, or could be given, in the ordinary section, we have been able to talk over more different books and points of view, than we could have in the regular section where the discussion, to benefit the class as a whole, must necessarily be limited by the reading capacity of the slower members. As the work has been more interesting, the extra time required has been no hardship, but has seemed to be especially remunerative.”

“I have spent from one to two additional hours a week for this section.”

“In actual time I have not done much more; but the type of work has been of a decidedly different character. Instead of rather automatic memorizing has come a feeling that this thing must be thought out independently. This sounds platitudinous, but it is true.”

“The amount of work I did in preparation for the group meetings was considerably greater than that done for the regular class meetings at the beginning of the year.”

“I have generally spent all of Monday afternoon and frequently other hours on the seminar work. This is somewhat in excess of the time needed for the regular class work.”

Question Three: As the work was given out, did it seem excessive or could more have been done conveniently?

“I could have conveniently done more work than was assigned though the hour of the section was not the best possible for me.”

“The work as assigned did not seem excessive.”

“The work did not seem excessive. Except that my schedule was unusually heavy this year, I could readily have done more.”

“The assignments seem well-proportioned. I do not think more would be advisable, however.”

“The work as assigned did at times seem excessive—at least to do thoroughly–, but this was seldom the case.”

“In general the work was not excessive usually being of an elastic nature above a certain minimum. I do not think that under our present system of college education in which every man who is at all able is expected to enter a host of student activities, I could have conveniently put in more time on the work. There were occasions when I did more and others when I did less than the average above mentioned, as the pressure of work in activities varied.”

 

Question Four: Would you favor the continuance of an honors section and if so what suggestions would you have for the improvement of the work?

“I am strongly in favor of a continuance of this system. It enables men who can and will do work that is more advanced to free themselves from the handicaps mentioned in the answer to question one. It certainly deserves a further trial, at least.”

“I am very strongly in favor of the continuance of such honor sections. We were able to pass over hurriedly some of the more elemental and obvious material, and as a result had more time for the discussion of the complex and deeper questions. A greater interest in the material discussed was aroused, with me at least, because of the removal of the drive and compulsion of the ordinary class-room.”

“I should favor strongly the continuance of an honors section, altho I realize it means much extra work for some member of the Faculty. It seems to me that such a group should not have more that eight members and that these members should not be picked before the middle of the first term. I can offer no suggestions for the improvement of the work. But I believe that this plan has not only benefitted the members of the honors section, but all the members of the ordinary section.”

“I am heartily in favor of an honors section.
“Perhaps the work might be improved by further splitting of the topics studied, allowing each student to specialize on one phase. I feel a general lack, in all my courses, of definite and exact knowledge. I think that possibly more thorough study is a limited field supplemented by well-informed discussion from several points of view would help to clarify my all too vague impressions.”

“Yes!! By all means. Caution: No more than approximately those present now should be admitted in any such section.
“The men must be genuinely interested—not those looking for escape from work—for this reason the selection of the group might well be made on the basis of the first term’s work as at present.
“I like the idea of one man leading the section each week—with a paper preferably which takes a definite stand. This ought to encourage discussion, and occasionally, controversy.”

“Yes, I would favor the continuance of such sections in Economics and other subjects also. I feel that I have derived more enjoyment and more value out of the meetings with the group than I have in any other course I have taken in college.”

“I would most certainly favor the continuance of an honors section in this,–and the introduction of the plan in other courses where the material admitted of treatment of this type. I think each group should be chosen by the professor from his regular group on the combined basis of marks, interest and ability. There are other courses in Amherst where the drag of the work due to the time necessary to explain and re-explain various fundamental phases of the work is even more noticeable than in the regular sections of the economics class. Could those who were fortunate enough to be able to go ahead without this repetition, be placed in a special section similar to our honors group, I feel sure they at least would find their college work vastly more inspiring and helpful.

“There is one suggestion I should like to make which I think might add somewhat to the value of such work. It is that any such group should carry on some definite piece of constructive investigation along the line of the course which appears most interesting to them. Each might contribute a paper or all work together under the direction of the professor on such a research. I believe it would serve to centralize much of the other work done. This might be done by the devotion of an occasional meeting to gathering together such special work at various stages in its progress. Otherwise I see very little which could be desired more than we have had this year.”

_______________________________________

From the Amherst College Catalog 1924/1925

Economics 1. Principles of economics. The present industrial system with special reference to American conditions. A study of the development of the main features of present industrial society, value and distribution and a number of modern social problems.

Elective for Juniors.

  1. Mon., Tu., Wed., 2.00, Chapel 5.
  2. Mon., Tu., 8.35, Thu., 9.30, Chapel 4.
  3. Wed., Sat., 9.30, Fri., 3.00, Chapel 5.

Professor Douglas and Mr. Taylor. [George Rogers Taylor, Ph.D., Instructor in Economics and Political Science]

_______________________________________

 

Sources:

The University of Chicago Archives. Department of Economics. Records. Box 6, Folder 7.
Amherst College Catalog 1924/25, p. 33, 81, 147ff.

 

Image Source: Amherst College. Olio 1926, p. 36.

Categories
Chicago Curriculum Fields

Chicago. Advanced General Survey Courses in Economics. Memo, 1926

The memo of this posting was written by the head of the Chicago department of economics, Leon Carroll Marshall. I have chosen this to begin a category “Fields”. The groups named below were tasked with preparing bibliographies, not for use in the survey courses, but to make explicit the level of preparation expected of students in those courses. Cox and Mints by the following summer apparently established “Money and banking” as a field distinct from business finance (a memo in the same folder dated August 9, 1927).  It is also interesting to note that Marshall seems to have thought it important to pair economics and business in as many fields as he could.

______________________

November 30, 1926

Memorandum from L. C. Marshall to All Persons Mentioned Herein:

The problem attacked in this memorandum is that of carrying through effectively our arrangements with respect to our advanced general survey courses—courses that in the past we have sometimes referred to as “Introduction to the Graduate Study of X,” although we are not now following this terminology.

The following background facts will need to be kept in mind:

  1. We are to have introductory point of view courses designed to give an organic view of the Economic Order. These courses are numbered 102, 103, 104.
  2. Our next range of courses is designed primarily to deal with method. This range includes: 1. Economic History; 2. Statistics; 3. Accounting; 4. Intermediate Theory.
  3. The foregoing seven courses are the only courses for which we assume responsibility as far as the ordinary [Arts and Literature] undergraduate is concerned. It may well be that from time to time some member of the staff will be interested in giving for undergraduates a course on some live problem of the day, but this is an exceptional matter and not a matter of our standard arrangement.
  4. Our best undergraduates may move on to the type of courses referred to above in the first paragraph, such as courses 330, 340, 335, 345, etc. In general the prerequisites for admission to these courses (as far a undergraduates are concerned) would be a certain number of majors in our work plus 27 majors with an average of B. Under the regulations which the Graduate Faculty has laid down, students who have less than 27 majors could not be admitted to these courses except with the consent of the group and Dean Laing.

 

It is highly essential that our work in these advanced survey courses such as 330, 340, 335, 345, etc. shall:

  1. Really assume the method courses mentioned above: really be conducted at a level which assumes that the student possesses certain techniques.
  2. Really assume an adequate background of subject-matter content.

 

Will the person whose name is underscored in each group undertake (as promptly as reasonably may be) the responsibility of conducting conferences designed

  1. To lead to explicit definite arrangements looking toward the actual utilization of the earlier method courses in these advance survey courses
  2. To prepare a bibliography that can be mimeographed and placed in each student’s hands who enters one of these advanced survey courses. This bibliography is not to be a bibliography of the course (that is a separate matter) but a bibliography of what is assumed by way of preparation for the course. Whether a somewhat different bibliography should be made for the Economics course and the Business course in a given field is left for each group to discuss. Personally I hope that it will be a single bibliography for the two. Mr. Palyi suggests the desirability of a bibliographical article (worthy of publication) for each field. This seems to me an admirable suggestion—one difficult to resist.

 

Will each leader of the group referred to below please put the outcome of your discussion in writing and send to the undersigned? It is to be hoped that you will find other matters to report upon in addition to the foregoing.

GROUPS

  1. The Financial System and Financial Administration

Meech, Mints, Cox, Palyi

  1. Labor and Personnel Administration

Douglas, Millis, Stone, Kornhauser

  1. The Market and the Administration of Marketing

Palmer, Duddy, Barnes, Dinsmore

  1. Risk and Its Administration

Nerlove, Cox, Millis, Mints

  1. Transportation, Communication and Traffic Administration

Sorrell, Wright, Duddy, Douglas

  1. Government Finance

Viner, Millis, Douglas, Stone

  1. Population and the Standard of Living

Kyrk, Douglas, Viner

  1. Resources, Technology and the Administration of Production

Mitchell, Daines, McKinsey

 

The following fields are not included in this memorandum either because of specific course prerequisites or because of obvious difficulties in the case:

  1. Economic Theory and Principles of Administration
  2. Statistics and Accounting
  3. Economic History and Historical Method
  4. Social Direction and Control of Economic Activity.

 

Source: University of Chicago Archives. Department of Economics, Records. Box 22, Folder 6.

Image Source: Leon Carroll Marshall. University of Chicago Photographic Archive, apf1-04114, Special Collections Research Center, University of Chicago Library.

Categories
Chicago Columbia Cornell Harvard Wisconsin

Chicago Economics’ Subjective Self-Ranking in 1913

The Dean of the University of Chicago’s College of Commerce and Administration, L. C. Marshall, submitted a proposal October 30, 1913 to President Harry Pratt Judson of the University of Chicago that outlined immediate steps for a transition from temporary arrangements for the College of Commerce and Administration to a permanent policy to go into effect 1914-15. Part of Marshall’s proposal addressed the issue of “the preparation of a student constituency” which besides outreach to entering freshmen and advanced undergraduates included the item “attracting graduate students”. The appendix transcribed for this posting presents a subjective ranking of the factors involved in drawing economics graduate students to the University of Chicago.

The overall ranking was determined by adding the ranks for seven factors with two of those factors given a double-weight.

According to L. C. Marshall, the scholarly reputation of Chicago in economics in 1913 put it in fifth place behind Columbia, Harvard, Cornell and Wisconsin.

_____________________________

Appendix I

AN ESTIMATE OF THE RANKING OF SIX INSTITUTIONS IN ABILITY TO DRAW GRADUATE STUDENTS IN ECONOMICS

Notes:

  1. This is an attempt to estimate how the institutions are regarded by prospective graduate students and not an attempt to estimate real merit.
  2. The estimate is based on the ranking according to the seven main items which are likely to draw students: I. Geographical location; II. Reputation for discipline given; III. General reputation of social science departments; IV. Scholarly reputation of economics department; V. Reputation for placing men; VI. Opportunities for self-support; and VII. Influence of Teachers out.
  3. Two items are weighted, viz; VI. Opportunities for self-support, and VII. Influence of teachers out.

I.

II.

Geographical Location

Reputation for Discipline given
1  Chicago
2  Columbia
3  Harvard
4  Wisconsin
5  Cornell
6  Illinois		 1  Harvard
2  Chicago
3  Columbia
4  Wisconsin
5  Cornell
6  Illinois

III.

IV.

General Reputation of Social Science Departments

Scholarly Reputation of Economics Department
1  Columbia
2  Harvard
3  Wisconsin
4  Chicago
5  Cornell
6  Illinois		 1  Columbia
2  Harvard
3  Cornell
4  Wisconsin
5  Chicago
6  Illinois

V.

VI.

Reputation for Placing Men

Opportunities for Self-support
(weighted by 2)
1  Columbia
2  Harvard
3  Wisconsin
4  Chicago
5  Cornell
6  Illinois		 1  Harvard
2  Wisconsin
3  Columbia
4  Illinois
5  Chicago
6  Cornell

VII.

VIII.

Influence of Teachers out
(weighted by 2)

Final Ranking and Points
1  Harvard
2  Columbia
3  Wisconsin
4  Cornell
5  Chicago
6  Illinois		 1  Harvard              14
2  Columbia           18
3  Wisconsin          28
4  Chicago              36
5  Cornell               43
6  Illinois                50

Comments:

No. I is eminently satisfactory

No. II will see Chicago at the head of the list when III, IV, and VII have been remedied

No. III and IV require (a) on the administrative side, carrying through the plans of the College of Commerce and Administration; (b) the earning of scholarly reputation by the members of the department

No. V will care for itself. Chicago will be at the top of this list in five years if we remedy III, IV, VI, and VII.

No. VI is a very serious matter, and requires consideration too detailed to be attempted here

No. VII will not be overcome for ten years.

 

Source: University of Chicago Archives. Department of Economics Records, Box 14, Folder 13

Image Source:  Picture of Dean Leon C. Marshall from University of Chicago Photographic Archive, apf1-04113, Special Collections Research Center, University of Chicago Library.