Tag: Taussig

Categories
Economist Market Economists Harvard Pennsylvania Williams

Harvard. Job placements of economics PhDs. Jewish candidates, 1928-29

 

In this post I provide transcriptions of four letters concerning Harvard Ph.D.s on the job market. Two of candidates (Mandell Morton Bober and Richard Vincent Gilbert) were Jewish and this was considered an important characteristic to signal to prospective employers. Nothing from the Harvard side indicates anything other than a willingness to provide information that would be revealed in the process of recruitment anyway. In an earlier post we could read a similar letter by Allyn Young’s on behalf of his protégé Arthur William Marget for a position at the University of Chicago in 1927. In the cases below we again see anti-Jewish prejudice on the demand side of the market for academic economists.

Before getting to the letters (that are also interesting for providing a glimpse into job placement at the time), I provide a bit of information about each of the Harvard alumni discussed.

______________

Harvard Ph.Ds discussed

Beach, Walter Edwards

Harvard, Ph.D. in Economics, 1929.
Thesis title: International gold movements in relation to business cycles.
A.B. Stanford University, 1922; A.M. Harvard University.
1929. Instructor in Economics and Tutor in the Division of History, Government, and Economics, Harvard University.

Bober, Mandell Morton

Harvard, Ph.D. in Economics, 1925.
Thesis title: Karl Marx’s interpretation of history.
S.B. University of Montana, 1918; A.M. Harvard University, 1920.
1925. Instructor in Economics, Boston University.
1926. Instructor in Economics. and Tutor in the Division of History, Government, and Economics, Harvard University. Cambridge, Mass.

Gilbert, Richard Vincent

Harvard, Ph.D. in Economics, 1930.
Thesis title: Theory of International Payments.
S.B. Harvard University, 1923; A.M. Harvard University, 1925.

Hohman, Elmo Paul

Harvard, Ph.D. in Economics, 1925.
Thesis title: The American whaleman: a study of the conditions of labor in the whaling industry, 1785-1885.
A.B. University of Illinois, 1916; A.M. University of Illinois, 1917; A.M. Harvard University, 1920.
1925. Assistant Professor of Economics, Northwestern University.
1926. Assistant Professor of Economics, Northwestern University. Evanston, Ill.

Patton, Harald Smith

Harvard, Ph.D. in Economics, 1926.
Thesis Title: Grain growers’ cooperation in Western Canada.
A.B. University of Toronto, 1912; A.M. Harvard University, 1921.
1926. Associate Professor of Economics, University of Cincinnati. Cincinnati, O.

Remer, Charles Frederick

Harvard, Ph.D. in Economics, 1923.
Thesis title: The foreign trade of China.
A.B. University of Minnesota, 1908; A.M. Harvard University, 1917.
1923. Instructor in Economics, and Tutor in the Division of History, Government, and Economics, Harvard University.
1926. Orrin Sage Professor of Economics, Williams College. Williamstown, Mass.

Roberts, Christopher

Harvard, Ph.D. in Economics, 1927.
Thesis title: The History of the Middlesex Canal.
S.B. Haverford College, 1921; A.M. Harvard University 1922.
1927. Instructor in Economics and Tutor in the Division of History, Government, and Economics, Harvard University.

Smith, Walter Buckingham

Harvard, Ph.D. in Economics, 1928.
Thesis title: Money and prices in the United States from 1802 to 1820.
A.B. Oberlin College, 1917; A. M. Harvard University, 1924.
1928. Assistant Professor Economics, Wellesley College.

Taylor, Overton Hume

Harvard, Ph.D. in Economics, 1928.
Thesis title: The idea of a Natural Order in Early Modern Economic Thought.
A.B. University of Colorado 1921.
1928. Instructor in Economics and Tutor in the Division of History, Government, and Economics, Harvard University.

 

Source: Harvard University. Doctors of Philosophy and Doctors of Science Who have received their Degree in Course from Harvard University, 1873-1926, with the Titles of their Theses. Cambridge: 1926. Also Annual Reports of the President of Harvard College.

______________

Carbon copy
Possible candidates for Charles Frederick Remer successor at Williams College

June 19, 1928.

Dear Professor Taussig:

Professor Burbank has asked me to write to you in answer to your letter of the 13th regarding possibilities for Remer’s position at Williams.

He believes that Bober can be recommended in the highest terms, but that the matter of his race should be mentioned. Gilbert, now at Rochester, is very able and in spite of the fact that he still has to complete his work for the Ph.D., might well be considered. He does not think so very highly of Patton; Hohman at Northwestern is fully as good.

He wonders what you would say regarding Walter Smith. He has some personal qualities that might cause trouble at Williamstown, but he is fully as capable as Remer.

If Professor Bullock has not left for Europe he suggests that he should be consulted since he knows the Williamstown situation very well.

Sincerely yours,

[unsigned, departmental secretary?]

______________

 

Carbon copy
Possible candidates for position at St. Lawrence University

January 28, 1929.

My dear Mr. Cram:

I have your note regarding the position at St. Lawrence University.

Beach probably will not go out next year. He wishes to stay here another year, and if we can make adequate provision for him we will do so.

If St. Lawrence is insistent upon the Ph.D you might recommend in very strong terms Christopher Roberts. If they will take a Jew you can recommend in superlative terms Professor M. M. Bober, now at Lawrence College; and also you might recommend under the above conditions, but perhaps less strongly R. V. Gilbert whom we expect to take the Ph.D this June.

However, before making any recommendations you should have the salary terms, the amount of teaching required, and the subjects to be taught.

Very sincerely,

H.H. Burbank.

HHB:BR

______________

Possible candidate for position at the Wharton School, University of Pennsylvania

University of Pennsylvania
Philadelphia

Wharton School of Finance and Commerce

May 16, 1929.

Professor H. H. Burbank
Department of Economics
Harvard University
Cambridge, Mass.

My dear Professor Burbank:

Thanks for your letter of May 8, informing me that Mr. Gilbert is of Jewish extraction. Professor Taussig had already told me that such was the case.

However, this will make no difference to us so long as his personality and bearing are attractive.

I am giving serious consideration to Mr. Gilbert, along with two other men who have been suggested to me from other sources. If Gilbert receives his Ph.D. this year, we may make him an offer, but we cannot consider him if he has not completed his work for the doctorate.

Sincerely yours,

[signed|
Raymond T. Bye
Acting Chairman
Department of Economics

RTB:T

______________

Possible candidate for position at the Wharton School, University of Pennsylvania (cont.)

University of Pennsylvania
Philadelphia

Wharton School of Finance and Commerce

June 17, 1929.

Professor H. H. Burbank
Department of Economics
Harvard University
Cambridge, Mass.

My dear Professor Burbank:

I hope that I did not cause you and your colleagues any inconvenience in pressing you and Dr. [O. H.] Taylor for an immediate decision on our offer to him. Things had dragged along here so long that I felt something must be done quickly and I know that I had prepared both Dr. Taylor and you for the possibility of our making him an offer, so that I felt it would not be difficult for you to make arrangements on short notice.

When I met you in Boston I was so well impressed with what you and Professor Vanderblue told me about Dr. Bober that I arranged for him to come here to meet us. We were all favorably impressed and I made every effort to secure his appointment to the position, but the Provost of the University was not willing to recommend a person of the Jewish race, so I had to give him up. It was then that I made the offer to Taylor. I think Dr. Taylor will fit into our problem for next year very nicely, for we need someone primarily to teach graduate courses. I question, however, whether we shall want to keep him permanently because, as I understand it, he is less effective as an undergraduate teacher. That is why I asked you to let him go on a year’s leave of absence. However, it is possible that the men here may like him so much that they will want to keep him permanently if he will stay. That will be for Professor E. M. Patterson to decide. He will be back as chairman of the department next year.

I want to thank you most cordially for your very material assistance in helping me to find a man to fill the vacancy here.

Sincerely yours,
[signed]
Raymond T. Bye
Acting Chairman
Department of Economics

RTB:T

 

Source:  Harvard University Archives. Department of Econoics. Correspondence & Papers 1902-1950.Box 14, Folder “Positions for 1929-30”.

Image Source: Left, Senior year picture of R.V. Gilbert and, right, tutor picture of M.M. Bober (1926) in Harvard Class Album, 1923 and 1926, respectively.

Categories
Curriculum Gender Harvard Radcliffe

Radcliffe. Economics course offerings, 1910-1915

 

Here are five more installments in the series “Economics course offerings at Radcliffe College”…

Pre-Radcliffe economics course offerings and the Radcliffe courses for 1893-94,  1894-1900 , 1900-1905 , 1905-1910 have been posted earlier.

________________

1910-1911
ECONOMICS.

Primarily for Undergraduates:—

1. Dr. HUSE and DAY. — Outlines of Economics. — Production, Distribution, Exchange, Socialism, Labor, Railroads, Trusts, Foreign Trade, Money, and Banking.

45 Undergraduates, 6 Special students. Total 51.

 

For Undergraduates and Graduates:—

3. Professor CARVER. — Principles of Sociology.—Theories of social progress. 2 hours a week, and a third hour at the pleasure of the instructor.

3 Graduates, 31 Undergraduates, 1 Unclassified student.  Total 35.
(1 Graduate, 2d half only).

6a1. Professor GAY. — European Industry and Commerce in the Nineteenth Century. Half-course. 2 hours a week, and a third hour at the pleasure of the instructor, 1st  half-year.

1 Graduate, 8 Undergraduates. Total 9.

6b2. Professor GAY. — Economic and Financial History of the United States. Half-course. 2 hours a week, and a third hour at the pleasure of the instructor, 2d half-year.

2 Graduates, 12 Undergraduates, 2 Special students, 2 Unclassified students. Total 18.

81. Dr. HUSE. — Money. A general survey of currency legislation, experience, and theory in recent times. Half-course. 3 hours a week, 1st half-year.

7 Undergraduates. Total 7.

82. Dr. DAY. — Banking and Foreign Exchange. Half-course. 3 hours a week, 2d half-year.

5 Undergraduates, 1 Special student. Total 6.

14a1. Professor CARVER. — The Distribution of Wealth.  Half-course. 2 hours a week, 1st half-year.

2 Graduates, 11 Undergraduates, 2 Special students. Total 15.

14b2.  Professor CARVER. — Methods of Social Reform.—Socialism, Communism, the Single Tax, etc.  Half-course. 2 hours a week, 2d half-year.

1 Graduate, 11 Undergraduates, 3 Special students, 1 Unclassified student. Total 16.

 

Primarily for Graduates:—

COURSES OF RESEARCH

20a. Professor GAY. — (a) The Millinery Trade in Boston. 1 Graduate. (b) The Small Loan Business in Boston. 1 Graduate.

Total 2.

**20b. Professor CARVER. — The Laws of Production and Valuation.

1 Graduate. Total 1.

[Note] The courses marked with two stars (**) are Graduate courses in Harvard University, to which Radcliffe students were admitted by vote of the Harvard Faculty.

 

Source:   Radcliffe College. Report of the President of Radcliffe College 1910-11, pp. 49-50.

_______________

1911-1912
ECONOMICS.

Primarily for Undergraduates:—

1. Dr. DAY and Mr. J. S. DAVIS. — Outlines of Economics. — Production, Consumption, Distribution, Exchange, Socialism, Labor Problems, Trusts, Money, Banking, and Public Finance.

43 Undergraduates, 8 Special students, 1 Unclassified student.
(1 Undergraduate, 1 Special student, 1 Unclassified student 1sthalf only.)  Total 52.

 

For Undergraduates and Graduates:—

3. Professor CARVER. — Principles of Sociology. — Theories of social progress. 2 hours a week, and a third hour at the pleasure of the instructor.

4 Graduates, 18 Undergraduates, 6 Special Students. (1 Special student, 1st half only.)  Total 28.

6a1. Professor GAY. — European Industry and Commerce in the Nineteenth Century. Half-course. 2 hours a week, and a third hour at the pleasure of the instructor, 1st  half-year.

1 Graduate, 4 Undergraduates, 3 Special students, 1 Unclassified student. Total 9.

6b2. Professor GAY. — Economic and Financial History of the United States. Half-course. 2 hours a week, and a third hour at the pleasure of the instructor, 2d half-year.

2 Graduates, 9 Undergraduates, 3 Special students. Total 14.

14a1. Professor CARVER. — The Distribution of Wealth.  Half-course. 2 hours a week, 1st half-year.

3 Undergraduates, 1 Special student. Total 4.

14b2.  Professor CARVER. — Methods of Social Reform.—Socialism, Communism, the Single Tax, etc.  Half-course. 2 hours a week, 2d half-year.

3 Undergraduates, 1 Special student. Total 4.

*18. Asst. Professor COLE. — Principles of Accounting. 3 hours a week.

6 Undergraduates. (4 Undergraduates, 1st half only; 1 Undergraduate, 2d half only.)  Total 6.

 

Primarily for Graduates:—

COURSES OF RESEARCH

20a. Professor GAY. — (a) The Organization of the Boot and Shoe Industry in Massachusetts in the First Half of the Nineteenth Century. 1 Graduate. (b) Economic Policy of England from 1625 to 1660. 1 Graduate. (c) Women in the Boot and Shoe Industry in Massachusetts. 2 Graduates.

Total 4.

20b. Professor CARVER. — Economic Theory.

1 Undergraduate. Total 1.

 

Source:   Radcliffe College. Report of the President of Radcliffe College 1911-12, pp. 53-54.

_______________

1912-1913
ECONOMICS.

Primarily for Undergraduates:—

1. Dr. DAY. — Outlines of Economics. — Production, Consumption, Distribution, Exchange, Socialism, Labor Problems, Trusts, Money, Banking, and Public Finance.

24 Undergraduates, 8 Special students, 4 Unclassified students.
(1 Special student, 1st half only.) Total 36.

 

For Undergraduates and Graduates:—

2a1 (formerly 6a1). Professor GAY. — European Industry and Commerce in the Nineteenth Century. Half-course. 2 hours a week, and a third hour at the pleasure of the instructor, 1st  half-year.

3 Graduates, 4 Undergraduates, 1 Special student. Total 8.

2b2 (formerly 6b2). Professor GAY. — Economic and Financial History of the United States. Half-course. 2 hours a week, and a third hour at the pleasure of the instructor, 2d half-year.

3 Graduates, 5 Undergraduates. Total 8.

7 (formerly 14). Professor CARVER. — Theories of Distribution and Distributive Justice. 3 hours a week.

9 Undergraduates, 2 Special students. Total 11.

8 (formerly 3). Professor CARVER. — Principles of Sociology.—Theories of social progress. 3 hours a week.

27 Undergraduates, 2 Special students, 2 Unclassified students. (1 Undergraduate, 1st half only.)  Total 31.

9 (formerly 18). Asst. Professor COLE. — Principles of Accounting. 3 hours a week.

5 Undergraduates. Total 5.

 

Primarily for Graduates:—

I
ECONOMIC THEORY AND METHOD

**121 (formerly 13). Professor CARVER. — Scope and Methods of Economic Investigation. Half-course. 2 hours a week, 1sthalf-year.

1 Graduate. Total 1.

**13 (formerly 4). Professor RIPLEY. — Statistics, Theory, method and practice. 2 hours a week.

3 Graduates. Total 3.

II
ECONOMIC HISTORY

**23 (formerly 11). Dr. GRAY. — Economic History of Europe to 1760. 3 hours a week.

1 Special student. Total 1.

[Note] The courses marked with two stars (**) are Graduate courses in Harvard University, to which Radcliffe students were admitted by vote of the Harvard Faculty.

 

COURSES OF RESEARCH

20a. Professor GAY. — Selected Topics in Modern European Economic History.

2 Graduates. Total 4.

20b. Professor CARVER. — Economic Theory.

1 Graduate. Total 1.

 

Source:   Radcliffe College. Report of the President of Radcliffe College 1912-14, pp. 42-43.

_______________

1913-1914
ECONOMICS.

Primarily for Undergraduates:—

1. Asst. Professor E. E. DAY and Mr. BURBANK. — Principles of Economics. 3 hours a week.

33 Undergraduates, 5 Special students, 2 Unclassified students.  Total 40.

 

For Undergraduates and Graduates:—

2a1 (formerly 6a1). Professor GAY.— European Industry and Commerce in the Nineteenth Century. Half-course. 2 hours a week, and a third hour at the pleasure of the instructor, 1st  half-year.

1 Graduate, 10 Undergraduates, 2 Special students, 1 Unclassified student. Total 14.

2b2 (formerly 6b2). Professor GAY. — Economic and Financial History of the United States. Half-course. 2 hours a week, and a third hour at the pleasure of the instructor, 2d half-year.

2 Graduates, 9 Undergraduates, 1 Special student, 1 Unclassified student. Total 13.

7 (formerly 14). Asst. Professor ANDERSON. — Economic Theory: Value and Related Problems. 3 hours a week.

1 Graduate, 5 Undergraduates.  Total 6.

9 (formerly 18). Associate Professor COLE. — Principles of Accounting. 3 hours a week.

5 Undergraduates. Total 5.

 

Primarily for Graduates:—

I
ECONOMIC THEORY AND METHOD

**11. Professor TAUSSIG. — Economic Theory. Half-course. 3 hours a week.

1 Undergraduate. Total 1.

**14. Professor BULLOCK. — History and Literature of Economics to the year 1848. 2 hours a week, and a third hour at the pleasure of the instructor.

1 Graduate. Total 1.

II
ECONOMIC HISTORY

**24. Professor GAY. — Topics in the Economic History of the Nineteenth Century. Two consecutive evenings a week.

1 Undergraduate. Total 1.

 

[Note] The courses marked with two stars (**) are Graduate courses in Harvard University, to which Radcliffe students were admitted by vote of the Harvard Faculty.

 

COURSES OF RESEARCH

20a. Professor GAY. — Economic History.

2 Graduates (1 Graduate, 1st half only). Total 2.

 

Source:   Radcliffe College. Report of the President of Radcliffe College 1912-14, pp. 99-100.

_______________

1914-1915
ECONOMICS.

Primarily for Undergraduates:

1. Asst. Professor E. E. DAY. — Principles of Economics.

5 Seniors, 14 Juniors, 15 Sophomores, 1 Freshman, 3 Unclassified students, 4 Special students.  Total 42.

 

For Undergraduates and Graduates:

2a1 hf.  Professor GAY. — European Industry and Commerce in the Nineteenth Century.

3 Graduates, 3 Seniors. Total 6.

2b2 hf.   Professor GAY. — Economic and Financial History of the United States

3 Graduates, 2 Seniors, 1 Junior.  Total 6.

7. Professor CARVER. — Economic Theory.

1 Graduate, 3 Seniors, 3 Juniors, 2 Sophomores.  Total 9.

8. Asst. Professor ANDERSON. — Principles of Sociology.

6 Seniors, 3 Juniors, 1 Special student. Total 10.

Accounting

Associate Professor COLE. — Principles of Accounting.

5 Seniors, 1 Junior.  Total 6.

 

Economic Theory and Method

Primarily for Graduates:

**121hf. Professor CARVER. — Scope and Methods of Economic Investigation.

1 Graduate.  Total 1.

**13. Asst. Professor DAY. — Statistics: Theory, method, and practice.

1 Graduate.  Total 1.

Applied Economics

**33 hf. Professor TAUSSIG. — International Trade, with special reference to Tariff Problems in the United States.

1 Graduate.  Total 1.

**34. Professor RIPLEY. — Problems of Labor.

1 Graduate.  Total 1.

Course of Research

20a2 hf. Professor GAY. — Economic History.

2 Graduates.  Total 2.

 

[Note] The courses marked with two stars (**) are Graduate courses in Harvard University, to which Radcliffe students were admitted by vote of the Harvard Faculty.

 

Source:   Radcliffe College. Report of the President of Radcliffe College 1914-15, pp. 41-42.

Image Source: From front matter of the bound version of  The Radcliffe Bulletin, 1912-13 in the Harvard University Library.

 

 

Categories
Economic History Exam Questions Harvard Yale

Harvard. Final Examination, U.S. Economic History. Callender, 1899-1900

 

This post is a cross between “get to know an economics Ph.D. alumnus (Harvard)” and a deposit into the data bank of old exams. For three years at the end of the 19th century Guy Stevens Callender taught U.S. economic history at Harvard where he received a Ph.D. in 1897.  He ultimately went on to a professorship at Yale. One of the connections that I discovered in preparing the post is that Guy Stevens Callender and John R. Commons were undergraduate classmates at Oberlin.

For an article about Callender’s contributions:

Engelbourg, Saul. Guy Stevens Callender: A Founding Father of American Economic History. Explorations in Economic History. Vol. 9, 1971-72, pp. 255-267.

_________________

Biographical note:

Guy Stevens Callender was born on 9 November 1865 in Hartsgrove, Ohio, the son of Robert Foster Callender and Lois Winslow Callender.  The family moved from Massachusetts to the Western Reserve when Callender was a child.  At an early age he demonstrated that he had an active mind, intellectual curiosity, and a strong physical constitution; these attributes, along with his being an avid reader of books, led him at the age of fifteen to teach in the district schools of Ashtabula County.  Using his savings from several winters of teaching and his summer earnings made working on the family farm, Callender succeeded in paying for college preparatory courses at New Lyme Institute, South New Lyme, Ohio.

In 1886, at the age of twenty-one, Callender enrolled at Oberlin College where he took the classical course.  There he was influenced by James Monroe, professor of political science and modern history, who taught courses in political economy and sponsored Callender’s volunteer work in the Political Economy Club.  Callender also was an active participant in extracurricular organizations, including the Oberlin Glee Club, Oratorical Association, Phi Delta Society, The Review (student newspaper), and the Traveling Men’s Association.  In these groups, some of Callender’s affinity for leadership and exactness became evident (i.e., service as the financial manager and secretary).  He graduated with the degree of Bachelor of Arts in June, 1891, counting among his classmates John R. Commons and Robert A. Millikan.

After a year spent traveling and working in the business departments of newspapers in Cincinnati, Indianapolis, and Chicago, enrolled (1892) for graduate study at Harvard University from which he received a B.A. (1893), an M.A. (1894), and a Ph.D. in political science (1897).  During his graduate studies at Harvard he served for some time as instructor in economics at Wellesley College, and he was considered an “outstanding man among our graduate students” by Frank W. Taussig and other members of the teaching faculty.  Following the award of his Ph.D., Callender held an appointment as instructor in economics at Harvard from 1897 to 1900.  There he conducted a course in American economic history, which he personally created.  In 1900 he was appointed professor of political economy at Bowdoin College; in 1903 he accepted an appointment as professor in the Sheffield Scientific School of Yale University, where he continued to teach and engage in scholarly research until 1915.  He also served as a member of the Governing Board of the Sheffield Scientific School. In 1904 Callender married Harriet Belle Rice; they had one son (Everett, b. 1905).

Callender published his only book, Selections from the Economic History of the United States, 1765-1860 in 1909.  In it he revealed his entire theory of the progress of the United States from the beginning of colonization until the Civil War.  Callender’s most important contributions are to be found in his condensed, precisely written introductory essays that precede each chapter. His article “The Early Transportation and Banking Enterprises of the States in Relation to the Growth of Corporations,” in the Quarterly Journal of Economics (November 1902) was also well recognized and consulted by scholars.

Callender was as a member of the American Historical Association and the American Economic Association, and he was a frequent contributor as a book reviewer, essayist, and speaker.  Callender’s contribution to scholarship is probably best summed up in his “The Position of American Economic History,” American Historical Review 19 (October, 1913).  Therein he argued that American economic history should “be pursued as a separate subject of study” and that economic historians must be prepared to interpret facts.  For Callender economic history was more than the chronological recital of events of commercial and industrial significance.  He sought historical explanations by applying the principles of economic science to the economic and social development of communities.  His published studies included an analysis of the part played by economic factors in the adoption of the Federal Constitution and in the debate over the economic basis of slavery in the South.

Prior to his death, Callender worked on several writing projects, including a comprehensive, multivolume economic history of the United States, but poor health prohibited him from completing this project.  Another work in progress was a critical essay of Arthur Young’s Political Essays Concerning the British Empire (1772), which focused on the history of British colonies in America.  Until then, Young’s essays had not been generally appreciated or known by American scholars.  Callender was also at work on an introduction for a new edition in two volumes of American Husbandry, which was first published in London in 1775.  Callender’s review of Cyclopedia of American Government (edited by A.S. McLaughlin and Albert Bushnell Hart) appeared in the Yale Reviewshortly after his death.  According to commentator Co Wo Mixter, this highly critical review showed “in a marked degree the range, vitality and acuteness of his thinking” (Yale Alumni Weekly, Oct. 1, 1915, p. 48).

Callender was the recipient of numerous awards and honors.  In 1907 Yale University awarded him an honorary M.A.  Two months before his death the Oberlin College chapter of Phi Beta Kappa elected him to membership.  Upon Callender’s death from a cerebral hemorrhage in Branford, Connecticut, on 8 August 1915, members of the Oberlin College Class of 1891 purchased from his widow his library of some 2500 volumes and gave it to the institution in his memory.  The Class raised additional funds to purchase other titles on economic history, thus rounding out and completing the collection.  A small amount of money was also set aside as an ongoing fund to keep the collection up-to-date.  Callender’s gift to the College Library, established by his graduating class, set an Oberlin precedent.

Source:  Oberlin College Archives.  Guy Stevens Callender Papers, 1820-1870.

_________________

Course Enrollment
1899-1900

[Economics] 6. Dr. [Guy Stevens] Callender.—The Economic History of the United States. Lectures (2 hours); discussions of assigned topics (1 hour); 2 theses.

Total: 163.  11 Graduates, 64 Seniors, 58 Juniors, 19 Sophomores, 11 Others.

Source:  Harvard University. Annual report of the President of Harvard College 1899-1900, p. 69.

_________________

Course Description
1897-98

[Economics] 6. The Economic History of the United States. Tu., Th., at 2.30, and a third hour at the pleasure of the instructors. Mr. Callender.

Course 6 gives a general survey of the economic history of the United States from the formation of the Union to the present time, and considers also the mode in which economic principles are illustrated by the experience so surveyed. A review is made of the financial history of the United States, including Hamilton’s financial system, the second bank of the United States and the banking systems of the period preceding the Civil War, coinage history, the finances of the Civil War, and the banking and currency history of the period since the Civil War. The history of manufacturing industries is taken up in connection with the course of international trade and of tariff legislation, the successive tariffs being followed and their economic effects considered. The land policy of the United States is examined partly in its relation to the growth of population and the inflow of immigrants, and partly in its relation to the history of transportation, including the movement for internal improvements, the beginnings of the railway system, the land grants and subsidies, and the successive bursts of activity in railway building. Comparison will be made from time to time with the contemporary economic history of European countries.

Written work will be required of all students, and a course of reading will be prescribed, and tested by examination. The course is taken advantageously with or after History 13. While an acquaintance with economic principles is not indispensable, students are strongly advised to take the course after having taken Economics 1, or, if this be not easy to arrange, at the same time with that course.

 

Source: Harvard University, Faculty of Arts and Sciences. Division of History and Political Science Comprising the Departments of History and Government and Economics, 1897-98.  pp. 32-33.

_________________

1899-1900
ECONOMICS 6
[Final examination, 1900]

  1. Into what periods may the economic history of the United States be properly divided? Give your reasons for making such a division, pointing out the chief characteristic of each periods.
  2. “A monopoly may be either legal, natural, or industrial.”—
    Distinguish each of these from the others by examples, and explain at length what is the character of an “industrial monopoly.”
  3. What legislation, if any, do you think is needed for the control of trusts? Give in full the reasons for your opinion.
  4. What features of American railway legislation do you consider open to criticism?
  5. “…As has been pointed out in the preceding chapter, cotton culture offered many and great advantages over other crops for the use of slave labor; but slavery had few, if any advantages over free labor for the cultivation of cotton….”—
    (a) Point out some of the advantages of cotton over other crops for the use of slave labor. (b) How do you reconcile the last part of the statement with the fact that cotton was produced chiefly by slave, instead of free, labor?
  6. Considering the conditions prevailing among the negroes in the South as well as in the West Indies since emancipation, what criticism, if any, would you make upon the policy of emancipation as actually carried out by the federal government during and after the war?
  7. What influences can you mention which have contributed to the recent depressed condition of cotton producers? (Do not confine your attention to the “credit system.”)
  8. What were the principal provisions of the resumption act? Explain the conditions under which it was carried into effect.
  9. Explain the conditions which led to the crisis or 1893.
  10. What reasons can you give to support the proposition that immigration has increased the population of the United States but little, if any?

 

Source:  Harvard University Archives.  Harvard University. Final examinations, 1853-2001.Box 2, Folder “Final examinations, 1899-1900”.

Categories
Exam Questions Harvard

Harvard. Final Exams for History of Tariff Legislation. Taussig 1883/4-1889/90

 

Frank W. Taussig first taught his half-course “History of U.S. Tariff Legislation” (one hour of class a week for the entire academic year) in 1883-84.  Beginning 1886-87 the half-course met two hours per week during the second term only. The previous post provides the entire 28 page printed syllabus with bibliography for this course dated 1888. Today’s post provides enrollment data for the course from 1883-84 through 1889-90 along with all the end-of-term examinations for the course.

_________________

Announcement of new course on Tariff Legislation

The scheme of instruction for the year 1883-84….Of the remaining five courses, of which four are new, two are full courses, with three or two exercises a week, while three, having each one exercise a week, are rated as half-courses. The latter are devoted to the treatment of special topics: The Economic Effects of Land Tenures in England, Ireland, France, and Germany, by Professor Laughlin; Tariff Legislation in the United States, by Dr. Taussig; Comparison of the Financial Systems of France, England, Germany, and the United States by Professor Dunbar.”

Source: Harvard University. Annual Report of the President of Harvard College 1882-1883, p. 73.

_________________

Course Enrollments

Enrollment 1883-84

Dr. Taussig. 6. Lectures on the History of Tariff Legislation, chiefly in the United States with a discussion of the principles of tariff legislation.  Hours per week: 1.

Total 17:  13 Seniors, 1 Junior, 3 Graduates

Source: Harvard University. Annual Report of the President of Harvard College 1883-1884, p. 72.

*  *  *  *  *

Enrollment 1884-85

Dr. Taussig. 6. History of Tariff Legislation in the United States, with a discussion of principles.—Lectures.  Hours per week: 1. *Consent of instructor required.

Total 40:  26 Seniors, 10 Juniors, 1 Graduate, 3 Other.

Source: Harvard University. Annual Report of the President of Harvard College 1884-1885, p. 86.

*  *  *  *  *

Enrollment 1885-86

Dr. Taussig. 6. History of Tariff Legislation in the United States.— Discussion of principles.  Hours per week: 1. *Consent of instructor required.

Total 35:  17 Seniors, 11 Juniors, 2 Graduates, 5 Others.

Source: Harvard University. Annual Report of the President of Harvard College 1885-1886, p. 51.

*  *  *  *  *

Enrollment 1886-87

Dr. Taussig. 6. History of Tariff Legislation in the United States, and consideration of its economic effects.—Lectures, written exercises, and oral discussion.  Hours per week: 2, 2ndhalf-year. *Consent of instructor required.

Total 38:  28 Seniors, 4 Juniors, 2 Graduates, 4 Others.

Source: Harvard University. Annual Report of the President of Harvard College 1886-1887, p. 59.

*  *  *  *  *

Enrollment 1887-88

Dr. Taussig. 6. History of Tariff Legislation in the United States.—Lectures, required reading, and investigation of special topics.  Hours per week: 2, 2ndhalf-year. *Consent of instructor required.

Total 58:  31 Seniors, 17 Juniors, 5 Graduates, 5 Others.

Source: Harvard University. Annual Report of the President of Harvard College 1887-1888, p. 62.

*  *  *  *  *

Enrollment 1888-89

Dr. Taussig. 6. History of Tariff Legislation in the United States.—Lectures and reports on special topics. Hours per week: 2, 2ndhalf-year. *Consent of instructor required.

Total 34:  18 Seniors, 14 Juniors, 1 Sophomore, 1 Other.

Source: Harvard University. Annual Report of the President of Harvard College 1888-1889, p. 72.

*  *  *  *  *

Enrollment 1889-90

Dr. Taussig. 6. History of Tariff Legislation in the United States.—Lectures on the History of Tariff Legislation.—Discussion of brief theses (two from each student).—Lectures on the Tariff history of France and England.  Hours per week: 2 or 3, 2ndhalf-year. *Consent of instructor required.

Total 29:  19 Seniors, 9 Juniors, 1 Other.

Source:Harvard University. Annual Report of the President of Harvard College 1889-1890, p. 80.

_________________

1883-84.
POLITICAL ECONOMY 6
[Mid-Year]

  1. Give a brief summary of the contents of Hamilton’s Report on Manufactures. Comment on his discussion of the relative productiveness of agriculture and manufactures; and on the proposition that manufactures are peculiarly productive, and particularly desirable in a country, because they admit of a greater division of labor and more extended use of machinery.
    Make some comparison between the general character of Hamilton’s Report and Gallatin’s Memorial, of 1831, on the Tariff.
  2. Describe the tariff act of 1789. Should you consider it a protective measure?
  3. Give a brief history of the cotton manufacture from 1789 to 1824, and of the tariff legislation on cottons. Comment on the following: “It is seen that the manufacture of coarse cotton cloth has been more efficiently and steadily protected than any other and that such cloths are now supplied so cheaply that as to enter largely into the list of exports….The more perfectly the home market is secured to the domestic artisan, the greater is the tendency to cheapening the commodity.”— H.C. Carey.
  4. Give an account of the passage of the tariff act of 1828, and of the provisions of that act. Why was it called “the tariff of abominations”? Comment on this statement: “Next came the tariff of 1828, the first that was based on the idea of protection for the sake of protection.”
  5. What was the “forty-bale theory,” or “export tax theory” of Congressman McDuffie? Discuss, in connection with it, the incidence of taxation by duties on imports.
  6. Given the important provisions of the Compromise Act of 1833. How long was that act, by its terms, to remain in force, and how long did it remain in force? Criticize the tariff system which the act finally brought into operation. Comment briefly on the following: “Mr. Calhoun introduced and carried the scheme of what is called a revenue tariff, which, taking off by gradations, should finally reduce the income, through the custom house, to the measure necessary to support the Government, and adjust it on the principles of a tariff for revenue only. And how long did it take this beneficent measure…to do its work on the industries of this country? In 1837 a bankruptcy covered the whole land, without distinction of sections, with ruin.”—W.M. Evarts.

Mid-Year. 1884.

_________________

1883-84.
POLITICAL ECONOMY 6
[End-Year]

  1. Secretary Walker, in his report on the tariff in 1845, laid down these general rules:—
    No duty should be imposed above the lowest rate that will yield the largest revenue.
    Below such a rate discrimination may be made.
    The maximum revenue duty should be imposed on luxuries.
    Should you say that these rules were sound, and stated the proper principles applicable to import duties? Should you say that the legislation based on them in the tariff of 1846 was a sound application of the principles of free trade?
  2. Describe and discuss the plan on which the wool and woolens schedule of the existing tariff was formed.
  3. Compare the tariff history of France during and after the wars of the French Revolution, with that of the United States during and after the war of the rebellion.
  4. Comment on the following:—
    “A tax on raw materials is not like a tax on finished goods. A tax on raw materials is equal to its own amount, plus the usual percentage of gross profit, multiplied by the number of procedures through which it has to pass until it reaches the consumer in the finished state. A protection of $28,000,000 on raw wool [a duty of 10 cents a pound, with a domestic production of 280,000,000 pounds] keeps swelling and swelling at each intermediate stage till it reaches the consumer, and may be called nearly a hundred million dollars when it reaches the consumer it its most finished state.”
  5. What should you say of the tariff as a factor in the general prosperity of the United States during the past hundred years?

Ann. June, 1884.

_________________

1884-85.
POLITICAL ECONOMY 6
[Mid-Year]

(Omit either question 3 or question 4.)

  1. Comment briefly on the following:—
    “There is not a single great branch of domestic manufactures which had not been established in some form in this country long before a protective tariff had been or could have been imposed. The manufacture of iron is nearly as old as the history of every colony or territory in which there is any iron ore. The manufacture of woolens is as old as the country itself, and was more truly a domestic manufacture when our ancestors were clothed with homespun than now. The manufacture of cotton is almost as old as the production of the fibre on our territory.”
  2. Compare the tariff act of 1816 with that of 1824, noting differences in (1) the general range of duties, (2) the circumstances under which they were passed, (3) the action taken in regard to them by the representatives of New England, the Middle States, and the South. It has been said that “the tariff of 1816 marks the beginning of protection in this country,” and that “the tariff of 1824 was our first tariff worthy of the name of protection.” Which of these statements is true, if either?
  3. Comment on the following:—
    “No protective duty was ever levied on a single article, the home manufacture of which grew to large proportions under that duty, without the price to the consumer growing cheaper, the duty thus being a boon instead of a tax.”
    “A duty on an imported article is invariably added to its price, at the cost of the buyer, and added also to the price of like articles made here.”
  4. State carefully the argument for the protection of young industries and mention the conditions, if any, which might justify the application of such protection.
  5. Give a brief critical statement of the views expressed by Hamilton, Gallatin, Clay, and Webster on the protective controversy.

Mid-year. 1885

_________________

1884-85.
POLITICAL ECONOMY 6
[End-Year]

  1. State as nearly as you can the duties on the following articles from 1846 to 1884: pig-iron, steel-rails, wool, woolen cloths, silks, coffee, copper
    Take any one of the following articles: pig-iron, wool, woolen cloths, silks, copper; and say something as the economic effect of the duties on that one between 1860 and 1884.
  2. Give an account of the tariff act of 1864. Compare the tariff policy adopted in the United States after the close of the civil war, and with the policy of France after 1815.
  3. What has been the practice in our tariff acts since 1842 as regards the imposition of specific and ad valorem duties? Comment on the following: “It is an economic truth that the ad valorem system is the only equitable rule for assessing duties. With the whole power of a great government behind, there is no reason why the laws of the country should not be enforced. The outcry of undervaluation is simply a trick to blind the people, as it would be impossible to enact a law imposing duties of 80, 100, even 200 percent. in the plain unvarnished form of ad valorem duties.”
  4. Comment briefly on two of the following:—
    1. “The fairest and most satisfactory test of the effect of the tariff on prices is to compare prices of the same article under high and low tariffs. The average gold price of pig-iron before 1860 was $28.50 per ton; in recent years it has been $33.70. The average is higher by $5.20 under a high tariff than during the period of low duties.”
    2. “Nothing can be more false than the claim of free trade advocates than that a duty is a tax that comes out of the farmers and artisans of this country. By far the greater part of the revenue collected on importations is the toll paid by people of other countries for the admission of their goods….I was assured by a score of manufacturers in England that the recent increase in the French tariff came out of their pockets, and not from the consumers in France; that they were compelled to sell their goods in France at the same price as before the increase of duty.”
    3. “A conclusive answer to the assertion that the protective policy secures high wages to the laborers of this country, is found in the fact that wages are higher in the United States—absolutely and in comparison with the old world rates—in those industries which do not have, or confessedly do not need, protection.”
  5. Compare the grounds on which a policy of protection has been advocated in recent years with the grounds put forward in 1820-30, and give any reasons that may occur to you for changes in the arguments.

Ann. June. 1885.

_________________

1885-86.
POLITICAL ECONOMY 6
[Mid-Year]

  1. Comment on the following:—
    “Beside the protection thrown over the manufacturing interest by Congress during this period (1789-1812), the war which raged in Europe produced a favorable effect. As the United States was a neutral nation, she fattened on the miseries of the European nations, and her commerce increased with astonishing rapidity. Our manufactures flourished from the same cause, though not to a corresponding degree with our commerce.”
  2. Take two of the following:—
    (a) Give some account of the sources from which we learn the character of the act of 1828, and the circumstances under which it was passed.
    (b) What was Webster’s position on the tariff question, in 1824, in 1828, and in 1833?
    (c) What was Clay’s position on the tariff question in 1820, in 1828, and in 1832?
    Under (b) and (c) discuss briefly the reasons why Clay and Webster acted as they did at the dates mentioned.
  3. Comment on the following:—
    “Whenever we diminish importation by a protective tariff, we must at the same time diminish the production of those goods which, were trade free, we should given in exchange for the goods imported…..It would, however, be a mistake in the other direction to assume that all the industry set in operation by the tariff is withdrawn from other employments, and that there is no increase whatever. The very fact that, under free trade, goods are imported instead of being made at home shows that we find it easier to make the goods which we send abroad than to make those which we receive in exchange for them. Hence when we are forced to make them for ourselves, there must be an increase in the sum total of our industry.”
  4. Comment on the following, and state when and by whom you think it was written:—
    “The principal argument for the superior productiveness of agricultural labor turns on the allegation that the labor employed on manufactures yields nothing equivalent to the rent of the land, or to that net surplus, as it is called, which accrues to the proprietor of the soil….It seems to have been overlooked that the land itself is a stock or capital, advanced or lent by its owner to the occupier or tenant, and that the rent he receives is only the ordinary profit of a certain stock in land, not managed by the proprietor himself, but by another, to whom he lends or lets it, and who, on his part, advances a second capital, to stock and improve the land, upon which he also receives the usual profit. The rent of the landlord and the profit of the farmer are, therefore, nothing more than the ordinary profit of two capitals belonging to two different persons, and united in the cultivation of the farm.”
  5. State as nearly as you can what were the duties on cotton goods, woolen goods, bar iron, hemp, and articles not specifically provided for, in the years 1800, 1814, 1820, 1830, and 1837. Mention what tariff act was in force at each date, and whether the duty was specific or ad valorem. Use tabular form if you wish.

Mid-year. 1886.

_________________

1885-86.
POLITICAL ECONOMY 6
[End-Year]

[Omit one question.]

  1. Does a tax on imports operate as a tax on exports? Apply your reasoning to the exports of Southern cotton in 1830, and to those of Western grain in 1880.
  2. Assuming that you were called on to reduce duties, state the order of preference in which you would effect reductions in the present duties on iron, sugar, silks. Give your reasons.
  3. Make a comparison between the general course of tariff legislation in the United States and on the continent of Europe, from 1860 to the present time.
  4. Make a comparison between the tariff legislation of the United States in 1833 and in 1846.
  5. Comment on the reasoning and the statement of fact in the following:—
    “The duty of 1867 on wool, which gave to wool-growing its greatest encouragement, has added nothing to the cost of wool to the manufacturer or the consumer. On the contrary, the price has been greatly cheapened. In 1867 the price was 51 cents, in 1870 it was 46 cents, in 1875 it was 43 cents. There has been a steady reduction, with occasional fluctuations, since 1867. Free wool will be of no permanent benefit to manufacturer or consumer, but a positive loss to both. On the other hand, the wool-growing interest will be ruined by the competition of Australia, New Zealand, and the South American State.”
  6. Would you impose specific or ad-valorem duties on steel rails, wool, woolen cloths? Give your reasons. What has been the practice in imposing duties on these articles since 1860?

Final. June, 1886.

_________________

1886-87.
POLITICAL ECONOMY 6
[End-Year]

  1. Comment on the historical statements, and on the reasoning from them, in the following extracts:—
    “Such was the state of things [bankruptcy and ruin the most complete] at the date of the passage of the tariff act of 1842. Scarcely had it become a law, when confidence began to reappear and commerce to revive—the first steps toward the restoration of the whole country, in the briefest period, to a state of prosperity the like of which had never before been known. Seeing that these remarkable facts were totally opposed to the free-trade theory, the author was led to study the phenomena presented in the free-trade period from 1817 to 1824, and in the protective one which commenced in 1825 and ended in 1834,–the one terminating in bankruptcy and ruin similar to that which exhibited itself in 1842, and the other giving to the country a state of prosperity such as had again been realized in 1846….The more he studied these facts, the more did he become satisfied that the free-trade theory embodied some great error.” H.C. Carey, Preface to the Principles of Social Science.”
  2. It has been said that protective duties cause the price of the protected articles to fall; and such an effect is said to have been produced on the prices of cotton cloth after 1816, of copper after 1869, and of steel rails after 1870. Comment on the principle, and on its application in these three cases.
  3. “This ill-understood and much reviled principle [the minimum principle] appears to me to be a just, proper, effective, and strictly philosophical mode of laying protective duties. It is exactly conformable, as I think, to the soundest and most accurate principles of political economy. It is, in the most rigid sense, what all such enactments so far as practical be ought to be: that is to say, a mode of laying a specific duty. It lays the import exactly where it will do good and leaves the rest free. It is an intelligent, discerning, discriminating principle, no a blind, headlong, generalizing, uncalculating operation….The minimum principle, however, was overthrown by the law of 1832, and that law, as it came from the House, and as it finally passed, substituted a general and universal ad valorem duty of fifty per cent.” Webster, Speech in the Senate, 1836.
    What were the duties to which Webster refers in this passage? And what should you say to his comments on them?
  4. Explain carefully what is the fundamental proposition in Walker’s Treasury Report of 1845, and discuss its soundness as a principle of tariff reform.
  5. Explain the present system of duties on woolen cloths, stating briefly its history; and say something as to its effects.
  6. It has been said that high duties should be levied on manufactured articles and low duties on raw materials, because raw materials, being more bulky, require much shipping to transport them, and their free admission would give increased employment to American vessels. Assuming that the materials would fact be carried in American vessels, should you say the argument was a sound one?
  7. How can you explain the fact that, while the manufacture of cotton cloths has been little, if at all, dependent on protection, the heavy duties on silk piece-goods have not prevented a continuous large importation?
  8. It has been proposed to admit sugar from Cuba duty free, by a reciprocity treaty. Should you be in favor of such a measure?
  9. Discuss on of the following subjects. (Those who have prepared special reports on any one of these subjects are not to select that one for discussion.)
    1. The financial working of the tariff act of 1846.
    2. Proposed tariff legislation since 1883
    3. The circumstances under which the tariff act of 1833 was passed.

Final. 1887.

_________________

1887-88.
POLITICAL ECONOMY 6
[End-Year]

  1. “I will not argue the question whether, looking to the policy indicated by the laws of 1789, 1817, 1824, 1828, 1832, and 1842, there has been ground for the industrious and enterprising people of the United States, engaged in home pursuits, to expect government protection for internal industry. The question is, do these laws, or do they not, from 1789 to the present time, constantly show and maintain a purpose, a policy, which might naturally induce men to invest property in manufactures, and to commit themselves to those pursuits in life? Without lengthened argument, I shall take this for granted.”—Webster, Speech of 1846.
    Was Webster justified in taking so much for granted?
  2. Compare the treatment of the bearing of protective duties on wages in Hamilton’s Report on Manufactures with the treatment of the same topic in Walker’s Report of 1846, and give an opinion on the value of the discussion at the hands of both statesmen.
  3. What connection has been alleged to exist, and what connection in fact existed, between tariff legislation and general prosperity in 1837-39, in 1843, and in 1857?
  4. Point out wherein the duties on wool and woolens under the act of 1828 resembled, and wherein they differed from, the duties on the same articles under the act of 1867.
  5. Compare the effect of the duties on cotton goods between 1816 and 1824, with the effect of the duties on the same goods between 1864 and 1883.
  6. Point out wherein Mill’s reasoning as to the effect of an import duty on the terms of an international exchange is different from the export tax theory of 1832.
  7. Explain what conclusions you can draw as to the economic effect of the duties on pig iron between 1870 and 1888, from your knowledge of foreign and domestic prices, duties, domestic production, and imports.
  8. Explain why the duty on imported sugar has not stimulated the production of beet sugar in the United States. Apply a similar explanation to some other industry, not connected with agriculture, in which high duties have had less effect than might have been expected.
  9. Point out wherein the course of the tariff legislation of the United States between 1864 and 1883 was similar to the course of legislation in France between 1815 and 1860, and wherein it was not similar.
  10. “First, there is no sufficient market for our surplus agricultural products except a foreign market, and, in default of this, such surplus will either not be raised, or, if raised, will rot on the ground. Second, the domestic demand for the products of existing furnaces and factories is very far short of the capacity of such furnaces and factories to supply; and, until larger and more extended markets are obtainable, domestic competition will inevitably continue, as now, to reduce profits to a minimum and greatly restrict the extension of the so-called manufacturing industries….Industrial depression, business stagnation, and social discontent in the United States, as a rule, are going to continue and increase until the nation adopts a fiscal and commercial policy more liberal and better suited to the new condition of affairs.”— D.A. Wells, in the North American Review.
    Do you think the remedy of lower import duties will remove the difficulties said to arise from excessive production?

Final, 1888.

_________________

1888-89.
POLITICAL ECONOMY 6
[End-Year]

[Arrange your answers strictly in the order of the questions.]

  1. State the duties on cotton cloths, woolen cloths, pig iron, and coffee, in 1790, 1840, 1850, 1885, noting whether the duties were specific or ad valorem, and what tariff acts were in force at these dates, respectively [Use tabular form if you wish.]
  2. “Beside the protection thrown over the manufacturing interest by Congress during this period (1789-1812), the war which raged in Europe produced a favorable effect. As the United States was a neutral nation, she fattened on the miseries of the European nations, and her commerce increased with astonishing rapidity. Our manufactures flourished from the same cause, though not to a corresponding degree with our commerce”
    Did Congress protect manufactures during this period? Did the wars in Europe have the effect described on our commerce and manufactures?
  3. Wherein were the duties on rolled iron in France, in the first half of this century, similar to those in the United States at the same period? How do you account for the similarity, and what was the effect of the duties in either country?
  4. Why was a compound duty imposed on wool in 1828? Why in 1867? Is such a duty now imposed on wool?
  5. Wherein does the present duty on worsted goods differ from that imposed on woolen goods in 1828? wherein from the present duty on woolens? What has been the effect of the difference between the present rates on woolens and worsteds?
  6. Point out some general features in the tariff act of 1846 which were recommended in Secretary Walker’s Report of the year preceding.
  7. What would be the effect of a treaty with Spain admitting free of duty sugar from Cuba?
  8. Wherein has the effect of the duties of the last twenty-five years been different as to cottons, linens, woolens? Why the differences?
    [Omit one of the following:—]
  9. Mill says that certain conclusions which he reaches as to the effect on foreign countries of import duties, do not hold good as to protective duties. Is there good ground for distinguishing as he does
    [Note: Taussig appears to have pasted questions 10 and 11 below over the last line (or two) of question 9.]
  10. “The only case indeed in which personal aptitudes go for much in the commerce of nations is where the nations concerned occupy different grades in the scale of civilization…In the main it would seem that this cause does not go for very much in international commerce. The principal condition, to which all others are subordinate, must be looked for in that other form of adaptation founded on the special advantages, positive or comparative, offered by particular localities for the prosecution of particular industries.”—Cairnes, Leading Principles.
    Discuss, with reference to the general line of reasoning in this passage, the international trade of the United States in (1) glassware, (2) hardware and cutlery, (3) hemp and flax [take any two].
  11. Comment on the following:—
    “The manufacture of silk goods in the United States at the present time [1882] probably supplies an example of an industry which, though comparatively new, can hardly be said to deserve protection as a young industry. The methods and machinery in use are not essentially different from those of other branches of textile manufactures. No great departure from the usual track of production is necessary in order to make silks….Those artificial obstacles which might temporarily prevent the rise of the industry do not exist; and it may be inferred that, if there are no permanent causes which prevent silks from being made as cheaply in the United States as in foreign countries, the manufacture will be undertaken and carried on without needing any stimulus from protecting duties.”— Taussig, Protection to Young Industries.

Final 1889.

Political Economy 6. Grade Distribution 1888-89, 2d half-year.

Total (32) Senior (16) Junior (14) Other (2)
A 2 2
A- 1
B+ 3 2
B 4 4
B- 1 1
C 1 3 2
D 4
E 2

_________________

1889-90.
POLITICAL ECONOMY 6
[End-Year]

  1. What grounds are there for believing that the restrictive policy of Great Britain did or did not have a considerable effect on the industrial development of the American colonies?
  2. What was the effect of the political situation in 1824 on the tariff act of that year? in 1842 on the act of 1842?
  3. “The tariff of 1846 was passed by a party vote. It followed the strict constructionist theory in aiming at a list of duties sufficient only to provide revenue for the government, without regard to protection.”—Johnston’s American Politics.
    Was the act passed by a party vote? Did it disregard protection? Did it succeed in fixing duties sufficient only to provide revenue?
  4. What basis is there for the assertion that the gold premium, in the years after the civil war, increased the protection given by the import duties?
  5. Under what circumstances was the tariff act of 1864 passed? How long did it remain in force?
  6. Is there any analogy between the effects of the duties on cotton goods after 1816 and those on steel rails after 1870?
  7. Wherein would there probably be differences in the effects of reciprocity treaties (1) with Canada, admitting coal free; (2) with Great Britain, admitting iron free; (3) with Brazil, admitting sugar free?
  8. Apply Gallatin’s test as to the effect of duties on the price of the protected articles, to the present facts in regard to (1) clothing wool, (2) silks.
  9. On what grounds is the removal of the duty on pig iron more or less desirable than that of the duty on sugar?
  10. Is it a strong objection to ad valorem duties that they depend on foreign prices and that therefore the duties are fixed by foreigners? Is it a strong objection to specific duties that they operate unequally?

Final. 1890.

Political Economy 6. Grade Distribution 1889-90, 2d half-year.

Total (27) Senior (17) Junior (9) Other (1)
A 2 1
A- 1
B+ 4
B 6 3 1
B-
C+ 1 1
C 3 3
D- 1
E

 

Source: Harvard University Archives. Examination papers in economics, 1882-1935. Prof. F. W. Taussig.

 

Categories
Harvard Suggested Reading Syllabus

Harvard. History of Tariff Legislation. Taussig, 1888

 

This post provides an extended bibliography and syllabus printed in 1888 for Frank W. Taussig’s course on the history of tariff legislation. In a later post I will provide transcriptions of the final exam questions for this course. This artifact is 28 printed pages long!  Exam for June 1888. Exam for June 1889.

__________________

Course Announcement 1888-89

[Political Economy] 6. History of Tariff Legislation in the United States. Half-course. Tu., Th., at 2, and a third hour at the pleasure of the Instructor (second half-year). Professor Taussig.

Source: Harvard University. Announcements of Courses of Instruction provided by the Faculty of Harvard College for the Academic Year 1888-89. Cambridge, May 1888. pp. 18-19.

__________________

TOPICS AND REFERENCES
IN POLITICAL ECONOMY VI.
HARVARD COLLEGE.

TARIFF LEGISLATION IN THE UNITED STATES.

Cambridge, Mass.
1888.

Published for Members of Harvard University by the Harvard Co-operative Society. For others by A. A. Waterman.

 

[p. 2]

POLITICAL ECONOMY VI.

PART I. IMPORTANT DOCUMENTS AND PAPERS.

  1. Hamilton’s Report on Manufactures.

Read Hamilton’s Works, ed. of 1810, I, 157-196; ed. of 1850, III, 192-223; ed. of 1885, III, 294-335.

Summary of the Report:

  1. The relative productiveness of agriculture and manufactures. Rent, as a sign of the productiveness of agriculture.
  2. Circumstances rendering manufactures productive: (1) division of labor; (2) use of machinery; (3) employment of women and children; (4) promotion of immigration; (5) greater diversity of talent; (6) more various field for enterprise; (7) greater demand for products of the soil, “home market.”
  3. Peculiar circumstances of U. S.: (1) absence of reciprocity; (2) cultivation of land not retarded; (3) force of habit opposes manufactures; (4) improbability of success, from (a) scarcity of labor, (b) dearness of labor, (c) scarcity of capital (remedied by funded debt).
  4. General arguments again: (1) will encouragement of manufactures cause a rise in prices? (2) independence in time of war; (3) charge of transportation saved; (4) no opposition of interest between North and South.

[p. 3]

  1. Means for encouraging manufactures enumerated and discussed; e. g. duties on imports, prohibitions of importation, prohibitions of exportation, bounties (commended, and constitutionality maintained), premiums, drawbacks, encouragement of inventions, etc.
  2. List of industries existing, and recommendations in regard to them.

 

  1. Gallatin’s Memorial of 1831.

Read Gallatin’s Memorial on Free Trade, pp. 1-47; the same passages in Congressional Documents, 1stsession, 22nd Congress, Senate Doc., vol. I, No. 5, pp. 1-30, and in The Banner of the Constitution, vol. III, pp. 97-101.

Summary of the Memorial:

  1. The needed revenue, and the average duty which would secure it.
  2. The general principles of free trade.
  3. Compensating advantages from protection, as the employment of female labor [compare Mill, Political Economy, Book I, ch. V, § 1, note], the stimulus to producing some raw materials, the creation of a home market.
  4. Certain arguments for protection: high wages; that foreign trade stimulates foreign industry; the relation of imports and exports; reciprocity and retaliation; the experience of other countries.
  5. The reduction of prices by domestic competition.
  6. Careful and detailed examination of duties then in force.

 

  1. Walker’s Report of 1845.

Read Report of the Secretary of the Treasury for 1845, Executive Documents, 29th Congress, 1st session, vol. II, No. 6, pp. 3-14. Printed also in Niles’s Register, vol. 69, pp. 233-235.

[p. 4]

  1. Noteworthy principles laid down:
    (a) No duty should be imposed above the lowest rate that will yield the largest revenue. What does this mean? (b) Below this rate discrimination may be made. What sort of discrimination would Walker favor? (c) The maximum rate may be imposed on luxuries. (d) All specific and minimum duties should be abolished.
  2. How far the reasoning and the proposals of the report are consistent with the principles of free trade.
  3. The treatment of the effects of a protective tariff on wages and on profits.
  4. Specific and ad valorem duties. The warehousing system.
  5. The general merit of the Report; the praise it has often received. Report of the Tariff Commission of 1882, pp. 1428-1427.

 

PART II. HISTORY OF TARIFF LEGISLATION.

  1. Period before 1789.

General References: Adam Smith, Wealth of Nations(Rogers’s ed.), II, 156-166. Pitkin, Statistical View, ch. I. In general, read on the period till 1816, H. C. Adams, Taxation in the U. S., 1789-1816.

  1. Policy of England. The Mercantile System.
    (a) The Navigation Laws and the Colonial System. (b) Bounties. (c) Prohibitions. (d) History of the iron manufacture, as a type. Bishop, Hist. Manuf., I, 623-629.
  2. Policy of the Colonies.
    (a) Bounties. Bishop, vol. I, passim. (b) Effect of war of revolution. Non-importation agreements. Bishop, I, 365-396.
  3. Industrial state of the Colonies. How far affected by legislation. H. C. Adams, Taxation, etc., 5-13. Thompson, Social Science, 353.

[p. 5]

  1. Tariff acts of individual States before 1789, g.Pennsylvania act of 1785, Hoyt’s Protection versus Free Trade, Preface, p. xii; Adams, Taxation in U. S., 27.
  2. Scheme of a Federal Impost (5% duty) under the Confederation. The effect of its failure on the formation of the Union. Elliot, Debates, 92-106. Pitkin, Statist. View, 26-29.

 

  1. Tariff Act of 1789.

General References: Hamilton, Life of Hamilton, IV, 2-7. Sumner, Protection in U. S., 21-25. Young, Report on Customs Legist., p. xv.

  1. Debate of 1789.
    (a) Madison’s position. Young, Report, p. vii, viii. Madison, Writings,
  2. I, 466, 468. (b) Protectionist views advanced. (c) General tendency of the debate to look mainly at the revenue.
  3. Act of 1789.
    (a) The preamble. (b) Modelled on 5% scheme of confederation. General 5% duty. (c) Duties of 7½ , 10, 15%, on certain articles. (d) Specific duties on cordage, hemp, nails, steel, etc. Hamilton, Works, II, 55.
  4. A common account of the significance of the act of 1789.
    Blaine, Twenty Years of Congress, I, 182-186.
  5. Tonnage act of 1789.
  6. Revenue Collection act of July 31, 1789.

 

  1. 1789-1816.

General References: Bolles, Fin. Hist., II, 73-87. Taussig, Young Ind., 14-21.

  1. Tariff Acts from 1789 till 1816. Gradual increase of duties. Act of 1804 (Barbary Powers act) as an example. Young’s Report, xxxi, xxxii.

[p. 6]

  1. Industrial history, 1792-1807. Expansion of trade, due largely to wars in Europe. Large imports, especially from England.
  2. Restrictions, 1808-1815. Embargo, 1808-1809. Non-intercourse Act, 1809. War, 1812-1815. Duties doubled during the war. Effect of restrictions on foreign trade; on manufactures.
  3. Public opinion on protection in the earlier part of the period. Madison’s attitude in 1789, Young’s Report, p. viii; his Resolutions of 1794, Annals of Congress, 1794, pp. 155, 209. Jefferson’s feeling in 1787, Notes on Virginia, Works, VIII, 404; his Report on Commerce, in 1793, Works, VII, 637-651. Various Committee Reports of this period in American State Papers, Finance, vol. I.
  4. Public opinion during the period of restriction. Clay’s speech of 1810, Works, I, 195-199 (edition of 1848).

 

  1. Act of 1816.

General References: Taussig, Young Ind., 28-34, 40-44. Sumner, 34-38. Calhoun, Works, II, 163-173. Stat. at Large, III, 310-311.

  1. Great growth of manufactures during the war. Manufacturers ask for aid. Appleton, The power-loom, etc., 12-13.
  2. Madison’s Message, Statesman’s Man., I, 331. Dallas’s Report, Am. St. P. Finance, III, 87-91.
  3. Provisions of the act. General increase of duties. Duties on cottons and woollens; on rolled and hammered bar iron. Taussig, Young Ind., 54, 56.
  4. Public opinion not strongly aroused. Attitude of New England, the Middle States, and the South. The act of 1816 marks transition from the period 1789-1815 to the period 1820-32.
  5. The War Argument. Calhoun’s speech of 1816. Holst’s Life of Calhoun, pp. 27-37.

[p. 7]

  1. The Protective Movement after 1819. The Act of 1824.

General References: Taussig, Young Industries, 21-28, 33-40, 43-48, and in Political Science Quarterly, vol. III, March, 1888; Webster, Works, 96-106. Stat. at Large, IV, 25.

  1. The years 1816-19. Inflated prices; large imports; land speculations; reckless banking. Crisis of 1819. Effect on agriculture; on manufactures. Hildreth, Banking, 64-78; Gouge, Hist. of Paper Money, 55-127.
  2. Protective movement after 1819. Agitation for Protection. M. Carey’s pamphlets, Appeal to Common Sense (1822), The Crisis (1823), etc. Niles’s Register.
  3. Tariff acts of 1818. at Large, III, 460, 461.
    Tariff bills of 1820, 1821, 1822.
    Attitude of the Middle and Western States; of New England; of the South. Question of constitutionality raised.
  4. Situation in 1824. Candidates for the presidency: Clay, Crawford, Jackson, Adams. Jackson’s Letter to Coleman. Parton, Life of Jackson, III, 34-36.
  5. Act of 1824. Its history in Congress. Attitude of Massachusetts. The measure acceptable chiefly to the West and Middle States.
    General advance of duties on raw materials (hemp, wool, iron), and on manufactures (cottons, woollens, tern cordage).

 

  1. Tariff Act of 1828.

General References: Taussig, in Political Science Quarterly, vol. III (March, 1888); Calhoun, Works, III, 47-51; Stat. at Large, IV, 270.

  1. Woollen Manufacture, 1824-28. Reduction of duty on wool in England in 1824 and 1825.

[p. 8]

  1. Woollens Bill of 1827. . The Minimum Scheme. Bishop, History of Manuf. II, 313. Bill in full, Annals Congr., III, 731.
  2. The Harrisburg Convention (1827). The demand for higher protection extended to other articles than wool and woollens. Niles, XXXII, 388-396.
  3. Political situation, 1827-28. Democratic leaders from North (Jackson men) combine with Southern members. Attitude of Adams’s supporters, especially those from New England.
  4. Act of 1828; “the tariff of abominations.” Duties on wool (note that on cheap wool); minimum system on woollens (note cheap woollens); on molasses, without drawback on rum; on iron, hemp, flax.
  5. Curious votes on this act. Niles, XXXV, 52-57. Slight political effect on the election of 1828.

 

  1. Agitation in the South. The Export Tax Theory.

General References: McDuffie’s speech, in Congr. Debates, vol. VIII, Part III, pp. 3142-3150. Mill, Political Economy, Book V, ch. IV, §§ 5, 6.

  1. Agitation in the South against the tariff, to which all depression is ascribed. Madison’s Private Correspondence, 274-285.
  2. First form of the export tax theory, as stated in 1830: a tax on imports is a tax on exports, and a tax on the South. McDuffie’s speech of 1830, Congr. Deb., vol. VI, pp. 843-847.
  3. Second form of the theory, in McDuffie’s speech of 1832. (See also his report for the Committee on ways and means in 1832, Reports of Committees, 1st sess., 23d Congr., vol. II, no. 279). The theory worked out in the movement of prices.
  4. The connection between slavery and the export tax theory.

[p. 9]

  1. Acceptance of the export tax theory by the South in 1832. Hayne’s speech, Debates, vol. VIII, pp. 86-90. Address of So. Car. Convention, in State Papers on Nullification, p. 62. Calhoun, Works, III, 411; IV, 182.
  2. The theory soon dropped in the South. Similar reasoning sometimes appears at the present time, e. g. N. Y. Nation, Dec. 31, 1885, and Dec. 15, 1887. How far is it sound?

 

  1. 1828-1832.

General References: Sumner, Life of Jackson, 215-223; Clay, Speech of Jan. 11, 1832, Works, I, 586-595. Stat. at Large, IV, 583.

  1. Tariff Acts of 1830. Tea and coffee free. Abominations of 1828 removed in part. Stat.  at Large, IV, 403, 419.
  2. Public Sentiment on the Tariff. Free Trade Convention in Philadelphia, 1831. Gallatin’s Memorial; Adams, Life of Gallatin, 610-642. Protectionist Convention in New York.
  3. The revenue question. Approaching discharge of the public debt.
  4. Various proposals in 1832.
    (a) Administration scheme. Jackson’s Message, Statesman’s Manual, II, 763. Bill prepared by Secretary McLane, Exec. Doc. 1831-32, vol. 5, No. 22. (b) Southern project. McDuffie’s report and bill, House Rep., 1831-32, vol. 2, No. 279. (c) Clay’s high protection scheme. (d) Moderate protection scheme. J. Q. Adams’s report and bill. House Rep. 1831-32, vol 5, No. 481.
  5. The act of 1832, founded on Adams’s scheme. The duties on iron, wool and woollens, cottons, silks, etc.

[p. 10]

  1. Act of 1833.

General References: Sumner’s Life of Jackson, 281-291. Clay’s speech of Feb. 12, 1833, Works, II, 106-121. Bolles, II, 422-431. Stat. at Large, IV, 629.

  1. Political Situation in 1832-33. Nullification by South Carolina. Re-election of Jackson, and election of a Congress likely to follow his suggestions. The old Congress holds over for the session of 1832-33.
  2. Verplanck bill, supported by the administration. Congr. Debates, vol. IX, p. 958. Its passage found to be impossible.
  3. Clay’s Compromise Scheme. The administration party and the South (Calhoun); the protectionists. Supposed “secret history” of the compromise. Benton’s Thirty Years’ View, I, 342-344. Clay’s speech in 1837, Congr. Debates, XIII, 969-970; Appleton’s speech in 1842, Congr. Globe, X, (Appendix), p. 575.
    The public lands bill fails because of a pocket veto. Amer. Ann. Register, 1832-33, pp. 182-185.
  4. Act of 1833. (a) Gradual reduction of duties. American Almanacfor 1834, p. 138. (b) Treatment of specific duties. U. S. Doc, 1833-34, Exec. Doc, vol I, No. 43. (c) Horizontal rate of 20 per cent. Its general policy. Webster, Works, IV, 258-261. (d) Did the act impose any duties after 1842? Decision of the Supreme Court in Aldridge vs. Williams, 3 Howard, 9.

 

  1. 1833-1842. Tariff of 1842.

General References: Hoist, Constitutional History, II., 451-463. Bolles, II, 426-431, 440-448. Statutes at Large, V, 548.
On the period between 1830 and 1860, see, in general, Taussig, in Quarterly Journal of Economics, April, 1888.

[p. 11]

  1. Economic events of 1833-42. The bank troubles, the crises of 1837 and 1839, the depression of 1839-41. These events sometimes said to be connected with the changes in duties. Carey, Social Science, II, 225; Stebbins, Protectionist Manual, 182.
  2. Operation of the act of 1833. (a) Any effect on manufacturing industries? (b) Accumulation of revenue due to the peculiar features of the act? (c) Attempts to modify it. Woodbury’s Treasury Report of 1835. Bill passed by the Senate in 1837, Congr. Debates, XIII, 939; a similar bill in the House. No proposals in 1837-41. (d) Tariff act of 1841, Stat. at Large, V, 463.
  3. Financial situation in 1842. Political situation. The Whigs and the tariff; Tyler’s position. Effect of these complications on the details of the act.
  4. Provisions of the act. Credits on duties abolished; but no warehousing system.
  5. Debates in 1842. The labor argument. The violation of the compromise of 1833. Not a word as to nullification. Prominence of the iron industry.
  6. Revival of trade in 1843-41. How far this was connected with the passage of the act of 1842.

 

  1. Tariffs of 1846 and 1867.

General References: Hoist, Const. History, II, 529-535, III, 277-280; Webster, Works, V, 225-235; Stat. at Large, IX, 42; XI, 192.

  1. Political situation. Campaign of 1844. Session of 1845-46, and passage of the act of 1846. Allegations of British Gold.
  2. Provisions of the act of 1846. The schedules; the ad valorem duties; the warehousing system. How far did it follow Secretary Walker’s recommendations? How far was it a free trade measure?

[p. 12]

  1. The debates on the act of 1846. The wages argument in the speeches of Hunt, Congr. Globe, 1845-46, Appendix, p. 967, and of Winthrop, ibid., 972-973. Its treatment by Webster.
  2. Financial operation of the act of 1846. Working of the ad valorem duties. Speech of Brooks, Congr. Globe, XXIV, 809-812 (1852). Report of the Secretary of the Treasury for 1853, pp. 62, 104.
  3. Act of 1857. The bill, as originally passed by the House, much amended in the Senate. The changes in duty made by it.
  4. Slavery and the tariff. Attempts by the Whigs to substitute the tariff for slavery as the decisive issue in politics.

 

  1. Economic History, 1840-60.

General References: Grosvenor, Does Protection Protect, 146-150, 223-229.— On manufacturing industries, see, in general, the introduction to the volume on manufactures of the census of 1860.

  1. General prosperity during this period. Can it be ascribed to the tariff acts of 1846 and 1857? — The crisis of 1857.
  2. International trade, and the growth of exports and imports. James, Amerikanischer Zoll-tarif, 49-73; International Review, XI., 450-462. Grosvenor, 50-53.
  3. Iron Manufacture. Uncertainty of the statistics. Course of production, and extent of importation. Anthracite and charcoal iron. Hewitt on Statistics of Iron, 24-32; Statistics in Hewitt’s A Century of Mining in the United States, Appendix, and in the Reports of the American Iron and Steel Association.
  4. The Cotton Manufacture. Batchelder, in Hunt’s Merchant’s Magazine, XLV, 14-16. The domestic consumption of raw cotton; statistics in Quarterly Reports of the Bureau of Statistics, No. 3, 1885-86, p. 60, in Reports of U. S. Comm. to Paris Exhibition of 1867, VI, 30-35, and in Hunt’s Merchant’s Magazine, XLV, 11.

[13]

  1. The Woollen Manufacture. Census of 1860, as above; Special Report of the Bureau of Statistics on the Manufacture of Wool (1887).
  2. The range and extent of manufacturing industry in 1860.

 

  1. The Morrill Tariff. Duties During the War.

General References: Wells, in Cobden Club Essays, Second Series, pp. 473-481.
On the history of legislation between 1860 and 1883, read Taussig, History of the Present Tariff.

  1. The state of the revenue in 1860. The political situation. The Republicans in control of the House in the 36th The tariff bill passed in the House in 1860, in the Senate in 1861.
  2. Provisions of the Morrill tariff act of 1861. Specific substituted for ad valorem duties. The rates on iron, wool and woollens, cottons, etc.
    How far the act was protectionist. Attitude of the manufacturers, especially on the wool and woollen duties.
  3. Financial needs of the civil war. General character of the war legislation. Acts of August and December, 1861, imposing direct tax, and raising revenue duties. Stat. at Large, XII, 292, 330.
  4. Internal Revenue act of 1862. Excise taxes in general at 3% on the value. Young’s Tariff Legisl., p. 126. Corresponding increase in import duties in the tariff act of 1862. Stat. at Large, XII, 433, 543.
  5. Tax and Tariff acts of 1864. Act authorizing $400,000,000 loan. Three-fold object of the tariff act: revenue, compensation of internal taxes and protection. Brief consideration of the bill in Congress. Its importance in financial and economic history. Stat. at Large, XIII. 202, 223.

[p. 14]

  1. Reduction of Duties, 1864-86.

General References: Taussig, Present Tariff, pp. 17-39, 88-101. Perry in Quarterly Journal of Economics, vol. II, pp. 69-78 (Oct., 1887).

  1. Reduction and abolition of the internal taxes, 1865-72. Further changes in 1883. The present internal tax system.
  2. Attempts to reduce duties. The state of opinion on the tariff immediately after the war. The bill of 1867, passed in the Senate, lost in the House.
  3. Act of 1870. Its object, a reduction of revenue. The revenue duties lowered; also a few protective duties, e. g. on pig iron. Young’s Tariff Legisl., p. 167.
  4. Act of 1872. Pressure for a reduction of duties. The protectionist tactics. A general 10 per cent. reduction and a lowering of duties on certain raw materials, substituted for a detailed revision.
    Abolition of duties on tea and coffee in 1872.
    In 1875, repeal of the 10 per cent. reduction, with an increase in the sugar duty, and in the internal tax on spirits.
  5. The Morrison bill of 1876; in Congr. Record, 1875-76, p. 3321. The Wood bill of 1878, Congr. Record, 1877-78, p. 2398; N. Y. Nation, vol. XXVI. pp. 89, 220, 225, 380.
  6. The act of 1883. Tariff Commission act of 1882. The report and recommendations of the Commission. The tariff bill adopted by both houses, on the report of a conference committee. Nature of the reductions in the act of 1883. Report of the Tariff Commission of 1882. Compare Quarterly Reports of the Bureau of Statistics, No. 2. 1886-87, p. 364.
  7. Unsuccessful attempts at legislation, 1883-1887.

[p. 15]

  1. Increase of Duties, 1864-83.

General References: Taussig, Present Tariff, pp. 40-88.

  1. Wool and woollens. Act of 1867. Convention of wool growers and manufacturers, and agreement by them on a tariff scheme. The compensating principle; mixed specific and ad valorem duties. Large increase of duties.
  2. Copper act of 1869. Increase of duties. Character of the act. Vetoed by President Johnson, but passed over the veto.
  3. Act of 1870, while reducing some duties, raises others, e. g. on steel rails, nickel, flax, etc.
  4. Act of 1883. General character of the advance of duties under it.

 

PART III. EFFECT OF TARIFF LEGISLATION SINCE 1860.

Convenient general sources of information are:

Report of the Special Commissioner of the Revenue (D. A. Wells) for 1866, 1867, 1868 and 1869.
Report of the Tariff Commission of 1882, House Misc. Doc, 47th Congr., 2d sess., Doc. No. 6, (referred to in the following pages as Tariff Commission Report.)
Arguments made before the Committee of Ways and Means on the Morrison tariff bill of 1884, House Rep., 48th Congr., 1st session (referred to as Arguments of 1884).
Statements to the Committee of Ways and Means on the Morrison tariff bill of 1886. House Rep., 49thCongr., 1st session (referred to as Statements of 1886).

[p. 16]

Report of the Secretary of the Treasury on the Revision of the Tariff, with accompanying documents. House Exec. Documents, 40th Congr., 1st session (referred to as a Report on Revision, 1886).
Report on the Existing Tariff on Imports, and the Free List, with comparative tables of present and past tariff. Senate Rep., 48th Congr., 1st sess., Rep. No. 12. (referred to as Tariff Compilation, 1884.)
Imports and Duties; a compilation showing the imports and duties on all articles from 1867 to 1883. House Misc. Doc, 48th Congr., 1st sess., No. 49.

 

  1. Iron, 1860-1885.

General References: Mineral Resources of U. S. (1886), 11-23. Wells, Practical Economics, 85-95. Tariff Commission Report, 2010-2022.
Statistics of production, imports, domestic prices, etc., are in the Reports of the American Iron and Steel Association.

  1. Iron Ore. Distance of the iron mines from the coal centres; the ores of Lake Superior. Imports of ore, chiefly from Spain, Elba, and Cuba. Swank, Production and Characteristics of Iron Ore in the United States; Mineral Resources, 39-103.
  2. Pig Iron. Increase of production since 1860. The two “boom ” periods, 1870-72, and 1879-81. Present locality of production: (a) district east of the Alleghanies, anthracite iron; (b) central district, Pennsylvania and Ohio; (c) Western and Southern States. Imports of Pig Iron; regular continuance of the imports of Scotch iron, and its explanation. Fluctuating import of other iron. Character of the pig-iron industry before 1873. J. S. Newberry, in International Review, I, 768-780. Growing production in the South.

[p. 17]

  1. Prices of pig iron, in England and in the United States. Difficulty of making comparisons. The effect of the tariff on prices; is the price in the United States made higher to the full extent of the duty? Probable consequences of removing the duty. (American prices given in Reports of the American Iron and Steel Association; English prices in Reports of British Iron Trade Association, and in the London Economist.)
  2. Bar Iron. Production; Imports; Duty. Difference between the cost of converting pig iron into manufactured iron in England and the United States.
    The manufacture of hardware. Exports of hardware.
  3. Bessemer steel. History of its manufacture in the United States. The product and import. How far prices have been affected by the tariff. Taussig, Present Tariff, p. 107. Swank, Iron in All Ages, ch. 38. Schoenhof, Destructive Influence of the Tariff, ch. 7.
  4. The controversy as to cotton ties. Tariff Comm. Report, pp. 2040, seq. The duty on tin plates. Report on Revision, 1886, pp. 383-392.
  5. The wages question in the iron trade. Mixture of skilled and unskilled workmen. The Amalgamated Iron and Steel Association, and its possible influence on the wages of skilled workmen. Discussion of the wages of unskilled laborers in (Wells’s) Census Revelations, etc.

 

  1. Cottons.

General References: Report on Cotton Manufacture in Census of 1880, pp. 5-15: Wells, Practical Economics, 81-85.
On the duties on cottons in general, see the statements in Arguments of 1884, pp. 123-181.

  1. Extent and Importance of the Cotton Manufacture.

[18]

  1. Domestic production of cheap goods. Is it desirable to check the importation of foreign cottons of lower price and poorer quality? Is it desirable to prevent foreign manufacturers from making occasional sales, at abnormally low prices, to get rid of surplus stocks?
  2. Imports of cottons. Character of the grades imported. Increase in the duty in 1883.
  3. Reasons why coarse cottons are manufactured successfully. Why the failure to manufacture finer qualities.
    Can popular education, no standing army, general intelligence, be adduced as causes enabling manufacturers in the United States to compete on equal terms with foreign manufacturers?

 

  1. Silks.

General References: Wyckoff, Silk Manufacture, 42-51; Schoenhof, Industrial Situation, ch. Ill, V, VI.

  1. Various attempts to encourage the production of raw silk in the United States. The colonial period; bounties in Georgia. Bishop, History of Manufactures, I, 358. The morus multicaulis speculation of 1830-40; see The Silk Culture in the United States (1844). Raw silk now admitted free. Whence it comes.
  2. History of the silk manufacture. Sewing-silk. State of the industry in 1860. Census Report of 1860, pp. 94-105.
    Great growth since 1865, especially since 1870, under the influence of high duties. How far were the duties originally intended to have this effect?
  3. Continued imports of silks. Reasons adduced why imports continue, in spite of the high duties: (a) adulteration of foreign silks; (b) the lower wages in European countries; (c) the difficulty arising from the nature of raw silk, of applying machinery in its manufacture in the same degree as in other textile industries. Wyckoff’s Silk Goods of America, pp. 7-40.

[p. 19]

  1. Administrative difficulties. The temptations to fraud under the high ad valorem duty. The consignment system. Reasons why it is difficult to substitute specific for ad valorem duties. Tariff Commission Report, 1048-1052, 1605-1613, 2165-2174.

 

  1. Wool and Woollens.

General References: Bulletin Wool Manufacturers, XV, 210-226: the same passage in Report on Revision, 299-313. Schoenhof, Destructive Influence, 17-35, Industrial Situation, 23-31. Taussig, Present Tariff, 53-64.
Statistics and general information are given in the Special Report of the Bureau of Statistics on Wool and Manufactures of Wool, 1887.

  1. Production of wool. Increase since 1860; transfer to the West. Bulletin Wool Mf., XIII, 102-106; Wool Report of 1887, p. 162. Meaning of this change.
    Character of American wool. Influence of climate and other physical causes.
  2. Imports of wool. What grades are imported, and why. Carpet-wool; Tariff Commission Report, 2414, 2415.
  3. Effect of the duties on wool. (a) Immediate effect of the act of 1867. Report of Special Commissioner of Revenue, 1869, p. 93; Bulletin of Wool Mf., II, pp. 2-34. (b) Effect on the prices of wool at home and abroad. Tables of prices in Wool Report of 1887, in London Economist, in Soetbeer’s Materials on the Silver Question, and in commercial circulars. (c) Temptation to fraudulent undervaluation of wool under the minimum duties. Osborn, The Administration and Undervaluation Frauds, 58, 78. Tariff Commission Report, 468. Report on Revision, 242.
  4. Production of woollens. Stimulus given by the war to the manufacture of woollens; depression after the war. Circumstances under which the act of 1867 was passed. The state of the manufacture in 1867-73. The census returns of 1870 and 1880. Character of the goods chiefly made, and their quality.

 

[p. 20]

  1. Imports of woollen goods. Their steady continuance.
    Character of the goods imported.
  2. Effect of the duties on woollens.
    (a) Effect on the consumer. How far an increased price is caused. Need of distinguishing between the effect of protection to wool and that of protection to woollens. Difference between the coarser and the finer qualities of woollen goods.
    (b) Effect on the manufacturer. Causes of the comparatively limited range of the wool manufacture.
    (c) Administrative difficulties. The mixture of specific and ad valorem duties. The minimum duties on dress goods, blankets, etc.
    (d) Change in the method of manufacture in recent years, and its unexpected effect on the working of the tariff. Report of the Secretary of the Treasury, 1887, p. 19; Wool Report of 1887, p. XXIV: Bulletin Wool Mf., XIV, 293-311.

 

  1. Sugar.

General References: D. A. Wells, in Princeton Review, VI, 319-335.

  1. The production and imports of sugar. Extent of the domestic product. Whence the imports come. Statistical Abstract, 1886: Reports on Commerce and Navigation.
  2. The duty on sugar before 1883, on the Dutch Standard. The Treasury rulings, and the decision of the Supreme Court. Change to the Polariscope test in the act of 1883.
  3. Free admission, by treaty, of sugar from the Hawaiian Islands, and its effect. Tariff Commission Report, 695-697; Statements of 1886, pp. 11-22. Anonymous pamphlet on The Hawaiian Treaty; statistics in Quart. Rep. Bureau of Statistics, No. 2, 1885-86.

[p. 21]

  1. Financial and economic aspect of the sugar duty. Proposals to reduce it, and to abolish it with or without compensation to Louisiana planters.
  2. Attempts to stimulate beet culture in the United States. Report of the Department of Agriculture on the Culture of the Sugar Beet, 1880 (note pp. 167-170). The experiment in making beet-sugar in California. Hilgard, in Overland Monthly, December, 1886.
    Reasons why beet sugar has not been made in the United States.
  3. The taxation of sugar in Europe. (a) Gradual abolition of duties in England. (b) On the continent, excise taxes on beet sugar. History of the beet sugar industry, and its connection with protection. Kaufmann, Die Zucker Industrie. (c) The system of bounties on exports, and its recent development. N.Y. Nation, XLII, 420; Wells, in Popular Science Monthly, Jan., 1888.

 

  1. Certain Raw Materials.

In general, consult the document referred to on pp. 15, 16.

  1. Character and extent of the imports and of the domestic production. The effect of the duty. Mineral Resources, 224-234, 242; Report of the Special Commissioner of Revenue for 1869, p. lxxxix; Arguments p. of 1884, p. 361; Statements of 1886, p. 187.
  2. Tariff Commission Report, pp. 955, 1015, 1599, 2379. Has the duty had the effect of promoting a dangerous destruction of forests?
  3. Hemp and Flax; Linens. The manner in which hemp and flax are raised, and the reasons why their importation continues. Report of the U. S. Commission of 1865, Senate Exec. Doc, 38th Congr., 2nd sess., No. 35; the Reports of the Flax and Hemp Spinners and Growers’ Association; Tariff Commission Report, 1452-1456.
    Tariff Commission Report, 345, 1145, 1452.
    Jute. Tariff Commission Report, 345, 1145, 1452.

[p. 22]

  1. Miscellaneous Articles.

 

  1. Copper. Circumstances under which the act of 1869 was passed. Taussig, Present Tariff, 65, 106. Conditions of production; no imports, considerable exports. Mineral Resources, 109-139; Tariff Commission Report, 2177, 2555.
  2. Tariff Commission Report, 201, 219; Wells, Practical Economics, 124; Mineral Resources, 169-173.
  3. Tariff Commission Report, 2591-2597; Mineral Resources, 160.
  4. Taussig, Present Tariff, 70; Tariff Commission Report, 227, 1553, 1648; H. M. Seely, The Marble Border of Western New England, in Proc. Middlebury Hist. Soc., vol. 1, part II, pp. 24-52.
  5. Congr. Globe, 1859-60, pp. 1020-1022; Tariff Commission Report, 227, 726, 941.
  6. Tariff Commission Report (Index).
  7. Tariff Commission Report, 613, 743, 753, 759, 2399; Arguments of 1884, 297.
  8. Arguments of 1884, 245-296. Census of 1880, vol. II., Report on Glass.

 

  1. General Discussions.

General References: Springer in North Amer. Review, vol. 136, pp. 571-580; reviewed in Bulletin Wool Manuf., vol. 13, pp. 199-211. Wells, Practical Economics, 98-116.

  1. Attempts to measure the effect of the protective system. Exaggerated estimates sometimes made. Mongredien, The Western Farmer in America; reviewed by Jonathan B. Wise. Difficulties of reaching numerical results.
  2. The enhancement of the price of articles made at home, in consequence of duties, takes place at present chiefly with raw materials. Is such an effect on raw materials more harmful than a similar effect on manufactured articles?
    Manufactures on which there is a protective tax (silks, earthenware). On very large classes of manufactures the duty is either a revenue duty (finer linen goods), or only nominal (ordinary cottons).

[p. 23]

  1. The effect of the protective system on general prosperity. The depression of 1874-78 and of 1883-85 often ascribed to it. How far such statements can be supported.
  2. Does the protective system tend to the accumulation of large fortunes, and to a spirit of communism? Rathbone, Protection and Communism (1884).
  3. The future of the United States as a manufacturing country. The prospects of New England.
  4. How far is it possible to trace the effect of protective duties?

 

  1. Specific and Ad Valorem Duties.

General References: James, Amerikanischer Zoll-tariff, 36-48; Webster, Works, V, 170-186; Tariff Commission Report, 1090-1092.

  1. Objections urged against specific duties: (a) that they are unequal, and bear more heavily on the poor than on the rich; (b) that they remain the same, though the price of the dutiable articles may vary greatly (steel rails in 1880-85); (c) that Congress is not capable of fixing them intelligently; (d) that their real incidence and effect are apt to be concealed.
  2. Objections to ad valorem duties: (a) the danger of under-valuation and fraud. The present duty on silks and its effect. Tariff Commission Report, 2469-2475. (b) The difficulties of administration.
  3. Mixed specific and ad valorem duties, as on woollens and on marble.
    Minimum duties, as in the tariff of 1828 on woollens, and at present on carpet wool, blankets, etc.

[p. 24]

  1. Distinctions to be made: (a) whether the article is homogeneous (pig-iron), or varies greatly in quality and character (silks). (b) whether duties are collected along a land frontier (Germany), or in comparatively few seaports (England; United States). (c) The character of the administrative system. Civil service reform.
  2. Tendency of free-traders to favor ad valorem duties, of protectionists to favor specific duties. Explanation of these tendencies.
  3. Practise in the United States. Judicious system until 1816; both specific and ad valorem duties. James, 29-36. Operation of the ad valorem system of the act of 1846. Strong tendency toward specific duties since 1861. Difficulties arise as duties go higher after 1816.
  4. Practise in foreign countries. None other than specific duties in England, Germany, and France.

 

  1. Collection of Duties.

General References: Bolles, Financial History, III., 489-523; Goodnow, in Political Science Quarterly, I., 36-44.

  1. History of the Revenue Collection Laws. Report on Revision, pp. 8-27.
    Act of 1789, dividing off customs districts, and establishing the offices of collector, surveyor, and naval officer. Stat. at Large, I. 36-37.
    Provisions of the acts of 1789, for ascertaining dutiable value; maintained until 1832.
  2. Acts of 1799 and 1818, establishing the moiety system; in 1799, as to penalties and forfeitures, in 1818 as to the extra duty of 50 per cent. on under-valued goods. Stat. at Large, I. 697; III. 437.
    Difficulties experienced under the moiety system. The Phelps-Dodge case; abolition of the moiety system in 1874. Bolles, as above; Stat. at Large, XVIII, 391.

[p. 25]

  1. Various devices for securing correct assessment of ad valorem duties. Appraisers appointed in 1818; additional appraisers in 1830, and in recent years. Invoices required to be sworn to before U. S. consuls in 1863.  Stat. at Large, XII, 737. Special agents authorized in 1878. The “fraud roll” authorized in 1879. Report of Secretary of Treasury, 1885, Appendix, p. 38.
  2. Frequent ambiguity in the tariff laws. The similitude clauses. The packing clause of the act of 1883 (construed in 6 Supreme Ct. Reporter, 462).
  3. Credit on duties allowed from 1789 till 1842. The compromise act of 1833 requires duties.to be paid in cash after June 30, 1842; the act of 1842 also requires cash duties. The act of 1846 retains cash duties, but establishes a general warehousing system.

 

  1. English Tariff History.

General References: Morley, Life of Cobden, ch. IX. Noble, Fiscal Legislation, ch. II., III. Bigelow, Tariff Question, pp. 1-17.

  1. The protectionist system of the 18th century. Pitt’s attempt at reform in 1876-87. Levi, British Commerce, 52-55.
  2. Huskisson’s measures in 1822-26. Modification of the navigation laws. Reduction of import duties on raw materials (wool, silk, metals) and on manufactures (woollens, cottons, silks).
  3. The corn law agitation. The corn law of 1815; the sliding scale of 1828. Anti-Corn-Law League formed in 1838.
    Character of the agitation carried on by the League. Cobden as an agitator. The causes which made certain the ultimate success of the League. Attitude of the manufacturers.
    New sliding scale in 1842. The distress of 1845-46. Repeal of the cornlaw, 1846.

[p. 26]

  1. The four great measures of Peel and Gladstone in 1842, 1846, 1853, and 1860. These measures largely of a fiscal character. Their fiscal and administrative qualities, as compared with tariff acts in the U. S. How far they are separable from the corn-law agitation.
    The present English tariff. Whitaker’s Almanac.
  2. The discussion of English tariff history in the United States. Was protection retained in England until it could he given up without a sacrifice?
    How far the supremacy of England as a manufacturing country is due to the fostering influence of the protective system of the 18th century.
    How far the growth of England since 1846 has been due to free trade.
  3. The connection between the repeal of the corn-laws, and the tariff of 1846 in the United States. Walker’s Report of 1845; p. 11; Webster, Works, V. 231.

 

  1. French Tariff History.

General References: Amé, Tarifs de Douane, vol. I, pp. 34-69. Morley, Life of Cobden, ch XXIX.

  1. Colbert, and the restrictive system of the 17thand 18th Clément, Système Protecteur.
  2. The commercial treaty with England in 1786 breaks with the restrictive system. Amé, I, 25.
    The French assembly establishes a moderate general tariff in 1791.
  3. Outbreak of the Revolutionary Wars. Re-establishment of the prohibitive system. Napoleon and the Continental system.
  4. The situation in 1814-15. Unsuccessful attempt to get rid of the prohibitive system. Gradual extension of the system, and its continuance until 1860. Efforts to get rid of it under the Restoration and under Louis Philippe. Why these efforts failed.
    Possible analogy with the experience of the United States after the civil war.

[p. 27]

  1. The government of the second empire is impelled to undertake reforms. Proposed revision of 1856.
    Commercial treaty of 1860. Its negotiation through Cobden and Chevalier. Its provisions; preparation of the tariff treaty.
    France concludes treaties with other countries than England. General adoption of the treaty system by European countries. Journal of Statistical Society, vol. 40, p. 1.
  2. The effect of the prohibitive system in France. Improvements in production retarded (iron, textiles)? The growth of the international trade after the commercial treaties. The continued advance of France as a manufacturing country under the system of moderate duties.
  3. Current toward protection in recent years. The treaty with England terminated, and the general tariff of 1882 enacted. Change from ad valorem to specific duties. Bounties on shipping and on sugar. Increase of duty on wheat in 1887. Guyot, The French Corn Laws. For the duties now in effect in France, see Report on Revision, pp. 593, seq.

 

  1. German Tariff History.

General References: Article on Zoll-verein in McCulloch’s Dictionary of Commerce, new ed. Wells, in Popular Science Monthly, Jan. 1888.

  1. Germany in the 18th century: (a) the country split into numerous petty States; (b) general application of the mercantile system. The policy of Frederick the Great a typical instance. Schmoller, Jahrbuch für Gesetzgebung, vol. VIII.
  2. Reform in Prussia in 1818. Trade between the different provinces of Prussia made free; a moderate uniform tariff established. In general, see Jahrbuch für Nat. Oek., Supplement VII. (1881); Worms, L’Allemagne Economique.

[p. 28]

  1. The agitation for a customs union. Frederic List. Gradual formation of unions between different States. Final formation of the Zoll-verein in 1834. The Zoll-verein tariff based on the Prussian tariff of 1818.
  2. The later history of the Zoll-verein. Contest in regard to the attitude of Austria; commercial treaty of 1853 with Austria. Contest between free-traders and protectionists. Reduction of duties through the treaty negotiated by Prussia with France in 1862. Zoll-verein renewed in 1865 on basis of French treaty. Treaties with other countries.
  3. In recent years a current toward protective duties and bounties in Continental Europe. The movement for protection begins in Germany after the crisis of 1873, and causes the protective tariff of 1879. Jahrbuch für Nat. Oek., vol. 34, and Supplements V and VI. The agitation for still higher duties on agricultural products.
    The duties under the present German tariff. Report on Revision, 630 seq.
  4. Austria breaks with the prohibitive system by the Zoll-verein treaty, and other treaties.
    Protectionist reaction after 1873. The tariff act of 1882 increases duties. Jahrbuch für Gesetzgebung, VI. 1223-1258.
    Frequent suggestions of a customs-union between the German Empire, Austro-Hungary, and the Balkan States.
  5. The arguments on protection in Germany. List’s argument for protection to young industries. Care for the laboring classes the main argument at present. Joined with it, the argument for compensation to employers for burdens imposed by legislation for social reform. Lexis, in Schönberg’s Handbuch, pp. 1104-1119.

 

Source: Frank W. Taussig.Tariff Legislation in the United States. Topics & References in Political Economy VI, Harvard College.Cambridge, Mass., 1888.

Image Source:  Harvard Class Album 1900.

Categories
Courses Curriculum Harvard

Harvard. Rich economics course descriptions, 1884-85

 

Harvard’s expansion of its course offerings in political economy starting in 1883-84 was a major milestone in university instruction in economics in the United States. A report from the Harvard Crimson and another from New York Post have been posted earlier in Economics in the Rear-view Mirror. Following up the previous post that provided J. Laurence Laughlin’s thoughts from 1885 about how to best teach economics, thick descriptions of the Harvard courses in political economy listed for 1884-85 can be found below. The chapter from which the excerpts have been transcribed is in the same volume in which Richard Ely contributed a chapter, “On Methods of Teaching Political Economy” that was cited by Laughlin.  

__________________

Excerpts from:

THE COURSES OF STUDY IN HISTORY, ROMAN LAW, AND POLITICAL ECONOMY, AT HARVARD UNIVERSITY.1
By Henry E. Scott, Harvard University.

A DESCRIPTION of the ground covered and of the methods used in the various courses in History and Political Science at Harvard must necessarily be preceded by a brief statement of the circumstances under which these studies are pursued there.

In the first place, all the courses offered in these branches — and in almost all other branches as well — are purely elective. The University requires each year a certain amount of work from every undergraduate who is a candidate for the degree of Bachelor of Arts; but, with the exception of about two-fifths of the work of the Freshman year, and certain prescribed written exercises in English in the Sophomore, Junior and Senior years, the undergraduate has full liberty to select any course in any subject which his previous training qualifies him to pursue. The courses in History and in Political Science may therefore be elected by any undergraduate, by the Freshman as well as by the Senior; and they are also, it may be added, open to the students of the various professional schools embraced in the University, to resident graduates, and to special students whether graduates or not.

1In the preparation of the following article, the writer has been greatly assisted by the instructors in the several courses described, and their statements have been incorporated in the text with but little change.

[168]
In order to provide suitable recognition for those students who have confined their college work to one or two special fields, Honors of two grades — Honorsand Highest Honors — are awarded at graduation in almost all branches in which instruction is offered. The candidate for Honors in History or in Political Science must have taken in the department selected six full courses or their equivalent, i.e., he must have devoted to it about one-half of his last three years as an undergraduate, four full courses or their equivalent being the amount of elective work required each year of Sophomores, Juniors, and Seniors; and he must have passed with great credit the regular examinations in those courses, and also, shortly before Commencement, a special examination covering all the six courses in question. Students who do not care to specialize to the extent necessary to obtain Honors can yet, by doing creditably about one-half as much work (i.e., by taking three full courses) in any one subject, receive at graduation Honorable Mention in that subject.

To pursue with advantage studies in History or in Political Science, the student must have easy access to books; and, in order to place within his reach the principal sources, authorities, and other helps necessary for the study of a given course, the system of “reserved books” was established some years ago in the Harvard College Library. The instructors in the various departments request the Library authorities to place upon the shelves of certain alcoves, assigned for this purpose in the reading-room of the Library, the books used by their classes for collateral reading and reference. The books thus reserved can be taken from the shelves by the students themselves without the formality of oral or written orders, and can be consulted in the Library during the day. At the close of library hours, they may, if properly charged, be taken out for the ensuing night only, [169] the borrowers promising to return them at 9 a.m. the next day. The right to use the reserved books is not limited to those students who take the particular course for which certain books have been reserved, but all persons entitled to the privileges of the Library are likewise entitled to use all the reserved books, the purpose of the system being not to withdraw the works from general use for the benefit of a narrow circle, but rather so to regulate their use that the greatest possible number of students may be able to consult them. Persons engaged in special investigations can, if necessary, obtain cards of admission to the shelves where the material they wish to use is stored; but, for the ordinary student, the reserved books, together with those ordered from the Library in the usual way, are sufficient.

The courses of instruction which are now to be described are classified — as are all courses offered in the College — as courses or half-courses, according to the amount of work required of the student and the number of exercises a week, a course having either three or two exercises a week, a half-course either two or one.1 Some of the courses are given every year, others every two years, others twice in three years. The more advanced courses can be taken only by special permission of the instructors, to obtain which students must give evidence of their ability to do the work expected of them. There are announced this year (1884-85) in the official pamphlet sixteen courses and two half-courses in History, one course and two half-courses in Roman Law, and four courses and four half-courses in Political Economy. There are actually given this year eleven courses and two half-courses in History, one course in Roman Law, and four courses and three half-courses in Political Economy,

1In the following description the half-courses are especially designated as such.

[170] the remaining courses being omitted in accordance with the arrangements mentioned above or for special reasons. The average number of hours of instruction per week devoted this year to History is thirty; to Roman Law, three; to Political Economy, fifteen.

[…]

THE COURSES IN POLITICAL ECONOMY.

Political Economy 1 (Mill’s “Principles of Political Economy “; Lectures on Banking and the Financial Legislation of the United States; three hours a week, Professor Dunbar and Assistant-Professor Laughlin) is designed (1) to provide for those students who intend to continue their economic studies for more than one year a suitable introduction to the elementary principles of the science, and their application to questions of practical interest; and (2) to furnish students whose time is chiefly devoted to other departments of study with that general knowledge of and training in Political Economy which all men of liberal education should desire. It has, therefore, its theoretical and its practical side. In the present year (1884-85) the new edition of Mill, prepared by Professor Laughlin, serves as a text-book for the main part of the course, and the remaining time is occupied by lectures on the elements of banking and the public finance of the United States (especially in the last quarter of a century). The instructor holds that for a course in the elements of Political Economy, where it is eminently desirable that the student should assimilate principles rather than memorize explanations of each subject, neither the recitation system nor the lecture system is best fitted, but that a judicious mixture of both is necessary; for the object of the instruction is in general not merely to give men facts, but to lead them to think. The text-book is supposed to furnish to the student a clear statement of the principles that are to be taken up at a given exercise. Then in the class-room the instructor, by questions, and by drawing the men into discussion and the free expression of difficulties, endeavors as much as possible to fix the knowledge of principles in the mind of the students, and to direct their attention to the workings of these principles in concrete cases. Graphic [186] representations of facts (such, for example, as are given by the charts in the text-book referred to) are often used to make the relation between theory and practice still clearer; and statements from the newspapers in regard to economic matters are sometimes read in the class-room, in order to test the student’s ability in applying abstract principles to the affairs of every-day life. To give the students practice in making accurate statements, questions are now and then written on the blackboard and answered in writing within fifteen minutes, and at the next hour these answers are criticised and discussed.

In the lectures on the elements of banking and finance in the latter part of the year, the three functions of banking — deposit, issue, and discount — are illustrated by references to the system of National Banks, of the old United States Banks, and of the Bank of England; and the sub-treasury system, the national debt, the methods of raising revenue during the war, the issue of legal tender paper, the resumption of specie payments, etc., are some of the topics discussed, Professor Dunbar’s pamphlet entitled “Extracts from the Laws of the United States relating to Currency and Finance” serving as a basis for the lectures on finance.

 

Political Economy 2 (History of Economic Theory — Examination of Selections from Leading Writers, three hours a week, Professor Dunbar) was in former years conducted by taking up, in the earlier part of the year, Cairnes’s “Leading Principles,” and, in the later part, some book of which the discussion and criticism would bring out more clearly the meaning of the generally accepted doctrines. Carey’s “Social Science,” [three volumes: Vol. 1, Vol. 2, Vol. 3] George’s “Progress and Poverty,” Shadwell’s ”Principles” — books which put the “orthodox” student in a defensive attitude — were used for this purpose. In addition, lectures were given on the history of political economy, and on examples of the working in practice of its principles, such as the working of the principles of international trade in the payment of the Franco-German indemnity in 1871-73, the commercial crisis of 1857, etc.

For the present year (1884-85) the course is remodelled. Nothing in the nature of a text-book is used. The subject is treated by topics. Such questions as the wages-fund controversy, the theory of international trade, the method of political economy, the theory of value, are to be taken up in succession. On each topic references to leading writers will be submitted to the students for examination and discussion. On the wages-fund question, for example, Mill’s retractation in the “Fortnightly Review” of his original views, Cairnes’s restatement of the theory, F. A. Walker’s position as found in his “Wages Question” and his “Political Economy,” George’s criticism of current views in “Progress and Poverty” will be read and discussed. The history of political economy is to be taken up in a similar way, by reference to characteristic extracts from the writings of the Physiocrats, Adam Smith, Malthus, Ricardo, Senior, Say, Bastiat, and their successors and critics in England and on the Continent. These extracts, read beforehand by the students and discussed in the class-room, will be supplemented by the comments and explanations of the instructor. By this method it is hoped that some familiarity with the literature of the subject will be obtained, as well as a more exact comprehension of its doctrines than can come from an elementary study like that of Course 1.

 

In Political Economy 3 (Discussion of Practical Economic Questions — Lectures and Theses, three hours a week, Assistant-Professor Laughlin) it is expected that the student, who is supposed now to have grasped firmly the general principles of political economy by at least one year’s previous study, will apply these principles to the work of examining [188] some of the prominent questions of the day, such as the navigation laws and American shipping, bimetallism, reciprocity with Canada, government and national bank issues, etc. At the beginning of each topic a general outline of the subject and its principal divisions is given by the instructor, together with more or less particular references to the most important authorities; but a complete list of books is not always furnished, the student being rather encouraged to hunt for material himself. The exercise in the class-room takes the form rather of a discussion than a formal lecture, references to authorities being given previous to each meeting, as the following examples will show: —

Standards of Value, see Jevons, “Money and the Mechanism of Exchange,” chaps, iii, xxv; S. Dana Horton, “Gold and Silver,” chap.iv, p. 36; F. A. Walker, “Political Economy,” pp. 363-368, “Money, Trade, and Industry,” pp. 56-77; Wolowski, “L’Or et l’Argent,” pp. 7, 22, 207; Mill, “Principles of Political Economy,” book iii, chap, xv; Walras, “Journal des Économistes,” October, 1882, pp. 5-13.

The third hour of the week (and also the mid-year examination) can be omitted by men who promise to prepare one considerable thesis (due in April) on a subject connected with some practical question of the day which has not been discussed in the class-room. Examples of such subjects are: the warehousing system; a commercial treaty with Mexico; the public land system; the remedy for our surplus of revenue; municipal taxation; characteristics of socialism in the United States; co-operation in the United States (productive and distributive co-operation, industrial partnerships, and cooperative banks); advantages and disadvantages of small holdings.

 

Political Economy 4 (Economic History of Europe and America since the Seven Years’ War, three hours a week, Professor Dunbar) serves to connect Political Economy with  [189] History. It requires no previous study of Political Economy, although some historical knowledge of the period is presupposed. Among the more prominent subjects taken up are: the rise of the modern manufacturing system, more particularly in cottons, woolens, iron; the steam engine; the economic effects of American Independence and of the French Revolution; the factory system; the migration of labor; improved transportation by railroads and steamships; the application of liberal ideas to international trade; the new gold of California and Australia; the economic effects of the Civil War in the United States; American grain in Europe; the Suez Canal; the crisis of 1873, and commercial crises in general; the development of banking; and the resumption of specie payments in the United States.

The course is chiefly narrative, and is carried on by lectures, supplemented by references for collateral reading. A printed list of topics is distributed to the students, containing a summary of the lectures and references to books reserved in the Library. An extract from this list will most clearly indicate its character and purpose. It gives the topics and references for the first lecture on the new gold supply: —

Lecture XLVII. — The discovery of gold in California: “Robinson’s California” (see Larkin’s and Mason‘s Reports, pp. 17, 33); also Exec. Doc. of U. S., 1848, i, 1. — The discovery in Australia: Westgarth, “Colony of Victoria,” 122,315. — Establishment of miners’ customs: Wood,”Sixteen Months in the Gold Diggings,” 125; Lalor’s “Cyclopaedia,” ii, 851. — Increased supply of precious metals in sixteenth and seventeenth centuries small in proportion to that in nineteenth century: Soetbeer, “Edelmetall-Production” (in Petermann’s “Mittheilungen”), Plate 3; “Walker on Money,” Part I, chaps, vii, viii. — The discoveries of 1848 and 1851 needed to give effect to influences already stimulating trade and commerce.

Similar topics and references are given for each of the eighty or ninety lectures.

 

[190] In Political Economy 5 (Economic Effects of Land Tenures in England, Ireland, France, and Germany—Lectures and Theses, one hour a week, counting as a half-course, Assistant-Professor Laughlin) a branch of the science that has been but slightly considered in Course 1 is taken up, and, as in the other practical courses, an attempt is made to apply principles to facts. The following extract from the official pamphlet, describing the courses of study in Political Economy, will indicate the ground covered: —

“This course covers the questions now of political importance in England, Ireland, France, and Germany in their economic aspects, and embraces the following subjects: — In England: the land laws; relative position of landlord, tenant, and laborer in the last one hundred years; tenant-right; leases; prices and importation of grain; repeal of the corn-laws; American competition; peasant proprietorship. In Ireland: the ancient tribal customs; English conquests; relations of landlord and tenant; security of tenure; Ulster tenant-right; absenteeism; parliamentary legislation; acts of 1869, 1870, 1881, 1882; population; prices of food and labor. In France: feudal burdens on land; relation of classes, and condition of peasantry and agriculture before the Revolution; small holdings and the law of equal division; present condition of peasantry and agriculture; growth of population; statistics of production, wages, prices; peasant proprietorship. In Germany: reforms of Stein and Hardenberg; condition of agriculture; peasant proprietors; statistics of wages and prices.”

A subject taken up (for example, English land tenures) is divided into topics, some of which are treated by the instructor by means of lectures, others are assigned to the individual members of the class, who are expected to present the results of their study in writing. These short theses are criticised and discussed by the instructor and the class, authorities that have been overlooked are pointed out, and suggestions are made as to the way in which the question can be better handled. Perhaps five or six of these papers [191] are required from each student during the year, the intention being that at least one shall be handed in each week. As the natural tendency of such work is to “compile,” much more consideration is given to the quality than to the quantity of the thesis.

 

In Political Economy 6 (History of Tariff Legislation in the United States, one hour a week, counting as a half- course, Dr. Taussig) the history of tariff legislation from 1789 to the present day is studied. The method of instruction is by lectures and collateral reading, specific references being given beforehand on the subjects to be taken up; for example, the references on the tariff act of 1789 are as follows: Hamilton’s “Life of Hamilton,” iv, 2-7; Adams, “Taxation in United States,” 1-30, especially 27-30; Sumner, “History of Protection,” 21-25; Young’s “Report on Tariff Legislation,” pp. iv-xvi. Similar references are given when the economic effects of the tariff, more particularly in recent years, are discussed. The class-room work is based on the assumption that the passages referred to have been read by the students, and, though mainly carried on by lectures, includes questioning and discussion on the references. The economic principles bearing on tariff legislation are taken up in connection with the more important public utterances on the subject, such as Hamilton’s “Report on Manufactures,” Gallatin’s “Memorial of 1832,” Walker’s “Treasury Report of 1845,” and the speeches of Webster, Clay, and others. These are read by the students, and discussed in the class; and at the same time with them are considered the views of writers on the theory of economic science. In the course of the year the various arguments pro and con in the protection controversy are, in one shape or another, encountered and discussed. Towards the close of the year lectures are given on the tariff history of England, France, and Germany.

 

[192] Political Economy 7 (Comparison of the Financial Systems of France, England, Germany, and the United States, one hour a week, counting as a half-course, Professor Dunbar) deals with the principles of finance, and with the financial systems of the more important civilized countries. The budgets of France, Germany, and England are examined and compared, the financial methods of the United States are noted, and the principles of finance and the advantages and disadvantages of different taxes are discussed. The instruction is mainly by lectures. The course is not given in the present year (1884-85), and may be omitted in future years, though it will be retained on the elective list.

 

In Political Economy 8 (History of Financial Legislation in the United States, one hour a week, counting as a half- course, Professor Dunbar) the funding of the Revolutionary debt, the establishment and working of the first Bank of the United States, the financial policy of Hamilton and Gallatin, the effect of the War of 1812 on the finances and the currency, the establishment of the second Bank of the United States, the fall of the bank in Jackson’s time, and the years 1836-40, the independent treasury, the State banking system, the growth of the public debt during the Civil War, and its reduction and conversion since, the establishment and working of the National Bank system, — are the topics successively considered. The method of instruction is by lectures and by reference to the public documents and other writings bearing on the subject. It is advised by the instructors that Courses 6 and 8 in Political Economy be taken together; and this advice has been followed, most students who take one of these courses being also members of the other.

 

Source:  Henry E. Scott, “The Courses of Study in History, Roman Law, and Political Economy at Harvard University”  Vol. I. Methods of Teaching History (pp. 167-170, 185-192) in the series Pedagogical Library, edited by G. Stanley Hall. Boston: D.C. Heath & Company, second edition, 1885.

Image Source:  Charles F. Dunbar (left) and Frank W. Taussig (right) from E. H. Jackson and R. W. Hunter, Portraits of the Harvard Faculty (1892); J. Laurence Laughlin (middle) from Marion Talbot. More Than Lore: Reminiscences of Marion Talbot, Dean of Women, The University of Chicago, 1892-1925. Chicago: University of Chicago (1936).

Categories
Exam Questions Harvard

Harvard. Exams on Adam Smith, J.S. Mill and Modern Writers. Taussig, 1915, 1916.

 

Frank W. Taussig only offered this intermediate level economic theory course twice. It was sandwiched in between his principles of economics course and the graduate economic theory course.

____________________

Course Description, 1917-18
[Note: the course was not offered, 1917-18]

7a 1hf. Economic Theory [No instructor listed]. Half-course (first half-year). Tu., Th., at 2.30, and (at the pleasure of the instructor) Sat., at 11.

Course 7a undertakes a survey of economic thought from Adam Smith to the present time. Considerable parts of the Wealth of Nations and of J. S. Mill’s Principles of Political Economy will be read, as well as selected passages from the writings of contemporary economists. No theses or other set written work will be required. The course will be conducted chiefly by discussion. It forms an advantageous introduction to Economics 7b [“The Single Tax, Socialism, Anarchism” taught by Professor Thomas N. Carver].
Students who have attained in economics A a grade sufficient for distinction (A or B) are admitted without further inquiry. Others must secure the consent of the instructor.

 

Source:   Division of History, Government, and Economics 1917-18. Official Register of Harvard University. Vol. 14, No. 25 (May 18, 1917) p. 62.

____________________

Course Announcement, 1915-16

[Economics] 7a 1hf. Economic Theory

Adam Smith, J. S. Mill, modern writers. Half-course (first half-year) Tu., Th., at 2.30, and (at the pleasure of the instructor) Sat., at 11. Professor Taussig.

 

Source:Announcement of the Courses of Instruction Offered by the Faculty of Arts and Sciences 1915-16 (2ndedition). Official Register of Harvard University, Vol. 12, No. 1, Part 13 (September 20, 1915), p. 101.

 

Course Enrollment, 1915-16

7a 1hf.Professor Taussig.—Economic Theory.

Total 27: 12 Graduates, 5 Seniors, 5 Juniors, 1 Sophomore, 4 Others.

 

Source:  Harvard University. Report of the President of Harvard College 1915-1916, p. 60.

 

Final Examination 1915-16
ECONOMICS 7a1

Arrange your answers strictly in the order of the questions.

  1. “The wages of the inferior classes of workmen, I have endeavored to show in the first book, are everywhere necessarily regulated by two different circumstances: the demand for labor, and the ordinary or average price for provisions. The demand for labor, according as it happens to be either increasing, stationary, or declining, or to require an increasing, stationary or declining population, regulates the subsistence of the laborer and determines in what degree it shall be either liberal, moderate, or scanty.”
    Explain (1) in what way Adam Smith analyzed the “demand for labor”; (2) the nature of the reasoning which led to his conclusions regarding the influence on wages of increasing or declining national wealth.
  2. Explain in what way J. S. Mill analyzed the demand for labor, and wherein his analysis resembled Adam Smith’s, wherein it differed; and consider whether Mill’s conclusions regarding the influence of increasing national wealth on wages were similar to Adam Smith’s.
  3. Explain:
    1. The Physiocratic notion concerning productive labor;
    2. Adam Smith’s distinction between productive and unproductive labor;
    3. Adam Smith’s doctrine as to the way in which equal capitals employed in agriculture, in manufactures, in wholesale or retail trade, put in motion different quantities of productive labor.
      What reasoning led Adam Smith to arrange industries in the order of productiveness indicated in (c) and what have you to say in comment on it?
  4. Why, according to Adam Smith, is there rent from land used for growing grain? from land used for pasture? from mines?
    What would a writer like Mill say of these doctrines of Adam Smith’s?
  5. How does Mill (following Chalmers) explain the rapid recovery of countries devastated by war? Do you think the explanation sound?
  6. Wherein is Mill’s analysis of the causes of differences in wages similar to Adam Smith’s, wherein different?
  7. What, according to Mill, is the foundation of private property? What corollaries does he draw as regards inheritance and bequest? What is your instructor’s view on the justification of inheritance and bequest?
  8. Explain wherein there are or are not ” human costs ” in the savings of the rich, of the middle classes, and of the poor; and wherein there are or are not” economic costs ” in these several savings.
  9. Hobson says: (a) that” the traditional habits of ostentatious waste and conspicuous leisure . . . induce futile extravagance in expenditure”; (b) that” the very type of this expenditure is a display of fireworks; futility is of its essence”; (c) that “the glory of the successful sportsman is due to the fact that his deeds are futile. And this conspicuous futility is at the root of the matter. The fact that he can give time, energy, and money to sport testifies to his possession of independent means.” Consider what is meant by” futility ” in these passages; and give your own opinion on the significance of “sport.” [J.A. Hobson, Work and Wealth: A Human Valuation, 1914.]
  10. Explain the grounds on which Hobson finds little promise for the future in (a) consumers’ cooperation; (b) producers’ cooperation; (c) syndicalism.

 

Source: Papers Set for Final Examinations on History, History of Religions,…, Economics,…, Fine Arts, Music in Harvard College. June, 1916, pp. 55-56.

____________________

Course Enrollment, 1916-17

7a 1hf.Professor Taussig.—Economic Theory.

Total 31: 2 Graduates, 13 Seniors, 12 Juniors, , 4 Others.

Source:  Harvard University. Report of the President of Harvard College 1916-1917, p. 56.

 

Final Examination 1916-17
ECONOMICS 7a1

Arrange your answers strictly in the order of the questions.

  1. Summarize the order in which Adam Smith arranges the several topics taken up by him in Book I; and explain the circumstances in his life and in the composition of the Wealth of Nations which explain this order.
  2. Wherein is Adam Smith’s discussion of differences of profit similar to Mill’s, wherein dissimilar?
  3. Precisely in what ways was Adam Smith’s doctrine on the rent of mines similar to that of Mill, in what ways dissimilar?
  4. How, according to Adam Smith, does the issue of paper money drive specie out of circulation?
  5. Can J. S. Mill’s doctrines on wages be reconciled with those of his chapter on the future of the laboring classes?
  6. Explain briefly what Wells means by “administrative” socialism; by “constructive” socialism.
  7. “The principle which prompts to save is the desire of bettering our condition, a desire which, though generally calm and dispassionate, comes with us from the womb, and never leaves us till we go into the grave….An augmentation of fortune is the means by which the greater part of men propose and wish to better their condition.” What application does Adam Smith make of this principle as regards the effects of public and of private prodigality and misconduct?
  8. What is said of Adam Smith’s principle (as stated in the preceding question) by Wells? by your instructor?
  9. “The fact must be insisted upon that most of the work of the world and all the good work is done to-day for some other motive than gain; that profit-seeking not only is not the moving power of the world, but that it cannot be, that it runs counter to the doing of effectual work in every department of life.” [H. G. Wells, New Worlds for Old (1913), p. 94]
    “The prosperous merchant of to-day would find himself somewhere high in the hierarchy of the distributing service….And you would get a pretty good salary; modern Socialism does not propose to maintain any dead level to the detriment of able men. Modern socialism has cleared itself of that jealous hatred of prosperity that was once a part of class-war socialism.” [H. G. Wells, New Worlds for Old (1913), p. 304]
    Is there any inconsistency between these two passages?
  10. “Another delusion is that public property is more serviceable than private property, to the public. It is difficult for some people to see that all productive property is serving the public, and the more efficiently it is managed, and the more it is made to produce for the manager, the better it is for the public…The only question is, is it likely to be used as productively in the hands of the individual who has shown the efficiency to accumulate it, as it would be if it were taken out of his hands by the public?”
    1. What parts of this quotation would Wells accept or reject?
    2. What is your own opinion of the quotation, and of Wells’ view on the subject?

 

Source:  Harvard University Archives. Examination Papers, 1917 (HUC 7000.28, vol. 59). Papers Set for Final Examinations on History, History of Religions,…, Economics,…, Fine Arts, Music in Harvard College. June, 1917, pp. 57-58.

Image Source: Frank W. Taussig from Harvard Class Album 1915.

 

Categories
Curriculum Germany Harvard

Harvard. The German language in higher education, 1894

 

Several earlier posts have considered foreign language requirements from the perspective of mid-20th century (e.g. Harvard, Columbia, Chicago). This post takes us back to the early years of graduate instruction at the end of the 19th century. The report by the “German Committee” submitted to the Board of Overseers of Harvard College in 1894 was forty-six pages long. I have included only the statements by three professors of economics (Taussig, Dunbar, and Ashley) between the report’s lede and its conclusions, but I can recommend a quick glance at the statements submitted by members of other departments at Harvard.

__________________

REPORT OF THE COMMITTEE ON GERMAN.
[October 4, 1894]

To The Board of Overseers : —

In order either to confirm or to correct the opinions held by the undersigned as to the position which instruction in the German language should occupy in the general scheme of the University, the following questions were addressed to teachers of every grade active in the various branches of the institution:

  1. Is any of your work, or of the work of any student in the University under you, determined, or limited, or in any way affected by knowledge or ignorance of the German language on the part of such student, and, if so, how?
  2. Is knowledge of German required of any student in the University for admission to, or for continuance in, any study under you, and, if so, how much knowledge, and how much is it used, and for what study or studies?
  3. What proportion of the published work of yourself, or of any student, or students, in your department, is published in the German language, and, if any, in what books or papers?
  4. What remedy or remedies can you suggest for any evil suffered by the University or any student or students thereof through ignorance of, or imperfect knowledge of German.

We beg leave to submit the answers received in the original; but, for the sake of convenience, we present also in this report, grouped according to the different branches of study, abstracts of opinions expressed, especially in response to question 1, to which we respectfully and urgently invite the attention of the Board of Overseers. It will be found that while a few of the professors, instructors or lecturers consider the knowledge of German as of little consequence to their students, an overwhelming majority of them, representing all conceivable varieties of study, agree, with singular concert of judgment, as to the desirability of that knowledge, differing only in the degree of their appreciation of it, some declaring the ability to read German merely helpful, while others pronounce it to be absolutely indispensable.

We shall now let them speak for themselves :

[…]

Professor F. W. Taussig, Professor of Political Economy.

  1. In the work of all my advanced courses, and especially in the course on economic theory, I am hampered by the fact that the students, otherwise well equipped, cannot handle German.

Professor C. F. Dunbar, Professor of Political Economy and Dean of the Faculty of Arts and Sciences.

  1. In public finance and banking the work is so far affected that I feel it practically useless to require the reading of anything which cannot be paralleled in French or English; and although I make references to German sources, it is with the feeling that they will be used by only a part of the class. This often makes it necessary, in order to cover a German topic with certainty (as e. g. in Taxation), to give it a disproportionate amount of time in my lectures. I must add that the state of things appears to me to be improving.

Professor W. J. Ashley, Professor of Economic History.

  1. In all the higher University work with which I am concerned, in the study of economic and social history, it would be a great advantage to the men to have a fair acquaintance with German.
  2. In “The History of Economic Theory down to Adam Smith,” to read German is declared in the department pamphlet to be “desirable.” In a class last year of some eight seniors and graduate students, two, if I remember rightly, showed that they could use German with ease, and one of these did an excellent piece of work for me and the class which would have been impossible otherwise.

[…]

            While these reports are calculated to create a favorable impression as far as they go, it is to be gathered from many of the opinions expressed that, although a certain advance is to be noticed, a greater and more general proficiency in German among the students is very desirable. As to the question how the deficiencies that may exist might be remedied, the answers received in response to our interogatories differ. They may be divided into the following classes: —

  1. Those recommending that students be admonished by way of suggestion and advice, in the official reports and pamphlets as well as in personal conversation, to devote more attention to the study of the German language.
  2. Those recommending that the requirements as to German in the examinations for admission to the University be increased.
  3. Those recommending higher requirements as to German for admission to scientific schools, and for honors and degrees; and
  4. Those recommending special courses for scientific German to be connected with the different scientific departments.

These different recommendations do not necessarily exclude one another, as, indeed, they appear grouped together in one or two of the answers we have received to our interrogatories. The admonition by suggestion or advice, as well as the establishment of higher requirements in German for certain honors or degrees, might prove desirable incentives under any circumstances. But a careful consideration of the whole subject has led us to the conclusion that the recommendation of an increase of the initial requirements deserves the most serious attention. The more Harvard rises to the station and dignity of a University in the higher,—that is, the true sense—the less the institution should have to do with that kind of work which naturally belongs to the office of the preparatory school. The student entering Harvard should be required sufficiently to possess what may be called the mechanical equipment necessary for the pursuit of his studies. This, applied to the German language, would mean that the Harvard student should be beyond the struggle with its structural difficulties, that he should be able to read it understandingly, without the painful drudgery of conscious translation word for word, and that in using it his labor should be reduced to a mere occasional enlargement of the vocabulary.

We admit that it may be very difficult, if not impossible, to reach this objective point all at once. But it may ultimately reached by gradual approaches. We venture respectfully to suggest as the first step a public announcement that the requirements as to German in the examination for admission, will henceforth be increased by degrees, and that elementary instruction in German at the University will be discontinued.

We further suggest that the time for the examination in German be extended to two hours and that it include, in addition to the translation of German prose, not of the simplest kind, but of ordinary difficulty, the translation of a few sentences of simple English prose into German, or a simple composition in German, and some ordinary tests in German grammar. The examination should certainly be severe enough not to permit the attainment of a satisfactory result by cramming.

We believe also that the recommendation made by several of the officers of instruction concerning the establishment of special courses in “scientific German” in connection with the respective scientific schools, deserves to be seriously considered. If, as sources of information, German works are to be read, it is most important that they should be read understandingly. The meaning of writers who are studied as authorities should not be merely guessed at. This is one of the cases in which “a little knowledge” is more dangerous than none at all. The particular study of scientific terminologies appears especially necessary with regard to German writers because, as is well known, not a few of them—whether writing on science, or philosophy, or even history, — take great liberties with their language in constructing composite words and in various other ways, thus creating, to some extent, technical terms, or forms of expression which, when applied to certain things, are to convey a special meaning — more or less peculiar to themselves. The courses suggested would, therefore, serve a useful purpose.

We would also respectfully recommend that in courses in which recitations form part of the system of instruction, the classes be divided into sections conveniently small, to contain not above 30 students, and that the number of instructors be correspondingly increased.

All of which is respectfully submitted.

C. SCHURZ,
J. ELLIOT CABOT,
CHARLES E. GRINNELL,

Committee on German.

4th October, 1894.

 

Source: Reports of the Visiting Committees of the Board of Overseers of Harvard College from February 6, 1890, to January 8, 1902 Inclusive. Cambridge, Massachusetts (1902), pp. 221, 241-242, 265-267.

Image Source:  Dunbar, Ashley and Taussig from The Harvard Portfolio (Class of 1895), Vol. VI.

 

 

 

Categories
Courses Harvard Principles

Harvard. Report on the Recitation Sections of Principles of Economics, 1913-14

 

 

A member of the Department of Economics Visiting Committee, John Wells Morss, took it upon himself to sit in and observe classroom performance in the recitation sections of the Harvard Principles of Economics course during the Fall term of 1913-14. From the first paragraph of his report it would appear that the department of economics had invited him to provide a report to serve as a complementary (friendly?) assessment to the survey being (or to be) conducted by the Harvard Division of Education on teaching in the economics department. That Division of Education report was later published: The Teaching of Economics in Harvard University—A Report Presented by the Division of Education at the Request of the Department of Economics. Cambridge: Harvard University Press, 1917. 

Morss’ report was passed along to President A. Lawrence Lowell of Harvard by the chairman of the department of economics, Charles Bullock, for-the-(positive)-record. While the report seems rather long-winded by today’s standards, it does provide us some good information, e.g. about the importance of the weekly questions discussed in the recitation sections. For a sample of the questions we are fortunate to have the published record.

Edmund Ezra Day and Joseph Stancliffe Davis. Questions on the Principles of Economics. New York: 1915.
“A few of the questions here presented are frankly borrowed from previously published collections…More of the questions have been drawn from a stock accumulated through several years in the hands of the instructing staff of the introductory course in Economics at Harvard University.” (p. vii)
The questions were arranged by topics to follow Taussig’s own textbook Principles of Economics (Second, revised edition of 1915: Volume One; Volume Two).

Another interesting takeaway is that Morss noted that over the four weeks that he attended sections, the average amount of assigned reading for these recitations was 33 pages per week from the Taussig textbook. This certainly seems modest from the perspective of today’s nominal reading lists but perhaps actually corresponds to the actual reading completed by the average undergraduate in an introductory or intermediate economics course.

Note: Since the following items come from the last folder from a box that contains the papers of President Lowell of 1909-14 and the month of February is significantly closer to the start than the end of the year, it seems likely that the date, “1913”, found in the typed date on Charles Bullock’s cover letter was mistaken and that both items transcribed below are from February 1914.

 __________________

Course Announcement and Description, 1913-14

[Economics] A. (formerly 1). Principles of Economics. Tu., Th., Sat., at 11.

Professor Taussig and Asst. Professor Day, assisted by Messrs. Burbank, J. S. Davis, R. E. Heilman, and others.

            Course A gives a general introduction to economic study, and a general view of Economics for those who have not further time to give to the subject. It undertakes a consideration of the principles of production, distribution, exchange, money, banking, international trade, and taxation The relations of labor and capital, the present organization of industry, and the recent currency legislation of the United States will be treated in outline.

The course will be conducted partly by lectures, partly by oral discussion in sections. A course of reading will be laid down, and weekly written exercises will test the work of students in following systematically and continuously the lectures and the prescribed reading. course A may not be taken by Freshmen without the consent of the instructor.

 

Source: Harvard University. Division of History, Government, and Economics, 1913-14, published in Official Register of Harvard University, Vol. X, No. 1, Part X (May 19, 1913) , p. 60.

__________________

Course Enrollment, 1913-14

[Economics] A (formerly 1). Professor Taussig and Asst. Professor Day, assisted by Dr. J. S. Davis, and Messrs. P. G. Wright, Burbank, Eldred, and Vanderblue.—Principles of Economics.

Total, 494: 1 Graduate, 1 Business School, 13 Seniors, 129 Juniors, 280 Sophomores, 24 Freshmen. 46 Others.

 

Source: Harvard University. Report of the President of Harvard College, 1913-1914, p. 54.

 

__________________

Examination Questions for Economics A, 1913-14

Mid-year and Year-end final exams for 1913-14 for Economics A have been transcribed and posted earlier. 

__________________

Cover letter from Professor Bullock (Economics)
to President Lowell

HARVARD UNIVERSITY
DEPARTMENT OF ECONOMICS

Cambridge, Massachusetts
February 20, 1913 [sic].

Dear Mr. Lowell:

Mr. John Wells Morss of our Visiting Committee has recently completed a very thoro investigation of the work done in the sections of Economics A. I enclose herewith a copy of the Report, which I think, will be of great interest to you. Last Tuesday I had the pleasure of an hour’s conference with Mr. Morss, in which he told me somewhat more fully about this investigation; and I think it may be worth your while to confer with him upon the subject.

Sincerely yours,
[signed]
C. J. Bullock.

__________________

Harvard University

THE SECTION MEETINGS OF ECONOMICS A

Notes by John Wells Morss
February, 1914.

When an amateur attempts to pass upon the work of professionals, a knowledge of his point of view is essential to one who would consider his conclusions. It therefore seems fitting to state that I was invited by the Department of Economics to make an examination of some of its work not because I was expected to reach results comparable to those expected from the examination now being conducted by the Department of Education, but because, as my invitation expressed it, the Department of Economics believed it “important to secure the opinion of some one who represents a different point of view, and brings to the work of inspection the experience of a man of business rather than of a student of education”. I have limited my examination to the work of the section meetings of the Economics Department, and shall limit this report to the work of the section meetings of Economics A, as that course has a large majority of the section meetings of the Department, and to consider them only greatly simplifies what I have to say. I have not compared my results with those of the Department of Education, and I have sought but little to obtain the views of those who conduct the section meetings as to their problems and difficulties lest they overwhelm my own observation.

Economics A, the introductory course to the subject most popular in Harvard College, has an enrollment of students this year of about five hundred and twenty-five. On Saturdays a lecture is delivered to the students in a body in the New Lecture Hall. On two other days of the week each student attends a meeting of the section to which he is assigned. There are twenty-one sections, each with a membership of about twenty-five. They are conducted by five instructors and Assistant Professor Day, all of whom will be referred to as the instructors. Twenty minutes or more of the one hundred minutes given weekly to the section meetings are devoted to writing an answer to a question set by the instructor. As twenty-one section meetings cannot be held at once, the same question cannot be put to all the students of the course; but the six different questions, prepared at a conference of the instructors, are all designed to serve the same purpose of testing the students’ knowledge and comprehension of recent work. I have not attempted to judge either questions or answers, but their usefulness seems to me to be unquestionable. After the answer is written the rest of the two meetings is devoted to a quiz with explanations and discussions based on the required reading which is usually from twenty to fifty pages of Prof. Taussig’s “Principles of Economics”. It is to this part of the work that I have given the most of my attention.

The attendance has been excellent at all the meetings at which I have been present. The maximum number of absences in a section of twenty-five does not ordinarily exceed two. One section had but five absences in six successive meetings beginning in the second week of the fall term. This record may not be equaled at meetings close to holidays and other special occasions, but on the whole the attendance is surprisingly good.

The preparation of the students is stimulated and tested by the questions asked of them by the instructor. So generally did it appear that substantially all the students of a section were called upon in an hour that I ceased after a time to attend to the point, though it seems plain that care should be used not to miss sluggish students assigned to seats in the back of the room. How generally the required reading had been done it was difficult to judge. Perhaps on the average three or four at each meeting answered that they were not prepared. At one meeting near the end of the year in another course than Economics A the preparation had been widely neglected, but that was a single case in my experience, and on the whole it seems that success is attained in the attempt to cause the students to work throughout the year with reasonable regularity.

The attention of the students seemed also satisfactory. Nobody went to sleep and apparently very few were near it. I saw no carving of the desks, though many results of such handiwork are visible. A half dozen raised hands would often indicate a strong desire to answer a question or join in the discussion. A considerable number of questions were asked in the class, some showing thought above the realization of ignorance. At some meetings a few students asked questions after the class, though the total number of those so doing was rather disappointing, considering the theoretical and stimulating nature of the subject.

The quality of the thinking done by the students did not seem to equal their attention. That they should show a lack of practical knowledge and of well considered opinions was to be expected in an elementary course; but they showed a striking incapacity for the simplest mental arithmetic, and on one occasion but few, if any, of them had had the curiosity, when studying the different kinds of currency, to look at the bills in their own pockets. And there was frequently illustrated the difference in result between reading and hard study. Often their ideas seemed hazy and too often a whole class seemed unable to answer a question adequately explained in the text. In other words, one who seeks the thoroughness required of a man is disappointed as is also he who expects to find among these students the indifference of an idle boy. When however one remembers that the average student of an elementary course in college is neither boy nor man, but in progress of development from one to the other, one is reasonably satisfied with the attitude and work of the students, and with their response to what is done for them.

In one particular however it seems that special effort should be made to improve the work of the students. In all the section meetings I attended comparatively few notes were taken. A reason may be that it is difficult to take notes of a running discussion; but the results of the discussions are often summarized by the instructor, and nobody can really take notes who can only report a slowly delivered lecture. Moreover in one case apparently not a single member of a section copied from the blackboard figures excellently illustrating the working of a clearing house. I for one should be glad to see lectures delivered to all the students of the College explaining the importance of note taking, and suggesting various practical methods. Further I would have the instructors of this course informally supplement such lectures from time to time by encouraging good note taking.

When the work of the instructor of a section meeting is considered, it is necessary early to realize that one of the most serious limitations under which he works is that of time. The maximum time available weekly for discussion in the section meetings is a short eighty minutes. The average number of pages assigned to be read in four successive weeks was thirty-three, and an experiment showed that it takes three minutes to read aloud one of those pages very rapidly. In other words there are but eighty minutes to discuss a text which cannot be read rapidly in less than one hundred minutes, and which is usually condensed in statement, closely reasoned and in many points debatable. There has therefore arisen a demand for an additional section meeting. This does not appeal to me. Economics A is a course which should be taken by every student in the College, and it should not require an exceptional amount of time from its students lest the number of them taking it be thereby limited. Moreover an additional fifty minutes would not solve the problem; the cry for still another hour would inevitably follow.

The work of the instructor is also rendered difficult by the exceptional nature of the course itself. Economics A is not only an introductory course, but is also the only course in Economics taken by a large proportion of its members. It embraces a great number of topics, each as a rule involving difficult questions of theory and based on a great variety of facts. The amount of ground to be covered is so great that of most topics only a cursory view can be had. It is impossible to pursue to any considerable extent the method of teaching by asking questions introduced into the Law School by Prof. Langdell. With that method, at least in the first year, but little ground can be covered, the facts must be few and certain, and the students either trained to reason closely or ambitious to become so trained. In Economics A the students are two or three years younger than in the Law School, and the facts and principles involved in a simple economic problem are generally of much greater complexity than those contained in the printed report of a law case. Moreover it is a rare person who does not believe that his general knowledge of economics questions is valuable. Therefore the attempt to teach elementary economics by questioning usually leads into a maze of disputed facts. Frequently therefore the instructor can ask questions only until the points are developed and then must make a statement relative to the matter under discussion. These statements are necessary and save much time, but one wonders occasionally if they are fully understood by the students, and whether a question or two after the statement would not furnish a useful test.

The variety, and to some extent the inconsistency, of the objects sought to be accomplished in the section meetings is another difficulty of the instructor. He seems called upon to see that his students do steady work; to check that work for deficiencies; to emphasize the more important, and explain the more difficult parts of a difficult subject; to stimulate intellectual interest and develop good mental habits; and, so far as time allows, to add to the contribution of others further facts and principles. In other words he must be a drill sergeant, an efficient and inspiring teacher, and an authority overflowing with his subject. An illustration of the problems caused by this diversity of objects presents itself when we consider whether it is better to ask single questions of one student after another, or to ask a considerable number of questions of one student before calling on another. If the latter course is followed, the subject can be more thoroughly and consistently developed, and the questioned student better tested and aroused. But then the poorer members of the class may fail to follow the line of questioning or may even regard the considerable time given to one man as an opportunity mentally to go to sleep. A rattling fire of single questions keeps the whole class wide awake.

An observer who has come to realize some of the difficulties of conducting a section meeting, and has seen different methods pursued by different instructors, is tempted to theorize and to select the methods which he thinks he would adopt if he were himself conducting a meeting. He would call upon his students in an order which they could not forsee, and would call on each one of them at least weekly to test his reading of the text. He would use the single question when the simplicity of the subject matter encouraged it, or the class seemed dull, and would seek the opportunity to develop with one student a more complicated problem by a series of questions. He would realize that the limitation of time made it necessary not to attempt to cover in the class all the ground covered by the text, but to plan carefully what topics should be touched upon and the amount of time to be given to each of them, even if his intention was not to hold rigidly to his plan, but to meet the needs of his class as it developed in the meeting. He would try to present in some measure of scale the most important points, although saving time on those which could not fail to be seized by the students because of their relative simplicity or general popular interest. In such an introductory course he would tend to emphasize reasons rather than conclusions, and theory rather than facts, although he would welcome an opportunity to explain and illustrate the actual working in detail of practical affairs. He would as a rule follow the opinions of the text and not complicate a problem by introducing too often his own opinions or those of other authorities; nor would he expect himself largely to contribute additional material to the discussion; yet he would avoid frequent references to the text by name, but endeavor to have a proposition rest not on the authority of the writer but on its own reasonableness. Realizing that a problem is half solved when the definitions of its terms are accurately determined, he would emphasize the importance of the exact meaning of words, and would not infrequently write on the blackboard a list of significant words and phrases as an outline for the work of the meeting.

But even if a method could be determined upon which would be better than any other, its creator would still be far from his goal. The very perfection of the method of one instructor may cause his class to bow to it and hardly ask a question, while the apparent deficiencies of another’s method seems to stimulate his class to ask questions until the ground is well covered. Again a method highly successful with one teacher cannot be effectively pursued by another; and the needs of the students, even of the students of the same section, vary greatly from time to time. Moreover almost every conclusion embodied in a method is a resultant of conflicting considerations and its application is a question of degree. One therefore is here led to an opinion often reached before in similar cases that good teaching is primarily a matter not of method, but of judgment, energy and skill in the teacher.

In studying the characteristics of the instructors of Economics A, one first notes that they are men of very diverse temperaments, experience and methods. So different are they that when I learned that they had a weekly meeting I thought that they might greatly help each other by consultation about their common work, especially as most of them obtain in in this course their first experience in teaching. I was distinctly disappointed when I learned that the object of their weekly meeting was mainly to prepare the questions for the written answer, rather than to consult about the next week’s teaching. Still much consultation, if attempted, might easily become formal or cramping, and it may be better that each should be left alone to work out his results, and that we should trust that freedom will continue to justify itself by its fruits. Whichever plan is followed, the probability that there will occasionally be employed an instructor of inferior quality is sufficiently great to raise the question whether it would not be desirable to have each section taught by different instructors in the first and second half years. This would guarantee to each section at least a half year’s good instruction, and in addition would give to the students the advantage of two methods and two points of view.

In conclusion I am happy to be able to report that in my opinion the instructors of the section meetings of Economics A, with all their differences, are men of an exceptionally high average of ability and earnestness, and that their instruction is notably good,–much better than I had expected to find. The expenditure in the past few years of additional money to better the grade of these instructors has been justified by results, and those responsible for it are entitled to congratulations.

 

Source: Harvard University Archives. President Lowell’s Papers 1909-1914, Box 14, Folder 404.

Image Source:  Wikimedia Commons photograph by Bill McLaughlin : Lowell Hall, originally called “New Lecture Hall”, Harvard University.

Categories
Exam Questions Harvard

Harvard. Graduate economic theory exams. Taussig, 1930-35

 

Today I am relieved to post the final batch (1930-1935) of enrollment data and examination questions for Frank W. Taussig’s core economic theory course. All in all nearly a half-century run for Harvard’s Grand Old Man.

Previous batches of transcribed exams are provided via the links below.

Examinations for 1887-90
Examinations for 1891-94
Examinations for 1897-1900
Examinations for 1904-09
Examinations for 1911-14
Examinations for 1915-17
Examinations for 1918-19 [Bullock and Carver]
Examinations for 1920-22
Examinations for 1923-25
Examinations for 1926-30

____________________________________

1930-31

Course Enrollment: Economics 11
1930-31

[Economics] 11. Professor Taussig.—Economic Theory

Total 58: 50 Graduates, 1 Senior, 7 Radcliffe.

 

Source: Harvard University. Reports of the President and Treasurer of Harvard College, 1930-31, p. 77.

 

1930-31
HARVARD UNIVERSITY
ECONOMICS 11
Mid-year Examination

Arrange your answers in the order of the questions.
One question may be omitted.

  1. In an examination paper set at Harvard College in 1876 the following question appears: “What is the error in the proposition that high wages make high prices?”
    What answer would have been expected from a student at that time? What answer would you give now?
  2. “The latent influence by which the values of things are made to conform in the long run to the cost of production is the variation that would otherwise take place in the supply of the commodity. The supply would be increased if the thing continued to sell above the ratio of its cost of production, and would be diminished if it fell below that ratio. But we must not therefore suppose it to be necessary that the supply should actually be either diminished or increased. . . . There is no need that there should be any actual alteration of supply; and when there is, the alteration, if permanent, is not the cause, but the consequence of the alteration in value. If, indeed, the supply could not be increased, no diminution in the cost of production would lower the value: but there is by no means any necessity that it should. The mere possibility often suffices.”
    Is this in accord with Mill’s analysis of demand and supply? with Marshall’s? with business experience?
  3. Can you distinguish between “supply price” and “expenses of production” in the following cases:
    1. the temporary equilibrium of supply and demand;
    2. accountants’ figures of cost for agricultural produce;
    3. accountants’ treatment of depreciation in the accounts of a manufacturing enterprise.
  4. In an examination paper set at Cambridge University, England, in 1929, the following appears: “From the point of view of economic principle, analyze the return obtained to-day from fen land drained in the seventeenth century?”
    What answer would Ricardo or Mill have given? What answer would be expected now from a student in Cambridge, England? What from a student in Cambridge, Mass.?
  5. (1) Marshall’s final conclusion as to the tenability of a distinction between interest and rent.
    (2) The following passages:

“The deepest and most important line of cleavage in economic theory” [is] “the distinction between the quasi-rents which do not, and the profits which do, directly enter into the normal supply prices of produce for periods of moderate length.”
“When the artisan or professional man has once obtained the skill required for his work, a part of his earnings are for the future really a quasi-rent of the capital and labour invested in fitting him for his work, in obtaining his start in life, his business connections, and generally his opportunity for turning his faculties to good account; and only the remainder of his income is true earnings of effort. But this remainder is generally a large part of the whole. And here lies the contrast. For when a similar analysis is made of the business man, the proportions are found to be different: in his case the greater part is quasi-rent.”

Is there inconsistency, apparent or real?

  1.    a.  Adam Smith’s remark, that the division of labor is limited by the extent of the market, has been said to state the gist of all there is to be said about external economies.
    1. It has been said, again, that the only internal economies which signify as regards economic theory are those accruing from the growth of production on a large scale.
    2. “If a commodity obeys the law of increasing return, an increase of demand causes much more of it to be produced, — more than if the commodity obeyed the law of constant return, — and at the same time lowers its price. . . . This line of reasoning has been thought by some writers to lend support to the claim that a Protective duty on manufactured imports in general increases the home market for those manufactured goods; and, by calling into play the Law of Increasing Return, ultimately lowers their price to the home consumer.”
    3. Consider these, separately or as a whole.
  1.     a. “Let us suppose that every one owns whatever capital he uses . . . and is not only of equal capacity, but of equal willingness to work, and does in fact work equally hard; also that all work is unskilled, — or rather, unspecialized in this sense, that if any two people were to change occupations, each would do as much and as good work as the other one had done.”
    1. “Let us suppose that labor is not of one industrial grade, but of several; that parents always bring up their children to an occupation of their own grade; that they have a free choice within that grade, but not outside it. Let us suppose, further, that the increase of population in each grade is governed by other than economic causes; it may be fixed, or may be influenced by changes in custom, in moral opinion, etc.”
    2. What would govern relative wages under each of these suppositions? What would govern the value of goods? Which supposition underlies Marshall’s conclusions on the relation between wages and value?

 

 

1930-31
HARVARD UNIVERSITY
ECONOMICS 11
Final Examination

Answers questions 1, 2, 3 briefly; 4 and 5 more at length.

  1. Jevons remarked: “Capital, as I regard it, consists merely in the aggregate of those commodities which are required for sustaining laborers of any kind or class engaged in work. . . . The single and all-important function of capital is to enable the laborer to await the result of any long-lasting work, — to put an interval between the beginning and the end of an enterprise.”
    Wherein does this resemble, wherein differ from, the view of Ricardo? Böhm-Bawerk? Marshall? Clark?
  2. Public encouragement or discouragement for industries of increasing, constant, or decreasing returns, — wherein the analysis of Pigou resembles that of Marshall, wherein differs.
  3. The bearing on the national dividend and its maximization, of the price structure obtaining under —

Simple competition,
Simple monopoly,
Joint supply,
Discriminating monopoly.

  1. Are there grounds for considering “profits” as an element in distribution different from wages, interest, rent?
  2. The doctrine that wages are determined by the marginal productivity of labor; the grounds on which it rests; and the aid it may give on such questions as the (1) basis of fair wages in the arbitration of industrial disputes, and the (2) effect on contractual wages of a compulsory system of social insurance (accident, sickness, old age, unemployment).

____________________________________

1931-32

Course Enrollment: Economics 11
1931-32

[Economics] 11. Professor Taussig.—Economic Theory

Total 48: 38 Graduates, 4 Seniors, 1 Business School, 5 Radcliffe.

 

Source: Harvard University. Reports of the President and Treasurer of Harvard College, 1931-32, p. 72.

 

HARVARD UNIVERSITY
1931-32
ECONOMICS 11
Mid-year Examination

Arrange your answers in the order of the questions.
One of the first six questions may be omitted.

  1. “The Classical Economists appreciated the necessity of a fund to support labour during the period of production; but they overlooked the continuous character of production and output, and confused the working capital, which is provided by continuously feeding the flow of available income back into the machine of process, with the liquid capital (goods in stock) at the commencement of any period of process. [Liquid capital is elsewhere defined as “goods yielding nothing, but capable of being used or consumed at any time”; it does not include goods in the hands of merchants.] They did not clearly perceive that the capital to keep labour in employment is found, not in the stocks of goods already available, nor by the abstention from the consumption of available income, but by decisions which have the effect (a) of determining what proportions of the goods emerging from the machine of process are in fixed and in liquid form respectively, and (b) of applying the flow of available income in one way instead of in another, namely, by supporting productive consumers instead of unproductive consumers.” M. Keynes.
    Does the error here described appear in the Classical Economists? and is the criticism of their treatment of abstention valid?
  2. “Marshall’s treatment [of supply] is highly elliptical. A striking illustration of his tendency to telescope his argument is his common practice in his graphs of labelling cost curves and supply curves alike with the symbols s-s’, conventionally used for supply curves, and thus diverting the attention of his readers , and perhaps also occasionally his own attention, from the necessity of selecting from the many possible types of cost curve that one which in the given circumstances alone has claims to being considered as also a supply curve.” Is Marshall open to this criticism? Illustrate and comment.
  3. The bearing (if any) of the concept of a representative firm on the theory of value, of rent, of business profits.
  4. Explain the method by which one can derive the supply price of a commodity produced under conditions of joint supply; that by which one can derive the demand price of a commodity demanded under the conditions of joint demand.
    What bearing, if any, have these methods of analysis on the phenomena of value and distribution in a society which is economically stratified?
  5. “When the artisan or professional man has once obtained the skill required for his work, a part of his earnings are for the future really a quasi-rent of the capital and labour invested in fitting him for his work, in obtaining his start in life, his business connections, and generally his opportunity for turning his faculties to good account; and only the remainder of his income is true earnings of effort. But this remainder is generally a large part of the whole. And here lies the contrast. For when a similar analysis is made of the profits of the business man, the proportions are found to be different: in his case the greater part is quasi-rent.”
    Is the greater part of the earnings of business men to be regarded as quasi-rent? Is the remainder only to be regarded as true earnings of effort?
  6. “The extra income derived from rare natural abilities bears a closer analogy to the surplus produce from the holding of a settler who has made an exceptionally lucky selection, than to the rent of land in an old country.” Is this extra income in the nature of a quasi-rent, in either case?

Not to be omitted.

  1. The following have been suggested, by one writer or another, as the grounds on which the distinction between interest and rent turns:
    1. Land is fixed in amount, instruments made by man are not.
    2. Land is an instrument made by man in essentially the same sense as is any other kind of capital-good; its industrial serviceability and its availability are the result of man’s action.
    3. Competition equalizes the returns on instruments but not those on land.
    4. The returns on land and instruments alike depend on marginal productivity.

Give your own views (briefly) on each point; and sum up with a statement of your conclusion on the tenability of the distinction.

 

HARVARD UNIVERSITY
1931-32
ECONOMICS 11
Final Examination

Arrange your answers in order of the questions.

  1. “With regard to utility, two views are commonly held. The older and more naïve is that an increment of supply (which should always be a continuous stream and not a stock) makes its specific addition to the utility of the total, without affecting the utility of the earlier increments. This is the basis for the familiar utility curve with the implication of consumer’s surplus. On the other hand, it may be held that the utility of all increments is always alike, the addition of each increment to the total bringing down the utility of the earlier ones to the level of its own. Both these views lead to nonsensical results: the first to fantastic magnitudes for total utilities, and the second to the conclusions that the utility of a larger supply may be less than that of a smaller and consequently that people often choose and pay for a reduction in utility.”
    Do these nonsensical results necessarily follow?
  2. “Pure profits are at once necessary and probably non-existent.” What is meant by “pure profits” in this statement? Given the meaning, what do you say to it?
  3. What is the influence of technological improvements on the rate of interest? what the influence of the rate of interest on technological improvements?
  4. “It is obvious that an increase in the supply of capital instruments will make for an increase in the national dividend as a whole. Can it at the same time make for a decrease in the real income of labour? The analysis relevant to this question has been developed by Marshall…. This analysis shows, first, that every factor of production, including entrepreneurs’ work, tends to be remunerated at a rate equivalent to its marginal net product of commodities in general. It shows, secondly, that, other things being equal, the marginal net product, in this sense, of every factor diminishes as the supply of the factor increases beyond a fairly low minimum. This proposition expresses what may be called the law of diminishing returns to individual factors of production. This law must not be confused with the law of diminishing returns to resources in general invested in a given occupation….”
    How far was this analysis developed by Marshall? Are the two laws not to be confused?
  5. Does an elastic demand for one commodity necessarily imply that the demand for some other commodity is inelastic?
  6. What grounds are there for the statement that in Great Britain the elasticity of the aggregate demand for labor is immensely greater than unity?

____________________________________

 1932-33

Course Enrollment: Economics 11
1932-33

[Economics] 11. Professor Taussig.—Economic Theory

Total 42: 33 Graduates, 1 Junior, 6 Radcliffe, 2 Others.

 

Source: Harvard University. Reports of the President and Treasurer of Harvard College, 1932-33, p. 66.

 

HARVARD UNIVERSITY
1932-33
ECONOMICS 11
Mid-year Examination

  1. The original and indestructible powers of the soil; what part they play in Ricardo’s treatment of rent, what in Marshall’s.
  2. “If, for simplicity of exposition, we leave out of account raw materials, the stream of floating capital is constituted almost entirely of wage-goods — goods that are paid over (through money) as wages. Thus, the larger the addition to the normal stream of floating capital that business men can secure in response to a given rise in their interest offer, due to a given improvement in their expectations, the larger proportionately will be the addition made to the real demand for labour. . . .
    “When a boom comes, a large part of the impact is always likely to be upon industries engaged in instrumental trades: and, plainly, extra work there will not lead to an addition to the flow of wage goods — floating capital — for a considerable time. Some part of the primary effect will, however, touch the industries that make these goods and, so far as it does this, we shall have an extra flow of them available to pay for extra labour. This was the important point that the doctrine of the Wages Fund ignored. It must be noticed, however, that this source of additions to floating capital (i.e. extra work) is only available, roughly speaking, so long as unemployed workers are available to be called into industry. If expectations and the desire to employ workpeople go on expanding after this point has been passed, the source is no longer available, and, consequently, the element of elasticity which it accords to the supply of floating capital no longer exists.”
    Was “the important point” here noted in conflict with the Wages Fund doctrine? and is the statement otherwise in conflict with that doctrine?
  3. The tendency of profits to a minimum; how treated by Ricardo, by Mill, by Cairnes?
  4. Explain, with the utmost brevity and precision,

“real cost” of production,
expenses of production,
supply price,
marginal cost,
bulk line cost.

  1. “It may be conceded that if a certain class of people were marked out from their birth as having special gifts for some particular occupation, and for no other, so that they would be sure to seek out that occupation in any case, then the earnings which such men would get might be left out of account as exceptional, when we are considering the chances of success or failure for ordinary persons.”
    Consider whether, given the premise, the conclusion here stated would follow; what is the bearing of the reasoning on Walker’s theory of business profits; what Marshall would say of premise and conclusion.
  2. What bearing, if any, on the concept of non-competing groups do you find on a consideration of, —
    1. universal education, general and technical;
    2. the influence of conventional necessaries;
    3. the representative firm;
    4. the law of derived demand for a commodity demanded jointly with other commodities.

 

HARVARD UNIVERSITY
1932-33
ECONOMICS 11
Final Examination

  1. “Ricardo appears to have seen distinctly almost everything of primary importance in the scientific doctrine of capital, very much as it is known now.” Marshall.
    If so, wherein? If not, wherein not?
  2. — The price of wheat raised on good land is the same as that of wheat raised on the marginal zone, and it affords a surplus above wages and interest paid by farmers for labor and capital used in the tilling of the good land.
    — The existence of this surplus in its original form, that of wheat, affects the supply and the price of that product.
    — The price of cloth woven on good looms is the same as that of equally good cloth woven on marginal ones, and it affords a net surplus above the cost of maintaining the stock of looms and the wages and interest paid by manufacturers for further capital used in connection with the good looms.
    — The existence of this surplus in its original form, that of cloth, affects the supply and the price of this product.
    Discuss (1) the bearing of these statements on the older distinction between capital and land, and (2) the connection between these surpluses and price.
  3. “The diminishing return which arises from an ill proportioned application of the various agents of production into a particular task has little in common with the broad tendency to the pressure of a crowded and growing population on the means of subsistence. . . . It has no very close connection with the tendency of agriculture in an old country to yield a diminishing return to a general increase of resources well applied in cultivation: and indeed exactly parallel cases can be found of a diminishing return to particular resources when applied in undue proportion, even in industries which yield an increasing return to increased applications of capital and labour when appropriately distributed.”
    Is this statement in accord with the general current of economic theory at the present time? Do you agree with it?
  4. “An increase in the supply of capital . . . will make for an increase in the national dividend as a whole. Can it at the same time make for a decrease in the real income of labour? The analysis relevant to this question has been developed by Marshall. Subject to certain important qualifications, which do not affect the present argument, this analysis shows, first, that every factor of production, including entrepreneurs’ work, tends to be remunerated at a rate equivalent to its marginal net product of commodities in general. It shows, secondly, that, other things being equal, the marginal net product, in this sense, of every factor diminishes as the supply of the factor increases beyond a fairly low minimum. . . . This proposition expresses what may be called the law of diminishing returns to individual factors of production. This law must not be confused with the law of diminishing returns to resources in general invested in a given occupation.”
    Wherein does this distinction differ from that contained in the preceding extract? Do you agree with it?
  5. Consider whether it is (1) justifiable, (2) practicable to “charge what the traffic will bear”
    1. when there is a large element of overhead costs;
    2. when there is a large element of joint cost;
    3. when there is simply monopoly;
    4. when there is discriminating monopoly.

____________________________________

1933-34

Course Enrollment: Economics 11
1933-34

 

[Economics] 11. Professor Taussig.—Economic Theory

Total 20: 11 Graduates, 2 Seniors, 5 Radcliffe, 2 Business School.

 

Source: Harvard University. Reports of the President and Treasurer of Harvard College, 1933-34, p. 85.

 

HARVARD UNIVERSITY
1933-34
ECONOMICS 11
Mid-year Examination

One question may be omitted.

  1. “The foundations of the theory [of cost of production and value] as they were left by Ricardo remain intact.” Does Marshall’s treatment of the relation of “general wages” to value bear out this statement? of differences of wages?
  2. Explain
    1. Internal economies of large-scale production.
    2. External economies of large output.
    3. External dis-economies of large output.
  3. “Ricardo, and the economists of his time generally were too hasty in deducing this inference [tendency to increased pressure] from the law of diminishing return; and they did not allow enough for the increase of strength that comes from organization. But in fact every farmer is aided by the presence of neighbours, whether agriculturists or townspeople. . . If the neighbouring market town expands into a large industrial centre, all his produce is worth more; some things which he used to throw away fetch a good price. He finds new openings in dairy farming and market gardening, and with a larger range of produce he makes use of rotations that keep his land always active without denuding it of any of the elements that are necessary for its fertility.” Do you agree?
  4. “The flow of investment of resources for future needs consists of two streams. The smaller consists of new additions to the accumulated stock: the larger merely replaces that which is destroyed; . . . The annual flow of this second stream is probably not less than a quarter of the total stock of capital, even in a country in which the prevailing forms of capital are as durable as in England. It is therefore not unreasonable to assume for the present that the owners of capital in general have been able in the main to adapt its forms to the normal conditions of the time, so as to derive as good a net income from their investments in one way or another.” Has this any bearing on the doctrine of quasi-rent?
  5. If the values of goods were proportional to their real costs, would the utility curve and the demand curve be the same, for persons receiving labor incomes?
  6. What is to be said
    1. of the necessaries of life, as regards elasticity of demand, consumer’s surplus, value and differences of wages;
    2. of conventional necessaries, in the same particulars?
  7. — “The price of wheat raised on good land is the same as that of wheat raised on the marginal zone, and it affords a surplus above wages and interest paid by farmers for labor and capital used in the tilling of the good land.
    — “The fact that farmers pay landlords for this surplus has no effect on the price of wheat.”
    — “The price of cloth woven on good looms is the same as that of equally good cloth woven on marginal ones, and it affords a net surplus above the cost of maintaining the stock of looms and the wages and interest paid by manufacturers for further capital used in connection with the good looms.
    — “The fact that entrepreneurs pay capitalists for this surplus has no effect on the price of cloth.”

What bearing have these passages on the theory of rent? of business profits?

 

HARVARD UNIVERSITY
1933-34
ECONOMICS 11
Final Examination

Arrange your answers in the order of the questions.

  1. Is interest treated as a derivative from “profits”

by Ricardo,
by Marshall,
by Böhm-Bawerk,
by those writers who regard profits as appearing only in a “dynamic” state?

Your own view?

  1. “There is always an interval between the setting to work of a man and the emergence, in consequence of his work, of any finished product, whether for consumption or as a productive instrument for the machine of industry. . . . What is essential is the time interval between the centre of gravity of the labour employed and the output (or, more strictly, the sale) of the finished product. I shall call this interval the period of production.”
    Wherein is the period of production here considered like, and wherein unlike, that discussed by F. A. Walker? by Böhm-Bawerk? For what purposes of economic analysis is the period described in the extract appropriate?
  2. “Autonomous” and “induced” inventions: their bearing on “increasing returns” and on the marginal productivity theorem.
  3. Reflections suggested by a Rembrandt, as regards
    1. market price;
    2. total utility and consumers’ surplus;
    3. the distinction between “wealth” and “capital.”
  4. The problems and distinctions implied in the terms

Economic Welfare,
National Dividend,
Marginal Social Net Product.

____________________________________

 1934-35

Course Enrollment: Economics 11
1934-35

 

[Economics] 11. Professors Taussig and Schumpeter.—Economic Theory

Total 27: 21 Graduates, 1 Senior, 5 Radcliffe.

 

Source: Harvard University. Reports of the President and Treasurer of Harvard College, 1934-35, p. 81.

 

 

Reading List for Economics 11, Fall Semester 1934

Posted from Wolfgang Stolper’s course notes.

HARVARD UNIVERSITY
1934-35
ECONOMICS 11
Mid-year Examination

One question may be omitted. Arrange your answers in the order of the questions.

  1. “Suppose that society is divided into a number of horizontal grades, each of which is recruited from the children of its own members; and each of which has its own standard of comfort, and increases in numbers rapidly when the earnings to be got in it rise above, and shrinks rapidly when they fall below that standard. Suppose, then, that parents can bring up their children to any trade in their own grade, but cannot easily raise them above it and will not consent to sink them below it. . . .”
    Suppose also that there is free competition as regards the earnings of capital.
    On these suppositions what would be the relation between

    1. the values of commodities and their “real cost”;
    2. the values of commodities and their money costs;
    3. the values of commodities and their supply prices?
  2. “Internal economies of large-scale production are primarily a long-run phenomenon, dependent upon appropriate adjustment of scale of plant to each successive output. They should not be confused with the economies resulting from ‘spreading of overhead.’” Why or why not to be thus confused?
    “Internal economies of large-scale production are independent of the size of output of the industry as a whole, and may be accruing to a particular concern whose output is increasing at the same time that the output of the industry as a whole is undergoing a decline.” Why or why not?
  3. Does quasi-rent have the same meaning in the following passages?
    1. “The quasi-rent of farm buildings.”
    2. “When the artisan or professional man has once obtained the skill required for his work, a part of his earnings are for the future really a quasi-rent of the capital and labour invested in fitting him for his work, in obtaining his start in life, his business connections, and generally his opportunity for turning his faculties to good account; and only the remainder of his income is true earnings of effort. But this remainder is generally a large part of the whole. And here lies the contrast. For when a similar analysis is made of the profits of the business man, the proportions are found to be different: in his case the greater part is quasi-rent.”
    3. “In relation to normal value the earnings of high ability are to be regarded as a quasi-rent rather than as a rent proper.”
  4. It is fatal to the conception of consumers’ surplus to admit:
    1. that differences in income make it impossible to measure satisfactions;
    2. that each unit of a homogeneous supply yields ipso facto the same satisfaction as every other unit;
    3. that the satisfaction indicated by the high price paid for an article having “prestige value” will disappear when the article becomes cheap.
  5. Does “capital,” as distinguished from “capital goods,” serve to synchronize the effort of labor with the reward for labor? If so, how? If not, why not?
  6. Explain the distinctions
    1. between the intensive and the extensive margins of cultivation for land;
    2. the intensive and the extensive zones of indifference in the application of labor;
    3. the marginal product of labor and the product of marginal labor.

State summarily your opinion of the usefulness of the distinctions as tools of analysis.

 

Course outline and final exam for Economics 11, Spring Semester 1935

Transcribed from Joseph Schumpeter’s papers and posted earlier.

Source for examination questions: Harvard University Archives. Prof. F. W. Taussig, Examination Papers in Economics 1882-1935 (Scrapbook).

Image Source: Frank W. Taussig in Harvard Class Album, 1934.