EH.net is owned and operated by the Economic History Association with the support of other sponsoring organizations.
Lyons, T. American Economic History
CORNELL UNIVERSITY
Economics 324/524 Tom Lyons
American Economic History Spring 1990
Reading List
(only starred readings are required)
I. Introduction
A. Modern Economic Growth
W.W. Rostow, The Stages of Economic Growth,
Ch. 2-6
*Simon Kuznets, Population, Capital, and
Growth, pp. 165-184
Robert Gallman and Edward Howle, "Trends in
the Structure of the American Economy
Since 1840," in Robert Fogel and Stanley Engerman, The
Reinterpretation of American Economic
History
B. The U.S. Economy, 1815-1860
*Douglass North, The Economic Growth of the
United States 1790-1860,
Ch. 1 and 7-12
Jonathan Hughes, American Economic History,
third edition, pp. 137- 50, 163-78, and
183-97
Albert Fishlow, "Antebellum Interregional
Trade Reconsidered," in
Ralph Andreano, New Views on American
Economic Development
II. Slavery and War
A. Cotton and Slavery
*Hughes, Chapter 12
Lewis Gray, History of Agriculture in the
Southern United States to
1860, Vol. 2, Ch. 29, 30, and 37
*U.B. Phillips, "The Economic Cost of
Slaveholding in the Cotton Belt," in
Gerald Nash,
Issues in
American
Economic
History,
third edition
*Alfred H. Conrad and John R. Meyer, "The
Economics of Slavery in the Ante-bellum
South," in
Conrad and
Meyer, The
Economics of
Slavery (also
available in
Fogel and
Engerman,
Reinterpretat
ion)
Harold D. Woodman, "The Profitability of
Slavery: A Historical Perennial," Journal
of Southern History (August 1963)
*Stanley L. Engerman, "The Effects of Slavery
upon the Southern Economy," Explorations
in Entrepreneurial History (Winter 1967)
*Robert W. Fogel and Stanley L. Engerman,
Time on the Cross, Volume 1,
Prologue and Ch. 2 and 4
Paul A. David et al, Reckoning with Slavery
Robert W. Fogel and Stanley L. Engerman,
"Explaining the Relative
Efficiency of Slave Agriculture in the
Antebellum South," American Economic
Review (June 1977)
Robert W. Fogel, Without Consent or
Contract: The Rise and Fall of American
Slavery
B. The Economics of the Civil War
Gerald Gunderson, "The Origin of the
American Civil War," Journal of
Economic History (December 1974)
*Eli Ginzberg, "The Economics of British
Neutrality During the Civil
War," Agricultural History (October
1936)
*David Donald, Why the North Won the Civil
War
*Paul Studenski and Herman Krooss, Financial
History of the United
States, second edition, Ch. 13-14
*Eugene Lerner, "Monetary and Fiscal Programs
of the Confederate Government," Journal of
Political Economy (December 1954)
C. Impact of the War
*Hughes, pp. 247-54
*Claudia Goldin and Frank Lewis, "The
Economic Cost of the American Civil
War,"
Journal
of
Economic
History
(July
1975)
*Charles A. Beard and Mary R. Beard, The Rise
of American
Civilization, Volume 2, pp. 99-121
Louis M. Hacker, The Triumph of American
Capitalism, Ch. 23 and 24
Thomas C. Cochran, "Did the Civil War
Retard Industrialization?,"
in Nash, Issues, third edition
*Stephen Salisbury, "The Effect of the Civil
War on American
Industrial Development" in Nash,
Issues, third edition
*Stanley L. Engerman, "The Economic Impact of
the Civil War,"
Explorations in Entrepreneurial
History (Spring 1966)
III. Western Agriculture and the Railroads
*Hughes, Chapter 15
Fred A. Shannon, The Farmer's Last
Frontier, Ch. 7-10
William Parker, "Productivity Growth in
American Grain Farming: An Analysis of
Its Sources," in Fogel and Engerman,
Reinterpretation
A. Distribution of Public Lands
*Hughes, pp. 92-98
Thomas LeDuc, "History and Appraisal of
U.S. Land Policy," in Thomas C. Cochran and
Thomas Brewer, Views of American Economic Growth, Vol. 1
*Shannon, Farmer's Last Frontier, Ch. 3
*Allan G. Bogue and Margaret Bogue, "Profits
and the Frontier Land
Speculator," Journal of Economic
History (March 1957) (also available
in Fogel and Engerman,
Reinterpretation)
Robert P. Swierenga, "Land Speculator
'Profits' Reconsidered: Central Iowa as
a Test Case," Journal of Economic History (March 1966)
B. Railroads
*Hughes, pp. 267-74
Robert Fogel, Railroads and American
Economic Growth, Ch. 1-3
Peter D. McClelland, "Railroads, American
Growth, and the New
Economic History: A Critique," Journal
of Economic History (March 1968)
Lloyd Mercer, "Rates of Return for Land-
Grant Railroads: The Central
Pacific System," Journal of Economic
History (September 1970)
*Stanley Engerman, "Some Economic Issues
Relating to Railroad Subsidies," Journal
of Economic History (June 1972)
C. Agrarian Unrest
Frederick Jackson Turner, "The Significance
of the Frontier in American History," in
Turner, The Frontier in American History
*Shannon, Farmer's Last Frontier, Ch. 13-14
*Anne Mayhew, "A Reappraisal of the Causes of
Farm Protest in the United States,
1870-1900," Journal of Economic History (June
1972)
Robert McGuire, "Economic Causes of Late
Nineteenth Century AgrarianUnrest,"
Journal of Economic History
(March 1981)
Bradley Lewis, "Economic Causes of Late
Nineteenth Century Agrarian
Unrest: Comment," Journal of Economic
History (September 1982)
*Hughes, pp. 421-23
IV. Emancipation and Reconstruction
*Hughes, pp. 254-62
Eric Foner, Reconstruction, Ch. 3, 4, and 8
James W. Garner, Reconstruction in
Mississippi, 1968 edition,
Introduction and Ch. 4 and 6
*Roger L. Ransom and Richard Sutch, One Kind
of Freedom, Ch. 1, 4, 5, 7 and 8
Joseph Reid, Jr., "Sharecropping as an
Understandable Market
Response:The Post-Bellum South,"
Journal of Economic History (March 1973)
*Claudia Goldin, "'N' Kinds of Freedom,"
Explorations in Economic History
(January
1979)
Price Fishback, "Debt Peonage in Post-
Bellum Georgia," Explorations in Economic
History (April 1989)
*Harold D. Woodman, "Sequel to Slavery: The
New History Views the Post-bellum
South," Journal of
Southern History
(November 1977)
David F. Weiman, "The Economic Emancipation
of the Non-Slaveholding Class," Journal of
Economic History
(March 1985)
Gavin Wright, Old South, New South, Ch. 2-6
V. Industry and Urbanization
*Hughes, Chapter 17
Edward C. Kirkland, Industry Comes of Age,
Ch. 7, 8, and 12
A. Industrial Organization
Kirkland, Industry, Ch. 10
*Alfred D. Chandler, Jr., The Visible Hand,
Ch. 9-11
Jeremy Atack, "Industrial Structure and the
Emergence of the Modern Industrial
Corporation," Explorations in Economic History
(January 1985)
Naomi Lamoreaux, The Great Merger Movement
in American Business,
Ch. 2-4
Anthony O'Brien, "Factory Size, Economies
of Scale, and the Merger Wave of
1902," Journal of Economic History (September 1988)
B. Scientific Management
Joseph A. Litterer, "Systematic Management:
Design for Organizational Recoupling in
American
Manufacturing
Firms,"
Business
History
Review
(Winter 1963)
Frederick W. Taylor, The Principles of
Scientific Management
*Hugh G.J. Aitken, Taylorism at the Watertown
Arsenal, Ch. 1 and 3
C. The Robber Barons
*Hughes, pp. 411-20
Joseph Schumpeter, "The Creative Response
in Economic History," Journal of
Economic History (November 1947)
*Matthew Josephson, The Robber Barons, Ch. 5
and 12
*Jonathan Hughes, The Vital Few, expanded
edition, Ch. 6
Hal Bridges, "The Robber Baron Concept in
American History," Business History
Review
(Spring 1958)
D. Labor and Unions
*Hughes, Ch. 16 and 21
*Ellen von Nardroff, "The American Frontier
as a Safety Valve,"
Agricultural History (July 1962)
*Kirkland, Industry, Ch. 16-19
Foster, Dulles and Melvyn Dubofsky, Labor
in America, 4th edition, Ch. 5-11
John T. Dunlop, "The Development of Labor
Organization: A Theoretical Framework,"
in Richard
Lester and
Joseph
Shister,
Insights into
Labor Issues
VI. The Role of Government
Henry W. Broude, "The Role of the State in
American Economic
Development," in Cochran and Brewer,
Views of American Economic Growth
*Hughes, pp. 274-81 and Chapter 18
*Thomas McCraw, "Regulation in America,"
Business History Review (Summer 1975)
*Gabriel Kolko, Railroads and Regulation
1877-1916, pp. 1-63 and 231- 39
*Robert Harbeson, "Railroads and Regulation,
1877-1916: Conspiracy or Public
Interest?"
Journal of
Economic
History (June
1967)
*Thomas Ulen, "The Market for Regulation: The
ICC from 1887 to 1920," American Economic
Review (May 1980)
Robert Aduddell and Louis Cain, "Public
Policy Toward 'The Greatest Trust in the
World',"
Business
History
Review
(Summer 1981)
Martin Sklar, The Corporate Reconstruction
of American Capitalism, 1890-1916
VII. Money, Banks, and Finance
Hughes, Chapter 11
*Hughes, Chapters 19 and 20
Milton Friedman and Anna J. Schwartz, A
Monetary History of the United States,
1867-1960, pp. 15-50, 89-119, 135-174 and 189-96
*Richard Sylla, "The United States 1863-
1913," in Rondo Cameron, Banking and
Economic
Development
Robert Craig West, Banking Reform and the
Federal Reserve 1863-1923
Kirkland, Industry, Ch. 11
*Lance E. Davis, "The Investment Market,
1870-1914," Journal of Economic History
(September 1965)
Margaret Myers, The New York Money Market,
Volume 1, Ch. 11, 12, 18, and 19
*Thomas R. Navin and Marian V. Sears, "The
Rise of a Market for Industrial
Securities," Business History Review
(June 1955)
Kenneth Snowden, "American Stock Market
Development, 1871-1929," Explorations
in Economic
History
(September
1987) CORNELL UNIVERSITY
Economics 324/524
Spring 1990
American Economic History
Tom Lyons
EXAM #2 (A)
Part A (32 points) Briefly explain the significance of
each of the following in American economic history,
1850-1900.
(1) graduation (in public-land law)
(2) time-entry contracts
(3) Munn v. Illinois
(4) Oliver Kelley and the Patrons of
Husbandry
Part B (18 points) Each of the following concepts is
relevant to economic analysis of late nineteenth century
agrarian unrest (in the West). Explain.
(1) barriers to entry
(2) factoral terms of trade
(3) deflation
Part C (17 points)
The Civil War did not greatly change the concentrated
pattern of land ownership in the South. "In 1865 and
1866, most of the prewar plantations were
reestablished;" however, "by 1880 the plantation system
had ceased to exist."
Explain, with reference to the question of economies of
scale in cotton farming.
Part D (33 points)
In One Kind of Freedom, Ransom and Sutch argue that the
economic institutions that replaced slavery in the rural
South "curtailed black advancement and retarded Southern
economic development in the late nineteenth century."
1. Briefly explain the key economic institutions
relevant to their argument.
2. Explain precisely the "lock-in mechanism"
identified by Ransom and Sutch, and the manner in
which this "lock-in" retarded southern development.
3. Evaluate the validity of the "lock-in" story.
Focus your analyses on one of the institutions
identified in (a); carefully examine, in light of
theory and historical evidence, its role in "lock-
in". CORNELL UNIVERSITY
Department of Economics
Economics 324/524 Spring 1990
American Economic History Tom Lyons
EXAM #2 (make-up)
Part A (35 points)
Briefly explain the significance of the following in
American economic history (1865-1910). Adequately
define or identify each item.
1. time-entry contracts
2. Desert Land Act of 1877
3. Oliver Hudson Kelley
4. increases in grain yield (i.e., output per
acre)
5. general amnesty (from confiscation), May 1865.
Part B (33 points)
Each item identifies a phenomenon in American economic
history and an economic concept. For each item: (a)
explain the significance of the phenomenon; (b) define
or explain the concept; (c) show how the concept figures
into a causal explanation of the phenomenon; and (d)
briefly assess the adequacy of that explanation.
1. "overproduction" of cotton/territorial monopoly
2. sharecropping (in the Cotton South)/risk
aversion
3. land grants/externalities.
Part C (32 points)
1. Briefly describe the agrarian unrest of the late
nineteenth century, including some discussion of
the most important movements and the geographic
areas most affected.
2. What caused agrarian unrest? (Distinguish your
explanation from the perceptions and complaints of
farmers; defend your explanation.)
3. What significant and lasting changes (if any)
resulted from agrarian unrest? CORNELL UNIVERSITY
Economics 324/524 Spring 1990
American Economic History
Tom Lyons
FINAL EXAM
Part A (35 points)
CHOOSE FIVE. Define or identify, and briefly explain
the significance of the following in American economic
history (to 1920).
1. "pyramiding" of reserves
2. Wanamakers
3. "first-class worker"
4. Pullman strike
5. Bland-Allison (silver purchase) Act
6. priority rights
Part B (24 points)
Each item identifies (1) a general issue in U.S.
economic history (1865-1920) and (2) a particular person
or organization. Explain the relevance of the latter to
the former; show how examination of a specific case
illuminates the general issue.
1. pioneering entrepreneurs, or robber barons? Andrew
Carnegie
2. market power and "bread and butter" gains, or
social reforms? Knights of Labor
Part C (26 points)
CHOOSE ONE (either #1 or #2). Answer every part of the
question you choose.
A number of causal factors have been identified in
attempts to account for the "coming of big business" in
American industry and, in particular, for the merger
waves of 1895-1920.
a) Briefly survey the trend toward bigness during the
period 1865-1895, with reference to pools, trusts,
and the New Jersey general incorporation law of
1889.
b) Identify the key factors behind the merger
movement. Explain.
c) Many mergers failed. Briefly explain economies of
scale, vertical integration, and barriers to entry
and their possible relevance to the success (or
failure) of mergers.
2. Federal regulation of railroads, beginning in 1887,
has been interpreted in terms of (1) capture, (2)
the public interest, and (3) contending private
interest groups.
(a) Briefly survey the evolution of railroad
regulation, from the Granger laws to the
Hepburn Act of 1906.
(b) Briefly summarize the case for each of the
three competing interpretations.
(c) Either reconcile the three interpretations or
explain why one, two, or all three may be
inconsistent with the historical evidence.
Part D (15 points)
"Almost all important questions [in history] are
important precisely because they are not susceptible to
quantitative answers" (Arthur Schlesinger, Jr.).
(1) Discuss, with examples from American economic
history, 1865-1920.
(2) Why are the new economic historians so concerned
with quantification? CORNELL UNIVERSITY
Economics 324/524 Spring 1990
American Economic History
Tom Lyons
FINAL EXAM (MAKE-UP)
Part A (35 points)
CHOOSE FIVE. Briefly explain the significance of the
following in American economic history (1865-1920).
Adequately define or identify each item.
(1) Aldrich-Vreeland Act (1908)
(2) New Jersey's general incorporation law (1889)
(3) Wanamakers
(4) job analysis and time study
(5) Crime of '73
(6) Federal Trade Commission
Part B (24 points)
Each item identifies a topic in American economic
history and an economic concept. Carefully explain the
relevance of the concept to the topic. Adequately
define or explain the concept itself.
1. robber barons; "creative destruction"
2. success or failure of big businesses; vertical
integration
Part C (26 points)
CHOOSE ONE (either question #1 or question #2). Answer
every part of the question you choose.
1. Federal regulation of railroads, beginning in 1887,
has been interpreted in terms of (1) capture, (2)
the public interest, and (3) contending private
interest groups.
a.Briefly survey the evolution of railroad
regulation, from the Granger laws to the Hepburn Act of
1906.
b.Briefly summarize the case for each of the
three competing interpretations.
c.Either reconcile the three interpretations
or explain why one, two, or all three may be
inconsistent with the historical evidence.
2. "Attempts to unionize American workers do not
appear to have met with great success prior to the
turn of the century".
(a)Briefly survey the evidence that might
yield this assessment.
(b)Why did the labor movement meet with such
limited success in the late nineteenth century (1870-
1900)? Consider the role of government as well as
demographic and technological factors.
(c)Briefly explain the significance of the
Clayton Antitrust Act and World War I, in terms of the
progress of the labor movement in the early twentieth
century.
Part D (15 points)
"Almost all important questions [in history] are
important precisely because they are not susceptible to
quantitative answers" (Arthur Schlesinger, Jr.).
Discuss, with examples from American economic history,
1865-1920. Why are the new economic historians so
concerned with quantification?