Preface

PREFACE

This book offers an interpretation of American economic development in the half century after the Civil War. Its hypotheses are drawn from modern economic theory, and the evidence presented is largely statistical; but the book is written in plain English, and the reader needs no previous training in economics or statistics to comprehend it. Chapter I furnishes a brief survey of the analytical framework; more detailed theoretical discussions appear at appropriate places in the subsequent chapters. Included are many subjects that have just begun to receive rigorous historical study—for example, health improvements, racial discrimination, invention, and urban growth—as well as some that are customarily treated in the textbooks. Although parts of the book do nothing more than “translate” the recent historical research of economists into language comprehensible to the general reader, I have in several instances attempted to push out the frontiers of knowledge and to raise questions for future research. I hope therefore that the book will interest my fellow economic historians as well as provide a useful analysis for students and general readers.

The central feature of the 1865–1914 era in American economic history was economic growth—a rapid and sustained rise in output per capita that constituted the return on investments in health, skills, and knowledge as well as investments in buildings, machines, and inventories. Inextricably related to economic growth was the transformation of the economy’s structure—most importantly, the relative decline of agricultural output and employment and the concomitant rise of urban manufacturing, trade, and service industries, often described as an “industrial revolution.” Institutions in general, and property rights in particular, were of critical importance in determining the rate of economic growth; conversely, growth gave rise to changes in institutions. Chapters II–IV focus on growth, transformation, and institutional change. Chapter V deals with questions of inequality in the distribution of income and wealth.

This small volume makes no pretense of comprehensiveness. Many traditional subjects do not appear at all, and others receive only cursory attention—treatment that tells the reader something about what I consider relatively unimportant. Because my main interest is interpretation, I have included only enough detail to make the book self-contained. A rather lengthy bibliography gives the sources of more detailed description and analysis. I hope that the book’s brevity will be considered a virtue but, like any short treatment of a broad subject, my comments tread a thin line between clarifying the issues and oversimplifying them. As a warning against overstepping this line, I have occasionally employed footnotes to indicate that matters are not as simple as the text might suggest and to refer the reader to a fuller treatment. To keep the number of footnotes within tolerable bounds. I have refrained from documenting evidence available in the Census Bureau’s well-known compilation, Historical Statistics of the United States.

Any merits of the book are attributable to many friends who generously assisted me. I wish to pay tribute to my teachers at The Johns Hopkins University—Edwin S. Mills, Peter Newman, Jürg Niehans, and H. Louts Stealer—who began the arduous task of making me an economist, and to my colleagues at the University of Washington, who are continuing the job. Also I am deeply indebted to those who read the manuscript and commented on it: Ralph L, Andreano, Mary L. Eysenbach, Day1 Higgs, Edward F. Meeker, Morris D. Morris, Nancy Neubert, Douglass C. North, Nathan Rosenberg, and David Sisk. Without belittling the others, I especially thank Professor North, for his unfailing encouragement, and Professor Rosenberg, whose incisive and wide-ranging comments contributed greatly toward improving the manuscript. Since I have stubbornly ignored much of their advice, none of the persons named should be held responsible in any way for the form or contents of the book.

ROBERT HIGGS

University of Washington, 1971