Hostname: page-component-77c89778f8-gq7q9 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-07-19T00:30:49.111Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

STRANGE BEDFELLOWS: FR. JOHN A. RYAN AND THE MINIMUM WAGE MOVEMENT

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  08 December 2011

J. DANIEL HAMMOND
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Fr. John A. Ryan (1869–1945) was one of the early advocates of minimum wage laws in the United States. The thesis of this paper is that in three respects Fr. Ryan stood apart from other advocates of the minimum wage. First, during the period of his work, economics was developing on the basis of the positivist conception of science. Fr. Ryan’s case for the minimum wage combined economics with “non-scientific” theology and philosophy. Second, most religiously motivated American reformers were Protestants, and their advocacy was grounded in the Protestant Social Gospel movement. This was different from Fr. Ryan’s grounding in the social encyclicals of Popes Leo XIII and Pius XI, which themselves were grounded in the Catholic Church’s constant teaching that man is made in the image of God. Third, many reformers were motivated not at all by religion, but by the utilitarian calculus that had become the foundation of the social sciences. Although Fr. Ryan made utilitarian judgments in his analysis, he was not an ethical utilitarian.

Type
Articles
Information
Journal of the History of Economic Thought , Volume 33 , Issue 4 , December 2011 , pp. 449 - 466
Copyright
Copyright © The History of Economics Society 2011

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

REFERENCES

Bateman, B. W. 1998. “Clearing the Ground: The Demise of the Social Gospel Movement and the Rise of Neoclassicism in American Economics.” In Morgan, Mary and Rutherford, Malcolm, eds., The Transformation of American Economics: From Interwar Pluralism to Postwar Neoclassicism. Annual Supplement to Volume 30, History of Political Economy. Durham, NC: Duke University Press, pp. 29–52.Google Scholar
Bateman, B. W. 2008. “Reflections on the Secularization of American Economics.” Journal of the History of Economic Thought 30 (March): 1–20.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bateman, B. W., and Kapstein, Ethan. 1999. “Between God and the Market: The Religious Roots of the American Economic Association.” Journal of Economic Perspectives 13 (4): 249–258.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Darwin, C. 1859. On the Origin of Species by Means of Natural Selection; or the Preservation of Favoured Races in the Struggle for Life. London: John Murray.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Darwin, C. 1871. The Descent of Man: and Selection in Relation to Sex. London: John Murray.Google Scholar
Gould, 1980. The Panda’s Thumb: More Reflections on Natural History. New York: Norton.Google Scholar
Hawkes, D. 2002. “The Evolution of Darwinism.” The Nation, June 10.Google Scholar
Hoxie, R. F. 1907. “Review of A Living Wage: Its Ethical and Economic Aspects.” Journal of Political Economy 15 (December): 641–642.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lees Smith, H.B. 1907. “Economic Theory and Proposals for a Legal Minimum Wage.” Economic Journal 17 (68): 504–512.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Leo, XIII. 1879. Aeterni Patris (On the Restoration of Christian Philosophy). http://www.vatican.va/holy_father/leo_xiii/encyclicals/documents/hf_l-xiii_enc_04081879_aeterni-patris_en.html.Google Scholar
Leo, XIII. 1880. Arcanum (On Christian Marriage). http://www.vatican.va/holy_father/leo_xiii/encyclicals/documents/hf_l-xiii_enc_10021880_arcanum_en.html.Google Scholar
Leo, XIII. 1891. Rerum Novarum (On the Condition of Labor). http://www.vatican.va/holy_father/leo_xiii/encyclicals/documents/hf_l-xiii_enc_15051891_rerum-novarum_en.html.Google Scholar
Leonard, T.C. 2000. “The Very Idea of Applying Economics: The Modern Minimum-Wage Controversy and Its Antecedents.” Toward a History of Applied Economics. Edited by Backhouse, R. and Biddle, J.. Annual Supplement to Volume 32, History of Political Economy. Durham, NC: Duke University Press, pp. 117–144.Google Scholar
Leonard, T. C. 2003. “More Merciful and Not Less Effective: Eugenics and Progressive-Era American Economics.” History of Political Economy 35 (4): 709–734.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Leonard, T. C. 2005a. “Mistaking Eugenics for Social Darwinism: Why Eugenics Is Missing from the History of American Economics.” History of Political Economy 37 (supplement): 200–233.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Leonard, T. C. 2005b. “Protecting Family and Race: The Progressive Case for Regulating Women’s Work.” American Journal of Economics and Sociology 64 (3): 757–791.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Leonard, T. C. 2005c. “Retrospectives: Eugenics and Economics in the Progressive Era.” Journal of Economic Perspectives 19 (4): 207–224.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lock, R. H. 1906. Recent Progress in the Study of Variation, Heredity, and Evolution. London: John Murray.Google Scholar
Mackenzie, J. S. 1901. A Manual of Ethics. Fourth edition, revised. New York: Hinds and Noble.Google Scholar
Marshall, A. 1897. “The Old Generation of Economists and the New.” Quarterly Journal of Economics 11 (2): 115–135.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Marshall, A. 1920. Principles of Economics. Eighth edition. London: Macmillan.Google Scholar
Neill, C. P. 1908. “Review of A Living Wage: Its Ethical and Economic Aspects.” Political Science Quarterly 23 (3): 546–547.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Pigou, A. C. 1907. “Social Improvement in the Light of Modern Biology.” Economic Journal 17 (67): 358–369.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Pius, X. 1907. Pascendi Dominici Gregis (On the Doctrines of the Modernists). http://www.vatican.va/holy_father/pius_x/encyclicals/documents/hf_p-x_enc_19070908_pascendi-dominici-gregis_en.html.Google Scholar
Pius, XI. 1930. Casti Connubii (On Christian Marriage). http://www.vatican.va/holy_father/pius_xi/encyclicals/documents/hf_p-xi_enc_31121930_casti-connubii_en.html.Google Scholar
Punnett, R. C. 1905. Mendelism. Cambridge: Macmillan and Bowes.Google Scholar
Riley, T. J. 1907. “Review of A Living Wage: Its Ethical and Economic Aspects.” American Journal of Sociology 12 (4): 561–563.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Rosen, C. 2004. Preaching Eugenics: Religious Leaders and the American Eugenics Movement. New York: Oxford University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ryan, J. A. 1906. A Living Wage: Its Ethical and Economic Aspects. New York: Macmillan. Revised and abridged edition, 1920. New York: Macmillan.Google Scholar
Taussig, F. W. 1916. “Minimum Wages for Women.” Quarterly Journal of Economics 30 (3): 411–442.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Taussig, F. W. 1923. Principles of Economics. Third edition. New York: Macmillan.Google Scholar
Thomas, D. Y. 1907. “Review of A Living Wage: Its Ethical and Economc Aspects.” Annals of the American Academy of Political and Social Science 29 (Child Labor): 234–235.Google Scholar
Webb, S. 1907. The Decline in the Birth-Rate. London: Fabian Society.Google Scholar
Webb, S. 1910–11. “Eugenics and the Poor Law: The Minority Report.” Eugenics Review 2: 233–241.Google Scholar
Webb, S. 1912. “The Economic Theory of a Legal Minimum Wage.” Journal of Political Economy 20 (10): 973–998.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Webb, S., and Webb, B.. 1901. Industrial Democracy. London: Trade Unionists of the United Kingdom.Google Scholar
Wiggam, A. E. 1922. The New Decalogue of Science. Indianapolis, IN: Bobbs-Merrill.Google Scholar
Wolfe, A. B. 1917. “Some Phases of the Minimum Wage: Discussion.” American Economic Review 7 (1): 275–279.Google Scholar