1999: Trade, Theory, and Econometrics: Essays in honor of John S. Chipman
(Note: Everything below is excerpted from:
TRADE, THEORY, AND ECONOMETRICS: Essays in honor of John S. Chipman, Edited by James R. Melvin, James C. Moore, and Raymond Reizman. ROUTLEDGE, London and New York, 1999.)
On September 26th and 27th, 1992, a very distinguished group of economists gathered at the University of Minnesota to honor an admired colleague, John Somerset Chipman. Many of the papers appearing in this volume were presented at the two-day conference honoring Chipman, and most of the papers presented at the conference do appear in this volume; although other commitments have prevented the appearance of one or two of the papers presented.
The editors would like to take this opportunity to thank the contributors for the splendid cooperation which we have received in preparing this volume. We would also like to share with the readers of this volume some of the atmosphere of the conference by including the text of two toasts and some remarks which were presented at the banquet the first night of the conference, and which follow.
James Melvin
Ray Riezman,
and
James Moore
TOAST FOR JOHN S. CHIPMAN
Author of over 105 articles, books, reviews, notes, and comments;
advisor to over 25 Ph.D. students;
recipient of numerous honors and awards;
colleague and university citizen of the first rank.
All in all, more than full measure of contributions and achievements and,
best of all, one that continues to grow.
It is with appreciation and affection that we gather tonight to recognize and
honor John Somerset Chipman.
Craig Swan, University of Minnesota
26 September 1992
SALUTE TO JOHN SOMERSET CHIPMAN
Good Americans, when they die, go to Paris. Good American economists, when they are born, are born in Canada. I have in mind Simon Newcomb. And Stephen Leacock. And Jacob Viner. Of course on this occasion I make reference to John Chipman. Indeed some sage --- it may even have been I --- defined Chipman as Viner without claws. Profundity and erudition, but this time erudition along with knowledge of generalized matrix inverses.
John and I, and many of you present, come from a special, special circle of scholars. When my son's first child was born, his mother-in-law was heard to say, "Couper is the most wonderful grandchild that ever was." Susan Stobaugh Samuelson reprimanded her: "Now, Mother, all grandmothers say that." Beverly Stobaugh replied impatiently, "Of course. I know that. But this time it's really true!"
Those are my sentiments. The generation of American economists born between 1914 and the Great Depression have all been my friends and companions at arms. It is not sentimental memory that makes me recall Lloyd Metzler as a Sir Galahad. And it will be a long waiting time before we meet another Lionel McKenzie or Tjallings Koopmans.
Most people are born very young. That was especially true of John Somerset Chipman. I knew his first paper when he was still 22. In Our Crowd Chipman stood out. Once upon a time American economists came off the farm –Frank Knight and Wesley Mitchell come to mind. After that, more of us came from Gary, Indian or Brooklyn. Judge Potter Stewart said he couldn't define pornography , but he knew it when he saw it. So it is with being a gentleman. Ian Little tells me gentlemen go to private schools; they have middle names of indeterminate gender. Maybe their families served in the diplomatic service.
The young Chipman was guilty on every count. But that didn't mean he sucked eggs or divided by zero. He recognized when complex roots had to have coefficients that got outweighed by the real.
It is perfectly possible to be brilliant and prolific without being generous. After John Chipman invents new theorems, he invariably scours the literature to see where it might already have appeared. His publications are a model of careful citation. Thus, if I wanted to refresh my memory on an obscure wartime multiplier theorem of mine, I could probably do as well by paging through Chipman's published Hopkins thesis as by looked up my collected papers. Ramseys', Kahns', and Chipmans' – we may hope – will get their reward in heaven for the selfless referring and consultings that they do here on earth.
Sir Thomas Gresham was wrong. Is it the good money that drives out bad in the end. Leo Durocher was wrong. It is the good guys who end up first. John Chipman is living proof of these lemmas.
John, we all say, with love and affection:
Hail Apollo!
Paul A. Samuelson, MIT
26 September 1992
REMARKS for JOHN CHIPMAN
(We excerpt the final paragraph of the remarks)
John has one of the broadest spectra of contributions in economics. Much of his work I am quite unqualified to appreciate, particularly the econometrics. However I can give my plaudits with some assurance to his monumental survey with extensions of the theory of international trade which was done for Econometrica, and his numerous contributions in collaboration with his student Jim Moore to welfare economics, and his classic article in the QJE on competitive equilibrium with increasing returns to scale of the industry. His work is distinguished by careful scholarship and meticulous accuracy. My congratulations, John, on what you have already accomplished. We will await the maturity of the many projects you are embarked on now. I very much doubt that my paper on Ideal Output was the making of me, although it has brought me so far forty-one years of the Economic Journal. On the other hand, I am sure, John, that what you have done since those early days has left you the distinguished scholar that you are recognized everywhere to be. It has been a pleasure for me and an advantage to me to know you over these years.
Lionel McKenzie, University of Rochester
26 September, 1992