832. J. M. Keynes to Harrod , 9 September 1938 [a]
[Replies to 827 , answered by 834 ]
9 September 1938
I quarrel with the first sentence in your letter of the 6th, where you write that in any warranted position .  This seems to me to be wrong in its dimensions. I suggest that the equation should run or if you like where is the rate at which income has increased. J stands for time. 
Otherwise I await your revised draft. I return the enclosed,  since I had kept a copy of it.
As regards Price History, the best plan, I think, would be if you will report the result of your negotiations and what proposals are feasible. I sent your previous letter to Austin,  and we are both agreed in being against any important contribution, in view of our other commitments. The question of the number of Memoranda we can take from the London and Cambridge Service is much mixed up with this, and others who are interested in these Memoranda may have their views.
J. M. K.
R. F. Harrod Esq., Christ Church, Oxford.
2. Harrod was not new to such mistake: see note 3 to letter 683 ; for a comment on its implications see D. Besomi, "From The Trade Cycle to the `Essay in Dynamic Theory': The Harrod-Keynes Correspondence, 1937-38", History of Political Economy 27:2 (1995), pp. 324-33.
3. Letter 821 , which Harrod sent back to Keynes on 6 September (letter 827 , [jump to page] ).
4. E. A. G. Robinson, assistant editor of the Economic Journal.
- a. CcTLI with autograph formulas and corrections, two pages on two leaves, in JMK EJ/1/5/322-23. Partly printed in Keynes, Collected Writings, vol. XIV, pp. 337-38. Reproduced by kind permission of the Provost and Scholars, King's College, Cambridge.
top of page
Return to index of this section
Go to previous page
Go to next page