Many years ago, when I was a reporter on the now defunct New York Sun, I was informed by the city editor that I had been assigned to cover the Westminster, the World Series of dogdom, at Madison Square Garden. While I liked dogs, and got along pretty well with them, I knew nothing whatever about the fine points of judging, and said so.

On October 27–28, 1961, the Harvard Business History Group sponsored a conference devoted to the theme “Business History as a Teaching Challenge.” The purpose was simple enough — get experienced, active practitioners in business history together with newcomers to the field in the expectation that interaction between the two groups would be mutually beneficial. This hope was realized, though the specific results were somewhat different — and perhaps more valuable — than those originally anticipated. The 50 participants found themselves more involved with a discussion of the appropriate subject matter of business history, past accomplishments, and future possibilities, than with current teaching problems and techniques. This development was not totally unanticipated, but the enthusiasm with which it was embraced came as a pleasant surprise. It therefore seems appropriate to precede the papers given at the conference with a brief summary of the present status and future prospects of business history in the light of the discussion and the written comments later submitted by participants.

While “higgling” always occurred to some degree in most country stores, this article establishes evidence that, for many basic commodities, a system of standard prices existed in some country stores long before the Civil War.

Once a flourishing transportation agency, the Great Lakes package-freight carriers passed through a period of decay and disappeared during World War II. This article analyzes the economic factors causing the diversion of traffic that was the primary reason for the decline of the package freighters.

This study narrates the history of the largest steamboat line on the western rivers during the decade following the Civil War and assesses causes and responsibilities for its failure.

Despite Louis Brandeis' well-publicized opposition to the New Haven-Boston & Maine railroad merger of 1907–1909, a large number of public-spirited men, including many progressive reform leaders whom Brandeis had worked with and admired, favored the combination. They saw the merger not as a conspiracy against the public interest, but a necessary response in the public interest to a commercial crisis in Massachusetts. This examination of their reasoning and action tempers Brandeis' widely accepted assessment of the controversy.

A distinguished Dutch scholar and one of the Review's International Correspondents considers approaches to business history in general and with specific reference to the Netherlands.