Attempts to monopolize the automobile industry began early in its history but were never successful because the industry possessed characteristics which made monopolization exceptionally difficult. The first of these efforts provides an illuminating example of business failure resulting from avoidable errors of judgment. The Electric Vehicle Company began its operations on the assumption that the electric automobile was going to be the dominant type; when this became demonstrably a bad guess, the company tried to compensate by using the Selden patent to collect royalties from the manufacturers of gasoline automobiles. This scheme likewise misfired, and the company collapsed into bankruptcy. The scheme also brought disaster to the Pope Manufacturing Company of Hartford, Connecticut, which abandoned a very promising position of leadership in the automobile field in order to participate in a highly speculative enterprise.

British historians appear to have surpassed their American contemporaries in recognizing the importance of developments in accounting theory and practice in shaping the course of business. Students of British accountancy today enjoy increasing institutional support and have published several impressive works. From these and other sources it is possible to construct an outline of the background of British (and, more particularly, Scottish) accountancy which reveals much of interest to American scholars.

The appeal by scholars for businessmen to incorporate historical consideration in their records management programs is likely to be more widely heeded if businessmen (and scholars) are aware of contemporary experience with business history. Until recently no systematic effort had been made to determine what that experience had been. The present article surveys the factors which have led to authorization of company histories; experiences in selecting authors; uses to which company histories have actually been put; impacts on employee, customer, and public relations programs; and comparative costs incurred in specific instances.

In order to utilize the new science of records management, historians need detailed, specific information on the various techniques which have been worked out. The Controlled Record Keeping program of the National Records Management Council, developed by historically oriented specialists, offers three basic tools which are equally useful to businessmen and scholars in helping to win the “Battle of the Bulk.”

Behind the formation, in 1890, of the National Association of Life Underwriters lay two decades of localized, often abortive attempts at self-regulation through association. Malpractice, while not universal, was sufficiently widespread to hinder the growth of a broad market for life insurance. Early regulatory efforts failed when the organizers of those efforts were unable to solve the administrative problems of dealing with apathy on the one hand and defiance on the other. But these failures paved the way for renewed efforts. When, at last, a number of widely scattered associations had succeeded in accomplishing reforms, thereby solidifying member support, the stage was set for organization on a national scale.

Business history and business inevitably share the problem of dealing with records in bulk. Here is a suggestion that historians borrow and adapt certain techniques that have proved effective in solving the problem for business.

The performance of industrial securities in the depression of 1893-97 went far toward ridding the financial community of the idea that such securities generally lacked investment quality. This ship in investing sentiment was a factor of major significance in accelerating the merger movement, the promoters of which, in turn, broadened the market for industrials still further. This they accomplished by offering wide participations in promising ventures, by sweetening those participations through extensive recourse to preferred stocks, and by employing promotional techniques new to the field of industrial security marketing. The creation of a broad market for industrial stocks, hitherto highly inflexible administrative tools, meant vastly increased fluidity of ownership. By the turn of the century the transition was well under way from closely held, “inside” ownership of American business to semipublic, “outside” hands.