Like Mr. Pargellis, I am concerned with the history of business and the businessman. He has a professional pride in seeing a better job done and he proposes to put into the hands of scholars the necessary tools to improve the quality of their work. My approach is that of a businessman who is disturbed by inadequate and sometimes prejudicial use of facts and the possible effect upon the general welfare of conclusions based on misstatements. Both of us want the writing and teaching of history to be factual and fair and as thorough as possible. I have no quarrel with Mr. Pargellis' point of view or with the remedy he suggests, and I agree readily that, in so far as imperfect knowledge of American history is due to lack of access to records, the cause should be removed. I cannot but feel that general acceptance of his proposal by companies whose files have been preserved will go a considerable way toward improving the situation and I do not see what harm could come from making such reports available to scholars, provided of course that in using them consideration be given, as Mr. Pargellis says, to “the ethical and legal standards of the time, with full appreciation of the political and competitive setting in which a businessman had to work.” The availability of corporate documents certainly would tend to prevent the making of careless or misleading statements, which without the records might go unchallenged.