This paper reexamines the extent to which the giant corporations cooperated with wage and price controls during World War II, an issue to which Galbraith first drew attention. Two forms of evidence are explored: a sample of court cases involving the Office of Price Administration and large corporations, and the monographs in which former administrators reflected on their wartime experiences. The conclusion is that the compliance record could be characterized as a good one, but that this achievement depended on the constraints on allocation and collective bargaining that existed during the war.

The Surplus Property Act of 1944 established several social objectives for the disposal of war surplus. In particular, small business was to be benefited; concentration was to be reduced. Such objectives are better considered as part of the war mobilization rather than the peacetime reconversion. While suggesting that concentration was not reduced, the evidence also suggests that concentration is not an inevitable consequence of war. Social objectives can be incorporated into war mobilization, but their realization involves a substantially higher cost.

Recent studies, when taken together, suggest that the bureaucratic elites of nineteenth-century Germany and Japan were much less successful in stimulating economic development than has been traditionally asserted. Direct government investment was neither extensive nor successful. Government-sponsored institutional change, notably in financial structures, had little if any beneficial impact. Development in both nations resulted from the gradual emergence of a commercial culture, and on world factors exogenous to government policy. The bureaucratic elites failed to adjust to changed circumstances, instead leading both nations into disastrous wars. These results call into question development strategies based on central government control.

This paper analyzes the roles of the Departments of Agriculture and the Interior in restricting the assignment of property rights to rangeland in the American West. While common property conditions encouraged overgrazing and dissipation of the rental value of the land, it was in the interest of both departments to oppose the private claims of the ranchers. Moreover, jurisdictional competition for administration of federal land holdings likely delayed the installation of bureaucratic controls on entry and range use until 1934.

The Crees of Saskatchewan adjusted their economic life in reaction to their long and interdependent relationship with European fur traders. For the period from the late eighteenth through the mid-nineteenth century, this paper examines one aspect of the Crees' economic adjustment to the fur trade, the limiting of access to the land and its resources to conserve the fragile supply of furbearmg animals. Hudson's Bay Company documents and studies by anthropologists provide the basis for this economic study.

The major contrast between preindustrial and modern economies is that the latter enjoy regular and rapid growth, whereas income per capita tends to stagnate in the former. Analysis of the organization of exchange in early Christian Ireland shows that the exchange and therefore the production of material wealth was so thoroughly integrated into securing and exercising power, as well as into establishing and maintaining family and social ties, that any improvements in technology which might have led to economic growth would inevitably have generated prohibitive social costs.

This article argues that the development of the peasant commune in Russia, with its periodic repartition of serf holdings, hierarchy of authority, and dependence on corvee as a form of obligation, was a consequence of enslavement of the Russian peasant. These features of the commune are seen as reducing the costs of both monitoring labor effort, and maintaining the productive capacity of the serf. The chronology of their development and their association with the more fertile land of European Russia and with private as opposed to state ownership provide evidence for the argument.