This journal is not able definitively to dispute Dr Breuning's ultimate warrant that the study indeed was conducted. Review of the reports of the six referees of the original submission (received in March 1981) and of correspondence (copies supplied to us by Dr Breuning) over the two-year course in which there were two subsequent resubmissions provided no amplifying information on this point. Nor can we ignore the coauthors' retractions because of their inability to vouch for Dr Breuning's assertions. They, according to Dr Breuning, could have had access to raw data if they had asked for it at the time reports were prepared (appendix L, p 7).
What is now central for our consideration is not only the current lack of authorial consensus but also the unfortunate lack of sufficient corroborative evidence within Dr Breuning's possession or capability of retrieving. Whether or not and for how long he should be expected to retain