| Book Review | The Journal of American History, 89.1

You have not been recognized as a subscriber to JAH online. About 178 words from this article are provided below; about 319 words remain.

If you are a individual member of the Organization of American Historians, you may:: • login here if you have already registered for online access.; • Or if you're already logged in register your subscription.
• Set up your online account for the first time.
If you are not a member of the Organization of American Historians, you can:: • Join the OAH and receive many member benefits including print and electronic issues of the Journal of American History.
• Purchase a research pass to gain two-hour access to the entire History Cooperative web site. You will have full access to current issues of the Journal of American History (86.1-present). Note: the Research Pass does not provide access to JSTOR's holdings of the Journal of American History.
Instititutions can:: • Subscribe to this journal and receive print and electronic issues.
• Activate your existing subscription so that we recognize your IP number ranges.

| Book Review | The Journal of American History, 89.1 | The History Cooperative

Book Review

Private Charity and Public Inquiry: A History of the Filer and Peterson Commissions. By Eleanor L. Brilliant. (Bloomington: Indiana University Press, 2000. xvi, 272 pp. $39.95, ISBN 0-253-33751-8.)

Eleanor L. Brilliant, a professor of social work at Rutgers University, has produced a painstakingly detailed examination of the histories of two commissions created through the intervention of John D. Rockefeller III: the Commission on Foundations and Private Philanthropy (1969–1970) chaired by the Bell and Howell chief executive officer, Peter Peterson, and the Commission on Private Philanthropy and Public Needs (1973–1977), led by the Aetna Life Insurance executive John Filer. 1

Generally known as the Peterson and Filer commissions, these two bodies ostensibly existed to make objective appraisals of the role and operation of foundations in American society. In reality, both sought to stanch potential bloodletting by changes in taxes. Internal disagreements prevented either body from reaching consensus on large questions such as the appropriate relationship between government, business, and nonprofits. Instead, both focused intently on foundations and tax policy and defended the equity of charitable deductions. . . .

There are about 319 more words in this article. Please log in (or, if you are not yet an authorized user, please go to the User Setup page) to gain full access rights. Or if you're already logged in register your subscription.