Cancer of the larynx is one of the rarer malignant neoplasms encountered in man, comprising 1 to 4 per cent of the entire material. Experience in the treatment of this condition is therefore limited except for a few large cancer centers and several university hospitals renowned for their laryngological work. Time and significantly numerical material are necessary to evaluate any new therapeutic procedure. The era of effective radiation therapy for cancer in this country goes back only to the early thirties and, particularly in the case of the larynx, shortly after Pancoast, Tucker, and others proclaimed the ineffectiveness of irradiation in this disease. They were perfectly right in their assertions before the days of protracted fractionated treatment as evolved by Coutard. In the thirties and early forties, however, there was almost universal acceptance of Coutard's principles and I believe that radiotherapy was given an extensive trial in cancer of the larynx during the decade 1930 to 1940. In more recent years, particularly now, we are again encountering opposition to radiotherapy as an acceptable method of treatment for this condition. Radiotherapists are in a peculiar position, especially in this country. They play the role of a mendicant, depending on the rest of the profession for their patients. They are often told what to do and how to do it by surgeons and others who have never heard of the inverse-square law, half-value layer, or volume dose distribution, not to mention ion pairs. To make the situation worse, there are many surgeons and specialists who believe that radiotherapy is part of their own specialty and that they should be versed in both, because only in this way will a patient get an honest, unbiased opinion as to the best type of therapy to be used in a given condition. To debate the question before this audience, which I presume might be a bit partisan, would hardly be cricket, but the problem is pertinent to our discussion. Various reports dealing with the radiological treatment of cancer of the larynx have been discounted because the material was said to have been selected. I ask quite frankly: What radiotherapist selects his material? I believe that in very few instances does he have complete control of the primary material. Patients are usually referred to radiotherapists by surgeons or laryngologists, and real selection of material lies in the hands of the man who controls the disposition of the cases. When this is under the control of one who does both surgery and radiotherapy, the patients may very well be selected with a bias and a leaning not in the direction of radiotherapy. Early in 1931, Dr. Rudolph Kramer, co-author of this paper, otolaryngologist to Mount Sinai Hospital and a surgeon of extensive experience, referred a patient aged fifty-four with an extrinsic cancer of the larynx for radiotherapy. The contraindication for laryngectomy was coronary artery disease.