FOLLOWING A REVIEW OF THE HISTORY AND PHILOSOPHY OF PROACTIVE PATROL, FOUR EXPERIMENTS ARE SUMMARIZED -TWO FROM THE UNITED STATES, ONE FROM THE NEW ZEALAND HOME OFFICE AND ONE FROM THE DURHAM, NEW ZEALAND, POLICE DEPARTMENT. THE FORT WORTH EXPERIMENT FOUND THAT INTENSIVE FOOT PATROL SIGNIFICANTLY REDUCED A NUMBER OF COMMON CRIMES IN A SELECTED AREA. THE KANSAS CITY EXPERIMENT FOUND THAT PROACTIVE PATROL EXPERIMENTS ACHIEVED LITTLE SIGNIFICANT CRIME REDUCTION. THIS DATA IS EXAMINED IN DETAIL. THE ORIGINAL PREMISE IN KANSAS CITY WAS THAT OFFICERS HAD 35 PERCENT OF THEIR TIME AVAILABLE FOR PROACTIVE PATROL. HOWEVER, CLOSER ANALYSIS SHOWED THAT 60 PERCENT OF THEIR TIME WAS UNCOMMITTED AND MOST OF THIS UNCOMMITTED TIME WAS SPENT ON NONLAW ENFORCEMENT ACTIVITIES. THE IMPORTANCE OF DIRECTION AND SUPERVISION IS DISCUSSED. IN 1964 THE NEW ZEALAND HOME OFFICE FOUND THAT INTENSIVE FOOT PATROL IN HIGH CRIME AREAS LED TO A 30 PERCENT REDUCTION IN OFFENSES. IN 1968 THE DURHAM POLICE AND DURHAM UNIVERSITY CONDUCTED AN INTENSIVE PATROL EXPERIMENT ON TRUNK ROADS IN AN ATTEMPT TO REDUCE ACCIDENT RATES. IT WAS FOUND THAT THERE WAS NO DETECTABLE RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN PATROL LEVELS AND ACCIDENT RATES BUT MORE NONINJURY MOTOR ACCIDENTS WERE REPORTED WIH INCREASED PATROL. THE IMPLICATIONS OF THESE VARIOUS EXPERIMENTS ARE DISCUSSED. IT IS CONCLUDED THAT PROACTIVE PATROL MAKES LITTLE CONTRIBUTION TO THE CAMPAIGN AGAINST CRIME BUT THAT WHEN 'SPARE' PATROL TIME IS SUBJECTED TO CONTROL AND DIRECTION, RESULTS ARE BENEFICIAL. REFERENCES ARE APPENDED. (GLR)