NOVEMBER 13, 1945. To the Members of the Senate Committee on Commerce and the Senate Committee on Military Affairs. GENTLEMEN: We have a feeling of deep concern regarding the pending legislation on Federal aid to science. We share the belief of the sponsors of this legisla tion that expansion of our scientific work can yield returns of great benefit to the Nation. The manner in which this aid is administered is vital to the success of any program undertaken. We have studied this matter, and we transmit to you our considered opinion on the two administrative plans which you now have under discussion. It is our belief that the top authority in the proposed National Research Foundation should rest in a board or commission of scientists and laymen chosen by the President on the basis of interest in and capacity to promote the purposes of the Foundation, and not in a director who would be aided by a board with only advisory duties. The responsibilities of the top authority will be so great and the fields to be covered are so extensive that only a broad and representative board of most able men could effectively assume this responsibility and authority. We believe that the Foundation can achieve its objectives better by grants to institutions for the support of broad fields of scientific research and scientific education than by contracts for research on specified and closely limited problems. We believe that the Foundation should not supervise or direct research activities of other Government agencies, and should not have the duty of surveying these activities, but should arrange for suitable interchange of information between Government agencies and research men carrying on work with the support of the Foundation; and that officers of other Government agencies should serve ex officio on certain advisory panels of the Foundation, such as an advisory panel to the division of national defense, but that no such ex officio members should serve on any board or commission of this Foundation to which authority is delegated. Recognizing the great need of study of human relationships, we believe that the Foundation should provide suitable support for the social sciences and humanities as well as for the medical and natural sciences, that the social sciences and humanities should be suitably represented in the membership of the board or commission, and that provision should be made for scholarships and fellowships in the social sciences and humanities as well as in the medical and natural sciences. It is our considered opinion that the bill S. 1285, which was introduced by Senator Warren G. Magnuson and is based on the report "Science; the Endless Frontier" made to President Truman by Dr. Vannevar Bush, conforms far more closely to the requirements stated above than does the bill 2. 1297, which was introduced by Senator Harley M. Kilgore, and we urge that you recommend passage of the Magnuson bill S. 1285 (committee print of Oct. 12, 1945), in order to achieve the maximum benefit from scientific research for all of the people. Yours sincerely, H. Victor Neher, Linus Pauling, E. C. Watson, William H. Fowler, INDIANA CHAPTER OF THE SOCIETY OF SIGMA XI, RECOMMENDATIONS ON SCIENCE LEGISLATION To the Members of the Subcommittee considering S. 1285, Senate Commerce Committee, INDIANA UNIVERSITY, November 20, 1945. and Subcommittee Considering S. 1297, Senate Committee on Military Affairs, Senate Office Building GENTLEMEN: The Indiana chapter of the Society of Sigma Xi wishes to make the following recommendations in regard to pending legislation dealing with a National Research Foundation: I. The administration of the National Research Foundation should be in accord with the provisions of bill S. 1285, i. e., top authority should be vested in a board. II. The Foundation should include the following administrative divisions: 1. Medical research 2. Physical sciences 4. National defense 5. Scientific personnel and education 6. Publications and information (a) If it is decided that the social sciences are to be included, they should be represented by an additional separate administrative division. (b) The administrative board may create such additional divisions as it deems necessary, and prescribe the powers and duties of such divisions. (c) The administrative committees of the above divisions should be set up in the manner prescribed by bill S. 1285. III. The provisions made for publication and dissemination of knowledge should supplement and not supersede existing channels. Furthermore, we strongly endorse that part of the resolution of the Southwestern Section of the Society for Experimental Biology and Medicine which reads as follows: * * to have clear assurance of freedom of scientific endeavor, under any form of Federal subsidy, support or encouragement, with the understanding that such freedom extend not only to scientific studies and scientific undertakings themselves, but also to the reporting and discussion of results therefrom * IV. As to patent policy, we support the position assumed by Dr. Bush, viz., it is a matter requiring separate legislation and has no place in legislation of this kind. Accordingly, we favor the implication of bill S. 1285 which places the Foundation in the same position in respect to patents as existing Government agencies. Respectfully submitted. SID ROBINSON, President, Indiana Chapter of the Society of Sigma Xi. UNIVERSITY OF DENVER, RESOLUTIONS ADOPTED BY THE SCIENCE FACULTIES Hon. WARREN G. MAGNUSON, DENVER, COLO., November 14, 1945. United States Senate, Washington, D. C. Dear SENATOR MAGNUSON: This communication is addressed to you because of the recognition that as comprehensive an expression of opinion as possible is essential in order that legislative matters may, in the final analysis, be based upon the most nearly representative judgment of those most vitally affected by legislation. The various aspects of proposals before the Congress of the United States pertaining to the encouragement and support of scientific research have been carefully analyzed by the members of the faculty of the science departments of the University of Denver. It is recognized that the best provisions of the various proposals should be contained in the final legislation insofar as some unanimity of opinion can be achieved as to which proposals are most desirable. In accordance with this principle the accompanying set of resolutions was adopted unanimously by the members of the faculty of the science departments as expressing the fundamental bases on which the various provisions of the final legislation should be based. These are respectfully submitted to you for your earnest consideration in connection with your responsibility, as a Member of the Congress of the United States, to provide legislation which will most effectively promote the welfare of the Nation in times of peace and most adequately provide the necessary protection should this Nation ever again be involved in a war. We urge you to give your support only to those provisions in forthcoming legislation which embody the policies recommended in the accompanying reso lutions. Respectfully submitted, ALFRED C. NELSON, Dean, Chairman, Committee on Research. University of Denver faculty members participating in consideration of and unanimous approval of the resolutions attached Dr. Frank R. Blood, assistant professor of chemistry. Dr. Byron E. Cohn, professor of physics. Dr. Essie White Cohn, associate professor of chemistry. Dr. Albert H. Cooper, professor of chemical engineering. Dr. Fred E. D'Armour, professor of zoology. Dr. Earl A. Engle, professor of chemistry and chemical engineering. Mrs. Olna Fant, instructor in mathematics. Dr. Arthur E. Holch, professor of botany. Dr. William H. Hyslop, professor of physics. Dr. Clarence M. Knudson, dean, college of engineering and professor of chemistry and chemical engineering. Dr. Arthur J. Lewis, professor of mathematics. Mr. Fred H. McClain, professor of electrical engineering. Dr. Alfred C. Nelson, dean, graduate college, and professor of chemistry and chemical engineering. Mr. Humphrey G. Owen, professor of zoology. Mr. Wilbur H. Parks, assistant professor of mechanical engineering Dr. Etienne B. Renaud, curator of museum of anthropology and professor of anthropology. RESOLUTIONS ADOPTED BY THE SCIENCE FACULTIES, UNIVERSITY OF Denver, NOVEMBER 7, 1945 1. We favor legislation to provide for Federal support of research in the medical, biological and physical sciences. 2. It is our opinion that Federal support of research should take the form of grants in aid to universities, colleges and other research institutions including already established Government agencies. Such grants should provide fellowships, salaries of research workers, equipment and other necessary expenses. 3. Provision should be made to secure a fair geographical distribution of Federal grants and an equitable recognition of the various fields of science. Special consideration should be given to the needs of smaller universities and colleges to avoid the concentration of funds in a few already adequately financed universities and research institutions. 4. The control of Federal support should be vested in a board, at least half of the personnel of which should be competent scientists. The members of this board should have authority to appoint their own director and committees. 5. In accord with current practices the results of research should be freely published through the institution where the research is carried on or by the appropriate societies. 6. It is recommended that primary support be given to institutions of pure science which normally would not be supported by industrial research organizations. VIRGINIA CHAPTER OF THE SOCIETY OF SIGMA XI, STATEMENT ON NATIONAL SCIENCE LEGISLATION SOCIETY OF THE SIGMA XI, University Station, Charlottesville, Va., November 6, 1945. Senator WARREN G. MAGNUSON, Senate Office Building, Washington, D. C. DEAR SENATOR MAGNUSON: I have the honor to present to you a statement signed by 100 scientists actively engaged in research, who are members of the National Scientific Research Society, with regard to the various bills for the promotion of research now being considered by the Committee on Commerce and the Military Affairs Committee. Our membership includes men and women in all the scientific schools of the University of Virginia and in the Institute of Textile Technology, as well as a few members in other organizations such as the Geological Survey. We have reached as many of our members as possible, and no one has declined to sign. We therefore feel that this statement, unanimously concurred in, expresses the considered opinion of a representative group of all scientists engaged in research. Yours respectfully, ROBERT E. LUTZ, President. We, the officers, members, and associates of the Virginia Chapter of the Society of Sigma Xi, a national organization of research scientists pledged to conduct, promote, and encourage scientific research, after careful study and discussion, hereby express our strong endorsement of the report of Dr. Vannevar Bush on a program for postwar scientific research. We agree with the importance Dr. Bush attaches to continued and expanding research in all the natural and medical sciences, with his analysis of the difficulties in the way of a strong and well balanced program for research and for the training of research scientists, and with his recommendations as to the means of reducing or overcoming these difficulties. We endorse the proposal to establish a National Research Foundation, free from political control. We believe that the members of the governing board of such a foundation should be chosen from a panel nominated by the National Academy of Science. We favor the enactment of legislation that will effectively carry out the recommendations of the Bush report. Specifically, we endorse the bil S. 1285, introduced by Senator Magnuson, and the corresponding bills H. R. 3852 and 3860, insofar as they embody these recommendations. We urge the rejection of the bill S. 1297, introduced by Senator Kilgore, because it contains several features we regard as definitely harmful to the conduct and progress of scientific research; among these objectionable features are (1) The appointment of a single director in whom authority is vested; DR. H. P. HAMMOND, DEAN OF ENGINEERING, PENNSYLVANIA STATE COLLEGE, STATEMENT ON APPLIED RESEARCH THE PENNSYLVANIA STATE COLLEGE, Congressman D. EMERT BRUMBAUGH, SCHOOL OF ENGINEERING, OFFICE OF THE DEAN, State College, Pa., September 29, 1945. New House Office Building, Washington, D. C. DEAR CONGRESSMAN BRUMBAUGH: Thank you for your letter of September 27,. I shall look for the copy of the report of the Subcommittee on Legislative Proposals for the Promotion of Science. It occurs to me in writing this note to you to point out what seems to be a defect in several, if not all, of the bills that have been suggested-and for that matter in the document written by Dr. Vannevar Bush called Science the Endless Frontier, on which the Magnuson bill is based and which has influenced the other bills. This defect is the exclusion from the wording of the bills of the term "applied science” or “engineering" or "agriculture" in the listing of types of research to be undertaken. This omission apparently was not accidental nor was it the intent to include applied science under the general category of "physical science." The intent was to provide for only basis research on the grounds, I believe, that applied research probably would be taken care of by industry or other agencies. This assumption, of course, is very far from correct. A great deal of the research that was done during the war, both by OSRD and by the Army and Navy, was of the direct applicatory type. No one could possibly conceive of developing new weapons without applying basic principles to specific problems. The omission of applied science is, therefore, a very serious defect so far as national security is concerned, and the military departments themselves cannot be expected to take care of all the research that must be done. A great deal of it must be and will be done in educational institutions. It seems to me and to many others that if a national law supporting research agencies is to be passed it must be done on a national and inclusive basis and not in terms of any one division of activity, as now clearly intended by the bills that have been presented. I am not sure that the Members of Congress are aware of this situation, but those of us in engineering who are studying the matter have been made aware of it not only by the wording of the bills but also by conferences with some of their proponents. Hearings on the Magnuson and Kilgore bills are to begin the week of October 7. If through your acquaintances and connections in either the Senate or the House you can call attention to these defects, I think you would be doing a considerable service to the national interest, and particularly to national security. I do not imply that basic research is not important; on the contrary, it is very important if we are to keep pace with the scientific developments of Russia, England, and Germany. But research in applied science is equally important and any national law to support research that is passed ought to include both. Yours very truly, H. P. HAMMOND, Dean, School of Engineering. DR. R. K. SUMMERBELL, NORTHWESTERN UNIVERSITY, ADDRESS ON THE EFFECT ON ACADEMIC RESEARCH OF A NATIONAL SCIENCE FOUNDATION NORTHWESTERN UNIVERSITY, DEAR SENATOR MAGNUSON: Recently I was asked to talk before a group of scientists on the pending Kilgore and Magnuson bills. My particular assignment was "The Effect on Academic Research of a National Science Foundation." It occurred to me that these views might be of value to you, and I am enclosing a copy of my manuscript. Sincerely, R. K. SUMMERBELL, Chairman, Department of Chemistry. THE EFFECT ON ACADEMIC RESEARCH OF A NATIONAL SCIENCE FOUNDATION EXCUSE FOR A BILL It is generally conceded that research and technical education on a scale considerably greater than that which preceded the war is essential to the continuing welfare of the country. The funds to support such research at any appreciable increase in level are not in the hands of the universities and there is no prospect that private sources will greatly increase their donations. Industry, even with Uncle Sam paying 85 or 90 percent of the cost has not made large contributions. These legislative bills constitute one answer to the problem. If we admit the general proposition that increased fundamental research is vital to the welfare of the country, anyone opposing these bills must submit some other plan for financing the much wanted pure research. The gap cannot be filled by pious praise of free enterprise and rugged individualism. It is my personal opinion that in response to popular demand, some form of Government subsidy is forthcoming. It is our job tonight to visualize the probable effect of these subsidies and to explore the alternative suggestions for administration. Under any method of administration there are bound to be certain deleterious effects. Whether the purse strings are held by a board of politicians, or by an appointed director, or by a board of scientists so pure that they make the driven snow look like the ideal black body, the administrators will hold the purse strings and will decide in which of several alternative ways the money is to be spent. That is, policies will be set up by a single person or by a small group which will determine the direction taken by fundamental research for |