cause serious delay. Perhaps it is not necessary to settle these questions of organization and control at this moment; rather the Foundation could operate for a few years under a provisional statute and the drafting of a more rigid organization be deferred until more experience is gained. In view of the recent change of scientific public opinion in favor of Federal support of science, ultimate agreement between now divergent views may be hoped for after a while. Under all circumstances a preliminary organization should not impede at a later date the creation of a Government department desponsible for scientific development under the leadership of a Cabinet member. The main problem at the beginning is to find for leadership of the Foundation vigorous personalities with revolutionary vision and conservative wisdom, to provide the greatest flexibility and to secure democratic participation of scientists on the operating level. Centralization at the top may be unavoidable; all the more is a broad democratic base needed. Decentralization should be strongly emphasized in the operation of the Foundation. It is true that big centers are necessary for certain types of scientific activity. But it would do great harm if the wartime trend toward concentration in a few places should be perpetuated, In the process of reshuffling and reallocation of the scant scientific personnel, all the odds favor those few institutions whose position has been strengthened during the war. A national program for scientific progress should, without wastefully scattering funds on barren grounds, also encourage enterprise and initiative in financially weak places where scientific life springs up. COMPARISON OF DE-EMPLOYMENT HERE AND IN EUROPE It may be appropriate to add a few words about endeavors for the promotion of science in Europe where the state financed and administered most of the universities and supported their scientific work. Late in the nineteenth century some German scientific visitors to the United States returned impressed by what they saw of American initiative and private help to the universities. Soon the American example was imitated in Germany. The effect was far-reaching; for example, cooperation by industry initiated the great development of the science faculty of the University of Goettingen with exphasis on combining applied and pure research. To mention one notable instance, Ludwig Prandtl, then an unknown young engineer, was brought to Goettingen where he started his epochmaking work on aerodynamics in a little wooden shack paid for by the industrial benefactors of the university. Much of the aerodynamical research that has advanced aviation in our age can be traced to the primitive hut which many Americans who were then students in Goettingen will remember. It goes without saying that since those days Prandtl's Institute has been transformed into a tremendous establishment which during the war was one of the research centers for the Luftwaffe. Of course the aerodynamical sciences did not remain and never were a German monopoly and, fortunately moreover, the greatest of Prandtl's pupils has been a leader in the American war effort. After the First World War the small Goettingen society for supporting science was merged into one of several new nation-wide foundations with a broad program. These foundations, as well as the Kaiser Wilhelmgesellschaft (organized with private funds for the support of mere research institutions) have played a decisive role in maintaining and enhancing scientific standards in Germany between the First World War and the Hitler revolution. Gradually the Government increased its financial and administrative participation in these organizations. Political control, as well as control by business and industry, was, however (except perhaps in the field of chemistry), conspicuously absent in German science prior to the advent of the Nazi regime. In 1933 the picture changed radically when the Nazi Party took control of German science. During the war, it seems, the interference by big and little dictators without competence, from Hitler personally down to the ranks of minor executives, has greatly contributed to retarding German war research and development, thus offsetting advantages that the Germans had by broader training and by their early and thorough organization. All in all, study and analysis of the German development may prove useful for the Science Foundation in spite of, or perhaps because of, the fundamentally different conditions here and in Europe. At any rate, the German example indicates how desirable it would be if the Federal support of science would be generously supplemented by aid from industry. 1196 FREEDOM OF SCIENCE In closing, I venture to make a remark on the problem of scientific freedom, an issue which has caused much of the early suspicion by scientists of Federal legislation. The recognition of basic research in the pending bills has greatly contributed to allaying the fear of bureaucratic encroachment upon freedom of research; now endorsement of the intentions of the bill is practically unanimous. Yet, the emphasis on basic research merely as a prerequisite for practical applications is not quite enough. Of course, every scientist is anxious to see science applied for advancing material human welfare; however, often a creative scientist (just as a creative inventor or artist) is not motivated by thoughts of practical usefulness but by a much deeper urge for knowledge for its own sake, for the liberation of the human mind. To keep this innermost source of scientific search free and alive is a delicate though absolutely vital matter of conscience to those for whom science is a vocation and without whom science cannot exist. A word of recognition of this fact in the preamble to the bill would go far toward removing the last vestiges of doubt that may remain in the hearts of some scientists. HEARINGS ON SCIENCE LEGISLATION (S. 1297 and Related Bills) HEARINGS BEFORE A SUBCOMMITTEE OF THE SEVENTY-NINTH CONGRESS PURSUANT TO S. Res. 107 (78th Congress) AND S. Res. 146 (79th Congress) AUTHORIZING A STUDY OF THE POSSIBILITIES 78860 PART 6 MARCH 5, 1946 TESTIMONY OF SCIENCE TALENT SEARCH FINALISTS Printed for the use of the Committee on Military Affairs UNITED STATES WASHINGTON: 1946 flcrograph HEARINGS ON SCIENCE LEGISLATION S. 1297 and Related Bills TUESDAY, MARCH 5, 1946 UNITED STATES SENATE, COMMITTEE ON MILITARY AFFAIRS, SUBCOMMITTEE ON WAR MOBILIZATION, Washington, D. C. The subcommittee met at 10:10 a. m., pursuant to the call of the chairman, in room 457, Senate Office Building, Senator Harley M. Kilgore, West Virginia (chairman), presiding. Present: Senator Harley M. Kilgore, West Virginia; Senator Edwin C. Johnson, Colorado. Also present: Senator Homer Ferguson, Michigan; Senator Leverett Saltonstall, Massachusetts. Also present: Dr. Herbert Schimmel, chief investigator. STATEMENT BY SENATOR HARLEY M. KILGORE The CHAIRMAN. The future of scientific research in the country is one of the pressing problems before the Senate today. Together with a number of my colleagues, I have spent a good deal of time in working out a national science program which will assure the continued development of scientific research and development for our Nation's security and welfare. We recognize particularly that we cannot have a strong, healthy growth of scientific investigation in this country unless we develop our greatest scientific asset-the talented young people who are the new generation of scientists. We have here today 40 young people, finalists in the science talent search. They are exactly the sort of talented youths our country needs to assist and encourage. They have been chosen in national competition as the high-school seniors with the greatest scientific potential. The objectives of the Science Talent Search match precisely the basic objectives of the National Science Foundation bill which we have under consideration. These objectives are to discover and foster the education of boys and girls of scientific talent. The foundation would supplement the aid to scientific education given by such excellent private institutions as science talent search, assuring the Nation of the best use of its greatest scientific resource-that is, its young scientists. For this reason, we have asked you 40 to appear here today to speak from the point of view of the young science student. We want to hear your ideas on the issues of our national science program. In |