Service in ACS national offices: Council Committee on Publications, 1966-71; chairman, 1 9 7 0 - 7 1 ; secretary, 1 9 6 8 - 7 0 ; Council Policy Committee (nonvoting), 1 9 7 0 - 7 1 ; Committee on 1969 CA Emergency Grants to Small Colleges; associate editor, Chemical Reviews, 1 9 6 4 - 6 6 . Member: American Association for the A d vancement of Science (fellow); Organic Syntheses, editorial board, 1950 to present, secretary, 1 9 4 9 - 5 9 . Dr. Rabjohn's views
Although the American Chemical Society has enjoyed an excellent reputation for many years, recent changes in the patterns of society and the economy require that new and more dynamic actions be taken by the organization. I believe that it should strive to maintain its top position as a scientific and educational society, but also should gradually develop reasonable and desirable programs related to professionalism. I think that an effort should be made to guard against an active minority dominating the operation of ACS; however, those who seek changes should be encouraged to become participants in running the Society instead of suggesting what needs to be done. It should be realized that changes and new programs which ACS will be expected to undertake in the coming years will require new sources of income. A reasonable balance will have to be established between desire and what the members are willing to support financially. It appears that membership dues will have to be increased if ACS activities are to be expanded. It seems that relatively few members have much knowledge of the financial operations of ACS and assume that a
considerable proportion of the annual budget should be available for their favored projects. There is need for improved communications in many of the operations of ACS. I have the impression that closer relationships should exist between the Board of Directors and the Council Policy Committee, and similarly all the way down through the various operating groups to the members. The establishment of the Executive Director's position should have aided communications between the staff and those who establish policies. I believe that efforts along these lines should be increased and that one or two younger, highly capable individuals should be hired to interact with the Executive Director to assure continuity in the operation of this most important office. The Society should make more effort to stimulate the local sections to elect younger members to the Council and to interest them to become active on committees, to help determine policies, and to work for changes and programs they desire. Financial support should be made available for attendance at Council meetings when a real need exists. Perhaps related to this matter is the subject of regional meetings. It appears that this program should be pushed harder, and more recognition should be given to the chemistry profession at the grass-roots level. The future members of ACS are largely college students, and they are participating actively in the regional meetings. Likewise, more members appear to be willing to attend local gatherings of chemists than to travel to a relatively few undesirable urban areas. The interactions of local section officers and councilors within given regions should
ACS spells out CBW stance to Fulbright ACS President Alan C. Nixon has sent a letter to Sen. J. William Fulbright (D.-Ark.), chairman of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee, expressing ACS support for Senate ratification of the Geneva Protocol of 1925—which prohibits use in warfare of chemical and biological weapons—without any of the qualifications sought by the Nixon Administration. Further, Dr. Nixon says that ACS endorses S. Res. 48—which calls for Senate approval of the protocol without qualification—introduced by Sen. Hubert H. Humphrey (D.-Minn.). And he says that ACS would like to present a "detailed policy statement" at any hearings on the measure. ACS support for ratification of the protocol without qualification is a distinct change from the position adopted by the ACS Board of Directors and Council in 1970, Dr. Nixon explains in the letter. In 1970 the ACS Board of Directors and Council endorsed rati54
C&EN Oct. 8, 1973
fying the protocol, but with the Nixon Administration's interpretation that the protocol does not prohibit the use of tear gas and herbicides in warfare. Among other things, the 1970 resolution said that ACS supported the "recent action of the President of the United States in submitting to the United States Senate for ratification the Geneva Protocol of 1925," and urged the Senate to ratify the protocol. This position dramatically reversed the Society's long-standing opposition to U.S. ratification of the protocol dating back to a resolution adopted by the ACS Council on Aug. 3, 1925. That resolution put ACS "strongly on record against the ratification of the Geneva protocol on poisonous gases, as against both National safety and on the grounds of humanity." Early this year, the ACS Joint Board-Council Committee on Chemistry and Public Affairs deliberated at several executive sessions on whether
be encouraged, and conceivable regional councils should be established as functional units of the ACS Council. Many members are not cognizant of the fact that the largest share of the Society's annual budget is associated with its publication program. The latter is the best in its class in the world and must be kept so. More effort should be made to make the membership aware of the magnitude and problems of these operations. Chemical and Engineering News, which is the official organ of the Society as well as a science news magazine, must be maintained. Further study should be given to its financial problems and the desirability of converting it to a biweekly publication. As the national business situation improves, C&EN can again be appreciated by a majority of the ACS members. I believe that most members of the Society recognize that many of the present problems of the chemical profession have arisen from outside sources. It behooves ACS to increase certain educational programs so that the public image of science and technology will be improved, and obviously related to these are closer contact with the Government in support of Society programs and science in general. Such undertakings require considerable effort and the membership should be asked for support. An expanded Executive Director's operation, as mentioned earlier, could be of considerable help in such areas. I believe that ACS is fortunate in having extremely competent help and support from its members and will continue to improve and prosper in spite of its numerous irritating, but minor problems.
ACS had gone far enough in its 1970 resolution on the protocol, Dr. Nixon says. He adds that "The renewed interest of the Committee on Chemistry and Public Affairs on behalf of the Society was prompted especially by President Richard M. Nixon's understanding that the protocol does not prohibit the use in war of riot-control agents and chemical herbicides, or of weapons utilizing smoke, flame, or napalm. "Attention eventually focused on endorsement of S. Res. 48," Dr. Nixon says, as "a means of both clarifying the Society's position with regard to the Protocol and encouraging a reinterpretation of the Administration's position." On June 1, 1973, the ACS Board of Directors voted to endorse S. Res. 48, thus "reaffirming the Society's support in 1970 of ratification of the Geneva Protocol, but without the reservations in the Administration's recommendation." On Aug. 28, 1973, at the ACS national meeting in Chicago the ACS Council endorsed the Board action of June 1.
