the Editors
Letters to Undivided
Support
for NSF
D E A R SIR:
Since my views on w h a t should go into a bill for a n a t i o n a l science foundation a r e expressed i n t h e M a r c h 17 issue of C & E N b y Joseph. Fleischer b e t t e r t h a n I could express them myself, it is unnecessary for me t o go f u r t h e r into this aspect of t h e m a t t e r than t o s t a t e m y agreement. I should like, however, t o enter an appeal for t h e avoidance of p a s t mistakes. I t is m o s t important t h a t w e have some kind of science foundation bill, if only because scientific r e s e a r c h is going t o be supported in one way or another. A n y reasonable bill which represents a fair compromise of t h e opinions of t h e scientists will be b e t t e r t h a n continuance of t h e present situation in which s o m u c h of t h e research of t h e universities is being supported b y t h e A r m y and N a v y . This is n o t t o criticize either the spirit or t h e method b y which t h e services a r e offering this assistance. B u t however well-meaning these efforts are, and liowever scrupulously t h e services refrain from a t t e m p t i n g t o control t h e direction of t h e research, this is an u n healthy s i t u a t i o n , a n d I understand t h a t the services themselves believe t h a t a n agency specifically designed for t h e purpose should as soon as possible t a k e over the governmental aid for research. Last year t h e Council of t h e AMERICAN CHEMICAL,
SOCIETY
turned
the
about
the provisions of S.1850, b u t there w a s good evidence t h a t a large n u m b e r of scientists did consider S.1850 t o be a very ^ o o d measure, including t h e administrative s e t u p of full-time responsible d i rector, t h e inclusion of t h e social sciences, a n d the p a t e n t provisions. Such evidence as appeared in t h e March 17 issue of Cn t h e air arranged by the section d u r i n g t h a t week a n d before a n d after w a s a l m o s t in t h e class with t h a t allotted t o a political convention of pre-New Deal e r a . W h y even the soap operas included in th.eir announcements words t o the effect t h a t t h e i r soapmaking chemists had gone t o N e w York to t h e ACS meeting there!" We have passed Dave's l e t t e r on t o our headline writer with t h e m i l d admonition t h a t this error will probably cost t h e editor a luncheon with Dave at T h e Chemists' Club. I t is always a pleasure t o lunch with him, n o m a t t e r who i s s t u c k with the chit.
1079*
