I do not think that any one administrator, too powerfully placed, can consistently be depended upon to give that sort of direction.

The bill provides for the development of social sciences related to scientific research, without encumbering the Foundation with controversial issues of opinion and prejudices.

I fully realize the importance of developing the social sciences in this country. No one can doubt that our greatest and most urgent problems lie in the field of human relations. But I think there is a danger in weaving too intimately into the fabric of a foundation concerned with the development of the natural sciences issues which are so controversial that they might break down the effective operation of the Foundation.

However, I think it is wise to provide, as this bill does, and as the bill S. 1850 in the Senate does, for the development of the social sciences in relation to scientific research in the natural sciences and for the further development of the social sciences as the course appears clear.

With regard to the provisions for patent protection, I am not well qualified to speak. It seems to me that the bill provides for the protection of the public through the provision of patent regulations which can be made applicable to each particular situation. I hasten to add again, however, that I have no special competence to discuss that question.

Finally, if we could mobilize our national effort to meet the dangers of a military enemy, as we did, surely it is not too much to hope that we can meet the threats of ignorance and poverty and ill health and the complex problems of our modern civilization by continued mobilization of our scientific effort for the attainment of these latter ends.

I sincerely hope, and insofar, as I know, it is the sentiment of scientists generally, that some legislation be promptly enacted. Whether it be this bill or 1850, or a modification of either or a combination of the two, is, I think, of less importance to scientists and the country than that some wise legislation should be enacted. Personally, I feel the important thing is to give freedom to scientists to carry out the work they are best qualified to do and to make provision whereby any ill-considered features can be corrected by the usual democratic process.

I am confident, Mr. Chairman, that the scientists of the country will be behind any legislation, this or 1850, which meets these needs. Mr. PRIEST. Doctor, we certainly thank you for a very fine statement. Are there any questions?

Is Dr. A. N. Richards here?

STATEMENT OF DR. A. N. RICHARDS, CHAIRMAN, COMMITTEE ON MEDICAL RESEARCH OF OSRD

Dr. RICHARDS. My name is Alfred N. Richards. I am vice president in charge of medical affairs of the University of Pennsylvania, and since July of 1941, I have served as chairman of the Committee on Medical Research of the Office of Scientific Research and Development.

During these past 5 years, the Committee on Medical Research has assisted the Director of OSRD in the mobilization of medical and scientific personnel in the field of military medical problems. It has done this by recommending to him contracts for investigations to be carried on in universities, research institutes, hospitals, other Government agencies, and commercial organizations. Of more than 500 such contracts. More than 90 percent have been made with universities. Their cost has amounted to nearly $125,000,000.

The fields of study have been defined by the problems of warfare. They relate to the hazards which young men, physically fit, encounter in combat and in dangerous climates. Involved are such questions as infectious diseases; wounds and burns and the methods of their treatment; the protection of aviators in combat and high altitude flying; problems of selection of personnel; increase in resistance to cold, heat, humidity; treatment of shock; protection against poison gases; insect repellents and insecticides, malaria-these are some of the chief problems which were attacked.

Some of the accomplishments resulting from these studies are known throughout the country by publications in the lay press.

Penicillin, DDT, blood-plasma fractions which have been found to be therapeutically useful, the antimalaria discipline which conquered the malaria in the tropics-these words represent what was accomplished, and they are indicative of what can be accomplished by joint efforts in the future.

The chief feature in all of this work was patriotic willingness on the part of the scientists to lay aside personal predilections and join forces for scientific attack on problems which might help to win the war.

Because of the urgency of need for speedy results, long-range fundamental research could not be emphasized during the war; the accomplishments which have proved fruitful were developments of research which was undertaken years before with little or no thought of practical applications.

Now, when I think of the differences between the war effort and the effort which is bound to come if such legislation as that which you are considering is made effective, I think the difficulties to come are far greater than those of wartime research. In the wartime research, the problems were clean-cut and definite. Existing knowledge had to be surveyed; applications rather than new discoveries had to be sought for; we had to make what we already knew useful, and that was done in some fields with conspicuous success.

In peacetime, the patriotic stimulus which actuated all of our scientists will be lacking; we will have to depend on the passion which actuates the minds of certain men to discover new knowledge for its own sake, for the satisfaction of their imaginative curiosity.

A national science foundation, such as is envisaged in this bill, and that of S. 1850, is a tremendous experiment. Investigators are commonly agreed, I think, that in undertaking a complex experiment in which a great many variables are present, it is unwise to be too definite and detailed in laying out the plans of the experiment. A broad general plan is better than one which is too definitely outlined, in that it encourages amendment, correction, and search for mistakes. From this point of view H. R. 6448 has the advantage over S. 1850.

We are all agreed that this country vitally needs an increase in the number of its scientists, fitted by quality of mind and training to increase our knowledge of nature and nature's laws.

This increase can be effected by a discriminating selection of young men and women of demonstrated talent, and by seeing to it that their training, both as to quality and duration, is designed to guarantee insofar as that is possible, their later mature accomplishments. This selection and training cannot be accomplished unless we take care of the present generation of productive scientists; unless we see to it that the conditions under which they work are optimum not only to maintain their individual productiveness, but also to provide them with able disciples and with all material facilities.

They must be trusted to select their own tasks, the function of the Government should be to encourage them and to foster their work. If these two aims can be accomplished by a national science foundation, we can be sure that our scientific capital will be restored and that profit to the Nation will result.

The unit toward which this legislation must be directed is the peculiar human individual, whose mind has a peculiar bend toward the acquisition of new knowledge, that is science. Its aims must be first to seek him out and then to encourage him in his difficult task of exploring the unknown. During the war our organization had a certain degree of rigidity of control over investigators which seemed to be necessary to effect its military objectives. Any such rigidity of control should not characterize a peacetime effort. Investigators should be encouraged to organize themselves on bases of community of interests and mutual respect and understanding. One of the most useful features of wartime science arrangements was the frequent conferences and discussions among investigators having common or related problems.

We cannot accomplish by organization that which can only be accomplished by the inspiration or the intuition of the mind of a scientist. If the designers and directors of a national science foundation do not take full and understanding account of the peculiarities of the individual human unit of science, the investigator, I believe it will fail. The task of directing such a foundation will be so huge, so complex, and will require such depth and breadth of both scientific and human understanding as to require that its responsibilities be shared by a chosen group of our wisest men rather than borne by a single individual.

Mr. PRIEST. Are there any questions?

If there are no questions, we appreciate your statement.

In your opinion it is true, is it not, that under our present system of taxation, we can no longer in this country depend on large private foundations to finance fundamental research?

Dr. RICHARDS. We certainly cannot depend on that to finance it to any such degree as is necessary. Discoveries which have been made durign the war, valuable in themselves, have been even more valuable in opening the way to new discoveries, and no financial foundation, of which I am aware, has the funds with which to finance a Nation-wide attack such as we now believe to be necessary.

Mr. PRIEST. We certainly thank you for your statement.
Dr. Condon is the next witness.

STATEMENT OF DR. E. U. CONDON, DIRECTOR OF THE NATIONAL BUREAU OF STANDARDS, DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE

Dr. CONDON. My name is Dr. E. U. Condon, Director of the National Bureau of Standards. I am this year president of the American Physical Society, and I have been working during the past winter a great deal as scientific adviser to this Special Senate Committee on Atomic Energy.

I appear here today to present a statement on behalf of the Honorable Henry A. Wallace, Secretary of Commerce, who would have liked to have been able to appear here today, but was unable to do so because of previous engagements.

Mr. PRIEST. The Chair will state that I talked with the Secretary yesterday afternoon, and he explained the circumstances, and said that you would appear representing him, so we are very sorry that he could not appear but we are glad that you can.

Dr. CONDON. With your permission, I would like to read the statement which he has prepared, and then if you like I might make one or two comments of my own, but particularly be available to answer any questions if there is any way that I can be of any use to you.

The statement that Mr. Wallace has prepared is as follows:

"Mr. Chairman and members of the committee, this committee has under consideration a subject which I believe to be one of the most important now before the Congress-increased Federal aid for basic scientific research and for the training of scientific personnel. There is such wide public support for the general objectives of the bills before you that an extensive statement on the need for a National Science Foundation hardly seems necessary. I should like to confine my remarks, therefore, to a discussion of the principal bill before your committee, H. R. 6448, introduced by Representative Mills on May 15, 1946.

"H. R. 6448 resembles very closely S. 1285 which was introduced by Senator Magnuson. Several departures from S. 1285 have been made, however, which I shall discuss briefly at a later point in this statement. These differences are not sufficient, however, to modify the opposition to S. 1285, which I expressed in testimony before the Senate Committee on Military Affairs, a copy of which I should like to submit for the record.

"It is as follows":

STATEMENT BY HON. HENRY A. WALLACE, SECRETARY OF COMMERCE, BEFORE THE SUBCOMMITTEE ON WAR MOBILIZATION OF THE SENATE MILITARY AFFAIRS COMMITTEE AND THE TWO SUBCOMMITTEES OF THE SENATE COMMERCE COMMITTEE, OCTOBER 11, 1945

Mr. Chairman and members of the committee, I am very glad to have this opportunity of appearing before your committee today to discuss the bills which you have under consideration on the important subject of increased national support for scientific and technological research and development.

Your committee has before it the bills which deal with two distinct aspects of this general subject. The purpose of the Kilgore and Magnuson bills (S. 1297 and S. 1285) is to promote the further development of fundamental scientific research through increased Federal financial support. The Fulbright bill (S. 1284), on the other hand, is concerned with detailed methods of stimulating the full and rapid use of scientific and technological developments in industrial and business operations in the interest of economic advance. In my opinion, there is need for both types of bills. Their purposes are complementary and not con

flicting. My remarks today will be confined to the Kilgore and Magnuson bills; but I should like to have the opportunity of appearing before your committee later in the hearings to discuss the Fulbright bill in some detail.

I unqualifiedly endorse Federal support of scientific research activity, including the social sciences, and of technological development. Federal Government support of research activity is vital to national defense and to economic advance. Federal support of technological development would accelerate the practical use of the results of scientific research. Inventions and discoveries resulting from nationally financed scientific research and developmental activity should be secured to the public and be equally available to all. This would tend to equalize opportunities for small and large business, prevent monopoly, promote competition, preserve free enterprise and stimuate economic progress.

To assure a proper climate in which scientific and technological development can best flourish, it is absolutely essential that Government support of such activity impose no restraints on the freedom of the individual investigator to pursue the truth where it may lead him and throw no cloak of secrecy over him that would prevent the free and reciprocal interchange of scientific information (not industrial know-how of military value) on a sound international basis. No nation can hope to achieve or maintain a position of scientific leadership working in the isolation of security regulations and secrecy provisions.

In discussing the general science bills, I shall address my remarks to the joint Kilgore-Magnuson proposal, which Senator Kilgore introduced into the record on the first day of the committee hearings on October 8. In my opinion, this new draft combines the best features of the Kilgore and Magnuson bills as originally introduced.

THE KILGORE-MAGNUSON PROPOSAL

The basic policy question raised by the Kilgore-Magnuson bill is whether or not Federal financial support should be given to scientific and technological research carried on by non-Federal educational and research organizations in addition to the scientific activities undertaken by the Federal Government itself. I believe there is such general agreement on this basic principle on the part of our scientific leaders, by labor, business, and agriculture, and among the general public that extended discussion of this point on my part is hardly necessary. This agreement has been and will be evidenced at these hearings. The major reasons why this principle is now so widely accepted may be briefly stated as follows:

1. The application of science to the development of weapons and other military matériel during the war which has just come to a close has clearly demonstrated that our national security is dependent on continued scientific and technological progress; and therefore, in the interest of national defense these activities must receive adequate Government support.

2. Hardly less important is the contribution of scientific and technical research to our general economic well-being and to a steady rise in the standard of living. Increased productivity, the decline in the death rate and the improvement in the health of the general public, and general economic and social advance, have in large measure been based on the products of scientific research. The contributions of science to our economy and society as a whole are of such vital concern as to warrant increased national support as a sound public investment. 3. Basic scientific research now requires a very large capital investment in laboratories, equipment and other facilities and involves substantial operating costs. In the past these costs have been borne by corporations, the Federal Government, universities, and private foundations. The extent of the research now required far exceeds the financial resources of the universities and private foundations, and much fundamental research for which there is no immediate practical application in salable products will naturally not be undertaken by corporations. In addition, small business and individual technicians are not able to afford the research facilities now required, and increased Government support is necessary to make scientific and technical information generally available in the interest of equalizing opportunity for large and small business, the promotion of competition, the prevention of monopoly, and the stimulation of economic advance.

In view of these considerations, I am in complete agreement with the general objectives of the Kilgore and Magnuson bills. The joint draft has also resolved many of the questions on detailed provisions of the two original bills which I discussed at some length in my letter of September 27 to Senator Thomas.

I