in Chemical and Engineering News for April 4, 1949, p. 980): "History gives you fair warning to be vigilant of your scientific liberties. Germany was once an extraordinary nation of equally extraordinary scientists. Hitler reduced her sciences to a regimented pattern in a state that had murdered the profit motive of the capitalistic system that won the scientific race. Let us not permit our so-called science bills, our Government's easy-money patronage of research, Government-owned mass of patents, and the political domination of scientists into a regimented society delude us in making the same mistake." I also agree with the following further statements made by Toulmin: "But to secure such a sense of obligation the Government must be wise and fair. The terms of the various science bills give me grave concern. They smack of rigid regulations instead of coordination of effort in the public cause by private and public institutions working as a team in the public interest. "I see the danger of control by politicians who are not scientists; the danger of power of the director to grant or withhold research funds to control university policies and scientific activities; the power to subject to strong pressure by the Federal agency making the grants on complacent university administrations which will yield to get Federal business. "The best analysis of this situation is contained in the report of the second meeting of the Inter-Society Committee for a National Science Foundation, which recommendations were endorsed by the distinguished dean of engineering, Charles F. MacQuigg, of this university. (Science, March 5, 1948, vol. 107, pp. 235-236.) "Where things must be done to prevent overlapping of scientific effort to organize our facilities and to finance projects beyond the purse of private industry or public institutions and where general coordination and planning of the scientific attack upon our problems such as given by a general staff in the Army, I go along. But no further. "When science bills purport to give dictatorial power, dogmatic control, and regimentation of scientists and scientific projects, I rebel. Every nation that has tried this control of science has committed suicide. Russia is doing it right now—and so long as she does it you need never worry about a Russian victory." The greatest objection to these science bills is that they lay the dread hand of governmental bureaucracy on science. It is subservient to rules and regulations and civil-service requirements which insure preservation of mediocrity. Those of inferior ability find their level in these postions where they are kept through political affiliation and civil service and where one is discouraged from taking independent, constructive action in the field of science contrary to the host of rules and regulations. The foundation would produce only second-rate scientists under such conditions. Proponents of this legislation state that the bills provide for integration and coordination of the numerous research activities of the various Government agencies. There is nothing which specifically provides that the foundation shall serve as a coordinating agency for Federal research. The past hearings on this subject have developed testimony that the proposed National Science foundation will be just another Government agency to be added to the 30 or more Federal agencies now doing research work. Furthermore, the proposed foundation will not serve any need which cannot be met by these approximately 30 Federal agencies now engaged in scientific research with total annual expenditures of more than $1,000,000,000. Many of these agencies are doing basic or fundamental research. For example, the Office of Naval Research alone is now supporting about 600 basic research projects in more than 150 colleges, universities, and other nonprofit institutions with a total expenditure of over $21,000,000. It is only necessary to attend the meetings of the numerous scientific groups to learn of the vast amount of basic research which is being carried on under Government auspices. As a member of the publication committee of one of the scientific societies I had first-hand knowledge of the many scientific papers which are being offered for publication dealing with the data resulting from such research. Aside from the above objectionable general aspects of the bills they contain many specific provisions which are most objectionable. Some are dangerous, Under the all-inclusive phraseology of some of the trick phrases (see for example, section 11 of H. R. 12) the foundation could appropriate almost without limit patents, patent rights, and material which would have only the slightest relation to public welfare and national security. Should the foundation be directed by an unscrupulous politician or ideologist, he could, under the powers granted him under some of the indicated provisions, yield tyrannical and dangerous power over industry. And it could happen, for the reason that the foundation is given broad power to condemn and confiscate personal property and real estate, including patents necessary for or resulting from scientific research or development. For these reasons all such possibilities should be eliminated by careful revisions of these bills, and particularly, by the elimination of the political-control feature common to all of them. Scientists alone should direct and operate any foundation which may be created, as specified in the Bush report. Again under section 4 (a) (2) of H. R. 12 it becomes possible to broaden the scope of the foundation to include the so-called social and economic sciences. These are highly controversial fields and the inclusion of them in the foundation would probably make it a political football and make it valueless insofar as the physical sciences are concerned. I am opposed to the above National Science Foundation bills and I doubt that a foundation is necessary for the reasons given. Sincerely yours, O. W. STOREY. Re H. R. 12, Eighty-first Congress, first session. MODINE MANUFACTURING CO., Chairman, Subcommittee on Public Health, Science, and Commerce of Committee on Interstate and Foreign Commerce, Washington, D. C. DEAR SIR: Will you please accept the following as testimony to your committee directed to the question of whether the subject bill should be reported out of committee. My remarks will not be as aptly phrased as I wish they might be but I will assure you that they express sincere conclusions following upon careful analysis: 1. I happen to hold an engineering degree. I have done engineering research work. I presently assist in directing engineering research work. It has been my experience and my observation that research at its best derives from competitive and incentive motivations. I have noted that research men operating under impersonalized subsidies "go through the motions" and commonly generate enough of tangible performance result to justify a continuation of their stipendsthey rarely "catch on fire" that is to say, they commonly lack the spontaneity and the creative approach to the challenge of research that the individual researchist or the member of an industrial research staff, so generally display. There are exceptions of course. There are men who are so devoted to an intensive desire to better the state of their fellowmen that they need only that inspiration to cause them to devote themselves to their work. But in the main an American produces best under the stimuli that are present in private enterprise, absent in governmentally endowed activity. 2. Our Federal Government, as I see it, should restrict its entry to projects which are too massive for the private citizen or private industry to undertake; or it should project itself into affairs that the private citizen or that private industry has evidenced inability to master. Neither of these justifications can be advanced for H. R. 12. Nothing in the world's history has approached the progress of scientific research under American free enterprise. Hitler exploited in meteoric fashion the potential that had been accumulated by private industry within Germany for generations-but the meteor burned out. Stalin and his kind have endeavored by decree to will that Russian research should become dominantly strong-and the short coming of result there speaks for itself. 3. It can be soundly argued that private-enterprise research is wasteful. With corresponding assurance it can be advanced that our American basic form of government by checks and balances as between legislative, administrative, and judicial branches, is inherently wasteful; but in both cases the waste is accompanied by a tremendous outpouring of performance. Likewise in both cases there are present safeguards against tyranny. 4. The arguments advanced for Government coordination of scientific research to improve its result can be just as plausibly set forward in favor of Federal control of our musical composers, or for Federal birth control. The simple fact is that the American people do not want to be improved in the cited categories by any form of Government coordination that is authoritarian in nature. I read intended authoritarianism from several passages in H. R. 12. 5. We need fewer rather than more of independent Government agencies. Hoover commission reports were not required to reveal the tremendous complication and almost unbelievable waste already existing in Federal independent agencies. When one attempts to correct a complicated situation which is intensely bad his approach should not be that of first increasing those complications. A simple and effective tactic is to eliminate unessential elements which are parts of the undesirable situation, rather than to add on additional such elements. 6. In summary, I believe that the projected coordination of United States research activities under H. R. 12 would be a trespass of the affairs of the private citizen and of private industry, a needless trespass, a harmful trespass, a trespass unjustified in that there is no evidence of inadequacy of private individual research and private industry research in this country at the present. I feel that the very Government which H. R. 12 would project into new fields of experimental administration has a miserable mess of bureaucratic wastefulness and mismanagement on its hands right now which it ought to thoroughly clean up before it essays to enter a new area of lecturing its citizens and of directing them in their daily procedure. Yours truly, A. G. DIXON, REPORT OF SUBCOMMITTEE ON BILLS, THE PATENT LAW ASSOCIATION OF CHICAGO, LEGISLATIVE COMMITTEE, RELATING TO NATIONAL SCIENCE FOUNDATION Last year a subcommittee, consisting of Messrs. Glen E. Smith, Elwood Hansmann, and Foorman L. Mueller, reported on certain bills introduced in the Eightieth Congress, these bills being as follows: (1) H. R. 4852, (2) H. R. 5532, (3) H. R. 6007, and the companion Senate bill, S. 2385. During the Eighty first Congress, so far as our information goes, the following bills have been introduced, all of which are very similar to each other and very similar to those of the Eightieth Congress, of which H. R. 6007 is typical: (1) H. R. 12, (2) H. R. 185, (3) H .R. 311, (4) H. R. 1845, with its companion Senate bill S. 247, (5) H. R. 2308. In addition, there is II. R. 359 of the Eighty-first Congress, which differs from the other bills, but has the same fundamental objects in view. With the exception of H. R. 359, all of the other bills provide in essence for the establishment of a National Science Foundation with 24 members to be appointed by the President, with the advice and consent of the Senate. The powers and duties of the Foundation are to promote a national policy for basic research and education in the sciences, the mathematical, physical, medical, biological, and engineering sciences being specifically mentioned. The Foundation has the power to make contracts or other arrangements to further the objects of the Foundation, such as grants, loans, or other forms of assistance, and also has the power and duty of appraising the impact of the scientific development on industrial development, and upon the general welfare. After consultation with the Secretary of Defense, the Foundation may initiate and support scientific research in fields pertaining to the national defense. The Foundation is to have the power to grant scholarships and fellowships in various institutions of learning, and to promote the interchange of scientific information among scientists of the United States and foreign countries. It will correlate all scientific research and may appoint special commissions for investigation of specific subjects. There is to be a Director of the Foundation appointed by the President, with the advice and consent of the Senate, at a salary of $15,000 per year, who, according to the provisions of most bills, is to act in accordance with directives of the Executive Committee of the Foundation. The Foundation is to have various divisions, such as (1) medical; (2) mathematical, physical and engineering science; (3) biological; (4) scientific personnel and education, including the granting of scholarships and fellowships. Other divisions may also be provided for, as well as special commissions. So far as patent rights are concerned, the Foundation may enter into contracts with individuals or organizations of such a nature as to protect the public interest and the equities of the individual or organization with which the contract is made. The employees of the Foundation are not to retain any rights in inventions which they make pertaining to the activities of the Foundation, but may execute patent applications to be assigned to the Government or dedicated to the public. The Foundation is to have the authority to cooperate in any international scientific research consistent with the purposes of the Foundation, and to expend money therefor within the limits of appropriated funds. The Director, under the general direction of the Executive Committee of the Foundation, may employ personnel at fixed compensaton in accordance with civil-service laws, and may also employ technical and professional personnel without regard to such laws. The Foundation is not to itself operate any laboratories or pilot plants. The Foundation is to have authority to do all things necessary to carry out the purposes of the proposed act, including the right to make rules and regulations covering the manner of operation of the Foundation, its organization and personnel. It is to have the right to make all necessary expenditures (of course, within the limits of appropriations), and to enter into contracts with individuals or organizations in the United States and foreign countries, including arrangements with Government agencies of the United States and those of foreign countries. Research in regard to atomic energy is excluded from the operation of the bills, and in connection with arrangements in foreign countries all negotiations, etc., are to be conducted through the Secretary of State. These are the generally similar provisions of all bills, with the exception of H. R. 359. However, the latter differs from the other bills in detail rather than fundamental concept. H. R. 359 The administrative officer is to be known as the Administrator, appointed by the President, and with the advice and consent of the Senate, at a compensation of $15,000 annually. The Foundation is to have a Board of nine members, appointed by the President and with the consent of the Senate, plus the chairman of several divisional scientific committees. These committees consist of from 5 to 15 members, appointed by the Administrator with the advice and approval of the Board. The various divisions of the Foundation specifically mentioned are (1) medical and physical sciences; (2) biological sciences; (3) social sciences: (4) Health and medical sciences; (5) national defense; (6) engineering and technology; (7) scientific personnel and education; (8) publications and information. In addition, there may be other divisions not exceeding three in number. The members of the Board and members of the divisional scientific committees normally serve for 3-year terms, and no member is eligible for continued service until the expiration of 1 year after his term of service has expired. Members of the Board and divisional scientific committees receive compensation at the rate of $50 per day when engaged on the business of the Foundation, plus travel and other expenses in connection with the work of the Board or the committee. The Administrator may enter into various contracts in a way similar to what is provided for in the other bills. There is a provision in the bill as to the distribution of funds to conduct research in various States and among the tax-supported colleges and universities in such States. The Administrator may award scholarships and fellowships for scientific study or other work in the various fields of science. It is provided that all contracts for federally financed research and development entered into between any Government agency and any organization shall make available to such agency full data on inventions, discoveries, and patent rights, including such reports as may be required by the agency. In turn, each Government agency upon the request of the Administrator of the Foundation shall make available to him such data and reports. All inventions, discoveries, and so forth, in which the United States or any Government agency holds any rights, including patent rights, shall be made available to the public on a nonexclusive and royalty-free basis to the extent that the United States or the Government agency is entitled to do this, and any invention or discovery produced in the course of federally financed research, whether patented or not, is to be made freely available to the public. The head of any Government agency financing research and development activities, by contract with any organization, may provide for the retention by the organization doing the research, or by the inventor, of such rights as the head of the Government agency deems fair and equitable and consistent with the national interest, provided that the head of the Government agency before entering into the contract shall make every reasonable effort to arrange for the couduct of the necessary research without entering into a contract by which the organization doing the research would retain any rights. This bill, like the others mentioned, provides for a cooperation in research with foreign governments and agencies thereof, and the financing of such research by the Foundation. There is an Interdepartmental Committee, consisting of the Administrator of the Foundation and the heads of Government agencies concerned, which is to correlate the scientific research and development activities of the Government. In its report of last year, the subcommittee stated the following conclusions: "1. That it is not necessary to establish a National Science Foundation for the reason that basic research may be adequately provided for by existing agencies and executive action. "2. That the bills as drawn are objectionable, for the reasons stated above, and are disapproved." Your present subcommittee reporting on the present bills with the same fundamental objects concurs in the conclusions of last year's subcommittee. It is believed that Government-financed research conducted by the proposed Foundation which is not under the supervision of any of the existing Government departments is fundamentally unsound. By creating Government-financed scholarships and fellowships, for example, the tendency would be to centralize a Federal control over our institutions of learning. Research conducted at Government expense under the conditions mentioned would remove the incentives provided by our patent system, and it is believed would inevitably be conducted far less efficiently than when done by private enterprise. Your subcommittee believes that any necessary research to be conducted under the supervision of the Government should be conducted by the various Government departments having Cabinet representation, such, for example, as the Department of Agriculture, the Department of Defense, etc. One thing appears to be sure, and that is that the Foundation would add to the already heavy burden carried by taxpayers. CONCLUSION Your subcommittee therefore recommends that all of the bills for a National Science Foundation introduced in the Eighty-first Congress should be disapproved in principle. Respectfully submitted. HARRY W. LINDSEY, Jr., FEBRUARY 23, 1949. HENRY M. HUXLEY, Chairman. This report was approved by the legislative committee February 24, 1949, and was approved by the board of managers of the Patent Law Association of Chicago March 4, 1949. Hon. J. PERCY PRIEST, UNIVERSAL OIL PRODUCTS Co., Chairman, Subcommittee on Public Health, Science and Commerce of the Committee on Interstate and Foreign Commerce, House Office Building, Washington, D. C. DEAR MR. PRIEST: It is my understanding that your subcommittee is considering testimony concerning National Science Foundation bill H. R. 12 and other bills on this subject. A careful study of these bills has prompted me to urge that the action of your subcommittee be unfavorable to the passage of them. H R. 12 and similar bills contain a number of provisions which are counter to the best interests of the Nation. * One of the more objectionable of these provisions in section 11 (e) of H. R. 12 in which "the Foundation is specifically authorized ** * to acquire by purchase, lease, loan, or gift and to hold and dispose of by sale, lease, or loan, |