JULY 1945

A REPORT TO THE PRESIDENTBY VANNEVAR BUSH

DIRECTOR OF THE OFFICE OFSCIENTIFIC RESEARCH AND DEVELOPMENT

COURTESY: NATIONAL SCIENCE FOUNDATIONTABLE OF CONTENTS

Letter of Transmittal
President Roosevelt’s Letter
Summary of the Report

9
11
13

1. Introduction

19

Scientific Progress Is Essential
Science Is a Proper Concern of Government
Government Relations to Science—Past and Future
Freedom of Inquiry Must be Preserved
2. The War Against Disease
In WarIn Peace
Unsolved Problems
Broad and Basic Studies Needed
Coordinated Attack on Special Problems
Action Is Necessary
3. Science and the Public Welfare
Relation to National Security
Science and Jobs
The Importance of Basic ResearchCenters of Basic Research
Research Within the Government
Industrial ResearchInternational Exchange of Scientific Information
The Special Need for Federal Support
The Cost of a Program

19
20
21
22
23
23
23
24
24
25
25
27
27
28
29
29
31
32
33
33
34

4. Renewal of Our Scientiﬁc Talent

35

Nature of the Problem
A Note of Warning
The Wartime Deficit

35
35
36

Improve the Quality
Remove the Barriers
The Generation in Uniform Must Not Be Lost
A Program
5. A Problem of Scientiﬁc Reconversion
Effects of Mobilization of Science for War
Security Restrictions Should be Lifted Promptly
Need for Coordination
A Board to Control Release
Publication Should Be Encouraged
6. The Means to the End
New Responsibilities for Government
The Mechanism
Five Fundamentals
Military Research
National Research Foundation
I. Purposes
II. Members
III. Organization
IV. Functions
V. Patent Policy
VI. Special Authority
VII. Budget
Action by the Congress

37
38
38
39
41
41
41
42
43
43
44
44
45
46
47
48
48
48
49
51
52
53
54
55

“New frontiers of the mind are before us, and ifthey are pioneered with the same vision, boldness,and drive with which we have waged this war, we
can create a fuller and more fruitful employment
and a fuller and more fruitful life.”
FRANKLIN D. ROOSEVELT

November 17, 1944

LETTER OF TRANSMITTALOFFICE OF SCIENTIFICRESEARCH AND DEVELOPMENT
1530 P Street, NW
Washington, DC
July 5, 1945

DEAR MR. PRESIDENT:
In a letter dated November 17, 1944, President Roosevelt requested my recommendations on the following points:
1. What can be done, consistent with military security, and with theprior approval of the military authorities, to make known to theworld as soon as possible the contributions which have been madeduring our war effort to scientific knowledge?
2. With particular reference to the war of science against disease, what
can be done now to organize a program for continuing in the future
the work which has been done in medicine and related sciences?
3. What can the government do now and in the future to aid research
activities by public and private organizations?
4. Can an effective program be proposed for discovering and developing scientific talent in American youth so that the continuing futureof scientific research in this country may be assured on a level comparable to what has been done during the war?
It is clear from President Roosevelt’s letter that in speaking of science
he had in mind the natural sciences, including biology and medicine, and I
have so interpreted his questions. Progress in other fields, such as the social sciences and the humanities, is likewise important, but the programfor science presented in my report warrants immediate attention.
In seeking answers to President Roosevelt’s questions I have had theassistance of distinguished committees specially qualified to advise inrespect to these subjects. The committees have given these matters theserious attention they deserve; indeed, they have regarded this as an
9

opportunity to participate in shaping the policy of the country withrespect to scientific research. They have had many meetings and havesubmitted formal reports. I have been in close touch with the work of thecommittees and with their members throughout. I have examined all of
the data they assembled and the suggestions they submitted on the points
raised in President Roosevelt’s letter.
Although the report I submit herewith is my own, the facts, conclusions, and recommendations are based on the findings of the committees
that have studied these questions. Since my report is necessarily brief, I
am including as appendices* the full reports of the committees.
A single mechanism for implementing the recommendations of the several committees is essential. In proposing such a mechanism I have departed somewhat from the specific recommendations of the committees, but I
have since been assured that the plan I am proposing is fully acceptable tothe committee members.
The pioneer spirit is still vigorous within this nation. Science offers alargely unexplored hinterland for the pioneer who has the tools for his task.
The rewards of such exploration both for the nation and the individual are
great. Scientific progress is one essential key to our security as a nation, toour better health, to more jobs, to a higher standard of living, and to ourcultural progress.
Respectfully yours,(s) V. BUSH, Director
THE PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES,
The White House,
Washington, DC* Editor’s note: The appendices are not included in this zine.
10

PRESIDENT ROOSEVELT’S LETTER

THE WHITE HOUSE
Washington, DC
November 17, 1944

DEAR DR. BUSH:
The Office of Scientific Research and Development, of which you are thedirector, represents a unique experiment of teamwork and cooperation incoordinating scientific research and in applying existing scientific knowledge to the solution of the technical problems paramount in war. Its work
has been conducted in the utmost secrecy and carried on without publicrecognition of any kind, but its tangible results can be found in the communiqués coming in from the battlefronts all over the world. Some day thefull story of its achievements can be told.
There is, however, no reason why the lessons to be found in this experiment cannot be profitably employed in times of peace. The information,
the techniques, and the research experience developed by the Office of
Scientific Research and Development and by the thousands of scientists inthe universities and in private industry should be used in the days of peace
ahead for the improvement of the national health, the creation of new enterprises bringing new jobs, and the betterment of the national standardof living.
It is with that objective in mind that I would like to have your recommendations on the following four major points:
First: What can be done, consistent with military security, and with theprior approval of the military authorities, to make known to the world assoon as possible the contributions which have been made during our war
effort to scientific knowledge?
The diffusion of such knowledge should help us stimulate new enterprises, provide jobs for our returning servicemen and other workers, andmake possible great strides for the improvement of the national well-being.
11Second: With particular reference to the war of science against disease,what can be done now to organize a program for continuing in the future
the work which has been done in medicine and related sciences?
The fact that the annual deaths in this country from one or two diseases
alone are far in excess of the total number of lives lost by us in battle during
this war should make us conscious of the duty we owe future generations.
Third: What can the government do now and in the future to aid research activities by public and private organizations? The proper roles ofpublic and of private research, and their interrelation, should be carefully
considered.
Fourth: Can an effective program be proposed for discovering and developing scientific talent in American youth so that the continuing futureof scientific research in this country may be assured on a level comparable
to what has been done during the war?
New frontiers of the mind are before us, and if they are pioneered withthe same vision, boldness, and drive with which we have waged this war,
we can create a fuller and more fruitful employment and a fuller and more
fruitful life.
I hope that, after such consultation as you may deem advisable withyour associates and others, you can let me have your considered judgmenton these matters as soon as convenient—reporting on each when you areready, rather than waiting for completion of your studies in all.
Very sincerely yours,(s) FRANKLIN D. ROOSEVELT
Dr. VANNEVAR BUSH,
Office of Scientific Research and Development,
Washington, DC

12

SUMMARY OF THE REPORTSCIENTIFIC PROGRESS IS ESSENTIAL

Progress in the war against disease depends upon a flow of new scientificknowledge. New products, new industries, and more jobs require continuous additions to knowledge of the laws of nature and the application ofthat knowledge to practical purposes. Similarly, our defense against aggression demands new knowledge so that we can develop new and improved weapons. This essential new knowledge can be obtained only
through basic scientific research.
Science can be effective in the national welfare only as a member of ateam, whether the conditions be peace or war. But without scientific progress no amount of achievement in other directions can insure our health,prosperity, and security as a nation in the modern world.

For the war against disease
We have taken great strides in the war against disease. The death rate forall diseases in the Army, including overseas forces, has been reduced from
14.1 per thousand in the last war to 0.6 per thousand in this war. In the last
40 years life expectancy has increased from 49 to 65 years, largely as aconsequence of the reduction in the death rates of infants and children.
But we are far from the goal. The annual deaths from one or two diseases
far exceed the total number of American lives lost in battle during thiswar. A large fraction of these deaths in our civilian population cut shortthe useful lives of our citizens. Approximately 7 million persons in the
United States are mentally ill and their care costs the public over $175 million a year. Clearly much illness remains for which adequate means of prevention and cure are not yet known.

13

The responsibility for basic research in medicine and the underlying
sciences, so essential to progress in the war against disease, falls primarily
upon the medical schools and universities. Yet we find that the traditionalsources of support for medical research in the medical schools and universities, largely endowment income, foundation grants, and private donations, are diminishing and there is no immediate prospect of a change inthis trend. Meanwhile, the cost of medical research has been rising. If weare to maintain the progress in medicine that has marked the last 25 years,
the government should extend financial support to basic medical researchin the medical schools and universities.

For our national security
The bitter and dangerous battle against the U-boat was a battle of scientific techniques—and our margin of success was dangerously small. The neweyes that radar has supplied can sometimes be blinded by new scientificdevelopments. V-2 was countered only by capture of the launching sites.
We cannot again rely on our allies to hold off the enemy while we struggle to catch up. There must be more—and more adequate—military research in peacetime. It is essential that civilian scientists continue in peacetime some portion of those contributions to national security that they
have made so effectively during the war. This can best be done through acivilian-controlled organization with close liaison with the Army and theNavy, but with funds direct from the Congress and the clear power to initiate military research that will supplement and strengthen that carried on
directly under the control of the Army and the Navy.

And for the public welfare
One of our hopes is that after the war there will be full employment. To
reach that goal the full creative and productive energies of the American
people must be released. To create more jobs we must make new and better and cheaper products. We want plenty of new, vigorous enterprises.
But new products and processes are not born full grown. They are founded on new principles and new conceptions, which in turn result from basic
scientific research. Basic scientific research is scientific capital. Moreover,
we cannot any longer depend upon Europe as a major source of this scientific capital. Clearly, more and better scientific research is essential to theachievement of our goal of full employment.
How do we increase this scientific capital? First, we must have plentyof men and women trained in science, for upon them depends both thecreation of new knowledge and its application to practical purposes.
14Second, we must strengthen the centers of basic research, which are principally the colleges, universities, and research institutes. These institutions provide the environment most conducive to the creation of new scientific knowledge and least under pressure for immediate, tangible results.
With some notable exceptions, most research in industry and in the government involves the application of existing scientific knowledge to practical problems. It is only the colleges, universities, and a few research institutes that devote most of their research efforts to expanding thefrontiers of knowledge.
Expenditures for scientific research by industry and the government increased from $140 million in 1930 to $309 million in 1940. Those for thecolleges and universities increased from $20 million to $31 million, while
those for the research institutes declined from $5.2 million to $4.5 million
during the same period. If the colleges, universities, and research institutes
are to meet the rapidly increasing demands of industry and the government for new scientific knowledge, their basic research should be strengthened by use of public funds.
For science to serve as a powerful factor in our national welfare, appliedresearch both in the government and in industry must be vigorous. To improve the quality of scientific research within the government, steps should
be taken to modify the procedures for recruiting, classifying, and compensating scientific personnel in order to reduce the present handicap of governmental scientific bureaus in competing with industry and the universities for top-grade scientific talent. To provide coordination of the common
scientific activities of these governmental agencies as to policies and budgets, a permanent Science Advisory Board should be created to advise theexecutive and legislative branches of the government on these matters.
The most important ways in which the government can promote industrial research are to increase the flow of new scientific knowledge
through the support of basic research and aid in the development of scientific talent. In addition, the government should provide suitable incentives
to industry to conduct research (a) by clarification of present uncertainties in the Internal Revenue Code with regard to the deductibility of research and development expenditures as current charges against net income, and (b) by strengthening the patent system so as to eliminate
uncertainties that now bear heavily on small industries and prevent abuses that reflect discredit upon a basically sound system. In addition, ways
should be found to cause the benefits of basic research to reach industries
that do not now utilize new scientific knowledge.

15

WE MUST RENEW OUR SCIENTIFIC TALENTThe responsibility for the creation of new scientific knowledge—and formost of its application—rests on that small body of men and women who
understand the fundamental laws of nature and are skilled in the techniques of scientific research. We shall have rapid or slow advance on any
scientific frontier depending on the number of highly qualified and trained
scientists exploring it.
The deficit of science and technology students who, but for the war,
would have received bachelor’s degrees is about 150,000. It is estimatedthat the deficit of those obtaining advanced degrees in these fields willamount in 1955 to about 17,000, for it takes at least six years from college
entry to achieve a doctor’s degree or its equivalent in science or engineering. The real ceiling on our productivity of new scientific knowledge and its
application in the war against disease and the development of new products and new industries is the number of trained scientists available.
The training of a scientist is a long and expensive process. Studies clearly show that there are talented individuals in every part of the population,
but with few exceptions, those without the means of buying higher education go without it. If ability, and not the circumstance of family fortune, determines who shall receive higher education in science, then we shall beassured of constantly improving quality at every level of scientific activity.
The government should provide a reasonable number of undergraduate
scholarships and graduate fellowships in order to develop scientific talent
in American youth. The plans should be designed to attract into science
only that proportion of youthful talent appropriate to the needs of science
in relation to the other needs of the nation for high abilities.

Including those in uniform
The most immediate prospect of making up the deficit in scientific personnel is to develop the scientific talent in the generation now in uniform.
Even if we should start now to train the current crop of high school graduates, none would complete graduate studies before 1951. The armed services should comb their records for men who, prior to or during the war,
have given evidence of talent for science and make prompt arrangements,
consistent with current discharge plans, for ordering those who remain in
uniform, as soon as militarily possible, to duty at institutions here andoverseas where they can continue their scientific education. Moreover, theservices should see that those who study overseas have the benefit of thelatest scientific information resulting from research during the war.
16

The lid must be lifted
While most of the war research has involved the application of existingscientific knowledge to the problems of war rather than basic research,
there has accumulated a vast amount of information relating to the application of science to particular problems. Much of this can be used by industry. It is also needed for teaching in the colleges and universities here
and in the Armed Forces institutes overseas. Some of this informationmust remain secret, but most of it should be made public as soon as there
is ground for belief that the enemy will not be able to turn it against us inthis war. To select that portion that should be made public, to coordinate
its release, and definitely to encourage its publication, a board composedof Army, Navy, and civilian scientific members should be promptly
established.

A program for action
The government should accept new responsibilities for promoting theflow of new scientific knowledge and the development of scientific talentin our youth. These responsibilities are the proper concern of the government, for they vitally affect our health, our jobs, and our national security.
It is in keeping also with basic United States policy that the government
should foster the opening of new frontiers, and this is the modern way to
do it. For many years the government has wisely supported research in
the agricultural colleges, and the benefits have been great. The time hascome when such support should be extended to other fields.
The effective discharge of these new responsibilities will require the full
attention of some overall agency devoted to that purpose. There is not now
in the permanent governmental structure receiving its funds from the Congress an agency adapted to supplementing the support of basic research inthe colleges, universities, and research institutes, both in medicine and thenatural sciences, supporting research on new weapons for both services,or administering a program of science scholarships and fellowships.
Therefore I recommend that a new agency for these purposes be established. Such an agency should be composed of persons of broad interest
and experience, having an understanding of the peculiarities of scientificresearch and scientific education. It should have stability of funds so that
long-range programs may be undertaken. It should recognize that freedomof inquiry must be preserved and leave internal control of policy, personnel, and the method and scope of research to the institutions in which it iscarried on. It should be fully responsible to the president and through him
to the Congress for its program.
17

Early action on these recommendations is imperative if this nation is tomeet the challenge of science in the crucial years ahead. On the wisdomwith which we bring science to bear in the war against disease, the creationof new industries, and the strengthening of our Armed Forces depends inlarge measure our future as a nation.

18

CHAPTER 1

INTRODUCTION

Scientific progress is essential
We all know how much the new drug penicillin has meant to our grievously wounded men on the grim battlefronts of this war—the countless
lives it has saved, the incalculable suffering that its use has prevented.
Science and the great practical genius of this nation made this achievement possible.
Some of us know the vital role that radar has played in bringing theUnited Nations to victory over Nazi Germany and driving the Japanese
steadily back from their island bastions. Again it was painstaking scientific research over many years that made radar possible.
What we often forget are the millions of pay envelopes on a peacetime
Saturday night that are filled because new products and new industries haveprovided jobs for countless Americans. Science made that possible, too.
In 1939 millions of people were employed in industries that did not evenexist at the close of the last war. Radio, air conditioning, rayon and othersynthetic fibers, and plastics are examples of the products of these industries. But these things do not mark the end of progress—they are but the
beginning if we make full use of our scientific resources. New manufacturing industries can be started and many older industries greatly strengthened and expanded if we continue to study nature’s laws and apply new
knowledge to practical purposes.
Great advances in agriculture are also based upon scientific research.
Plants that are more resistant to disease and adapted to short growing seasons, the prevention and cure of livestock diseases, the control of our insect enemies, better fertilizers, and improved agricultural practices allstem from painstaking scientific research.
19

Advances in science, when put to practical use, mean more jobs, higher
wages, shorter hours, more abundant crops, more leisure for recreation,
for study, for learning how to live without the deadening drudgery that has
been the burden of the common man for ages past. Advances in science
will also bring higher standards of living, lead to the prevention or cure ofdiseases, promote conservation of our limited national resources, and assure means of defense against aggression. But to achieve these objectives—to secure a high level of employment, to maintain a position of world
leadership—the flow of new scientific knowledge must be both continuousand substantial.
Our population increased from 75 million to 130 million between 1900
and 1940. In some countries comparable increases have been accompanied by famine. In this country the increase has been accompanied bymore abundant food supply, better living, more leisure, longer life, and better health. This is, largely, the product of three factors: the free play of initiative of a vigorous people under democracy, the heritage of great national
wealth, and the advance of science and its application.
Science, by itself, provides no panacea for individual, social, and economic ills. It can be effective in the national welfare only as a member of ateam, whether the conditions be peace or war. But without scientific progress no amount of achievement in other directions can insure our health,prosperity, and security as a nation in the modern world.

Science is a proper concern of government
It has been basic United States policy that the government should foster
the opening of new frontiers. It opened the seas to clipper ships and furnished land for pioneers. Although these frontiers have more or less disappeared, the frontier of science remains. It is in keeping with the American
tradition—one that has made the United States great—that new frontiers
shall be made accessible for development by all American citizens.
Moreover, since health, well-being, and security are proper concerns of
the government, scientific progress is, and must be, of vital interest to thegovernment. Without scientific progress the national health would deteriorate; without scientific progress we could not hope for improvement inour standard of living or for an increased number of jobs for our citizens;and without scientific progress we could not have maintained our liberties
against tyranny.

20

Government relations to science—past and future
From early days the government has taken an active interest in scientificmatters. During the 19th century the Coast and Geodetic Survey, the Naval
Observatory, the Department of Agriculture, and the Geological Survey
were established. Through the Land-Grant College Acts the government
has supported research in state institutions for more than 80 years on a
gradually increasing scale. Since 1900 a large number of scientific agencies
have been established within the federal government, until in 1939 theynumbered more than 40.
Much of the scientific research done by government agencies is intermediate in character between the two types of work commonly referred to as
basic and applied research. Almost all government scientific work has ultimate practical objectives, but in many fields of broad national concern it
commonly involves long-term investigation of a fundamental nature. Generally speaking, the scientific agencies of the government are not as concerned with immediate practical objectives as the laboratories of industry,nor, on the other hand, are they as free to explore any natural phenomena
without regard to possible economic applications as the educational andprivate research institutions. Government scientific agencies have splendid
records of achievement, but they are limited in function.
We have no national policy for science. The government has only begun
to utilize science in the nation’s welfare. There is no body within the government charged with formulating or executing a national science policy.
There are no standing committees of the Congress devoted to this important subject. Science has been in the wings. It should be brought to the center of the stage—for in it lies much of our hope for the future.
There are areas of science in which the public interest is acute but thatare likely to be cultivated inadequately if left without more support thanwill come from private sources. These areas—such as research on military
problems, agriculture, housing, public health, certain medical research,and research involving expensive capital facilities beyond the capacity ofprivate institutions—should be advanced by active government support.
To date, with the exception of the intensive war research conducted by the
Office of Scientific Research and Development, such support has been
meager and intermittent.
For the reasons presented in this report, we are entering a period whenscience needs and deserves increased support from public funds.

21

Freedom of inquiry must be preserved
The publicly and privately supported colleges, universities, and research
institutes are the centers of basic research. They are the wellsprings ofknowledge and understanding. As long as they are vigorous and healthy
and their scientists are free to pursue the truth wherever it may lead, there
will be a flow of new scientific knowledge to those who can apply it topractical problems in the government, industry, or elsewhere.
Many of the lessons learned in the wartime application of science under
the government can be profitably applied in peace. The government is particularly fitted to perform certain functions, such as the coordination andsupport of broad programs on problems of great national importance. But
we must proceed with caution in carrying over the methods that work inwartime to the very different conditions of peace. We must remove the rigid controls that we have had to impose and recover freedom of inquiry andthat healthy competitive scientific spirit so necessary for the expansion of
the frontiers of scientific knowledge.
Scientific progress on a broad front results from the free play of free intellects, working on subjects of their own choice, in the manner dictated bytheir curiosity for the exploration of the unknown. Freedom of inquiry
must be preserved under any plan for government support of science in accordance with the five fundamentals listed on page 46.
The study of the momentous questions presented in President Roosevelt’s letter has been made by able committees working diligently. This report presents conclusions and recommendations based upon the studies ofthese committees, which appear in full as the appendices.* Only in the creation of one overall mechanism rather than several does this report departfrom the specific recommendations of the committees. The members of
the committees have reviewed the recommendations with regard to thesingle mechanism and have found this plan thoroughly acceptable.

* Editor’s note: The appendices are not included in this zine.
22CHAPTER 2

THE WAR AGAINST DISEASE

In war
The death rate for all diseases in the Army, including the overseas forces,
has been reduced from 14.1 per thousand in the last war to 0.6 per thousand in this war.
Such ravaging diseases as yellow fever, dysentery, typhus, tetanus,
pneumonia, and meningitis have been all but conquered by penicillin andthe sulfa drugs, the insecticide DDT, better vaccines, and improved hygienic measures. Malaria has been controlled. There has been dramatic progress in surgery.
The striking advances in medicine during the war have been possible
only because we had a large backlog of scientific data accumulated throughbasic research in many scientific fields in the years before the war.

In peace
In the last 40 years life expectancy in the United States has increased from49 to 65 years, largely as a consequence of the reduction in the death rates
of infants and children. In the last 20 years the death rate from the diseases of childhood has been reduced by 87 percent.
Diabetes has been brought under control by insulin, pernicious anemia
by liver extracts, and the once widespread deficiency diseases have beenmuch reduced, even in the lowest income groups, by accessory food factors and the improvement of diet. Notable advances have been made in theearly diagnosis of cancer, and in the surgical and radiation treatment of
the disease.
These results have been achieved through a great amount of basic research in medicine and the preclinical sciences, and by the dissemination23

of this new scientific knowledge through the physicians, medical services,and public health agencies of the country. In this cooperative endeavor thepharmaceutical industry has played an important role, especially during
the war. All of the medical and public health groups share credit for theseachievements; they form interdependent members of a team.
Progress in combating disease depends upon an expanding body of newscientific knowledge.

Unsolved problems
As President Roosevelt observed, the annual deaths from one or two diseases are far in excess of the total number of American lives lost in battle
during this war. A large fraction of these deaths in our civilian population
cut short the useful lives of our citizens. This is our present position despite the fact that in the last three decades notable progress has been
made in civilian medicine. The reduction in the death rate from diseasesof childhood has shifted the emphasis to the middle and old age groups,
particularly to the malignant diseases and the degenerative processes
prominent in later life. Cardiovascular disease, including chronic diseaseof the kidneys, arteriosclerosis, and cerebral hemorrhage, now accountfor 45 percent of the deaths in the United States. Second are the infectious
diseases, and third is cancer. Added to these are many maladies (for example, the common cold, arthritis, asthma and hay fever, peptic ulcer) which,though infrequently fatal, cause incalculable disability.
Another aspect of the changing emphasis is the increase of mental diseases. Approximately 7 million persons in the United States are mentallyill; more than one-third of the hospital beds are occupied by such persons,at a cost of $175 million a year. Each year 125,000 new mental cases are
hospitalized.
Notwithstanding great progress in prolonging the span of life and therelief of suffering, much illness remains for which adequate means of prevention and cure are not yet known. While additional physicians, hospitals, and health programs are needed, their full usefulness cannot be attained unless we enlarge our knowledge of the human organism and thenature of disease. Any extension of medical facilities must be accompanied
by an expanded program of medical training and research.

Broad and basic studies needed
Discoveries pertinent to medical progress have often come from remoteand unexpected sources, and it is certain that this will be true in the future. It is wholly probable that progress in the treatment of cardiovascular24

disease, renal disease, cancer, and similar refractory diseases will be madeas the result of fundamental discoveries in subjects unrelated to those diseases, and perhaps entirely unexpected by the investigator. Further progress requires that the entire front of medicine and the underlying sciencesof chemistry, physics, anatomy, biochemistry, physiology, pharmacology,
bacteriology, pathology, parasitology, etc. be broadly developed.
Progress in the war against disease results from discoveries in remoteand unexpected fields of medicine and the underlying sciences.

Coordinated attack on special problems
Penicillin reached our troops in time to save countless lives because thegovernment coordinated and supported the program of research and development of the drug. The development moved from the early laboratory
stage to large-scale production and use in a fraction of the time it would
have taken without such leadership. The search for better anti-malarials,
which proceeded at a moderate tempo for many years, has been accelerated enormously by government support during the war. Other examples
can be cited in which medical progress has been similarly advanced. In
achieving these results, the government has provided overall coordinationand support; it has not dictated how the work should be done within any
cooperating institution.
Discovery of new therapeutic agents and methods usually results frombasic studies in medicine and the underlying sciences. The development ofsuch materials and methods to the point at which they become available tomedical practitioners requires teamwork involving the medical schools,
the science departments of universities, the government, and the pharmaceutical industry. Government initiative, support, and coordination can bevery effective in this development phase.
Government initiative and support for the development of newly discovered therapeutic materials and methods can reduce the time required
to bring the benefits to the public.

Action is necessary
The primary place for medical research is in the medical schools and universities. In some cases coordinated direct attack on special problems may
be made by teams of investigators, supplementing similar attacks carriedon by the Army, the Navy, the Public Health Service, and other organizations. Apart from teaching, however, the primary obligation of the medical
schools and universities is to continue the traditional function of such institutions, namely to provide the individual worker with an opportunity
25

for free, untrammeled study of nature, in the directions and by the methods suggested by his interests, curiosity, and imagination. The history of
medical science teaches clearly the supreme importance of affording the
prepared mind complete freedom for the exercise of initiative. It is the special province of the medical schools and universities to foster medical research in this way—a duty that cannot be shifted to government agencies,
industrial organizations, or any other institutions.
Where clinical investigations of the human body are required, the medical schools are in a unique position, because of their close relationship toteaching hospitals, to integrate such investigations with the work of the departments of preclinical science and impart new knowledge to physicians in
training. At the same time, the teaching hospitals are especially well qualified to carry on medical research because of their close connection with the
medical schools, on which they depend for staff and supervision.
Between World War I and World War II the United States overtook allother nations in medical research and assumed a position of world leadership. To a considerable extent this progress reflected the liberal financial
support from university endowment income, gifts from individuals, andfoundation grants in the ’20s. The growth of research departments in medical schools has been very uneven, however, and as a consequence most of
the important work has been done in a few large schools. This should becorrected by building up the weaker institutions, especially in regions
which now have no strong medical research activities.
The traditional sources of support for medical research, largely endowment income, foundation grants, and private donations, are diminishing,
and there is no immediate prospect of a change in this trend. Meanwhile,
research costs have steadily risen. More elaborate and expensive equipment is required, supplies are more costly, and the wages of assistants arehigher. Industry is only to a limited extent a source of funds for basic medical research.
It is clear that if we are to maintain the progress in medicine that has
marked the last 25 years, the government should extend financial support
to basic medical research in the medical schools and in the universities,
through grants both for research and for fellowships. The amount that canbe spent effectively in the first year should not exceed $5 million. After a
program is underway perhaps $20 million a year can be spent effectively.

26

CHAPTER 3

SCIENCE AND THE PUBLIC WELFARE

Relation to national security
In this war it has become clear beyond all doubt that scientific research is
absolutely essential to national security. The bitter and dangerous battle
against the U-boat was a battle of scientific techniques—and our marginof success was dangerously small. The new eyes that radar supplied to
our fighting forces quickly evoked the development of scientific countermeasures that could often blind them. This again represents the evercontinuing battle of techniques. The V-1 attack on London was finally defeated by three devices developed during this war and used superbly inthe field. V-2 was countered only by the capture of the launching sites.
The secretaries of war and the Navy recently stated in a joint letter to
the National Academy of Sciences:
This war emphasizes three facts of supreme importance to national security: (1) Powerful new tactics of defense and offense are developedaround new weapons created by scientific and engineering research;(2) the competitive time element in developing those weapons and tactics may be decisive; (3) war is increasingly total war, in which thearmed services must be supplemented by the active participation of every element of civilian population.
To insure continued preparedness along farsighted technical lines, theresearch scientists of the country must be called upon to continue inpeacetime some substantial portion of those types of contributions tonational security, which they have made so effectively during the stressof the present war. . . .

27

There must be more—and more adequate—military research during
peacetime. We cannot again rely on our allies to hold off the enemy while
we struggle to catch up. Further, it is clear that only the government canundertake military research, for it must be carried on in secret, much of it
has no commercial value, and it is expensive. The obligation of the government to support research on military problems is inescapable.
Modern war requires the use of the most advanced scientific techniques. Many of the leaders in the development of radar are scientists who
before the war had been exploring the nucleus of the atom. While there
must be increased emphasis on science in the future training of officers forboth the Army and the Navy, such men cannot be expected to be specialists in scientific research. Therefore a professional partnership between
the officers in the services and civilian scientists is needed.
The Army and the Navy should continue to carry on research and development on the improvement of current weapons. For many years the
National Advisory Committee for Aeronautics has supplemented the workof the Army and the Navy by conducting basic research on the problems offlight. There should now be permanent civilian activity to supplement the
research work of the services in other scientific fields so as to carry on intime of peace some part of the activities of the emergency wartime Officeof Scientific Research and Development.
Military preparedness requires a permanent, independent, civiliancontrolled organization, having close liaison with the Army and the Navy,
but with funds directly from the Congress and with the clear power to initiate military research that will supplement and strengthen that carried on
directly under the control of the Army and the Navy.

Science and jobs
One of our hopes is that after the war there will be full employment andthe production of goods and services will serve to raise our standard ofliving. We do not know yet how we shall reach that goal, but it is certainthat it can be achieved only by releasing the full creative and productiveenergies of the American people.
Surely we will not get there by standing still, by making the same things
we made before and selling them at the same or higher prices. We will not
get ahead in international trade unless we offer new, more attractive, andcheaper products.
Where will these new products come from? How will we find ways tomake better products at lower cost? The answer is clear. There must be a
stream of new scientific knowledge to turn the wheels of private and public
28

enterprise. There must be plenty of men and women trained in science andtechnology, for upon them depend both the creation of new knowledge andits application to practical purposes.
More and better scientific research is essential to the achievement ofour goal of full employment.

The importance of basic research
Basic research is performed without thought of practical ends. It results ingeneral knowledge and an understanding of nature and its laws. This general knowledge provides the means of answering a large number of important practical problems, though it may not give a complete, specific answer to any one of them. The function of applied research is to provide
such complete answers. The scientist doing basic research may not be at
all interested in the practical applications of his work, yet the further
progress of industrial development would eventually stagnate if basic scientific research were long neglected.
One of the peculiarities of basic science is the variety of paths that leadto productive advance. Many of the most important discoveries have comeas a result of experiments undertaken with very different purposes in mind.
Statistically it is certain that important and highly useful discoveries will
result from some fraction of the undertakings in basic science, but the results of any one particular investigation cannot be predicted with accuracy.
Basic research leads to new knowledge. It provides scientific capital. It
creates the fund from which the practical applications of knowledge must
be drawn. New products and new processes do not appear full grown.
They are founded on new principles and new conceptions, which in turnare painstakingly developed by research in the purest realms of science.
Today, it is truer than ever that basic research is the pacemaker of technological progress. In the 19th century, Yankee mechanical ingenuity,
building largely upon the basic discoveries of European scientists, could
greatly advance the technical arts. Now the situation is different.
A nation that depends upon others for its new basic scientific knowledge will be slow in its industrial progress and weak in its competitive position in world trade, regardless of its mechanical skill.

Centers of basic research
Publicly and privately supported colleges and universities and the endowed research institutes must furnish both the new scientific knowledge and the trained research workers. These institutions are uniquely
qualified by tradition and by their special characteristics to carry on
29basic research. They are charged with the responsibility of conserving
the knowledge accumulated by the past, imparting that knowledge to students, and contributing new knowledge of all kinds. It is chiefly in these
institutions that scientists may work in an atmosphere that is relatively
free from the adverse pressures of convention, prejudice, or commercial
necessity. At their best they provide the scientific worker with a strong
sense of solidarity and security, as well as a substantial degree of personal intellectual freedom. All of these factors are of great importance in thedevelopment of new knowledge, since much of this new knowledge is certain to arouse opposition because of its tendency to challenge current beliefs or practices.
Industry is generally inhibited by preconceived goals, by its own clearly
defined standards, and by the constant pressure of commercial necessity.
Satisfactory progress in basic science seldom occurs under conditions
prevailing in the normal industrial laboratory. There are some notable exceptions, it is true, but even in such cases it is rarely possible to match theuniversities with respect to the freedom that is so important to scientificdiscovery.
To serve effectively as centers of basic research these institutions must
be strong and healthy. They must attract our best scientists as teachers andinvestigators. They must offer research opportunities and sufficient compensation to enable them to compete with industry and the government forthe cream of scientific talent.
During the past 25 years there has been a great increase in industrial research involving the application of scientific knowledge to a multitude ofpractical purposes—thus providing new products, new industries, new investment opportunities, and millions of jobs. During the same period research within the government—again, largely applied research—has also
been greatly expanded. In the decade from 1930 to 1940 expenditures forindustrial research increased from $116 million to $240 million, and thosefor scientific research in the government rose from $24 million to $69 million. During the same period expenditures for scientific research in thecolleges and universities increased from $20 million to $31 million, while
those in the endowed research institutes declined from $5.2 million to $4.5
million. These are the best estimates available. The figures have been taken from a variety of sources and arbitrary definitions have necessarily
been applied, but it is believed that they may be accepted as indicating thefollowing trends:
1. Expenditures for scientific research by industry and the government—almost entirely applied research—have more than doubled
30

between 1930 and 1940. Whereas in 1930 they were six times as large
as the research expenditures of the colleges, universities, and research institutes, by 1940 they were nearly ten times as large.
2. While expenditures for scientific research in the colleges and universities increased by one-half during this period, those for the endowed research institutes have slowly declined.
If the colleges, universities, and research institutes are to meet the
rapidly increasing demands of industry and the government for new scientific knowledge, their basic research should be strengthened by the useof public funds.

Research within government
Although there are some notable exceptions, most research conductedwithin government laboratories is of an applied nature. This has always
been true and is likely to remain so. Hence the government, like industry, isdependent on the colleges, universities, and research institutes to expand
the basic scientific frontiers and furnish trained scientific investigators.
Research within the government represents an important part of our
total research activity and needs to be strengthened and expanded after
the war. Such expansion should be directed to fields of inquiry and service
that are of public importance and are not adequately carried on by privateorganizations.
The most important single factor in scientific and technical work is thequality of the personnel employed. The procedures currently followed within the government for recruiting, classifying, and compensating such personnel place the government under a severe handicap in competing with industry and the universities for first-class scientific talent. Steps should betaken to reduce that handicap.
In the government the arrangement whereby the numerous scientificagencies form parts of larger departments has both advantages and disadvantages, but the present pattern is firmly established and there is much tobe said for it. There is, however, a very real need for some measure of coordination of the common scientific activities of these agencies, both for policies and budgets, and at present no such means exist.
A permanent Science Advisory Board should be created to consult withthese scientific bureaus and advise the executive and legislative branchesof the government as to the policies and budgets of government agencies
engaged in scientific research.
This board should be composed of disinterested scientists who have noconnection with the affairs of any government agency.
31

Industrial research
The simplest and most effective way in which the government canstrengthen industrial research is to support basic research and developscientific talent.
The benefits of basic research do not reach all industries equally or at
the same speed. Some small enterprises never receive any of the benefits. It
has been suggested that the benefits might be better utilized if “researchclinics” for such enterprises were to be established. Businessmen would
thus be able to make more use of research than they do now. This proposal
is certainly worthy of further study.
One of the most important factors affecting the amount of industrial
research is the income tax law. Government action with respect to thissubject will affect the rate of technical progress in industry. Uncertainties
as to the attitude of the Bureau of Internal Revenue regarding the deduction of research and development expenses are a deterrent to research expenditure. These uncertainties arise from a lack of clarity in the tax law as
to the proper treatment of such costs.
The Internal Revenue Code should be amended to remove present uncertainties with regard to the deductibility of research and development
expenditures as current charges against net income.
Research is also affected by the patent laws. They stimulate new invention and make it possible for new industries to be built around new devices
or new processes. These industries generate new jobs and new products,
all of which contribute to the welfare and the strength of the country.
Yet uncertainties in the operation of the patent laws have impaired theability of small industries to translate new ideas into processes and products of value to the nation. These uncertainties are, in part, attributable tothe difficulties and expense incident to the operation of the patent system
as it presently exists. These uncertainties are also attributable to the existence of certain abuses that have appeared in the use of patents. These
abuses should be corrected. They have led to extravagantly critical attacks, which tend to discredit a basically sound system.
It is important that the patent system continue to serve the country inthe manner intended by the Constitution, for it has been a vital element in
the industrial vigor that has distinguished this nation.
The National Patent Planning Commission has reported on this subject. In addition, a detailed study, with recommendations concerning theextent to which modifications should be made in our patent laws, is currently being made under the leadership of the secretary of commerce. It is
recommended, therefore, that specific action with regard to the patent32

laws be withheld pending the submission of the report devoted exclusively
to that subject.

International exchange of scientific information
International exchange of scientific information is of growing importance.
Increasing specialization of science will make it more important than everthat scientists in this country keep continually ahead of developments
abroad. In addition, a flow of scientific information constitutes one facetof general international accord that should be cultivated.
The government can accomplish significant results in several ways: byaiding in the arrangement of international science congresses, in the official accrediting of American scientists to such gatherings, in the official reception of foreign scientists of standing in this country, in making possible
a rapid flow of technical information, including translation services, andpossibly in the provision of international fellowships. Private foundations
and other groups partially fulfill some of these functions at present, but
their scope is incomplete and inadequate.
The government should take an active role in promoting the international flow of scientific information.

The special need for federal support
We can no longer count on a ravaged Europe as a source of fundamental
knowledge. In the past we have devoted much of our best efforts to the application of knowledge that has been discovered abroad. In the future wemust pay increased attention to discovering this knowledge for ourselves,particularly since the scientific applications of the future will be morethan ever dependent upon such basic knowledge.
New impetus must be given to research in our country. Such impetus
can come promptly only from the government. Expenditures for research inthe colleges, universities, and research institutes will otherwise not be able
to meet the additional demands of the increased public need for research.
Further, we cannot expect industry to adequately fill the gap. Industry
will fully rise to the challenge of applying new knowledge to new products.
The commercial incentive can be relied upon for that. But basic research isessentially noncommercial in nature. It will not receive the attention it requires if left to industry.
For many years the government has wisely supported research in the
agricultural colleges, and the benefits have been great. The time has comewhen such support should be extended to other fields.
33

In providing government support, however, we must endeavor to preserve as much as possible the private support of research both in industry
and in the colleges, universities, and research institutes. These private
sources should continue to carry their share of the financial burden.

The cost of a program
It is estimated that an adequate program for federal support of basic research in the colleges, universities, and research institutes and for financing important applied research in the public interest will cost about $10
million at the outset and may rise to about $50 million annually when fully
underway at the end of perhaps 5 years.

34

CHAPTER 4

RENEWAL OF OUR SCIENTIFIC TALENT

Nature of the problem
The responsibility for the creation of new scientific knowledge rests onthat small body of men and women who understand the fundamental lawsof nature and are skilled in the techniques of scientific research. While
there will always be the rare individual who will rise to the top without
the benefit of formal education and training, he is the exception, and evenhe might make a more notable contribution if he had the benefit of thebest education we have to offer. I cannot improve on President Conant’s
statement thatin every section of the entire area where the word science may properly
be applied, the limiting factor is a human one. We shall have rapid orslow advance in this direction or in that depending on the number of really first-class men who are engaged in the work in question. . . . So in thelast analysis, the future of science in this country will be determined byour basic educational policy.

A note of warning
It would be folly to set up a program under which research in the naturalsciences and medicine was expanded at the cost of the social sciences, humanities, and other studies so essential to national well-being. This point
has been well stated by the Moe Committee as follows:As citizens, as good citizens, we therefore think that we must have inmind while examining the question before us—the discovery and development of scientific talent—the needs of the whole national welfare. We
could not suggest to you a program that would siphon into science and35technology a disproportionately large share of the nation’s highest abilities without doing harm to the nation, nor, indeed, without cripplingscience. . . . Science cannot live by and unto itself alone. . . .
The uses to which high ability in youth can be put are various and, to alarge extent, determined by social pressures and rewards. When aided
by selective devices for picking out scientifically talented youth, it isclear that large sums of money for scholarships and fellowships andmonetary and other rewards in disproportionate amounts might draw
into science too large a percentage of the nation’s high ability, with a result highly detrimental to the nation and to science. Plans for the discovery and development of scientific talent must be related to the otherneeds of society for high ability. . . . There is never enough ability at highlevels to satisfy all the needs of the nation; we would not seek to draw
into science any more of it than science’s proportionate share.

The wartime deficit
Among the young men and women qualified to take up scientific work,
since 1940 there have been few students over 18, except some in medicine
and engineering in Army and Navy programs and a few 4-Fs, who havefollowed an integrated scientific course of studies. Neither our allies nor,as far as we know, our enemies have done anything so radical as to suspend almost completely their educational activities in scientific pursuits
during the war period.
Two great principles have guided us in this country as we have turned
our full efforts to war. First, the sound democratic principle that there
should be no favored classes or special privilege in a time of peril, that all
should be ready to sacrifice equally. Second, the tenet that every man
should serve in the capacity in which his talents and experience can best be
applied for the prosecution of the war effort. In general we have held theseprinciples well in balance.
In my opinion, however, we have drawn too heavily for nonscientificpurposes upon the great natural resource that resides in our trained young
scientists and engineers. For the general good of the country too manysuch men have gone into uniform, and their talents have not always been
fully utilized. With the exception of those men engaged in war research, allphysically fit students at graduate level have been taken into the Armed
Forces. Those ready for college training in the sciences have not been permitted to enter upon that training.
There is thus an accumulating deficit of trained research personnel,
which will continue for many years. The deficit of science and technology
36students who, but for the war, would have received bachelor’s degrees isabout 150,000. The deficit of those holding advanced degrees—that is,young scholars trained to the point where they are capable of carrying on
original work—has been estimated as amounting to about 17,000 by 1955
in chemistry, engineering, geology, mathematics, physics, psychology, andthe biological sciences.
With mounting demands for scientists both for teaching and for research, we will enter the postwar period with a serious deficit in our
trained scientific personnel.

Improve the quality
Confronted with these deficits, we are compelled to look to the use of ourbasic human resources and formulate a program that will assure theirconservation and effective development. The committee advising me on
scientific personnel has stated the following principle, which should guideour planning:
If we were all-knowing and all-wise we might, but we think probably
not, write you a plan whereby there might be selected for training,which they otherwise would not get, those who, 20 years hence, would
be scientific leaders, and we might not bother about any lesser manifestations of scientific ability. But in the present state of knowledge a plancannot be made that will select, and assist, only those young men andwomen who will give the top future leadership to science. To get top
leadership there must be a relatively large base of high ability selected
for development and then successive skimmings of the cream of ability
at successive times and at higher levels. No one can select from the bottom those who will be the leaders at the top because unmeasured andunknown factors enter into scientific, or any, leadership. There arebrains and character, strength and health, happiness and spiritual vitality, interest and motivation, and no one knows what else that mustneeds enter into this supra-mathematical calculus.
We think we probably would not, even if we were all-wise and all-knowing, write you a plan whereby you would be assured of scientific leadership at one stroke. We think as we think because we are not interested
in setting up an elect. We think it much the best plan, in this constitutional republic, that opportunity be held out to all kinds and conditionsof men whereby they can better themselves. This is the American way;
this is the way the United States has become what it is. We think it very
important that circumstances be such that there be no ceilings, other37

than ability itself, to intellectual ambition. We think it very importantthat every boy and girl shall know that, if he shows that he has what it
takes, the sky is the limit. Even if it be shown subsequently that he has
not what it takes to go to the top, he will go further than he would otherwise go if there had been a ceiling beyond which he always knew hecould not aspire.
By proceeding from point to point and taking stock on the way, by giving further opportunity to those who show themselves worthy of further opportunity, by giving the most opportunity to those who show
themselves continually developing—this is the way we propose. This is
the American way: a man works for what he gets.

Remove the barriersHigher education in this country is largely for those who have the means.
If those who have the means coincided entirely with those persons who
have the talent we should not be squandering a part of our higher education on those undeserving of it, nor neglecting great talent among those
who fail to attend college for economic reasons. There are talented individuals in every segment of the population, but with few exceptions those
without the means of buying higher education go without it. Here is a tremendous waste of the greatest resource of a nation—the intelligence ofits citizens.
If ability, and not the circumstance of family fortune, is made to determine who shall receive higher education in science, then we shall be assured of constantly improving quality at every level of scientific activity.

The generation in uniform must not be lost
We have a serious deficit in scientific personnel partly because the men
who would have studied science in the colleges and universities have been
serving in the Armed Forces. Many had begun their studies before theywent to war. Others with capacity for scientific education went to war after finishing high school. The most immediate prospect of making up
some of the deficit in scientific personnel is by salvaging scientific talentfrom the generation in uniform. For even if we should start now to train
the current crop of high school graduates, it would be 1951 before theywould complete graduate studies and be prepared for effective scientificresearch. This fact underlines the necessity of salvaging potential scientists in uniform.

38

The armed services should comb their records for men who, prior to or
during the war, have given evidence of talent for science and make prompt
arrangements, consistent with current discharge plans, for ordering those
who remain in uniform as soon as militarily possible to duty at institutions
here and overseas where they can continue their scientific education. Moreover, they should see that those who study overseas have the benefit of thelatest scientific developments.

A program
The country may be proud of the fact that 95 percent of boys and girls offifth-grade age are enrolled in school, but the drop in enrollment after thefifth grade is less satisfying. For every 1,000 students in the fifth grade,
600 are lost to education before the end of high school, and all but 72 haveceased formal education before the completion of college. While we areconcerned primarily with methods of selecting and educating high school
graduates at the college and higher levels, we cannot be complacent about
the loss of potential talent that is inherent in the present situation.
Students drop out of school, college, and graduate school, or do not getthat far, for a variety of reasons: they cannot afford to go on; schools andcolleges providing courses equal to their capacity are not available locally;business and industry recruit many of the most promising before they havefinished the training of which they are capable. These reasons apply withparticular force to science: the road is long and expensive; it extends atleast six years beyond high school; the percentage of science students who
can obtain first-rate training in institutions near home is small.
Improvement in the teaching of science is imperative, for students of latent scientific ability are particularly vulnerable to high school teachingthat fails to awaken interest or provide adequate instruction. To enlarge
the group of specially qualified men and women it is necessary to increase
the number who go to college. This involves improved high school instruction, provision for helping individual talented students to finish high school(primarily the responsibility of the local communities), and opportunities
for more capable, promising high school students to go to college. Anything short of this means serious waste of higher education and neglect ofhuman resources.
To encourage and enable a larger number of young men and women of
ability to take up science as a career, and in order to gradually reduce thedeficit of trained scientific personnel, it is recommended that provision bemade for a reasonable number of (a) undergraduate scholarships andgraduate fellowships, and (b) fellowships for advanced training and39

fundamental research. The details should be worked out with reference tothe interests of the several states and of the universities and colleges, andcare should be taken not to impair the freedom of the institutions and individuals concerned.
The program proposed by the Moe Committee in Appendix 4* would
provide 24,000 undergraduate scholarships and 900 graduate fellowships
and would cost about $30 million annually when in full operation. Eachyear under this program 6,000 undergraduate scholarships would be madeavailable to high school graduates and 300 graduate fellowships would beoffered to college graduates. Approximately the scale of allowances provided for under the educational program for returning veterans has been usedin estimating the cost of this program.
The plan is, further, that all those who receive such scholarships or fellowships in science should be enrolled in a National Science Reserve andbe liable to call into the service of the government in connection with scientific or technical work in time of war or other national emergency declared by the Congress or proclaimed by the president. Thus, in addition to
the general benefits to the nation by reason of the addition to its trained
ranks of such a corps of scientific workers, there would be a definite benefit
to the nation in having these scientific workers on call in national emergencies. The government would be well advised to invest the money involvedin this plan even if the benefits to the nation were thought of solely—which
they are not—in terms of national preparedness.

* Editor’s note: The appendices are not included in this zine.
40CHAPTER 5

A PROBLEM OF SCIENTIFIC RECONVERSION

Effects of mobilization of science for war
We have been living on our fat. For more than five years many of our scientists have been fighting the war in the laboratories, in the factories andshops, and at the front. We have been directing the energies of our scientists to the development of weapons and materials and methods on a large
number of relatively narrow projects initiated and controlled by the Officeof Scientific Research and Development and other government agencies.
Like troops, the scientists have been mobilized and thrown into action toserve their country in time of emergency. But they have been diverted to agreater extent than is generally appreciated from the search for answers
to the fundamental problems—the search on which human welfare andprogress depends. This is not a complaint—it is a fact. The mobilization ofscience behind the lines is aiding the fighting men at the front to win the
war and to shorten it, and it has resulted incidentally in the accumulationof a vast amount of experience and knowledge of the application of science to particular problems, much of which can be put to use when the
war is over. Fortunately, this country had the scientists—and the time—tomake this contribution and thus to advance the date of victory.

Security restrictions should be lifted promptly
Much of the information and experience acquired during the war is confined to the agencies that gathered it. Except to the extent that military security dictates otherwise, such knowledge should be spread upon the record for the benefit of the general public.
Thanks to the wise provision of the secretary of war and the secretaryof the Navy, most of the results of wartime medical research have been41

published. Several hundred articles have appeared in the professional journals; many are in the process of publication. The material still subject tosecurity classification should be released as soon as possible.
It is my view that most of the remainder of the classified scientific material should be released as soon as there is ground for belief that the enemy will not be able to turn it against us in this war. Most of the informationneeded by industry and in education can be released without disclosing its
embodiments in actual military material and devices. Basically there is no
reason to believe that scientists of other countries will not in time rediscover everything we now know that is held in secrecy. A broad dissemination of scientific information upon which further advances can readily bemade furnishes a sounder foundation for our national security than a policy of restriction, which would impede our own progress despite being imposed in the hope that possible enemies would not catch up with us.
During the war it has been necessary for selected groups of scientists towork on specialized problems with relatively little information as to what
other groups were doing and had done. Working against time, the Office of
Scientific Research and Development has been obliged to enforce this practice during the war, although it was realized by all concerned that it was an
emergency measure that prevented the continuous cross-fertilization soessential to fruitful scientific effort.
Our ability to overcome possible future enemies depends upon scientific advances that will proceed more rapidly with the diffusion of knowledge than under a policy of continued restriction of knowledge now in ourpossession.

Need for coordination
In planning the release of scientific data and experience collected in connection with the war, we must not overlook the fact that research has gone
forward under many auspices—the Army, the Navy, the Office of Scientific
Research and Development, the National Advisory Committee for Aeronautics, other departments and agencies of the government, educational
institutions, and many industrial organizations. There have been numerous cases of independent discovery of the same truth in different places.
To permit the release of information by one agency and to continue to restrict it elsewhere would be unfair in its effect and would tend to impair
the morale and efficiency of the scientists who have submerged individualinterests in the controls and restrictions of war.
A part of the information now classified that should be released is possessed jointly by our allies and ourselves. Plans for release of such42

information should be coordinated with our allies to minimize the danger ofinternational friction that would result from sporadic uncontrolled release.

A board to control release
The agency responsible for recommending the release of informationfrom military classification should be an Army, Navy, and civilian body,
well grounded in science and technology. It should be competent to advise
the secretary of war and the secretary of the Navy. It should, moreover,have sufficient recognition to secure prompt and practical decisions.
To satisfy these considerations I recommend the establishment of aboard, made up equally of scientists and military men, whose function
would be to pass upon the declassification and control the release for publication of scientific information that is now classified.

Publication should be encouraged
The release of information from security regulations is but one phase of
the problem. The other is to provide for preparation of the material and its
publication in a form and at a price that will facilitate dissemination anduse. In the case of the Office of Scientific Research and Development, arrangements have been made for the preparation of manuscripts, while thestaffs under our control are still assembled and in possession of the records, as soon as the pressure for the production of results for this war has
begun to relax.
We should get this scientific material to scientists everywhere withgreat promptness and at as low a price as is consistent with a suitable format. We should also get it to the men studying overseas so that they willknow what has happened in their absence.
It is recommended that measures that will encourage and facilitate thepreparation and publication of reports be adopted forthwith by all agencies,
governmental and private, possessing scientific information released fromsecurity control.

43

CHAPTER 6

THE MEANS TO THE END

New responsibilities for government
One lesson is clear from the reports of the several committees attached as
appendices.* The federal government should accept new responsibilities
for promoting the creation of new scientific knowledge and the development of scientific talent in our youth.
The extent and nature of these new responsibilities are set forth in detail in the reports of the committees whose recommendations in this regard are fully endorsed.
In discharging these responsibilities federal funds should be madeavailable. We have given much thought to the question of how plans for theuse of federal funds may be arranged so that such funds will not drive outof the picture funds from local governments, foundations, and private donors. We believe that our proposals will minimize that effect, but we do notthink that it can be completely avoided. We submit, however, that the nation’s need for more and better scientific research is such that the risk mustbe accepted.
It is also clear that the effective discharge of these responsibilities will
require the full attention of some overall agency devoted to that purpose.
There should be a focal point within the government for a concerted program of assisting scientific research conducted outside of the government.
Such an agency should furnish the funds needed to support basic researchin the colleges and universities, coordinate where possible research programs on matters of utmost importance to the national welfare, formulatea national policy for the government toward science, sponsor the* Editor’s note: The appendices are not included in this zine.
44

interchange of scientific information among scientists and laboratories
both in this country and abroad, and ensure that the incentives for research in industry and the universities are maintained. All of the committees advising on these matters agree on the necessity for such an agency.

The mechanism
There are within government departments many groups whose interests
are primarily those of scientific research. Notable examples are foundwithin the Departments of Agriculture, Commerce, Interior, and the Federal Security Agency. These groups are concerned with science that is collateral and peripheral to the major problems of those departments. These
groups should remain where they are and continue to perform their present functions, including the support of agricultural research by grants to
the Land Grant Colleges and Experiment Stations, since their largest contribution lies in applying fundamental knowledge to the special problemsof the departments within which they are established.
By the same token, these groups cannot be made the repository of the
new and large responsibilities in science that belong to the government andwhich the government should accept. The recommendations in this reportthat relate to research within the government, the release of scientific information, clarification of the tax laws, and the recovery and developmentof our scientific talent now in uniform can be implemented by action within the existing structure of the government. But nowhere in the governmental structure receiving its funds from the Congress is there an agency
adapted to supplementing the support of basic research in the universities,
both in medicine and the natural sciences, supporting research on new
weapons for both services, or administering a program of science scholarships and fellowships.
A new agency should be established, therefore, by the Congress for thispurpose. Such an agency, moreover, should be an independent agency devoted to the support of scientific research and advanced scientific education alone. Industry learned many years ago that basic research cannot often be fruitfully conducted as an adjunct to or a subdivision of an operating
agency or department. Operating agencies have immediate operating
goals and are under constant pressure to produce in a tangible way, forthat is the test of their value. None of these conditions is favorable to basic
research. Research is the exploration of the unknown and is necessarily
speculative. It is inhibited by conventional approaches, traditions, andstandards. It cannot be satisfactorily conducted in an atmosphere where it
is gauged and tested by operating or production standards. Basic scientific45research should not, therefore, be placed under an operating agency whoseparamount concern is anything other than research. Research will always
suffer when put in competition with operations. The decision that there
should be a new and independent agency was reached by each of the committees advising in these matters.
I am convinced that these new functions should be centered in one
agency. Science is fundamentally a unitary thing. The number of independent agencies should be kept to a minimum. Much medical progress, forexample, will come from fundamental advances in chemistry. Separationof the sciences in tight compartments, as would occur if more than one
agency were involved, would retard and not advance scientific knowledge
as a whole.

Five fundementals
There are certain basic principles that must underlie the program of government support for scientific research and education if such support is tobe effective and avoid impairing the very things we seek to foster. These
principles are as follows:
1. Whatever the extent of the support may be, there must be stability offunds over a period of years so that long-range programs may be undertaken.
2. The agency to administer such funds should be composed of citizens selected only on the basis of their interest in and capacity topromote the work of the agency. They should be persons of broad interest in and understanding of the peculiarities of scientific researchand education.
3. The agency should promote research through contracts or grants toorganizations outside the federal government. It should not operate
any laboratories of its own.
4. Support of basic research in the public and private colleges, universities, and research institutes must leave the internal control of policy, personnel, and the method and scope of the research to the institutions themselves. This is of the utmost importance.
5. While assuring complete independence and freedom for the nature,
scope, and methodology of research carried on in the institutions receiving public funds, and while retaining discretion in the allocationof funds among such institutions, the foundation proposed hereinmust be responsible to the president and the Congress. Only throughsuch responsibility can we maintain the proper relationship between
science and other aspects of a democratic system. The usual controls46

of audits, reports, budgeting, and the like should, of course, apply tothe administrative and fiscal operations of the foundation, subject,however, to such adjustments in procedure as are necessary to meetthe special requirements of research.
Basic research is a long-term process—it ceases to be basic if immediate
results are expected on short-term support. Methods should therefore befound that will permit the agency to make commitments of funds from current appropriations for programs of five years’ duration or longer. Continuity and stability of the program and its support may be expected (a) fromthe growing realization by the Congress of the benefits to the public fromscientific research, and (b) from the conviction that will grow among those
who conduct research under the auspices of the agency that good-quality
work will be followed by continuing support.

Military research
As stated earlier in this report, military preparedness requires a permanent, independent, civilian-controlled organization, having close liaison
with the Army and the Navy, but with funds direct from the Congress andthe clear power to initiate military research that will supplement andstrengthen that carried on directly under the control of the Army and theNavy. As a temporary measure the National Academy of Sciences has established the Research Board for National Security at the request of thesecretary of war and the secretary of the Navy. This is highly desirable sothat there may be no interruption in the relations between scientists andmilitary men after the emergency wartime Office of Scientific Researchand Development goes out of existence. The Congress is now considering
legislation to provide funds for this board by direct appropriation.
I believe that, as a permanent measure, it would be appropriate to add tothe agency needed to perform the other functions recommended in this report the responsibilities for civilian-initiated and civilian-controlled military research. The function of such a civilian group would be primarily to
conduct long-range scientific research on military problems—leaving to
the services research on the improvement of existing weapons.
Some research on military problems should be conducted, in time ofpeace as well as in war, by civilians independently of the military establishment. It is the primary responsibility of the Army and the Navy to train themen, make available the weapons, and employ the strategy that will bring
victory in combat. The armed services cannot be expected to be experts inall of the complicated fields that make it possible for a great nation to fightsuccessfully in total war. There are certain kinds of research—such as
47

research on the improvement of existing weapons—that can best be done
within the military establishment. However, the job of long-range research
involving the application of the newest scientific discoveries to militaryneeds should be the responsibility of those civilian scientists in the universities and in industry who are best trained to discharge it thoroughly andsuccessfully. It is essential that both kinds of research go forward and that
there be the closest liaison between the two groups.
Placing the civilian military research function in the proposed agency
would bring it into close relationship with a broad program of basic research in both the natural sciences and in medicine. A balance between
military and other research could thus readily be maintained.
The establishment of the new agency, including a civilian military research group, should not be delayed by the existence of the Research Board
for National Security, which is a temporary measure. Nor should the creation of the new agency be delayed by uncertainties with regard to thepostwar organization of our military departments themselves. Clearly, the
new agency, including a civilian military research group within it, can remain sufficiently flexible to adapt its operations to whatever may be the final organization of the military departments.

National research foundation
It is my judgment that the national interest in scientific research and scientific education can best be promoted by the creation of a National Research Foundation.
I. Purposes. The National Research Foundation should develop and promote a national policy for scientific research and scientific education, support basic research in nonprofit organizations, develop scientific talent in
American youth by means of scholarships and fellowships, and by contract and otherwise support long-range research on military matters.
II. Members.
1. Responsibility to the people, through the president and the Congress, should be placed in the hands of, say, nine members, whoshould be persons not otherwise connected with the government
and not representative of any special interest, who should be known
as National Research Foundation members, selected by the president on the basis of their interest in and capacity to promote the purposes of the foundation.
2. The terms of the members should be, say, four years, and no member
should be eligible for immediate reappointment provided he has
48

served a full four-year term. It should be arranged that the members
first appointed serve terms of such length that at least two members
are appointed each succeeding year.
3. The members should serve without compensation but should be entitled to expenses incurred in the performance of their duties.
4. The members should elect their own chairman annually.
5. The chief executive officer of the foundation should be a director
appointed by the members. Subject to the direction and supervisionof the foundation members (acting as a board), the director should
discharge all of the fiscal, legal, and administrative functions of thefoundation. The director should receive a salary that is fully adequate to attract an outstanding man to the post.
6. There should be an administrative office responsible to the director
to handle in one place the fiscal, legal, personnel, and other similaradministrative functions necessary to the accomplishment of the
purposes of the foundation.
7. With the exception of the director, the division members, and one
executive officer appointed by the director to administer the affairsof each division, all employees of the foundation should be appointed under Civil Service regulations.
III. Organization.
1. In order to accomplish the purposes of the foundation, the members
should establish several professional divisions to be responsible tothe members. At the outset these divisions should be:
a. Division of Medical Research. The function of this division should
be to support medical research.
b. Division of Natural Sciences. The function of this division should
be to support research in the physical and natural sciences.
c. Division of National Defense. It should be the function of thisdivision to support long-range scientific research on military
matters.
d. Division of Scientiﬁc Personnel and Education. It should be thefunction of this division to support and supervise the grant ofscholarships and fellowships in science.
e. Division of Publications and Scientiﬁc Collaboration. This division
should be charged with encouraging the publication of scientificknowledge and promoting the international exchange of scientific information.

49

2. Each division of the foundation should be made up of at least fivemembers, appointed by the members of the foundation. In making
such appointments the members should request and consider recommendations from the National Academy of Sciences, whichshould be asked to establish a new National Research Foundation
nominating committee in order to bring together the recommendations of scientists in all organizations. The chairman of each division should be appointed by the members of the foundation.
3. The division members should be appointed for such terms as themembers of the foundation may determine, and may be reappointed

PROPOSED ORGANIZATION OF NATIONAL RESEARCH FOUNDATIONNATIONAL RESEARCHFOUNDATIONMEMBERSDIRECTORSTAFF OFFICES
GENERAL COUNSELFINANCE OFFICER
ADMINISTRATIVE PLANNINGPERSONNEL

50

DIVISION OF
MEDICAL RESEARCHDIVISION OF
NATURAL SCIENCESDIVISION OF
NATIONAL DEFENSE

MEMBERSMEMBERSMEMBERSEXECUTIVE OFFICEREXECUTIVE OFFICEREXECUTIVE OFFICERDIVISION OF
SCIENTIFIC PERSONNEL& EDUCATIONDIVISION OF
PUBLICATIONS &SCIENTIFIC COLLABORATIONMEMBERSMEMBERSEXECUTIVE OFFICEREXECUTIVE OFFICER

at the discretion of the members. They should receive their expenses
and compensation for their services at a per diem rate of, say, $50
while engaged on business of the foundation, but no division member
should receive more than, say, $10,000 compensation per year.
4. Membership of the Division of National Defense should include, in
addition to, say, five civilian members, one representative designated by the secretary of war and one representative of the secretary of
the Navy, who should serve without additional compensation forthis duty.
IV. Functions.
1. The members of the foundation should have the following functions,powers, and duties:
a. To formulate overall policies of the foundation.
b. To establish and maintain such offices within the United States,
its territories, and possessions, as they may deem necessary.
c. To meet and function at any place within the United States, its
territories, and possessions.
d. To obtain and utilize the services of other government agencies tothe extent that such agencies are prepared to render such services.
e. To adopt, promulgate, amend, and rescind rules and regulations
to carry out the provisions of the legislation and the policies andpractices of the foundation.
f. To review and balance the financial requirements of the several
divisions and propose to the president the annual estimate forthe funds required by each division. Appropriations should be
earmarked for the purposes of specific divisions, but the foundation should be left discretion with respect to the expenditure ofeach division’s funds.
g. To make contracts or grants for the conduct of research by negotiation without advertising for bids.
And with the advice of the National Research Foundation divisions
concerned:h. To create such advisory and cooperating agencies and councils,
state, regional, or national, as in their judgment will aid in effectuating the purposes of the legislation, and to pay the expenses
thereof.
i. To enter into contracts with or make grants to educational andnonprofit research institutions for the support of scientificresearch.
51

j. To initiate and finance in appropriate agencies, institutions, or organizations research on problems related to the national defense.
k. To initiate and finance in appropriate organizations research projects for which existing facilities are unavailable or inadequate.
l. To establish scholarships and fellowships in the natural sciences,including biology and medicine.
m. To promote the dissemination of scientific and technical information and further its international exchange.
n. To support international cooperation in science by providing financial aid for international meetings, associations of scientificsocieties, and scientific research programs organized on an international basis.
o. To devise and promote the use of methods of improving the transition between research and its practical application in industry.
2. The divisions should be responsible to the members of the foundation for:a. Formulation of programs and policy within the scope of the particular divisions.
b. Recommendations regarding the allocation of research programs
among research organizations.
c. Recommendation of appropriate arrangements between the foundation and the organizations selected to carry on the program.
d. Recommendation of arrangements with state and local authorities with regard to cooperation in a program of science scholarships and fellowships.
e. Periodic review of the quality of research being conducted under
the auspices of the particular division and revision of the program of support of research.
f. Presentation of budgets of financial needs for the work of thedivision.
g. Maintaining liaisons with other scientific research agencies,
both governmental and private, concerned with the work of thedivision.
V. Patent policy. The success of the National Research Foundation in promoting scientific research in this country will depend to a very large degree upon the cooperation of organizations outside the government. In
making contracts with or grants to such organizations the foundation
should protect the public interest adequately and at the same time leave
the cooperating organization with adequate freedom and incentive to52

conduct scientific research. The public interest will normally be adequately protected if the government receives a royalty-free license for governmental purposes under any patents resulting from work financed by thefoundation. There should be no obligation on the research institution topatent discoveries made as a result of support from the foundation. There
should certainly not be any absolute requirement that all rights in suchdiscoveries be assigned to the government, but it should be left to the discretion of the director and the interested division whether in special cases
the public interest requires such an assignment. Legislation on this pointshould leave to the members of the foundation discretion as to its patent
policy so that patent arrangements may be adjusted as circumstances andthe public interest require.
VI. Special authority. In order to insure that men of great competence andexperience may be designated as members of the foundation and as members of the several professional divisions, the legislation creating the foundation should contain specific authorization so that the members of thefoundation and the members of the divisions may also engage in private
and gainful employment, notwithstanding the provisions of any otherlaws, provided, however, that no compensation for such employment is received in any form from any profit-making institution that receives funds
under contract or otherwise from the division or divisions of the foundation with which the individual is concerned. In normal times, in view of
the restrictive statutory prohibitions against dual interests on the part ofgovernment officials, it would be virtually impossible to persuade persons
having private employment of any kind to serve the government in an official capacity. In order, however, to secure the part-time services of themost competent men as members of the foundation and the divisions,these stringent prohibitions should be relaxed to the extent indicated.
Since research is unlike the procurement of standardized items, which
are susceptible to competitive bidding on fixed specifications, the legislation creating the National Research Foundation should free the foundationfrom the obligation to place its contracts for research through advertisingfor bids. This is particularly so since the measure of a successful researchcontract lies not in the dollar cost but in the qualitative and quantitative
contribution that is made to our knowledge. The extent of this contribution
in turn depends on the creative spirit and talent that can be brought to bear
within a research laboratory. The National Research Foundation must,
therefore, be free to place its research contracts or grants not only withthose institutions that have a demonstrated research capacity, but also53with other institutions whose latent talent or creative atmosphere affords
the promise of research success.
As in the case of the research sponsored during the war by the Officeof Scientific Research and Development, the research sponsored by the
National Research Foundation should be conducted, in general, on an actual cost basis without profit to the institution receiving the research contract or grant.
There is one other matter that requires special mention. Since researchdoes not fall within the category of normal commercial or procurement operations that are easily covered by the usual contractual relations, it is essential that certain statutory and regulatory fiscal requirements be waived
in the case of research contractors. For example, the National Research
Foundation should be authorized by legislation to make, modify, or amend
contracts of all kinds with or without legal consideration and without performance bonds. Similarly, advance payments should be allowed at the discretion of the director of the foundation when required. Finally, the normal
vouchering requirements of the General Accounting Office with respect todetailed itemization or substantiation of vouchers submitted under cost
contracts should be relaxed for research contractors. Adherence to the usual procedures in the case of research contracts will impair the efficiency of
research operations and will needlessly increase the cost of the work of thegovernment. Without the broad authority along these lines which was contained in the First War Powers Act and its implementing executive orders,
together with the special relaxation of vouchering requirements granted by
the General Accounting Office, the Office of Scientific Research and Development would have been gravely handicapped in carrying on research on
military matters during this war. Colleges and universities in which research will be conducted principally under contract with the foundation
are, unlike commercial institutions, not equipped to handle the detailed
vouchering procedures and auditing technicalities that are required of theusual government contractors.
VII. Budget. Studies by the several committees provide a partial basis formaking an estimate of the order of magnitude of the funds required to implement the proposed program. Clearly the program should grow in ahealthy manner from modest beginnings. The following very rough estimates are given for the first year of operation after the foundation is organized and operating, and for the fifth year of operation, when it is expected that the operations would have reached a fairly stable level:54

MILLIONS OF DOLLARSACTIVITY

FIRST
YEAR

FIFTH
YEAR

DIVISION OF MEDICAL RESEARCH . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

$ 5.0$ 20.0

DIVISION OF NATURAL SCIENCES . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

10.0

50.0

DIVISION OF NATIONAL DEFENSE . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

10.0

20.0

DIVISION OF SCIENTIFIC PERSONNEL & EDUCATION . . . . . . .

7.0

29.0

DIVISION OF PUBLICATIONS & SCIENTIFIC COLLABORATION

0.5

1.0

1.0

2.5

33.5

122.5

. . .

ADMINISTRATION . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

Action by the Congress
The National Research Foundation herein proposed meets the urgent needof the days ahead. The form of the organization suggested is the result ofconsiderable deliberation. The form is important. The very successful pattern of organization of the National Advisory Committee for Aeronautics,
which has promoted basic research on problems of flight during the past
30 years, has been carefully considered in proposing the method of appointment of members of the foundation and in defining their responsibilities. Moreover, whatever program is established, it is vitally importantthat it satisfy the five fundamentals.
The foundation here proposed has been described only in outline. The
excellent reports of the committees that studied these matters are attached
as appendices.* They will be of aid in furnishing detailed suggestions.
Legislation is necessary. It should be drafted with great care. Early action is imperative, however, if this nation is to meet the challenge of science and fully utilize the potentialities of science. On the wisdom withwhich we bring science to bear against the problems of the coming years
depends in large measure our future as a nation.

* Editor’s note: The appendices are not included in this zine.
55