Items in cart [0]
| [ Top of Page ] [ Home ] [ Contact Us ] [ Help ] [ The National Academies Home ] | ||
Below are the first 10 and last 10 pages of uncorrected machine-read text (when available) of this chapter, followed by the top 30 algorithmically extracted key phrases from the chapter as a whole.
Intended to provide our own search engines and external engines with highly rich, chapter-representative searchable text on the opening pages of each chapter.
Because it is UNCORRECTED material, please consider the following text as a useful but insufficient proxy for the authoritative book pages.
Do not use for reproduction, copying, pasting, or reading; exclusively for search engines.
OCR for page 565
17 Academy
1 ~ Centennial
FRE D E RI C K S E I T Z ( 1 962—1 969)
In ~96z, six months before the end of his twelfth year as President
and seventeenth year of elective office in the Academy-Research
Council, Dr. Bronk sent a long personal letter to the membership of
the Academy declaring his intention to refuse another renomination,
although he would "gladly serve in an unofficial capacity whenever
called upon." He pointed out that the nature of the presidency, in the
light of the Academy's greatly increased opportunities and respon-
sibilities, had undergone marked change in his twelve years in office
and that fact should be considered in the choice of a new President. It
had been a "period of rapid evolution of the Academy," owing much
to the steady growth of federal involvement in science and technol-
ogy. As a consequence, the Academy had been "called upon for advice
more than ever before," and had become "to an increasing degree
involved in broad policy issues at the higher levels of Government."
The activities of the Academy had, as a result, required of him "more
565
OCR for page 566
566 / FREDERICK SEITZ (1962—1060)
Frederick Seitz, President of
the Academy, ~ 962- ~ 969;
Chairman of the National Re-
search Council, ~ 962- ~ 969
(From the archives of the
Academy).
than normal full time" and would henceforth need the services of a
full-time President in a salaried officer
The unexpectedly large response to the letter, as the Academy's
Nominating Committee later said, indicated "a most unusual and
overwhelmingly enthusiastic approval of the directions in which the
Academy shad] moved during the twelve years of Dr. Bronk's presi-
dency." The Council of the Academy agreed that the office should be
"an essentially full time position," but to avoid the possibility of a
"permanent president," recommended that the incumbent maintain
his ties, through leave of absence, with his university or other institu-
tion, with the Academy reimbursing his employer for at least part of
his salary. The Council would nominate only one candidate for the
office, although the membership might, as was its right, nominate
others.
The members replying to Bronk's letter had suggested more than
fifty names for the office. The Nominating Committee's unanimous
~ DetIev W. Bronk letter, lanuary ~6, ~962 (NAS Archives: NAS: Presidency: Nature of
Office: Consideration by Members).
OCR for page 567
Academy Centennial 1 567
choice was Frederick Seitz, Professor of Physics at the University of
Illinois, who was elected at the Academy meeting in April ~96~.2
Seitz had obtained his Princeton doctorate in physics in ~934, when
he was twenty-three, and moving rapidly up the academic ladder, had
become professor and head of the Physics Department at the Car-
negie Institute of Technology shortly after the beginning of World
War II. During the war he was section chief of the metallurgy project
of the Manhattan District and consultant to the Secretary of War,
serving as director of the training program in atomic energy at the
Oak Ridge National Laboratory in ~ 946 and ~947. In ~ 949 he became
Research Professor of Physics at the University of Illinois, and in
~957, head of the department. His fields are the theory of solids and
nuclear physics. In ~955 Seitz became a member of the Naval Re-
search Advisory Committee of the Office of Naval Research and
chaired the committee from ~ 960 to ~ 96~. From ~ 958 to ~ 96 ~ he was
a member of the Defense Science Board of the Department of
Defense, and Vice-Chairman of that Board in ~96~ and ~96~. He was
science advisor to the North Atlantic Treaty Organization in ~959 and
960.3
Tall and courtly in manner, with many cultural interests (he is said
to know all the Kochel numbers by heart), he had been a member of
the Academy since ~95~ and on the NRC Governing Board for four
years, first as a member of the Academy Council and then as Chair-
man of the NRC Division of Physical Sciences. He assumed the
presidency on a half-time basis on July I, ~962, and three years later,
in accordance with the wishes of the membership, he became the first
full-time President of the Academy, as well as its first salaried Presi-
dent.4
The vastly altered outlook and the wide-ranging operations of the
Academy as Seitz took office in ~962 made it evident, as Bronk
agreed, that he must have special assistants and consultants to aid him
with the increased administrative responsibilities of the office, par-
2 Report of the Nominating Committee to the Members . . ., April ~3, ~962 (NAS
Archives: NAS: Com on Nominations: Report); NAS Archives: NAS: Presidency: Nature
of Office: Consideration by Members: ~962; NAS, AnnualReportfor1961~2, p. ~7.
3 In ~962 Seitz became a member of the President's Science Advisory Committee, and
served as Chairman of the President's Committee on the National Medal of Science in
~ 962- ~ 963
4 For the nature of the "new" office, see "Minutes of the Academy," April 28, ~964. On
the first residence in Washington purchased by the Academy in ~965 for the use of its
President, see "Minutes of the Council," September 26, ~964, pp. - lo; February 6-7,
~965, pp. Two; June 5, ~965, p. lo; December 7, ~968, pp. ~4-~5.
On Seitz's full-time presidency, see NAS-NRC, News Report 13:89 (November-Decem-
ber ~963); ibid., 15:1, 4-5 (February ~965); Science 147:715-716 (February ~2, ~965).
OCR for page 568
568 / FREDERICK SEITZ (1962 - 1969)
ticularly for general planning and overseeing the activities of the
Research Council. The President was subsequently to have a number
of such staff advisors, among them former NSF Director Alan Water-
man; Academy members Harry H. Hess and James A. Shannon
(retired as Director of the National Institutes of Health), and later
Academy member R. Keith Cannan.5
Changes in the office of President called for modifications in the
Constitution and Bylaws, and eighteen months later Seitz appointed a
Committee on Elective Offices to consider them. The committee
recommended election of a full-time President for a term to be
established in each case by the Council, but for no more than six years,
at which time he should be eligible for reelection. However, no
President should serve for more than twelve years or beyond the age
of seventy. The term of other officers of the Academy should remain
at four years, but subject to reelection.6
The committee furthermore recommended increasing the mem-
bership of the Council of the Academy from six to twelve elected
members who, with the officers of the Academy, would meet at least
four times annually, rather than at stated meetings of the Academy as
previously. (They would actually meet almost monthly.) And the
Council would be empowered to fix the compensation and allowances
granted to the President, as well as to other officers as it deemed
necessary or desirable. The committee's proposed amendments to the
Constitution and Bylaws were adopted by the Academy membership
in October ~964.7
Under the impact of national and international events, and of
diligent and wise administration, the Academy that Bronk relin-
quished to Seitz was as transformed as would be the institution that
Seitz turned over to his successor. During their years of office, the
Academy that George Ellery Hale had envisioned as "a national focus
of science and research" became a reality.
The National Academy of Engineering
President Seitz assumed direction of an organization not only im-
mensely complex and thriving, but also facing the prospect of increas-
5 "Minutes of the Council," December 8, ~962, p. 7 et seq.
6 Correspondence in NAS Archives: NAS: Com on Elective Offices: ~963 & ~964.
. For Seitz's review of NAS-NRC activities on taking office, see NAS, Annual Report for
1962~3, p. 3; NAS Archives: NAS: Council of Academy: Activities Review: ~ 962.
7 "Minutes of the Council," September 28, ~963, p. ~8; December 5, ~964, pp. ~3-~4;
NAS, Annual Report for 1963-64, pp. 36-39; 1964-65, p. 4.
OCR for page 569
Academy Centennial / 569
ing complexity. In the summer of ~960, Augustus B. Kinzel of Union
Carbide Corporation, the Chairman of the Research Council Division
of Engineering and Industrial Research and a member of the
Academy, had written President Bronk that the engineering profes-
sion was considering the establishment of an academy of engineering.
That fall, L. K. Wheelock, Secretary of the Engineers Joint Council
(EJC), representing over one hundred and seventy thousand members
in the national engineering societies, confirmed the intention of the
engineers to afford themselves of opportunities and services similar to
those the Academy provided in science and raised the question of the
relationship of the proposed new academy to the National Academy
of Sciences.8 Bronk was requested by the engineers to appoint a
representative to an EJC committee on a national academy of en-
gineering, and in January ~96~ he nominated himself.9 A year later
he appointed a committee under Academy Vice-President Julius A.
Stratton of MIT to consult with the Engineers Joint Council on their
plans, thus beginning several years of discussions on whether the
engineers should establish an independent academy or affiliate with
the National Academy of Sciences.~°
Shortly after his election, Seitz unquestionably the most history-
minded of Academy Presidents—reviewed the century of Academy
relations between scientists and engineers, their representation
among the incorporators in ~863, the founding of the National
Research Council in ~9~6 with the assistance of the Engineering
Foundation, the work of the NRC Division of Engineering following
World War I, and the presidency of engineer Frank B. Jewett during
World War II. He was fully aware that after its first half-century
(when nearly one-sixth of the Academy members were engineers), the
Augustus B. Kinzel to Bronk, July I, ~960; Secretary, EJC, to Bronk, November 4,
~960 (NAS Archives: INST Assoc: EJC: NAE: Proposed); NAS Archives: NAE: History of
Establishment: ~965: NAS, Annual Reportfor 1960~1, p. 3.
9 Bronk to L. K. Wheelock, EJC, January 2, ~96~ (NAS Archives: INST Assoc: EJC: NAE:
Proposed: General).
~°"Minutes of the Council," February lo, ~962, pp. 6-7; NAS, Annual Report for
1961~2, pp. ~20.
On the imminence of the new academy see Seitz to Eric A. Walker, June 6, ~963 (NAS
Archives: INST Assoc: EJC: NAE: Proposed: ~963); E. B. Wilson to Seitz, June ~8, ~964;
Seitz to E. B. Wilson, June ~5 and 23, ~964; E. B. Wilson to Seitz, November ~4,
~964 (NAS Archives: ORG: Historical Data).
'I See, e.g., Seitz's voluminous correspondence with long-time Academy members
particularly with E. B. Wilson, and his historical account of the Academy in U.S.
Congress, House, Committee on Science and Astronautics, Government and Science.
Hearings before the Subcommittee on Science, Research, and Development of the Committee on
Science and Astronautics, 88th Cong., fist sees., ~964, pp. 3-32.
OCR for page 570
57o
o
.....
~ · ~ ~
~ ~ ~ As
° 3 bit ho
—~ L,^ X
~ ~ Hi
I_ 'A
U' ~ ~
~ — ~
be to ~
I ~ o ^
~ _ 3
Use C~ ~ C~S ;
~ . V)
<~ ·=
^ C
.= o ~ ~ ¢
o
._
.= =~ -
;> ° ~
. ~ ~ ;>
V) so
A, .
3 ~ ~=
° ~ ~ ~
o ~ ~ Cal _
· _ _l ~ ~ _
Z ~ ~ ~ ~
~ . ~ ~
=~ - ~3~
Cal · ~
~ · ~ ~ ~ _
· _ ~4 no ~ _
~ 7 -G
C't o—
~ Hi o ~ O
= ~ ~ ~ X
· ;~4
_,
~ ^ . ~ ~
3 ~—~
_
C) — ~ ·
OCR for page 571
Academy Centennial 1 571
criteria for election to the Academy, emphasizing creative scholarship
as determined primarily through published research, had placed
large and important groups of practicing engineers at an advantage,
that most of the work of the Research Council was oriented toward
engineering or applied science, and that the ascendancy of science
in the public mind since World War I had been partly at the expense
of the prestige of the engineering profession.
In March ~964, after consulting with Julius Stratton's still-active
committee and accepting its recommendations, Seitz appointed a
Committee of Twenty-Five, comprising ten members of the Academy
Section of Engineering and fifteen members named by the Engineers
Joint Council, as the nucleus of the proposed academy, to make
specific plans for its activation.~3 It was originally planned that the
new academy would be established independently with a congres-
sional charter of its own.~4 However, upon a recommendation of the
Council of the Academy,
the committee agreed to establish the
academy under the Act of Incorporation of the National Academy of
~ -
~aences.
On December 5, 1964, marking, as Seitz said, "a major landmark in
the history of the relationships between science and engineering in
our country," the Council of the Academy approved the Articles of
Incorporation of the new academy. Five days later its twenty-five
charter members met in the Academy building to organize the Na-
tional Academy of Engineering as an essentially autonomous parallel
body in the National Academy of Sciences, electing as its first Presi-
dent, Augustus B. Kinzel.~5
t2 Bronk to Kinzel, July lo, ~960, and Seitz to Eric A. Walker, June 6, ~963 (NAS
Archives: INST Assoc: EJC: NAE: Proposed); Seitz, Presentation at First Meeting, April
27, ~964 (NAS Archives: C&B: Com of Twenty-Five on a NAE: Meetings).
to NAS,Ann~lRepo~for 1963~4, pp. ~o-z I; Kinzel to Seitz, July a, ~964 (NAS Archives:
ibid., General); Seitz, "Some Thoughts on an NAE," NAS-NRC, News Report 14:53-57
(July-August ~ 964); "Minutes of the Council," September 26, ~ 964, pp. 5-8, ~ on- ~ .
Concerning a proposed "National Academy of Medicine," see "Minutes," above, pp.
8 9; NAS Archives: ORG: Projects Proposed: National Academy of Medicine.
~4 Seitz to H. L. Dryden, March ~9, ~964 (NAS Archives: C&B: Com of Twenty-Five on a
NAE: Appointments: Members).
is NAS, Annual Report for 1964~5, pp. 67-69; Science 146: 1661-1662 (December 25,
~964); John Lear, "Building the American Dream," Saturday Review (February 6, ~965),
pp. 4~5~; Kinzel, "The Engineer Goes to Washington," International Science and
Technology 42:49-52 (June ~965). See also William E. Bullock, consulting mechanical
engineer, "The National Academy of Engineering," April ~965, p. 4 (NAS Archives:
NAE: History of Establishment: ~965); also NAS Archives: INST Assoc: EJC: Annual
Report ~ 960-6 ~ .
(Continued overlcaf )
OCR for page 572
572 / FREDERICK SEITZ (1962 - 1969)
"For many years," the Engineering Foundation commented, "lead-
ers in the engineering community [had] sought to more effectively
utilize the capability of the engineering profession and to focus this
capability on the many pressing technological problems confronting
the nation." Directed to those ends, the stated objects and purposes
of the NAE were:
To provide means of assessing the constantly changing needs of the nation
and the technical resources that can and should be applied to them . . .
To ... Epromote] cooperation in engineering in the United States and
abroad . . .
To advise the Congress and the executive branch . . . whenever called upon
. . . on matters of national import pertinent to engineering . . .
To cooperate with the National Academy of Sciences on matters involving
both science and engineering. . .
To serve the nation . . . in connection with significant problems in engineer-
ing and technology . . .
To recognize outstanding contributions to the nation by leading engi
neers. ~7
The initial consideration, of establishing effective working relations
between the two Academies, one composed largely of academic mem-
bers, the other of practicing engineers, devolved on the Joint Board,
consisting of three members from each Academy, as stipulated in the
Articles of Organization. The Articles also made the President of the
National Academy of Sciences a member of the NAE Executive Com-
mittee. ~8
The Articles of Organization stipulated, as well, that the NAE
Council would recommend individuals for the chairmanship of the
Research Council's Division of Engineering and Industrial Research.
On July I, ~965, John A. Hutcheson, recently retired Vice-President
of the Westinghouse Electric Corporation, became the first Chairman
appointed under the new procedure. The appointment also marked a
The complete title of the Annual Reports from ~964 to ~965 on would be: National
Academy of ScienceslNational Academy of EngineeringlNational Research Council. The short
form will be continued in these footnotes.
~6 Brochure, Engzneenng Foundation: A Half Century of Slice 1914-1964 (Engineering
Foundation, ~964).
~7 NAS, Annual Report for 1964~5, pp. 22~230. For the Articles of Incorporation,
proposed organization, and initial committees of the NAE, see ibid., pp. 22~248.
The qualifications for NAE membership were: "Important contributions to engineer-
ing theory and practice, including significant contributions to the literature of en-
gineering," and/or "Demonstration of unusual accomplishments in the pioneering of
new and developing fields of technology" (ibid., p. 231).
t~ NAS, Annual Report for 1964-65, pp. 2, ~ 7, 67-72.
OCR for page 573
Academy Centennial 1 573
first step toward making the chairmanship a full-time position. The
following February, the division, noting that the efforts to promote
industrial research so prominent in its work during the twos and
Ages were no longer necessary or part of its activities, became simply
the Division of Engineering.~9
Committee on Science and Public Policy
The decade after Sputnik witnessed not only increasingly closer
Academy relations with the government but, for the first time, regu-
lar communication with the White House. It began in ~95' with
Eisenhower's appointment of James R. Killian as his Special Assistant
for Science and Technology and Chairman of the President's Science
Advisory Committee (Ps~c). The succeeding Administration brought
to the White House one of the most science-minded of Presidents,
John F. Kennedy.20 In April ~96~, three months after his inaugura-
tion, he came to the annual meeting of the Academy to speak of the
"many new frontiers" of science opening to the nation and of his
awareness that never before, "even during the days of World War
II," had there "been a time . . . when the relationship between science
and government must be more intimate."2t
One means of strengthening that relationship, then in the planning
stage, was established within the year, with the organization in the
Academy of an advisory body representing the scientific community
and composed entirely of Academy members, its Committee on
Science and Public Policy (cosPuP).
The need for an independent body of scientists to evaluate a variety
of scientific and technical questions in relation to public policy had
become apparent to George Kistiakowsky during his tenure as Science
Adviser to the President. He could see that in the existing situation,
studies in this area, commissioned directly by the White House, would
t9 NAS, Annual Reportfor 1964-65, p. 98; NAS Archives: E&JR: Appointments: Chairman:
~965; ibid., E&JR: Name Change: February ~966.
20 Indicative of the rising esteem of science and the Academy, was the State dinner
given by President Eisenhower for an assembly of eminent scientists in January ~958
[Science 145:112 (July lo, ~964)]. It was Kennedy, however, as Jerome Wiesner said,
who "set a precedent for Presidential attendance at Academy functions" [Where Science
and Politics Meet (New York: McGraw-Hill Book Co., ~ 965), p. 6]. See Profile of Jerome
Wiesner in The New Yorker (June ~9 and 26, ~963).
2~ NAS, Annual Reportfor 1960-61, pp. ~9-20.
OCR for page 574
574 / FREDERICK SEITZ (1962 - 1969)
have to be either accepted or rejected by the White House without the
benefit of evaluation by independent scientists.
When Jerome B. Wiesner succeeded Kistiakowsky as Science Ad-
viser to the President and as Chairman of the Federal Council on
Science and Technology (FCST), he wrote Detlev Bronk, as President
of the Academy, that he too saw a possible role for the Academy in the
formulation of national science policies. Following discussions at the
annual meeting of the Academy in April ~96~, Bronk appointed
Kistiakowsky Chairman of an ad hoc Committee on Government
Relations to recommend an appropriate advisory mechanism and the
scope of its charge.22
In February ~963, the standing Committee on Government Rela-
tions (appointed in January ~96s on the recommendation of the ad
hoc committee), comprising fourteen members representing the sec-
tional disciplines of the Academy, became the Committee on Science
and Public Policy (cosPuP), with Kistiakowsky as Chairman. The
cosPuP was charged with providing basic information for the "coor-
dination and long-range planning of the support of science by the
executive agencies of the Federal Government." As Kistiakowsky said:
There is growing recognition of the need for greater coordination and
long-range planning of the support of science by the executive agencies of the
Federal Government. Such planning and coordination are now possible
through the interaction of the President's Science Advisory Committee, the
Federal Council for Science and Technology, and the Special Assistant to the
President for Science and Technology. Through these agencies, the National
Academy of Sciences has tin cosPuP] new opportunities to assist in the
formulation of national policies and programs....23
In ~962 Kennedy established an Office of Science and Technology
in the Executive Offices to aid the Special Assistant for Science and
22 Kistiakowsky to Bronk, November 20, ~959, and reply, December 9 (NAS Archives:
EXEC: FCST); "Minutes of the Council," December ~ I, ~960, pp. 6-9; Weisner to Bronk,
January ~3, ~96~ (NAS Archives: ORG: NAS: Com on Government Relations: Ad hoc);
"Minutes of Meeting of [Standing] Com. on Govt. Relations," November 27, ~96~, pp.
~-4; NAS Archives: ORG: NAS: Studies of Long-Range National Goals for Science:
~960-6~; "Minutes of the Academy," April ~4, ~96~, pp. ~3-~4. See also NAS, Annual
Reportfor 1959~0, pp. ~-2, ~4; 1960~1, pp. 2-3, 24-25; 1961~2, pp. 6, 20-2~.
23 NAS, Annual Reportfor 1962~3, pp. ~ ~2-~ ~3; "Minutes of the Council," February 9,
~963, p. 9. See also Lee Anna Embrey, "The Role of the National Academy of Sciences
in Long-Range Planning for Science," NAS-NRC, News Reportl4:60-75 (September-
October ~964); Kenneth Kofmehl, "cosPuP, Congress and Scientific Advice," Journal of
Politics 28:10~120 (February ~966); Harvey Brooks (member of PSAC, ~959-~964;
OCR for page 575
Academy Centennial 1 575
Technology in the implementation of advice from the cosPuP, the
PSAC, and other sources and to provide the Special Assistant with
necessary permanent staff support. Directed by the Special Assistant,
who chaired the PSAC and the FCST as well, the Office of Science and
Technology was to complete the policymaking apparatus for science
and technology within the White House.24
The cosPuP, without the necessity of waiting on the traditional
formal request for Academy advice, became, as anticipated, an effec-
tive agency providing counsel to the government on political issues
involving technical considerations and offering broad counsel on the
needs and opportunities in the major fields of science. It served as an
authority and arbiter for legislative and executive support of science,
identifying and analyzing "the most important and promising di-
rections for future research in the sciences and in the applications of
science to critical public problems."25
The cosPuP's first published report, The Growth of World Population,
was prepared by a panel under the chairmanship of W. D. McElroy,
and published in mid-April of ~963. It addressed the problem of
uncontrolled world population growth and immediately attracted
nationwide attention and almost unanimously favorable reaction
from the press. Publication of the report was followed that same
month by an announcement by the National Institutes of Health that
its budget would include an additional $4 million in the coming fiscal
year for research on the biology of human reproduction.
A few days later, the influential Christian Science Monitor com-
mented that "Historians are likely to say that birth control emerged
from the shadows locally, nationally, and internationally—in ~963."
It cited first the Academy's recommendations and then noted that
Chairman, cosPuP, ~965-~97~), "A Brief History of [cosPuP]," Iuly a, ~969 (NAS
Archives: C&B: COSPUP: History); Science 149:953 (August e7, ~965).
24 NAS, Annual Report for 1962~3, p. ~ ~3; NAS Archives: EXEC: OST: ~96~; Science
136:32-34 (April 6, ~962); ibid., 137:270 (July 27, ~962). See also Harvey Brooks, "The
Science Adviser," in Robert Gilpin and Christopher Wright (eds.), Scientists and National
Policy Making (New York: Columbia University Press, ~964), pp. 73-96, passim.
For the interest of Congress in an Office of Science and Technology of its own, see
Congressional Record l O9 :13663-13665, 88th Cong., ~ st sees., July 30, ~ 963.
25 S. D. Cornell to L. I. Haworth, August e6, ~963 (NAS Archives: C&B: COSPUP:
General: ~963); Science 141 :27-28 (July 5, ~963).
In March ~966, the National Academy of Engineering established its cognate unit,
the Committee on Public Engineering Policy (COPEP). See NAS, Annual Report for
1965~6, p. 60; 1966~7, pp. 67-68.
OCR for page 584
584 / FREDERICK SEITZ (1962 - 1969)
utilizing testing equipment developed for the Mohole project.44 The
most extraordinary development during the years of the project,
however, and the most widely publicized, was the emergence from a
hypothesis suggested by Harry Hess of a unifying concept of global
plate tectonics that for the first time provided an answer to the
question of continental drift and a basis for future research in that
phenomenon in the earth sciences.45
Big Science, Little Science
The Academy's role with respect to phenomenon of"big science,"
that is, of large-scale, long-range national science programs, was
foreshadowed by its acceptance of responsibility for the long-term
Atomic Bomb Casualty Commission for the AEC, the Medical Follow-
up Agency for the Veterans Administration in ~946, and the national
road test program of its Highway Research Board in ~955.46
Although "big science" appeared to be an irresistible force, both
here and abroad, in such programs as oceanography, the space
sciences, high-energy physics, and medicine, it held many perils, not
only in the uncertainties of sustaining such programs, but in the
44 NAS, Annual Reportfor 1963~4, p. 1 17 et seq.; Merle A. Tuve, "International Upper
Mantle Program," (cited above); Philip Abelson, "Deep Earth Sampling." Science
162 :623 (November 8, ~ 968).
45 Upper Mantle Project: United States Program, Final Report (Washington: National
Academy of Sciences, 1971); "Closing the Upper Mantle Project: New Legacies in Earth
Science," NA0NRC, News Report 21 :2-3 (November 1971).
By the end of the Upper Mantle Project, sea-floor spreading had been transformed
from an imaginative insight by Hess to a hypothesis, then to a theory, and, in the minds
of most solid-earth scientists, to an established fact.
Columbia [University] Reports, January 1973, p. 3, described "the discoveries in the
geological sciences in the past decade, particularly in the new global tectonics, a
revolution in geologic ideas comparable to those wrought by the recognition of the
genetic code in biology or of quantum mechanics in physics and chemistry."
46 On the Atomic Bomb Casualty Commission, see Chapter 15, pp. 490-497. On the
follow-up agency see Michael E. DeBakey and Wilbert W. Beebe, "Medical Follow-Up
Studies on Veterans," journal of the American Medical Association 182:1103-1109 (De-
cember ~5, 1962), and NA0NRC, News Report 8:21-25 (March-April 1958). On the
Highway Research Board, see Chapter 9, p. 259, and for its road test program,
see NAS, Annual Report for 1957-58, pp. 4, 45; Ideas and Actions: History of the Highway
~ .' , ~ ~ ,, . in,
Research Board' 1920-1970 (Washington: National Academy of Sciences 1971)9 pp. 73,
-150.
For the Academy9s reluctance to manage large-scale programs, see ``Minutes of the
Council9" December 4, 1954.
OCR for page 585
Academy Centennial 1 585
potential effect on "little science" as well. As the President of the
Academy said,
"big science" (i.e., research in expensive fields such as high-energy physics),
while of recognized importance, must not be allowed to divert support from
nc milch high o''~litv "mall miens" ~~ con he rnncil~rt~~1
1 1
~- All A AlA54A ~.7 OtAt~1 O~ ~O ~~t ~~ Ill . . . ~ [if we define]
"small science" as the efforts of talented individuals, requiring on the average
perhaps $so,ooo a year.47
By the early sixties, while the funding of the new and enormously
expensive high-energy accelerators continued to be debated, both
training and research in small reactors had become available in
universities and research institutions across the country. To assess the
question of the nature of further support for these research reactors,
the NSF, in November ~96z, asked the Academy for an assessment of
current reactor utilization. The request was referred to the Subcom-
mittee on Research Reactors in the Committee on Nuclear Science, at
that time by far the largest and most active committee in the Research
Council's Division of Physical Sciences. The members of the subcom-
mittee, after visiting more than twenty universities and institutions
operating such reactors, reported their approval of AEC and NSF plans
for continued small reactor support.48
Federal programs supporting medicine and medical research
began assuming the characteristics of "big science" in the early sixties.
The Academy's Drug Research Board played an important role with
respect to those programs. The organization of the Board grew out of
the work of a special Academy committee advisory to the Secretary of
Health, Education, and Welfare, convened in ~960 to assess recent
public criticism directed at the Food and Drug Administration (FDA)
concerning the safety of drugs then on the market. Reviewing the
FDA'S regulatory activities, the committee found them "accept-
able" but only because the ~ 938 statute creating the FDA had
been concerned solely with the safety of drugs. Joining others, the
committee urged that FDA be Liven the authority to ban the sale of
47 NAS, Annual Reportfor 1963-64, p. ~7.
Concerning "big science" and "little science," see Basic Research and National Goals
pp. 12 ff., 56 ff., 77 If., ~74 If., 273-275, 299-30~. See also Alvin M. Weinberg, "The
Impact of Large Scale Science on the United States," Science 134:161-164 (July 2~,
~6~), and his Reflections on Big Science (Cambridge: MIT Press, ~967).
48 NAS, Annual Report for 1962-63, p. go; report in NAS Archives: PS: Com on Nuclear
Science: Subcom on Research Reactors: ~964; U.S. Congress, House, Committee on
Science and Astronautics, The National Science Foundation: A General Review of Its First 15
Years, 88th Cong., ~ st sees., ~ 965, pp. ~ ~ - ~ 20.
~-
OCR for page 586
586 / FREDERICK SEITZ (1962—1969)
drugs whose efficacy, as well, had not been proven. The committee
recommended also that an extensive advisory apparatus be created
within the FDA to provide it with continuing policy guidances
Two years later, following the tragic consequences to pregnant
women who had taken the drug thalidomide, Congress amended the
1938 act to strengthen federal control of drug safety. In the private
sector, the Pharmaceutical Manufacturers Association created a
Commission on Drug Safety to consider the principles underlying the
safe introduction of new drugs for general use. In March 1963, with
its final report due to be completed late in the year, the Commission
proposed that thereafter it be transferred to the Academy. At the
same time the FDA proposed a contract with the Academy to provide
authoritative advice on drugs on a continuing basis.50 Instead, the
Academy organized in September ~ 963 the Drug Research Board as a
standing unit in the Division of Medical Sciences, to operate under
contract with the National Institutes of Health.
With William S.; Middleton, Guest Professor at the University of
Oklahoma Medical School, as Chairman, the seventeen-member
Board, drawn from governmental and industrial research labora-
tories and academic institutions, limited itself to an advisory role
rather than undertaking investigations of individual drugs. The
Board saw as its principal tasks the improving of the exchange of
information between physicians and agencies concerned with drugs
and the appraisal of the methods practiced in establishing drug
safety.5~ It set up a succession of ad hoc committees, one of which,
Problems of Drug Safety, later became a standing committee report-
ing to the Board.
The ~ 962 amendments to FDA'S organic act had not only
strengthened the controls on quality, labeling, and safety, but also had
directed the FDA to certify that each new drug had been shown to be
effective for its indicated uses. Although this provision applied
primarily to new drugs, the Commissioner of FDA decided that it
should also be applied to all drugs approved for sale by FDA within the
period ~93~962. With only limited in-house resources, he turned to
the Drug Research Board for the necessary studies.
49 NAS, Annual Reportfor 1960-61, p. 85; "The National Academy of Sciences and Drug
Reform," Saturday Review43 :57-61 (November 5, ~960); NAS Archives: ORG: NAS: Com
Advisory to HEW: ~960.
50 "Minutes of the Governing Board," April 2l, ~963, p. 4, App. 6.~; ibid., September
299~963,P-5'APP-7-2-
5i NAS, Ann~l Report for 1963-64, p. 8~ et seq.
Board: ~963.
; NAS Archives: MED: Drug Research
OCR for page 587
Academy Centennial 1 587
The Drug Research Board, in its advisory capacity, restricted itself
to planning the study. The thirty drug review panels, comprising ~80
research physicians and a policy advisory committee under Dr. Mid-
dleton, were organized as a separate unit, the Drug Efficacy Study,
within the Division of Medical Sciences.
Its first reports, on almost four thousand new drug formulations
introduced on the market between ~938 and ~96~, appeared in the
fall of ~967, the final report two years later. Investigating only the
claims made for their use, the study found "a considerable number"
of the drugs under review to be effective.52
The Centennial Celebration
Amid the accelerating activities of the Academy in the decade of the
Ages, the centennial of its founding occurred, and the event was
marked by a four-day series of brilliant occasions.
Its genesis began in a rather low key. At a meeting of the Council in
October ~ 96 I, Bronk suggested that the centennial celebrations of the
Academy two years hence "should be simple and modest in size," since
the Academy lacked physical facilities for a large assembly. The
Academy would instead, Bronk said, make it the occasion to seek
funds for the final completion of the building, that is, the addition of
an auditorium between the west wing that was then under construc-
tion and a projected east wing.53 Plans for a simple ceremony proved
52 NAS,Annua[Reportfor 1965~6, pp. so . . .1968~9, pp. 78-79; Alfred Gilman,
"The Objectives of the Drug Research Board," Proceedings, Joint Meeting of the Council on
Drugs, American Medical Association with the Drug Research Board of the National Research
Council, October 18-19, 1971 (Washington: National Academy of Sciences, ~97~), pp.
8-~5; Drug Efficacy Study: Final Report to the Commissioner of Food and Drugs, Food and
Drug Administration from the Division of Medical Sciences, Natianal Research Council
(Washington: National Academy of Sciences, ~969), pp. 3, ~2-~3.
53 "Minutes of the Council," October 7, ~96~, p. lo; NAS, Annual Reportfor 1961~2,
pp. 2' 35
For the ultimate completion of the Academy building, see Detlev Bronk, "A National
Focus of Science and Research," Sciencel76:37~379 (April 28, ~972).
Two years later, in March ~974, the Academy was notified by the State Historic
Preservation Officer of the District of Columbia that the Academy building had been
listed in the National Register of Historic Places (correspondence in NAS Archives: P&E:
REAL Estate: Buildings, NAS—NRC).
The Centennial also saw the launching of plans to lease upon construction, an
eight-story office building with underground garage, constructed by and on the
grounds of nearby George Washington University, to be designated the Joseph Henry
Building and to house under one roof the scattered offices of the Academy and
OCR for page 588
588 / FREDERICK SEITZ (1962—1969)
Centennial Convocation of the National Academy of Sciences, October 22, 1963. Left to
right: Jerome B. Wiesner, Science Adviser to the President; President John F. Kennedy;
Detlev W. Bronk, President of the Rockefeller University and Chairman of the
Centennial Committee; Frederick Seitz, President of the Academy (From the archives
of the Academy).
short-lived, however. With the appointment of Bronk's Centennial
Committee early in ~96z,54 and the generous response to his fund-
raising efforts, the planning for the centennial, over which the new
President of the Academy, Frederick Seitz, would preside, expanded.
The four-day celebration in the House of the Academy55 (October
2 I-24, ~963) was an elaborate, resplendent, and memorable event. It
Research Council (NAS, Annual Reportfor 1962~3, pp. 2, 20-21, 34-35; 1966~7, p. 14;
"Minutes of the Council," September 26, 1964, pp. 3-5).
On plans to prepare a history of the Academy for the Centennial, see "Minutes of the
Council," February 12, 1961, p. 2; April 24, 1966, p. 19. The first suggestion for the
One-Hundredth Anniversary appeared in "Minutes of the Academy," April 28, 1953,
p. 10.
54 For that committee of thirteen, augmented by the members of the Academy Council,
see Centennial Program, October 1963, n.p. For the October date, see "Minutes of the
Council," October 6, 1962, pp. 7-8.
55 This recurrent phrase in Academy accounts of the Centennial was probably
Dr. Bronk's, and almost certainly a reference to Solomon's House or College of the Six
Day's Work in Bacon's New Atlantis. See NAS-NRC, News Report 13 :53 (July-August
1963); also NAS, Annual Report for 1950-51, pp. xii, xiii.
OCR for page 589
Academy Centennial I ~j,89
coincided with a peak of activity in national science. Federal support
for science and technology, after a time of consolidation following
World War II, had resumed its advance, rising from approximately
$3 billion in fiscal year ~953-~954 to more than $~4 billion in
~962-~963, and was reflected in Academy-Research Council expen-
ditures as they rose from $5.5 million to $ ~ 3.5 million in that
decade.56
More than 600 Academy members and guests attended the special
receptions, the luncheons, and banquets arranged that week as well
as the scientific sessions held each day in the auditorium of the State
Department, at which twenty-three members of the-Academy pre-
sented papers.57
The presence of Edwin B. Wilson, born in ~ 8~9, provided a
personal link between the Academy's One-Hundredth Anniversary
and its founding. Present at the semicentennial celebration in ~9~3,
E. B. Wilson had heard S. Weir Mitchell, at that time eighty-four and
the oldest living member of the Academy, reminisce about his associa-
tion with Joseph Henry, who had served as the Academy's second
President from ~868 to ~878.58
The Centennial banquet had as guests of honor Sir Howard Florey,
President of the Royal Society of London, the oldest academy of
56 A congressional study in ~964, National Goals and Policies, declared that for the first
time national science policy had assumed "major public dimensions," requiring equal
consideration with economic policy and foreign policy (U.S. Congress, House Select
Committee on Government Research, House Report ~ 94 I, 88th Cong., ad sees.,
December 29, ~964, p. 9).
57 NAS Archives: NAS: Centennial: Scientific Sessions: General. The papers appeared in
the commemorative volume, The Scientific Endeavor: Centennial Celebration of the National
Academy of Sciences (New York: Rockefeller Institute Press, ~965), 33~ pp.
The twenty-three Academy members contributing to the volume were Melvin Calvin,
Geoffrey F. Chew, Theodosius Dobzhansky, l. B. Fisk, William A. Fowler, Jesse L.
Greenstein, H. H. Hess, G. Evelyn Hutchinson, George B. Kistiakowsky, Ernst Mayr,
Neal E. Miller, l. Robert Oppenheimer, George E. Palade, Linus Pauling, I. I. Rabi,
Roger Revelle, T. M. Sonneborn, E. L. Tatum, George Wald, Victor F. Weisskopf,
Fred L. Whipple, Jerome B. Wiesner, and Eugene P. Wigner.
58 NAS, Annual Report for 1963~4, p. lo.
For the planned sequence of events, see Bronk to President Kennedy, August 26,
~963 (NAS Archives: NAS: Centennial: Convocation: General); and, in resume, John S.
Coleman, Executive Secretary, NRC Division of Physical Sciences, to James Gibbons,
University of Notre Dame, January ~4, ~964 (NAS Archives: NAS: Centennial: ~963:
General: ~964).
A ceremony held one week before the celebration, with President Seitz, Postmaster
General John A. Gronouski, Dr. Wiesner, the Academy staff, and the press in
attendance, marked the formal issuance of a commemorative stamp for "Science" in
honor of the Centennial (NAS Archives: NAS: Centennial: Science Postage Stamp: ~ 963).
OCR for page 590
590 / FREDERICK SEITZ (1962—1969)
President John F. Kennedy addressing the Centennial Convocation of the National
Academy of Sciences, October 22, ~963 (From the archives of the Academy).
science; Nathan Marsh Pusey, President of Harvard University, the
oldest university in the United States; Henry Allen Moe, President of
the American Philosophical Society, the oldest learned society in this
country; and Sven O. Horstadius, President of the International
Council of Scientific Unions (~csu).
The banquet was also the occasion for a ceremonial presentation to
Dr. Bronk and his wife of a special Centennial Medal struck in gold,
honoring Dr. Bronk's four years as Chairman of the Academy's
National Research Council, his five years as Foreign Secretary, and
twelve years as President of the Academy.59
The Centennial Convocation was held in Washington's Constitution
Hall on October 22 and brought together in varied and colorful
59 The Rockefeller Institute Review (January-February ~964), p. 23. Additional details of
the celebration appear in NAS, Annual Reportfor 1963-64, pp. ~-~ I, and NAS Archives:
NAS: Centennial: General: ~963. See also Howard Simons, "The Academicians of
Washington," New Scientist 20 :136-139 (October 7, ~963).
The Academy celebration had a sequel: the establishment of a custom of annual
exchange visits between officers and members of the Academy and the Royal Society
for informal discussions centering on interests and problems preoccupying the two
academies.
OCR for page 591
Academy Centennial / 591
academic array some 670 Academy members, members emeriti,
foreign associates and medalists of the Academy, the presidents of
academies of science throughout the world, and representatives of
hundreds of learned societies. The audience also included a large
number of members of U.S. government agencies. All were there to
honor the Academy and to hear President Kennedy speak on the
significance of the anniversary in the history of science in this country.
The President's appearance at the Academy gathering occurred only
one month before his tragic assassination.
Speaking on "A Century of Scientific Conquest," the President
looked both to the past and to the future:
It is impressive to reflect that one hundred years ago in the midst of a savage
fraternal war, the United States Congress established a body devoted to the
advancement of scientific research. The recognition then of the value of
abstract science ran against the grain of our traditional preoccupation with
technology and engineering.... But if I were to name a single thing which
points up the difference this century has made in the American attitude
toward science, it would certainly be the wholehearted understanding today
of the importance of pure science....
I . . . greet this body with particular pleasure, for the range and depth of
scientific achievement represented in this room constitutes the seedbed of our
nation's future.... As a result in large part of the recommendations of this
Academy, the Federal Government enlarged its scientific activities through
such agencies as the Geological Survey, the Weather Bureau, the National
Bureau of Standards, the Forest Service, and many others, but it took the
First World War to bring science into central contact with governmental
policy and it took the Second World War to make scientific counsel an
indispensable function of government....
Recent scientific advances have not only made international cooperation
desirable, but they have made it essential. The ocean, the atmosphere, outer
space, belong not to one nation or one ideology, but to all mankind, and as
science carried out its tasks in the years ahead, it must enlist all its own
disciplines, all nations prepared for the scientific quest, and all men capable of
sympathizing with the scientific impulse.60
~4 Summing-Up
A backward look at the history of the National Academy of Sciences
from ~863 to ~963 shows that those first hundred years witnessed an
60 John F. Kennedy, "A Century of Scientific Conquest," The Scientific Endeavor, pp.
3 ~ 2, 3 ~4; also printed in NAS-NRC, News Report 13 :81-86 (November-December ~ 963).
OCR for page 592
592 / FREDERICK SEITZ (1962 - 1969)
unprecedented acceleration in the growth and understanding of
science and technology. In Lincoln's time, the steam locomotive, still a
relative innovation, promised a new era of transportation across the
vast stretches of the United States. A century later, President Ken-
nedy, in a joint session of the House and Senate, was saying to
Congress:
I believe that this Nation should commit itself to achieving the goal, before
this decade is out, of landing a man on the moon and returning him safely to
earth. No single space project in this period will be more exciting, or more
impressive to mankind, or more important for the long-range exploration of
space; and none will be so difficult or expensive to accomplish.6'
The Act incorporating the National Academy of Sciences that
Lincoln had signed into law on March 3, ~863, had stated, almost
cryptically, that ". . . the Academy shall, whenever called upon by any
department of the Government, investigate, examine, experiment,
and report upon any subject of science or art...."
But the federal government, absorbed in the overwhelming prob-
lems of the Civil War, was only vaguely aware of the existence of the
new body of savants placed at its disposal and knew even less what to
do with it. A few tentative problems, dealing with such matters as
coinage, weights and measures, iron ship hulls, and the purity of
whiskey were presented to the Academy for its advice, but with no
sense of urgency. The relationship between the government and the
Academy grew slowly.
As the Academy marked the first half-century of its existence, the
United States faced the imminence of a world war; and the Academy
responded by creating the National Research Council as an operating
arm to meet the government's burgeoning needs for technical advice.
Before another quarter century had elapsed, this country was once
again at war and turning to the Academy with momentous questions
about an awesome new force about to be unleashed on the world—
atomic energy, with all its implications for war and peace.
But the National Academy of Sciences, in its first century, reflects
far more than the technical problems to which its collective wisdom
has been applied. The research of members, elected over the years in
recognition of distinguished achievement in their fields, represents
much of the scientific knowledge acquired during the last half of the
nineteenth century and the first half of the twentieth.
That growth is dramatically illustrated in the papers that were
61 Congressional Record 107 :~81, 87th Cong., ~ st sees., May 25, ~ 96 ~ .
OCR for page 593
Academy Centennial 1 593
presented during the centennial observance and later published as
The Scientific Endeavor. One sees in the titles of those sessions
the heights to which the human mind aspires: "History of the
Universe," "Nature of Matter," "The Determinants and Evolution of
Life," and under the general rubric, "The Scientific Endeavor," such
large social issues as "Communication and Comprehension of Scien-
tific Knowledge," "The Role of Science in Universities, Government,
and Industry: Science and Public Policy," "Synthesis and Applications
of Scientific Knowledge for Human Use," and "Science in the Satis-
faction of Human Aspiration."
This history has recorded the role of the National Academy of
Sciences in its relationship to the federal government and to the
growth and maturation of science itself. If there has been a sole
constant in that history, it is the Academy's capacity to respond to
changes in the nation, its needs, its perils, its challenges and opportu-
nities. Even as the Academy celebrated its centennial year, changing
public attitudes toward the mission and function of science were
beginning to emerge and the Academy, as it has throughout its
history, began to think in terms of restructuring and redirecting its
. .
Organization to foresee and meet the challenges as they arose.
OCR for page 594
Representative terms from entire chapter:
annual reportfor