Cover Image

Not for Sale



View/Hide Left Panel
Click for next page ( 566


The National Academies | 500 Fifth St. N.W. | Washington, D.C. 20001
Copyright © National Academy of Sciences. All rights reserved.
Terms of Use and Privacy Statement



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 9621 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 565
566 / FREDERICK SEITZ (19621060) 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 565
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 565
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 565
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 Presidentsreviewed 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 565
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 565
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 565
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 565
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 565
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 565
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 internationallyin ~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 565
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 565
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 565
586 / FREDERICK SEITZ (19621969) 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 565
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, NASNRC). 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 565
588 / FREDERICK SEITZ (19621969) 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 565
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 565
590 / FREDERICK SEITZ (19621969) 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 565
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 565
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 565
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 565