34 



Dr. Julius Stratton, provost of MIT, asking "if it would be possible 

 for the tests agreed ui)on to be conducted by MIT as a public service 

 and at no ex])ense to the committee." The following day, Dr. Stratton 

 replied agreeing to have MIT conduct the agreed-upon tests. ^- 



The MIT tests were completed November 7, and a report of results 

 ])re])ared early in December. A transmittal letter to the Senate Small 

 Business Committee was written by Provost Stratton, December 16, 

 and a sealed coj^y of the report was delivered personally to the com- 

 mittee by Goodwin, December 17. That same day the committee 

 released a statement analyzing the report and criticizing the work of 

 the NBS in battery additive testing. 



The release identified eight eft'ects of the additive upon batteries 

 that had been found by the MIT tests, and said that the results of these 

 tests completely supported the claims of the manufacturer. A 15-page 

 commentary by Dr. Laidler accompanied the release; it asserted that 

 the MIT tests were a thorough assessment of the effectiveness of the 

 additive, and were "in sharp contrast to the residts of tests conducted 

 * * * by the National Bureau of Standards." The Laidler statement 

 called the NBS findings "reprehensible," and said the NBS researchers 

 i-esponsible for testing AD-X2 were "simply psychologically incapable 

 of giving battery AD-X2 a fair trial." ^^ 



Dr. Astin later commented on the procedure employed in the MIT 

 tests, and on the resultant eight effects: 



A major couclusiou of the Bureau's investigations with respect to the effect 

 reported by MIT is that the effect is observable in the batteries only with elec- 

 trolyte of extremely dilute acid concentration, so dilute in fact that it appears to 

 be of no significance whatever in normal storage battery operation. ^* 



Reorganization of the Senate imder the Republican majority after 

 the elections of 1952 placed Senator Thye in the chairmanship of 

 the Small Business Committee, but did not change the staff of the 

 committee. At tlie close of the year, Ritchie was endeavoring, with 

 the assistance of the committee staff, to have the Post Office Depart- 

 ment reopen his case. However, his petition was denied, February 18, 

 1953, and the Post Office fraud order went into effect February 24. 

 At this point, Ritchie obtained the help of the new committee chair- 

 man. Senator Thye wrote a transmittal letter to accompany a final 

 petition by Ritchie to Postmaster General Arthur Summerfield to 

 set aside the fraud order. According to Lawrence: "Blake O'Connor 

 delivered the docimients late Friday night, February 27, to Summer- 

 field at his Connecticut Avenue apartment." ^^ Subsequently, the 

 order was set aside, and by the end of March, Dr. Astin's resignation 

 was on the President's desk. 



When a newspaper columnist "exposed" the resignation as having 

 been forced by the AD-X2 issue and the personal hostility of Assistant 

 Secretary Sheaffer, a hearing was convened by the Senate Small 

 Business Committee on the afternoon of the same day, March 31. 



s- Ibid., p. 384. (This information is contained in an extract of a memorandum introduced in tlie record 

 of tlie, hearing by Senator Guy M. Gillette.) 



83 "Senate Unit Flays NBS Battery Test," Washington Post (Dec. 18, 1953), p. 37, col. 3. Also, see 

 Lawrence, op. cit., p. i7. Lawrence supplies a later explanation by Laidler that his commentary had been 

 "written hastily" and that it had been his impression that he was "preparing background material on the 

 basis of which the committee would pursue its investigations." He said that he still stood "behind the 

 opinions expressed in my report," but that he would have worded it differently had he known it was for pub- 

 lication. He also indicated that a final paragraph had been added to his report by someone else. The addi- 

 tional paragraph had hinted that the close association of the NBS scientists with the battery industry might 

 have led them, despite their "considerable scientific distinction," to have made "such grave errors." 



8< Hearings, op. cit., pp. 225-226. 



86 Lawrence, op. cit., p. 19. 



