June 17, 1920] 



NATURE 



501 



There is evidence that these particles are atoms of 

 mass about 3, carrying two charges. Consequently 

 the atom of nitrogen can be disintegrated in two ways 

 by collision with a-particles : one by the escape of 

 .m H atom, and the other by the expulsion of mass 3, 

 and both processes occur independently. Atoms of 

 mass 3 are also released from oxygen atoms, but 

 \ \ atoms cannot be detected. 



It may be concluded, therefore, that atoms of 

 mass 3, carrying two positive charges, are components 

 of the nuclei of nitrogen and oxygen. 



This new atom is to be regarded as an isotope of 

 helium, and should give nearly the same spectrum. 

 The energy of motion of the atom of mass 3 expelled 

 from nitrogen and oxygen is about 8 per cent, greater 

 than the original energy of the a-particle, showing 

 that energy is liberated as a result of the disintegra- 

 tion. The atoms of mass 3 probably consist of three 

 hydrogen nuclei with one binding electron, and atoms 

 f helium of four hydrogen nuclei and two electrons. 

 Apart from hydrogen itself, these atoms are important 

 secondary units in the building up of atomic nuclei. 

 In the light of the new experimental evidence, 

 examples are given of the possible modes of forma- 

 tion of isotopes and possible structures of nitrogen 

 and oxyg-en nuclei are considered. It is pointed out' 

 that close combinations may exist of H nuclei and 

 electrons, giving rise to atoms of zero nuclear charge, 

 and that such a conception is needed to explain the 

 (•volution of the heavy elements. 



The Rockefeller Gift to Medical Science^ 



AS was announced in the Daily Mail of June 11, 

 ■^*- the Rockefeller Foundation for Medical Research 

 has made the generous gift of a sum of 1,205,000/. for 

 the advancement of teaching and research in the 

 Medical School of University College and Hospital. 

 Owing to the inconsiderate and premature manner in 

 which the statement was made public, it is natural 

 that some mistakes should have been made and the 

 objects of the gift in certain respects misunderstood. 



The reason for the delay in making a public an- 

 nouncement is that the Senate of the University of 

 London has as yet had no opportunity of formally 

 accepting the gift. When this had been done it was 

 the intention to make it public through appropriate 

 channels and in such a way that the people of England 

 might appreciate the intention of the donors to give a 

 manifest proof of the friendliness of their feelings 

 towards the work that we are doing here and their 

 appreciation of its value. We have reason to believe 

 that they particularly wish this aspect to be em- 

 phasised. It should be remembered that the object of 

 the Rockefeller Foundation is "the welfare of man- 

 kind," so that its benefits were not intended to be 

 confined to the United States. The members of the 

 Foundation desire it to be regarded as entrusted to 

 them for this purpose, and the present endowment is 

 not meant in any way as a charitable gift. In view 

 of statements to the contrary, it is necessary to make 

 it plain that no conditions are attached, and that the 

 recipients are left free in a very wide sense to make 

 the best use of the money for the benefit of medical 

 science, and especially as to the details of its applica- 

 tion. It will naturally be understood that the manner 

 of its use has been the subject of much discussion 

 between representatives of the Rorkefeller Founda- 

 tion and the institutions receiving the gift. 



With regard to the objects to which it is proposed 

 to devote the endowment, a few words on the historv 

 of the negotiations may be of interest. Towards the 

 end of last year two representatives of the Rockefeller 

 Foundation, Dr. WicklifTe Rose (General Director of 

 NO. 2642, VOL. 105] 



the International Health Board) and Dr. Pearce 

 (.Adviser in Medical Education to the Foundation), 

 arrived in London. Before proceeding further they called 

 at University College. In the absence of Prof. Starling, 

 they were received by the present writer, whom 

 they gave to understand that they had come to make 

 inquiries into the conditions of medical education in 

 London. They were accordingly informed of the 

 recent creation of metlical and surgical "units," of 

 their situations and the names of various gentlemen 

 associated with these units from whom thev might 

 obtain further information. This they proceeded to 

 do. Early in the present year they made another visit 

 to University College with definite proposals, and 

 were seen by Prof. Starling and Prof. Elliot Smith, 

 who showed them what was necessary to be done for 

 the adequate provision of instruction and research in 

 the fundamental sciences of anatomy, physiology, and 

 pharmacology. It was clear to them that the most 

 Dressing need, was the building of a new anatomical 

 institute, although the medical sciences themselves 

 naturally required the larger proportion of any pro- 

 posed gift. 



In .'\pril four representatives of University College 

 and Medical School visited the United States for the 

 purpose of further conference. These were the 

 Provost (Sir Gregory Foster), Dr. Blacker (Dean of 

 the Medical School)." Prof. T. R. Elliott (professor of 

 medicine), and Prof. Elliot Smith (professor of 

 anatomy). , On their return they brought back the 

 definite offer of this extremely generous gift, and 

 speak with the greatest appreciation of the friendli- 

 ness of the manner in which they w'ere received, the 

 spirit in which the offer was made, and in which it 

 was impressed upon them that it should be accepted. 



Owing to the premature publication of the scheme 

 it was necessary to call a general college meeting on 

 Friday last, at which the Provost made a statement 

 of its actual terms. In the words of the Rockefeller 

 Executive Committee, they are as follows: "(i) An 

 institute of anatomy. (2) Increase of clinical facili- 

 ties. (3) Clinical laboratories planned. (4) Increased 

 maintenance costs. (5) Closely unified administra- 

 tion." The Medical School will receive 835,000/. and 

 the College 370,000/. Further details of the ways in 

 which it is proposed to utilise the money will be duly 

 announced. At this meeting Prof. Elliot Smith 

 pointed out that anatomy is to be understood as in- 

 cluding in its purview the microscopic structure of the 

 tissues, embryology, and a study of the factors govern- 

 ing the development of form. It is further to be hoped 

 that the working of the scheme wmU involve a much 

 closer co-operation between the College and the 

 medical dcparttnents, to the advantage of both. 



It is perhaps advisable to direct attention to the 

 fact that the gift is for the purpose of improving 

 medical education and research. At the same time 

 the hospital, as an institution for the cure of patients, 

 will benefit indirectly, although doubtless its working 

 expenses will be increased owing to the enlargement 

 proposed. W. M. Bayliss. 



The Permanent Value of University 

 Benefactions. 



A N account of the opening of the new building of 

 -^*' the Department of Applied Statistics and 

 Eugenics at University College, London, presented by 

 Sir Herbert Bartlett, was given in last week's 

 Nature. The speech made by Prof. Karl Pearson in 

 seconding the vote of thanks to the donor contains 

 certain truths which have a wider application than to 

 the immediate audience, and we therefore reproduce it 



