372 



SCIENCE 



[N. S. Vol. XL VI. No. 1190 



many to the belief that some modification 

 is desirable of the traditional relationship 

 between the investigator and the material 

 product of his discoveries. In the initia- 

 tion of such changes, of which the present 

 proposal is one among a number which 

 might be suggested, many serious problems 

 present themselves, and we feel that the 

 solution suggested by Professor Robertson 

 should be subjected to careful scrutiny and 

 the fullest possible criticism. We have ac- 

 cordingly requested Professor Robertson 

 to' publish a statement of the fundamental 

 conceptions underlying his proposal, to- 

 gether with the text of the agreement it- 

 self. Professor Robertson's statement fol- 

 lows : 



H. M. Evans (Professor of Anatomy), 



F. P. G-AY (Professor of Pathology), 

 T. Brailsford Robertson (Professor 



of Biochemistry and Pharmacol- 

 ogy), 

 C. L. A. Schmidt (Research Assistant 

 in Pathology), 



G. H. Whipple (Director of the 

 Hooper Foundation for Medical Re- 

 search and Professor of Research 

 Medicine). 



At the present time, as in the historic 

 past, the scientific investigator looks to 

 public or private generosity to supply him 

 with the means of subsistence and the ma- 

 terial prerequisites of his work. This re- 

 lationship of the investigator to the public, 

 while it has been unquestionably fruitful, 

 is nevertheless fraught with many and 

 serious disadvantages. To enumerate but 

 a few of the more salient of these, the in- 

 vestigator is placed in a relationship of 

 direct or indirect dependence upon his 

 patron, a relationship which is not con- 

 ducive to the best 'and most complete 

 mutual understanding and appreciation. 

 The income proceeding from these hap- 

 hazard sources is of variable and unpre- 



dictable magnitude, and bears no necessary 

 relationship whatever to the development 

 of our material environment and the con- 

 current increase in complexity and pro- 

 liferation in detail of scientific problems. 

 The donors to a greater or less extent 

 modify iby their imperfectly informed 

 preferences the channels of expenditure, so 

 that the resources available for the de- 

 velopment of any particular field of re- 

 search are frequently disproportionate to 

 its intrinsic importance. 



It is obvious that a much more desirable 

 condition of affairs might be attained if 

 some automatic mechanism could be de- 

 vised whereby a proportion (and a very 

 small proportion would be sufQcient) of the 

 values created by scientific investigation 

 would flow back to provide the material 

 foundations of further discoveries, just as, 

 at the present time, the intellectual founda- 

 tions of fresh discoveries are automatically 

 afforded by the information flowing in 

 from the discoveries of the past. 



A number of separate attempts to 

 achieve this end have already been made, 

 but while the results achieved have fre- 

 quently been admirable in themselves, they 

 have hitherto failed to afford any pre- 

 cedent which is generally acceptable to 

 scientific men or to the institutions employ- 

 ing them. In some cases individuals have 

 set aside a proportion of the proceeds from 

 their inventions for the support of isolated 

 scientific enterprises, the Solvay Institute 

 in Brussels being a noteworthy instance of 

 this type. In others an institution or an 

 individual affiliated with the institution 

 has entered the commercial field, selling 

 certain articles manufactured in the labor- 

 atory, the proceeds from the sales being 

 devoted to the upbuilding of the institu- 

 tion. Illustrious examples of this method 

 of procediire have been afforded by Behr- 

 ing and by Pawlow. The objection to this 



