662 



SCIENCE 



[N. S. Vol. XLIII, No. 1115 



me in describing them as possessing at least 

 average ambitions, with the inevitable re- 

 sult that we have seen some field of scien- 

 tific investigation occupied by two or more 

 bureaus, other and less attractive fields 

 shunned, and even other fields claimed by 

 those bureaus not best qualified to make 

 ■the largest use of the opportunity for crea- 

 tive work. Among ourselves, we know of 

 so many illustrations that no examples need 

 be cited; each of us no doubt feels sure 

 that he can at least specify the sins of other 

 bureaus. This is the competitive system 

 almost at its worst, because it is coun- 

 tenanced by men of scientific training and 

 high ideals of public service. Fortunately, 

 however, the two bureaus of which I have 

 particularly spoken, as well as some others, 

 furnish proof that there can be coordinated 

 effort in federal scientific work. 



I have here referred to the business 

 world, because I believe we must apply 

 some of the same rules to our scientific 

 work. However slight may be the statutory 

 limitations imposed by Congress upon these 

 scientific bureaus, we can not escape the re- 

 quirements of economic law, which is never 

 a dead letter, although too often unread. 

 If in the world of private business the com- 

 petitive system sometimes breaks down and 

 fails to protect the public, so in our nar- 

 rower circle of public business there may 

 be a similar failure of competition to pro- 

 duce the best results. The question is al- 

 ways fair and is sometimes pertinent. How 

 far should these government scientific bu- 

 reaus go in seeking to enlarge their field of 

 usefulness ? Does this competitive spirit by 

 its appeal to individual ambitions make for 

 better public service? To what extent is it 

 good public policy to have the public ser- 

 vants on the qui vive for new opportu- 

 nities to serve, new worlds to discover, new 

 appropriations to get ? Service and discov- 

 ery are the proper ideals of the individual 



investigator, but should even ideals justify 

 trespass and disregard of others? 



First of all, we must agree that however 

 great its advantage as a method of stimu- 

 lating progress, competition must be always 

 fair. If we are to apply the principles of 

 the Sherman Act and the Clayton Law to 

 public business, unfair methods must be 

 ruled out as illegal. I do not believe my 

 comparison is a forced one. You can read 

 decrees of the federal courts that prohibit 

 corporations from doing things that are 

 somewhat similar to practises of which 

 we ourselves have been guilty. In one case, 

 among other items, the defendant corpora- 

 tion was enjoined from making false repre- 

 sentations concerning competitors and from 

 hiring away employees of competitors — 

 simply a twentieth-century echo of the 

 ninth and tenth commandments of the 

 Mosaic law, especially the edict against 

 coveting thy neighbor's man-servant. In 

 the public service proper coordination of 

 work often makes transfers from one bu- 

 reau to another desirable, and so as a means 

 of increasing efficiency such transfers are 

 and should be welcomed, but efficiency from 

 the larger view is attained only when the 

 interests of both bureaus are considered, in 

 which event the individual also profits by 

 his larger opportunity. "With science alive 

 and expanding in so many directions, sub- 

 division and redistribution of functions 

 makes certain interbureau transfers of 

 specialists absolutely necessary. 



Another unfair practise, not counte- 

 nanced by the courts in their regulation of 

 private business, is tricky advertising as a 

 method of meeting real competition. Hon- 

 est advertising must be founded on truth, 

 and even scientific bureaus may need some- 

 times to apply this acid test to the state- 

 ments they give out to the public. Scien- 

 tific investigations whose purpose is to in- 

 crease human knowledge do not find their 



