1 April 1954

Prof. A. R. Todd, F.R.S.

University Chemical Laboratory

Pembroke Street

Cambridge, England

Dear Alex:

I am very pleased to learn that you have accepted the invitation to come to Washington for the annual meeting of the National Academy of Sciences, and to take part in the symposium on nucleic acids. I am looking forward very much to seeing you.

I apologize for not having been able to answer your letter before this. It arrived a day or two after I had left Pasadena, on a two-weeks’ trip, and I have just seen it now, on my return.

As to the subject of your talk, I think that a review of your work on nucleotides and the evidence for the type of chemical linking in nucleic acids that you have gathered would be quite appropriate - perhaps something like the Bakerian Lecture that you are going to give. As to time, perhaps Sterling Hendricks has already written you. He has arranged for papers to be presented by five speakers in addition to you, and the time available is about three hours. I think that you, as the first speaker, might well have somewhat more than the thirty minutes indicated by these figures - perhaps forty minutes. However, if Dr. Hendricks has given you some contradictory information, you probably should follow his advice. The symposium is not supposed to be primarily an argument among specialists in the field - it is, rather, to inform the members of the National Academy of Sciences about recent work in the interesting field of nucleic acids. There will probably be a few questions from the floor, but in general they will be to clarify the subject rather than to raise doubtful points for argument.

I hope that we can get together for a talk about our mutual interests while you are in Washington. Ava Helen is not going to come with me this time. I shall be staying in the Hotel Washington.

With best regards to Alison, I am

Sincerely yours,

Linus Pauling:W

cc: Dr. Bronk, Dr. Hendricks

2 April, 1954

Dear Peter:

Mama and I have got back from a two-weeks' trip. We spent eight days in Antioch College, Yellow Springs, Ohio. Then I went to Kansas City for a day, to attend a meeting of the American Chemical Society, while Mama went on to Spokane, to visit Aunt Elizabeth. Then she went on to Portland, to see Linda, and I flew there one day later, so that I was there on Saturday and Sunday.

On arriving home I found two packages of Penguin books. I am glad to have them.

Yesterday Bill Freeman came to see me -- he talked to me for about two hours, about the ways in which College Chemistry should be revised. I have decided to prepare the second edition of College Chemistry this summer, and I shall work on it during July and August. I expect that it will be quite a chore. However, it is such a profitable book that the job needs to be done.

I received a telegram inviting me to give the principal address at the annual meeting of the Chemical Institute of Canada, in Toronto, on 21 June 1954, and I accepted. Mama and I are planning to drive to Toronto, and then to drive home, probably in the Porsche. There is a possibility that Linda will go with us, in which case we would use the Riley. We are planning to attend Linda's graduation, in Portland, on 13 June. Then we shall have eight days to drive to Toronto -- we hope to drive through the Canadian Rockies. We shall be back home about 1 July.

We talked with Linda about her European trip. She seems to want to spend a whole year in Europe. We would like to have her with us for a while -- perhaps July and part or all of August. We have seen so little of her in recent years that we think that this would be a good plan. She had said that you were not going to work in the laboratory in Naples, your plans having been changed, and she suggested that she might tour Europe with you during July and August. We told her, however, that it was important for your career that you work in the Cavendish during the period when it is open, and that probably it was only during September that you would be free to tour about on the Continent.

I am not sure what your situation is for the coming year. I judge that you have permission from Bragg to work until 1 July, and that Mott has to decide about you then. Perhaps I am wrong on this point -- has the decision been made already?

Mama and I are rather worried about having Linda alone in France, or even in Germany, although we think that Tubingen might be a nice place for her to spend the winter. On the other hand, we think that the best arrangement that could be made would be for her to live with you in Cambridge. Do you think that you could get a small apartment suitable for the two of you? I think that Linda might well benefit by attending lectures and doing some advanced work in the field of literature, and that arrangements could be made for this even though she were not admitted as a regular student at Cambridge. If there were some job that she could get, not necessarily with pay, as assistant on a scholarly investigation of some kind, I think that she would profit by it. She is not very definite about what she would like to do.

Mrs. Wulf had a postcard from Norman Davidson, saying that he had seen you. Also, Mr. Wilmott has shown us the transparency, of you and the Wilmotts. It is a very nice picture of you.

Love from

[Linus Pauling]

P.S. I am still working on the collagen structure, and the decision has not yet been made as to whether it is right or not. Another couple of weeks, or perhaps months, should tell us.

You may be interested in a smart remark made by ex-President Truman. He spoke at a meeting of the American Chemical Society -- I had already left Kansas City for Portland -- and he commented on our work on blood. He said that he noticed that I had been doing work on red corpuscles recently, but that with the Republican government what it is I probably would be wise to concentrate on white corpuscles in the future.

5 April 1954

President Detlev W. Bronk

National Academy of Sciences

2101 Constitution Avenue

Washington, 25, D.C.

Dear Det:

In answer to your letter of 31 March, I shall say first that I wish to have a table reserved for the Editorial Board of the Proceedings at lunch on Tuesday. I shall send out letters to the members of the Board, asking them to attend if possible.

I think that the suggestion that one or more members be appointed to the Editorial Board from Chicago, in order that they may advise the University of Chicago Press, is a good one.

I do not know whether the members of the Editorial Board in general have been valuable in making efforts to see that manuscripts of real merit are submitted for publication. Would it be possible for someone in your office to check the Proceedings for the last couple of years, to make an up-to-date tabulation of the number of manuscripts submitted by each member of the Editorial Board? This procedure is, of course, not completely reliable in indicating efforts of the members, but it might have some usefulness. Perhaps we could consider dropping from the Board those men who have not submitted any papers (or communicated any), and appointing some men who have communicated or submitted several papers.

I am greatly pleased by the new format of the Proceedings. I thank you for your effective effort in this matter.

Sincerely yours,

Linus Pauling:W

cc: Prof. Wilson

7 April 1954

Dr. Alan T. Waterman, Director

National Science Foundation

Washington 25, D.C.

Dear Dr. Waterman:

I submit herewith an application to the National Science Foundation for a grant for support of research on configurations of polypeptide chains in proteins.

I think that the success that has been obtained in the investigations along this line during recent years indicates that further progress can be made. The problem of determining the structure of proteins is, or course, a very difficult one, and it is hard to predict what can be done; nevertheless, I feel optimistic about it.

Sincerely yours,

Linus Pauling:W

Encl: 15 copies of application

President DuBridge

Linus Pauling

7 April 1954

Lawyer's fee

I enclose a statement by Mr. A. L. Wirin of the lawyer's fee in connection with the hearings before the Industrial Employment Review Board.

I trust that the California Institute of Technology will reimburse Mr. Wirin. I shall not recapitulate the situation, but mention only that the original application for clearance was made by me at the request of Dean Watson, that I asked that a lawyer be provided and engaged Mr. Wirin only a few days before the first hearing, that it was discovered that much of the difficulty resulted from a mistake made by Mr. Ewart, Director of Personnel, in completing the application and by his failure to provide me with a carbon copy, which would have permitted the mistake to be discovered, and that you have now taken action to withdraw the application.

Please let me know if you wish to have additional information from me.

Respectfully yours,

Linus Pauling:W

Encl.

8 April 1954

Mr. Walter E. Quigley

2317 Humboldt Avenue South

Minneapolis 5, Minnesota

Dear Mr. Quigley:

I am sorry not to have much to give you in answer to your letter of 29 March, about the problem of conversion of sea water into fresh water. Several years ago I mentioned the possibility of using nuclear energy for this purpose. I did not, however, prepare a paper for publication, and the figures that I quoted were taken from the A.E.C. literature. I have not kept a file of material on this subject, and in particular do not have anything that is up to date.

The California Institute of Technology has, not, so far as I know, been awarded any federal money for experiments on the sea water-fresh water problem.

There are 136O tons of water in an acre foot. I think that there probably are parts of the world in which fresh water made at sea level from salt water by use of nuclear power, and at a cost of 5 cents per ton, would be economically profitable. There is still some uncertainty about the cost, however, and it may be several years, perhaps a decade, before information about nuclear power plants and the cost of their operation will become available.

I think that the answer to your question about the salt removed from the sea water is that it would simply be dumped back into the sea. It is, of course, possible to remove bromine, magnesium, and other constituents from the sea water, and possibly some by-product of this sort could be profitably separated in the course of the manufacture of the fresh water, but the business would probably not be a great one.

Sincerely yours,

Linus Pauling:W

12 April 1954

Dear Peter:

The letters that you mailed to Portland have been forwarded to us here, and have arrived just after my last letter to you had been sent. I shall take your advice about sending my congratula-tions to Max Perutz.

The suggestion that you make that Linda might get a job in Cambridge, which would keep her busy part of the time and give her some training, seems to me to be a good one. Probably she could do some worth while studying at the same time.

I enclose a check for $425 for you, representing the reimbursement for your trip, and the monthly sum for 1 April.

On Friday I spoke at a conference of private secondary school teachers in the Biltmore Hotel. Mr, Hamilton spoke to me, sending his regards to you. Mama and I have just been looking at the Kodachrome of you and the Wilmotts. It is a fine picture of you.

Love from

[Linus Pauling]

Linus Pauling:W

12 April 1954

Prof. W. Albert Noyes

Department of Chemistry

University of Rochester

Rochester, N.Y.

Dear Albert:

I was very pleased to learn that you are to receive the 1954 Priestley Medal, and I am writing to extend my congratulations to you. Your services to chemistry and to the world have been so great as fully to justify the award to you of the highest honor in American chemistry.

With best regards, I am

Sincerely yours,

Linus Pauling:W

13 April 1954

Dr. H. W. Sternberg

Synthetic Fuels Research Branch

Bureau of Mines

Bruceton, Pa.

Dear Dr. Sternberg:

I have read with interest your paper with your collaborators, in the last issue of the Journal of the American Chemical Society, and I am writing to ask if you have made arrangements to have your compounds investigated by x-ray diffraction and electron diffraction. If not, perhaps we could do this work.

I think that the compound dicobalt hexacarbonyl acetylene, which boils at about 65° with 4 millimeters pressure, would be well suited to an electron-diffraction study of the gas molecules, and also that it would be worth while to check up on the structure of the compound with diphenyl acetylene by x-ray diffraction.

Please let me know if you would be interested in having this structural work done, and if you could supply us with the materials.

Sincerely yours,

Linus Pauling:W

14 April 1954

TO MEMBERS OF THE EDITORIAL BOARD OF THE PROCEEDINGS OF THE NATIONAL ACADEMY OF SCIENCES

Gentlemen:

I am writing to ask that those members of the Editorial Board of the Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences who are in Washington for the coming meeting of the Academy attending a meeting of the Board during the lunch period on Tuesday 27 April. A table will be reserved for this purpose.

The following topics will be discussed:

(1) Should the Proceedings be copyrighted? The result of the recent poll is inconclusive. Of those who returned ballots, 8 favored copyrighting, 2 were neutral, and 6 were opposed.

(2) Should the Editorial Board of the Proceedings be changed in name, to Advisory Board?

(3) Should some action be taken to obtain wider circulation of the Proceedings?

(4) Should some of the Editorial Board take action to stimulate members of the Academy to submit more important papers to the Proceedings?

(5) Should any change in regulations be recommended to the Council?

I shall look forward to seeing you in Washington.

Sincerely yours,

Linus Pauling:W

(Talk at a meeting at the First Unitarian Church of Los Angeles, 8 P.M., Thursday 15 April 1954. Arranged by the Unitarian Church - I was invited by Mr. Fritchman.)

THE WORLD PROBLEM AMD THE HYDROGEN BOMB, by Linus Pauling

During the last few months some hydrogen bombs were exploded, and information about the destructive power that they have been shown actually to possess has been released to the public*

We - everybody in the world - must consider this information, and decide what its significance is, and what must be done if the world is to be saved for posterity.

The time has come when man must show whether he is properly called homo sapiens, or whether he is still an unthinking brute.

First, I may mention that the hydrogen bomb itself is not the worst weapon that could be built - it is outdone as a death-dealing instrument by the cobalt bomb, which has not yet been tried out on a large scale. But the hydrogen bomb itself is enough to force us to consider the direction in which the world is moving, and to reach a decision about the future of the world.

Let me summarize our present situation. In 1939, through the work of scientists in England, Italy, France, Germany, the United States, and other countries, it became evident that it was possible to release the energy locked up in the nuclei of heavy atoms* The leading scientists in Germany decided that the release of the energy would probably be so slow that, although it could be used as a source of power, it could not be used in a bomb. The leading scientists in the United States, England, and France felt that it was likely that the energy could be released in the time of a millionth of a second, and that bombs equivalent to thousands of ordinary block-busters could be made. The atom-bomb project was begun, and it resulted in the manufacture of atom bombs by 1944.

The atom bomb that was dropped on Hiroshima consisted of a small amount - a few pounds - of uranium 235, which had been separated from ordinary uranium in a plant in Oak Ridge. An ordinary explosive is used to compress suddenly the mass of the ball of uranium 235 into a smaller volume; when this is done, the nuclei react, in a millionth of a second, splitting into half nuclei, and releasing a quantity of energy around a million times that released in the explosion of the same amount of nitroglycerine or TNT. You know that a pound of TNT exploded in this room would kill many people. A ton of TNT - a block-buster bomb, as it used to be called - would destroy most of the buildings in this block. The atom bomb exploded at Hiroshima killed eighty thousand people, and injured many more - this bomb had the explosive power of twenty thousand tons of TNT. The atom bomb detonated a few days later over Nagasaki destroyed the center of this city and killed another hundred thousand people - this bomb was of a different kind, made from plutonium 239.

Scores of atom bombs have been detonated since then, in the United States, South Pacific, Australia, and Russia. It has been reported that the latest models of atom bombs are around ten or twenty times as destructive as the original ones.

No announcement has been made as to the number of atom bombs that are stored up in the arsenals of the leading countries of the world, but a recent newspaper report said that the informed guesses lie in the region of five thousand atom bombs in the United States, five hundred atom bombs in Russia.

Scientists recognized early that still more destructive bombs could be made. The energy radiated by the sun arises not from the fission of the nuclei of heavy atoms, but from the fusion of light nuclei - the reaction of four protons, the nuclei of hydrogen atoms, to form a helium nucleus. The first serious mention of fusion bombs in the literature, so far as I know, was in a book by an Austrian physicist, Dr. Hans Thirring, published in Vienna in 1946. In this book he gave a detailed description of several kinds of hydrogen bombs, which might possibly be made. One of them consists of say a ton of heavy hydrogen surrounding an ordinary Plutonium atom bomb. The ordinary atom bomb is to serve simply as the detonator of the hydrogen bomb - to raise the hydrogen to a high enough temperature to cause it to react. The reaction leads to the formation of helium, and to the evolution of energy, for about a ton of hydrogen, one thousand times as great as that for an atom bomb. Thirring also described the lithium hydride bomb, in which a lithium nucleus and a hydrogen nucleus fuse together and split to form two helium nuclei. The materials for the heavy hydrogen bomb are expensive; lithium hydride, however, is a cheap substance, and hydrogen bombs made of it might cost far less, per unit of destructive power, than ordinary atom bombs.

I have seen a statement that the hydrogen bombs that have already been exploded in the South Pacific have an explosive power between two and fourteen million tons of TNT; the largest one is thus described as a fourteen megaton bomb, meaning equivalent to fourteen million tons of TNT.

This bomb would destroy practically everything within an area of one thousand square miles - that is, within a circle about thirty-five miles in diameter. One of these bombs detonated over New York would destroy the whole city, out to the suburbs, and might kill five million people. One of them detonated over Los Angeles would destroy this city, perhaps killing two million people.

It is possible, simply by using larger amounts of material, to make a single hydrogen bomb many times as powerful as the fourteen megaton bomb. President Eisenhower has announced, a few days ago, that the United States does not intend to make larger hydrogen bombs, because there is no need to have any larger bombs. This is, of course, true - there is no city in the world that would not be completely destroyed by a single hydrogen bomb of the size of the largest one already tried out.

Part of the danger from atom bombs and hydrogen bombs lies in the radioactive material that they produce. Japanese fishermen eighty miles from the hydrogen bomb explosion were burned by radioactive ash that fell on their ship. Many radioactive fish had to be destroyed in Japan - even fish caught by fishermen two thousand miles from the scene of the explosion. The effect of radioactivity can be very greatly increased by a simple process -just the addition of some cobalt to the atomic bomb or hydrogen bomb. A few years ago there was published an article in the Bulletin of the Atomic Scientists, which contains many valuable and illuminating articles, by a scientist in the University of Chicago, who asked whether the cobalt bomb might not be used to wipe out life on the earth. He calculated that for an expenditure of about thirty billion dollars enough cobalt bombs could be made to kill everybody on earth. For two or three billion dollars enough cobalt bombs could be made to kill everybody - animals too - in the United States, simply by detonating them off the western coast, and in other suitable places, and allowing the winds to carry the products of detonation across the country. Probably some millions of people would be killed elsewhere too. What is the answer to the problem posed by the existence of great arsenals of atom bombs and the existence of the hydrogen bomb? Is it that the United States must be overwhelmingly powerful, as said a few days ago by ex-Vice President Barclay? No, this is not the answer, because if our policy were for us to be overwhelmingly powerful, we could expect that the Russian policy would be for Russia to be overwhelmingly powerful. Then the world would surely see the third world war - a hydrogen-bomb war. No matter how quickly this war got under way, neither side could expect to avoid devastating hydrogen-bomb damage or atom-bomb damage.

There is no effective defense against these great weapons of destruction. We might hope that fifty percent of the airplanes or guided missiles carrying atom bombs or hydrogen bombs that are launched against American cities could be shot down. The most optimistic estimate that I have seen is that possibly ninety percent could be shot down. If we accept this, all that would be necessary would be for around ten or twenty missiles carrying hydrogen bombs to be launched toward New York probably one or two of them -more probably still, several - would escape being shot down and would explode over the city. Then New York would be destroyed. While we were losing our major cities, we might be able to cause equally great damage in Russia.

Is this a prospect that we should look forward to? It is not. We cannot allow the world to move forward to this end. The United States should be proud to take the lead in averting this greatest of all world disasters.

A few years ago Henry L. Stimson, former Secretary of War, said "No American can contemplate what Mr. Churchill has referred to as 'this terrible means of maintaining the rule of law in the world' without a determination that after this war is over this great force shall be used for the welfare and not the destruction of mankind."

We must agree with Mr. Stimson that atomic energy should be used for the welfare and not the destruction of mankind. The statement of Mr. Churchill that "atom bombs are a terrible means of maintaining the rule of law in the world" is no longer valid. The atom bomb and the hydrogen bomb have become powerful weapons of destruction in the hands of powerful nations, opposed to one another. If international affairs continue along the lines characteristic of the whole past history of the world, we shall sooner or later see the outbreak of a hydrogen-bomb war. No nation will benefit from such a war - it may be expected confidently that a hydrogen-bomb war, if it comes, will result in the destruction of most of the cities in the world, the death of hundreds of millions of people, the end of the present civilized world.

There is only one way in which this end can be avoided. This way is to work for peace in the world. In the past each great nation has attempted, in its diplomatic negotiations with other nations, to achieve results which benefit itself preferentially over other nations. Negotiations between nations have not in general been carried out on a high ethical plane. The representatives of a nation do not ask whether an agreement that is being made - or a declaration of war - will benefit the world as a whole, but only whether the act will benefit one's own nation. The time has now come when it is to the advantage of everybody in the world, of every nation in the world, to solve international problems in a peaceful manner - which necessarily means in a just and ethical manner - and not to solve them by force, by that ultimate resource of powerful injustice, war.

We have not yet seen either the Russian diplomats or the American diplomats attacking world problems in this way. Bluster, the issuance of ultimatums, and threats of war are still the approved methods of world diplomacy. The United Spates has a get-tough policy against Russia - last week there was an official announcement which mentioned hydrogen bombs and instant and massive retaliation if the Communists were to intervene in any way in Indo-China.

We shall have war in the world - hydrogen-bomb war, leading to the destruction of civilization - unless the decision is made to give up war as the method of decision in international affairs.

Continued negotiation, arbitration, analysis of international problems will have to be carried out - year after year. We should be willing to spend billions of dollars every year to achieve permanent peace. The machinery of arbitration – the United Nations in particular - is as yet not large enough to meet the needs in the modern world. We need a stronger United Nations, and ultimately a World Government.

Because our point of view is different from that of the Russians, we must expect arbitration to result in what seems to each side to be appeasement of the other side. We must work through the United Nations, to find what actions we can take to meet the needs and desires of Russia, and what actions Russia can take to meet the needs and desires of the United States and other nations. There are many other ways - liberation of oppressed colonial peoples, raising the standard of living - in which effective action can be taken for the avoidance of war; we should have a Department of Peace, in Washington, to attack this problem in a broad way.

I am sure that peace can be achieved if the effort is made - and the hydrogen bomb requires that the effort be made. For eight years there has been discussion about international control of atomic energy. The position of the United States and the position of Russia on this question do not differ very much. The Russians have asked for abolition of atomic weapons, and for international control. The United States has asked for international control of atomic weapons and energy, with inspection of all countries. The Russians have asked for universal disarmament or reduction in armaments - this step would, of course, be of the greatest value to the world, in releasing materials and labor needed for improving the standard of living of the people of the world, and thus combating one of the principal causes of war. The differences between the East and the West about disarmament and international control of atomic energy are relatively minor ones, which could in time be settled by discussion and arbitration if there were a strong enough desire to settle them.

During the preceding hundreds and thousands of years the world has seen the steady development of more and more powerful weapons of destruction. At each stage the opinion was expressed that war had at last become so terrible that it would have to be abandoned as a means of settling differences among nations. This belief has in the past been found to be false, even though twenty million people were killed in the first world war, one hundred million in the second world war. Now, however, we are forced to accept the conclusion that atom bombs and hydrogen bombs can destroy civilization on earth. War must be outlawed, be abandoned as a means of settling differences among the nations of the earth. The time has come for man to show that he has the power of reason, that he can behave in accordance with high ethical and moral principles, that, recognizing the universal brotherhood of man, and putting into practice the teaching of the world’s great religious leaders, he can take action that will preserve civilization and humanity.

16 April 1954

Dear Peter:

I forgot to enclose your check in the letter. Here it is now - for $550, to include the allowances for 1 April and 1 May 1954.

I have written letters of congratulation to F. E. King in Nottingham, and Pringle, as well as Max Perutz. A number of our friends were elected to the Royal Society this time.

You no doubt had noticed that Lady Robinson died. Mama had a letter from her only about six weeks ago.

I think that it would be fine if you could scare up a job for Linda. I think that she liked the job that she had as computer, on crystal structure work, one summer. You know that she likes mathematics. Mama and I hope that you will not allow her proposed trip to cause you to take an unduly long vacation this summer.

Love from

[Linus Pauling]

Encl.

16 April 1954

Sir Robert Robinson

Dyson Perrins Laboratory

South Parks Road

Oxford, England

Dear Sir Robert:

My wife and I were shocked to learn that Lady Robinson had died, and I am writing to express our sympathy to you.

My wife received a letter from Lady Robinson only a short time ago. We had been thinking about you and her, and had spoken about the possibility of our seeing you again when we make our next trip to Europe (at present not scheduled).

We enjoyed very much being with Lady Robinson (and with you also) in New Brunswick. We also remember with happiness our last visit to your home in Oxford.

I have heard that you are planning to retire this year. Is there any chance that you could consider coming to Pasadena for a while?

My wife joins me in expressing our deep affection for you.

Sincerely yours,

Linus Pauling:W

APR 18

1954

Dear Love,

We are having a beautiful trip over the desert. The hills rise out of the sand like islands out of the sea. The watercourses are marked by a double row of bushes. Love from

Paddy

P.S. The LA Times resorts to the Big Lie. Their headline "State Dept. Supports Nixon about Indochina."

19 April 1954

Dean Elmer E. Anderson

Deep Springs

Deep Springs, Calif.

Dear Dean Anderson:

I find that I can get away from Pasadena on the weekend of 14 May. Probably my wife and I will arrive in Deep Springs about noon on Friday 14 May. I am not sure when we shall have to start home again.

It seems unlikely that we shall be able to bring Crellin, who will, I think, have to stay in Pasadena in order to attend school.

I thank you for inviting us.

Sincerely yours,

Dictated by Linus Pauling

Signed in his absence:W

Wednesday noon.

Dearest love:

I have been counting up the time on this trip - away from you - I wish that you were with me. It is like valences resonating among the 12 bonds in closest packing: there are twelve days to go by, & after one day 1/12 was over, after two days 1/6, after three 1/4 (now); tomorrow 1/3, then 5/12, and on Saturday 1/2. Then 5/12 to go, 1/3, 1/4, 1/6, 1/12 - and home again!

The air trips to Dallas on Sunday and to Philadelphia yesterday were fine. The desert mountains, plains were beautiful - without you to talk to, I looked out a great deal. No one sat with me on either trip.

The stay with Ogden Baine in Sou. Meth. U. was well worth while. He made some excellent suggestions about revising Col. Chem. Sunday night there was a dinner at his house; the Slobads were there - we had gone to their house 3 years ago after my talk. Monday evening I gave a talk at Baylor Hospital on abnormal hemoglobins. Dr. Smith said that their work was

[page 2]

in the field of molecular medicine, which would in the future probably be attributed to me as its originator.

Yesterday I registered here, & then took the train to Wilmington, recorded a radio broadcast, had dinner (saw Billmeyer, Blaker, [?] his wife, who worked for Dr Corey, Dr Mosher (from Salem)), gave my talk, and caught the 9:42 PM back to Philadelphia. A man who got on the train at the same time spoke to me, saying that he was a chemist, & had worked at cancer research with Dr Creech here. He talked to me, about my 1940 antibody paper, during the half-hour trip.

There is something new in customer relations at the Benjamin Franklin. The waitress (the nice looking one who often serves us) this morning said to me "Here's your waffle, honey."

I must go soon to the APS Council meeting.

Love from

Paddy

[on top of the leader head LP writes:]

The Murphy grandson is going to Reed next year. Why not get Amos as ass't to Fritschman?

AN Richards said that he is accelerating toward death.

Thursday, 10 ^oo PM

Dearest little love:

Many people have asked for you. Chaney said that the greatest attraction of the APS meeting was missing this year. Mrs Beams, Mrs Murphy, Aydelotte, AN Richards, RT Birge, Mrs Boring, Mrs Bridgman, Karl Darrow, Dobzhansky, Sam Goudsmit + Mrs G., Walter Miles, Mrs Shaffer, Shull + Mrs Shull, Mrs Hugh Taylor, + others asked why you weren't here.

I met Felix Frankfurter. He talked this morning-not too well. Judge Briggs gave an excellent talk, about crime + insanity. I pre-sided this afternoon. The program was only passable. Bob R.'s talk was not bad (He is going back into Gov't work.) Unfortunately Carl Cori didn't turn up-perhaps Gerti is too sick.

I sat with Bernadotte E. Schmitt, who said that he used to be in the

over

[page 2]

State Dep't, but wouldn't go back now-also with the Murphys , the Sioussats ( Mrs S. used to be Mrs Dillon. She is lively, for ~ 75. She used to travel in the Western Wilds), Moes. The Wendell Stanleys are here. They have sat by me several times-they say Linda probably knows more about Wendell's situation than they do. Wendell seemed to feel that young W. is sensible in attacking his problems, such as the draft.

Paul Weiss is moving to N.Y.-the Rockefeller Institute.

Warren Weaver is in good shape. He gave a fine talk on Lewis Carroll.

Your two letters arrived this morning. I had finished my Nation article + mailed it at 2:30 AM, but I think the stone information would not have caused me to write differently.

I bought three books @ 15¢ at Leary's Bookstore + am reading them.

Last night a Weizmann Institute man came + asked me to speak at " " Fund-raising dinners in Tucson, May 27, + Tulsa, June 6. I agreed, of course, although it means two more short trips.

I adore you. I wish you were here.

Paddy.

Sent to The Nation. 22 April 1954

The suspension of Dr. J. Robert Oppenheimer, as a security risk, from his advisory activities to the Atomic Energy Commission, constitutes a disgraceful act on the part of the government of the United States. This display of ingratitude toward a man who has been foremost among the scientists of the country in unselfish service to the nation cannot be justified by any rational argument. His reputation has been seriously damaged; and it will remain damaged, no matter what is the outcome of his loyalty hearing.

The members of the Editorial Board of the Bulletin of the Atomic Scientists, all of whom know Dr. Oppenheimer well, have described the action of the Government as "contrary to decency and common sense," and have summarized their opinion in the following words:

"It seems to us a breach of faith on the part of the Government to call upon a man to assume such heavy responsibilities in full knowledge of his life history and then, after he has demonstrably done his best and given the most valuable services to the nation, to use the facts which were known all the time to cast aspersions on his integrity."

There is no question about Dr. Oppenheimer's loyalty. It is stated, and he has himself announced, that in the 1930's he had among his friends some who were interested in communism and social and political questions, and who may have been communists. In the 1940's and 1950's he devoted most of his time, energy, and extraordinary ability in outstanding service to the nation. Throughout this recent period he has sacrificed his own career as a productive scientist in order to perform a public service. Few men have better deserved the nation's highest award to civilians, the Presidential Medal for Merit, which was presented to him by President Truman at the end of the war.

[This paragraph was struck through by Pauling] He has since 1940 been closely associated with the leading men in the government and the armed services. His appointment as director of the Atomic Bomb Laboratory at Los Alamos was made by General Groves with full knowledge of his earlier associations.

The conclusion that Dr. Oppenheimer is a loyal and patriotic American must be reached by any sensible person who considers the facts. It must have been reached by the officials of the AEC, and by President Eisenhower himself. We are accordingly forced to conclude that the recent action is the result of political considerations, that Dr. Oppenheimer has been sacrificed by the Government to protect itself against McCarthyism.

This action is sure to have serious consequences to the nation. It may be expected that many thoughtful scientists will decide that it is dangerous to make an important contribution to the national welfare, and that they should not accept employment in government agencies, or should be careful that their contributions are not outstanding.

It has been said that Dr. Oppenheimer opposed the H-bomb program at the time, 1949, when the initiation of this program was under consideration. The members of the Editorial Board of the Bulletin of the Atomic Scientists have commented on this point in the following words: "So far as his objections (to making a hydrogen bomb) were moral and political, he was entitled to his opinion as a man, and it would be absurd to say that all doubts on these scores have been resolved or can ever be resolved."

[This paragraph was struck through by Pauling] Moreover, his opinions about the H-bomb program were expressed in connection with his advisory duties to the Government. Are we entering that dangerous period in the history of a nation when, after a political or administrative decision is made, government officials and citizens are to be punished for having advanced opposing arguments during the discussion preceding the decision?

Dr. Oppenheimer is to be commended if he advanced moral and ethical arguments against the manufacture of that greatest of all weapons of mass destruction, the H-bomb. Nine years ago atom bombs were used, without warning, to kill hundreds of thousands of civilians - men, women, and children, innocent except for being citizens of an enemy country. The use of H-bombs will permit the slaughter not of hundreds of thousands, but of millions of innocent people, in a single explosion. There is no conceivable system of ethical and moral principles that would permit A-bombs and H-bombs to be used by a nation to force other nations to accept political decisions or to attempt to benefit itself at the expense of the rest of the world.

In 1949, when scientists knew that H-bombs could be made, the Government might have followed the course of initiating vigorous negotiation with the rest of the world to achieve a system of general disarmament, abolition of atomic weapons, and settlement of differences between nations through arbitration, with use of strengthened UN. Now, when hydrogen bombs have been made and exploded, there no longer remains even the slightest doubt that their use in war would be a catastrophe for the world, would cause the end of civilization. Instead of raising trivial questions about Dr. Oppenheimer's loyalty, which he has demonstrated time and again since 1940 through his deeds, the Government should be asking him to use his great intellectual ability, in collaboration with many other outstandingly able physical scientists, social scientists, and specialists on international relations and other aspects of the world problem, to find a practical alternative to the madness, the evil, of atomic barbarism.

The world is now ready for peace - permanent peace. Charles E. Wilson, the Secretary of Defense, said on April 19 that "the Russians are more afraid of us than we are of them, and their build-up has been a defensive build-up." Great Britain, France, and other nations are apprehensive of atomic war. The world problems that must be solved are great ones, but they can be solved if man's intelligence and ingenuity are used for this purpose rather than for devising new methods of waging war. I would be proud to see the United States take the lead in bringing sanity into the world, abolishing the terrifying threat of a hydrogen-bomb war and its destruction of civilization, and initiating a future of world-wide law and order.

10 PM Friday

Dearest love:

We've had our annual dinner. I wore my beautiful pearl studs--also pants, shirt, etc. The speaker wasn't there - he was sick, + Roberts gave the address. It was very good. He said he would give us the organization chart of the Phil. Soc.

[the diagram is written in outline form:]

Miss Noonan

|

Eisenhart--------------------------------------------------Lingelbach

| |

| |

| |

The vice-presidents The Janitor

|

|

|

The president

Mrs. Sioussat said that we should visit them sometime in Washington. She said that she once drove 910 miles in one day - alone - bringing trout from the Rockies to Los Angeles.

I talked with Aydelotte before dinner, standing + thinking that he looked bad. He said, "Let's sit down", + suddenly fell backwards into a big chair, which slid + struck a big screen.

Did you know that he was knighted?

I read a book every day, and go to sleep about 2AM.

The dinner was shad with roe.

Chaney says that chinese are all dishonest - not the chinese communists, but all of them. He says that he likes them very much. I think he means that their culture is such that you should not take what they say at its face value.

Do you remember that Simpson said that Peale's Mastodon had been sold to PT Barnum + lost in a fire? Now he has found it - in the museum at Darmstadt, which bought it in ~1854.

Mrs. Bernadotte Schmidt likes Max Mason. She is a cousin of Seth Nicholson.

Love from your

Paddy

Emeneau in his talk today said that Ava is Dravidian for "Oh, my mother" (vocative, I suppose).

5 ³⁰ PM Saturday

Dearest little love:

Nothing much has happened today. The business meeting this morning was dull-the only amusement came when, after half the ballots had been cast, the President announced th[at] by error the name Graham appeared on the printed ballot where it should be Goddard and that he accordingly ruled that every vote cast for Graham was to be taken to be a vote for Goddard. This action made the ballotting [sic] seem farcical.

Oliver Buckley (Bell Labs) was elected VP, filling my place. He walks badly, as the result of a stroke.

[page 2]

This afternoon Dr. Robb of DuPont took me to see a psychiatrist, Dr Freed. Robb is trying to get me interested in mental disease.

I can't see Pat, because their name is not in the phone book, and I don't remember where they live.

I've looked over the movies, but they look poor. I think I'll have dinner, go to bed, and read a while.

Love from

Paddy

9 PM Sunday

Dearest little love:

I adore you. I'll be glad when I get home to you.

Today is rather warm + humid here. I read the Sunday Times + took the noon train, then talked with a young Army doctor who had made an appointment with me. I went to dinner with Alex, John Edsall, Joel H., and Jack Williams — I ate soft-shell crabs. I've been talking to Alex — he saw Peter about noon yesterday, and says that he looks fine.

Last night I decided to go to a movie. That was a mistake. It was a musical comedy, but misnamed in both respects. The star was the girl who was in the one we saw — wild west, saloons, etc.

The last Life has three 2-page color ads ^ ^{and one 1}-page about power mowers. Dr. Slobad in Dallas says that rotary mower will cut weeds as well as grass. I've written several places for literature. We need a power-propelled rotary; the Toro Co's is $219.95.

I still have 5/12 of this trip to go. I'm tired of being away from you.

[page 2]

I have just seen Herman + Edna Schlesinger. They drove from Chicago — no accident this time. Herman said that Phoebe's sister had a stroke + is an invalid, + that Phoebe takes care of her. Thorfin is still running his gov't contract.

Tomorrow afternoon is my symposium. Alex is the first speaker; then Crick, then Watson, etc.

I think I'll take a bath + go to bed.

Love from

Paddy

26 April 1954

Dearest Love,

Your letter came today. I'm very worried about Dan. I wish that I had spoken to him when you told me how badly he looked. I hope he comes through all right.

I have first bought a copy of New Republic. Much of it seems good to me, but a few sentences are bad-either wrong or misunderstandable.

Crelly must take better care of himself.

Today we had our symposium-very good papers, but a bit crowded in time, so that I couldn't allow much discussion.

I've just had dinner with Alex, Pete Hughes + his wife, + a dozen others. I decided not to go to the evening meeting. Bill Shockley is getting a medal.

Tomorrow is the business meeting. There may he some fuss about the Oppenheimer affair, and about the government generally.

I've begun sneezing but I don't think

[page 2]

that I'll catch cold. I'll go to be early.

The azaleas and dog woods are marvelous. I haven't seen the cherry trees here, but there were some wonderful ones in Philadelphia-along that East Bank road. We drove that way to see the psychiatrist.

Love from

Paddy

P.S. Tell Crellin that I said for him to obey you, or I'll scalp him.

Paddy

1/4 of trip still to go!

28 April 1954

Mrs. Mary Sheppard

American Association for the Advancement of Science

1515 Massachusetts Avenue, N.W.

Washington 5, D.C.

Dear Mrs. Sheppard:

I am enclosing Professor Pauling's review of NATURE AND STRUCTURE OF COLLAGEN, which you asked him to write. He will appreciate reading proof on the review.

Sincerely yours,

Executive Secretary Gates and Crellin Laboratories

W