Department of Biochemistry,
University of Cambridge.

14 December, 1957.
Dear ye hader bers.

The response to my earlier letter and the proposed note to Nature
has been agreeably favourable. ‘The only complete dissentient is Weidel
who says "even a megatherium protoplast is not a protoplast in the old
sense — the very old sense — since it still has a morphologically and
chemically distinct envelope around its proto- or cytoplasm ......° I
should call this envelope the second imermost layer of the Wall ses
++-yrotoplasts, if defined as drops of cytoplasm plus nuclear material
set free from their natural envelope(s) don't seem to have been obtained
by anybody yet."

PiW. Wilson wishes us well but says "I do not think I should sign
such @ note for the simple reason that I am not competent in the field.
We have not done enough work ..... if four or five people ..+. can agree
this would be sufficient to justify the publication of the statement,"

No replies have been received from Gerhardt, Mitchell & Moyle,
Storck and Spisgelman, However, Gerhardt and Storck had earlier personallv
agreed with the general outline.

The draft was also sent to Klieneberger-Nobel who expressed agreement
with it; to Lederberg who says "your criticism about the characterisation of
protoplasts seems to me entirely valid, and it is becoming more and more certain
that different treatments are giving units with varying degrees of impairment
of wall structure and function"; it has also been sent to Fraser with whom.
I have been corresponding for some time. JI have not had a reply to an earlier
letter about definitions nor have I yet heard from him about the note to Nature.

The following are in general agreement and will probably or certainly
sign a joint letter to Nature:

Brenner

Jeynes

Kandler

Kellenberger

Rubio-Huertos

Salton

Strange & Dark

Tomcesik j
Weibull

It seems likely that Gerhardt and Storck also would agree and it is hoped
th * Lederberg will also do so.

In these circumstances I feel it is justifiable to proceed as follows:
I have slightly modified the draft not in the light of various suggestions
and I am sending it to the Editor of Nature with a covering letter saying
that most of the signatures are of people who have formally agreed but that
some have expressed agreement with the contents without specifically indicating
readiness to sign - it will be entirely possible for anyone to withdraw his
name at the proof stage. I would be grateful, therefore, if myone who wishes
to disasso-t-te himself would let me know in writing by return of post so that
the elimination can be made.

Yours sincerely, | C ae ww lw
Sea cn 6s) oo "A ? hu.# We EZ