March 16, 1953

Dear Norton:

Your letter just received. I am relieved to hear that you may come
ont for a visit, as this ie obviously necessary to clear up muwrous
issuss. I've beensso busy the last few weeks I could act. pay proper at~
tention to things that have had to be ¢done--ne.g. your .#, amd Bruce's.
If you pessiblg can manage the visit, 1t would be very useful.

Just tentative thoughts, not conclusions, we aight talk about: the
ms. you sent me may be quite unnecessary. If you go much further slomg the
lines of your present werk, why not publish it Cinder your scle authorship)
and forget ubont the G&L you sent me, moat of vhioh will he slither already
anticipated in J Bact '£2, or superseded.

As to addreas on the motility paner, it would se highly ina>propriate
to either chorge or credit Rockefeller for rork not done thern ct all. I
think we will be able to promide 2 reasonrble numhor of reprints from the
grant. Soeonmey I atili want to discuss the questions of authorsfip of this
paper with Srucs, but, the cutcome of this need not affect ynoxtutart the
possibliity of furnishing reprinte tc you. This again is scathing we could
batter settle personallg. I don't know whether Proae can afford to walt for
our mesting-- just when would it be?

Some of toe questions fou raised about distribution of FA are being
studied with lambda: Larry and Eether halt picked up a super-efficleat
system that givos extrenely high incidence of transduction (better than 1073
per laubda particle) of Gai+ (and, for that actter of Gel- to Gals).

But I mainly wanted to reinforce the likelthood of your viwit, 4 ang
of my remerkxa can do ao.

Hastily,

?,

er

Joshua Lederberg