March 2, 1957

Dear Jia:

Just received yours of the 28th. Obviously, I won't have auch aore tine
to think about Giannini plans for the next month— except ferhaps while
flying from NY-Sfommhen {t might be a useful diversion. So if there are
any further developments, please do write os c/o Ciba,

I am glad to note the information in your letter. Here are some notes
in reply.

Distilied water— if you mean to use this on the first floor, it would be
moot advantageous to have the still on the second. Unless your use is very
modeat, a pipeldne is a tremeddous advantage in convenience and, more to the

int, safety. We can use about half the oupput of al® gallon-per-hour still,
Fotis say about 50 gallons per day, mostly for dishwashing.

Windows: check.

Room-22SE service: is this shown as 40 on the 1929 blueprint? It is marked ©
there as a jani@ar's room. It might be just the neek in which tke to put the
autodave. I am anxious to have this built into one amall room, opening into
the area where it will be used. It is almost impossible to keep the maze of
pipes clean,

It may be necessary to make a new atart on the plans, as fou say. But it
has helped to lay out the principles to make the preliminaries.
I think you are entitled to the following information.

Kenneth Thimann called me Thursday, and this morning I had letters from
him, Ernst Mayr and Dean Bundy, all of course from Harvard. Yes, you guessed at!
I wrote back to tell them of the existing complexities, but that until I had
made an irrevocable commitment elsewhere I could not ignore whatever proposals
they might wish to make. However, I did ask that any such proposals from thes
be authoritative—— Harvard has a long history of temporizing with prospective
candidates. In fact, I first learned that theybwere seriously considering this
one in 1951. While this issue needs a fair hearing, to forestall future regress,
I do not believe that it need add to your concerns. In particular, I hope
it will not eccasion undue haste or preasure on your own dealings with the
administration. While I naturally hope there can be an early affirmation of
our preliminary understanding, and 2 settlement of some of the legalisms and
the financing in due course, I also need some time to get my bearings with
regard to Harvard and dewelopments here at Wisconsin. Curiously enough, Thimann
had not heard of our negotiations, which perhaps speaks for the splendid
isolation of Harvard. (The most unlikely people have commented to me about
Berkeley).

i have also written formally to Stanford, indicating my probable preference
for Berksiey under present circumstances. However, I am looking forward to the
most cordial relations with the Béakfheg group: I hope I judge right that they
have a sympathetic understanding of our motives. Clifford Grobstein has just
signed there. He is a good friend (and an excellent re wisition for Stanford)
and we had a very instructive visit together en route his return to Washington.
I have been encouraging Stanford to consider@ Cavalli for their Genetics appoint-
ment, at least for a year's visiting profeasorship. If I could suggest som
discreet way in whieh the (I trust) equally favorable opinions of ty our
colleagues, e.g., Roger dtanier, could be relayed to Palo Alto.... Genetics at
Berieley certainiy has everything to gain from strong appointments at nearby
inatttutions, and I have of course partioularly strong ties with Cavalli since
our several collaborations. I dou't know whether you could have had occasion
to met Cavalli yourself. But you should know something about him: when we
returned from our California trip, a letter from him was watting, in which he
asked ms to write in support of nis candidacy to you, which I would have no
hesitation in doing.

You may receive some mail for me addressed to your care: please hold 1t
if so. i wiii call you upon arrival at the airport, and will be in touch with
my brother Seymour as regards living arrangements, etc.

Yours sincerely,

J ch epber g
J {:
je

foe
is