II

Manuscripts Department, Lilly Library

Tndiana University, Bloomington,

Sonneborn mss.

 

3
S
@
to
rd
G
re

 

this Material

; is covered by copyright and may not be
; quoted or reproduced without permission

' £0r nererence Use Only.
~< of copyright holder.

 

yt

4 Vig sw

    
     
  
   

 

Dr. M. Demeree * 2

Biological ‘Laboratory |

14 Cold Spring Harbor” .
‘Long Island, New York

   
  

   

 

Dear ‘Dr. Demerec reo

      

OS After’ a:long telephone conversation with Lindegren, I have agreed 3
o make a few minor changes in my discussion of his. paper. I'am erelosing” _ ...
the revised discussion and am.sending a copy of it to Liniegren. ern

      
  
 

 

 

=e 4, “h

“ -°.Twant to make very clear to you that I dbject strongly ani
seriously:-to the efforts Liniegren has. made and continues: to make to |”. *
squelch all criticism of his ‘work, Hetried to argue me out of publishing S

 

_ = my criticism by maintaining that my main’ point has been experimentally . ; ee
_ x’ answered .- The “experimental answers" he speaks of are not in his-paper, .~
~': and he- finally admitted this, but then said they are-in another paper not o
-..ayet published, Nevertheless, he wished. me to delete my criticisms bee ~~
"3; cause of these "ars wers" which I'lmve net yet seen. Frankly, I. have no 2.0.
‘Ii confidence in his judgment as to what constitutes: valid evidence and T am
" ¢ Unwilling to delete my criticism unlesa I ‘see the evidence myselZ?, You
will recall that he, and apparently Spiegelman, maintained his present ree
‘vised manuscript answered my criticisms which they prevailed upon you BO ge
-.delete, . When I’ saw the paper = which Idmegren never sent me though Cog ee 2S
“Spiegelman said he would - i found their claims were totally unsupported, :
don't Like the smell of the whole, business. <9). 0: fu Bn

   

   
 
 
  
 
   

 

      

 

Sy In my conversation with Liniegren just’ now, I.mde him promise
to make clear the source and nature of the évidence he cites in answer 3
- to my criticism, particularly to state that the evidence is not in the.
“3 paper ‘I eriticized: or in any. that has’ yet appeared in print. I am dem
- pending on you to check ani-see that he fulfills that promiss.. Other=
~ wise, it would be only fair'to-let me have a chance to reply to his a
‘answer which: if it follows the line he told me over tha phone, is, in
_. my opinion, ridiculous and a violation of elementary scientific principles, « .

2

Loe, '. I.realize that the volume must-go to press quickly and that
this bickering is holding it up. On the other hand, the issues involved
are fundamental for the maintenance of honesty and dreedom in scientific
piblication.” I am sure you do not want the C. S. H. Symposia to run the
‘risk of being involved in that basic issue. Lindegren's methods of at—
“> temptirg to suppress ‘frée triticism are, in my opinion, as reprehensible
aye A se ge ee Ee A oe ARO Th

a

   
   

i.

  

 

 
If

Manuscripts Department, Lilly Library
Indiana University, Bloomington, Indiana

Sonneborn mss.

|

2015 Maverlas

_is covered by copyright and may not be

' quoted or reproduced without

TOL MEASLOCUCE YOO UNL e
of copyright holder.

permission

 

Page #2 Jamary 22, 1947
Dr. Demereo

as Fascist to Communistic censorship, and I only hope that the others who
criticized Lindegren's paper at Cold Spring Harbor have not had their
criticisms suppressed, I say this to you because I know you would not
wart to be involved in such suppression, aml I certainly do not wish you
to be, ,

Believe me, I would not write to you in this way if I did not
think the matter were extremely important,

With very best personal regards,

Cordially yours
T. M. Somneborn

TMS ret
Ere.