. r 26, 1957.
‘Dear Boris: . EM ath) .

I have just now umanaged to get to your mB. (amidst prepara~
tions for leaving Melbourne and other responsibilities) and am
about to send it directly to J. Bact. with some minor corrections
on my part. I hope you will have an opportunity to make any neces—
sary revisions after the reviewers have criticized it. In parti-
cular, the emmument derivation of p.14 Para. 1 is a bit mysterious
and should be clarified. The statement of the two ‘enzyme-liks
systems' of p. 20, Para. 2 sould also be clarified something like
the followings

(begin with sentence 2): One would govern the entry of specifiic
substrates into the cell; the second would accumulate the enmtered
material to high concentrations. The permeation system would be
specifically induced, but wouldnot require appreciable energy for
its function. etc. Tho accunulatiion system, though requiring
energy, need not be inducible t$f or highly specific etc,

This is not the clearest way your thought can be cast-- in any
@ase, I was not so sure of your thinking on this critical issue
to want to take responsibility for restating it.

I also, for the moment, deleted the next to last paregr. on
p. 20 as I did not understand it. I also thought it uncrisp to
allude so vaguely to the experiments which "were not encouraging?
If you restore this Paragr., I suggest you be somewhat mpre
specific.

P. 14-— "(Lederverg, private communication)" : I would
add "of, Cobn & Monod..." or mak whatever the reference is
to their listing of these compounds-—— we don't have to emulate
their own ungraciousness/ on this particular issue. If I can
findthe reference myself (which is not too likely at short notice
here) I'll put it in myself.

P. 15 last Para. This is a rather disorganized statement of
a lot of important information. It would almost warrant a
separate subheading: interactions of cations and diverse sub-—
strates, and a systematic listigg. In re effect of distilled
water, did say NaCl restore activity? I would think the
emphasis should be on the cation, not the maleic or phosphate.

P.16 I would recommend leaving out Paragr. 4 but have
left it in for the present.

This is all for the moment. If all goes well, you should
have the ms. back for revision in a month or so, If you would
like to return it via Madison, I'll be glad to look at it again,
but as both you and the Journal may be in a hurry, you could
send it directly back to Porter. I have also suggested that
   
  

he send you the proofs direc ay f this is impractical I will

be glad to read thep. (I wit in Madison by Thanksgiving).

Please let Hank and me know of y intentions with regard to
reprints. I assume a fair number would be furchased bg the UW

but let us knowDieet Lrrtrrraathie bf Bebenitprdentiago, ete.

We will be en route to India by the time you get this, If anything
urgent came up, you might contact us maWaZli in Milan, but we
be homa not too long after. VICTORIA, AUSTRALIA "

With best regards, oO .
" : Yours,

- > Jombua Lederberg