This is in part an answer to your letter of the 28th of October and also to raise certain questions, to which I hope you will
be able to reply quickly since time is so short.
With respect to my spending some time with you in Paris, I had intended to do this in any case if at all possible. What I
should like to ask is whether it would not be possible to do this before the London meetings rather than after. My teaching
duties are such that it would be difficult for me to stay on after the London meetings but it would be relatively easy for
me to arrange to come to Paris by say the 1st of April and spend the ten or eleven days with you and then go on to London.
I know, of course, that this comes in the Easter vacation and you have perhaps made plans to go away somewhere. Please let
me know your reactions to this suggestion.
As I perhaps told you, my paper will deal primarily with the precursor problem in which I will summarize more or less the
work which I talked about at Paris and add some new material which we have obtained since then. I have written up some of
this material for original publication and I will send you copies of the manuscript in the near future, as soon as they can
be made. If you have any information relevant to the precursor problem, I should be deeply grateful if you would send it
to me immediately so that I can include it in my discussion of this question. In line with this, I would like to have the
tables as well as the figures of the paper which you wrote with Pappenheimer. I wrote to him about this question but he apparently
also had a manuscript copy in which both tables and figures were missing. The point is I would like to discuss these experiments
and it would be much better if I could be more specific in detail about them than I can be with the manuscript alone.
Seems you are all expecting a brilliant synthesis (and completely biased) summary of the field in my paper, I perhaps might
let you know that I wrote to Gale asking that he choose somebody else for this task. I felt in the first place that I wasn't
certain that I could do an adequate job and in the second place I decided that it would be far preferable if I confined my
paper to one aspect of the problem rather than trying to cover the entire field. To the best of my knowledge, Gale has asked
Roger to undertake this summary and he has agreed to do this.
I presume your tracer experiments are pretty far along by now and that you are in a position to make some definitive statements.
We have been working extremely hard on this approach and we have been employing electrophoresis through starch columns to
separate out the enzyme as well as other proteins, and with respect to the -galactosidase of E. coli, we can say at the present
time that the protein fraction containing the enzyme, less than 6.5% of the carbon comes from preformed cellular carbon.
We are at present trying to push this down further, but in any case the results thus far support the concept of synthesis
directly from the amino acids. We have come into a rather peculiar observation that apparently other concentrates are being
induced at the same time and at present we are attempting to examine this somewhat further.
I shall forego any further information at the moment. There are some other points that I would like to talk about, particularly
in connection with your kinetic theory but I will delay this for another letter which I hope to write in a relatively short
time. In the meantime I hope you will be able to answer the questions which I have raised as soon as you can so I can make
the necessary arrangements. In the meantime please accept my fondest regards and extend them to your colleagues, both male