December 26, 1950.
Dear Bernie-

I keep thinking hat I've written this letter, and wait for your answer,
only to find no copy in the file: ergo, no letter.

Unless I'm even further mistaken, I have mantioned to you a prospective
publicatica- 2 veluae of reprints in mierchial penetics which I am trying
to get together midinly for teaching. On the basis of good external advice,
as well as ay own convictions, the subject has been rarcowed to bacteria
and bacteriophages. If you heve any good but unobvious suggestions for
papers, cr goud alveit obviou. possible Mitles, T'd be glad to hear from
you. The point tm finally coming to is that T rould like very mich to
dacluce your Txpestentia paper in th: surhes. If this asets with your ap-
provel, aay I so commnisate tu the publisher when applying for their
legal assent?

Your letter of Recaubor 7 was most interesting, even if indigestible.
(Aaron has the sane response to a siaflar missile - I mean missive). At any
rate, I was pleased to see such 2 neat explanation cf the nab rickettslostatic
effect. So you think that a pab-pob relationship wight somehow he involved
in the iakiblifca by pub of sulfsnanide-catitring Yenroanors? This should
convince any scaptics cf the Lnporhuncs of biochemterl genetics in the
chenvtherapy !

I was alao pleased to note that you had cleared Plough's mass. I don't
think there's auch that can be done about it. Any field as popular as this
4a bound to have some scatelogical obstructions; possibly the best thing
to do is to ignore it completely in public, and keep up 4 mild but continuing
pressure in private. But I wouldn't be surprised if Plough were to publish
a formal, possibly # long-winded, retraction, if you've convinced him that
he's confused.

if I haven't already done so, may I thank you for sending the set of
K-12 derivatives in good order. E, coli W was not included; if it's no
trouble to you, I'd like to try it sometime. Menwhile, I've picked up hal f-a-
dozen quite fertile, intra- and inter-crossable strains. These differ in
possiblyba couple of dozen characters; we're beginning some serological work
too. If I haven't mentioned it before, you might also be interested that
s® 48 dominant to S*. Nevertheless, a few prototrophs come through on strepto-
mycin minimal agar from S® x S¥ crosses, which may have some bearing on
phenomic lag.

Best wishes,
Sincerely,