March 2012 Auction Ends Wednesday, March 28th, 5pm Pacific
This lot is closed for bidding. Bidding ended on 3/28/2012
Maurice Wilkins autograph manuscript twice-signed, dated July 1999. Manuscript discusses a spring 1952 letter Wilkins wrote to Francis Crick which delineated some of the key DNA research developments at that time. Includes a photocopy of original letter on four pages, which Wilkins references throughout. Manuscript goes into great scientific detail and also discusses Wilkins' controversial relationship with Rosalind Franklin, whom many credit with first discovering the DNA helix. Reads in part: ''This letter, Spring 52, is specially important because it reported the next step forward I made since Oct 51 when Stokes & I took helical diffraction theory to R.F. (Rosalind Franklin) and she made clear that she could not cooperate in analyzing her much improved B pattern. I felt obliged to leave her with all the best DNA & our new x-ray equipment. Chargaff's DNA, which I had intended to use, was disappointing & it was only after 4 or 5 months that I had new x-ray equipment & tried it on DNA in intact sperm heads. The result was the clearest evidence yet that DNA was helical & the angle of the helix was 45 [degrees] & diam ~ 20A [degrees] which was the basic data needed for model building. Olby [Crick's biographer] published my letter but not the sketch I made in it showing layer line 1, 2, 3. Jim Watson referred to this evidence with !!! in his letter to Delbruck. However, we still believed that DNA had 3 chains which was used in Fraser's model in Nov 51 and it very much discouraged us because the diffraction pattern of DNA (& sperm heads) was not supporting 3 chains! Olby's book puts the Fraser model a year late. I checked many of his proofs but evidently not the chapter on 3 chain models. (paper-back edition is the same.)...Simply going ahead with 2 chain models & not bothering about the crystalline (A type) pattern could have solved the problem, the arguments about 3 chains would have had been thrown out. But all that in hindsight! I was right to emphasize 'the exact crystallinity gives...the general micelles arrangement (micelles=molecule)...I think that means that although the base sequence is irregular there is a regularity overall, we cannot be certain that is what I meant but it is the same argument used later by Watson & Crick. (after discovering base pairs.) P.3 refers to 'discussing all our latest ideas & results with you again.' This may appear rather wild but was a positive reaction to my isolation & underlying dislike of the Bragg Moratorium. To set up officially a Cambridge/London collaboration did not seem possible. Molecular biologists may regard my intent in studying DNA in intact cells of various kinds was poor judgment because the main goal of DNA structure needed to be kept clearly in view, but on p.3 I wrote 'this must wait.' I would explain that my interest went beyond orthodox science -- I enjoyed greatly the beauty & excitement of living cells. Randall was a very keen gardener & enjoyed the beauty of the living world. Such attitudes are relevant to the controversy today about GM foods etc etc. Some broadening of attitudes will be needed before policies on application of DNA science in the world today can be agreed. To discuss 'all our latest ideas and results' is of the greatest importance between scientists. It gives a deep satisfaction which is as strong as that which arises from discovering a new aspect of scientific truth. And such discussion is vital to the sense of community & cooperation which is basic in science. I was therefore inviting Francis to lunch although I knew that discussing my new results could undermine the Bragg Moratorium. About that time John Kendrew had telephoned me to ask if I would join work with Francis & Jim, but I could see no chance officially of arranging for joint Kings/Cambridge work. Kendrew was a great mediator. The letter mentions an invitation to go to Cambridge to stay at the Cricks. The reason I had visited Signer in Berne was that I had understood from a telephone conversation that he could supply me with DNA of special quality which Gosling, I had obtained very good pattern. But had now, at my suggestion, had been given to Rosalind for her exclusive use in the hope of establishing better relations. I was entranced by working on DNA in vivo; but also I knew that protein/DNA relations would become the basis of research on DNA functioning. But I was clear that the structure of DNA must come first and did not spend much time on in vivo experiments. It was important to check that the crystalline diffraction patterns were characteristic of living DNA and not just an artefact [?] when chemical methods were used to isolate DNA from cells...'' Manuscript, measuring 8.25'' x 11.5'' on two pages, is signed boldly on each: ''MHF Wilkins''. Each page has staple holes at top left and the first page of the manuscript has an uneven left edge, minor toning, and the number ''2'' written in pencil at top left. Second page has the number ''3'' written in pencil at top left as well. Near fine condition.
Maurice Wilkins Autograph Manuscript Signed With Pivotal Moments Leading to DNA Discovery -- ''...Rosalind Franklin...made clear that she could not cooperate in analyzing her much improved B patt
Click above for larger image.