Albert Schat, Ph.D.
HomeAbout Dr. SchatzArticles by Dr. SchatzArchived CollectionsSite MapContact Us

Search is Powered by: Google

(Note from Webmaster: Google has indexed very few pages on this web site. The Google Search above may not reflect all content on this site.)

Source: The Evening Bulletin (Philadelphia): October 30, 1952
Print Article | Open Image Viewer

Nobel Recognition Sought For Waksman's Colleague


The National Agricultural College urged today that just recognition be given its professor of microbiology, Dr. Albert Schatz, by the Nobel Committee for his contribution to the discovery of streptomycin.

Schatz's former colleague, Dr. Selman A. Waksman, microbiologist of Rutgers University, received the Nobel prize in physiology and medicine on October 23 for his discovery of streptomycin.

In a letter to the committee, Dr. Elmer S. Reinthaler, vice president of the college, near Doylestown, expressed hope that they would consider honoring Schatz after receiving statements forwarded to them. Reinthaler wrote in behalf of the college administration and faculty.

Offers Documents

Reinthaler said he would be pleased to furnish the committee documentary support of the statements contained in his letter.

Dr. Waksman agreed on December 29, 1950, in New Jersey Superior Court to recognize Dr. Schatz, then a Brooklyn College proressor, as a co-discoverer of streptomycin and to share royalties.

As a part of an eight-point settlement of a suit by Schatz against the Rutgers University microbiologist, Waksman agreed that Schatz would receive three per cent of net royalties on the drug and $125,000 for assignment of foreign rights.

Retracted Charges

In the settlement, Schatz agreed to retract charges that Waksman had used "fraud and duress" to induce him to assign Schatz's rights to the Rutgers research and endowment foundation.

Reinthaler said he was certain that so distinguished a body as the Nobel committee for medicine at the Caroline Institute, University of Stockholm, could not have been aware of and yet have ignored certain pertinent facts regarding the discovery of streptomycin and its original codiscoverer.

For this reason, he continued "we have caused an investigation to be made, and as a result there are convinced that further consideration by your council would be well warranted."