Page:The Armed Forces Institute of Pathology-ItsFirstCentury.djvu/306

NEW NAME, NEW HOME, NEW RESPONSIBILITIES New plans had to be drawn to incorporate the bomb-resistant features with the expectation that the plans, drawn in the final weeks of 1950, with the cooperation of the Protective Construction Division, Office of the Chief of Engineers, and the National Security Resources Board, would receive Board approval early in 1951.

Efforts were made, without success, to have the full original estimate of $11,004,041 included in the military budget for fiscal year 1951. Failing in this, the proponents of the new Institute undertook to get the $7,130,000 for construction, according to the revised plans of May 1950, included in the fiscal year 1952 military budget.11

Before this could be done, however, the impact of the Korean war called for a revision of the entire military program and necessitated the filing of a second supplemental fiscal year 1951 budget of high-priority items. The $7,130,000 item was included in the Medical Department figures in two bills, introduced in the House of Representatives by Mr. Vinson on 11 December 1950— H.R. 9893, an authorization, and H.R. 9920, an appropriation. The bills passed the House on 15 December 1950, and the Senate on 21 December. Both were signed by President Truman on 6 January 1951, to become Public Law 910 and Public Law 911, 81st Congress, 2d and closing session. 12

Before the legislative obstacles and delays were finally surmounted, General Dart, the vigorous leader of the movement for the new building, had retired on the last day of July 1950, and had been succeeded by another vigorous advocate of the new Institute, Col. (later Maj. Gen.) Elbert DeCoursey (fig. 89). The new Director was a native of Kentucky, and a graduate of the University of Kentucky, with the M.D. degree from the Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine. He joined the Medical Corps of the Army in 1929, had served as pathologist at several major Army hospitals, and had been active in research in the field of atomic energy and radiobiology.

The retiring Director, General Dart, was signally recognized by the publication of an entire number of The Military Surgeon in his honor. Issued in October 1951, the issue contained forewords by Maj. Gen. George E. Armstrong, who had succeeded General Bliss as The Surgeon General of the Army; by Rear Adm. H. Lamont Pugh, Surgeon General of the Navy; by Maj. Gen.