Chapter II: Front Matter (2)

The copyright work is set off and interferes no longer with the energies of the library proper. There is a separate division having to do with the acquisition of material, another--of 67 persons--to classify and catalog it. There are 42 persons attending to the ordinary service of the reading room as supplied from the stacks, and there are eight special divisions handling severally the current newspapers and periodicals, the documents, manuscripts, maps, music, prints, the scientific publications forming the Smithsonian deposit, and the books for the blind. There is a Division of Bibliography whose function is to assist in research too elaborate for the routine service of the reading room, to edit the library publications, and to represent the library in co-operative bibliographic undertakings. There is now within the building, besides a bindery, with a force of 45 employees, a printing office, with a force of 21. The allotment for printing and binding, in 1896 only $15,000, is for the coming year $90,000.

The immediate duty of this organization is near at hand. There is a huge arrear of work upon the existing collection--necessary for its effective use, and its intelligent growth. It must be newly classified throughout; and shelf listed. The old author slip catalog must be revised and reduced to print. There must be compiled a subject catalog, of which none now exists. Innumerable gaps--that which is crooked can be made straight, but that which is wanting cannot be numbered--innumerable gaps are to be ascertained and filled. A collection of reference books must be placed back at the Capitol, with suitable apparatus, to bring the library once more into touch with Congress and enable it to render the service to Congress which is its first duty. The other libraries of the District must be brought into association--not by gathering their collections into the Library of Congress, but by co-ordinating processes and service. The Library of Congress as the center of the system can aid in this. It can strengthen each departmental library by relieving it of material not necessary to its special work. It can aid toward specialization in these departmental libraries by exhibiting present unnecessary duplication. (It is just issuing a union list of serials currently taken by the libraries of the District which has this very purpose.) It can very likely print the catalog cards for all the government libraries--incidentally securing uniformity, and a copy for its own use of each card--which in time will result in a complete statement within its own walls of the resources of every departmental library in Washington. It will supply to each such library a copy of every card which it prints of a book in its own collections relating to the work of the bureau which such library serves.

To reduce to order the present collection, incorporating the current accessions, to fill the most inconvenient gaps, to supply the most necessary apparatus in catalogs and to bring about a relation among the libraries of Washington which shall form them into an organic _system_: this work will of itself be a huge one. I have spoken of the equipment of the Library of Congress as elaborate, the force as large, and the appropriations as generous. All are so in contrast to antecedent conditions. In proportion to the work to be done, however, they are not merely not excessive, but in some respects far short of the need. To proceed beyond those immediate undertakings to projects of general service will require certain equipment, service, and funds not yet secured, and which can be secured only by a general effort. But the question is not what can be done, but what _may_ be done--in due time, eventually.

A general distribution of the printed cards: That has been suggested. It was suggested a half century ago by the Federal Government through the Smithsonian Institution. Professor Jewett's proposal then was a central bureau to compile, print and distribute cards which might serve to local libraries as a catalog of their own collections. Such a project is now before this Association. It may not be feasible: that is, it might not result in the economy which it suggests. It assumes a large number of books to be acquired, in the same editions, by many libraries, at the same time. In fact, the enthusiasm for the proposal at the Montreal meeting last year has resulted in but sixty subscriptions to the actual project.

It may not be feasible. But if such a scheme can be operated at all it may perhaps be operated most effectively through the library which for its own uses is cataloging and printing a card for every book currently copyrighted in the United States, and for a larger number of others than any other single institution. Such must be confessed of the Library of Congress. It is printing a card for every book currently copyrighted, for every other book currently added--for every book reached in re-classification--and thus in the end for every book in its collection. It is now printing, at the rate of over 200 titles a day--60,000 titles a year. The entry is an author entry, in form and type accepted by the committee on cataloging of the A. L. A. The cards are of the standard size--3 × 5 inches--of the best linen ledger stock. From 15 to 100 copies of each are now printed. It would be uncandid to say that such a number is necessary for the use of the library itself, or of the combined libraries at Washington. The usefulness of copies of them to any other library for incorporation in its catalogs must depend upon local conditions: the style, form, and size of its own cards, the number of books which it adds yearly, the proportion of these which are current, and other related matters. On these points we have sought statistics from 254 libraries. We have them from 202. With them we have samples of the cards in use by each, with a complete author entry. Having them we are in a position really to estimate the chances. I will not enter into details. Summarily, it appears that our cards might effect a great saving to certain libraries and some saving to others, and would entail a mere expense without benefit to the remainder--all of which is as might have been guessed.

The distribution suggested by Professor Jewett and proposed by the A. L. A. had in view a saving to the recipient library of cataloging and printing on its own account. It assumed a subscription by each recipient to cover the cost of the extra stock and presswork. There is conceivable a distribution more limited in range, having another purpose. The national library wishes to get into touch with the local libraries which are centers for important research. It wishes the fullest information as to their contents; it may justifiably supply them with the fullest information as to its own contents. Suppose it should supply them with a copy of every card which it prints, getting in return a copy of every card which they print? I am obliged to disclose this suggestion: for such an exchange has already been begun. A copy of every card printed by the Library of Congress goes out to the New York Public Library: a copy of every card printed by the New York Public Library comes to the Library of Congress. In the new building of the New York Public Library there will be a section of the public card catalog designated The Catalog of the Library of Congress. It will contain at least every title in the Library of Congress not to be found in any library of the metropolis. In the Library of Congress a section of the great card catalog of American libraries outside the District will be a catalog of the New York Public Library.

I have here a letter from the librarian of Cornell University forwarding a resolution of the Library Council (composed in part of faculty members) which requests for the university library a set of these cards. Mr. Harris states that the purpose would be to fit up cases of drawers in the catalog room, which is freely accessible to any one desiring to consult bibliographical aids, and arrange the cards in alphabetical order by authors, thus making an author catalog of the set. He adds "The whole question has been rather carefully considered and the unanimous sense of the council was that the usefulness of the catalog to us would be well worth the cost of the cases, the space they would occupy, and the time it would take to arrange and keep in order the cards."

There is a limit to such a distribution. But I suspect that it will not stop with New York and Ithaca.

There is some expense attendant on it. There is the extra stock, the presswork, the labor of sorting and despatching. No postage, however, for the Library of Congress has the franking privilege, in and out. The results however: one cannot deny them to be attractive. At Washington a statement of at least the distinctive contents of every great local collection. At each local center of research a statement of the distinctive contents of the national collection. An inquirer in Wisconsin writes to Washington: is such a book to be had in the United States; must he come to Washington for it, or to New York?--No, he will find it in Chicago at the Newberry or the Crerar.

If there can be such a thing as a bibliographic bureau for the United States, the Library of Congress is in a way to become one; to a degree, in fact, a bureau of information for the United States. Besides routine workers efficient as a body, it has already some expert bibliographers and within certain lines specialists. It has not a complete corps of these. It cannot have until Congress can be made to understand the need of them. Besides its own employees, however, it has within reach by telephone a multitude of experts. They are maintained by the very government which maintains it. They are learned men, efficient men, specially trained, willing to give freely of their special knowledge. They enter the government employ and remain there, not for the pecuniary compensation, which is shamefully meagre, but for the love of the work itself and for the opportunity for public service which it affords. Of these men, in the scientific bureaus at Washington, the National Library can take counsel: it can secure their aid to develop its collections and to answer inquiries of moment. This will be within the field of the natural and physical sciences. Meantime within its walls it possesses already excellent capacity for miscellaneous research, and special capacity for meeting inquiries in history and topography, in general literature, and in the special literature of economics, mathematics and physics. It has still Ainsworth Spofford and the other men, who with him, under extraordinary disadvantages, for thirty-five years made the library useful at the Capitol.

The library is already issuing publications in book form. In part these are catalogs of its own contents; in part an exhibit of the more important material in existence on some subject of current interest, particularly, of course, in connection with national affairs. Even during the period of organization fifteen such lists have already been issued. They are distributed freely to libraries and even to individual inquirers.

But there may be something further. The distribution of cards which exhibit its own contents or save duplication of expense elsewhere, the publication of bibliographies which aid to research, expert service which in answer to inquiry points out the best sources and the most effective methods of research: all these may have their use. But how about the books themselves? Must the use of this great collection be limited to Washington? How many of the students who need some book in the Library of Congress--perhaps there alone--can come to Washington to consult it at the moment of need? A case is conceivable: a university professor at Madison or Berkeley or San Antonio, in connection with research important to scholarship, requires some volume in an unusual set. The set is not in the university library. It is too costly for that library to acquire for the infrequent need. The volume is in the National Library. It is not at the moment in use at Washington. The university library requests the loan of it. If the National Library is to _be_ the national library----?

There might result some inconvenience. There would be also the peril of transit. Some volumes might be lost to posterity. But after all we are ourselves a posterity. Some respect is due to the ancestors who have saved for _our_ use. And if one copy of a book possessed by the federal government and within reasonable limits subject to call by different institutions, might suffice for the entire United States--what does logic seem to require--and expediency--and the good of the greater number?

The Library of Congress is now primarily a reference library. But if there be any citizen who thinks that it should never lend a book--to another library--in aid of the higher research--when the book can be spared from Washington and is not a book within the proper duty of the local library to supply--if there be any citizen who thinks that for the National Library to lend under these circumstances would be a misuse of its resources and, therefore, an abuse of trust--he had better speak quickly, or he may be too late. Precedents may be created which it would be awkward to ignore.

Really I have been speaking of the Library of Congress as if it were the only activity of the federal government of interest to libraries. That, however, is the fault of the topic. It was not what might be done for science, for literature, for the advance of learning, for the diffusion of knowledge. It was merely what might be done for _libraries_; as it were, not for the glory of God, but for the advancement of the church. We have confidence in the mission of libraries and consider anything in aid of it as good in itself.

Their most stimulating, most fruitful service must be the direct service. The service of the national authority must in large part be merely indirect. It can meet the reader at large only through the local authority. It can serve the great body of readers chiefly through the local libraries which meet them face to face, know their needs, supply their most ordinary needs. Its natural agent--we librarians at least must think this--is its own library--the library which if there is to be a national library not merely of, but _for_ the United States--must be that library.

_Must become_ such, I should have said. For we are not yet arrived. We cannot arrive until much preliminary work has been done, and much additional resource secured from Congress. We shall arrive the sooner in proportion as you who have in charge the municipal and collegiate libraries of the United States will urge upon Congress the advantage to the interests you represent, of undertakings such as I have described. To this point we have not asked your aid. In the equipment of the library, in the reconstruction of its service, in the addition of more expert service, in the improvement of immediate facilities, our appeal to Congress has been based on the work to be done near at hand. I have admitted to you the possibility of these other undertakings of more general concern. If they commend themselves to you as proper and useful--the appeal for them must be primarily your appeal.

THE TRUSTEESHIP OF LITERATURE--I.

BY GEORGE ILES, _New York City_.

Six months ago the curtain descended upon what is likely to be accounted the most memorable century in the annals of mankind. So salient are three of its characteristics that they challenge the eye of the most casual retrospection. First of all, we see that knowledge was increased at a pace beyond precedent, to be diffused throughout the world with a new thoroughness and fidelity. Next we must observe how republican government passed from the slender ties spun in the times of Washington, Jefferson and Adams, to the intimate and pervasive cords of to-day, when, as never before, the good of the bee is bound up with the welfare of the hive. Parallel with this political union of each and all there was a growth of free organization which, in every phase of life, has secured uncounted benefits which only joined hands may receive. Fresh torches of light fraternally borne from the centers of civilization to its circumference have tended to bring the arts and ideals of life everywhere to the level of the best. These distinctive features of the nineteenth century were in little evidence at its dawn, but they became more and more manifest with each succeeding decade. In American librarianship, as in many another sphere of labor, more was accomplished in the last quarter of the century than in the seventy-five preceding years.

It is as recently as 1852 that Boston opened the doors of the first free public library established in an American city. Its founders were convinced that what was good for the students at Harvard, the subscribers to the Athenæum, was good for everybody else. Literature, they felt, was a trust to be administered not for a few, but for the many, to be, indeed, hospitably proffered to all. To this hour, by a wise and generous responsiveness to its ever-growing duties, the Boston foundation remains a model of what a metropolitan library should be. As with the capital, so with the state; to-day Massachusetts is better provided with free public libraries than any other commonwealth on the globe; only one in two hundred of her people are unserved by them, while within her borders the civic piety of her sons and daughters has reared more than six score library buildings. The library commission of the state is another model in its kind; its powers are in the main advisory, but when a struggling community desires to establish a library, and contributes to that end, the commission tenders judicious aid. The population of Massachusetts is chiefly urban, an exceptional case, for taking the Union as a whole, notwithstanding the constant drift to the cities, much more than half the people are still to be found in the country. For their behoof village libraries have appeared in thousands. Still more effective, because linked with one another, are the travelling libraries, inaugurated by Mr. Melvil Dewey in New York in 1893, and since adopted in many other states of the Union, and several provinces of Canada. All this registers how the democracy of letters has come to its own. Schools public and free ensure to the American child its birthright of instruction; libraries, also public and free, are rising to supplement that instruction, to yield the light and lift, the entertainment and stimulus that literature stands ready to bestow. The old-time librarian, who was content to be a mere custodian of books, has passed from the stage forever; in his stead we find an officer anxious that his store shall do all the people the utmost possible good. To that end he combines the zeal of the missionary with the address of a consummate man of business. Little children are invited to cheery rooms with kind and intelligent hospitality; teachers and pupils from the public schools are welcomed to classrooms where everything is gathered that the library can offer for their use; helpful bulletins and consecutive reading lists are issued for the home circle; every book, magazine and newspaper is bought, as far as feasible, with an eye to the special wants and interests of the community; information desks are set up; and partnerships are formed with expositors of acknowledged merit, with museums of industry, of natural history, of the fine arts. Not the borrowers only, but the buyers of books are remembered. The Standard Library, brought together by Mr. W. E. Foster, in Providence, is a shining example in this regard.

The sense of trusteeship thus variously displayed has had a good many sources; let us confine our attention to one of them. During the past hundred years the treasure committed to the keeping of librarians has undergone enrichment without parallel in any preceding age. We have more and better books than ever before; they mean more than in any former time for right living and sound thinking. A rough and ready classification of literature, true enough in substance, divides it into books of power, of information, and of entertainment. Let us look at these three departments a little in detail. Restricting our purview to the English tongue, we find the honor roll of its literature lengthened by the names of Wordsworth, Tennyson and Matthew Arnold, Carlyle and Ruskin, Emerson and Lowell. And not only to authors such as these must our debt be acknowledged. We owe scholarly editors nearly as much. In Spedding's Bacon, the Shakesperean studies of Mr. Furniss, and the Chaucer of Professor Skeat, we have typical examples of services not enjoyed by any former age. To-day the supreme poets, seers and sages of all time are set before us in the clearest sunshine; their gold, refined from all admixture, is minted for a currency impossible before. In their original, unedited forms, the masterpieces of our language are now cheap enough to find their way to the lowliest cottage of the cross-roads.

It is not, however, in the field of literature pure and simple that the manna fell most abundantly during the past hundred years. Mr. Alfred Russel Wallace, the last of the great students who took all natural history for their province, declares that the advances in discovery, invention and generalization during the nineteenth century outweigh those of all preceding time. Admit this judgment, and at once is explained why the records and the spirit of science dominate the literature of the last ten decades. And let us note that while books of knowledge have increased beyond measure, they have appeared with a helpfulness and with merits wholly new. For the first time in the history of letters, men and women of successful experience, of practised and skilful pens, write books which, placed in the hands of the people, enlighten their toil, diminish their drudgery, and sweeten their lives. Cross the threshold of the home and there is not a task, from choosing a carpet to rearing a baby, that has not been illuminated by at least one good woman of authority in her theme. On the heights of the literature of science we have a quality and distinction unknown before these later days. The modern war on evil and pain displays weapons of an edge and force of which our forefathers never dared to dream; its armies march forward not in ignorant hope, but with the assured expectation of victory. All this inspires leaders like Huxley, Spencer and Fiske with an eloquence, a power to convince and persuade, new in the annals of human expression and as characteristic of the nineteenth century as the English poetry of the sixteenth, in the glorious era of Elizabeth. The literature of knowledge is not only fuller and better than of old, it is more wisely employed. In the classroom, and when school days are done, we now understand how the printed page may best direct and piece out the work of the hand, the eye and the ear; not for a moment deluding ourselves with the notion that we have grasped truth merely because we can spell the word. To-day we first consider the lilies of the field, not the lilies of the printer; that done it is time enough to take up a formal treatise which will clarify and frame our knowledge. If a boy is by nature a mechanic, a book of the right sort shows him how to construct a simple steam engine or an electric motor. Is he an amateur photographer, other books, excellently illustrated, give him capital hints for work with his camera. It is in thus rounding out the circle which springs from the school desk that the public library justifies its equal claim to support from the public treasury.

In the third and last domain of letters, that of fiction, there is a veritable embarrassment of riches. During the three generations past the art of story-telling culminated in works of all but Shakesperean depth and charm. We have only to recall Scott and Thackeray, Hawthorne, George Eliot and Thomas Hardy, to be reminded that an age of science may justly boast of novelists and romancers such as the world never knew before. No phase of life but has been limned with photographic fidelity, no realm of imagination but has been bodied forth as if by experience on fire, so that many a book which bears the name of fiction might well be labelled as essential truth. Within the past decade, however, the old veins have approached their bounds, while new lodes do not as yet appear. Of this the tokens are the eager sifting of the rubbish heap, the elaborate picturing of the abnormal and the gross. Pens unable to afford either delight or cheer have abundant capacity, often with evident malice, to strike the nerves of horror and of pain. If at the present hour high achievement in fiction is rare, if we hear more echoes than ever and fewer voices, quantity abounds to the point of surfeit. With an output in America alone of 616 works for 1900, all fears of famine may well be allayed.

The main fact of the situation then is that the librarian's trust has of late years undergone stupendous increase; this at once broadens his opportunities and adds to his burdens. Gold and silver, iron and lead, together with much dross, are commingled in a heap which rises every hour. Before a trust can be rightly and gainfully administered, its trustees must know in detail what it is that they guard, what its several items are worth, what they are good for. And let us remember that literature consists in but small part of metals which declare themselves to all men as gold or lead; much commoner are alloys of every conceivable degree of worth or worthlessness. There is plainly nothing for it but to have recourse to the crucibles of the professional assayer, it becomes necessary to add to the titles of our catalogs some responsible word as to what books are and what rank they occupy in an order of just precedence.

This task of a competent and candid appraisal of literature, as a necessity of its trusteeship, has been before the minds of this Association for a good many years. A notable Step toward its accomplishment was taken when Mr. Samuel S. Green, in 1879, allied himself with the teachers of Worcester, Massachusetts, that they and he together might select books for the public schools of that city. The work began and has proceeded upon comprehensive lines. Such literature has been chosen as may usefully and acceptably form part of the daily instruction, there is a liberal choice of books of entertainment and inspiration worthily to buttress and relieve the formal lessons. The whole work goes forward with intent to cultivate the taste, to widen the horizons, to elevate the impulses of the young reader. Mr. Green's methods, with the modifications needful in transplanting, have been adopted far and wide throughout the Union. Already they have borne fruit in heightening the standards of free choice when readers have passed from the school bench to the work-a-day world.

Thus thoughtfully to lay the foundation of the reading habit is a task beyond praise; upon a basis so sound it falls to our lot to rear, if we can, a worthy and durable superstructure. It is time that we passed from books for boys and girls to books for the youth, the man and the woman. And how amid the volume and variety of the accumulated literature of the ages shall we proceed? For light and comfort let us go back a little in the history of education, we shall there find a method substantially that of our friend, Mr. Green. Long before there were any free libraries at all, we had in America a small band of readers and learners who enjoyed unfailing pilotage in the sea of literature. These readers and learners were in the colleges, where the teachers from examination and comparison in the study, the class-room and the laboratory were able to say that such an author was the best in his field, that such another had useful chapters, and that a third was unreliable or superseded. While literature has been growing from much to more, this bench of judicature has been so enlarged as to keep steadily abreast of it. At Harvard there are twenty-six sub-libraries of astronomy, zoology, political economy, and so on; at hand are the teachers who can tell how the books may be used with most profit. Of the best critics of books in America the larger part are to be found at Harvard, at its sister universities and colleges, at the technological institutes and art schools of our great cities. We see their signed reviews in such periodicals as the _Political Science Quarterly_ and the _Physical Review_; or unsigned in journals of the stamp of the _Nation_. Fortunately, we can call upon reinforcements of this vanguard of criticism. It would be difficult to name a branch of learning, an art, a science, an exploration, from folk-lore to forestry, from psychical research to geological surveys, whose votaries are not to-day banded to promote the cause they have at heart. These organizations include not only the foremost teachers in the Union, but also their peers, outside the teaching profession, of equal authority in bringing literature to the balances. And the point for us is that these societies, through their publications and discussions, enable these laymen to be known for what they are. Because the American Historical Association is thus comprehensive, its membership has opened the door for an initial task of appraisal, important in itself and significant for the future.

Drawing his two score contributors almost wholly from that Association, Mr. J. N. Larned, of Buffalo, an honored leader of ours, has, without fee or reward, acted as chief editor of an annotated Bibliography of American History. The work is now passing through the composing room of Houghton, Mifflin & Co., of Boston; its contributors include professors of history at Bowdoin, Bryn Mawr, Columbia, Harvard, McGill, Toronto, Tulane and Yale, as well as the Universities of Michigan, Wisconsin and Chicago; our own Association is worthily represented by Messrs. James Bain, Clarence S. Brigham, V. L. Collins, W. E. Foster, J. K. Hosmer, E. C. Richardson and R. G. Thwaites. As a rule the notes are signed. Where for any reason a book demanding notice could not be allotted to a contributor, Mr. Larned has quoted the fairest review he could find in print. He has included not only good books, but such other works as have found an acceptance they do not deserve. All told his pages will offer us about 3400 titles; a syllabus of the sources of American history is prefixed by Mr. Paul Leicester Ford; as an appendix will appear a feature also of great value. In their "Guide to American history," published in 1896, Professors Channing and Hart, of Harvard University, recommended such collections of books as may be had for $5, $10, $20, $50 or $100. Professor Channing is kind enough to say that he will revise these lists and bring them down to date as a contribution to Mr. Larned's work. Professor Channing may, we trust, name the books in each collection in the order in which they may be most gainfully read.

In times past our bibliographies have begun to need enlargement the moment they left the bindery; in the present case that need is for the first time to be supplied. Mr. Larned's titles come to the close of 1899; beyond that period current literature is to be chosen from and appraised with the editorship of Philip P. Wells, librarian of the Yale Law Library, who will issue his series in card form. We hope that he may be ready with his cards for 1900 at the time that Mr. Larned's book appears. Thereafter Mr. Wells' series will probably be published quarter by quarter. Beginning with 1897, Mr. W. Dawson Johnston, now of the Library of Congress, has edited for us a series of annotated cards dealing with the contemporary literature of English history. Both the form and substance of his series are capital. In so far as his cards go directly into catalog cases, where readers and students must of necessity see them, they render the utmost possible aid. If subscribers in sufficient array come forward, Mr. Larned's book may be remolded for issue in similar card form, with a like opportunity for service in catalog cases. In the Cleveland Public Library and its branches useful notes are pasted within the lids of a good many volumes. It is well thus to put immediately under the reader's eye the word which points him directly to his goal, or prevents him wasting time in wanderings of little value or no value at all.

With Mr. Larned's achievement a new chapter is opened in American librarianship; he breaks a path which should be followed up with a discernment and patience emulous of his example. If the whole working round of our literature were sifted and labelled after his method, the worth of that literature, because clearly brought into evidence, might well be doubled at least. Every increase in the availability of our books, every removal of fences, every setting-up of guide-posts, has had a heartening public response. So it will be if we proceed with this effort to bring together the seekers and the knowers, to obtain the best available judgments for the behoof of readers and students everywhere. Economics and politics, so closely interwoven with American history, might well afford the second field for appraisal. A good many libraries still find aid in the "Reader's guide" in this department, although it appeared as long ago as 1891. Next might follow the literature of the sciences pure and applied, together with the useful arts. Among useful arts those of the household might well have the lead, for we must not be academic, or ever lose sight of the duties nearest at hand to the great body of the plain people. Mr. Sturgis and Mr. Krehbiel, in 1897, did an excellent piece of work for us in their "Bibliography of the fine arts"; their guide might profitably be revised and enlarged in its several divisions, not omitting the introductory paragraphs which make the book unique in its class. These tasks well in hand, we might come to such accessions of strength and insight as to nerve us for labors of wider range and greater difficulty, where personal equations may baffle even the highest court of appeal, where it is opinion rather than fact that is brought to the scales. I refer to the debatable ground of ethics, philosophy and theology; and, at the other pole of letters, to the vast stretches of fiction and belles lettres in our own and foreign tongues. With regard to fiction and belles lettres, one of Mr. Larned's methods has a hint for us. In some cases he has found it best to quote Mr. Francis Parkman, Mr. Justin Winsor, or the pages of the _Nation_, the _Dial_, the _American Historical Review_, and similar trustworthy sources. With respect to novels and romances, essays and literary interpretation, it does not seem feasible to engage a special corps of reviewers. It may be a good plan to appoint judicious editors to give us composite photographs of what the critics best worth heeding have said in the responsible press.

It is in the preponderant circulation of fiction, and fiction for the most part of poor quality, that the critics of public libraries find most warrant for attack. They point to the fact that many readers of this fiction are comparatively well-to-do, and are exempted by public taxation from supporting the subscription library and the bookseller. The difficulty has been met chiefly in two ways; by curtailing the supply of mediocre and trashy fiction; by exacting a small fee on issuing the novels brought for a season to a huge demand by advertising of a new address and prodigality. Appraisal, just and thorough, may be expected to render aid more important because radical instead of superficial. In the first place, the best books of recreation, now overlaid by new and inferior writing, can be brought into prominence; secondly, an emphasis, as persuasive as it can be made, ought to be placed upon the more solid stores of our literature. "Business," said Bagehot long ago, "is really more agreeable than pleasure; it interests the whole mind, the aggregate nature of man more continuously and deeply, but it does not look as if it did." Let it be our purpose to reveal what admirable substance underlies appearances not always seductive to the casual glance. Lowell and Matthew Arnold, Huxley and John Fiske, Lecky and Goldwin Smith are solid enough, yet with no lack of wit or humor to relieve their argument and elucidation. A New York publisher of wide experience estimates that the average American family, apart from school purchases, buys less than two books a year. Newspapers and magazines form the staple of the popular literary diet. What fills the newspapers is mainly news; their other departments of information are often extensive and admirable, but within the limits of the hastily penned paragraph or column they cannot rise to the completeness and quality of a book carefully written and faithfully revised. The plain fact is, and it behooves us to reckon with it, the average man, to whom we bear our credentials as missionaries, looks upon a book as having something biblical about it. To sit down deliberately and surrender himself to its chapters is a task he waves away with strangely mingled awe and dislike. So he misses the consecutive instruction, as delightful as profitable to an educated taste, which authors, publishers and librarians are ready and even anxious to impart.

We hear a good deal in these days about the need of recreation, and not a word more than is true, but let us remember that the best recreation may consist in a simple change of work. Behold the arduous toil of the city lawyer, or banker, as on a holiday tour he climbs a peak of the Alps or the Adirondacks, or wades the chilly streams of Scotland or Canada a salmon rod in his hands. Why does he undergo fatigues so severe? Partly because they are freely chosen, partly because they are fatigues of an unwonted and therefore refreshing kind. So in the field before us to-day. Truth is not only stranger than fiction, it is more fascinating when once its charms are recognized and entertained. Our public schools throughout the land prove that a true story of exploration, of invention or discovery, of heroism or adventure, has only to be well told to rivet a boy's attention as firmly as ever did Robinson Crusoe or Treasure Island. When readers take up from instinctive appetite, or wise incitement, the best books about flowers or birds, minerals or trees, an art, a science, a research, they come to joys in new knowledge, in judgments informed and corrected, unknown to the tipplers and topers whose staple is the novel, good, bad and indifferent. And why, if we can help it, should public money ever be spent for aught but the public good?

With a new sense of what is implied in the trusteeship of literature, if we endeavor in the future to ally ourselves with the worthiest critics of books, we must bid good-bye to the temporary expedients which have cramped and burdened our initial labors. The work of the appraisal of literature requires a home, a Central Bureau, with a permanent and adequately paid staff of editors and assistants. The training of such a staff has already begun; in addition to the experience acquired by those enlisted in our present bibliographical tasks, instruction is now given in advanced bibliography at the New York State Library School at Albany, and doubtless also at other library schools. And at the Central Bureau, which we are bold enough to figure to ourselves, much more should be done than to bring books to the balances. At such a home, in New York, Washington, or elsewhere, every other task should proceed which aims at furthering the good that literature can do all the people. There might be conducted the co-operative cataloging now fast taking form; there should be extended the series of useful tracts begun by that of Dr. G. E. Wire on "How to start a library," by Mr. F. A. Hutchins on "Travelling libraries." At such a center should be exhibited everything to inform the founder of a public library; everything to direct the legislator who would create a library commission on the soundest lines or recast library laws in the light of national experience; there, moreover, should be gathered everything to arouse and instruct the librarian who would bring his methods to the highest plane. Thence, too, should go forth the speakers and organizers intent upon awakening torpid communities to a sense of what they miss so long as they stand outside our ranks, or lag at the rear of our movement. In the fulness of time such a bureau might copy the Franklin Society, of Paris, and call into existence a needed book, to find within this Association a sale which, though small, would be adequate, because free from the advertising taxes of ordinary publishing. To found and endow such a bureau would undoubtedly cost a great deal, and where is the money to come from? We may, I think, expect it from the sources which have given us thousands of public libraries, great and small. Here is an opportunity for our friends, whether their surpluses be large or little. When a gift can be accompanied by personal aid and counsel, it comes enriched. It is much when a goodly gift provides a city with a library, it would be yet more if the donation were to establish and maintain an agency to lift libraries everywhere to the highest efficiency possible, to give literature for the first time its fullest acceptance, its utmost fruitage.

In a retrospective glance at nineteenth century science, Professor Haeckel has said that the hundred years before us are not likely to witness such victories as those which have signalized the era just at an end. Assume for a moment that his forecast is sound, and that it applies beyond the immediate bounds of science, what does it mean for librarianship? It simply reinforces what in any case is clear, namely, that it is high time that the truth and beauty of literature known to the few made its way to all the people, for their enlightenment, consolation and delight. If the future battles of science are to be waged less strenuously than of yore, if scholarship has measurably exhausted its richest mines, let us give the broadest diffusion to the fruits of their triumphs past. In thus diffusing the leaven of culture the public library should take a leading, not a subordinate part. Its treasure is vaster and more precious than ever before. The world's literature grows much like the world's stock of gold, every year's winning is added to the mass already heaped together at the year's first day. In the instruction, entertainment and inspiration of every man and woman there is a three-fold ministry, that of art, of science, and of letters. Because letters bring to public appreciation, to popular sympathy, both art and science, and this in addition to their own priceless argosies, may we not say that of art, science and letters, the greatest of these is letters?

THE TRUSTEESHIP OF LITERATURE--II.

BY RICHARD T. ELY, _Director School of Economics, University of
Wisconsin_.

It is my purpose to speak plainly and, if possible, forcibly, concerning what seems to me a grave menace to the progress of science, but in all that I shall say, I would have it understood that I have only the friendliest feelings personally for the gentleman who has brought forward what seem to me dangerous proposals. I appreciate his zeal for progress and his self-sacrificing efforts for human advancement in various directions, but I think that in this particular case--namely, the evaluation of literature, or the establishment of a judicature of letters, my friend is working against his own ideals.

I admit freely that the readers in our public libraries very generally need help in the selection of books, and that great assistance may be rendered them by judicious advice. Much time is wasted by those who read scientific and serious works which do not present the results of recent investigations: furthermore, as another consequence effort is misdirected and instead of producing beneficial results may do positive damage. The question may be asked: "Shall I read Adam Smith's 'Wealth of nations?' I hear it mentioned as one of the great works in the world's history." Probably many a librarian has had this precise question asked him. In giving an affirmative answer it will be most helpful to offer a few words explaining the circumstances under which it appeared one hundred and twenty-five years ago, and its relation to the subsequent development of economic schools and tendencies. Doubtless this work is frequently perused as if it were fresh from the press and were to be judged as a work appearing in 1901.

I further admit the harm which has come to individuals from the study of the so-called "crank" literature in economics and sociology, as well as in other branches of learning. Doubtless many a man is working vigorously in a wrong way and attempting to force society into false channels who might be doing a good work had his reading been well directed in a formative period.

But the magnitude of the interests involved in the proposal which greets us requires caution and conservatism in action. We must take a long, not a short, view of the matter, inquiring into remote and permanent results.

It is proposed, as I understand it, to have so-called expert opinions expressed concerning books, new and old; to secure as precise and definite estimates of their value as possible, and then by means of printed guides, and even card catalogs, to bring these opinions and evaluations before the readers in our libraries.

Let us reflect for a moment on what this implies. It means, first of all a judicial body of men from whom these estimates are to proceed. Have we such a body? Is it in the nature of things possible that we should have such a body? I say that so far as contemporary literature is concerned, the history of knowledge gives us a positive and conclusive negative answer--a most emphatic "No." Let anyone who knows the circumstances and conditions under which reviews are prepared and published reflect on what the attempt to secure this evaluation of literature implies. Many of us know a great deal about these circumstances and conditions. We have written reviews, we have asked others to write reviews, and we have for years been in contact with a host of reviewers. We may in this connection first direct out attention to the general character of the periodicals from which quotations are frequently made in the evaluation of literature. I say nothing about my own view, but I simply express an opinion of many men whose judgment should have great weight when I say that one of the most brilliant of these periodicals has been marked by a narrow policy, having severe tests of orthodoxy along economic, social and political lines, and displaying a bitterness and vindictiveness reaching beyond the grave. I mention no names, and the opinion may or may not be a just one; but it should be carefully weighed whether or not, or to what extent, the evaluations of such a periodical ought to be crystallized as it were: that is, taken from the periodical press and made part of a working library apparatus, to last for years.

Another periodical, an able magazine, which makes much of reviews is under the control of a strong body of men, but they stand for scarcely more than one line of thought among many lines. And sometimes very sharp and very hard things are said about those who believe that scientific truth is moving along one of these other lines. Indeed, the discreet person, knowing personally the reviewer and the reviewed, will not be convinced that there is always in the reviews, here as elsewhere, an absence of personal animosity. Let us for a moment reflect on this personal element in reviews, as it has surely fallen under the notice of every man with wide experience in these matters. As a rule, the reviewers are comparatively young and inexperienced men, frequently zealous for some sect or faction. Sometimes great leaders of thought write reviews, but generally they are unable to find the time to do so. As a result in our reviews in the best periodicals it will frequently be found that an inferior is passing judgment on a superior, and furthermore, reviewers share in our common human nature, and the amount of personal bias and even at times personal malignity found in reviews and estimates of books is something sad to contemplate. An unsuccessful candidate for a position held by an author has been known to initiate a scandalous and altogether malicious attack in a review.

In the next place, I would call your attention to the absence of objective standards. Necessarily are the standards personal and subjective; particularly and above all in economics, but in high degree in sociology, ethics and philosophy in general, and religion. Biological reviews have displayed in marked degree the subjective personal element. Chemistry, physics, astronomy and mathematics probably are best of all fitted for evaluations free from personal bias.

It may be asked what damage will result from evaluation. Passing over grave injustice to individuals, we observe that they must lead to the formation of what Bagehot aptly called a crust, preventing the free development of science. We have been laboring for years to obtain scientific freedom, freedom in teaching, freedom in learning, freedom in expression. For this end many a battle has been fought by noble leaders of thought. Indeed, every new movement of thought has to struggle to make itself felt, and to struggle precisely against those who control the most respectable avenues of publication; against the very ones who would be selected to give expert opinions and make evaluations of literature. Call to mind the opposition to Darwin and Huxley--although they were especially and particularly fortunate in early gaining the adherence of scientific men--also the opposition to Adam Smith, Malthus, Ricardo and John Stuart Mill--and to the last named, even now, some would on a scale of 100 give an evaluation perhaps of 50, others of 65--still others 80 and 90. Recently an economic book appeared of which one widely quoted periodical said that it illustrated a _reductio ad absurdum_ of false tendencies, while another expert opinion inclined to place it among the great works of the age. It would seem to me that if we are to have formal evaluations, they should at least be restricted to works which have been before the public for a period of fifty years.

We have in this proposal, as I take it, an attack on liberty, proceeding from one who would not willingly attack it, but illustrating the truth of the saying "Eternal vigilance is the price of liberty." It is proposed to publish virtually an _index librorum prohibitorum_ and an _index expurgatorius_. And of all efforts ever conceived along this line, this is precisely the worst because of its apparently impersonal character. Let the ordinary reader go to a guide and find a book described as unscientific and superficial, and what weight can it have for him. The authority has spoken. It is well enough for librarians personally to guide and direct their constituencies, and one review may be weighed against another review. The old methods even must be used by librarians cautiously, and they are ample for the purpose to be attained. The great point is that there should be a fluid current of opinion, and every facility for a revision of judgment should be maintained. Reviewers themselves change their views. I, myself, remember reviews which I wrote of works by two distinguished American authors, which I now regret, as my estimates were, I believe, not altogether sound and did an injustice to the authors, namely John Fiske and Lester F. Ward. But after all, I suppose no special harm was done, but if extracts from these reviews had been made part of a system of evaluation it would have been different.

Librarians as librarians must watch with impartiality the struggles among tendencies and schools of thought, and above all things, endeavor to keep open a free way for new truth.

BOOK COPYRIGHT.

BY THORVALD SOLBERG, _Register of Copyright, Washington. D. C._