Chapter L: P. LANE: Under 1 h and 1 q I would like to ask whether a proclamation

by the king of England would be put under England, or Great Britain, King, or under Edward VII.?

Mr. HANSON: We enter such publications in two places; the official proclamations or edicts under the name of the country with a subdivision for king or sovereign, and then their private publications under their names.

Miss CRAWFORD: 1 j: "Enter a periodical under the first word, not an article or serial number, of its title."

What is the judgment of the committee upon newspapers? Should they always be entered under the first word of their title, or would it be better to enter under the name of the place?

Miss KROEGER: We consulted Mr. Fletcher about the rules, and he suggested this very point, bringing up the question of newspapers. And we have a rough draft of a rule to enter newspapers under the name of the place, putting the name of the place in brackets and not in the title. 1 j also brings up the question as to whether it is to be under the first word of the current title or of the original title.

Miss GRAHAM: 1 i 15: "Exhibitions under the name of the place where they are held."

It would seem to me that in the case of the Pan-American Exposition, that should be first, rather than Buffalo. Also the Columbian Exposition.

Mr. HANSON: I think a majority of the expositions in this country have specific names. In the discussion of the committee I think Mr. Cutter proposed the rule as follows: "Enter under the name of the place in case of expositions, always making a cross-reference from the special name of the exposition, if it has one." In all cases it would be necessary that the cross-reference should be made from the special name by which it is known--as the Cotton States, Pan-American, World's Columbian.

CHAIRMAN: Is there anything more to say on this subject? If not, Miss Graham, you might bring up that question you spoke to me about this morning.

Miss GRAHAM: The matter Mr. Hopkins refers to was regarding the revision of the "A. L. A. catalog" of the 5000 best books. We feel the need in small libraries, and I think the need is felt where libraries are trying to organize, for a revision of that catalog. We all use that in small libraries when making out lists of standard works. There are many of them out of print. If we could have a revision of that catalog on printed cards it seems to me it would be a great help in the work of library extension as well as to smaller libraries which have little cataloging force--where the librarian has to be cataloger.

CHAIRMAN: I thought perhaps enough would be interested in this to raise the question in such a way that the Publishing Board would take it up. It may be cards are in existence that might be reprinted for this work.

Miss AMBROSE: There is a supplement to this catalog just about ready to come out. Would that include new editions or simply new books?

Mr. FLETCHER: The matter has been put off to such a large extent that the State Library at Albany has undertaken to publish this supplement; but it has been delayed. They intend to print it for their own state use, but allow the Publishing Board to distribute it to other places. As to a revision, I do not know whether it has been undertaken. I think that the original edition was not electrotyped, and that there are no plates existing to reprint it from.

CHAIRMAN: I will read a question from the Hartford Public Library on the arrangement of author, editor and translator in a card catalog--whether to be put in one alphabet or arranged separately?

Miss CRAWFORD: That hits upon a very practical experience which we had in Dayton. We arranged the works of an author under the author's own works; then the author as editor; and then author as joint author; and then the author as translator; alphabeting by the word which happened to follow the name of the author at the top of the line. We tried that for three or four years, and at the end of that time we ourselves in our own use of the catalog were so continually running up against our own arrangement as a thing which we never used and which was a constant blunder to us that last year we set about rearranging all the authors so as to bring them in one alphabeting order by the first word of the title, regardless of whether it was as author, editor or compiler. Of course when translator or editor of a specific person's work, that entry was placed after the others.

Mr. FLETCHER: That is our practice, after having used the other for some time. We now undertake to put all the works of an author in a general series, whether he is author, or editor, or collector, or whatever it be, if the work is significant as his work. We put those all in one alphabet, as if there was no such addition after his name, and then we put at the end the two notes which are in the nature of cross-reference. If a man is translator of somebody else's work we cannot very well put those in as his works. Everything else we put in one series.

Mr. PERLEY: In the library of the Institute of Technology, of Boston, we arranged the authors, joint authors, translators and editors all in one common alphabet. It seems to me in a library of this kind such an arrangement is especially good, because the public patrons of the library never seem to take very kindly to distinctions, however interesting they may be to the librarians; and it happens very often that the American translator is a good deal more important to the American reader than the original author from whom it was translated. And in the same way a joint author may take equal rank with the author in the main entry.

Miss CRAWFORD: 1 o: "Enter under highest title unless family name or lower title is decidedly better known." Will you keep the title in the vernacular in all cases? For example, will you always say "Fürst von" instead of the English form, and "Graf von," etc.?

Mr. HANSON: There is a varying practice as to that. I will say for the Library of Congress, where they are purely titles of honor or minor noblemen, we use the vernacular; but we have found it advisable for kings, in fact for sovereigns, to use the designation king, emperor, pope, etc., in English.

Miss KROEGER: Has anything been said about entering sovereigns and popes in the vernacular or English form? The rule says, "_May_ be given in the English form."

Mr. FLETCHER: I think we should generally feel, as Mr. Cutter expresses it in his rule, that this is a matter of progress; and before long our library committees will not tolerate "Henry" instead of "Henri" for king of France, or "Lewis" instead of "Louis." We are in a transition stage, and this "May be" means that it is considered allowable while we are in the transition stage to use the English form instead of the vernacular. But give names of sovereigns in the vernacular. The same thing is true of names of cities. Some librarians are leading us a little and giving Wien for Vienna.

Mr. PERLEY: It seems to me the use of the English form would largely depend upon the length of the custom. I think for the names of the Italian cities which have been given common English names since the Middle Ages we are justified in using the English forms, and the names of persons in the same way.

Adjourned without day.

SECTION FOR CHILDREN'S LIBRARIANS.[G]

The A. L. A. Section for Children's Librarians held two sessions during the Waukesha conference. In the absence of Miss Annie Carroll Moore, chairman of the section, the chair was occupied by Miss L. E. STEARNS, who presided as honorary chairman.

_FIRST SESSION._

The first session of the section was called to order at 2.15 p.m., Friday, July 5.

The secretary read a communication from the chairman, Miss Moore, who extended her cordial greeting to the Children's Librarians' Section, and expressed regret that she was unable to be present. She also expressed her satisfaction that the meetings should be conducted by one whose contributions to the work of children's librarians, both by the pen and the power of her magnetic personality, have been so far-reaching in their influence. Miss Stearns' paper given at the Lake Placid conference, 1894, she believed to be one of the most important contributions to the development of work with children, as it set people thinking and talking, and stimulated activity along the lines indicated. In regard to the establishment of a separate section of the A. L. A., Miss Moore said: "It is most encouraging and gratifying to feel that we have the support of those whose interest in library work for children precedes our own, and whose wise counsel may be counted upon in considering the problems which have arisen out of a practical experience.

"It has been the chief object in the construction of this first program to define certain phases of our work in order that we may proceed with a clearer vision of its significance and with a better idea of how we are to accomplish the results at which we seem to be aiming. It is hoped that succeeding meetings may be rich in profitable discussions of practical problems, but let us plan our programs with the utmost care, that we may gather a body of matter which shall prove valuable for the future as well as enlightening in the present.

"Most hearty thanks are due to all who have assisted in the making of the program, and to those who have volunteered to carry it to a successful issue.

"We feel especially grateful to the librarians at large who have so generously responded by the preparation of papers, or by participating in the discussions, to this special claim of ours upon their time and thought."

The secretary read a statement regarding

THE CLUB OF CHILDREN'S LIBRARIANS.

At the A. L. A. conference in Montreal in 1900 an informal meeting was held for the purpose of personal acquaintance and co-operation among those actively engaged in library work with children.

As a result of this meeting an organization was formed, to be known as the Club of Children's Librarians, of which Miss A. C. Moore was made chairman, and Miss M. E. Dousman secretary. In order to facilitate the work of the club it was decided to divide the work into departments, each department to be in charge of a chairman appointed by the chair.

The secretary of the club was instructed to inform the secretary of the American Library Association of the formation of the club and to offer its services in the making of the program for future sessions on library work with children, if so desired.

The result of this proposition was that at a meeting of the executive board of the A. L. A. it was voted that a section for library work with children be established, providing such section be acceptable to the officers of the Club of Children's Librarians. The section was accepted, and the program for the same was submitted by the officers of the club to the program committee of the A. L. A.

The establishment of a section devoted to work with children, as a result of the efforts of the club, is a matter of congratulation for all those interested in this branch of library work. Special thanks are due the chairman, Miss Moore, for her unremitting efforts in making the program for the sessions helpful and inspiring. Thanks are also due chairmen of committees for their zeal in collecting valuable material and for the presentation of practical and suggestive reports.

In view of the establishment of the Section for Children's Librarians, which makes possible the thorough treatment of children's library work, it seems desirable that the Club of Children's Librarians be no longer continued, its special purpose being accomplished; at the present meeting of the section it is hoped to perfect its organization and outline its plans for the coming year.

The first paper of the session was by Miss CAROLINE M. HEWINS, and in her absence was read by Miss HELEN E. HAINES. It dealt with

BOOK REVIEWS, LISTS AND ARTICLES ON CHILDREN'S READING: ARE THEY OF
PRACTICAL VALUE TO THE CHILDREN'S LIBRARIAN?

(_See_ p. 57.)

The subject was discussed by Miss HAINES, who said:

Miss Hewins' criticisms and deductions are so sound that there is little to add to what she has said, except in the way of assent. The children's librarian who relies only upon what she can find in print to tell her what she ought to think about children's literature, leans upon a broken reed. In general, reviews in this field are valueless, owing to lack of discrimination and of good taste, and to indifference. The reason for this is the unimportance of the subject, from the standpoint of the average reviewer or literary editor. Miss Hewins has stated with entire fairness the conditions that control reviews of children's books. Christmas time--the "rush season"--is practically the only time when they are given attention, and then owing to the great mass of review copies to be handled, notices are most inadequate. Indeed, most of these notices are evolved from material supplied by the publisher with the book--the trail of the publisher is over them all.

There is not yet among children's librarians a sufficient "body of doctrine"--critical judgment, knowledge of books--to produce satisfactory library lists. Such lists are too often made up from hearsay, or through selection from other lists, which is almost always unsatisfactory. The most prevalent and serious defect in these annotated library lists is the use of too many words which mean nothing. In this work especially "the adjective is the enemy of the substantive." Even the Carnegie list, excellent as a whole and probably the best of the kind yet published, is crude in some respects, and would stand pruning. There is too frequent use of such phrases as "a wholesome book," "a cheery tale," "a children's classic," and there is too great a preponderance of American books, of commonplace "series," of books in what may be called the public-school rut. As an example of "what not to do" in book annotation, extracts may be given from a recent annotated list of children's books, which included the following:

Warner, S. The wide, wide world.

Miss Warner is one of the best friends a young girl can have as chaperone into the delightful kingdom of romance.

Weyman, S. The house of the wolf.

A modern English version of a curious French memoir written about 1620.

Church. Three Greek children.

Mr. Church is an accomplished restorer of the antique, and has a keen discrimination for points appealing to child-like magnetism.

Cooper. The spy.

A story founded upon fact. The same adventitious causes which gave birth to the book determined its scenes and its general character.

It will be seen that not one of these annotations conveys an idea of subject, quality, or treatment, while in two of them at least it is evident that the annotator knew nothing at all about the book.

Articles on children's reading are in general either sentimental or prejudiced, and they are not of direct practical use to the children's librarian. Reading such articles, however, is interesting and often suggestive. Their best feature is the hints they now and then give of some book or class of books that has pleased children, and that the librarian does not know or had not thought of.

Turning to specific points in Miss Hewins' paper, one is inclined to question the stringent criticisms of the "Pansy" books, the "Prudy" books, "Editha's burglar," and the like stories, that certainly do delight many children, though they may not be of a high literary plane. Nor do I believe in children's books carefully "written down" to their audience and never rising above their comprehension. "Words-in-one-syllable" books are obnoxious to a right-minded child. It is a good thing to be given now and then what is above our comprehension. What we don't quite understand holds a strong fascination. Nor do I believe that the "horrors" of the old fairy stories are particularly harmful--the thrills they impart have a subtle charm, and most children delight in "horrors." The difficulty is to steer between what is vulgar and coarse or trashily sentimental on the one hand, and the limiting of a children's collection only to "pretty-pretty" stories, innocuous but utterly without character or variety, on the other. Such a collection should be made as broad, as varied, as catholic as it can be, including old books, English books--Miss Yonge, Miss Shaw, Miss Strickland--not just current and American books.

In conclusion, the most important thing is to know the books themselves. This could not be possible for the librarian of a general collection, but it is possible, and ought to be indispensable, for the librarian of a special class of literature. A children's librarian can make herself familiar with the literature suitable for children, and should do so. Personal familiarity is better than all "evaluations" by other people. There should be a constant interchange of criticism and experience among those working in this field--it is as yet small enough to permit this. This should be largely personal and individual--not brought out as a public expression--until there is developed a better basis for critical and literary discernment in this subject than now exists. The most important thing to do is not to rush hastily into print--to "educate ourselves in public"--but to set to work to know our books, and through such knowledge to establish a fund of critical judgment and experience that will later make it possible for the utterances of children's librarians to carry weight in their own field of literature.

There followed a "collective paper," in three parts, each part being treated by a special writer. It dealt with

THE BOOKS THEMSELVES.

In the absence of Miss WINIFRED TAYLOR Miss EDNA LYMAN read Miss Taylor's consideration of