College and Research Libraries


By R A L P H E . E L L S W O R T H and N O R M A N L . K I L P A T R I C K 

Midwest Reaches for the Stars' 
Dr. Ellsworth is director, and Mr. Kil-

patrick, associate director in charge of tech-
nical processes, State University of Iowa 
Libraries. 

IN 1940 the presidents of 13 M i d w e s t uni-versities expressed their interest in a 
cooperative storage library for the M i d w e s t . 
A survey, financed by the Carnegie C o r p o -
ration, was made and published. Aspects 
covered were problems concerned with the 
transfer of books, cost figures, plans of in-
corporation, and objectives. 

T h i s plan came to naught for reasons 
unknown to us. T h e war, the constitution-
al inability of librarians to agree on any-
thing, the inherent weakness of the storage 
library idea by itself, plus the basic philoso-
phies of the librarians concerned were prob-
ably the relevant factors. 

O n c e more in 1947 the presidents of the 
Midwestern universities have suggested that 
we librarians open the question. T h e r e is 
no war, there is more knowledge about the 
storage idea, librarians agreed on one point 
and found that it didn't kill them, and there 
is a n e w generation of librarians in 13 
of the Midwestern universities—some of 
us imbued with the graduate library school 
experimentation, the rest, wise, fearless, and 
scholarly. In fact, with men like Doane, 
M i l l e r , W a r n e r Rice, Pargellis, Parker, 
Henkle, M c D i a r m i d , Hazen, Moriarity, 
N y h o l m , O r r , Manchester, T o w n e , and 
D o w n s , it is inevitable that the dragons will 
be slain. W e have our St. Georges, our 
doubting Thomases, our D o n Quixotes, but 

1 P a p e r presented b y D r . E l l s w o r t h at the C o n f e r -
ence of E a s t e r n C o l l e g e L i b r a r i a n s , C o l u m b i a U n i v e r -
sity, N o v . 29, 1947. 

also", as a group, w e have a fairly honest 
common understanding of scholarship and 
its bibliographic implications. 

So now, under the chairmanship of Presi-
dent C o l w e l l , a new committee consisting 
of Presidents C o l w e l l , Fred, and W e l l s , 
and librarians M c D i a r m i d , Doane, and 
Ellsworth, is at work with t w o subcommit-
tees appointed. O n e is making a fresh 
survey, and one is studying centralized cata-
loging and acquisition. 

T h e contents of this paper represent only 
the personal opinions of the authors. W e 
are the subcommittee on cataloging and 
acquisition. T h e concepts we state have 
not been submitted to or approved by our 
committee. 

The Regional Idea 

N o w , a f e w preliminary statements about 
the regional idea are in order. W e are 
well aware that there is a kind of psycho-
logical disorder which causes a man w h o 
cannot solve his personal problems to turn 
to grandiose schemes which are often nearly 
perfect in themselves, but which lack a f e w 
connecting links with reality, and the lack 
destroys the validity. It is often difficult 
to distinguish, at any given time, between 
the efforts of a man w h o has a toe hold 
on a truly great idea to a man whose toes, 
all ten of them, are up in the clouds. 

W e librarians have a bit of this disorder 
in our blood. W e turn to the "larger unit 
of service" idea, in part, because of its sweet 
reasonableness, but also because we cannot 
or will not meet our own problems on their 
home grounds. 

136 COLLEGE AND RESEARCH LIBRARIES 



Exajnple i. W e cannot or w i l l not agree 
a m o n g ourselves in the large libraries on a 
division of collecting policies, because at 
heart w e are all bibliographic empire build-
ers. T h e r e f o r e , w e turn to F a r m i n g t o n , 
because w e sincerely hope it w i l l permit us 
to eat our cake and have it, too. 

Example 2. T h e small public library 
turns to the county or regional idea, because 
the t o w n cannot afford a librarian. But it 
can afford teachers, preachers, lawyers, 
doctors, and dentists. W h a t w e mean is 
that w e can't convince the citizens that they 
w a n t to pay f o r a librarian. But w h e n w e 
get a county or regional librarian, have w e 
really convinced the citizens that they w a n t 
her, or have w e merely spread the cost so 
that the citizens are not conscious of it, or 
the librarian? 

Example J. In a given metropolitan 
area, w e have t w o medium-sized universi-
ties and a f e w small colleges. Just w h a t 
do w e add to the intellectual resources of 
the g r o u p when w e make a regional library 
center out of them, unless in so doing w e 
succeed in causing them to eliminate un-
necessary duplication and thereby purchase 
additional teachers and books they w o u l d 
otherwise not have? 

Example 4. W e speak glibly about 
eliminating duplication in collecting fields. 
W e are keen on the idea, but w e think in 
an academic vacuum. W e seem unaware 
that our plans might have curricular im-
plications, the results of w h i c h w e w o u l d 
be unable to face. L e t us take a state uni-
versity and a nearby state college of agricul-
ture. T h e professor of poultry diseases at 
the state college publishes his research in 
the highly specialized poultry journals 
w h i c h the university does not have or need. 
But his research is based on data w h i c h he 
can get only f r o m the basic science and 
medical journals, w h i c h w e librarians 
w o u l d like to think the university and not 

the state college should o w n . T h i s cannot 
be. Both institutions must o w n them. 
T h e poultry journals are cheap, but the 
others are not. Supposing the university 
creates an institute of atomic research and 
the other an institute of nuclear physics. 
W i l l they not require the same literature? 
C o u l d either exist without the literature? 

O u r basic objective is to see w h a t can be 
done regionally either to make our money 
go further, or to increase the quantity and 
quality of printed research and instruc-
tional facilities in the M i d w e s t within a 
ten-year period—because after that w e ' l l 
probably be defending the status quo. 

A t the very beginning w e must have the 
librarians' and their institutions' stand on 
one basic issue, " A r e w e prepared to dis-
card our inherited philosophy of trying to 
make each of our libraries as large and in-
clusive as possible in favor of a philosophy 
of building the contents of each of our li-
braries in relation to the inclusive contents 
of a g r o u p of homogeneous libraries?" If 
the answer is yes, w e can proceed to an 
examination of the pig in the poke, but if 
it is no, then there is no use starting. T h e 
reason w e shall insist on this declaration of 
intention is that practical experience has 
shown that a group can never r e f o r m itself, 
unless its members wish to do so. 

T h i s question sounds simple. It is not, 
as you can see f r o m the f o l l o w i n g examina-
tion of its ramifications. 

Implications 

First, the legal aspect. R e g i o n a l c o -
operation is going to mean that local funds 
w i l l be sent outside of the state to pay f o r 
books that are going to be located outside 
of the state. T h i s issue can be dodged at 
first by calling it payment f o r bibliographic 
service, but sooner or later it must be faced 
directly, even if n e w state legislation is 
necessary. W e are leaving this up to our 

APRIL, 1948 137 



presidents, because they got us into this, and 
they can get us out. 

Previous commitments made in terms of 
special collections will limit our freedom to 
act, but will not stymie us seriously. 

Second, the curricular implications. T h e 
direction we take will determine the nature 
of the problem. If w e go in the direction 
of assigning special collecting fields to each 
of us, then in time these collections will be-
come so strong as to fix the research focal 
points of our universities. O r else, they 
will be white elephants to us. 

If Iowa, for example, is to have the one 
complete collection in psychology, one of its 
strongest departments today, then the uni-
versity should make this the strongest psy-
chology department in the M i d w e s t , and 
everyone concerned should accept this as a 
responsibility to be met no matter what the 
effect is upon the research welfare of Iowa's 
other departments in w a r or peace, in pros-
perity or depression. 

T h i s has t w o implications, one internal 
and one external. 
# First, it implies that the other depart-
ments in our university will operate at a 
somewhat narrower scope—all at the P h . D . 
level to be sure, but with beer instead of 
champagne. 

Second, it implies that the other universi-
ties will keep their psychology departments 
limited in favor of the subjects they are to 
operate on an unlimited basis. 

W o u l d w e accept this idea? A n d do our 
presidents, deans, and faculties under-
stand it? 

A Midwest Library Center 

T h i s is only one possible direction. T h e 
other w o u l d be for us not to build exhaus-
tive collections in any field on any of our 
campuses, except in special libraries or in 
special cases, but rather to make our cam-
pus collections w o r k i n g libraries f o r teach-
ing and research, and to build the exhaus-

tive collections in the M i d w e s t library cen-
ter. If this were done, w e could cull out 
little used materials, dead or alive. W e 
could begin positive acquisition by placing 
all our foreign importations that come f r o m 
the Farmington Plan, and buy for campus 
use only the foreign titles our faculty 
request. 

Such a plan w o u l d not force our research 
curricula in any direction. W e w o u l d be 
free to build working research collections 
in any or all fields, but we w o u l d be freed 
of the necessity of acquiring and maintain-
ing the little used, elusive, minor publica-
tions for any or all of our fields. These 
would be in the center, paid for coopera-
tively by all of us. 

In periods of severe depression, w e w o u l d 
not have to starve most of our departments 
in order to meet commitments f o r a f e w 
departments. W e w o u l d merely ask all to 
go on a moderate diet. 

In normal times we w o u l d not be in the 
position of controlling the introduction or 
shift in emphasis of research programs. 
N o r w o u l d w e be required to support an 
exhaustive research collection that had 
g r o w n apart f r o m faculty^ development. 

Neither would we be denying researchers 
access to an exhaustive collection in their 
field. T h i s would be available to them in 
C h i c a g o ; not on our campus. 

If w e do this, and w e hope w e shall, then 
let us be frank in admitting that some day 
in Chicago w e shall have a great research 
library that will dwarf all our campus li-
braries in importance. 

Effect on Chicago University 

Let us admit also that if this center is 
located on the campus of the University of 
Chicago, as I hope it will be, that its pres-
ence will increase the prestige and resources 
of the University of Chicago, and will give 
it an advantage over the rest of us. Its 
presence also gives the University of Chi-

138 COLLEGE AND RESEARCH LIBRARIES 



cago a chance to become a great intellectual 
host to scholars in the region. 

Is this a g o o d or bad thing f o r I o w a or 
Northwestern or Illinois? T h a t w i l l de-
pend on one's point of view. 

T h e university could extend some very 
real and useful courtesies to scholars w h o 
come to use the center. It could a l l o w 
them access to the faculty club. It could 
encourage them to feel at home a m o n g the 
resident faculty in their subject field. B y 
cultivating this kind of faculty relationship, 
we believe the entire region w o u l d profit. 

Nature of the Center 

T h e nature of the library center w i l l be 
determined by the collecting policies w e 
adopt. Its services should include lending 
and copying of all types. It should be con-
nected to each of us by either teletype, 
leased telephone w i r e , facsimile reproduc-
tion, radio, or television. Deliveries by air 
mail should be c o m m o n . It might w e l l 
have a translation service. 

It should obviously contain special study 
facilities f o r visiting scholars and should 
have a complete set of bibliographic tools 
and a staff of expert bibliographers. 

T h e concept of ownership between it and 
us should be so fluid that any local condi-
tion can be met. 

T r a v e l expenses f o r scholars f r o m each 
library should be anticipated and handled 
locally so that red tape is avoided and so 
that the scholar does not need to beg. 

In addition, the center should be tied 
into the needs of the smaller colleges of the 
region at a level consistent with their needs. 
T h e financial relationships should be so 
flexible and simple as to encourage use. 

T h i r d , the technical processes aspect, and 
n o w w e come to the piece de resistance. 
W e should be smart enough to centralize a 
large share of the purchasing and catalog-
ing of the participating libraries at the 
center. 

Centralized Acquisition and Cataloging 

F o r some time n o w , along with most 
other sensible librarians, w e have been con-
vinced that w e needed a basically n e w ap-
proach to the cataloging problem. It has 
seemed reasonable that w e should cen-
tralize cataloging nationally. W e are n o w 
convinced that this w o n ' t be done, because 
there is too much inertia to overcome, that 
no agency that must catalog f o r all types 
of libraries can do the j o b ( w e refer to the 
L i b r a r y of C o n g r e s s ) , and that it cannot 
be done unless the centralizing agency can 
at the same time include acquisitions. T h e 
latter is obviously impossible on a national 
basis. 

But the regional approach f o r a group 
of homogeneous libraries looks promising. 
W e are trying to sketch out methods of 
centralizing cataloging and acquisitioning. 
O u r report w i l l be made to the M i d w e s t 
committee during the winter. 

W e wish to describe our proposal in 
enough detail to show you what w e are up 
to, without pretending that w e k n o w h o w 
to solve all the difficulties that have to be 
overcome, or that our committee w i l l find 
the proposals acceptable. W e must neces-
sarily w a v e a magic w a n d here and there to 
cause a f e w embarrassing rabbits to appear 
and disappear at our convenience. T h a t is 
legitimate at this stage of development, 
though it w o u l d be intolerable later. 

First, w e offer a f e w general observations 
and assumptions. 

O n e , it seems absurd f o r each of the M i d -
west libraries to catalog and classify col-
lections of which approximately 6 0 per cent 
are c o m m o n to all. 

T w o , cooperative cataloging is no an-
swer, because most librarians think it repre-
sents an added cost. 

T h r e e , there are f o u r reasons w h y pres-
ent day use of printed L . C . cards does not 
permit us to l o w e r our costs significantly, 

APRIL, 1948 139 



( a ) cards are available f o r only approxi-
mately 65 per cent of the materials w e 
acquire; ( b ) w e consider it necessary to 
make changes on many of these cards; ( c ) 
w e consider it necessary to adapt the recom-
mended classification numbers on the c a r d ; 
and ( d ) those w h o furnish cooperative 
cataloging copy must initiate an expensive 
process. 

Four, if w e are to receive the maximum 
benefit from centralized acquisition and 
cataloging, w e shall have to be willing to 
accept a uniform assignment of classifica-
tion numbers and entry f o r m . Likewise, 
a uniform assignment of subject headings— 
if w e continue our present system of subject 
cataloging, which I assume reluctantly. 

Five, our basic objective is t w o f o l d : one, 
to provide each of us with a union list of 
our joint holdings, and t w o , to free each of 
us of a large share of our present cataloging 
costs and to a lesser extent of our acquisition 
costs. 

Six, w e propose to centralize acquisition 
not because w e expect sizable savings, but 
because it is a necessary element in cen-
tralized cataloging. A n d n o w to the pro-
posals : 

Plan I. T h e center w o u l d purchase, 
process, catalog, and mark each publication 
acquired by the participating libraries and 
send it along ready f o r the shelf. 

Since it is probably true that the largest 
share of acquisition cost comes f r o m the 
selecting function, the center will try to 
reduce this as much as possible by making 
advance arrangements with publishers for 
automatic supplying of new publications 
according to the nature of the publication 
and the wishes of each university. Each 
library will retain the right to acquire and 
ignore what it wishes, but the center will 
have enough high quality personnel to 
enable it to engage in selecting f o r each li-
brary in areas where this is possible. 

Sovereignty, nevertheless, stays in each 
library. 

A direct means of conversation communi-
cation between each library and the center 
will be established, so that confused order 
requests can be handled directly with no 
wasting of time through letter correspond-
ence. 

T h e center will develop a union list of 
the holdings of its participating libraries, 
using a system of Kardex Visible Index on 
panels which can be kept either on circular 
posts, in tubs, or in letter file cabinets. T h e 
basic size of the entry slip on the visible 
index panels might be 1 " x 8 " , though the 
height of the slip can vary f r o m to the 
height of the panel. Each entry will include 
the classification number, and the biblio-
graphic data for each item. T h e bottom 
line of each slip will contain a r o w of num-
bers f r o m 1 to 40, each being the symbol 
f o r one of the participating libraries. 
Ownership f o r each title will be indicated 
by checking the library's number on each 
slip. 

Basic Catalog 

W h e n the holdings of the libraries have 
been recorded (and here w e wave our 
w a n d ) each panel will be photographed and 
reproduced by the most appropriate method 
—photo-offset, enlarged microprints, or 
O z a l i d prints, and the resulting sheets 
gathered together in volumes and sold to 
the libraries. W e might call this our basic 
catalog. 

T h i s will be each library's identification 
catalog of its o w n holdings, as well as f o r 
the holdings of the other libraries in the 
region. Each library will no longer use its 
o w n card catalog f o r this purpose and will 
discard its identification cards. 

Additions 

Additions of n e w titles by the libraries 

140 COLLEGE AND RESEARCH LIBRARIES 



will be recorded in the visible index master 
file, either by adding a new entry, or check-
ing ownership as the case may be. T h e r e 
are several ways in which this information 
can be put into our campus copies of the 
printed basic catalog. O n e , each panel 
could be reproduced as it is changed and 
new prints sent out to the libraries. T w o , 
a system of cumulative supplements could 
be used with a new edition of the basic cata-
log every ten or twenty years. 

Individual Library Records 

Each library will need to keep a record 
of its new additions until such time as the 
record is incorporated into the printed cata-
log. T h i s could be done in one of several 
ways. If the title is already listed in the 
basic catalog, the library w o u l d need only 
to check its number on the relevant card. 
If the title is not in the catalog, a small card 
file would be kept until such time as each 
entry is incorporated in the basic catalog. 
It will already have such a card f r o m the 
order process. 

Ordering would be done by a typical 
multiple card order system—copies of which 
would go to the center and additional copies 
w o u l d remain in each library for whatever 
use it cared to make of them. Accounting 
f o r each library would be done at the center. 

Since the Kardex Visible Index panel is 
flexible in terms of the size of card it will 
accommodate, it would be feasible to in-
clude the necessary cross references for 
identification, and, of course, w e could in-
clude title entries if we wished. 

Subject Cataloging 

For the time being the f o l l o w i n g method 
of handling subject cataloging w o u l d be 
used. T h e center w o u l d compile sets of 
guide cards with L . C . subject headings 
(plus improvements) printed on the tabs. 

Each library would buy a set and use this 
for forming a new subject catalog. Behind 
each guide card it would file the relevant 
subject cards it n o w owns. Its o w n set of 
cross references w o u l d be discarded. 

In the future when new processed books 
come f r o m the center, they will contain the 
right number of printed cards to be filed 
in the subject catalog, but no headings are 
to be typed on these cards. Each will be 
filed behind its appropriate subject guide 
tab. 

T h i s method of handling subject head-
ings (as well as " S e e " and "See also" refer-
ences) will simplify the business of keeping 
them up to date. W h e n a change is in 
order, the center will merely print new 
guide cards, and send us copies. W e will 
pull the old guide and its accompanying 
cards. W e discard the guide, and file the 
new guide, and the accompanying cards in 
their correct alphabetical place. Current 
changes in subject cross reference will come 
f r o m the center. 

Each library can do as it pleases with 
special card indexes of purely local matters. 
If it wishes to have these, it may do so at 
its own expense. 

Each library could do as it pleased with 
the subject guide cards that are not repre-
sented by books in its library. W e would 
leave them there for book selection purposes, 
if for no better reason. 

Standardized Classification 

N o w on the basis of this bird's-eye view 
of a new proposal, w e are ready to claim 
that we could live with standardized classi-
fication. M a n y of the local adaptations 
that are necessary are shelving problems 
anyway, not classification problems. Other 
local adaptations are indulgences just to 
please someone. W e are ready to say that 
w e cannot afford these, because the values 

APRIL, 1948 141 



w e get out of them are not very high. T h i s 
problem should be looked up by someone 
not hindered by library bias. 

Campus location symbols could be added 
to the identification catalog, and the number 
of copies owned could be recorded there or 
in the shelflist, which could be just an extra 
card furnished by the center. By the way, 
the center would get these cards f r o m L . C . 
if available, or it could make its o w n , or 
even make its own instead of buying f r o m 
L . C . 

Standardized Subject Headings 

Difference of opinion will exist on the 
centralized classification question, and w e 
will have to count noses sooner or later, but 
on the question of centralized subject head-
ings as suggested, w e fail to see h o w much 
of an argument can be developed. Perhaps 
we are w r o n g . 

Effect of Project on Staffs 

W h a t effect w o u l d all of this have on 
our staffs? W e would each need a high 
class bibliographic expert to coordinate the 
remaining parts of acquisition, cataloging, 
and bibliographic service. W e would need 
a small staff of filers. T h e professional 
members of our order and catalog staffs 
would be absorbed, in part, by the center, 
and in part by finding positions in other 
libraries in other parts of the country, not 
so fortunate as to be located in the M i d -
west. 

Effect on Library Profession 

W h a t effect on the library profession? 
W e l l , w e all admit n o w that the primary 
source of our procurement difficulties lies 
in our inability to keep high-powered li-
brarians interested, because w e can't sep-
arate professional w o r k f r o m clerical 
duties. T h i s project w o u l d make a dent 
on that problem. 

Plan I, as you might guess from reading 
between the lines of my statement, calls for 
a complete recasting of the entire purchas-
ing and cataloging system n o w being used. 
T h i s is bitter medicine, and is going to be 
considered radical, Utopian, unrealistic, etc. 
W e are so convinced that drastic measures 
are called for that the idea no longer 
frightens us. But others in our midst will 
react differently. 

Second Proposal 

T h e r e f o r e , we propose a second plan for 
centralization that accepts the present card 
system, that can be expanded in scope as 
our group is ready to expand, and that 
avoids the use of standardized classification 
and subject headings. Plan II relies upon 
the printed card system as n o w used. 

T h e center w o u l d develop a union card 
catalog of our respective holdings, but this 
would not be reproduced. It w o u l d be 
used mostly for ordering purposes and for 
the answering of inquiries for interlibrary 
loan purposes. 

Purchasing, processing, and cataloging, 
but not classification would be done in the 
center, and books that come to us f r o m the 
center would have the catalog cards in 
them. T h e center would secure L . C . cards 
if they are available, or it could compose its 
own. Each library, if it insists, could ap-
ply its o w n classification and subject 
headings. 

It should be obvious that the only econ-
omy in this plan, in terms of cataloging 
costs, comes from central cataloging of the 
books for which libraries are unable n o w 
to secure printed cards f r o m the Library of 
Congress—approximately 40 per cent, w e 
are told. T h e r e might be other economies 
resulting from central purchasing, but these 
would never be large and might not exist 
at all. 

N o w if w e w o u l d accept centralized clas-

142 COLLEGE AND RESEARCH LIBRARIES 



sification and subject heading assignments 
f r o m the center, in other words if we would 
get our cards all ready for the catalog, the 
economies would be greater, but the task of 
reconciling present and past records in card 
form would be complex and perhaps 
impossible. 

T h u s , although we are going to develop 
such a plan, we are probably going to say 
that our group should either go all the way, 
or do nothing at all. W e are pretty well 
convinced that in this situation half way 
measures will probably serve only to add 
further confusion to an already chaotic 
condition. 

If the M i d w e s t committee is willing to 
consider the idea of a basically new plan, 
w e shall find ways of studying and solving 
the problems that must be faced before any 
new plan could be approved. T h e problem 
is not so much one of stubborn details as it 
is one of agreeing upon fundamental values, 
and being willing to give up small advan-
tages for the sake of securing large values. 

Coordinating Subject Cataloging and 
Bibliography 

Later on w e should hope that we w o u l d 
address ourselves to the problem of subject-
ing the relationship between subject cata-
logs, printed bibliographies, and abstracting 
services to fresh, unbiased, scholarly 
scrutiny. But for the time being, w e con-
sider it wise to concentrate our attention on 
straightening out a program of identification 
cataloging, and ordering. T h e t w o prob-
lems are quite different in nature, and prob-
ably will require different organization and 
publication media. 

Midwest Library Center and the Farming-
ton Plan 

W e wish to close this paper by going back 
to the regional concept in relation to the 
Farmington Plan. F o r some time n o w in 

the Association of Research Libraries, we 
have debated the merits of the Farmington 
Plan, and we have had difficulties because 
the plan forces us to face up to issues which 
w e do not wish to face or know how. 

O u r original plan was to assign subject 
priorities to each library and to make each 
library accept responsibility for building 
exhaustive research collections in its priority 
subjects. W e had two objectives: first, to 
get one copy of everything into the country, 
and second, to encourage libraries to special-
ize and to avoid the alleged evils of the 
present situation which are that w e all more 
or less specialize in the same fields and all 
ignore the same fields. 

W e assumed that each university would 
continue to build large collections for re-
search, but that each would build exhaus-
tive collections in only a f e w fields, and that 
these would be divided among the 
libraries. 

If the priorities were to be assigned in 
broad areas, such as chemistry, modern 
Russian history, or physics, only the largest 
libraries could afford to accept such broad 
responsibility. If the broad fields were to 
be divided into narrow units, there would 
be practical difficulties from the point of 
view of the dealers in getting the books 
where they belonged, and f r o m the point of 
view of the librarians, in building expensive 
subject catalogs to tell scholars where the 
books are. 

T h o s e libraries that were assigned priori-
ties that coincide with major research pro-
grams in their universities could justify 
more or less perpetual commitments in 
favor of these subjects, because they could 
assume that their institution would be will-
ing to remain strong in those fields—even 
at the expense of other departments. But 
the libraries that could not afford broad and 
expensive priorities w o u l d inevitably have 
to take subjects that would not be matched 

APRIL, 1948 143 



by active research w o r k in their universities. 
T h e i r librarians hesitated because it seemed 
illogical, even f o r the g o o d of the cause, to 
put money where it w o u l d not produce lo-
cal results. 

T h e miserable part of all this is that w e 
do not really wish to build diversified 
specialized libraries ( b e y o n d certain o b -
vious exceptions) because w e k n o w perfect-
ly w e l l that all our universities are g o i n g to 
f o l l o w pretty much the same curricular pat-
terns in research ( w i t h specific exceptions) 
and in about the same relative proportions. 
T h e y w i l l differ m o r e in level of attainment 
than they w i l l in diversity of effort. T h e s e 
things are determined by factors w h i c h are 
not necessarily subject to the control of the 
university administrations. T h i s explains 
w h y much of our talk in the A . R . L . is so 
h o l l o w . W e really care very little about 
these minor publications if their acquisition 
costs us very much. 

T h e second variation in the F a r m i n g t o n 
Plan was based on a frank realization of 
these facts. T h i s was the regional idea. 
T h i s said, let us do w h a t w e believe in 
d o i n g ; namely, buy selectively w h a t w e 
think w e need in our libraries to support 
the research activities that are thriving n o w 
w i t h o u t regard to w h a t the other universi-
ties do. L e t us next admit the validity of 
importing one copy of foreign books, but 
let us do so in the least expensive and most 
convenient manner, w h i c h w o u l d be to put 
them all in one place so w e w o u l d k n o w 
where they were, and w o u l d , therefore, not 
need to build an expensive catalog to locate 
them. T h a t w o u l d logically be at the L i -
brary of Congress. B u t this is a big country 
and W a s h i n g t o n , D . C . is number one target 
f o r an atomic bomb, so w e said, let us im-
port as m a n y as three copies and spot them 
regionally, and pay f o r each of the three 
collections cooperatively on a regional basis. 
B u t there are n o regional libraries at the 

present time, so f o r the first year w e w o u l d 
import only one copy and put it in the 
L i b r a r y of Congress, and let the future take 
care of itself. T h a t is w h e r e w e are today. 

Summary 

If in C h i c a g o w e can have a M i d w e s t e r n 
library center that w i l l do the f o l l o w i n g 
things: 

1. Become a reservoir collection of Farm-
ington importations plus all of the little used 
materials we wish to get out of our respective 
collections. 

2. Supply us with a union catalog of its 
and our holdings. 

3. Enable us to get rid of a significant per 
cent of our technical processes costs by doing 
centralized purchasing and cataloging for us. 

4. Supply us with the kind of bibliographic 
service mentioned earlier in this paper. 

T h e n the M i d w e s t w i l l gain because it 
w i l l have m o r e books than it n o w has and 
better bibliographic service than it n o w has. 

T h e Universities of I o w a , Illinois, M i n -
nesota, and others w i l l gain because w e 
w i l l have to buy less marginal material, w e 
w i l l get rid of a large share of o u r technical 
processes costs, w e can buy m o r e of the 
books needed f o r present day teaching and 
research, and w e can keep the size of our 
libraries d o w n to w h e r e w e w a n t them. 
W e w i l l be meeting the problem of library 
specialization in the only w a y it can be met 
honestly and permanently. 

T h u s , it comes out that our collecting 
problems are tied up w i t h our cataloging 
problems. O u r cataloging problems can be 
solved only through centralization. C e n -
tralization of cataloging can be done ad-
vantageously only when accompanied by 
central purchasing. Central purchasing 
can be done advantageously on a unit no 
larger than the region. So the region is 
the place to start, and the M i d w e s t is the 
region in w h i c h to start. 

144 COLLEGE AND RESEARCH LIBRARIES