College and Research Libraries By FELIX E. HIRSCH lt1terlibraty Loans from the College Viewpoint' Dr. Hirsch is librarian and professor of history_, Bard College. A LMOST NINE eventful years. have passed ~ since the A.L.A. Council approved, at the meeting in Cincinnati, the Interli- brary Loan Code in its present form .2 During these years of unending emergen- cies and readjustments, most college li- brarians were so busy with their daily tasks, that little leisure remained for re- thinking the whole interlibrary loan prob- lem in the light of the postwar situation. The literature on the subject almost dried out, if we except the judicious comments found in the general works by Lyle and by Wilson and Tauber and in a few scattered periodical articles. 3 Perhaps the time ~s ripe for a critical reappraisal. Two basic questions are to be answered : Is the Interlibrary Loan Code of I940 flexible and liberal enough to meet the needs of I 949? Are college libraries doing their full share to facilitate the exchange of . books between academic libraries? I say college libraries, since it is evident that most university and research libraries have contribut-ed nobly to the cause of inter- library cooperation. The administrators of 18 college libraries 1 Paper presented at the meeting of the . College Libraries Section, A.C.R.L.1 Jan. 21, 1949, hChLt~ago .. 2 See its full text in Coltege and Researc ~ ranes 2 -31 8-319, September 1941. . . C ll ·a Lyle Guy R. The Admimstratwn of the ~ ege Library.' H. W. Wilson, 1944,_ p. 180-184; and Wtls~n. L · R and Tauber Maunce F. The Unwers~ty Lf~~ry ·Chicago, Uni~ersity of Chicago ~ress,_ 1945, p 404-413 The most valuable recent arttcle 1s th!lt b. Robert. H. Haynes on "Interlibra~y Loans" m Harvard Library Bulletin 2:127-129, Wtnter 1948. were asked for a frank expression of their opinions. All of them responded immedi- ately and, with one exception, extensively. These 18 libraries4 are of different sizes, varying fro~ less than 30,000 t~ almost 350,000 volumes. Some have generous appropriations; others are struggling with inadequate budgets. Several are close to metropolitan book centers; others are lo- cated in rural areas far from the con- veniences of a union catalog. A number of the institutions chosen follow a rather conservative philosophy of education, while a few hold very progressive ideas. I believe that these 18 libraries (plus the Bard Library) represent a fair cross sec- tion, even though this paper does not claim by any means to be as exhaustive as Ken- neth J. Boyer's survey of an earlier period. 5 There is no full agreement on the ques- tion of whether or not the Interlibrary Loan Code of 1940 is liberal enough for our times. All of us admit that it was a real achievement when it was formulated . Several college librarians are still perfectly satisfied with it. Some think it is fine, if its provisions are generously interpreted; others would like to see certain phrases re- worded. A few go much further in their cnticism. The librarian of Franklin and Marshall feels that the A .L.A. code "lacks liberality in that it fails to meet college 4 Allegheny Antioch Bennington, Bowdoin, ;Bryn Mawr Earlham Frar{klin and Marshall, Hamtlt.on, Keny~n, Middlebury, Reed, Sarah Lawre~ce, Smtth, Union Vassar, WellesleY., We~ls and Wtllta!Tis- 11 Boyer Kenneth J. 'Interlibrary Loans m College and Uni;ersity Libraries." Library Quarterly 2: I 13· 134, April 1932. 434 COLLEGE AND RESEARCH LIBRARIES library needs adequately.'' The same opin_:- ion is expressed by Sarah Lawrence and Wells. I, for one, wish that some of the truly liberal spirit of the Philadelphia Interlibrary Loan . Code . could be infused in the A.L.A. Code. Only Aid .to Research ? The general criticism of the A.L.A. code is based on a number of specific complaints. One is directed against the definition that "the primary purpose of the interlibrary loan services is to aid research calculated to advance the boundaries of knowledge by the loan of unusual books." The librarian of Wellesley and the acting librarian of Smith College believe that, as Miss King puts it, "the service has second- ary purposes, namely to aid the upperclass student carrying an honors program or doing such independent investigative work and study that the library's resources must be supplemented by outside aid." Miss Stone of Sarah Lawrence goes even further : "We in Westchester County be- lieve the primary purpose of interlibrary loan is to make all the books in the county available to all the readers." It is a matter of course that no conscientious college li- brarian will encourage any senior project, thesis or honors paper for which his own library cannot supply the basic material, but he cannot buy all the expensive mono- graphs which might be used once by one exceptional student. No harm will be done by securing some of them-or all of them-by interlibrary loan. Miss King also suggests dropping, as somewhat mis- leading, the last sentence under "Purpose;'' that transactions for other than research purposes "should be considered as part of an extension service rather than as inter- library loans." The second major criticism is directed against point 3 of the code, that "no OCTOBER~ 1949 material o£ any kind may be borrowed tor · class use." Few college librarians would . wish to encourage borrowing for class use as a regular practice; it plainly would not be fair. You would not like to expose an irreplaceable work, belonging to another library, to a rather rough treatment by 20 freshmen. The present inadequacies of the international book trade make ex- ceptions inevitable; A Dante course was given at Bard for which certain volumes of his works in the Temple Classics edition were considered indispensable by the in- structor. In spite of early ordering from England we were unable to secure the copies in time. An explanatory letter to Miss Stone quickly produced these coveted volumes from Sarah Lawrence on an un- limited loan, and the instructor was able to teach the course as planned. Would it not be better to follow the suggestion from Wellesley that the code should be liberal- ized in this point and read: "Material needed for class use should be requested only in exceptional cases."? Where only a few responsible students would use a book, no harm would be done. While nobody wishes to infringe on the rights of the lending library, it should not use too much discretion. To give an example of how not to proceed: In the early fall of 1947 we asked a large university library, with which we had long-established close contacts, for a book to be used by an under- graduate. The answer was that a policy decision would have to be made about it. In spite of some reminders, that policy has not been made. Lack of Liberality Various college librarians feel that the code is not liberal · enough in suggesting two weeks as an average loan period. It would save a lot of nervous tension and unnecessary correspondence if the average 435 period were at least three, or preferably four weeks. Of course books no longer needed should be returned immediately by the borrowing library. Two other criti- cisms are directed not so much against the code as against its rigid application. Sev- eral librarians strongly object to the en- . forced use of express where regular mail would be as safe and almost as fast. The librarian of Earlham claims that several times he received on the same day two in- terlibrary loan books, the larger by parcel post costing four cents, and the smaller by express collect costing 94 cents. He adds: " I suspect that shipping by express is an in- direct way of discouraging borrowing, and I would infinitely prefer an outright refusal." Many college librarians also dislike the frequently imposed condition that books lent should be used only in the borrower's library building. In most cases this seems like so much red tape. Books borrowed by interlibrary loan are very rarely lost. Miss Stone remembers two losses during her librarianship at Sarah Lawrence, and only one volume has disappeared in my more than 12 years at Bard. The librarian of Williams College sees a technical in- convenience in such a requirement and adds: "I believe that the responsibility as- sumed by the borrowing library is sufficient guarantee for the safety of materials lent." Finally, the librarian of Antioch suggests that a revision of the A.L.A. code should take full account of the revolutionary changes brought about by microfilm and microcards. For Whom Should We Borrow? Inasmuch as colleges are not primarily research institutions, for whom may we justly borrow books? The overwhelming majority of the college .librarians consulted feels that borrowing for undergraduates, especially seniors, is legitimate if every request 1s carefully screened by the bor- rowing librarian. If the library does not own the book which the student needs, or its equivalent, and if the purpose seems serious enough, an interlibrary loan would certainly be advisable. That holds espe- cially true when an advanced student works in a field new in the curriculum, in which the collection has not yet been built up to a satisfactory extent. This point was raised by the librarian of Hamilton College. If the librarian doubts the validity of the re- quest, he can easily consult the instructor. For many years we have been doing a large amount of work along these lines at Bard and have never regretted the effort involved. Sarah Lawrence, which prac- tices the same method of individualized education as Bard does, has gone even further in this dire~tion. For a student body of 340 Miss Stone borrowed about goo volumes last year. She puts it very convincingly: " _I can only say, if other colleges had the same interest of instruction we have, and the same inordinate interest in reading that our s~udents show, they probably would find themselves resorting to the same tactics." The college libraries around Philadelphia have extended the system of interlibrary loans for undergrad- uates to the ideal point. Bryn Mawr Library furnishes printed letters of introduc- tion to the libraries of Haverford and the University of Pennsylvania. This system enables the students of Bryn Mawr and Haverford to borrow books in the cooperat- ing libraries without red tape. There are close ties also between Swarthmore and the libraries of the other two Philadelphia Quaker colleges, and a station wagon has facilitated borrowing between them. While many college lib~arians are cau- tious regarding interlibrary loans for stu- dents, few will want to restrict faculty members. Any librarian who tries to scrutinize their requests will find himself in a rather unpleasant spot. With all his 436 COLLEGE AND RESEARCH LIBRARIES tact and all his bibliographic knowledge, how can he prove to them that the books available in his library are just as good, if not better than those to be secured from the Lib r ary of Congress or Harvard? The professors will never believe him. There- fore it is much better to meet all requests corning from faculty members, except for obviously excessive demands. I can see no harm in borrowing for the personal re- search purposes of faculty members. This is one way of creating good will •among our constituents. Why should we not help the struggling Ph.D. candidate and save him an expensive trip to some distant uni- versity libr ar y ? Why should we not furni sh the active scholars on our faculty with important research material for their next books or articles ?6 The librarian of Vassar seems correct in saying: "I think the more faculty must depend on inter- libra ry loans to use scholarly materials, the more the librar y ought to feel some obliga- tion to help those facult y members." The librarian of Reed adds sympathetically: " A man doing research here , so far away from the great library centers, is greatly handicapped. I am amazed that they ac- complish as much as they do." Of course, our liberality may be occasiohally abused, but we should take that with good humor. The librarian of a New England college, for instance , found it somewhat hard to swallow when a professor of chemistry requested the loan of a pamphlet on phonograph records from the Library of Congress, and the pamphlet arrived by express at the cost of ninety cents. . . . Should the professor pay for it? He was willing to do so, but the Library Com- mittee at that institution had adopted the principle that the library was to assume all such charges. I think the principle is 6 See the comments of Professor Al an Hol ske and Ka rl H. Koopman on this issu e in College and R e- search Libranes 7:74-77, J anuary 1946, and 8 : xs 7- x6o, April 1947. Both writers have some good arguments to offer fo r t heir d iffe rent v iewpoin t s. OCTOBER~ 1949 good even though its application here looks bad. Procuring important books from other libraries for our community is just as much the moral obligation of a college library as subscribing to periodicals and having a reserve book collection. In fact we should be happy that by borrowing books which are costly and hard to obtain, we save ourselves a lot of trouble and money. Therefore quite a few college libraries, among them Bard, do not charge postage or any other fee. We talk so much about public relations. Here is a golden opportunity to improve them from our petty cash funds. Us efuln ess of Union Catalogs Now I come to my second major point. I believe that, generally speaking, college libraries have not yet developed the system of interlibrary cooperation to its fullest desirable extent. Comparatively few seem to visualize its potentialities. These few are usually those connected with a biblio- graphic center or a union catalog. I have testimony from various college librarians for the revolutionizing effects of the Philadel- phia and the Pacific Northwest Biblio- graphic Centers. Says the librarian of Reed about the latter: "Any praise that might be given to the center would never be too high in my estimation. · They do a remarkable service to the libraries in this area. We could not carry on the work that we do without them." Local or regional union catalogs have also served to spur the spirit of coopera- tion. An outstanding example is the West- chester Library Association Union Catalog with which Sarah Lawrence Library has been collaborating so effectively. Benning- ton and Bard are also loosely affiliated with it. We at Bard rarely borrow, but fre- quently lend through this union catalog which includes our accession cards, and I feel very cheerful about the opportunity to 437 help other libraries. The requests are usually for monographs which are not ur- gently needed by our clientele. I would rather see a volume on Italian history or on psychiatry read in another library than gathering dust on our shelves. Other union catalogs operate, for instance, in V er- mont, southeastern Michigan and Ohio (at Western Reserve). According to the librarian of Allegheny, tentative studies are under way for a similar establishment, at first probably limited to periodical col- lections to serve the Pittsburgh area. The librarian of Hamilton suggests a union catalog for upstate New York. Above all the local and regional union catalogs, we have the nationwide union catalog in the Library of Congress from which all of us have received valuable help on occasion. But that catalog cannot solve the day-to- day problems of interlibrary cooperation with which college librarians are faced. 7 Selfh elp~ Not B egging! A few of us feel that neither union catalogs nor bibliographic centers can fur- nish the final answer to our basic problem. We want to expand the collaboration be- tween libraries. We want to bring costly and unusual books to our constituency at the lowest possible expense with the great- est speed and with a minimum of red tape. In other words we want to extend the material accessible to our faculty and stu- dents beyond the walls of our own college library, and we would like to help our colleagues in other libraries toward accom- plishing the same goal. The one thin g college librarians definitively do not wish to do is to ask the large research libraries for more help. Harvard, Yale, New York State, Cornell, the University of Pennsyl- vania and University of Chicago Libraries, to mention but six examples from a much T For t he whole t opic of r egi on a l librar y ce n ters t~­ d ay see the symposium in Co llege and R esearch Lt- braries 8 :54-69, J a nua r y 194 7- longer list , have done all that can be ex- pected of them. We hardly dare to ap- proach them for more. Instead of asking more favors from big librar ies fo r which we have rarely an opportunity to do an appreciable service in return, w e should think in terms of selfhelp. Some sceptics probably w ill object that selfhelp is just a noble illusion and that there is no satisfactory alternative to rely- in g on the bi g research libraries. I am convinced that we may be able to do a constructive job if we de yelop a policy of collaboration among ourselves, pr ovided we have enough good will , ingenuity and pa- tience. In some cases such a system can be easily established, due to the closeness of similar institutions. Amher st , Mount Holyoke and Smith have built up a very effective cooperation which goes far beyond the normal interlibrary loan and permits faculty members of each institution to draw freel y on the resources of the other two. 8 Where the impediment of .distance is to be overcome, collaboration between li- braries of similar size and t ype r emains feasible and is very effective. The Sarah Lawrence and Bard College Lib r aries, both of approximately the same size and ch ar- acter, exchange all kinds of materials freely and rapidly. The fact that they are So miles apart has never made any difference. At present we are be ginning to develop a similar informal exchan ge w ith the Wells College Library, which is more than 200 miles away. A gain here are tw o libraries of similar character, though somew hat dif- ferent size, w hich can supplement each other s Two char acteristic passages from their Interlib r ary Loan Agreement of May 7, 19 48 read: "The cooperat- ing l ib r aries agree to lend any material not cu rre ntly needed by its own borrower s or staff, unl es s u se of su ch m aterial is r estricted Ly specia l conditions, or unless its rarity, fragile condition, or s ize . make it un wise to risk it to the hazards of tra n sporta tion . . . . Faculty member s w ho wish to obtain loa ns in person from cooperating libraries ne ed not present letters of intr oduction. S tudents w ishing to avail themsel ves of this privilege shou ld obtain letters of introd~ctio~ from th eir libr arian s. S uch letters should speedy, If pos- sible, the material wan ted and should be presented promptl y. " 438 COLLEGE AND RESEA RCH LIBRA RIES very well as we get more familiar with each other's strong and weak points. It is grate- fully acknowledged that our good neighbor Vassar has been a great help to Bard, both by freely lending materials and by admitting properly introduced Bard students tempo- rarily to its rich library facilities, but it has sometimes worried me that we cannot reciprocate to a sufficient extent. I am not stopping with these three institutions, but hope that eventually we will be able to work out an informal collaboration with the various college libraries in the Albany- Schenectady area and beyond. Substitutes for Union Catalogs Such an exchange · presupposes a fairly thorough acquaintance with the collections of the cooperating libraries. One should know enough about them to guess correctly when asking for books. Otherwise the process of borrowing would become tedious and slow. Since the costs of building up union catalogs for such college libraries usually are forbidding, at least a regular exchange of accession lists (as practiced between Vassar and Wells on the one hand and Bard on the other) is highly desirable. If one studies these lists over a longer period, he knows what kind of materials to expect in a given library. Also lists of periodical holdings (in addition to what may be found in the Union List of Serials) and any other lists or catalogs of collections should be exchanged. I could think of still another effective device. At Bard we have checked our holdings of the Shaw list and its supplement. I am sure many other college libraries will have done like- wise. Why, then, don't we note by some symbols in our copies of the Shaw list the titles which we lack, but which are available in cooperating college libraries of similar character? This would be the next best thing to a union catalog, since the Shaw list and its supplement contain so OCTOBERJ 1949 much of the scholarly material needed in a good college library. The job involved in this notation could be handled by a re- liable clerical worker or a student assitant in a comparatively short time. The com- pilation sponsored by the International Re- lations Board of the A.L.A. under the title Books published in the United States I9J9- I945 and currently the United States Quarterly Booklist could be jointly checked in the same manner. Two proposals coming from other col- lege librarians go in similar directions and deserve earnest consideration. Union Col- lege suggests round robin request blanks within a group of cooperating libraries, and Franklin and Marshall propounds the com- pilation of a subject guide to outstanding or strong collections for similar college libraries in a given area. Mr. Anstaett adds: "I am visualizing a sort of union subject guide, each library listing its very strongest subject holding. We, for ex- ample, are very strong in Pennsylvania German material, and we have just ac- quired a hospital library containing many medical journals. When these are cata- loged our collection of this kind of material will be outstanding, at least for a college library." Such collections could be made more accessible by a new detailed regional subject guide. Along the same lines, the librarian of Allegheny expresses his will- ingness to make the famous Lincoln collec- tion which Ida Tarbell gave to his institution, available for wider use in the Pittsburgh area. These are just a few suggestions which I am sure could be greatly enlarged and improved upon. But while we think of these details, let us not lose sight of the fundamental problem which is to overcome institutional narrowness and inertia. If the college libraries of a given area learn to collaborate closely with each other, they (Continued on page 444) 439 Total circulation for the first academic year with a maximum book stock of 30,000 volumes was approximately 84,000, of which 38,000 was nonreserve. Maximum enrolment for any length of time during this period was 4500. Figures for the second year are perhaps more significant in that they represent one phase of the productivity of a fairly well or- ganized though still rapidly expanding col- lection. Also the second year reflects the full curricula offerings to both freshmen and sophomores. For this period total circu- lation was approximately 300,000, of which 82,000 was n0nreserve (two-week period) and 2 1 8,000 was reserve (one hour and overnight) . During the second year the maximum book stock was approximately 44,000 and the top enrolment 8 500. It is perhaps significant that the rela.tively small book collections, I3,DOO-I6,ooo vol- umes per campus, did sustain the gross use reflected in the foregoing. These figures compare favorably with institutions having many times the book stock available to our students. This experience would seem to confirm to some extent the belief held by many librarians that great numbers of books are not required to fulfill the needs of any present undergraduate academic program. Indeed, the writer feels that the relatively small but highly select book collections available to ACUNY students facilitated their use. What of the Future? The writer is frequently asked about the future disposition of these libraries. At this time he does not know. When Mo- hawk was closed, its library was consoli- dated with the Champlain and Sampson collections. Sampson closed in June and plans are now under way to consolidate its collection with the Champlain library. At this time it appears altogether possible that some sort of educational institution will remain permanently at Champlain. Presumably the present library will be inherited by whatever agency directs the permanent establishment. Champlain is scheduled for operation again next year under its present organiza- tion. For at least that far ahead its main library problem will be the intelligent use of the considerable number of duplicate titles it will have. Interlibrary Loans from the College Viewpoint (Continued from page 439) will be surprised to find out how many important scholarly titles they hold among themselves and that they can stand on their own feet instead of being beggars. This will encourage interlibrary loans on a much larger scale. I hope all of us will eventu- ally rival with Sarah Lawrence's 950 books lent and borrowed per year. Another Farmington Plan Beyond the closer cooperation in inter- library loans, I foresee in the more distant future some kind of a Farmington plan for college libraries. That is, college libraries of a given area will agree which subjects they wish to develop more strongly, leaving the special care of others to their neighbors. By the system of free interchange they will be just as able to have these books available to their own clientele, when needed, as if they had acquired them themselves. This will bring about a much more reasonable and effective use of our book budgets. I hope I will still live to see the day when the last trace of institutional isolationism disappears from our college libraries. 444 COLLEGE AND RESEARCH LIBRARIES