College and Research Libraries


agement engineering and mechanical engi-
neering, all significant fields for a technologi-
cal library. 

The editing of the volume is uneven, and 
among the errors noted are a citation to the 
United States Catalog published in 1938 (p. 
41), a suggestion that the Monthly Checklist 
of State Publications (whose ti~le is inexactly 
cited) includes listings for significant munici-
pal publications (p.5 I), reference (p.45) to 
a list of dealers on page I5 when that list 
occupies pages 46-47, and omission of the 
Union List of Serials in "Inclusive Listings of 
Periodicals" (p.58). Though many periodi-
cal abbreviations are used in the supple-
mentary references at the end of chapters, no 
key to these abbreviations is included in the 
manual. 

The book includes many lists of dealers and 
library supply houses and a number of descrip-
tions for currently available library equipment 
and forms, which enhance the value of the 
book as a manual of practice. They also 
contribute to its early obsolescence. 

Despite its faults, however, the book should 
be a useful manual in the smaller technical 
library where standard works on library ad-
mmtstration are not readily available. 
Whether so long and so specific a how-to-do-it 
text is the most practical orientation for the 
busy executive is perhaps debatable. And it 
is hard to conceive that this manual can have 
much usefulness for the library school student 
whose needs extend considerably beyond the 
rather limited discussions of management and 
organization problems included here. For 
this last group of users, the chapter on ref-
erence techniques will probably offer the most 
useful information.-Carlyle f. Frarey, Co-
lumbia University. 

The Subject Catalog 
The Use of the Subject Catalog in the Univer-

sity of California Library. By Leroy C. 
Merritt. Berkeley and Los Angeles, 
University of California Press, I95I. (Uni-
versity of California Publications in Li-
brarianship, v. I, no. I) I8p. 35¢. 
With this publication the University of 

California inaugurates a new series of studies 
in professional librarianship under the editor-
ship of ]. Periam Danton, Donald Coney, 
Robert Vosper, and Mr. Mer_ritt. In an area 
where relatively few such series exist, the 
appearance of another is an event to be cele-

brated with appropriate commendation, en-
couragement and praise, particularly when 
the first number is so prophetic of the probable 
significance and excellence of others to follow. 
The study is well-designed and attractively 
printed, and the University of California de-
serves high praise for so auspicious a begin-
ning. It would be encouraging to observe 
the development of similar series at other 
major library schools so that fuller reporting 
of the results of significant studies than is now 
feasible in existing professional journals might 
be realized. 

Most, if not all of the previous studies 
of use of the subject catalog suggest that this 
approach to library materials is less-used 
than tradition maintains. Some studies have 
apprised us of the need for greater integration 
of printed bibliographies with the card catalog 
since bibliographies will give better access to 
a larger bulk of material and will be used 
more widely. In some other studies there is 
even a subtle implication that the relatively 
slight use of the subject catalog by scholars 
and specialists may justify its eventual aban-
donment, or at least its drastic reduction in 
size and scope. As Merritt points out, how-
ever, these studies have been limited largely 
to the use of the subject catalog by compara-
tively advanced students; "none ... is con-
cerned with the more casual use ... by the 
average college undergraduate." This study 
reports an attempt to measure this casual use 
which seems to have resulted in important 
findings. 

California, like other libraries faced with 
rising costs and static or declining budgets, was 
interested in reducing its cataloging costs. 
Careful analysis of contributing factors led 
to the conclusion that a truly meaningful re-
duction could result only from · economies in 
subject cataloging. In this study Merritt 
reports the results of a year-long investigation 
to determine whether any curtailment of 
subject cataloging might be attempted without 
impairing service to catalog users too much. 
At California, such a study was made feasible 
by the existence of a divided catalog and by 
the . installation of the IBM book charging 
system. In a series of samplings, each of 
which showed a high positive correlation with 
the others and with the total sample, I2.6 per 
cent of the total circulation of monographs 
"with catalog assistance" was analyzed. 
Although the resulting figures do not take 

182 r:OLLEGE AND RESEARCH LIBRARIES 



account of catalog use for other than book 
loans, there is no evidence in the study to 
suggest that, were such an analysis possible, 
significantly different results would obtain. 
The study, in fact, demonstrates high regard 
for tight methodology and objective analysis 
and evaluation of results. 

Based on this analysis of who borrowed 
books of what publication date in which lan-
guage on what subjects, the conclusion 
reached, that the efficiency of the subject 
catalog may be expected to decline to a level 
no lower than So per cent of its present ef-
fectiveness if a subject approach to library 
materials is limited only to those titles pub-
lished in the English language within the past 
twenty years, is particularly significant when 
Merritt demonstrates that a reduction of 
nearly 65 per cent in subject cataloging load 
(and presumably in costs as well) can be 
realized through adopting such a policy. To 
librarians hard-pressed to reduce cataloging 
costs and still · maintain a high quality of 
service, this will be a welcome conclusion. 
The figures cited pertain to only one institu-
tion, of course, and this single study cannot 
determine whether the conclusion is equally 
valid for another institution or for another 
type of library. The suggestion is provocative, 
however, and merits further studies in other 
libraries to corroborate the validity of the 
findings under other conditions. For example, 
are patterns of subject catalog use in public 
libraries so different that this study is irrele-
vant to that problem? It is obvious, of 
course, that where the volume of English lan-
guage acquisitions bulks larger, or the per-· 
centage of current imprints is higher than at 
California, less savings in subject cataloging 
can be realized. Yet one suspects that it is 
in the academic and the research library where 
the cost problem is felt most acutely, and it 
is in such libraries that the pattern of acquisi-
tions should resemble closely that at Califor .:. 
nia. Merritt's findings are significant in that 
they tend to conform in a general way to the 
conclusions reached by Knapp, Brown, Swank 
and others, and in that they do not support 
a conclusion that the subject catalog might be 
abandoned altogether. 

Of course there will be some to argue the 
accuracy and reliability of this study since 
its conclusions run counter to tradit.ional 
concepts of library service long held. But to 
those others who are perceiving that modern 

APRIL, 1952 

economics preclude perpetuation of lovely 
traditions unless they contribute markedly 
to the over-all quality of library service, this 
study will offer some hope of reconciling 
budget and service. And to those who are 
deeply concerned with the efficacy of the 
modern subject catalog, now grown in some 
libraries to overwhelming proportions , here 
is some prospect that the colossus may be cut 
down to manageable size and effective posi-
tive programs developed to improve the use-
fulness of the vestigial subject catalog which 
remams. 

Merritt's straightforward presentation of 
the results of the California study is com-
mended to the attention of all who are con-
cerned with the construction , maintenance 
and interpretation of the library catalog. 
Here is positive evidence that there are ways 
to study the complex problem of catalog use 
and that out of such studies it will be possible 
to attack the problems of cataloging costs and 
of catalog intelligibility with some hope of 
ultimate success.-Carlyle ]. Frarey , Colum-
bia Univ ersity. 

Professional Division of Graduate 
School 

GEORGE PEABODY COLLEGE 
FOR TEACHERS 

Nashville 5, Tennessee 

SUMMER QUARTER, 1952 

First Term: June 16-July 19 

Second Term: July 21-August 23 

23 Courses with Faculty of 15 

M.A. (L.S} 5th Year Program 

M.S. in L.S. 6th Year Program 

Director: Dr. William A. FitzGerald 

183