College and Research Libraries


GRANT T. SKELLEY 

Characteristics of Collections Added 
to Alllerican Research Libraries, 

1940-1970: A Preliminary Investigation 

During the years 1940-1970 301 American libraries wer.e re~orted in 
College & Research Libraries and College & Research L1bran~s News 
to have added 1,454 collections. In this report the collectwns are 
analyzed by (1) .type of library, (2) type. of. coll~ction, (3) means ac-
quired, and (4) sources of gifts (to academtc hbranes). 

INTRODUCTION 

THERE IS A coNSIDERABLE, if not sub-
stantial, amount of writing about ''book 
selection" and "collection building" in 
libraries of all kinds. Little seems to 
have been written, however, about the 
role that has been played among re-
search libraries in general by the prac-
tice of acquiring collections of library 
materials-as opposed to adding indi-
vidual titles one at a time. It is the pur-
pose of this paper to make an informal, 
preliminary report on an investigation 
based on one reasonably usable data 
base, with the hope that it may suggest 
and contribute to some more thorough 
and more conclusive studies. 

American libraries have been growing 
since colonial times partly by means of 
acquiring, in bulk, existing collections. 
But documentation and details of most 
of these transactions, and of the nature 
of the collections, are for the most part 
either lacking or widely scattered and 
difficult of access. For a fairly recent pe-

Grant T. Skelley is assistant professor, 
School of Librarianship, University of 
Washington, Seattle. 

52/ 

riod, however, a starting point, at least, 
exists. From its first issue, dated Decem-
ber 1939, College & Research Libraries 
and, more lately, College & Research Li-
braries News (hereinafter referred to 
as C&RL and C&RL News) have in-
cluded, with some variations in presen-
tation and arrangement, news of recent 
acquisitions by libraries throughout the 
United States and Canada. With certain 
qualifications brought out later in this 
report, these published descriptions of 
what American libraries were adding to 
their resources in the form of collec-
tions provide a sample of what has been 
going on. 

The term "research library" is subject 
to definitions that vary according to in-
dividual predilections and persuasions. 
(One notices without comment the dis-
tinction made in the title of the journal 
used as the primary source for this in-
vestigation.) Consequently, no attempt 
has been made to discriminate among 
the libraries whose acquisitions were re-
ported. With a few exceptions . to be 
noted, every added collection that was 
reported in the pages of C&RL and 
C&RL News, 1940-1970 inclusive ( 1,454 
collections in 301 libraries), has been 



counted and categorized according to 
( 1) type of library, ( 2) type of collec-
tion, ( 3) means acquired, and ( 4) 
sources ·of gifts. Definitions are given 
below. 

A word about scope. C&RL at first 
listed people who supplied the journal 
with information about new acquisi-
tions, and these people were called c're-
porters." Mention of them was soon dis-
continued, and some of the editors of 
C&RL during the period covered have 
informed the author that the large ma-
jority of the descriptions that appeared 
(and appear currently) were derived 
from news-releases, and that virtually 
all of such announcements they re-
ceived appeared, sometimes in edited 
versions, in subsequent issues of the 
journal. Other sources accounted for a 
small number of the collections report-
ed. 

Within that scope-the scope of the 
news sources C&RL has and the news 
it published-exclusions in this study 
include ( 1) Canadian libraries, since 
there were so few reported; ( 2) one or 
two instances where the library could 
not be positively identified from the in-
formation given; ( 3) one or two cases 
where collections were jointly acquired 
by two or more libraries not in the same 
system; ( 4) the second or third mention 
of any one collection; ( 5) those cases 
where the description was unclear as to 
whether or not books were acquired as 
a lot, and ( 6) those collections that 
were said to have been formed by an 
agent of the library going on a buying 
junket. 

No attempt was made to quantify the 
growth these collections represented in 
terms of number of volumes or other 
units. When given, sizes ranged from 
two volumes (and other larger quanti-
ties as specific) to eight tons to three 
truckloads to a 14,000,000-item archival 
collection (that of Ford Motor Compa-
ny, given to the Edison Institute in 

Characteristics of Collections I 53 

1965). The years used in the tables are 
the years in which collections were re-
ported in C&RL or C&RL News, and 
are therefore not necessarily always the 
years they were acquired. 

DEFINITIONS 

Collection 

A collection was any group of materi-
als containing two or more items, with 
the exception that a run of a single se-
rial title was not considered a collection. 
However, runs of two or more serials 
were considered to be a collection. 

Type of Library 

Academic/ Private-Any academic in-
stitution of higher education not sup-
ported by state or municipal funds. A 
unit of a multiunit system was identi-
fied and tallied only under the parent 
institution. 

Academic/ Public-Any academic in-
stitution of higher education supported 
by public funds. A unit of a multiunit 
system was identified and tallied only 
under the parent institution. 

Other-A library that does not quali-
fy as either type of academic library, 
or as a "public" or ''state" library, i.e., 
the kind of library that would common-
ly be referred to as "special" or would 
be in a category almost by itself, like 
the Newberry, Folger, Huntington, etc. 

Public-With one exception, a tax-
supported library serving a city or coun-
ty. Branches were tallied by system. The 
exception is the Library of Congress, in-
cluded here on the basis of its tax sup-
port. (How its inclusion affects the sta-
tistics for public libraries is brought out 
below.) 

State-A state library and its branch-
es. Branches, such as the Sutro Branch 
of the California State Library, were 
tallied as with "public." 

Type of Collection 

Author-Used to designate a collec-



54 I College & Research Libraries • January 1975 

tion of books by one author, or of the 
manuscripts of his works, or both. Cor-
respondence and "papers'' were cate-
gorized as a subject collection (see be-
low). 

Book-Used to designate any collec-
tion of printed books, serials, pamph-
lets, etc. 

Genre-A collection of certain types 
of material, book or nonbook, where 
author or subject was not the unifying 
principle: Victorian fiction, incunabula, 
clay tablets, recorded music of the 
1920s, books from one private press, 
etc. 

Heterogeneous-Applied to any col-
lection that was not distinctly an author, 
genre, or subject collection, such as the 
occasional <<gentleman's" library report-
ed. 

Manuscript-Applied to any collec-
tion consisting of manuscript books, 
holograph or partly holograph letters 
and documents (also typewritten), di-
aries, business records, log books, etc. 

Mixed-Used to describe any collec-
tion that contained any combination of 
books, manuscripts, and nonbook ma-
terial as defined for purposes of this re-
port. 

Nonbook-Reserved for material not 
fitting the description of "book" and 
"manuscript," including the one or two 
instances of clay tablets, but usually be-
ing such as phonorecords, etchings, 
films, maps, theater programs, and 
"realia." 

Subject-A collection of books, man-
uscripts, or nonbook material (or 
mixed) that pertains to a given topic or 
area of study. The way some of the col-
lections were described, the choice of 
designating a collection as "subject" was 
more or less intuitive, but usually there 
was little indecision. 

Means Acquired 

Gift-Many acquisitions were called 
"gift" in the description. When the 

term was not used, the operative word 
was almost always either "received" or 
"acquired." Those collections that were 
said to have been "received" were 
classed as gifts; those said to have been 
"acquired" were classed as "unspecified" 
(see below). Collections said to have 
been purchased with a money gift from 
some donor were classed as gifts. 

Loan-There were so few of these 
as to be inconsequential, and they might 
legitimately be considered de facto 
gifts. Technically, however, there is a 
matter of legal title involved. 

Purchase-Includes only those specifi-
cally so designated, except for collec-
tions said to have been purchased with 
a gift of money, which were included 
as "gifts." 

Unspecified- Includes those collec-
tions which, according to the descrip-
tions, were not clearly gifts, loans, or 
purchases. 

Sources of Gifts 
(This information applies only to 

collections added by academic libraries, 
in an attempt to gauge the significance 
of alumni and faculty as donors among 
the reported gift collections.) 

Alumni-Besides the collections which 
were specifically identified as the gift of 
a living alumnus, this category includes 
those collections said to have been from 
"the estate of" or "the family of" 
(etc.) a deceased alumnus. 

Faculty-Inclusion in this category of 
donor was determined in the same man-
ner as for alumni, with "faculty" being 
broadened to include administrators 
and librarians. 

Unspecified-Includes all gift collec-
tions for which the relationship of the 
donor to the school was not given. 

REMARKS 

The data of the sample analyzed here 
do not lead convincingly to any general-
ized conclusions, but they do call for 
some remarks and raise some questions. 

:) 



.................................................. ----------------------------------------------------~--~----------~~--~ 

TABLE 1 
COLLECTIONS ADDED, 1940-1970 (BY YEAR) 

Type of Library Means Acquired Type of Collection 
Academic/ Academic/ 

Year Public Private Public State Other Total Gift Purchase Loan Unspecified Total Book Manuscript Nonbook Mixed Total 

1940 13 15 2 1 0 31 26 1 1 3 31 18 4 3 6 31 
1941 17 10 1 0 2 30 17 0 0 13 30 12 3 6 9 30 
1942 6 7 2 0 2 17 7 6 1 3 17 7 6 1 3 17 
1943 13 20 3 9 5 50 35 2 1 12 50 15 23 3 9 50 
1944 17 19 1 0 0 37 25 1 0 11 37 16 11 2 8 37 
1945 17 17 0 0 1 35 30 2 0 3 35 15 13 1 6 35 
1946 20 13 0 2 0 35 34 0 0 1 35 26 4 2 3 35 
1947 13 20 0 0 0 33 23 1 0 9 33 13 7 4 9 33 
1948 4 16 3 0 0 23 18 2 0 3 23 13 3 2 5 23 
1949 4 9 2 0 0 15 11 0 0 4 15 8 1 4 2 15 
1950 9 8 2 0 0 19 12 1 0 6 19 9 6 2 2 19 
1951 6 11 4 0 0 21 16 4 0 1 21 15 3 1 2 21 
1952 7 18 4 0 0 29 22 1 0 6 29 14 9 1 5 29 
1953 7 10 2 0 0 19 13 3 0 3 19 13 4 0 2 19 
1954 10 13 2 0 0 25 13 4 0 8 25 7 10 0 8 29 (] 
1955 8 17 3 0 1 29 16 7 0 6 29 13 11 0 5 29 

;:s-o 
~ 

1956 16 14 0 0 0 30 21 1 0 8 30 13 2 1 14 30 
.., 
~ 

1957 18 22 2 0 0 42 32 3 0 7 42 11 18 2 11 42 C') ~ 
1958 25 33 7 0 1 66 44 6 0 16 66 31 16 2 17 66 <.'\) .., 
1959 11 30 3 0 3 47 38 6 0 3 47 26 14 1 6 47 

~. 
Cf:l 

1960 14 12 3 0 5 34 26 4 1 3 34 15 15 3 1 34 
~ 

c:;· 
1961 35 21 1 0 6 63 37 4 0 22 63 28 21 3 11 63 Cf:l 
1962 38 39 2 1 9 89 54 16 0 19 89 43 23 4 19 89 0 "'"""+-. 
1963 43 29 5 1 4 82 56 6 0 20 82 42 25 3 12 82 (] 
1964 22 27 4 0 2 55 38 3 0 14 55 33 14 0 8 55 ~ 
1965 18 16 0 0 2 36 21 3 1 11 36 21 4 5 6 36 

.,....... 
<.'\) 

1966 28 21 3 0 1 53 30 7 0 16 53 32 10 3 8 53 
C') 
~ 

1967 55 55 3 0 3 116 45 8 0 63 116 28 67 2 19 116 
~. 

0 

1968 54 37 7 0 1 99 58 9 0 32 99 30 50 0 19 99 ~ 
1969 29 37 16 0 3 85 46 7 0 32 85 26 46 4 9 85 -1970 28 62 16 0 3 109 62 10 0 37 109 32 60 2 15 109 CR 

Total 605 678 103 14 54 1,454 926 128 5 395 1,454 625 503 67 259 1,454 CR 



56 I College & Research Libraries • January 1975 

Type of Library 

It will be seen from Tables 1 and 2 
that a not unexpected pattern emerges 
in that academic libraries reported re-
ceiving by far the most collections-a 
total of 1,283, or 88.5 percent of all re-
ported. The evenness of distribution be-
tween public and private academic li-
braries ( 41.5 percent and 46.5 percent) 
is misleading, however, in light of the 
fact that twenty-five public academic li-
braries acquired 398 collections, while 
sixteen private academic libraries ac-
quired 418 collections. In other words 
15 percent of the academic libraries ac~ 
counted for 64 percent of the collec-
tions acquired by both types, and 21.5 
percent of the public academic libraries 
accounted for 66 percent of the collec-
tions acquired by that type, and 10.5 
percent of the private academic li-
braries accounted for 62 percent of the 
collections acquired by that type. (See 
Table 4 for ranked lists.) In the total 
sample, 148 ( 49 percent) of the li-
braries reported only one collection. 

Forty-five ( 15 percent) reported ten or 
more. 

The figure for public libraries is like-
wise misleading, for, as pointed out . 
above, this category includes the Library 
of Congress, which accounted for seven-
ty-seven, or 75 percent of the total num-
ber reported by public libraries. 

A similar situation exists with state 
libraries, where one such library (Vir-
ginia) reported 50 percent of the thirty-
one-year total of fourteen collections 
in one year ( 1943), and overall reported 
ten, or 71.5 percent of the total for this 
category. 

Libraries in the "other" category show 
a more normal distribution, with a total 
of twenty-two libraries reporting fifty-
four collections, although the figures 
are somewhat skewed by the fact that 
one library ( the Truman Library) re-
ported seventeen, or 31.5 percent of the 
total. 

Type of Collection 

There was of course an extraordinary 
variety of materials, subjects, authors, 

TABLE 2 

COLLECTIONS ADDED, 1940--1970: SUMMARY 

Type of Library 
Academic/ Academic/ 

Characteristics Public Private Public State Other Total Percent 

Book 312 287 14 2 10 625 43.0 
Manuscript 169 219 72 10 33 503 34.0 
Nonbook 25 32 5 0 5 67 5.0 
Mixed 99 140 12 2 6 259 18.0 

Total 605 678 103 14 54 1,454 100.0 
Author 36 59 15 4 2 116 8.0 
Subject 405 415 75 8 3.9 942 65.0 
Genre 63 77 8 1 6 155 11.0 
Heterogeneous 101 127 5 1 7 241 16.0 

Total 605 678 103 14 54 1,454 100.0 
Gift 334 489 69 14 25 931 64.5 
Purchase 84 32 3 0 3 122 8.5 
Loan 2 2 0 0 0 4 
Unspecified 185 155 31 0 26 397 27.0 

Total 605 678 103 14 54 1,454 100.0 
Alumni 2 34 36 4.5 
Faculty 40 40 80 9.5 
Unspecified 292 415 707 86.0 

Total 334 489 823 100.0 



and genres represented among the 1,454 
collections analyzed here, and to single 
out several for mention would not even 
begin to give any indication-much less 
a representative cross-section-of the 
richness and diversity that enhanced the 
resources of American libraries during 
the period covered. One should think 
that nearly everyone connected with re-
search libraries knows of great collec-
tions, for example, the Rosenwald at 
the Library of Congress, but what im-
presses one in the course of reading this 
thirty-one-year record from beginning 
to end is the amount of less glamorous 
but probably in its way equally useful 
research material that settled quietly 
and without fanfare into library sanc-
tums of somewhat lesser majesty. 
Though these are only samples, they 
give powerful evidence of the fact that 
American research libraries do have the 
lodes and troves of resources their pro-
moters so often routinely ( though now 
and then inflatedly) claim they do. 

That manuscript collections come as 
close as they do to equalling the number 
of book collections ( 34 percent and 43 
percent respectively) might come as a 
surprise, since one would suppose that 
more people collect books than collect 
(or save) manuscript material. When 
one considers that the category "mixed" 
( 18 percent of total) most often was 
a mixture of books and manuscripts, 
frequently appearing to be predomi-
nantly the latter and thus laying fair 
claim to being called a manuscript col-
lection for all practical purposes, the 
distribution of the two kinds of collec-
tion becomes yet more even. 

Means Acquired 

As might be inferred from the defini-
tions of "gift," "purchase," '1oan," and 
"unspecified," above, this area is the one 
in most need of more exact informa-
tion. However, if the sample is indica-
tive, there was an impressive number of 

Characteristics of Collections I 51 

gifts during the period: 931 ( 64 per-
cent) overall, 824 (56 percent) for all 
academic, 334 (55 percent) for academ-
ic/ public, 489 ( 72 percent) for aca-
demic/private, 69 ( 67 percent) for 
public, 14 ( 100 percent) for state, and 
25 ( 46 percent) for other types of li-
braries. It is probably not unreasonable 
to assume that a large proportion of the 
"unspecifieds" are also gifts. Attributing 
reasons for the higher incidence of 
gifts in private academic libraries than 
in public academic libraries is b eyond 
the scope of this study, but the finding 
is nonetheless somehow not surprising. 

Source of Gifts (Academic) 
The figures would seem to indicate 

that alumni of private schools are far 
more of a mind to give to their alma 
maters than those of public institutions 
(thirty-four of the former, two of the 
latter), and that faculty members of 
public institutions are relatively 1nore 
generous than those of private, al-
though in absolute numbers both re-
ceived the same number of collections 
(forty) from faculty members. 

SOME QUESTIONS 

This inquiry into some characteristics 
of the amassing of collections raises 
certain questions, some of which are: 

1. To what extent has the acquisi-
tion of specific collections influ-
enced the subsequent collection 
building policy of the library con-
cerned? 

2. To what extent has the acquisi-
tion of specific collections influ-
enced the research and curricular 
development at academic institu-
tions? 

3. To what extent do research pro-
grams and instructional programs 
attract gift collections to academ-
ic libraries? 

4. To what extent are the special 
collections made known and made 
available? (An approach to an an-



120 

llO 

100 

90 

80 

70 

60 

50 

40 

30 

20 

10 

58 I College & Research Libraries • January 1975 

- Total Collections 
----Gift Collections 

I 
I 

'\ I 
/ \ I 

I \ I 
I 'I 

I 
I 

I 
I 

I 
I 

o~---------------------------------------------------------------1940 1945 1950 1955 1960 1965 1970 
Fig. 1 

Total Collections and Gift Collections by Year, 1940- 1970 

swer to this question is underway, 
based on the data gathered for 
this paper. ) 

5. What is the cost effectiveness of 
gift collections? Of purchased 
collections? 

6. How much unneeded duplication 
and relative dross results from the 
acquisition of some collections? 
What does such duplication and 
dross cost the library in terms of 
staff time, increased cataloging 
backlogs, and reduced service? 

7. What effect have donors' choices 
of donee library had on the ulti-
mate utility of the collection to 
the scholarly community and oth-
er potential users? 

8. Do the fluctuations displayed in 

Figure 1 represent a true picture 
of the collections-adding activity 
during the period, or merely the 
fluctuations in public relations ac-
tivity? Why the sharp decline 
from 1943 to 1949? Why the pre-
cipitous decline 1958-1960, 1962-
1965? Or the large increases be-
tween 1960 and 1962, 1965 and 
1967? How much will the Tax Re-
form Act of 1969, which plugged 
the loophole regarding taxes on 
appreciated value of personal 
property donations, affect dona-
tions from 1970 on? 

9. What is the relationship between 
acquisition (or "selection") pol-
icy and the acceptance of gift col-
lections? In other words, how of-



Characteristics of Collections I 59 

TABLE 3 

NUMBER OF COLLECTIONS REPORTED BY NUMBER OF LIBRARIES, 1940-1970 

Number of Academic/ Academic/ 
Collections Public Private 

77 
51 
45 
38 
37 
34 
32 
23 
22 
21 
20 
19 
17 
16 
15 
14 
13 
12 
11 
10 
9 
8 
7 
6 
5 
4 
3 
2 
1 

3 
1 

1 
1 

1 
1 1 
1 

1 
1 

1 
1 

1 1 
2 1 
4 
1 
1 2 
1 
3 
7 3 
1 1 
1 2 
3 1 
3 3 
1 4 
7 7 

14 11 
15 23 
46 83 

Total 116 151 

ten are gifts and gift collections 
accepted solely on the basis that 
the library can then claim to have 
some scarce or prestige item ( s), 
regardless of how they relate to 
the nature of their collection, or 
of the fact that the most logical 

Number of Libraries 

Public 

1 

1 
1 

1 
1 
2 
7 

State Other Total 

1 
3 
1 
1 
1 
1 
2 
1 
1 
1 
1 
1 

1 3 
3 
4 
1 
3 
1 
3 

1 12 
3 
3 
4 

1 7 
5 

2 16 
26 

5 44 
4 13 148 
5 22 301 

and useful place might be in a 
different library? 

10. Does the relationship between size 
and reputation of a library and 
the number of collections it ac-
quires bear out the time-honored 
adage that "gifts beget gifts"? 

TABLE 4 

AcADEMIC LIBRARIE s REPORTING TEN oR MoRE CoLLECTIONS, 1940-1970 

N umber of 
Collections 
(N = 816) Private ( N = 16) 

Names of Parent Institutions 

Public (N = 25) 

51 Columbia, Stanford, Washington U. 
45 Yale 
38 U. California ( Berkeley) 
37 Northwestern 
34 U. California (Los Angeles ) 



60 I College & Research Libraries • january 1975 

TABLE 4-Continued 

Number of 
Collections 

Names of Parent Institutions 

(N = 816) Private (N = 16) 

32 Syracuse 
23 
22 
21 
20 
19 
17 
16 
15 

14 
13 
12 
11 

10 

Cornell 
Duke 

Princeton 
U. Rochester 
Harvard 

Dartmouth, New York U. 

Joint Universities, U. Southern 
California, William & Mary 

RECEIVING LIBRARIES 

Table 3 shows how many libraries in 
each category reported a given number 
of collections. Since it has already been 
pointed out that academic libraries ac-
counted for almost 90 percent of the 
collections reported during the period, 
that the Library of Congress dominated 

Public (N = 25) 

Southern Illinois U. 
U. Minnesota 

U. Virginia 

U. Missouri 
U. Houston, U. Kansas 
Ohio St. U., Pennsylvania St. U., U. Illinois, 
U. Kentucky 
Kent St. U. 
Indiana U. 
U. Delaware 
U. California ( Santa Barbara), U. Vermont, 
U. Wisconsin 
Michigan St. U., U. Arizona, U. Pennsylvania, 
U. Pittsburgh, U. Texas (Austin), U. Washing-
ton, U. Wyoming 

the public library field, that one state li-
brary was the major performer in that 
category, and that the number of collec-
tions reported by libraries in the "other" 
category was relatively evenly distribut-
ed, only those academic libraries that re-
ported ten or more collections during 
the period are identified in Table 4. 

I 

I