College and Research Libraries B y D O R O T H Y H . L I T C H F I E L D Departmental and Divisional Libraries1 DE P A R T M E N T A L LIBRARIES h a d b e e n chosen by the chairman as the sub- ject for discussion. T h e four speakers represented universities w i t h divergent points of v i e w , since one of the libraries has ten departmental units and one has none at all. Stephen A . M c C a r t h y , assistant director of libraries, U n i v e r s i t y of Nebraska, led off w i t h an informal account of recent developments at N e - braska. T h e i r departmental libraries in all subjects except chemistry, architecture, and geology w i l l be in the new main build- ing. Features n o w up for consideration are personnel; cataloging and f i l i n g ; spe- cial services, such as routing the current periodicals to f a c u l t y members. Ilse W i l h e l m i , supervisor of depart- mental libraries at O h i o State U n i - versity, followed w i t h a paper entitled " M y D e p a r t m e n t a l Libraries W a n t to K n o w . " H e r e , as everywhere, cataloging problems are of special concern. In one of the scientific libraries, analytic cards for the Journal of Agricultural Research articles had been filed in the catalog some time before the faculty requested that the cards be w i t h d r a w n . Freshmen had ob- jected to the inclusion of cards for articles they couldn't understand. H a p p i l y , an- 1 R e p o r t of the U n i v e r s i t y L i b r a r i e s Section meet- ing at Chicago on December 28, 1940. C h a i r m a n E a r l N. M a n c h e s t e r p r e s i d e d ; Dollie B. H e p b u r n , supervisor, acquisition d e p a r t m e n t , Columbia U n i v e r - sity L i b r a r y , substituted f o r D o r o t h y H . Litchfield as s e c r e t a r y . other scientific library had already asked for these same c a r d s ; so the transfer w a s made to everyone's satisfaction. T h e speaker touched on classification and subject headings; f i l i n g ; ordering of L . C . c a r d s ; uniform circulation r u l e s ; re- turn of little-used volumes to the main l i b r a r y ; opportunity for departmental li- brarians to attend staff meetings in the main library. T h e difficulty of acquiring reference technique is illustrated by the story of the zealous custodian w h o filed a pink slip in the catalog for every question answered by the main library staff. A f t e r a time, her catalog cards w e r e lost in between w a d s of pink slips. M i s s W i l - helmi epitomized the w h o l e departmental point of v i e w w h e n she said that a faculty member w a n t s the same kind of service a business firm expects of its special library. N e x t , F r e d Folmer, supervisor of departmental libraries at the U n i v e r s i t y of I o w a , described a centralized system in his paper " A r e W e O n e or E l e v e n ? " Since I o w a acquired a supervisor of de- partmental libraries sixteen years ago, the library has been able to reduce the num- ber of departmental units f r o m 21 to 10. T h e r e are well-formulated relationships w i t h each department of the main l i b r a r y ; o r d e r ; c a t a l o g i n g ; serials; documents; ref- erence; circulation; binding; reserves; li- brary instruction. In observing these rela- tionships, the custodian must maintain a JUNE, 1941 237 d e l i c a t e b a l a n c e in l o y a l t i e s b e t w e e n t h e d e p a r t m e n t h e serves a n d his c o l l e a g u e s in t h e m a i n l i b r a r y . N o o n e h a s y e t f o u n d a w a y t o a r r a n g e staff m e e t i n g s of de- p a r t m e n t a l l i b r a r i e s , w h i c h e v e r y o n e a g r e e s w o u l d be b e n e f i c i a l . Dr. Van Hoesens Paper T h e l a s t p a p e r , by D r . V a n H o e s e n , li- b r a r i a n , B r o w n U n i v e r s i t y , w a s r e a d by W i l l i a m H . J e s s e , s u p e r i n t e n d e n t of c i r c u l a t i o n . A t B r o w n , e i g h t e e n d e p a r t - m e n t a l l i b r a r i e s w e r e r e c e n t l y a b s o r b e d i n t o t h e m a i n l i b r a r y o r o n e of t h e t w o d i v i s i o n a l l i b r a r i e s o u t s i d e t h e m a i n b u i l d - i n g . A d i v i s i o n a l l i b r a r y i n c l u d e s m a t e r i a l in s e v e r a l r e l a t e d s u b j e c t s of a g r o u p , s u c h as t h e p h y s i c a l sciences. I t is a d v i s a b l e t h a t n o d e p a r t m e n t o r d i v i s i o n be e s t a b - l i s h e d u n l e s s it is o r g a n i z e d as a n a d m i n - i s t r a t i v e u n i t , w i t h c e r t a i n m i n i m u m r e - q u i r e m e n t s s u c h as a f u l l - t i m e a s s i s t a n t a n d l i b r a r y h o u r s a p p r o x i m a t e l y t h o s e of t h e m a i n l i b r a r y . T h e n u c l e u s of m a n y a d e p a r t m e n t a l l i b r a r y is t h e p r i v a t e l y o w n e d f a c u l t y m e m b e r ' s c o l l e c t i o n , w h i c h h e keeps in his office a n d p l a n s t o t u r n o v e r t o t h e li- b r a r y s o m e d a y . B u t t h e n a t u r e of its o r i g i n o u g h t n o t t o j u s t i f y c o n t i n u a t i o n of a d e p a r t m e n t a l l i b r a r y a l o n g lines in- c o m p a t i b l e w i t h t h e g e n e r a l l i b r a r y policy of t h e u n i v e r s i t y . Discussion M R . GEORGE B. BROWN, a s s i s t a n t o r d e r d e - partment, University of Illinois. About the question of duplicating catalog cards for de- partmental libraries. W e have heard that Nebraska and Ohio State type all duplicate cards. A t Illinois we bought a multigraph- ing machine for $1600.00 W e make no at- tempt to send copies of one department's cards to a related department. MR. RALPH H . PARKER, director of li- braries, University of Georgia. In connec- tion with our present project of completely reclassifying the departmental libraries, we have set up an automatic system of sending to every department a complete set of cards for every book purchased in its field, whether or not the book is shelved there. MR. EDWARD A. H E N R Y , d i r e c t o r o f l i b r a r i e s , University of Cincinnati. It seems to me that there is a staggering amount of revision going on in the libraries where there is no duplicating machine. M R . J A M E S A. M C M I L L E N , d i r e c t o r of l i - braries, University of Louisiana. W e in- stalled a Seto-type machine for printing cards. Cost $1700.00. MISS H E L E N DAWLEY, s e r i a l c a t a l o g e r , U n i - versity of Chicago. A t Chicago we have just discarded our Seto-type for a new kind of machine. MISS EVELYN M . H E N S E L , c a t a l o g l i b r a r i a n , Pennsylvania State College. It has been found indispensable to have sets of cards for related books regardless of their location. For example, the physics and chemistry li- braries interchange cards; the agriculture library has a complete set of cards for every book on forestry. MISS W I L H E L M I . H a s t h e U n i v e r s i t y o f Nebraska had any success with circulating current periodicals to the faculty? W e tried it in our law library, with discouraging re- sults. MR. MCCARTHY. T h e departmental librarian arranges this with the secretary of the de- partment, who takes entire charge of it. MR. T H O M A S P . F L E M I N G , l i b r a r i a n , M e d i - cal School, Columbia University. It is man- aged the same way in our school. M R . R A L P H E. ELLSWORTH, d i r e c t o r of l i - braries, University of Colorado. Don't we spend too much time talking about the practical problems instead of the educational side of departmental libraries? L e t us con- sider the intangible ideas involved. MR. FLEMING. I agree. W e ought to spend less time worrying about the loss of a current 238 COLLEGE AND RESEARCH LIBRARIES periodical and more time trying to let the faculty know about articles in those periodi- cals that they might not come across them- selves. MR. LLOYD w. JOSSELYN, reference librarian, Purdue University. Nobody has mentioned the problem of special collections which are kept locked up. One library has keys to forty-seven separate collections . . . it would be better if everything were in open stacks. C H A I R M A N . Yes. The different points of view expressed here today show us the im- portance of open stacks . . . and open minds. Departmental Librarians' Problems T h e proceedings and transactions of this meeting bring a touch of nostalgia to one who was a departmental librarian in the late nineteen twenties. T h e problems of fifteen years ago are still unsolved: per- sonnel; cataloging; binding; responsibility for equipment and housing; allocation of f u n d s ; correlation of reference service with the main library. Even the depart- mental library's right to existence is still challenged—and effectually—by some of the university libraries today, although the practice now established of appointing a director of libraries suggests that the de- partmental idea is accepted by an increas- ing number of presidents and trustees. T h e most conspicuous advance in de- partmental practice seems to" have been made in cataloging. Departments are re- ceiving full sets of cards and analytics, even when the main library has the master set; while duplicating machines rush the cards through without the old time-con- suming revision. Some cataloging depart- ments are even supplying cards for related books shelved elsewhere in the sys- tem. O n e main library tried to speed up its output of departmental cards by cut- ting down on the collation, imprint, and notes; but this was firmly opposed by any departmental librarian with enough pro- fessional training to know just how useful the complete bibliographical information could be. Professional Training versus Subject Knowledge T h e question of professional training versus subject knowledge is still disputed vigorously in departmental circles. In ef- fect, should the librarian of a physics li- brary be a librarian or a physicist? T h e main library staff prefers a professional librarian who will respect the principles of library economy; and the physics de- partment holds out for someone who speaks its language. Several of the speakers touched on the departmental reactions to the main library policies of acquisition and binding. H a s the departmental librarian a right to change binders because he has found one who will do the work at a third less, in spite of the fact that the head of the binding department knows that particular binder's work is poor? W h y , asks the faculty chairman of his departmental li- brary committee, does the main library place the periodical subscriptions through a certain European agent, when there is an American agent who charges much less? Although the departmental librarian often finds himself able to marshal main library opinion in his support, he some- times must conduct his own campaign for equipment and stack space. T h e head of a scientific laboratory is loath to spend hard-won apparatus money on catalog trays, and he would rather buy anything than a new stack unit for the library. O n e speaker told of stopping all new books JUNE, 1941 239 and periodicals to a departmental library, with the explanation that there simply wasn't any more shelving space. I n two weeks the required expansion was pro- vided. Gradually, by methods running the gamut of persuasion all the way from presidential ukase to subterfuge, univer- sity librarians are taking over the depart- mental libraries. Library schools are working toward the day when they will develop departmental librarians who are specialists in the subject itself as well as in its bibliography. I t is a goal worth striv- ing for, although in this feverish age it seems impossible of attainment. A Handbook of Medical Library Practice AH A N D B O O K O F M E D I C A L L I B R A R Y P R A C T I C E is in preparation by a com- mittee of the Medical Library Associa- tion. Based on a preliminary manuscript by M . Irene Jones of the medical science department, Detroit Public Library, this book will be the result of the combined efforts of a group of medical librarians who are trying here to collect and present in orderly fashion those differences in ma- terial and procedures which distinguish a medical library from a general one. T h e i r intention is to give chiefly the added information a general librarian needs upon entering the medical field. F a r from be- ing a complete manual of procedure, the volume presupposes some general knowl- edge of library methods and tools. It will form, as its title indicates, a supple- mentary handbook of special practices and reference equipment for medicine. Particularly full treatment will be given subject headings, classification, reference books, rare books, and the history of medicine. T h e contents will comprise the following chapters: I. T h e medical library and the librarian, by J u d i t h W a l l e n H u n t ; I I . Selection and ordering of books and periodicals, by Bertha B. H a l l a m ; I I I . Cataloging, by L . Margueriete P r i m e ; I V . Subject headings, by Isabelle T . Anderson; V . Classification, by M a r y Louise Marshall and M . Irene Jones; V I . Reference, by Eileen R. C u n n i n g h a m ; V I I . Pamphlets, pictures, microfilm, etc., by Eleanor Fair and Lillia M . D . T r a s k with the collaboration of Ethel W i g - more; V I I I . Rare books and the history of medicine, by Chauncey D . Leake and G e r t r u d e L . Annan. T h i s editorial committee, under the chairmanship of J a n e t Doe, hopes for publication in the spring of 1941. In- quiries may be addressed to the secretary of the association, Anna C. H o l t , 25 Shat- tuck St., Boston. 240 COLLEGE AND RESEARCH LIBRARIES