REPORT OF THE LIBRARIAN OF CONGRESS LIBRARY OF CONGRESS Washington, D. C., December 5, 1910 SIR: I have the honor to submit herewith my report as Librarian of Congress for the year ending June 30, 1910. The report of the Superintendent of the Library Building and Grounds (and Disbursing Officer) follows, beginning at page 77. SERVICE Within the fiscal year treated by this report the only change that has occurred in a position of importance was the assignment of Mr. Charles Martel to the supervision of the Periodical Room, in place of Mr. C. B. Guittard, resigned (May 1, 1910), and the advance of Mr. Clarence W. Perley to the title of Chief Classifier. The duties of the Periodical Division will not, however, prevent Mr. Martel from continuing the general supervision of the classification. Since the close of the fiscal year, however, a change has occurred of very great moment, in the resignation from our service of Mr. J. C. M. Hanson, who leaves us to become Associate Director of the Library of the University of Chicago. Mr. Hanson was placed in charge of our Catalogue Division when the collections were moved from the Capitol. They then comprised over 800,000 volumes of printed matter, as well as the manuscripts, maps, music, and prints, the care of which fell upon other divisions. Of the printed 60811-10- 2 books there was not merely no catalogue by subject, but none by author that could be made fully available to the public or continued in its existing form, since the one that existed was in script, on cards varying from the present standard size. There was no shelf list; and the only classification of the books upon the shelves was the "Baconian," adopted early in the nineteenth century, which provided for but 44 main groups (chapters). It was the task of Mr. Hanson's Division to determine the principle, method, and form of a new comprehensive catalogue, author and subject, to construct this, and apply it to the existing collection and incoming accessions; to determine, construct, and similarly apply a new, elastic, modern system of classification with all the records incidental thereto; and, at the outset, to handle in addition all the business of ordering, receiving, and accessioning the incoming material. For this he had a force of but a dozen persons. Later the order work was set apart and the classification consigned to the charge of a special group under a "chief classifier." The general administrative responsibility for this as for the catalogue remained, however, still with Mr. Hanson, and it was upon him that fell the duty not merely of determining and directing the work, but of developing and organizing the staff to handle it, from a Division of a dozen persons to one of over ninety. The history of this undertaking has been recorded in our annual reports since 1899. Its significance can be realized only by those who understand what an exact, full, and scientific catalogue—an author and subject catalogue—means for a collection of books already the third largest in the world. Add to this what it means in the printed cardsproducts of the work-which have become available to hundreds of other libraries, even the most scholarly-so as to constitute the Library of Congress the nearest approach yet made to a central bureau of cataloguing for the entire country; add finally to this the initial responsibility, though later relieved, of the classification also; and consider that all the above work was to be pursued and achieved upon collections in current use, without interruption of this: and if the resultant impression be not an adequate measure of the task itself it will at least be indicative of the qualities which it called for on the part of Mr. Hanson and his associates. It is, of course, with profound reluctance that we view his departure, his relinquishment of a work fundamental and farreaching in its consequences to this library and wide reaching in its service to libraries in general. The opportunity now offered him, however, in a position more generally administrative in character, and at a higher salary, is one that he could not be asked to forego. The changes in minor positions during the year have reached about the same number as formerly, with the usual loss to our service and corresponding gain to that of some other library. Appendix VI gives the names of all employees in the Library proper and Copyright Office as of October 1, 1910, and in the case of employees appointed under the present administration (i. e., since April 5, 1899) a memorandum of their education and experience at the date of appointment. On two separate occasions an interest in this has been expressed in the form of resolutions introduced in Congress calling for information. The first such resolution, introduced in the House on January 26, 1906, was as follows: Resolved by the House of Representatives, That the Librarian of Congress be requested to furnish to the House of Representatives a statement giving the names of all employees now in the Library of Congress and on its pay roll, date of appointment, the actual residence of each employee at the time appointed, and the names of all persons who recommended the appointment of each employee. Also to state briefly what special training for library work, or for the particular position occupied, each employee had at the time of appointment; also to state what, if any, examinations have been made testing the ability and fitness of applicants before appointed. The second, introduced in the Senate on April 30, 1910, covered less ground. It read: Resolved, That the Committe on the Library be directed to inquire into and report to the Senate at the earliest day practicable the number, compensation, and State of residence of each of the employees in the Congressional Library, and upon whose recommendation each employee has been appointed. The House resolution of January 26, 1906, was referred to the House Committee on Reform in the Civil Service. The Senate resolution of April 30, 1910, was referred to the Senate Committee on the Library. Although apparently different in scope, each seemed to admit of an identical statement concerning the methods of appointment in the Library, and in particular the criteria upon which selections for the service are made. These are specified in the law itself (appropriation act approved February 19, 1897) which provides that the employees in the library service shall "be selected by the Librarian of Congress, by reason of special aptitude for the work of the Library, including the copyright work," and further, "that all persons employed in * Library of Congress under the Librarian * * said shall be appointed solely with reference to their fitness for their particular duties." The best evidence of compliance with the law seemed to be the qualifications in education and experience of the persons actually appointed under it. My response, therefore, to the House resolution of 1906 was accompanied by an exhibit setting forth these facts in the case of the then existing roll, so far as appointed during my administration. The exhibit was revised for the Library Committee of the Senate in connection with the Senate resolution of 1910, and is again revised to the date of October 1, 1910, for Appendix VI |