The public library

[27] cp. America:—“In towns where there is more than one library accessible to the public, these should reach as soon as possible some modus vivendi that will prevent the useless duplication of any class of literature. This may usually be done by agreeing to specialize. For example, in Chicago such an agreement has been made by the Public Library, the John Crerar Library, and the Newberry Library. The Public Library specializes in general literature, the John Crerar in science, and the Newberry in history, economics, and so on. In pursuance of this policy, the Newberry Library has even transferred to the John Crerar its medical collection, which had reached a considerable size. Such action is evidently a long step toward the complete understanding between civic institutions that is so much to be desired; and it deserves the highest commendation.” Bostwick: The American Public Library, pp. 73-4. Similar specialization has been effected in the Astor, Lenox, Bar Association, Academy of Medicine, and Columbia University Libraries in New York.

[28] There are great irregularities in the distribution of these libraries; for instance, the ratepayer in Holborn has to walk on the average 540 yards to get to a library; in Camberwell he would have to go 1,030 yards; in Wandsworth 1,400; while in the huge borough of Woolwich, if it were all built up, he would have to travel about 2,400 yards. The majority of the boroughs, however, only expect their readers to walk between 500 and 1,000 yards.

If we consider the provision of libraries in proportion to the population, we find that the extreme variations are that Hampstead supplies a library for every 14,000 inhabitants, while 75,000 inhabitants in Stepney share one between them.

But the demand for library facilities is not the same in all the boroughs, for we find that while in Hampstead 125 out of every 1,000 of its inhabitants are registered as using the library, in Shoreditch only 29 per 1,000 avail themselves of the facilities which exist in that borough. The effect of this is that the number of readers per library varies considerably, for while Poplar and Hammersmith share a library or branch between 1,200 readers, Stoke Newington and Chelsea are satisfied with one establishment for 4,600 readers.

(John McKillop: “The Present Position of London Municipal Libraries with suggestions for Increasing their Efficiency,” in Library Association Record, Dec. 1906.)

[29] Rye, R. A., The Libraries of London (1910)—“Preliminary Survey.”

[30] In a lecture at the School of Librarianship, University College, London, on May 23rd, 1921.

[31] “Sometimes a discovery of vital moment lies concealed for many years in a little known periodical; the most striking recent case is that of Mendel’s experiments, now the inspiration of the most productive school of modern biology, described in 1865 in the periodical of a natural history society in Brünn but buried until 1900, when a happy chance revealed them.” Times, June 29, 1921—“Indexing of Technical Literature.”

[32] “A union catalogue of the current periodicals preserved in the German libraries, published in 1914, comprised some 17,000 entries. A similar list for the periodicals filed in the libraries of the United Kingdom, prepared in 1914-15 by some English State and copyright librarians, was submitted for publication to the Department of Scientific and Industrial Research, but the proposal met with no encouragement. Yet the compilation of such a list is an essential preliminary to the proper national organization of knowledge. For a union list indicates the relative strength and weakness of our national libraries in respect of their periodical collections: it enables the librarian to correct the latter without unduly increasing the expenditure of the library in that department of literature.” Nature, June 9, 1921—“Co-operative Indexing of Periodical Literature.”

[33] Edward Edwards, by Thomas Greenwood, p. 137.

[34] Ibid.

[35] Bostwick: The American Public Library, p. 28.

[36] Friedel: Training for Librarianship, p. 176.

[37] “The amount produced by the penny rate varies from borough to borough within very wide limits. The wealthy City of Westminster receives nearly £23,000 for every penny of its imposed rate; Kensington comes next with £9,500, and the others fall gradually till we find that Stoke Newington receives only £1,400. But to estimate the burden it is necessary to consider the produce of the penny rate in relation to the number of inhabitants, and in doing this we find that while every 1,000 inhabitants in Westminster can raise for library purposes £128, in the over-burdened east and south-east, Poplar and Camberwell can only raise £20, while Stepney comes lowest on the list with £19 per 1,000 inhabitants. But this does not express the whole of the burden, for while 1,000 inhabitants of wealthy Westminster have the power to spend £128, they find that their five libraries, well stocked with books and liberally staffed, cost them only £65, while Poplar, which finds six [actually four] establishments too little for its needs, must perforce expend the whole of the £19 per 1,000 citizens that it is enabled to raise.” J. McKillop: The Present Position of London Municipal Libraries. These figures were put down in 1907; the present situation may be understood from later statistics. The areas and populations are similar.

From L.C.C. London Statistics, 1913-4.

From L.C.C. Statistical Abstract, 1920.

Current estimate at Poplar, £8,318 to 2.17d. in £.

Poplar, it should be noted, has one of the most efficient library systems in London, though the buildings are not pretentious and the furniture is for use and not ornament. To provide and work this admirable system something like an economic miracle had to be worked, for so narrow was the financial margin that as the borough librarian picturesquely put it, if a few slates fell off the roof the cost of replacing them had to come out of the book fund.

[38] J. McKillop: Present Position of London Municipal Libraries.

[39] Ibid.

[40] Ibid.

[41] Ibid.

[42] Adult Education Committee: Third Interim Report, 20.

[43] “The public libraries and museums should be remitted to special committees of the education authority. On each of these committees it would be desirable to co-opt representatives of voluntary organizations and societies specially interested in the work of the committees, such as local educational bodies, scientific societies, and art clubs. Librarians and curators should, of course, have direct access to their respective committees and the fullest possible scope for their powers and special knowledge.” Adult Education Committee: Third Interim Report, 56.

[44] Bostwick: The American Public Library, p. 95.

[45] Adult Education Committee: Third Interim Report, 19.

[46] Adult Education Committee: Third Interim Report, par. 9-12.