College and Research Libraries By R O B E R T L. T A L M A D G E The Farmmgton Plan Survey: A n Interim Report EV E R S I N C E it got u n d e r way, the Farm-i n g t o n P l a n has been regarded, a n d has repeatedly been cited, as one of the most i m p o r t a n t , most enlightened, a n d most h o p e f u l instances of i n t e r l i b r a r y cooperation in the history of American libraries.1 T h r o u g h o u t its ten years of o p e r a t i o n , 2 however, there has been a relatively small b u t persistent stream of complaints f r o m p a r t i c i p a t i n g libraries together w i t h expressions of d o u b t f r o m various q u a r t e r s as to the Plan's actual success or, indeed, its value. Consequent- ly, the Association of Research Libraries, which administers the P l a n t h r o u g h its F a r m i n g t o n P l a n Committee, decided some m o n t h s ago t h a t a m a j o r survey was in order. Mr. R o b e r t Vosper, director of librar- ies at the University of Kansas, was asked to u n d e r t a k e the assignment, a n d I was accepted as his assistant. T h e Council on L i b r a r y Resources g r a n t e d f u n d s to A R L to cover costs of the study, a n d the proj- ect got u n d e r way in late N o v e m b e r . T h e final r e p o r t a n d o u r r e c o m m e n d a t i o n s will be ready in October, w h e n they will be s u b m i t t e d to a n a t i o n a l conference o n the F a r m i n g t o n Plan. By 1939, scholars a n d l i b r a r i a n s h a d long been aware of the lack of any com- prehensive A m e r i c a n coverage of foreign 1 P a p e r p r e s e n t e d b e f o r e t h e A c q u i s i t i o n s Section of A L A ' s R e s o u r c e s a n d T e c h n i c a l S e r v i c e s D i v i s i o n on J u l y 17 at S a n F r a n c i s c o . 2 E d w i n E . W i l l i a m s , The Farmington Plan Hand- book ( [ C a m b r i d g e ] , 1 9 5 3 ) , 170 p. p r e s e n t s a n ex- c e l l e n t h i s t o r y of t h e P l a n ' s d e v e l o p m e n t . Mr. Talmadge is Associate Director, University of Kansas Libraries, Lawrence. publications. It was the o u t b r e a k of W o r l d W a r II, however, which suddenly m a d e this lack a crucial p r o b l e m . N o t only were scholars cut off f r o m c u r r e n t E u r o p e a n publications a n d prevented f r o m visiting E u r o p e a n libraries, b u t there were also m a n y prewar E u r o p e a n publications being sought by govern- m e n t a n d n a t i o n a l defense agencies which could n o t be located in any Amer- ican library. T h e significant books were here—usually in m u l t i p l e copies, since many libraries n a t u r a l l y w o u l d have ac- q u i r e d them. Many less significant titles were now urgently needed, however, a n d one m i g h t say t h a t libraries h a d u n a n - imously overlooked them or simply re- jected t h e m as each library p u r s u e d its n o r m a l selective acquisition policy. From the s t a n d p o i n t of n a t i o n a l defense it was an a l a r m i n g situation, a n d s o m e t h i n g needed to be done to prevent its recur- rence in the f u t u r e . Over the n e x t several years m a n y pro- posals toward solving the p r o b l e m were m a d e by leaders a m o n g l i b r a r i a n s a n d scholars. I omit m e n t i o n of all except one: At the u r g i n g of A r c h i b a l d Mac- Leish, t h e n L i b r a r i a n of Congress, J u l i a n Boyd drew u p a statement calling f o r completion of the n a t i o n a l U n i o n Cata- log a n d "agreements of specialization a m o n g libraries to the end t h a t at least one copy of each research title [pub- lished a b r o a d ] m i g h t be placed in a n ap- p r o p r i a t e library in this country." T h i s statement was presented at a m e e t i n g of the executive committee of t h e Librar- ian's Council of the L i b r a r y of Congress SEPTEMBER 1958 375 in F a r m i n g t o n , Connecticut, in October, 1942. Present, in a d d i t i o n to MacLeish a n d Boyd, were such l i b r a r i a n s a n d scholars as L u t h e r Evans, Frederick Goff, David Mearns, W i l m a r t h Lewis, Keyes Metcalf, a n d R a n d o l p h Adams. Boyd's statement led directly to the f o r m u l a t i o n of a specific proposal, a n d it was f r o m this m e e t i n g t h a t t h e F a r m i n g t o n P l a n got its n a m e . D u r i n g t h e n e x t five years, t h r o u g h various committees, proposals, counter- proposals, discussions, critiques, surveys of subject strength in various libraries a n d of foreign book p r o d u c t i o n , a n d t h e experience of the L i b r a r y of Congress Postwar Mission to E u r o p e , w h a t we now know as t h e F a r m i n g t o n P l a n grad- ually, n o t to say p a i n f u l l y , evolved. It was the p r o d u c t of m a n y minds, a n d any- one r e a d i n g E d w i n Williams's chronol- ogy must a d m i r e the i m a g i n a t i o n , the e x p e r t knowledge, the patience, a n d the immense store of good will a n d spirit of cooperation c o n t r i b u t e d by a great m a n y librarians. T h e r e were m a n y differences of o p i n i o n a n d compromises were legion. A l o n g the way, the P l a n became a p r o j e c t of A R L . A t a special two-day m e e t i n g of A R L in March, 1947, it was decided to l a u n c h t h e P l a n w i t h cover- age of 1948 p u b l i c a t i o n s of three coun- tries. O t h e r countries were to be a d d e d as r a p i d l y as possible u n t i l world-wide coverage was achieved. T h e P l a n was to o p e r a t e in this fash- ion: T h e e n t i r e body of h u m a n knowl- edge, as e m b o d i e d in the L i b r a r y of Congress classification schedules, h a d been b r o k e n d o w n i n t o over eight h u n - d r e d segments. Over sixty libraries which were to p a r t i c i p a t e indicated w h i c h of these subjects each w o u l d be willing to cover, a n d a table of allocations was d r a w n u p . Allocations were generally supposed to follow t h e p r i n c i p l e of b u i l d i n g o n strength. (Some p r o b l e m s in the P l a n p r o b a b l y traced back to lack of complete success in a p p l y i n g this principle.) A designated agent in each foreign c o u n t r y was to collect all new books a n d p a m p h l e t s p u b l i s h e d in his c o u n t r y " t h a t m i g h t reasonably be ex- pected to interest a research worker in the U n i t e d States," classify t h e m accord- ing to the L C classification, a n d send them, w i t h invoices, to the a p p r o p r i a t e A m e r i c a n libraries. T h e libraries agreed to pay for the books, list them p r o m p t l y in the U n i o n Catalog at the L i b r a r y of Congress, a n d m a k e them available t h r o u g h i n t e r l i b r a r y loan or photo- g r a p h i c r e p r o d u c t i o n . T h e agents were instructed to exclude twenty-seven types of material; some, such as reprints, ju- venile literature, a n d sheet music, j u d g e d to have little research value, a n d others, such as periodicals a n d official govern- m e n t publications, felt to represent such special problems t h a t they should be h a n d l e d outside the Plan. T h e Carnegie C o r p o r a t i o n of New York g r a n t e d $15,000 to A R L to cover a d m i n i s t r a t i v e costs of the Plan. D u r i n g t h e first year or so all receipts were for- w a r d e d by agents to a single p o i n t in the U n i t e d States, where they were classified before being d i s t r i b u t e d to the a p p r o p r i - ate libraries. L a t e r the agents sent the books direct to the libraries. P r o b l e m s a n d complaints arose as quickly as the first books started to ar- rive, a n d the n e x t several years p r o d u c e d m a n y changes in t h e original arrange- m e n t s a n d r o u t i n e s as p a t i e n t a t t e m p t s were m a d e to improve them, to iron o u t the wrinkles. O n e large p r o b l e m that was foreseen was the extension of the Plan's coverage to countries using languages t h a t few A m e r i c a n libraries were e q u i p p e d to h a n d l e , a n d to countries so lacking in well-organized book trades a n d bibliog- r a p h i e s that the single-agent "system could n o t work satisfactorily. W h e n the time came, it was decided t h a t o n e li- 376 COLLEGE AND RESEARCH LIBRARIES brary should accept responsibility f o r ac- q u i r i n g all publ i cat i ons of a country or region, regardless of subject, a n d t h a t it should m a k e its own dealer arrange- ments. I n the course of this evolution of the Plan, t h e tendency was to reduce its scope. I n a d d i t i o n to the exclusion of m a n y types of material, it was first decid- ed to restrict receipts to those in the L a t i n a l p h a b e t , a n d t h e n to limit t h e m to books a n d p a m p h l e t s in the r e g u l a r trade. I n the early stages of discussion, the definition of desired materials read, "every book . . . which might conceivably be of interest to a research worker . . .," b u t along t h e way the word "conceiv- ably" was changed to the word "reason- ably," a r a t h e r f u n d a m e n t a l a l t e r a t i o n in terminology. Finally, the scope of t h e P l a n has been limited by the fact t h a t it has fallen f a r short of world-wide cover- age. T h e s e limitations have worried m a n y librarians. At present, the subject p l a n is in ef- fect f o r t h i r t e e n W e s t e r n E u r o p e a n a n d three South A m e r i c a n countries, Aus- tralia a n d Mexico, a n d eighty-five coun- tries are covered o n an all-subject basis by i n d i v i d u a l libraries. T h e r e are now sixty libraries p a r t i c i p a t i n g in the Plan. D u r i n g its first ten years, o n the subject basis alone, the P l a n has b r o u g h t i n t o the U n i t e d States some 150,000 volumes at a purchase cost of a b o u t $275,000. T h e assumption has been that a large percentage of these titles of research value w o u l d n o t have been a c q u i r e d by any A m e r i c a n library if it h a d n o t been f o r the Plan. P e r h a p s o u r survey is itself as good evidence as any t h a t the P l a n has r u n i n t o m a n y vexing problems. I n spite of diligent efforts by t h e A R L F a r m i n g t o n P l a n C o m m i t t e e to correct difficulties as they developed, it has n o t proved pos- sible to do so to an e x t e n t satisfactory to all the p a r t i c i p a t i n g libraries. H e n c e the decision by A R L to a r r a n g e for a m a j o r re-examination of the Plan's status a f t e r a decade of o p e r a t i o n . Mr. Vosper a n d I are following three general lines of investigation in o u r study. First, almost inevitably, was a q u e s t i o n n a i r e to all p a r t i c i p a t i n g librar- ies. I t r a n to ten pages, b u t I should say in o u r defense t h a t this length occurred only because we left large b l a n k spaces in which the librarians were invited to provide u n i n h i b i t e d comments a n d ad- vice. W e achieved 100 per cent r e t u r n s — this w i t h the assistance of W e s t e r n Un- ion to s t i m u l a t e a few laggards. T h e q u e s t i o n n a i r e was basically exploratory; we w a n t e d to test general opinions, lo- cate points of strain, solicit suggestions, a n d ask for copies of any studies of re- ceipts that the i n d i v i d u a l libraries m i g h t have made. T h e second phase of the study re- q u i r e d a b o u t two m o n t h s of living o u t of suitcases, as we visited as m a n y of the p a r t i c i p a t i n g libraries as limitations of time a n d travel f u n d s w o u l d allow. T h e s e visits were aimed p r i m a r i l y at li- braries w i t h the largest subject alloca- tions a n d receipts a n d those w i t h special problems, b u t we were able as well to consult a n u m b e r of the l i b r a r i a n s w h o p a r t i c i p a t e on a more limited scale. M r . Vosper covered libraries in the n o r t h central states, f r o m Michigan to Minne- sota, a n d I j o u r n e y e d to the West Coast a n d to Florida a n d Georgia. T o g e t h e r , we spent a m o n t h r a n g i n g f r o m Wash- ington, D. C., u p to C a m b r i d g e a n d over to Ithaca. Finally, we w e n t together to U r b a n a to see R o b e r t B. Downs who, as c h a i r m a n of the F a r m i n g t o n P l a n Com- mittee, is the m a n we are w o r k i n g for, a n d w h o is also director of one of the largest p a r t i c i p a n t s in the P l a n . T h e t h i r d phase of the survey is still u n d e r way. I t consists of a n u m b e r of studies of F a r m i n g t o n P l a n receipts be- ing u n d e r t a k e n at various libraries o n SEPTEMBER 1958 377 o u r behalf. Some of these studies are q u a n t i t a t i v e — c o m p a r i n g receipts f r o m a given country, f o r example, w i t h t h a t country's p u b l i c a t i o n s as listed in bibli- ographies. Others, m u c h m o r e difficult, are q u a l i t a t i v e — a t t e m p t i n g to j u d g e the q u a l i t y or value for research of titles sent by agents a n d titles n o t sent by agents. W e h o p e also to find o u t how m a n y F a r m i n g t o n P l a n receipts are u n i q u e in the U n i t e d States, o r — t h e other side of the coin—the e x t e n t to which they simply d u p l i c a t e copies b r o u g h t in by o t h e r libraries in t h e course of their n o r m a l acquisitions pro- grams. W e are n o t only investigating the p e r f o r m a n c e of the P l a n b u t also asking if it is really necessary. F u r t h e r , we h o p e to answer the great q u e s t i o n of w h e t h e r it is more effective to have book selection d o n e at the source of the books, by a n agent, or by the library which is to house t h e m . O u r m e t h o d is to compare w h a t the F a r m i n g t o n library has received in a given subject w i t h the collection in a library which, outside of the Plan, has set o u t to cover the same subject compre- hensively. T h e q u e s t i o n n a i r e r e t u r n s were mostly m i l d in tone, w i t h few expressions of strong d o u b t a b o u t the P l a n or dissatis- faction w i t h its o p e r a t i o n . As a m a t t e r of fact, the great m a j o r i t y of the replies were distinctly favorable. Virtually all of t h e m reflected agreement w i t h the way the Plan is set u p a n d a p a t i e n t tolerance toward problems. N o n e t h o u g h t the P l a n perfect, to be sure, b u t few seemed to favor any m a j o r changes except f o r ex- tension of geographical coverage, espec- ially to J a p a n , Russia, a n d the Iron- C u r t a i n countries. W e asked for o p i n i o n s on a n u m b e r of a l t e r n a t i v e programs, f o r example, one by which all receipts w o u l d be sent to the L i b r a r y of Congress for classification a n d cataloging before d i s t r i b u t i o n to libraries. T h e few w h o favored such alternatives were far out- n u m b e r e d by those opposing them. A n u m b e r c o m p l a i n e d a b o u t the work of i n d i v i d u a l agents, especially t h e Biblio- t h e q u e N a t i o n a l e , b u t this last was n o surprise. I n general, the replies were middle-of-the-road. O n r e a d i n g them over one m i g h t conclude t h a t w h a t few p r o b l e m s existed could be solved fairly easily a n d t h a t they h a r d l y justified the survey we were u n d e r t a k i n g . O u r visits to libraries t u r n e d o u t to be indispensable, for they gave q u i t e a dif- f e r e n t picture. T h e q u e s t i o n n a i r e h a d confined itself to the Plan. O n o u r visits, we deliberately asked, n o t so m u c h a b o u t the P l a n as such, b u t a b o u t the whole p r o b l e m of f o r e i g n acquisitions. W h a t foreign materials d i d the libraries w a n t in their collections? W h y a n d how d i d they set a b o u t selecting a n d procur- ing them? W e asked for their views on w h a t the n a t i o n a l interest—as distinct f r o m their own local i n t e r e s t — r e q u i r e d . W e asked a b o u t subject fields in which they a t t e m p t e d to collect foreign ma- terials outside the P l a n as exhaustively as some o t h e r library was p r e s u m a b l y receiving t h e m u n d e r the P l a n — f o r again, the answers m i g h t indicate that the P l a n was really b r i n g i n g only dupli- cate copies i n t o the country. W e interviewed the h e a d librarians, a n d variously their chief assistants, ac- quisitions a n d reference personnel, sub- ject specialists on the library staffs, a n d usually several faculty members. Each visit lasted several hours, a n d in o n e or two cases we allowed m o r e t h a n a day f o r a single library. T h e s e visits were in- variably enjoyable a n d h e l p f u l , b u t t h e total effect of t h e m was m o r e t h a n per- plexing. W e received every possible an- swer to every question, a n d every possi- ble v a r i a t i o n of o p i n i o n somewhere a l o n g the line. T o p a r a p h r a s e N e w t o n ' s law, f o r every o p i n i o n we were given at one library we were likely to receive an e q u a l a n d opposite o p i n i o n at the next. 378 COLLEGE AND RESEARCH LIBRARIES Of the dozens of facets of the Plan, a n d of foreign acquisitions, that came u p for discussion, three cause Mr. Vosper a n d m e the most concern. First is t h e one t h a t permeates the F a r m i n g t o n P l a n a n d causes most com- plaints. T h i s is the lack of any definition of the phrase "research value," or of "scholarly utility," to guide t h e dealers. W e now d o u b t t h a t any two l i b r a r i a n s could reach complete agreement on a general, working definition of "research interest" if they sat d o w n to work one out. T h i s , by the way, was tested back in 1952, w h e n f o u r well-known l i b r a r i a n s set o u t to check in the Swiss n a t i o n a l b i b l i o g r a p h y for 1949 the items they t h o u g h t would meet the definition. Ex- cluding fiction, d r a m a , a n d poetry, they reviewed 1,022 items. T h e y agreed u n a n - imously on only 110 items, they voted three to one (either for or against) on 396, a n d on 516 items, just over half of the total, two voted yes a n d two voted no. T h e situation has n o t changed. W h a t o n e library calls j u n k , a n d complains t h a t the agent should not have sent, an- other library pronounces of f u n d a m e n t a l research value. T h e r e are dozens of ex- amples. H e r e is one: local histories a n d guide books. O n e library with an alloca- tion in history will protest t h a t it cer- tainly does n o t w a n t to go t h a t deep (and I should add t h a t they certainly d o n o t wish to give those books costly f u l l cataloging)—while a n o t h e r library will say, " W e are eager to get o u r h a n d s o n a n y t h i n g t h a t illustrates local architec- t u r e a n d sculpture in the country." T h e y are talking a b o u t the same books. Please do n o t conclude t h a t the first library is being selfish a n d looking only to its own local interests; these people honestly be- lieve t h a t these books are n o t w o r t h hav- ing, even in a single copy, anywhere in the country. A n o t h e r e x a m p l e is belles- lettres, which constitute a n especially clean-cut problem, w i t h one i n s t i t u t i o n w a n t i n g only first-class authors, a n o t h e r w a n t i n g virtually all m i n o r a u t h o r s in a d d i t i o n . O n one side of the A t l a n t i c are the ' poor agents, trying to guess w h e t h e r the Americans will like this book or n o t — we are going to send the agents a ques- tionnaire, by the w a y — a n d o n the o t h e r shore the librarians are growling—or tearing their hair—because in their opin- ion the agent sent 25 per cent j u n k last year, or he failed to send 30 per cent of the significant publications of his coun- try. W h o is right here, a n d w h o is wrong? W e d o n ' t know. T h e r e were times w h e n Mr. Vosper a n d I, e x a m i n i n g receipts, did n o t agree. It is the f a m i l i a r p r o b l e m of comprehensiveness versus selectivity t h a t faces every acquisitions l i b r a r i a n every day. H e knows he must always draw a line somewhere, b u t the line may be d r a w n at different points in different subject areas, a n d for m a n y different reasons. A closely related difference of o p i n i o n a m o n g l i b r a r i a n s concerns the basic F a r m i n g t o n p r o c e d u r e of dealer selec- tion of materials. A small g r o u p of the very largest libraries says, "Using o u r subject specialists we can do a better j o b of selection t h a n any agent abroad can possibly do. W e have d o n e it f o r years. W e d o exactly w h a t the P l a n sets o u t to do: acquire every book of reasonable research interest, a n d we do it better t h a n the P l a n can do it. A n y t h i n g o u r specialists d o n ' t select isn't w o r t h hav- ing." T h e s e librarians are entirely right. T h e y would like to t e r m i n a t e the sys- tem of dealer selection a n d have the libraries take over on a basis of decen- tralized responsibility f o r a p a r t i c u l a r subject. A far larger g r o u p , i n c l u d i n g nearly all the university libraries, says, on the other h a n d , " W e are n o t staffed f o r such SEPTEMBER 1958 379 a task. A u t o m a t i c selection by dealers a b r o a d is h e l p f u l to us. W e simply w a n t the dealers to d o a b e t t e r j o b . " T h e y too are q u i t e r i g h t . W e q u e s t i o n e d l i b r a r i a n s closely a b o u t their use of b l a n k e t orders. T h e great m a j o r i t y do n o t use them, or, if they ever did, have d i s c o n t i n u e d t h e m be- cause they d i d n o t like t h e results. T h e few libraries t h a t d o use b l a n k e t orders are in some cases t h e same very large ones t h a t I have m e n t i o n e d . T h e y v a l u e the a u t o m a t i c delivery of books t h a t the b l a n k e t o r d e r produces. O n e of these b l a n k e t orders is not, however, simply a carefully phrased set of instructions to a dealer which, once sent to h i m , is allowed to stand u n c h a n g e d . R a t h e r , a b l a n k e t o r d e r may actually be a thick file of correspondence, as the library constantly modifies a n d refines its orig- inal instructions o n the basis of experi- ence. Each s h i p m e n t of books may result in f u r t h e r r e f i n e m e n t . T h i s is significant, because in essence t h e F a r m i n g t o n P l a n is actually a gigan- tic, complex, inflexible b l a n k e t o r d e r which a t t e m p t s to cover all subjects a n d m a n y countries w i t h o n e generalized de- finition of w h a t is w a n t e d , a n d a uni- f o r m list of exclusions. T h e r e is n o way, u n d e r the Plan, to d i f f e r e n t i a t e between the degree of selectivity or the types of materials desired for o n e subject or country a n d those desired for a n o t h e r . It is no great w o n d e r t h a t there is wide dissatisfaction w i t h receipts. Early in o u r travels Mr. Vosper a n d I recognized the need f o r some m e a n s of d r a w i n g such distinctions. W e t h i n k there may be a way to ac- complish this, if the l i b r a r i a n s will accept it. It w o u l d involve f o u r things. First is the decentralization of respon- sibility, such as t h e large libraries pro- pose. Each library, h a v i n g accepted re- sponsibility f o r one or m o r e subject fields, w o u l d choose its own agents. Second, to preserve the advantages of a u t o m a t i c selection a b r o a d , is the use of b l a n k e t orders w r i t t e n by i n d i v i d u a l libraries, these to be tailored as neces- sary to t h e p a r t i c u l a r subject field or c o u n t r y of p u b l i c a t i o n . T h i r d , is t h e establishment of a n a t i o n a l supervisory g r o u p — c a l l t h e m referees, if you will— w h i c h w o u l d m o n i t o r these b l a n k e t orders, a n d their subsequent amend- ments, to assure p r o t e c t i o n of t h e na- tional interest. ( T h i s is essential, we t h i n k , because of the h u m a n tendency — a n d we f o u n d some instances of i t — t o confuse the n a t i o n a l interest w i t h one's provincial p o i n t of view, to say, "If we are n o t interested in this p a r t i c u l a r type of material, how could anyone else be?") F o u r t h is a r e g u l a r review by statistical studies, say, every five years, to check o n how well the P l a n is f u n c t i o n i n g . W e t h i n k this m e t h o d of o p e r a t i o n m i g h t relieve the most i r r i t a t i n g prob- lem of the last ten years, t h a t of selec- tion. It raises two i m m e d i a t e questions: W i l l the libraries accept the j o b of get- ting o u t these b l a n k e t orders? T h i s m i g h t n o t be too onerous, since the pre- sent F a r m i n g t o n P l a n terms can be used as a p o i n t of d e p a r t u r e . Second, will these librarians, individuals all a n d ac- customed to calling their own shots, accept the idea of anyone's q u e s t i o n i n g their b l a n k e t orders, their d e f i n i t i o n of "research value"? W e h a v e n ' t yet asked t h e m . I n any case, we t h i n k this m i g h t be a n i m p r o v e m e n t in the P l a n as it operates in those countries now covered o n a subject basis. T h e second of the m a j o r p r o b l e m s t h a t especially concern us p e r t a i n s to t h e so-called "critical areas," countries or regions w h e r e language problems o r inadequacies of book trade a n d bibli- o g r a p h y led to the assignment of re- sponsibility f o r acquisition of all p u b - lications to a single library, w i t h the 380 COLLEGE AND RESEARCH LIBRARIES library m a k i n g its own dealer arrange- ments. T h e p r o b l e m h e r e is g e t t i n g the p u b - lications, or even l e a r n i n g of their exist- ence. I t is f r e q u e n t l y difficult to find a dealer w h o will do the j o b r e q u i r e d ; all too o f t e n , a r r a n g e m e n t s laboriously ar- rived at fail to last, a n d the library m u s t start all over again. W e are told t h a t personal contact, r a t h e r t h a n corre- spondence, is o f t e n r e q u i r e d . W e are told, f o r example, by the University of F l o r i d a in connection w i t h its coverage of the C a r i b b e a n t h a t some book stores w o n ' t b o t h e r w i t h billing. If you w a n t t h e i r books, you must p u t cash o n the c o u n t e r . W e are convinced t h a t these libraries are d o i n g their best w i t h the means available to them, b u t they meet w i t h widely varying success. B o t h they a n d we f e a r their best is n o t e n o u g h . O n e strong i n d i c a t i o n of this is t h e concern expressed by various organizations of scholars w h i c h are currently w o r k i n g i n d e p e n d e n t l y on their own possible solutions to p u b l i c a t i o n p r o c u r e m e n t p r o b l e m s in these critical areas a n d o t h e r areas n o t yet covered at all by t h e Farm- i n g t o n Plan. (Let me say t h a t the Plan's f a i l u r e thus far to make its coverage world-wide is d u e p r i m a r i l y to these k n o w n difficulties of p r o c u r e m e n t . ) T h e s e o t h e r groups i n c l u d e the Social Science Research Council, deeply con- cerned w i t h coverage of the M i d d l e East; b o t h the A m e r i c a n O r i e n t a l Society a n d the Association f o r Asian Studies, wor- ried a b o u t the F a r East; a n d the Joint C o m m i t t e e on Slavic Studies of the A m e r i c a n Council of L e a r n e d Societies a n d the SSRC, studying Slavic a n d East E u r o p e a n publications. A n I n t e r n a t i o n a l Conference on Scientific I n f o r m a t i o n is to be held in W a s h i n g t o n in N o v e m b e r . T h e Seminar on L a t i n A m e r i c a n Ac- quisitions meets a n n u a l l y . All of these g r o u p s are w o r k i n g o n problems that the F a r m i n g t o n P l a n was expected to solve. If a d e q u a t e p r o c u r e m e n t f r o m these countries is to be achieved, it does in- deed a p p e a r t h a t r e g u l a r visits, e i t h e r to establish a n d m a i n t a i n library-dealer relationships or actually to buy a n d ship publications, are necessary. Libraries, however, c a n n o t afford to s u p p o r t rov- ing p r o c u r e m e n t officers. W e are n o t sure of the solution, b u t one possibility may lie in the use of A m e r i c a n govern- m e n t a l personnel already a b r o a d . M a n y of w h a t we t e r m critical areas have be- come truly critical in the world-wide political scene since W o r l d W a r I I . I need m e n t i o n only t h e N e a r East, South- east Asia, the F a r East, a n d Africa. T h i s raises the question of the n a t i o n a l in- terest in i n f o r m a t i o n a b o u t these areas for intelligence purposes. I t was t h e f a i l u r e of the n a t i o n ' s libraries to meet intelligence a n d defense contract needs d u r i n g W o r l d W a r I I which, a f t e r all, triggered the F a r m i n g t o n Plan. W e d o n o t know how m u c h A m e r i c a n intelli- gence agencies now d e p e n d u p o n t h e resources of o u r research libraries, b u t we are trying to i n q u i r e i n t o this. If this d e p e n d e n c e is significant—if the intelligence agencies are n o t self-suffi- cient along these lines—then it seems that a case m i g h t be m a d e f o r govern- m e n t a l assistance to libraries a t t e m p t i n g comprehensive coverage of p u b l i c a t i o n s in these areas. T h i s m i g h t take the f o r m of close cooperation by an enlarged corps of publications p r o c u r e m e n t officers a b r o a d . I t m i g h t be in the f o r m of gov- e r n m e n t a l contracts w i t h a few m a j o r li- braries employing a n d supervising their own p r o c u r e m e n t personnel a b r o a d . Fail- ing some such a r r a n g e m e n t , we see n o ready a n d a d e q u a t e solution to this p a r t of the p r o b l e m . O u r t h i r d m a j o r concern is serials. T h e only provision for serials in the F a r m i n g t o n P l a n countries covered by SEPTEMBER 1958 381 subject is the instruction to dealers to send a sample copy of each new title to the a p p r o p r i a t e library. It is t h e n u p to the library to place a subscription or not, as it sees fit. If it decides n o t to subscribe, the library is supposed to send the sample copy to the F a r m i n g t o n P l a n office at H a r v a r d , which will at- t e m p t to find a h o m e f o r t h a t title in an- o t h e r library. T h e r e is n o certainty, how- ever, that any library will subscribe, a n d we have f o u n d lots of evidence t h a t m a n y serial titles are n o t picked u p by any library. Yet, it goes w i t h o u t saying t h a t in m a n y subjects, particularly the sciences a n d technology, serials are m u c h m o r e i m p o r t a n t t h a n t h e m o n o g r a p h s the F a r m i n g t o n P l a n so painstakingly acquires. O n the o t h e r h a n d , libraries c a n n o t be asked to accept the same re- sponsibility f o r serial p u b l i c a t i o n s in a subject as they d o f o r m o n o g r a p h s . Most of the l i b r a r i a n s we consulted could suggest n o solution t h a t w o u l d p e r m i t all of us to feel secure in the knowledge t h a t foreign serial publica- tions are being covered comprehensively. One, however, has studied the p r o b l e m closely a n d has some very cogent ideas as to how it may be solved; this is Her- m a n H e n k l e , of the J o h n C r e r a r Li- brary. W e have asked h i m to present these ideas in a w o r k i n g p a p e r at the conference on the F a r m i n g t o n P l a n to be held in the fall. T o tie u p some loose ends: G o v e r n m e n t d o c u m e n t s are e x c l u d e d f r o m the P l a n in its subject coverage. Mr. Vosper a n d I have decided t h a t this does not worry us at all. T h e L i b r a r y of Congress sets o u t to collect foreign g o v e r n m e n t d o c u m e n t s t h r o u g h treaty a n d exchange a r r a n g e m e n t s . W e feel se- cure in the results of its efforts a n d posi- tive t h a t a n y t h i n g L C isn't accomplish- ing c a n n o t be accomplished by any o t h e r library or g r o u p of libraries. C a t a l o g i n g is a n o t h e r area, of great concern to the f o u n d e r s of the P l a n which does n o t worry us m u c h . T h e question of q u a l i t y of receipts arises here. W e received o n e or two confessions t h a t l i b r a r i a n s h a d rebelliously t h r o w n a p a r t i c u l a r piece of " j u n k " i n t o the wastebasket—rather t h a n r e t a i n i n g it, m u c h less cataloging it—a p r o c e d u r e strictly n o t p e r m i t t e d w i t h i n the terms of the P l a n . I n m o r e cases, l i b r a r i a n s have given m i n i m a l cataloging or even the briefest of listing to very low grade receipts, b u t they have r e p o r t e d them to the N a t i o n a l U n i o n Catalog. T h e q u a l i t y of entries in such cases may leave s o m e t h i n g to be desired. For all receipts w i t h i n reason, however, we be- lieve t h a t the l i b r a r i a n s take very seri- ously their responsibility f o r a d e q u a t e cataloging a n d p r o m p t r e p o r t i n g to N U C . Some may miss the thirty-day d e a d l i n e on r e p o r t i n g , b u t not by m u c h . T h e y recognize how essential such re- p o r t i n g is to the success of the Plan. W e f o u n d a considerable lack of en- thusiasm toward proposals f o r central- ized cataloging of F a r m i n g t o n receipts, a p p a r e n t l y because of the possible de- lays in transit of books a n d the p r o b a b l e costs. W e are inclined to t h i n k t h a t the p r o b l e m of centralized or cooperative cataloging must be solved on its own merits a n d on a b r o a d base, n o t by way of the F a r m i n g t o n Plan. If cataloging in source becomes a reality, o u r foreign acquisitions will, of course, come to us already cataloged. As to subject allocations, q u i t e a few changes seem to be in order. Several libraries i n d i c a t e d a wish to r e l i n q u i s h certain of t h e i r allocations, sometimes because of dissatisfaction w i t h their re- ceipts, in o t h e r cases because of dimin- ishing local interest in p a r t i c u l a r sub- jects. A n y o n e setting o u t toward m a j o r , over-all reallocations w o u l d be wise to proceed w i t h caution, however. M a n y libraries value t h e i r allocations highly, 382 COLLEGE AND RESEARCH LIBRARIES a n d he w h o tries to take t h e m away would be safer d o i n g it at a distance t h a n by personal contact. W h i l e the F a r m i n g t o n P l a n was be- ing set up, it was decided by A R L that it was p r e f e r a b l e to have large subject blocks allocated to relatively few librar- ies. A few m o n t h s later A R L reversed itself a n d decided to try to accommo- d a t e all libraries wishing to p a r t i c i p a t e . T h i s resulted in m a n y very small sub- ject allocations a n d t e n d e d to m u l t i p l y the complications. T h e r e may be ad- vantages in r e t u r n to the original idea of having fewer libraries involved in the Plan, if those libraries are willing to accept the larger subject blocks. All t h a t I indicate r e g a r d i n g o u r con- clusions m u s t be considered tentative. I n view of the great lack of consensus a m o n g the p a r t i c i p a t i n g librarians, o u r final r e p o r t must d e p e n d , m u c h m o r e t h a n we h a d originally suspected, on the findings of the various statistical studies of receipts not yet completed. W e h o p e t h a t they will tell us how impor- tant the P l a n actually is, a n d how well it is really doing. It is conceivabe, for example, that so m a n y F a r m i n g t o n re- ceipts will prove to be d u p l i c a t e d by the regular receipts of American librar- ies, t h a t we will conclude the Plan is r e d u n d a n t a n d should be d r o p p e d . I d o u b t , however, t h a t we will discover any such thing. For t h a t matter, m a n y librarians will argue t h a t such dupli- cation is w o r t h while. For the present we strongly believe t h a t the P l a n is essential to the n a t i o n a l interest. How- ever, a f t e r talking with m a n y librarians, we are convinced t h a t a n u m b e r of f u n d a m e n t a l changes in procedures m u s t be m a d e if the Plan is to survive; too many librarians are too close to being f e d u p . W e have a r r a n g e d f o r a n u m b e r of working papers to be presented at the conference this fall. Some will deal in detail with problems of p r o c u r e m e n t in various critical areas. O n e will take u p the p r o b l e m of serials. A n o t h e r will describe programs, now being carried o n by groups of libraries in E u r o p e , w i t h objectives paralleling those of the Farm- ington Plan. W e will r e p o r t o u r findings, a n d either make firm r e c o m m e n d a t i o n s or describe possible alternatives regard- ing the f u t u r e of the Plan. T h e Plan's f u t u r e (if any), its objectives, a n d its procedures will t h e n d e p e n d , as they always have, u p o n the decisions of the p a r t i c i p a t i n g libraries. T h e F a r m i n g t o n Plan, for all its shortcomings a n d whatever its f u t u r e , has already been w o r t h while in m a n y i m p o r t a n t ways. It has b r o u g h t o u r m a j o r libraries to the recognition of their collective responsibility for cover- ing the world's publications in the na- tional interest. It has established the fact that the j o b must be done on a cooperative basis. It has reaffirmed the fact t h a t o u r libraries are, a n d m u s t always be, i n t e r d e p e n d e n t . It has dem- onstrated once more that m a j o r co- operative projects can, despite irritations a n d difficulties, be m a d e to work. W e believe that w i t h patience a n d persistence, the Plan's present p r o b l e m s can be alleviated a n d t h a t it will even- tually achieve a measure of world-wide coverage. W e believe it will b r i n g im- p o r t a n t benefits to A m e r i c a n scholar- ship. SEPTEMBER 1958 383