LIBRARY CHRONICLE. Hmertcan anfc Brftisfo ^Libraries. ffstte 2, THE following appears in the Library Journal for March, 1894 : " We should be loath to add to international polemics by treating other- wise than good-naturedly the further comments and criticisms of our recent visitor, Mr. Brown, nor did we intend, in our comment upon his original article to do other than ' speak up ' for American libraries in fair counter to some of his conclusions. We will therefore only disclaim on the part of Americans ' contemptuous reference ' to European libraries ; nor will we comment on the tone of his reply, except to say that doubt- less Americans as well as English are prone to generalise from hasty information, and to draw conclusions, which might not be confirmed by a more full acquaintance with facts. We can scarcely let the matter pass, however, without entering friendly protest against Mr. Brown's method of comparison of figures of libraries. Witness his first citation : ' In Boston, during the year 1890-91 (I have no later figures), the total use of the libraries amounted to 1,715,860, made up of 1,367,924 book issues and 347,936 visits ; total cost, ^33,426, or 4d. per head of users. In Man- chester, during 1891-92, the total use amounted to 4,718,986, made up of 1,654,568 book issues and 3,064,936 visits ; total cost about ,13,000 or one half-penny per head of users. Boston use per head of population is 3'8o ; Manchester 9.' This is only another illustration of how figures can mislead. Deducting reference room figures which the 'newsroom' use in England, owing to the difference of custom in America and England regarding newspapers, makes unfair, we have, by testing the reports of 1891 for these two libraries, the following figures : Circulation: Man- chester, 702,000 ; Boston, 1,715,000. Number of books in library : Manchester, 206,000 ; Boston, 576,000. Number of books purchased : Manchester, 6,400 ; Boston, 25,000. Now, applying Mr. Brown's method of deducing results, let us see what these figures show : Percentage cost per book circulated, Manchester, 9*5 ; Boston, 9*2 ; percentage cost per book cared for, Manchester, 3*1 ; Boston, 27 ; percentage cost per book purchased, Manchester, 10 ; Boston, 6'6. Who shall say which figures are correct ? Who shall say that either library is badly managed ? As a matter of fact we believe both are admirably administered. These differences could be multiplied to an unlimited degree, but these are sufficient to question the usefulness of such comparisons. No con- clusions can be drawn from such comparative library figures, because the conditions are so dissimilar as to make any such tests radically unfair. Indeed, they are as misleading generally as the few users of American libraries in the deserted months of July and August were to Mr. Brown. As for the vaunted Americans contributions to library science, of which Mr. Brown demands a list, we may have over- estimated them. But we had supposed the modern card-catalogue, the dictionary catalogue, the Library Association, modern library architec- ture, periodical indexes, library schools, branch library systems, free book deliveries, access to shelves, the Rudolph indexer, the linotype permanent catalogue, the revolving book-shelf, and a few minor improvements, had 10
