Search results

I should first like to say a few words about the title I have given to this paper. The title was chosen quite deliberately because I felt that it epitomized both the subject matter itself and the manner of its presentation. I had two principal reasons for the choice. The first was because I wished not only to give an indication of the subject of the paper but also I wanted to emphasize my firmly held belief that an information service and its information officer are one and indivisible. The information officer must, by the very nature of his calling, identify himself with the services he provides. For that reason the personal pronoun was introduced into the title. Moreover, the whole purpose of holding a display or exhibition is to display or exhibit—to draw attention to something—to advertise it—even to the point of ostentation. A telling phrase has the ability to do just that, and therefore my second reason was my desire to make the title arresting and so carry that precept into practice.

The problems of an information service or special library discussed are those of staffing. The problems are greater because a solution in one organization is seldom applicable in another. This difficulty in arriving at a common solution arises not so much from the extremely varied activities of many information services, but rather from the infinitely varied nature of the organizations of which they form part. These variations are in several dimensions—in size, in subjects covered, in the organizational structure of the undertaking, and the status of the information officer within the organization itself vis‐à‐vis his administra‐tive, technical, and commercial colleagues. These variations are so considerable, yet at the same time so indeterminate, that the information services themselves frequently defy comparison. Their staffing problems, unless considered individually, become major problems. For these reasons this paper attempts to survey only certain facets of the problem, and its scope has been restricted so as to exclude all but the larger industrial libraries. At the same time, it is hoped that the paper will have some bearing on related problems in other types of libraries.

The 28th annual conference of Aslib, held at Nottingham University from 11th to 14th September, 1953, proved to be the largest that Aslib has so far organized. A list of those present is printed on pp. 254–260. Yet again Aslib was glad to be able to welcome a number of overseas guests and members, including Dr. and Mrs. Lancour and their small daughter from the U.S.A., Drs. and Mrs. van Dijk and Miss Rom from the Netherlands, Mr. M. S. Dandekar and Mr. J. V. Karandikar from India, Miss D. M. Leach from Canada, and Mrs. T. Collin from Norway. Mr. Walter A. Southern, a Fulbright scholar from the U.S.A. affiliated to Aslib during his year's study in the United Kingdom, represented the Special Libraries Association, and Mr. J. E. Holmstrom attended as an observer on behalf of Unesco.

ONE of the pressing problems that faces the public librarian of to‐day is the finding of adequate protection for the property committed to his care. The open‐access library loses books; at any rate now‐a‐days. But there is no means of prosecuting borrowers who take an extra book from the library in their pockets. There are model standing orders which may be adopted, which regulate the conduct of readers in reference libraries and reading rooms, but a book‐thief may plead that he meant only to borrow a book that has been found in his possession, and his offence will be treated merely as a technical breach of the rule that a book must be “charged” before it is taken from the library. When a clear case has been made, as in the notorious Walthamstow case, a foolishly sentimental Bench will refuse to help the libraries. We would urge the Library Association to give some consideration to the drafting of model standing orders which will give legal effect to the present “rules” under which libraries work, rules which the vicious may defy almost with impunity. The safety of the books in most libraries depends, actually, on public ignorance of the fact that most of our rules have no legal authority behind them.

It has often been said that a great part of the strength of Aslib lies in the fact that it brings together those whose experience has been gained in many widely differing fields but who have a common interest in the means by which information may be collected and disseminated to the greatest advantage. Lists of its members have, therefore, a more than ordinary value since they present, in miniature, a cross‐section of institutions and individuals who share this special interest.

Aarhus Kommunes Biblioteker (Teknisk Bibliotek), Ingerslevs Plads 7, Aarhus, Denmark. Representative: V. NEDERGAARD PEDERSEN (Librarian).

Sir Raymond Streat, C.B.E., Director of The Cotton Board, Manchester, accompanied by Lady Streat. A Vice‐President: F. C. Francis, M.A., F.S.A., Keeper of the Department of Printed Books, British Museum. Honorary Treasurer: J. E. Wright, Institution of Electrical Engineers. Honorary Secretary: Mrs. J. Lancaster‐Jones, B.Sc., Science Librarian, British Council. Chairman of Council: Miss Barbara Kyle, Research Worker, Social Sciences Documentation. Director: Leslie Wilson, M.A.

The Winter Meeting held at Aslib on 23rd November took the form of a ‘Brains Trust on Special Librarianship’. The members of the panel were:

Sir Raymond Streat, C.B.E., Director of The Cotton Board, Manchester, accompanied by Lady Streat. A Vice‐President: F. C. Francis, M.A., F.S.A., Keeper of the Department of Printed Books, British Museum. Honorary Treasurer: J.E.Wright. Honorary Secretary: Mrs. J. Lancaster‐Jones, B.Sc., Science Librarian, British Council. Chairman of Council: Miss Barbara Kyle, Research Worker, Social Sciences Documentation. Director: Leslie Wilson, M.A.

TO many of us it is a matter for regret that we are not able to keep ourselves so closely in touch with library affairs in other parts of the world as we would wish. With American happenings we are, of course, fairly well acquainted, but Colonial effort has not received the attention which is its due. In many places in the Empire methods are, in certain ways, in advance of ours—in more than one country the legislation has been more enlightened than it was in England until quite recently—and everywhere the experience of keen progressive librarians facing their own particular problems must prove of interest and value to those in the home country. Therefore we believe that by devoting this issue to a discussion of some phases of Colonial librarianship we are but answering the large demand for such information.