Likewise, the libraries of the country have been affected by these changes on the world scene. In order to assist these libraries in giving adequate library service, the Congress passed in 1955 the Library Services Act, and in 1964, the Library Services and Construction Act. As a result of these grant-in-aid programs, the libraries are able to purchase additional library materials and, consequently, provide better community library service.

The Library of Congress has, of necessity, been indirectly affected by the improvement of community library services. These community libraries are looking more and more to the Library of Congress for the development of classification schemes, subject headings, cataloging codes, automated techniques, and for printed catalog cards. Consider that in 1945 the Library sold 14 million printed catalog cards and that during the last year the figure rose to 61 million. A considerable savings in manpower that is not only expensive but difficult to obtain because of the shortage of trained catalogers is made available to the libraries of the Nation through this national card distribution program. The House of Representatives in passing the Higher Education Act of 1965 authorized an expansion of this cataloging program that will have far-reaching implications. It will provide for the establishment of a centralized cataloging program in which cataloging information on not only American trade publications but also foreign publications will be made available to the Nation's libraries by the Library of Congress within a short time after the materials are received. The Higher Education Act of 1965 also provides for matching grants for the purchase of library materials for college and university libraries and the Elementary and Secondary Education Act of 1965 which was enacted into law during this session of Congress provides for funds for the purchase of school library materials. The needs of these libraries are real and with the improvement in the national library picture will come more requests to the Library of Congress for its services. For these reasons, it is obvious there will be no letup in the Library of Congress services to other libraries. It will become more and more difficult for the Library of Congress to face up to its responsibilities to the library community unless it is given adequate space to work in.

Another important area of growth in the Library since World War II has been in the Legislative Reference Service. Congress recognized the need for a research service which would help them by providing information on the myriad of legislative proposals which come before them, and, in 1946 with the passage of the Legislative Reorganization Act, put new life into the Legislative Reference Service.

The record is clear that recent years have seen a tremendous increase in the need for the Library of Congress to provide proper information not only to Congress and the Government but to all interested citizens of the United States. The Library's role during this period has been a steadily expanding one.

JAMES MADISON, THE "FATHER OF THE CONSTITUTION"

James Madison was one of the greatest of the Founding Fathers. He rightly deserves to be honored by the Nation for which he struggled so diligently. He drafted the guarantee of freedom of religion in Virginia's Declaration of Right, one of the most significant documents on religious freedom in the history of the Western World. He was an outstanding leader of the Continental Congress, and he led and won the fight in that Continental Congress to make western lands a national public domain. He fought strongly for provisions requiring the separation of church and state in the new nation. He drafted the document which became the Constitution of the United States of America, and sponsored and drafted the first 10 amendments to the Constitution which formed the Bill of Rights. As Secretary of State under Thomas Jefferson, he contributed largely to the purchase of the Louisiana Territory. As the President of the United States, he stiffened American foreign policy in defense of American neutral rights, gallantly commanded the armies and navies in the War of 1812, and under his administration the United States became universally regarded as a world power.

MADISON MEMORIAL COMMISSION

The Madison Memorial Commission was created by act of Congress in Public Law 417 of the 86th Congress. That Commission was created for the purpose of devising an appropriate memorial to James Madison. The Commission was composed of Presidential appointees and four Members of the House and four Members of the Senate. Since its creation the Commission has worked actively

to find a proper memorial to James Madison in the Nation's Capital. Representatives of the Commission testifying before the Subcommittee on Public Buildings and Grounds of the Committee on Public Works recommended strongly the proposed memorial to James Madison which is contained in House Joint Resolution 642. This memorial would be a Madison Memorial Hall located within a section of the proposed third Library of Congress to be constructed under House Joint Resolution 642. The actual details of the memorial within the Library and the manner in which James Madison would be honored would be developed in consultation with the James Madison Memorial Commission.

STATEMENT OF THE LIBRARIAN

Mr. STEED. We also have with us this afternoon our Librarian, Dr. Mumford. Doctor, we would like to hear from you.

Dr. MUMFORD. Thank you, Mr. Chairman and members of the subcommittee. I appreciate this opportunity to appear on behalf of the Architect of the Capitol's estimate for an appropriation to prepare preliminary plans for the Library of Congress James Madison Memorial Building. In 1956 I began discussions with the Architect of the Capitol concerning the obvious need to plan for a third Library of Congress building.

In 1958 supporting data for a new building were presented to the Joint Committee on the Library on whose initiation legislation authorizing the preparation of preliminary plans and estimates was enacted in Public Law 86-469, approved on May 14, 1960. An appropriation of $75,000 to carry out the purposes of that statute was provided by Public Law 86-628 approved on July 12, 1960.

During the architectual study which was started in April 1961, the original objective of a single building of nearly 2 million square feet, net, of usable space which would require four squares east of the Library Annex, was modified in favor of a joint Library of CongressJames Madison Memorial project in which, on square 732, would be constructed the Madison Memorial and Library of Congress subgrade vaults for the storage of rare and historic collections. This plan would have produced about 25 percent of the Library's required expansion space thus leaving the balance to be provided in a structure east of the Library Annex. Joint resolutions which were introduced in both Houses of Congress in the 87th and 88th Congresses to authorize the square 732 project failed of enactment.

By authorizing the construction of the Library of Congress James Madison Memorial Building, Senate Joint Resolution 69 of the 89th Congress will fulfill both the James Madison Memorial project and the Library of Congress building program. It is generally recognized that the James Madison Memorial is long overdue, and it is a fact that evidence of the Library's extreme need for the new building to sustain its growing collections and services increases day by day.

The Library-like other research institutions but in much greater measure because of its size and its multiple responsibilities to the Federal Government and to many publics in all fields of learning-has been profoundly affected by the "information explosion" that followed World War II. There has been a tremendous increase in Englishlanguage publications, especially in the fields of science and technology, and new and emerging nations are adding steadily to the inflow of materials. As areas of the world become of crucial concern, their publications, and publications relating to them, must be available for the use of the Congress, the Government, and the research community.

EXAMPLES OF CROWDED CONDITIONS

As a result of the worldwide increase in publishing and of the Library's lack of space, the Library's Orientalia Division, for example, has had to begin storing material on the floor. The Serial Division has some 18,000 bound volumes of newspapers floor-stacked _on_an annex deck because shelf space cannot be provided for them. The Far Eastern Law and the Near Eastern and African Law Divisions are of necessity located at some distance from the collections they service. and an inordinate amount of time must be spent by professional staff in transit between their offices and the collections.

The situation in regard to housing the general book collections is no less critical. Volumes are stacked on the floor, they are shelved on window sills, they are "double shelved" one behind another, and many are on top of others on already packed shelves. Because we do not have sufficient free shelf space for orderly growth large segments of these collections must be moved repeatedly to make way for new accessions. We have had to disperse some classes of materials over a half dozen separate locations. The repeated shifting of these collections within the stacks to take advantage of small patches of unfilled shelving is obviously an expensive operation. The total picture is very bad as to maintaining efficient service.

Despite emergency measures to relieve congestion by transferring some activities to the Navy Yard Annex and 500 tons of materials to storage near Baltimore, our space situation steadily deteriorates. We have staff working in subgrade areas without windows, in the major part of the main building exhibit galleries, and in alcoves between glass enclosed bookcases so cramped for space that the occupants impede other staff members in gaining access to the books and in turn are interrupted at their work when such access is necessary. Others are working in study rooms and in book stacks not designed or ventilated for that purpose. Many occupy space far short of GSA standards which specify from 60 square feet per person for the grade GS-1 to 6 levels to 250 to 300 square feet for the top civil service levels. By contrast the Legislative Reference Service's Government and General Research Division staff averages, for all grades, 46 square feet of space per person.

The Legislative Reference Service works during the peak congressional request season under very difficult deadlines with great dedication and effectiveness. Yet we cannot expect that this high morale can continue indefinitely in the face of such physically frustrating working conditions and at a considerable distance from the collections which the staff must use.

We are utilizing the study rooms in the Library, which were originally intended to serve the research needs of the scholars of the country, for official purposes and until a new building is occupied there will be no rooms available for scholars. Those who come to the Library for periods of intensive research complain bitterly about the space assigned to them. Yet, as many of them will tell you, this space is far superior to some of the areas where the Library staff works. The Library of Congress is so circumscribed by lack of space that its stature as a great national institution will be seriously impaired unless steps are taken without further loss of time to provide the

Library with an additional building. I urge that this appropriation be made during the present session of the Congress.

BASIS FOR $500,000 REQUEST

Mr. STEED. Thank you, Dr. Mumford.

In the matter of this $500,000 request, earlier this year in a similar situation, Mr. Stewart, you gave the committee a sort of rule of thumb you go by with regard to the amount of money you need for preliminary plans and so on, based on the size and scope of the project. If I remember correctly your statement then, this $500,000 is considerably under what normally would be estimated as a sufficient amount to do this part of a project of the magnitude we are talking about here.

Mr. STEWART. I believe, Mr. Chairman, that is correct to an extent. We have a somewhat different situation in this case. If I may, I would like to ask Mr. Campioli to further explain that.

Mr. CAMPIOLI. The money we have requested will be used principally to develop the preliminary drawings and estimates of cost for the project. It will also include an appropriate rendering of the building and a model of the building portraying how the new building will look in this setting.

The figure of $500,000 is based on a computation starting from the total gross square foot area of the building. After receiving the Librarian's program requiring nearly 2 million square feet of net usable area, we came up with a figure of 2,400,000 gross square feet.

Based on the assumption that the fee for this project might be the same as was paid for on the Rayburn Building, which was 512 percent, and asuming that the preliminary work usually constitutes about 20 percent of an architect's fee for the services he renders, we came to a figure of approximately $700,000 for the normal cost of what would be the preliminary work.

On the basis that we have had to prepare these figures without the benefit of drawings and purely on the basis of square footage, we have assumed a figure here lower than the figure of 20 percent of the total fee.

Mr. STEED. That is the point I wanted to make. This is just a rough guess and very likely it will be inadequate to take you to the point that you normally would go with an authorization or an appropriation of money for this type of activity.

Mr. CAMPIOLI. Yes, sir. We will have to come back to you later for the moneys for the contract drawings and specifications, and when the project is approved we can proceed further.

Mr. STEED. At a previous date, if my memory serves me, you had some funds to do some preliminary planning about a Library building. What was that amount?

Mr. CAMPIOLI. We were given $75,000 for that purpose. I believe we used $65,000 of that. That was to develop what might be called a schematic, layout and feasibility report, instead of the type of preliminary drawings we propose at this point. It is our hope in negotiating for the architect's services on the project we may be able to incorporate some of the knowledge gained in that work and possibly absorb some or all of the earlier sum in the fee for this project.

Mr. STEED. There is a radical change from what they had in mind at that point and what has been enacted at this point.

Mr. CAMPIOLI. Yes, sir. This would entail a more complete submission than was formerly presented on the earlier scheme.

JOINT DIRECTIONAL AND CONSULTING ARRANGEMENTS

Mr. STEED. In the matter of this bill having all these commissions and committees participating in this project, which to say the least is a very unusual situation, have you had an opportunity yet to make any determination, Mr. Stewart, as to how you will pick your associate architects, set this up, and get it going?

Mr. STEWART. Not as yet, Mr. Chairman. This is a matter on which I will obtain the advice and direction of the commissions and the committee involved. In fact, it is probably the first important item I will present to these groups for decision.

There might be a question of ethics involved in this. You will recall in 1961 the Joint Committee on the Library, under a prior authorization act, approved selection of a group of architects-engineers for the preparation of preliminary plans and estimates for a third Library building. These plans were prepared and approved by the Joint Committee on the Library but were never developed further due to lack of implementation.

Of course, since that time, the project has undergone considerable change. The site is different, the scope has changed, and the congressional group responsible for direction of the project has been augmented.

I will have to look to these gentlemen on these commissions and committees for guidance and direction on this question.

Mr. STEED. Are you in a position to make any comment at this time as to whether the provisions of this Senate Joint Resolution 69, requiring the participation of so many groups, is a workable way for you to go ahead and accomplish this project?

Mr. STEWART. It is an unusual setup, but I am not in a position now to say just how it will function or what difficulties will arise.

Mr. STEED. You just have not had a chance yet to probe into it to see what kind of a modus operandi can be devised?

Mr. STEWART. That is right. I shall have to get into consultation with these committees and see what they have in mind.

Mr. STEED. There are some misgivings about it. I hope the people involved will realize that this is a very unusual situation and will exert themselves in the direction of placing authority in your hands so you can proceed in an orderly manner. I hope we don't get into a situation where too many cooks spoil the broth and create some untenable situations.

Mr. STEWART. There are many questions yet unanswered and I hope some of these can be resolved before the end of this session of Congress. Mr. STEED. I can visualize some headaches unless we are very lucky. In the part of the bill which provides for the consultation with the American Institute of Architects, what is your thinking at this point on how that will apply?

Mr. STEWART. I have no clear-cut idea. Perhaps Mr. Campioli, who is a member of that institute, can give you his judgment on this point.