Page images
PDF
EPUB

REFERENCE DEPARTMENT

Burton W. Adkinson, Director, Reference Department
Robert C. Gooch, Assistant Director, Reference Department
Alice Parker, Chief, Prints and Photographs Division

John C. L. Andreassen, Chief, Division of Aeronautics

Arthur G. Renstrom, Assistant Chief, Division of Aeronautics

George A. Pughe, Chief, Air Information Division

James Vulfson, selection and evaluation officer, Air Information Division
Michael Kwapiszewski, Air Information Division

William T. Walsh, Chief, Air Research Division

Harry T. Krould, Chief, European Affairs Division

Roy T. Basler, Chief, General Reference and Bibliography Division

Henry J. Dubester, Assistant Chief, General Reference and Bibliography Division Thomas Shaw, senior reference assistant, General Reference and Bibliography Division

David Baumgardt, consultant in philosophy

John T. Dorosh, curator, Slavic Room

James B. Childs, Chief Documents Officer, General Reference and Bibliography
Division

Sergius Yakobson, Chief, Slavic and East European Division
Paul Horecky, Slavic and East European Division

Fritz Epstein, Slavic and East European Division
Bela T. Kardos, Slavic and East European Division
Howard T. Cline, Director, Hispanic Foundation

Francisco Aguilera, Assistant Director, Hispanic Foundation
Legare Obear, Chief, Loan Division

Ralph L. Henderson, Assistant Chief, Loan Division

David C. Mearns, Chief, Manuscripts Division

Robert Land, Assistant Chief, Manuscripts Division

Arch C. Gerlach, Chief, Map Division

Walter Ristow, Assistant Chief, Map Division

Marie Goodman, Head, Acquisitions Section, Map Division

Harold Spivacke, Chief, Music Division

Edward Waters, Assistant Chief, Music Division

Richard S. Hill, reference librarian, Music Division

Frank Campbell, librarian, Music Division

William Lichtenwanger, assistant reference librarian, Music Division

Arthur W. Hummel, Chief, Division of Orientalia

Cecil Hobbs, reference librarian for Southeast Asia

Horace I. Poleman, Chief, Indic Section, Division of Orientalia

Walter Maurer, Indic Section, Division of Orientalia

Lawrence Marwick, Chief, Hebraic Section, Division of Orientalia

Edwin Beal, Chief, Japanese Section, Division of Orientalia

Robert F. Ogden, Chief, Near East Section, Division of Orientalia

Kwang Tsing Wu, Chinese Section, Division of Orientalia

Frederick R. Goff, Chief, Rare Books Division

Raymund L. Zwemer, Chief, Science Division

Rita Liepina, reference librarian, Science Division

Paul L. Berry, Chief, Serials Division

John Thaxter, Assistant Chief, Serials Division

Willard Webb, Chief, Stack and Reader Division

Dwight E. Gray, Chief, Technical Information Division

Clement R. Brown, Chief, Bibliographic Section, Technical Information Division

COPYRIGHT OFFICE

William P. Siegfried, Assistant Registrar, Copyright Office

Lawrence Keitt, Law Librarian

LAW LIBRARY

Francis X. Dwyer, Assistant Law Librarian

William H. Crouch, Chief, American-British Law Section
Walter Zeydel, Assistant Chief, American-British Law Section
Vladimir Gsovski, Chief, Foreign Law Section

Edmund J. Jann, reference assistant, Foreigh Law Section

Frederick Karpf, research assistant, Foreign Law Section
Helen Clagett, Chief, Latin American Law Section

Cuca Clark, reference assistant librarian, Latin American Law Section

Mr. BUSBEY. There was some mention made at the morning session of transfer of funds from various departments of Government, totaling around $2,200,000. Who selects the personnel to work on those special projects?

Dr. EVANS. We do, sir.

Mr. BUSBEY. Are these people and all the employees of the Library given security checks?

Dr. EVANS. We operate under the regular security Executive order procedure, yes, sir, with the approval of this committee some years ago; and some of these people are also given security checks of a special character by the agencies for whom they work. For instance, some of our people not only are given a general loyalty and security check but are given an Air Force check to see if they are qualified to receive secret information. We apply whatever they require in the way of special checks for handling special information.

Mr. BUSBEY. Let us say, for instance, you are in need of five specialists, not in any particular field, but in any field. What is the regular procedure of the Library of Congress in selecting these individuals?

Dr. EVANS. We have a system of people applying directly to us for jobs. We also have contacts with the Civil Service Commission and with other agencies employing similar people and we sometimes get people referred to us from there. We have them fill out the regular form 57 which the Civil Service Commission uses. We do our own interviewing of their references. When we employ them we put them through the regular FBI and Civil Service Commission procedures on loyalty and security. But we make the final choice of the people and we are responsible.

Mr. BUSBEY. You say "we." A good many?

DI. EVANS. The Library administration.

Mr. BUSBEY. Do you have a selection committee?

Dr. EVANS. No, sir; our Personnel Office works with the people who want to fill the job, the line officers, and recommendations come up from division to department to the Personnel Office to the Administrative Department and then to Mr. Clapp and myself. It is not a committee action, but in some cases we do consult with one another and in the case of specialists in the Legislative Reference Service, Dr. Griffith's setup, sometimes ad hoc committees of his senior specialists, for instance, evaluate for him some particular specialist. But there is no regular committee system.

Mr. BUSBEY. Final approval rests with yourself and Mr. Clapp?
Dr. EVANS. That is right, sir.

POSSIBILITY OF REDUCTIONS IN SOME DIVISIONS

Mr. BUSBEY. We have been looking at the justifications for 1954 and I see quite a number of requests for additional personnel. In all probability it is necessary to carry out the functions of the Library as you see them; but it occurred to me that, along the line somewhere, there should be 1 or 2 divisions where you may not need as many people as you had in past years. I have not heard anything about reducing personnel in these divisions.

Dr. EVANS. Mr. Busbey, we have reduced personnel in some of the divisions to get to our present situation. We are asking only for those

funds to deal with situations which we have not been able to deal with by making reductions. So that in some of these cases I have presented to you there have been reductions in personnel. There are fewer catalogers in the Descriptive Cataloging Division than there used to be. There are fewer people in the stacks than there used to be. We have made a great many of those internal adjustments and we do not have any that we are prepared to propose at this time that have not been already taken into account. We made some in 1950 after we asked you for help in connection with the outbreak of the Korean war. We set up a Korean specialist and put some other people at work that had a bearing on that situation. We had to give up some positions in other divisions to do that but we carried out your wishes in that regard. That is just a sample of how we have made reductions. But I do not believe I could make any other reductions without injuring our service.

LEGISLATIVE REFERENCE SERVICE WORK FOR COMMITTEES

Mr. BUSBEY. There has been no consideration given to the proposition of having the various congressional committees, out of their appropriations, reimburse the Legislative Reference Service for any of the work done for them; has there, Dr. Griffith?

Dr. GRIFFITH. The House Administration Committee has had such a proposal under advisement and, at the last meeting at which I was present, they instructed me to draft a policy statement to submit to them. It is substantially our existing policy. They have not yet acted on it.

In a nutshell, it is (1) that we should handle the ordinary inquiries from committees without reference to reimbursement; that is to say, the inquiries that can be done in a short span of time; (2) that we should accept from committees lengthy inquiries without reimbursement but not accept deadlines. The staff in question should remain free to handle urgent inquiries from individual Members or other committees. In other words, we should not tie up individuals on our staff exclusively for one committee for a long period; (3) if a committee had a major job for us to do which required the earmarking of a staff member or members for an extended period of, say, 2 or 3 months, the committee shall find the amount to reimburse us for such staff use, so that we can make temporary arrangements to maintain our staff intact and available in that particular field for inquiries from the committee of the other House and for the individual Members. We do receive in an average year around $30,000 in such reimbursements from committees.

With that $30,000 we engage temporary staff largely when Congress is in session so as to keep the service intact. This proposal is under consideration; but it is by and large the practice as it stands now.

Mr. BUSBEY. I do not believe our distinguished chairman can accuse me of trespassing on his territory in regard to the transfer of funds from the executive in this respect because this, after all, is part of the legislative branch of our Government. But it seems to me it would help you in making a better showing as far as appropriations are concerned for your department of the Library of Congress if you were adequately reimbursed by these various committees that ask you to do any appreciable amount of work, because they have appropriations

for that work. Otherwise, it is lumped in, in an appropriation for the Legislative Service, and some of the other committees might be charged with some of that although not asking anything of the Library of Congress at any time.

Dr. GRIFFITH. I can give you, while there are exceptions, a fair picture of the situation in this respect. The average standing committee, as you know, is allowed four professional staff members. Almost all of the committees have taken advantage of that provision. A situation arises in which a committee, shall we say the House Interior and Insular Affairs, to give an actual and concrete example, has something in the field of Indian affairs. It has filled its four allowable positions in the fields of engineering, mining, and certain of its other numerous responsibilities. It does not have a justification for a full-time person in Indian affairs. Therefore, they, and so has the Senate committee, regularly call on us. We have retained 1 person in Indian Affairs; that 1 person has satisfactorily served the 2 committees. The House Interior Committee is not in a position to reimburse us under the present standing orders of the House, if its four positions are filled as they normally are, unless they go to the Accounts Committee and ask for an additional amount of money for a job which might take only a month or two.

As regards the Reorganization Act, Mr. Chairman, I respectfully submit that the wording of that act and the wording of the report. which led to it indicate that, instead of providing the committees with more than four professionals in order to staff the committees at their peak load, the Legislative Reference was created as a reserve pool. When these emergencies do come, they should as of right ask us to reinforce their needs; and we are operating in the spirit and the letter of that act. We wholly agree that Congressman Busbey has a major point; which is that when a committee needs a person for an extended period and we have only one specialist in the field and the committee takes that person out of circulation, then they should reimburse us for it through their own funds if available; and if not, presumably through a request of the committee on Accounts. In fact they do this; and we do receive from such reimbursements in the neighborhood of $30,000 a year for this type of service over and above what was contemplated in the Reorganization Act.

INFORMATION BULLETIN

Mr. BUSBEY. Dr. Evans, I should like to satisfy my curiosity a little bit regarding this information bulletin you publish. That intrigues me. This bulletin comes out, I believe, every week. Does it not?

Dr. EVANS. That is right, sir.

Mr. BUSBEY. I notice that each issue consists of quite a number of pages. I noticed one that came in the office the other day had 33 pages. How many people do you have working on this information bulletin?

Dr. EVANS. There is 1 typist who spends most of the week, perhaps 3 days of the week typing it. There is 1 person in the information office who spends, I suppose, a day and a half to 2 days a week; the rest of it is supplied as routine without much time being taken by various people throughout the Library reporting on happenings

and problems on which we want the counsel of other librarians throughout the country, and so on. It takes some staff time in the duplicating unit. The net cost, paper, and mailing and everything else we figure at somewhere between $200 and $300 per week. Mr. BUSBEY. How large a mailing list do you have that receives this bulletin every week?

Dr. EVANS. Approximately 3,000. I am not sure of the precise figure at the moment.

Mr. CLAPP. We revised this mailing list every year and only people who ask to be kept on it are kept on it. I do not have the actual number here but it is in the neighborhood of 3,000.

Dr. EVANS. We can revise the figure, Mr. Chairman. (The following was subsequently submitted:)

EXTENT OF MAILING LIST FOR THE INFORMATION BULLETIN

There are 2,533 names on the mailing list for the Information Bulletin. This mailing list is canvassed at approximately annual intervals in order to weed out addressees who do not specifically request continuance. Questionnaires on this point were mailed on March 25, 1953, and the resultant weeding is now going on. So far 360 names have been dropped.

Mr. BUSBEY. How would that 3,000 be broken down?

Dr. EVANS. Mostly librarians who have asked for it because inherently the work of the Library of Congress is of interest to them and it helps them in their own work. I would say that nearly all of the people who receive it are in library work in this country and to some extent in other countries.

Mr. CLAPP. It is considered by librarians to be a source of information about library business. The letters that come in are very glowing on this point. People tell us that it is the most useful source of such information in the field.

Dr. EVANS. Our primary purpose, Mr. Busbey and gentlemen, has been to inform our staff members of what is going on. We felt there was a great deal of gossip, a great deal of misunderstanding; in an institution as big as the Library of Congress, there is no way of people knowing what is going on and who is being promoted and why unless it is written down for them. So that this publication is intended primarily for the information of our own staff.

Mr. BUSBEY. I am not directing my criticism at the bulletin. I am just exploring the situation.

Dr. EVANS. I hope I do not sound hostile, Mr. Busbey. I am not. I am trying to explain.

Mr. BUSBEY. I was rather intrigued. For instance, in the bulletin of April 20 of this year, it has a running, day-by-day account of your trip in Paris. I was rather puzzled as to just what value some of this material would have either to the members of the Library of Congress, the librarians around the country, or even the Members of Congress. Here on Sunday, April 12, you say:

At noon, after late rising, I joined Mr. and Mrs. Smith in an automobile trip to Chartres Cathedral which I had never visited before. Ate picnic lunch in a field outside the village; toured the cathedral.

I am just going down here. I have not anything underlined or marked.

April 14. As usual, I walked from my hotel to the office shortly after 9 o'clock.

« PreviousContinue »