recorded knowledge in the conduct of foreign policy and to national survival have resulted in an increased flow of publications into the Library despite more selective approaches to acquisition. For several years, we have found that every section of the cataloging divisions hast received more material than could be handled by available staff. Until there was prospect of additional space for the Library, I could not ask for sufficient staff to attain currency, but with the Naval Weapons Plant space in the offing, this obstacle will be removed, and I therefore urge your favorable consideration of this request. I cannot stress too strongly how central to the effectiveness of the Library of Congress and, indeed, to the library economy of the Nation this enlarged program would be.

The second item under our main appropriation head is the request to finance by direct appropriation an important bibliographic project hitherto financed by funds from other Federal agencies. I refer to the Monthly Index of Russian Accessions, for which 38 positions are requested at a cost of $222,429. An independent survey financed by the National Science Foundation has made a positive finding regarding the usefulness of the Index to scientists and research scholars. Since the support of the other Federal agencies cannot be continued for reasons which I shall be glad to explain in detail, it would be most unfortunate if those who are making such significant use of this valuable research tool should find that it is no longer available.

For the Reference Department, I am requesting seven low-grade positions at a cost of $33,855, mainly for stack attendants to meet the increased workload in the Stack and Reader Division and to reduce a serious arrearage in binding preparation work.

I come now to several nonsalary items under this same appropriation. The estimates include an item of $111,320 to provide for a full year's maintenance of the Naval Weapons Plant space; provision was made for only 3 months' cost in 1963. Unfortunately, it is now apparent that there will be some delay in completing the renovation process and the space is not likely to be ready for occupancy before April 1, 1964. Consequently, we shall not need the $111,320 requested, and the estimates should accordingly be reduced by $111,320.

One item to which we give high priority on our list of requests is $35,000 for the installation of a small-scale computer to replace our present electrical accounting machine setup. Such an installation is of great importance to the Library in improving the effectiveness of such business operations as payroll, billing, and accounting, and to make possible the investigation of computer utilization in certain limited bibliographic applications.

This summarizes the principal requests under our main appropriation.

For the Copyright Office, I am asking for six new positions at a cost of $35,765, the first request for new positions since fiscal year 1960. These are to meet the steady but continual increases in copyright registrations and to cope with increasingly complex legal problems.

For the Legislative Reference Service, the request is for seven relatively low grade positions at a cost of $39,082, plus $12,000 for supplies, photoduplication service, and published research materials which can be sent to congressional offices in response to inquiries. The increase in the total number of inquiries has been phenomenal, going

from 84,195 in 1961 to an estimated 108,000 in 1963, an increase of 22 percent which has been handled with only a 312-percent increase in staff. The seven positions requested will not in all likelihood close the gap, as it is now expected that the number of inquiries in 1964 will almost certainly go up to 115,000.

For the self-supporting card distribution program, I included in the regular estimates 18 positions, at a cost of $94,696, which are required to help prepare for publication the very much expanded book catalogs. During the course of this fiscal year, the continued sharp increase in card distribution business, which could not have been anticipated, has compelled me to submit an amendment to increase the printing allowance by $100,000. This will be needed to print the large number of additional cards demanded by libraries throughout the country. In due course funds spent for this program will be returned to the Treasury as miscellaneous receipts, with 10 percent profit added.

Another high priority request is the $100,000 additional for books for the general collections. Books are of course the lifeblood of the Library. A combination of circumstances is responsible for making funds hitherto available for this purpose very inadequate. There is a continuing worldwide increase in book production, the natural result of the formation and development of new countries. There are a number of new subject areas in which we must collect widely because of the particular interest of the Congress, the Federal Government, and research scholars; I need cite only the increasing interest in science and technology, in Slavic areas, in all of Asia, and in all of Africa. Coincident with the increase in the world production of books, there have been sharp price increases, reducing the purchasing power of the dollar.

For books for the blind the overall net increase requested is $7,600 for the pay increase required by Public Law 87-793. Under this appropriation head I am happy to report a reduction of $28,000 in the cost of repairing talking book machines as a result of voluntary efforts, which we have actively encouraged, of groups throughout the country called Telephone Pioneers. This reduction more than offsets the increase required to take care of the cost of initiating a braille music program, a new program authorized by Public Law 87-765.

I come now to the foreign currency program authorized by section 104(n) of Public Law 480. For this program I am requesting an increase of $298,000. Of this amount $268,000 is for foreign currencies surplus to general U.S. needs and $30,000 for hard dollar support. The program, which is now in the second year of operation in India, Pakistan, and United Arab Republic, has been eminently successful. Materials from one or more of the three countries are being acquired and distributed to the Library of Congress and to 29 participating libraries at the rate of 112 million pieces per annum. The program has been so well accepted by the participating libraries that in addition to the $10,000 in direct support contributed last year, this year's direct support has amounted to $17,500 which, like last year's support funds, will result in that much being covered into the miscellaneous receipts of the Treasury. Furthermore, the interest of libraries throughout the country in this program is demonstrated by their contributions of over $150,000 for a cooperative cataloging project

to support the cataloging of materials acquired from the three countries in which the program operates. This cataloging project is of direct benefit to the Library of Congress.

Therefore I strongly recommend for 1964 an additional $268,000 in foreign currencies and $30,000 in hard dollar support to initiate programs in three more countries, Burma, Indonesia, and Israel, where we are informed that there are foreign currencies suprlus to the general needs of the United States and where we know that materials of interest to the Library of Congress and participating libraries are available.

A small portion of the foreign currencies will be expended for bibliographic listings, which are exceedingly healpful not only to the participating libraries but to about 300 other U.S. libraries. Useful books are also published in English in the countries where this program would operate; it is proposed to initiate a program to acquire limited quantities of these for some 300 U.S. college and university libraries not equipped to handle the foreign-language materials.

I wish to express my appreciation for this opportunity to present the most urgent needs of the Library of Congress. My staff and I will be glad to answer any quesitons you may have.

THE LIBRARY AS A NATIONAL INSTITUTION

Mr. STEED. Dr. Mumford, as I listened to your statement it points up in some instances a growing and expanded use of the Library beyond that made of it by the Congress itself. I think the question has been raised occasionally over a period of many years whether this is a library for Congress or whether it is more. The contention has been made, I think, that it is more a national library of the United States. I think last year there were some very strong suggestions made that the Library should be formally designated as the National Library of the United States and shifted to the executive branch of the Government.

In view of some of the budget items, and especially in view of some of the newer items, could you give us a summary of this general situation and make any comment about it that you think might be helpful in the matter.

Dr. MUMFORD. Mr. Chairman, I think perhaps you are referring to a memorandum that was prepared by Douglas W. Bryant, associate director of the Harvard University Library, at the request of Senator Claiborne Pell, a member of the Joint Committee on the Library. That memorandum was introduced by Senator Pell into the Congressional Record of May 24, 1962.

I was requested to comment upon this memorandum and did make a report of some 60 pages, which was published in the Congressional Record of October 2, 1962. In it I addressed myself to the points that had been raised in the memorandum, and particularly the question of the Library of Congress being a national library.

I do not think anybody would question that the Library of Congress does perform the functions of a national library. Its first responsibility is to provide service to the Congress, and secondly to other governmental agencies and to the scholarly world generally. But it performs more functions that are characteristics of a national

1

library, I think, than any other national library in the world, and it is appropriate to call attention to the fact that most countries of the world have formally designated national libraries. I might mention briefly some of the functions you would expect a national library to carry on. Some carry on functions that others do not, and vice versa, but maintaining comprehensive collections is an important responsibility of a national library, especially material that is evidence of the national heritage, for the use of the Government, the scholarly world, and the public, making it a national center for research.

A national library usually develops a comprehensive classification system, which is widely used by other research institutions, and cataloging codes, which are nationally accepted standards. Á national library customarily serves as a center for cooperative cataloging of books and other forms of material. A national library may provide a national catalog card distribution service.

It maintains national union catalogs on cards, which serve as guides to the Nation's research resources in various forms and in various fields, and furnishes information about the location of needed materials to those who cannot personally consult these tools.

A national library usually publishes in book form a national bibliography, or a major contribution thereto, such as our national union catalog.

It often participates in a nationwide interlibrary loan system, which enables it to share collection responsibilities with other libraries and to make research materials generally available, thereby strengthening smaller libraries throughout the country by supplementing their research resources.

A national library should have an active bibliographic program. All of these functions that I have enumerated, the Library of Congress performs.

And while it may not be characteristic of a national library generally, it is certainly appropriate for the Library of Congress to carry on the program of service which it provides to the blind throughout the country.

The Library of Congress also conducts research in the area of library technology, engages in national and international cooperative bibliographic projects, and works with other national libraries and international organizations to achieve standardization of rules in order to increase the accessibility of library materials without regard to national boundaries and language barriers.

This list is not exhaustive. I could enumerate still more functions that are characteristic of a national library that the Library of Congress does perform.

So I do not believe anybody could question that, through the various authorizations over the years and through appropriations for our services, the Congress has recognized and authorized the performance of national library functions.

Mr. STEED. Is it not true that many agencies of Government have made arrangements to make use of the Library facilities, thereby avoiding the necessity of increasing their own library facilities?

Dr. MUMFORD. Yes. Many of the agencies of the Government maintain libraries as working collections, but they do not attempt to build up extensive research collections of older materials. These agencies

are constantly transferring to us such materials, which are used to fill gaps in our collections. If we do not need these materials, we use them for exchange purposes. The National Library of Medicine maintains a comprehensive collection in its field, as does the National Agricultural Library; we do not attempt to collect extensively in these fields but leave it to those national libraries.

Mr. STEED. If the Library of Congress were designated a national library, as such, and the administration of it was transferred to the executive branch, do you see any advantages that would thereby accrue that do not already exist?

Dr. MUMFORD. May I speak to each part of that?

In the first place, in regard to the name-being designated the National Library-it has seemed to me, as I indicated in my report upon the Bryant memorandum, that the substance is more important than the form. In other words, as long as Congress has authorized and does authorize the performance of functions of a national library and provides support for those functions, the lack of formal designation as a national library is not a fatal defect. I think it would be very unfortunate to abandon the name "Library of Congress." It has 163 years of tradition in the legislative branch and I think to violate that would be most unfortunate. The Congress, I think, takes pride in the Library and in the name that it bears.

However, it is an anomaly that we have two other national libraries so designated-the National Library of Medicine and the National Agricultural Library-whereas the great general library of the Government and of the Nation is not so designated. I would like very much to see Congress recognize the fact that the Library of Congress is performing the functions of a national library, not by eliminating the name "Library of Congress" but perhaps by adding as a subtitle to the present name, "the National Library of the United States."

In regard to transferring it to the executive branch, I cannot see any advantage to this. Again, I think the Library, as a part of the legislative branch, has become a cultural monument in 163 years and it would be most unfortunte to sever this traditional relationship. And I can see no practical advantage. The Library would still have to look to the Congress for support. It would be subject, of course, to the President's determination of the overall level of the budget and would compete, if it were placed in an executive department, with other services in the department. It would also be subject to review by the Bureau of the Budget, and we would not have the opportunity of presenting our needs directly to this committee as we are now doing. I cannot see any practical advantage to the Library in this suggestion of being transferred to the executive branch.

If it is argued that the Library needs the interest and attention of the President, the Chief Executive, there is nothing to prevent that at the present time. Certainly the Chief Executive may express interest in the Library, and has on many occasions.

Mr. STEED. Mr. Horan, do you have any comments you would like to make?

Mr. HORAN. In the next few days I am to make a speech in which I suggest that this country is going in the direction of a monolithic authoritarian state, and we are helping at the legislative level in a lot of our actions, and I do not like it. I regard the House of Representa