« PreviousContinue »
I suspect the Air Force and some of these other agencies are not collecting some of the things that they could collect, because they assume that whenever they need them, they will find them in the Library of Congress. We have tried in many ways to get funds out of other agencies where we thought we could be successful in doing so, in helping us with out collections and our services. But, as Mr. Clapp emphasized, those are special projects of one kind or another but do not, in general, help to solve the basic problem of having for the whole world, maps that may possibly be needed sometime, or the books that may possibly be needed sometime. And if they all tried to do it, it would be enormously expensive.
Let me show you a want list that the Library of Congress prepared some time ago on Japanese material. Some of this covers Korea, because Japan administered Korea from 1910 until 1945 and did not allow the use of the Korean language.
QUESTION OF DIVISION OF RESPONSIBILITY ON MAP WORK
Mr. CANFIELD. Dr. Evans, before you go into those items, may I say this? I agree with you in the main. I do not believe that the Army and the Navy, our Defense Establishments, would ever be prepared to do away with its map services and yield entirely to the Library of Congress for their needs.
Dr. Evans. For map-making purposes, we do not compete with them. They will need to make maps. That is one of their big jobs. And they will need a lot of current maps to work with. I agree with you entirely that they cannot entirely get rid of this. But they do not need to build a large collection like ours. And no matter what they do and what their program is, they always have to come to us for part of the material that they do not have in their current collections.
So I do not think there is much disagreement between us, except this; that I think a basic collection in the Library of Congress that covers the world is the most economical way to proceed and then the others can proceed to get the additional materials or the copies of current materials which they need a lot, or for some area on which they are working a lot.
I think that is about as good a statement as I could make of it.
Mr. SCRIVNER. I think we recognize the importance of your Map Service and showed that when last year we approved some of the funds that you requested to do a lot of work in the Map Section.
Dr. EVANS. That has been increased a good deal since the war broke out. I think Congress has increased that considerably.
Mr. SCRIVNER. Which war are you talking about?
Dr. Evans. World War II. At the beinning of World War II we had 9 positions and now we have got, I am told, 13.
Mr. ADKINSON. There has been no increase in 4 years.
"WANT LIST” OF MATERIALS FOR JAPAN
Dr. Evans. This want list that we have got would cost about $50,000 to procure the materials. This is just for Japan. Some of this material we would not acquire under the proposal we have before you
at present. Some of it is old material going back into the last century. But most of the material that is missing is within the last 20 years or so.
This has all been put into English, if you would like to glance at it. It merely illustrates the fact that where we have a strong staff, as we do on Japan, we can make up these lits, but we have no one on Korea. on Japan, we can make up these lists, but we have no one on Korea. We have no one on the Philippines. We have no one on some of these other territories. We have a wholly inadequate staff in point of numbers regarding the whole Soviet Union and the Slavic countries in general. We have put the Soviet Union in here because it is, for the most part, Asiatic, although some of the material would be European in character.
Mr. SCRIVNER. During the hearings just 3 or 4 months ago, you stressed the importance of the Soviet work and the committee recognized the weight of your observations by increasing the appropriations.
Dr. Evans. You approved this project (indicating] Monthly List of Russian Accessions; and I deeply appreciate that.
Mr. SCRIVNER. I was not referring to the particular project, but you stressed almost solely the importance of Russia and, as I say, the weight of your suggestions impelled the committee to grant at least a lair portion of your request for that work.
FURTHER REFERENCE TO SPECIAL KOREAN MAP
Dr. Evans. I think I cut Mr. Clapp off. I believe he wanted to say something.
Mr. CLAPP. I did want to make a statement, Mr. Chairman. I think all three members of the committee have said that it seems incredible that the Army Map Service after the number of years of our occupation of southern Korea should not have had this particular series of maps which they want here. I think you do not appreciate, sir, the quantities of maps there are in the world, particularly with respect to Korea. There are Korean maps, Japanese maps; I suppose there are Russian maps; there are British maps, Dutch maps, American maps; and it is perfectly possible that the Army Map Service should have all the maps necessary for its work and still not have the Korean 1 to 50,000 series. That is perfectly credible.
Mr. MCGRATH. What makes you think that this committee does not appreciate those facts?
Mr. CLAPP. Because the committee is amazed, sir, that the Army Map Service should not have had this particular series.
Mr. CANFIELD. Was not the Library of Congress amazed, in all frankness? Were you not surprised?
Mr. CLAPP. I am not enough of a map man to make a judgment on it here.
Mr. CANFIELD. The first thing you stressed here today, the first thing Dr. Evans stressed today in his presentation was this fact, and there was a purpose in his doing it. I think he was amazed. He is here and he can speak for himself.
ROLE OF LIBRARY OF CONGRESS MAP COLLECTIONS
Mr. CLAPP. The distinction I would make, sir, is this: The Army Map Service has got to collect maps for the uses which it can foresee.
The Library of Congress is collecting maps for unforeseeable uses of many agencies, since it has no use of its own. We must collect on a much more catholic basis than any other agency, whether it is State or Air Force or Weather Bureau or the Army Map Service or any of the others.
Mr. SCRIVNER. In other words, your statement defines merely the difference between general information, relating to maps, as compared with specific information?
Mr. CLAPP. Yes, sir; that is exactly it. I do not suppose that the Commerce Department would conceive it within its duties, its scope, its role, to collect ard hold for an indefinite period the reports of the Ministry of Commerce of the Japanese Government for the 1880's. We must do so if we are to fill the role which we conceive to be ours. And we do. At any moment any of the agencies may possibly have use for these, for this little-used material, and they must know where they can put their hands on it.
OTHER EXAMPLES OF RECENT REQUESTS
Dr. Evans. Mr. Chairman, may I give another illustration, because this does not apply just to maps? We got a request from the Department of State for material on the Korean language. If the State Department was going to be prepared to solve all of its problems regarding languages in foreign areas, it would have to build up a really large collection and we think the logical place to build that up for the whole Government is the Library of Congress. We have a great collection of languages all over the world, including many dialects in Africa.
Mr. SCRIVNER. When did you get that request?
Dr. Evans. I have not the date. It is somewhere within this 2-week period. They did not supply me with the exact dates of these requests.
We had a request from the United States Public Health Service for material on the public health system in Korea. Now, if the Public Health Service were to build up comprehensive collections on public health systems all over the world, including the laws relating to publichealth, the inspection regulations, the annual reports, it would duplicate material very seriously that the Library of Congress is already collecting under the international agreements that we have, that the State Department has made, regarding the exchange of government publications between this Government and other governments.
Mr. SCRIVNER. I should think the World Health Organization ought to have all that information, should it not?
Dr. Evans. But its headquarters are in Geneva, I believe.
COMPARISON OF PRESENT REQUEST WITH REQUESTS MADE AT PREVIOUS
Mr. MCGRATH. To what extent, Doctor, does this estimate represent a resubmission of items which have previously been disallowed?
Dr. Evans. Completely, sir, except the two positions, I believe, for the Law Library.
Mr. McGRATH. In other words, everything you are asking here except two positions for the Law Library has heretofore been discussed by this committee and disallowed; is that correct?
Dr. EvANS. They have been disallowed. In 1946 the committee would not go into the merits of the case, because they thought that this total request, which was almost a doubling of the Library of Congress, represented policy questions which needed discussion. So some of them were not discussed, in detail, but they were all presented and some of them have been presented in recent years, in more recent years.
Mr. MCGRATH. When you appeared before this committee a few months ago, did you make a request for these particular items which you are now requesting?
Dr. Evans. We requested then if you will turn to the first page after the green sheets, you will see the tabulation. We requested, I believe, all of the map positions.
Mr. ANDREASSEN. We did not request the reference assistant for 1951, but we did for 1950.
Dr. Evans. That is the third position, GS-5.
Dr. Evans. That is right. We just requested three out of those four in 1951. Under the Orientalia Division we did not request any of those in 1951. We requested the Korean in 1950.
Mr. MCGRATH. When you last appeared before the committee, a few months
did you request any of these items which we are now talking about; and, if so, which ones?
Dr. Evans. We requested the three out of the four in the Map Division.
Mr. MCGRATH. We have covered that. Now we are talking about the next subdivision.
Dr. EVANS. We requested the two secretaries in the Orientalia Division.
Mr. MCGRATH. Two secretaries?
Dr. EVANS. I am sorry; we did not request those. We requested the next three, the three catalogers.
Mr. McGrath. You requested three catalogers, GS-5?
Mr. MCGRATH. Did you, at the last hearings, request one GS-11, a Korean specialist?
Dr. EVANS. No, sir.
Mr. MCGRATH. Did you, when you last appeared, request one GS-11, an Indochina specialist?
Dr. EVANS. No, sir.
Mr. MCGRATH. Did you request the Philippine and Pacific island specialist, one GS-11?
Dr. EVANS. No, sir.
RECENT ADDRESS BY LIBRARIAN AT COOPERSTOWN, N. Y. Mr. MCGRATH. In view of that statement, Doctor, I call your attention to a press release which reports that you were visiting Cooperstown, N. Y., and made an address there. Í
presume you did speak there?
Dr. Evans. That is right, sir.
Mr. McGRATH. This release states-and this is from the Washington papers on Wednesday:
The Librarian of Congress says the United States might have had a better understanding of Korea if Congress had permitted the Library to employ an expert on that nation.
Is that a fair statement of what you said?
Mr. MCGRATH. After you made that statement did you tell your audience at any time that the last time you appeared before this committee you did not request the Korean specialist?
Dr. Evans. No, sir.
Mr. MCGRATH. Did you tell your audience, the last time you appeared here you did not request an appropriation for a specialist on Indochina?
Dr. EVANS. I mentioned none of the others, sir.
Mr. MCGRATH. You are further reported to have said, Doctor, that Congress had turned you down for the last 4 years on requests for an expert on the far-eastern country, referring, of course, to Korea. Did you make that statement, Doctor?
Dr. Evans. I am not certain, sir. I was under the impression, until I checked on returning, that it had been in last year's request.
Mr. ANDREASSEN. The three catalogers were.
Mr. MCGRATH. We have covered the catalogers, Mr. Andreassen. But you made reference to the specialist on Korea and you are also reported to have said, now that fighting has broken out in Korea, you appealed to President Truman. Is that a correct statement?
Dr. Evans. No, sir. The statement I made was that the Library of Congress was inadequate in various ways; and one of the ways it was inadequate was that it had not explained its needs adequately to the librarians of the country, to the people of the country and to the Congress. And I said that as an example of that, the Library had requested an expert on Korea, had not been granted the expert, and that now that the Korean situation had developed in this way, Í had just approved, the day before, on Monday, a supplemental request to be considered at the time of the President's supplemental budget request to the Congress. I merely mentioned the President as having submitted a bill which we were trying to ride. That was the only reference I made to the President.
Mr. MCGRATH. So then, Doctor, I take it from your testimony, that if you had refreshed your recollection before you made the speech, rather than when you came back here, you would not have made the statement that Čongress denied you a Korean specialist; is that correct, sir?
Dr. Evans. I would have made it clear that Congress had not in the past year denied a Korean specialist. But what Congress did deny, that we asked for, was a Japanese cataloger who would have proficiency in the Korean language, so that we might be able to render some service on this vital geographic area. It was another position and not the position of expert.
Mr. SCRIVNER. And is not that the one, which in compliance with your own request, on the basis of a priority which you made up as to where you would put the new employees, if they were granted—that