THE DEVELOPMENT OF REFERENCE SERVICES IN AMERICAN RESEARCH LIBRARIES BY SAMUEL ROTHSTEIN B.A., University of British Columbia, 1939 M.A., University of British Columbia, 1940 B.L.S., University of California, 1947 THESIS SUBMITTED IN PARTIAL FULFILLMENT OF THE REQUIREMENTS FOR THE DEGREE OF DOCTOR OF PHILOSOPHY IN LIBRARY SCIENCE IN THE GRADUATE COLLEGE OF THE UNIVERSITY OF ILLINOIS. 1964 URBANA, ILLINOIS UNIVERSITY OF ILLINOIS THE GRADUATE COLLEGE I HEREBY RECOMMEND THAT THE THESIS PREPARED UNDER MY SUPERVISION RY Samuel Rothsteln PNTTTT.F.n The Development of Reference Services in American Research Libraries BE ACCEPTED IN PARTIAL FULFILLMENT OF THE REQUIREMENTS FOR THE DEGREE OF Doctor of Philosophy in Library Science In Cfliargfc>o f Thesis ~ -, . Head of Department Recommendation concurred Committee <y&<sw-&^ 7 V on Final Examination! t Required for doctor's degree but not for master's. M440 TABLE OF CONTENTS Page INTRODUCTION 1 Chapter I. THE CONTEXT FOR REFERENCE SERVICE: THE RISE OF RE­ SEARCH AND RESEARCH LIBRARIES, 1850-1900 12 II. ' THE GENESIS OF REFERENCE SERVICE, 1876-1895 45 III. REFERENCE SERVICE IN THE GENERAL RESEARCH LIBRARIES, 1896-1916: GROWTH AND ORGANIZATION . 76 IV. THE NATURE OP REFERENCE WORK IN THE GENERAL RESEARCH LIBRARIES, 1896-1916: POLICIES AND PRACTICES 97 V. SPECIAL LIBRARIANSEIF AND THE CONCEPT OF AMPLIFIED SERVICE: LEGISLATIVE AND MUNICIPAL REFERENCE WORK, 1900-1916 123 VI. THE INDUSTRIAL RESEARCH L-IBRARY: REFERENCE SERVICE FOR PROFESSIONAL RESEARCH WORKERS •. .144 VII. REFERENCE SERVICE IN THE GENERAL RESEARCH LIBRARY, 1917-1940 171 VIII. "RESEARCH SERVICE" IN THE GENERAL LIBRARY BEFORE WORLD WAR II 201 IX. SUMMARY, CONCLCJSIONS, AND A REVIEW OF PRESENT TRENDS .233 BIBLIOGRAPHY 261 VITA 280 iii I ***^*a^''**'w***^»'"«l***>«"*ig«*M"*'-*^*q«"grat**«t»qM^ n __H »_r»»___»_w__pM_tt<»«»<gwawMM«w««oM<c,,WM^CW?'aio,l*l*l>^^ AOKNOWLED GEMENTS Though the responsibility for this study is mine alone, in many ways it has been a cooperative undertaking. I am glad to have this opportunity to record my appreciation for the advice, informa­ tion, and encouragement which have done so much to enable me to carry the study to completion. My greatest debt is to Dr."Leslie Whittaker Dunlap, who has variously acted as supervisor, class instructor, adviser, and critic in the long process of library experience, course work, research, and writing that has culminated in this dissertation. The initial idea for the study arose out of my course with him; its development has taken its shape largely out of our many subsequent discussions. He has always managed to combine searching criticism-with the warm­ est personal encouragement. I am deeply grateful. My thanks also go out to the other four members of my commit­ tee—Dr. Thomas 3±. Benner, Dr. Robert B. Downs, Dr. Rose B. Phelps, and Professor Ernest J. Reece—who were kind enough to read the lengthy initial draft; their suggestions and criticisms helped me avoid many errors. Dr. Harold Lancour also favored me with a thorough reading of the first draft. A number of librarians have, by personal interviews and by making materials available, given me important information on the development of reference services in their institutions. I wish to express-my thanks for help of this kind given to me by Dr. Burton W. Adkins on, Mr. David C. Mearns, and Mr. Thomas S. Shaw of the Library of Congress; Mr. Charles Mixer and Miss Constance Winchell of the _____ _. I V Columbia University Library; Mr. Archibald P. De Weese, Mr. Barron F. Franz, and Mr. James G. Tobin .of the New York Public Library; Mr. Herman H. Henkle of the John Crerar Library; Mr. Charles M. Mohrhardi of the Detroit Public Library; Mr. B. Bowman and Mrs. Gertrude Woodward of the Newberry Library; Miss Estelle Brodman of the Armed Forces Medical Library; and Dr. Otto Kinkeldey, formerly librarian of the Cornell University Library. Mr. Stephen Stackpole of the Carnegie Corporation of New York generously placed at my disposal the Corporation's files on the "research librarianships." The staff of the University of Illinois Library and Library School has been consistently indulgent in meeting the many requests entailed by this dissertation. I owe particular thanks to Miss Helen Stewart and her girls at the Loan Desk, who renewed my many overdues without a grumble; to Mr. T. E. Ratcliffe and his assist­ ants in the Reference Department, who supplied me with inter-library loans and many facts; and to Miss Donna Finger and Miss Billie Hurst of the Library School Library. In its long months "in process," this study has come to intrude on the lives of many people. To my friends Frances and Leonard Blackman, Joan and Bill Taylor, Jean and Jack Sumner, Marie Dunlap, John Boll, Eleanor Blum, Waif Erickson, Wesley Simonton, and Rick Farley, who have patiently suffered through many a long mon­ ologue, this word of thanks is well warranted. I am especially indebted to Frances Blackman, who typed both the draft and final copy at the cost of so many late hours. She showed me what assist­ ance really means. Most of the time I spent on this dissertation and on the course work that preceded it, I was the recipient of a grant from the Carnegie Corporation of New York-. To the Corporation—and particularly to Mr. Stephen Stackpole, the executive assistant of its British Dominions and Colonies Program, and to Dr. Norman MacKenzie, president of the University of British Columbia, who was largely instrumental in my receiving this generous aid,'—I again express my thanks. To my wife Miriam, who has done most of all—well, she gets a page of her own. • JWU—*V* FOR MIRIAM M.im*ii trf*i<r+iwjr—ime**&*iuwirmxm*mmy*>m INTRODUCTION Modern American library history has received only sporadic attention as a subject for investigation. Though we have now accu­ mulated an adequate supply of source materials to draw upon in the form of annual reports, service studies, biographical accounts, and chronicles of individual libraries, no one has yet fashioned out of these materials a critical history of American librarianship. To paraphrase Leo LaMontagne, we have salvaged remnants from the past, but we have yet to convert them into history.1 The lack has cost the profession dearly. Even a casual sur­ vey of the literature of librarianship reveals the shocking degree of duplication and naivete''that stem from an insufficient awareness of previous efforts. There is clearly room and need for a series of evaluative studies of the development of American library services which could eventually be put together to form the desired definitive history of American librarianship. The present dissertation is intended as a contribution toward that end. It undertakes to furnish the histor­ ical background for one of the continuing problems of American librarianship — the provision of reference services in research libraries. Definitions Reference services in research libraries exist for, and are conditioned by, the needs and purposes of research. The task of definition must accordingly begin with the examination of the mean­ ing of "research." m iiiimi. i .11 I II II mil in miiimi..ii.ii—w^ i I' » gg As a "popular" word, "research" has lent itself to a wide ! 'variety of usage. "Research" backs up the glittering claims of i cosmetics advertisements, and students complacently label their ex­ ercises as "research papers." As if by way of rebuttal to popular usage, within the academic field proper there has been a recent tend­ ency, mainly on the part of workers in the natural sciences, to identify "research" with the experimental method. Neither usage is acceptable here. While it is manifestly inappropriate to dignify as "research" every casual attempt at investigation, it is also a mis­ conception of the scientific method to refuse to admit under the rubric of research serious inquiries that rely on methods other than those pre-eminently useful in the natural sciences. As Shryock points out, "the continued attempt to define "research" jor "science" in terms of a particular method or result is confusing, since histor­ ically the methods and results have changed in any given field with­ out changing what is more essential — the objective."^ There yet remains room for a logically defensible interme­ diate ground between these poles, as is evidenced in the position i adopted by such competent judges as Frederic Ogg and the National Resources Committee. Thus Ogg, writing from the point of view of the humanists and social scientists, has defined research as any investigative effort -- in library, laboratory, field or shop — which has for its object an increase of the sum total of human knowledge, either by additions to the stock of actual present knowledge or by the discovery of new bases of knowledge ... Research may or may not come to success; it may or may not add anything to what is already known. It is sufficient that its objective be new knowledge, or at least a new mode or orientation of knowledge.3 The National Resources Committee was at some pains to distin­ guish serious investigations from routine testing operations. Its definition reflects the Committee's orientation toward the sciences, I " 51 but otherwise displays the requisite amplitude. "Research" has been defined to comprise investigations in both [ the natural and social sciences, and their applications, includ­ ing the collection, compilation and analysis of statistical, mapping and other data that will probably result in new knowl­ edge of wider usefulness than aid in one administrative decision applying to a single case.4 From these definitions, combining breadth of view and preci- 1 sion, the distinguishing features of research are seen to lie in the facts that it rests upon a serious, careful inquiry, and that its object is the extension or revision of knowledge.