ACRL News Issue (B) of College & Research Libraries G u id elin es on th e se le c tio n o f g e n e r a l c o lle c tio n m a te r ia ls fo r tr a n sfe r to sp ecia l c o lle c tio n s By the RBMS Ad Hoc Com m ittee for D evelop ing T ran sfer G uidelines Chair, Samuel A. Streit Rarities in the stacks—how to identify and move them. M any libraries intentionally acquire rare books, documents and manuscripts, but virtually all li­ braries acquire books and documents which, with time and changing circumstances, and regardless of intention, become rare. Over time, they acquire a special cultural and historical value, and some­ times a significant financial value in the market place, as well. The following guidelines relate to li­ brarians’ responsibility to identify rare and valu­ able materials in general and open stack collections and to arrange for their transfer to the greater secu­ rity of special collections departments. * These guidelines reflect two pervasive and un­ derlying conditions which influence both the for­ mulation and the administration of transfer policy: the identification of the rare and special, and the complex interaction of library departm ents re­ quired to effect changes in the records by which readers are informed of the location of materials. Transfer policies and procedures will vary from *While some libraries have had a good experi­ ence with intermediate, restricted access collec­ tions, others have not. The wisdom of whether to form them seems to depend on circumstances pecu­ liar to a library and is not addressed in these guide­ lines. Note, however, that their use requires policy decisions regarding w hat to transfer and how to do so which are considered parallel to those consid­ ered here. institution to institution, depending on staffing, physical setting, and use of the collections; these guidelines are written to identify the general topics to be considered in an adequate transfer program. The transfer policy and delegation of responsibility A successful transfer program depends upon co­ operation and coordination at every level of the li­ brary organization. Both will be assisted considera­ bly by a w ritten policy statement. In developing the policy, it is essential to obtain the sanction of the library’s senior adm inistration. The policy should be w ritten by those adm inistratively re­ sponsible for the transfer program , usually the head of Special Collections, the Collection Devel­ opment Officer, or the two in concert. Articulation of selection criteria and transfer procedures must involve all relevant components of the library: these will generally include Special Collections, Reference, Cataloging, Gifts, Circulation, Preser­ vation and Collection Development and may in­ clude systems representatives in libraries under au­ tomation. The transfer policy must: 1. promulgate publicly the library’s definition of and policy tow ard rare and special collections, strongly justifying the measures being taken to pro­ July/August 1985 / 349 350 / C&R L News tect rare m aterials, and describing how these m ea­ sures will enhance the institution’s resources in car­ rying out its mission; 2. establish firm lines of authority for the con­ duct of an economical and expeditious program ; 3. reflect wide agreement on selection criteria and procedure based on the institution’s mission, its resources for carrying out that mission, and the nature and strengths of its special collections; 4. list the criteria of rarity being used in selecting transfer items, which m ay be influenced to some extent by the nature and strengths of the library’s general and special collections; 5. set forth clear procedures to be followed in the transfer process, including procedures for recom ­ mending transfer, altering bibliographic and cir­ culation records, and inspection by the Preserva­ tion Officer; 6. in stru ct readers reg ard in g the pro ced u re whereby they can cause review of individual items thought to require restricted access. In many cases it will be natural to solicit the re­ view of draft statements of the policy by represent­ atives of faculty, stu d en ts, a n d /o r other well- inform ed researchers. It may be useful to consult w ith staff at other libraries or to bring in a consul­ tan t to review or advise on statem ent preparation. Once completed, the policy should be approved by the library’s senior adm inistration and incorpo­ rated into the library’s overall collection develop­ m ent policy. Transfer procedures A transfer program has three phases: I. the identification of m aterials which fit the se­ lection criteria; II. the physical relocation and processing (label removal, and/or repair and preservation processes) required; and III. record changes. I. Identification of materials Ideally, a transfer program will systematically inventory large segments of the general collections, examining each item individually and reviewing the bibliographic records for each: catalog cards, com puterized records, accession or shelf list and so on. Few libraries, however, will find such a com pre­ hensive review possible. They will opt instead to re­ view m aterials and records selectively, perhaps as p art of a program w ith another purpose. Regard­ less of how broadly or narrow ly based the transfer program is, it is necessary to bear in m ind th at di­ rect inspection of both inidividual transfer candi­ dates and their corresponding bibliographic rec­ ords are of the utm ost im portance. A selective program based on knowledge of the history of the collection and designed to review areas of known strength m ay—in m any libraries—meet a substan­ tial p art of the need. A selective review may include any of the follow­ ing: 1. reading the shelves (or examining the shelf list) in classifications know n—or thought—to contain candidates for transfer. Examples might include those w ith a high concentration of early imprints or local imprints; 2. reviewing an im print date file list for early books in subjects of particular interest and value; or 3. producing from m achine-readable records re­ view lists based on im print date, place of publica­ tion, literary genre or subject, or any combination of similar keys. Examples of library activities during which m a­ terials or records are reviewed and rare m aterial may be identified include: a. acquisitions; b. gifts and exchange; c. cataloging; d. preservation; e. binding; f. photoduplication; g. microreproduction; h. circulation (either charge or discharge); i. inventorying and shelf-reading; j. interlibrary loan; k. preparation of exhibitions; l. collection surveys; m. retrospective conversion or records; and n. weeding. Any of these activities m ay lead to the discovery of m ultiple copies in the collection, the retention or disposal of which will be determ ined by local pol­ icy. IL Conservation treatment Conservation treatm ent should be considered carefully during the development of a transfer pol­ icy. It is tem pting to build into the policy physical treatm ent which responds sympathetically to the needs of each individual item, although this may create backlogs or funding requirem ents w hich com plicate the transfer program . It m ay prove more effective to prescribe only the most simple physical treatm ents and to use the necessity of h an ­ dling each item as an opportunity to gather the d ata required to design a program for more exten­ sive refurbishing of the collection. III. Record changes A means must be devised, as p art of the transfer program , to inform readers prom ptly when the lo­ cation of an item has been changed. The most ef­ fective way to do this is through recataloging. This may, however, prove beyond the means of libraries faced w ith the transfer of any substantial num ber of items. The following techniques have obvious attractions (economic) and disadvantages (access to the collections). Still, a library might choose to: a. annotate (or jacket) catalog cards; all cards m ight be treated or, less successfully, only some (e.g., m ain entry); b. charge items via a circulation record. The rec­ ord system should be selected carefully: “transfer July /August 1985 / 351 records” have a way of aging into obsolete systems and thus become doubly (or trebly) removed from the public; c. indicate in machine readable records a change in location; d. place a dummy in the old location to refer to the new; e. transfer all m aterials published prior to a stated date (e.g., 1751 or 1801) in some or all sub­ ject classifications w ithout record change but with general publicity. This systematic change has been received well in some libraries. W h at to transfer The transfer decision simultaneously evaluates the unique qualities of an item and applies institu­ tional policy. Thus the candidate for transfer (e. g ., a 16th century book) may be w ithin the scope of an existing special collections or rare book collection development policy. Selection for transfer implies that all similar items in the collection (e.g., all books in original bindings printed before 1751) ought also be identified. The constraints on policy are familiar: institu­ tional mission, on the one hand, and, on the other, the resources—personnel, space and equipm ent, technology, and budget—needed to conduct that mission. The interaction between mission and re­ sources dictates realism and, often, compromise. Defining w hat is rare or unique is not always obvi­ ous, and decisions will vary among institutions. Still, certain general considerations apply in evalu­ ating an item for transfer: •its age; •its intrinsic characteristics and qualities; •its condition; • w h a t we know from other sources. I. Age The longer an item has survived, the more w orth saving it probably becomes; as an item ages it be­ comes one of a decreasing num ber of witnesses to its own time. Consequently there is now universal agreem ent on the need to protect 15th-century printing, even if fragm entary or present in leaf- books. There is growing agreement on the same grounds to protect all materials, regardless of form or condition, printed before 1801. There is less gen­ eral agreement on books of later date and on “re­ gional incunables”—books published in a locality or region in the first years (or decades) after p rin t­ ing was established in them —in spite of a consensus th at responsibility for them must somehow be dis­ tributed among many institutions. II. Intrinsic characteristics Books provide two kinds of physical evidence: first, the technological facts of their production, which can be determined by a close examination of the physical objects; second, the aesthetic qualities of illustrations, typography, binding, and so forth. W ith the first class, institutional circumstances may necessitate partial or complete substitution of the original by microform or photocopy. But there is general agreem ent, for example, th a t m an u ­ scripts, documents, and original drawings, all nec­ essarily unique, require special protection of the artifacts themselves. Such volumes will require transfer. By the same argum ent books with fore- edge paintings should be transferred although the text itself may be of little consequence. It is generally recognized that m iniature books (10 centimeters or smaller) are too vulnerable for open stacks and th at books w ith engravings, litho­ graphs, and original p h o to g rap h s— necessarily produced in limited quantities at any tim e—are vulnerable to m utilation and deserve protection. O ther categories on which there is wide, but not always, general, agreement include: a. fine and signed bindings; b. early publishers bindings; c. extra-illustrated volumes; d. books w ith significant provenance; e. books w ith decorated end papers; f . fine printing; g. printing on vellum or highly unusual paper; h. volumes or portfolios containing unbound plates; i. broadsides, posters and printed ephemera; j. books by local authors of particular note; k. materials requiring security. III. Condition W hile age itself dictates transfer for our oldest surviving books, condition may be more im portant in judging more recent m aterial. All values of the book—scholarly, bibliographical, and m arket— are greatly affected by condition. Copies th at are badly worn, much repaired or rebound, should not autom atically be considered for transfer, unless the age of the m aterial preempts condition as a crite­ rion. The durability of most library m aterials de­ clined drastically since the m id-nineteenth cen­ tury, and it is now increasingly difficult to locate even representative examples of many printing and binding processes in fine original condition. So many volumes have required rebinding, for exam­ ple, th at the richness of the original decorative art applied to bindings and printed endpapers is in­ creasingly difficult to find and study. Lesser copies must, therefore, be scrutinized with care as possi­ ble transfer items. In the tw entieth century, books generally have been issued in dustwrappers which most “general” libraries routinely (and for good reasons) discard. Nonetheless, dustjackets, like other ephemera, fre­ quently contain im portant information (e.g., text, illustrative design, and price), and serious consid­ eration should be given to their retention. IV. What we know from other sources The rarity and im portance of individual books are not always self-evident. Some books, for exam­ ple, were produced in circumstances which virtu­ 352 / C&RL News ally guarantee their rarity (e.g., Confederate im­ prints) . Factors affecting importance and rarity can in­ clude the following: 1. desirability to collectors and the antiquarian book trade; 2. censored or banned books; 3. early and especially im portant works in a p ar­ ticular field of study or genre of literature; 4. works published in very limited editions or items known to be scarce; 5. costly acquisitions. Older reference works and early periodicals still needed for general use frequently become highly valuable and may require careful consideration, especially if facsimile or other reprint editions are available to replace them on the open shelves. The definition and redefinition of transfer policy is complex and ongoing. Its creation and refine­ ment is continuous, requires the exercise of imagi­ nation and good judgment, and profits from wide and informed reading. Although there is no litera­ ture dealing with transfer per se, the following books, selected from the large literature of books about books and book collecting, may provide spe­ cial help to those charged with forming and re­ forming their library’s policies. 1. Brook, G.L. Books and Book Collecting. Lon­ don: Andre Deutsch, 1980. 2. Carter, John. ABC for Book Collectors, 6th ed. rev. by Nicolas Barker. London: G ran ad a Books, 1980. 3. Carter, John. Taste and Technique in Book Collecting. Cambridge: Cam bridge University, 1947; reprinted, London: Private Libraries Assoc., 1982. 4. Cave, Boderick. Bare Book Librarianship, 2nd rev. ed., New York: R.R. Bowker, 1983. 5. Gaskell, Philip. A New Introduction to Bibli­ ography. New York: Oxford University Press, 1972. 6. Peters, Jean, ed. Book Collecting: A Modern Guide. New York: R.R. Bowker, 1977. 7. Peters, Jean. Collectible Books: Some New Paths. New York: R.R. Bowker, 1979. 8. Schreyer, Alice D. Bare Books, 1983-84. New York: R.R. Bowker, 1984. Editor’s Note: Members wishing to comm ent on these guidelines may write to Samuel A. Streit, As­ sistant University Librarian fo r Special Collec­ tions, John Hay Library, Brown University, Box A, Providence, B I 02912. ■ ■ University of California’s BI course slated for cuts The University of California Regents’ decision to re d u ce th e n u m b er of un its assigned to U C ­ Berkeley’s Bibliography I course for undergradu­ ates has come under fire from the University union. The University Council/American Federation of Teachers (UC/AFT) filed an unfair labor practice charge on April 29, asserting that the faculty of the School of Library & Information Studies had not been consulted. Reducing the number of units from 3 to 2, effec­ tive this fall, will mean that instructors teaching the course will have to cram the same information into fewer hours per week at two-thirds the salary they formerly received. The number of sections of­ fered will also be reduced, resulting in fewer stu­ dents being trained in how to use the library. And the administration also plans to give preference to Ph.D. candidates in the library school as instruc­ tors for the course, who may or may not have the bibliographic instruction experience traditionally required of Bib I instructors. The union’s unfair labor practice charge was lodged w ith the California Public Em ployment Relations Board, which is now in the process of is­ suing a complaint. After the complaint is issued, a settlement conference and possibly a hearing will be scheduled. The course was originally developed by the UC­ Berkeley library faculty in the late 1960s, then sig­ nificantly expanded in 1972 by the School of Li­ brary & Information Studies. Librarians at Moffitt U ndergraduate L ibrary and other libraries on campus act as liaisons to the Bib I instructors, and will continue to do so after the cuts take place. ■ ■ Intellectual freedom award The University of Illinois G raduate School of Library and Information Science will accept nominations from now through September 1 for the 1986 Robert B. Downs Award for an outstanding contribution to intellectual free­ dom in libraries. The school’s faculty estab­ lished the award in 1968 to honor Downs, dean emeritus of library administration at Illinois, on the occasion of his 25th anniversary with the University. Throughout his career Downs has opposed censorship and other efforts to restrict intellectual freedom. The award recognizes individuals or groups for their efforts to oppose censorship or to fur­ ther intellectual freedom in libraries and infor­ mation centers. Letters of nomination may be sent to Charles H. Davis, D ean, G rad u ate School of Library and Inform ation Science, University of Illinois, 410 David Kinley Hall, 1407 W. Gregory Drive, Urbana, IL 61801.