College and Research Libraries In Miss Stewart's book, the summary and evaluation come at the beginning, and the review is broken into two parts. The first part, which is chronologically arranged, takes up ninety-four pages and is based on some 284 references. The second part, a topical summary, takes sixty-seven pages to list some forty-two features by which the reading ma- chines are classified. These range from cost of the equipment, through the various opti- cal and mechanical features, to end with use costs. The chief value of these two volumes lies in their chapters of recommendations and their bibliographies. The former will be fertile fields for doctoral candidates looking for subjects for dissertations. They will also be used by industry to help lay out research projects on present and future equipment. The two bibliographies bring together just about all that one could find in this field up to 1957. I suspect that many students will be shuffling these lists into manifold arrange- ments for some time to come. The outstanding shortcoming of both books lies in the lack of illustrations. The descriptions of equipment and techniques cry for pictures and diagrams. The evalua- tion of equipment and processes in both books is somewhat undescriminating. There is little weight given as to who made what judgment when. There are surprisingly few errors when one considers what a wide range of time and subject matter is covered. One that will amuse those who know him is the appearance of Frank and Frederic Luther, both writing about Dagron. Library Trends, VIII (1960), no. 1 (Photo- duplication in Libraries. Edited by James E. Skipper.) Photoduplication has been the subject of single articles appearing in four previous is- sues of Library Trends. Now it has an issue of its own. Of the ten papers presented here, seven are on the administrative aspects and three on the technological phases of the field. Of an administrative nature are: Lester K. Born, "History of Microform Activity"; Law- rence S. Thompson, "Microforms as Library Resources"; John A. Riggs, "The State of Microtext Publications"; George A. Schweg- mann, Jr., "The Bibliographical Control of Microforms"; H . Gordon Bechanan, "The NOVEMBER 1960 Organization of Microforms in the Library"; Robert E. Kingery, · "Copying Methods as Applied to Library Operations"; Miles 0. Price, "Photocopying by Libraries and Copy- right: A Precis." Of greater interest to the technologists in the field are: Robert H. Muller, "Policy Questions Relating to Library Photoduplica- tion Laboratories"; Charles G. La Hood, Jr. , "Microfilm as Used in Reproduction and Transmission Systems"; Peter Scott, "Ad- vances and Goals in Microphotography." This issue is recommended reading for all who are interested in microfilming. Librari- ans responsible for organizing microform reading rooms will benefit by Bechanan's report on Harvard's progress in this line. Heads of library photoduplication labora- tories will be thankful to Muller for his sur- vey of their problems. Commercial micro- photographic agencies about to embark on projects aimed at libraries would do well to study the articles by Thompson, Riggs, and Schwegmann. This issue will be on library school reading lists for some time to come. Microt exts as Media for Publication: The Papers and Discussion of a Symposium Held at Hatfield Technical College on the lOth November 1959 ... Hatfield, Herts., England: Hertfordshire County Council, 1960. 87p. 9s. Hatfield is located twenty miles north of London (about as far from its center as Scars- dale is from Times Square) and is the source of an increasing number of important publi- cations on photoduplication. In January 1958 a Symposium on Microtexts and Micro- recording was held, and its papers published. A Symposium on Modern Copying Tech- niques followed in January 1959, resulting in another booklet. The third publication is perhaps of greatest interest to librarians. It consists of papers presented ·on microfilm, microfiche, and Microcard, and considers them from the standpoint of their sujtability for publication of scholarly material. The first paper is on "Microfilm-The Versatile Academic Tool" by Eugene Power of University Microfilms. It contains a wealth of information based on twenty-five years of experience with this medium. This is fol- lowed by Dr. L. J. van der Wolk's report on "Publishing on Microfiche." This presents a 495