College and Research Libraries


ones—they are selected largely from notes 

on L i b r a r y of Congress cards, from the 

earlier printed lists mentioned above, and 

from the University of W a s h i n g t o n and 

Stanford University files ( b u t unfortu-

nately the source of each note is not 

i n d i c a t e d ) . I t w o u l d naturally f o l l o w 

that they do not all have the same set 

form, even the simplest ones. T h i s may 

be confusing to the beginner, w h o could 

probably use the list more profitably and 

more easily, could learn note terminology 

more readily, and f o l l o w one set form 

more uniformly, if the notes in " L i b r a r y 

of- Congress f o r m " w e r e so marked. 

In order to reduce production cost, the 

compiler's manuscript, instead of the 

customary typed copy for planographing, 

w a s photographed. ( I t might be pointed 

out here that it w a s a little disappointing 

to find that so f e w examples of notes 

describing the various near-print processes 

have been included.) O n examination, no 

typographical errors w e r e noted in the 

entire w o r k . 

M i s s M c P h e r s o n states, in her Some 

Practical Problems in Cataloging, that 

"notes on catalog cards present at one and 

the same time some of the most difficult 

features of cataloging, some of the. most 

interesting problems in handling a book 

technically, and some of the greatest out-

lets for self-expression which a cataloger 

may have the privilege of experiencing." 

M i s s Swain's list should prove to be of 

decided value in all three regards, but 

particularly in the last, both for the cata-

loger for w h o m w o r d i n g of notes is an un-

welcome opportunity for self-expression, 

and for the cataloger w h o is inclined to be 

too w o r d y , or lacking in clarity, in his self-

expression on catalog c a r d s . — I r e n e M. 

Doyle, Library School, George Peabody 

College for Teachers, Nashville. 

The Rockefeller Foundation; a Review 

for 1939. Raymond B. Fosdick. T h e 

Foundation, N e w Y o r k , 1940. 507p. 

Distributed w i t h o u t charge. 

Recent Trends in Higher Education in 

the United States: With Special Refer-

ence to Financial Support for Private 

Colleges and Universities. T r e v o r 

A r n e t t . G e n e r a l Education Board, 

N e w Y o r k , 1940. 8op. Distributed 

w i t h o u t charge. 

Annual Report: 1939. G e n e r a l Education 

Board, N e w Y o r k , 1940. i 7 i p . Dis-

tributed w i t h o u t charge. 

S O M E M A Y a s k w h y r e v i e w s o f t h e r e -

ports of foundations such as those listed 

above make their w a y into the columns of 

College and Research Libraries. T h e 

answer w o u l d seem to be that college and 

university librarians cannot intelligently 

administer their libraries w i t h o u t know-

ing the research and instructional objec-

tives of their institutions, w h i c h are at-

tained in large part by the aid of the 

great foundations. T h e history of re-

search and higher education in the U n i t e d 

States and elsewhere is to a considerable 

extent the story of the vision behind the 

grants of a h a n d f u l of foundations and 

corporations devoted to education and 

research. 

T h e Rockefeller Foundation report for 

1939 surveys the w o r k of the Foundation 

in the five fields in w h i c h it concentrates 

its e f f o r t s : international h e a l t h ; the medi-

cal sciences; the natural sciences; the social 

sciences; and the humanities. T h e r e are 

at least four reasons w h y librarians and 

others interested in higher education 

should be acquainted w i t h this report. 

T h e first is the method of reporting. 

M o s t librarians w h o have to w r i t e an 

account of their activities may study w i t h 

profit the style of this report, w h i c h 

70 COLLEGE AND RESEARCH LIBRARIES 



makes the peregrinations of a malaria-

carrying mosquito as exciting as the latest 

w a r communiques. 

T h e second point of relevance to li-

braries is the concentration of the Founda-

tion upon a f e w problems in each of its 

fields of interest. A l t h o u g h the Founda-

tion has made some grants for research 

and teaching in various fields of medicine, 

it has t h r o w n most of its w e i g h t in the 

medical division of its program into 

psychiatric research. In the natural 

sciences its support has been concentrated 

behind research in experimental biology. 

T h e theory behind this policy is that the 

resources of even so large a Foundation 

w o u l d be dissipated to little purpose w e r e 

they to be used for research in all parts 

of even the five fields mentioned. O n the 

other hand, because of the interconnections 

of all fields of knowledge, significant re-

search in any restricted area is bound to 

advance knowledge in related subjects. 

T h a t such a policy of concentration upon 

a f e w fields might profitably be applied to 

library programs w a s clearly stated by 

M r . M u n n in his presidential address at 

Cincinnati. 

T h e radio research financed by the 

Foundation is a third activity which 

should be of great interest to librarians. 

O n e study contrasts radio's present service 

w i t h that of the printed page. I t w a s 

discovered that those w h o listen to the 

radio least are those w h o most readily find 

satisfaction in w h a t they read, and that 

the percentage of radio listeners is greater 

among high-school graduates than it is 

among college graduates, and still greater 

among those w h o did not reach high 

school. Y e t this latter culture-level group 

that listens most in point of time, listens 

least to radio's more serious offerings. 

Radio seems as yet not to be extending the 

interests of those members of its audience 

w h o find more satisfaction in listening 

than in reading. 

T h e sections on the claim of the social 

sciences and the handicaps of the social 

sciences cannot be skipped by any librarian 

interested in the widest implications of 

his profession as a social science. 

In Recent Trends in Higher Education, 

M r . A r n e t t is interested in the financial 

problems confronting privately supported 

colleges and universities. H i s report con-

siders the implications of a series of 

statistical studies of the current receipts 

and expenditures, receipts for capital pur-

poses, enrollments, and tuition fees of 

approximately t w o hundred representative 

institutions. F r o m the data presented 

three trends stand o u t : 

1. Decreasing gifts to private institu-

tions 

2. Decreasing returns on invested en-

dowment 

3. Increasing competition for both 

funds and students from state institutions 

T h e study indicates a need for a com-

prehensive study of the total resources 

of the U n i t e d States for higher education, 

and the subsequent need for intelligent 

coordination and cooperation. 

T h e areas of interest to which the 

General Education Board is now directing 

its attention in its program for Southern 

education are defined in the f o l l o w i n g 

headings: 

1. T h e f u l l e r development of the eco-

nomic and social resources of the South 

by means of educational and research 

contributions, especially in the fields of 

the social and the natural sciences. 

2. T h e development of selected college 

and university centers, w i t h particular 

attention to improvement of personnel, of 

library service, and of collaboration among 

DECEMBER., 1940 71 



institutions favorably located for coopera-

tion in meeting regional needs. 

3. U n d e r t a k i n g s in elementary and 

secondary education, chiefly in cooperation 

w i t h state departments of education, 

teacher-education institutions, and agen-

cies engaged in studies or experiments of 

region-wide import. 

In its program in the field of general 

education, the Board in recent years has 

taken a special interest in efforts to im-

prove provisions for the care and educa-

tion of y o u n g people aged twelve to 

t w e n t y . O u t of studies and thinking 

generated by this interest has come a new 

conception of secondary education for a 

new kind of secondary school student, 

namely the student w h o w i l l become one 

of the great ordinary run of wage-earners 

and housewives. T h e Report summarizes 

the w o r k towards these objectives through 

subsidies to such organizations as the 

A m e r i c a n C o u n c i l on Education, A m e r i -

can Y o u t h Commission, Association of 

School F i l m Libraries and numerous oth-

e r s . — N e i l C. Van Deusen, Fisk Univer-

sity, Nashville. 

More About Thompson s Medieval Li-

brary 

T o T H E E D I T O R 

C O L L E G E A N D R E S E A R C H L I B R A R I E S 

S I R : 

Y o u r reviewer 1 of James W e s t f a l l 

T h o m p s o n ' s book The Medieval Library 

seems to have missed several errors in 

that volume, w h i c h should be called to the 

attention of the prospective purchaser. 

O n page 21 w e r e a d : " C y p r i a n seems 

to have known little of books outside of 

the B i b l e . " T h e notes of B a l u z e on 

C y p r i a n in the M i g n e edition w o u l d 

1 College and Research Libraries 1:281-83, J u n e 
1940. 

show h o w serious a misstatement this is. 

O n page 65, D r . T h o m p s o n has mis-

translated from the great w o r k of 

M a n i t i u s on Post-Classical L a t i n Litera-

ture. M a n i t i u s had w r i t t e n about 

Paschasius Radbertus (i, 4 0 7 ) : " S e h r 

seltene Kenntnisse sind bei ihm die 

Irenausiibersetzung und T e r t u l l i a n de 

pudicitia." M i s r e a d i n g this sentence, 

T h o m p s o n makes Paschasius Radbertus a 

translator of Irenaeus and of T e r t u l l i a n . 

B u t Radbertus never translated Irenaeus, 

and T e r t u l l i a n w r o t e in the same lan-

guage as Radbertus did, so there w a s little 

need to translate him. 

O n page 2 1 , w e are told that T e r t u l l i a n 

"died ca. 200." A c t u a l l y , he did most of 

his w o r k a f t e r 200 A.D. 
O n page 127, D r . T h o m p s o n quotes 

three prose lines f r o m Bernard of 

Chartres. H i s ear for verse misled him 

here, as they are three hexameters. 

U s u a l l y , historians of culture deplore 

the destruction of books which took place 

during the sixteenth century. I t is some-

w h a t surprising, therefore, to read on page 

371 in D r . T h o m p s o n : 

T h e monasteries could not meet these new 
conditions and interests; nor, indeed, did 
they endeavor to compete with them. In-
stead they sank into sloth and lethargy, idly 
living upon their properties and indifferent 
to the new ideas of a new age. . . . In the 
end, the monasteries—and their libraries— 
were doomed to spoliation and dissolution 
for their sin against the light of the time. 
The retribution was deserved, however much 
one may regret the ruthless and senseless 
ivay in which it was inforced. 

T h e italics are my o w n . I am g r a t e f u l 

to you, M r . Editor, for your kindness in 

a l l o w i n g me this space to dissent. 

Sincerely yours, 

( R e v . ) Joseph F . C a n t i l l o n , S.J., 

Loyola School, New York City 

72 COLLEGE AND RESEARCH LIBRARIES