REPORT OF COMMITTEE ON ESTABLISHMENT OF NEW COMMISSIONS
This committee has been requested to report on two topics—"a plan for the League to follow in giving aid in the organization of commissions in states now without them," and also a draft of "tentative provisions for a model library law to be used with the model commission law."
An A. L. A. committee of which Dr. Arthur E. Bostwick is chairman, has made a valuable report on points to be covered by a model law relating library to municipality, printed in the 1912 proceedings. The same committee has under consideration the drafting of the points covered into a model charter, and the League committee decided that action on its own part was unnecessary at present.
The other topic assigned this committee cannot be disposed of in so brief a manner. It is a question of theory and of insight, of sympathetic understanding and action.
There are eleven states without library commissions: West Virginia, South Carolina, Florida, Mississippi, Louisiana, Oklahoma, New Mexico, Arizona, Nevada, Montana and Wyoming. These states contain one-eighth of the population of the country, and have only one-twentieth of the libraries.
The first step toward aid is to learn how library commissions have been established in other states. Letters sent to 36 states elicited 22 replies. Perhaps a distinction should be made between library commissions and state libraries, or boards of education, such as New York, California and Oregon. But there have been included in this report all states doing extension work, regardless of name or title of organization.
The questions asked were:
1. How did the demand for a commission arise?
The answers received are practically unanimous. There was a need felt and provided for by a few far-sighted library workers. Eight give the credit of the initiative to library workers or associations. Seven give it to women's clubs or the state federation. Five say librarians and women's clubs were co-partners in the work, and three, Maryland, Wisconsin and Nebraska, include teachers in this partnership.
2. Who drew the law?
The law has usually been drawn by or under the supervision of a few interested workers, such as president of state library association, superintendent of public instruction, president of university, or legislative committee of state federation. In Kentucky use was made of the model commission law.
3. What was done to secure its passage?
One would expect a wider range in replies than this question elicited. "A friendly legislator took it in charge" sums up the story in most states. Personal letters and interviews of library workers and club women with members of the legislature, and particularly with members of committees, seem the usual methods. In some states the measure was defeated one or more times before influence enough was brought to bear to secure its passage. In Nebraska, the measure failed twice until pushed by the federation and teachers. Even if no general demand is formulated, there must be a desire expressed by organizations strong enough to impress legislators.
4. What literature was used?
At first, there was no literature available and the majority report "none used" or "nothing special." Idaho, Minnesota and Kentucky mention the Wisconsin publications particularly, also some from Iowa. Five speak of special leaflets prepared or statistics used from traveling library reports or from the League Handbook.
5. How long did it take?
The time required varies from "a few weeks" to fourteen years. Nine secured the desired legislation in one session. Six used two to four years. Nebraska required five years; Minnesota, six years; Tennessee, eight years, and Illinois, fourteen.
6. When was your law passed?
Massachusetts passed the first library commission law in 1890. Since then similar laws have been enacted in 36 states, concluding with South Dakota and Arkansas in 1913.
7. Has it been amended—if so, when and how?
It is interesting to note how few amendments except increase in appropriation have been made in library laws. This emphasizes the importance of careful framing of the law in the beginning. A study of the chief points of the law in other states with such changes as will adapt them to the conditions in the new state should always be made.
Five states report no amendment. Two report increase in membership of commission. Ten report increase in appropriation, or minor changes. Missouri and North Dakota have had their annual appropriation repealed on the theory that it is not constitutional to bind succeeding legislatures. Oregon has made the most radical amendment, changing this year from library commission to state library.
The conclusion of the matter seems to be that the initiative is with a few interested people, working through library associations, women's clubs and teachers, on the legislators, and that it may often be accomplished in one session after public opinion is sufficiently formed to bring the necessary pressure to bear.
These summaries lead to the following suggestions for aid:
1. A collection of material should be made which would include all pamphlets and articles on the practical establishment of library commissions. Effort should be made to include the special leaflets prepared in each state during its campaign. Some states, notably Kentucky, have prepared maps for circulation to arouse interest. A collection of all such special material kept for loan would be found suggestive and helpful in other states.
2. If possible some one should be sent by the League as an organizer to assist for a short time in the establishment of new commissions. This organizer should understand conditions in that section of the country, and should be able to advise wisely, talk with legislators persuasively, and address library meetings and state federations enthusiastically. Something may be accomplished by correspondence and by leaflets, but much more is possible to the trained observer on the field. Conditions even in neighboring states differ widely, and require study on the field for helpful understanding.
3. Special training for library commission workers. There is need of electives in the lines in which commission work differs from public library work.
4. Discussion of practical questions at League meetings. This is already being done and should be continued so long as there is need of a place where workers may discuss their individual problems.
5. It is suggested a committee be appointed to look after the needs of new commissions after their organization, as well as before the law is passed. There are many problems arising at home and abroad in which new workers would be glad of assistance, were there some particular committee to which they could apply.
Respectfully submitted,
MINNIE C. BUDLONG, Chairman,
ELIZABETH B. WALES,
ASA WYNKOOP,
WILLIAM FREDERICK YUST.
June 23, 1913.
The report was accepted and the committee continued.
Miss Elizabeth B. Wales, secretary of the Missouri library commission, read the following report of the committee on charter provisions: