But “penny wise is pound foolish.” Saving first cost is not always true economy. It would be foolish indeed to save on architect’s fees. For a little one-room wooden building, to be sure, a local carpenter might do, under the supervision of a clever librarian or a practical trustee. But as soon as the building gets complex, get an architect. His fees will save enough in convenience, in comfort, in grace, in beauty, in actual money outgo to contractors, to prove themselves the best economy. Just so, as the problem gets still larger and more complex, get the advice of an expert librarian to help present it to the architect. He will more than earn his fees by keeping down useless waste of space; by pointing out how to economize in running expenses; by aiding the architect to enhance the beauty of the building; by promoting and thus expressing its true purposes.
I have now had some personal experience in this matter which I will put into percentages. From what I have seen, I not only believe, but know, that one per cent of the cost of building, put into employing a really competent expert librarian, will save from ten per cent to forty per cent on the cost, in space, convenience and material. If you doubt, why not verify the facts by inquiring of some trustees or donors who have tried the experiment? They are surely unprejudiced and credible witnesses. One per cent spent in saving ten per cent is a net economy, worth at least considering.
This principle, first applied to library matters by Henry J. Carr in 1891, has been recognized recently by the Mayor of Rochester. Having in hand the establishment of a central library and a system of branches, he sent for a leading librarian of great experience, got his advice, for which a liberal fee was paid, and no doubt thus saved for the city thousands of dollars which might otherwise have been wasted in experiments and bungling.
“The internal arrangements should be devised by a person practically acquainted with the working of such a library as the building is intended to accommodate, and not by architects or building committees” (or inexperienced librarians) “without such experimental knowledge.”—Fletcher.[67]
“There is an increasing disposition in planning libraries, to turn to experts,”—Foster.[68]
No experienced librarian would allow without vigorous protest such waste of space and money as is referred to in the Boston Transcript[69] thus: “The increased cost of administration in some of the newer palatial library buildings is alarming. In one, the cost was nearly threefold, in another nearly fourfold what it was before.” This might have been saved, or at least largely reduced, by paying a modest fee to a good expert.
Calculate the cost of each cubic foot of wasted space, the cost for twenty years to come of lighting, heating, cleaning and repairs for useless space; the salary of additional attendants to care for unnecessary processes, and you will find that economizing on advice will waste thousands of dollars.