Manual of Library Economy / Third and Memorial Edition

by James Duff Brown; W. C. Berwick Sayers

350. Age Limits.

350. Age Limits.—There are wide differences in the practice as regards the limit of age from which persons are allowed to use the libraries, but within recent years the opinion on this point has undergone considerable change. Formerly persons under eighteen and sixteen were forbidden the use of public libraries; now such high limits are very uncommon, though fourteen is still frequently seen in the rules of otherwise progressive libraries. Of course, local conditions must receive due consideration in this matter, though it is difficult to think of any circumstance which calls for any distinction being made between children of twelve and those of fourteen years of age. There are hundreds of bright, intelligent lads and girls of twelve who are the equals in knowledge and ability of their fellows of thirteen and fourteen years of age; in fact, children do not fit, intellectually, into age-compartments; their capacities are surprisingly individual. What seems reasonable is the entire abolition of age limits in lending libraries, subject to the reservation that the librarian should have discretionary power to refuse to issue books to any child unable to read and write. Failing this, the limit might be fixed at twelve where there are no separate juvenile libraries, but reduced to seven where such departments exist. There is a certain amount of trouble and inconvenience to adults resulting from admitting very young children, especially in open access and other libraries without separate juvenile accommodation, and this would be partly met by the compromise proposed. Separate children’s libraries are the solution of the difficulty, and, when these can be provided all round, the age limit downwards can be abolished so far as they are concerned, while the limit for the adult library can be raised to twelve or fourteen. But adequate provision should be made for interchanging, and all necessary facilities provided for enabling intelligent young people under the limit to procure suitable more advanced books if desired, and also for allowing adults to revive their youth by allowing them access to the works of Ballantyne, Henty and other authors.

351.

351. As regards age limits in reference libraries and reading rooms, there is more to be said for keeping them high than in the case of lending libraries, especially when there are separate children’s rooms. But, generally speaking, there is no strong reason for excluding well-conducted boys or girls from a popular reading room, whatever their ages may be, provided they do not come during school hours, or do not otherwise make the library a place in which to hide from some duty. In some libraries, with age limits of twelve, fourteen or over, it is the practice to turn away younger children from news and reading rooms in cases where they are accompanied by their parents or elders. This is an abuse of a rule which was only intended to protect readers from the noisy incursions of irresponsible youngsters, who are wont to stray into public places out of sheer devilment, or accident, or excess of curiosity. To apply this rule to children in arms, or youngsters accompanied by and in charge of their elders, is simply officialism calculated to injure the popularity and prestige of municipal libraries. The age limit for a reference library designed for students, with open access to the shelves, should be fixed at fourteen or sixteen, with discretionary power to the librarian to grant permits to any studious youngster under that age. Where access to public reading rooms and juvenile departments is easy, there seems no good reason for throwing open the reference library to all and sundry, unless under the safeguards suggested.

352. The Borrowing Right.

352. The Borrowing Right.—There are several points in connexion with the borrowing rights of various classes of citizens which it is desirable to notice, especially as they have much bearing on the question of a library’s popularity and good management. In some towns the borrowing right is strictly confined to ratepayers or residents in the library district. Employees who live outside the district are excluded, but for what particular reason it is difficult to understand. An employee contributes directly to the material well-being of the district in which his work lies; he contributes indirectly but substantially towards the rates; he spends most of his waking and all his working hours in the district; and in other ways he is as much a citizen as the resident who works outside the district and only sleeps in it at night. It is impossible to discover any reason for the distinction made between employee and resident in some places, and it may be pointed out that plenty of large towns grant the borrowing right to employees without the slightest inconvenience, difficulty or injustice to anyone. A further wise liberality permits borrowing privileges to all non-resident scholars and students at schools or similar institutions in the town. Similar arguments apply in favour of such an arrangement, and these young folks are usually readers of a valuable type.

353.

353. Teachers and others engaged in educational work should be dealt with as generously as possible, and should be lent as many books as they need at a time for purposes of their work. From six to twelve works are frequently required by a teacher in preparing a subject, and he should be allowed to have them, the most liberal interpretation possible being given to this privilege. Obviously no teacher should be permitted to make his needs an excuse for borrowing batches of current and popular works to the detriment of other readers, but it is better to risk even this than to fail him in what may be an important matter. A teacher reaches farther than the average individual.

354.

354. Another regulation which tells against the interests of municipal libraries is that in which every intending borrower, ratepayer or otherwise, is required to obtain the signatures of one or two registered ratepayers as guarantors before a ticket will be issued. It is not necessary to imagine reasons for this very serious obstacle to intending borrowers. Since many large and small towns dispense with this precaution in the case of ratepayers, and allow non-ratepayers and compounding householders to have tickets on the guarantee or recommendation of one ratepayer or on leaving a small deposit, there is no reason why this elaborate double guarantee should not be abolished all round. The time will doubtless come when guarantees of all kinds will be abolished and suitable recommendations substituted.