The meeting was called to order at 2.15 p.m. by President Carr, who announced that the discussion would be continued from the morning session, on the subject
[ THE RELATIONSHIP OF PUBLISHERS, BOOKSELLERS AND LIBRARIANS.]
Melvil Dewey: There seems to be an impression on the part of some that the attitude I have taken in regard to this question is for the sake of starting up discussion. I am quite sincere in what I say and in what I believe in regard to it. In the first place, I think nothing could be more unfortunate than for any of us to get into an attitude of antagonism with the publishers and booksellers. There was something like that twenty-five years ago; their organization and ours began at the same time. There were some who wanted to fight with the booksellers and publishers. I think that is all wrong. I am heartily in sympathy with nearly everything that Mr. Bowker said this morning, and with what has appeared in the columns of the Publishers' Weekly. I read every page of it. I believe so profoundly in the value of the bookman's work that, when formulating definitions of our university studies, as to what a full-fledged university should be, I insisted it should include publishing research and publication, not only the preservation of learning. It is because I have so profound a respect for what may be done by the book trade, as we call it, that I believe in these things. But the discussion this morning seemed to be very much on the line of Ruskin's attack on railroads, which he said always were devices of the devil, and he said it very eloquently. You heard the same talk about the trolley lines—about the whitening bones of the young innocents that had been killed by them. We were assured that bicycles were to destroy the horse trade entirely, yet horses now bring double what they did before. Twenty-five years ago, I remember a very prominent man most earnestly pointing out just what was pointed out this morning—that the A. L. A. and the public libraries were simply devices to injure the interests of publishers and booksellers. And the attitude of men on these things is based on what Mr. Bowker called "an economic and social fallacy." I like the phrase; only he was fitting it to me, and I fit it to him, and it is for you to decide which is right. The question hinges on what we understand the library to be. If the library is like a blacksmith shop, or shoe store, or something of that kind, then he is right. If the library is an essential part in our system of education and a necessity for our civilization, then I am right. In New York we still have the plank road and the toll-gate, and we are just taking them over for public use—buying them and abolishing the tolls, so that the public's right to use the roads has come back to them. All the arguments we heard this morning would fit the question of abolishing the toll-roads. A great many people keep no horses. Why should they be taxed to maintain the roads? We have the fire department. We do not tax only the people whose houses are on fire. It is a public necessity. We have the best illustration of the case in our schools. The tax-supported high school has killed off a number of private schools, and estimable people who were earning their living that way were thrown out of employment. And the tax-supported high school is in analogy with the public library. It has offered instruction free and has ruined the business of others. It is so with many professional schools. A transition has been going on very rapidly. The last big fight we have been having is over the business colleges, some of which are directed by mere charlatans, and others by those who are giving admirable instruction, doing their work well. But they have outlived their time. The public demanded that certain instruction of this kind should be made available cheaply to all the people.
Now, we have been charged with wanting to abolish the bookseller. I never said anything about abolishing him. It is like saying that because the tadpole is going to be a frog we are abolishing the tadpoles. It is nature that does it; it is a matter of growth. Or it is like saying that the entomologist in pointing out that the moth is going to develop into the butterfly, is abolishing all the moths. So the good booksellers, if they go on with the work of supplying the public with good reading, will do it through the agency of the public library, where they can do it cheaper. When we are sure that a certain thing ought to be done; that it is a good thing; [and, secondly, when we are sure] that it can be done cheaper than in any other way, we are not inclined to waste a great deal of time theorizing over anybody's philosophy as to whether it is a proper thing to do or not. We want the right things done in the best and cheapest way. I am sorry to see the old-time bookseller, who did good work, crowded out of the field. I do not see any way in which he can save himself, except in the largest cities. I am sorry to see a great many of the old schools, the secondary schools, crowded out of business and entirely replaced by the tax-supported schools. I do not understand that it is our purpose, either in this Association, or in life, to be studying how we are going to feed every man after the system which has fed him up to the present time is abolished. If the man is good for anything, he will earn his wages; and it is utterly fallacious to say a thing is wrong because somebody is going to lose his business. When the railroad was built a great many worthy men who drove stage coaches were driven out of business in just that way. Every modern improvement does that; new machinery of all kinds has the effect of driving people out of employment; but, in the long run, it pays.
I ought to say in the first place that the suggestion that the librarian would sell books for a profit is one of those queer things that crop out in connection with all great movements. I never yet heard of any library that was buying books and distributing them. I believe that the library will order books in connection with other work. My thesis is this: the book owned is a great deal better than the book loaned. I believe it is better for a man to own a book than to borrow it; that it is legitimate, at public expense, to show him that book in the library and hand it to him as his book—just as legitimate an expense, every way, as it is to employ a man to sell people books so that they won't patronize the Booklovers' Library. I think the whole thing hinges there. It is not a matter of theory, but of fact. If that is what we want to accomplish, can we do it best with the book store or with the library? I contend that it is impossible to rehabilitate the old bookseller, any more than the old private school, which could be done only by endless means in endowment. I do not believe we should try, because it can be done better and cheaper in another way; because the library has the books on its shelves. The statistics this morning showed that the bookseller is dying out. I believe it to be entirely impossible to rehabilitate that profession. If in the library it becomes a recognized principle that the library is supported at public expense for the purpose of lending books. I am confident that the public will demand it to be done in that way. I am confident of another thing. You have only to consult your catalogs to see the remarkable development of the last decade in publishing which is done by endowed universities and colleges and of learned societies. See the great body of technical journals that have been turned over the university presses. Every university that pretends to accomplish much now has a press, and is developing it with great rapidity. It was said this morning that the publisher hinged on the cash; that the bookseller hinged on that. Ladies and gentlemen, the cash profit is not a proper scale in which to weigh the questions in which we are interested. When you take questions of education, or religion, or philanthropy, and put them on a question of cash profit, you are in an absolutely false attitude. I do not mean by that that we must not regard business conditions. We must know how to pay for our coal and our rent, but not a dividend in dollars and cents. And the moment my antagonist says that this question is to be measured by a cash dividend, I say he is ruled out of court in any body of librarians who are giving their lives and their work at salaries not at all commensurate, but who make dividends on a higher plane. There is no occasion for an attitude of hostility; nor, I take it, for me to take issue on this new proposition in regard to prices to libraries. There is not a librarian in this room who has all the money he wants. If prices rise ten per cent., it will diminish the number of books he can buy. I followed the argument this morning. If it is correct, there is only one thing we can do. We, as librarians, are cutting into the revenues of these men, and we ought not only not to ask a discount but librarians ought to pay twenty-five per cent. in addition, because we are cutting into their revenues. We ought to appoint a committee, which without a bit of the spirit of antagonism, should meet the publishers and booksellers and point out all over the United States large consumers who buy for cash. I think it is a practical mistake to try to force up the price, and that we are bound as custodians of this money that is put in our hands, firmly and courteously, but, I am sure, with the most friendly relations on both sides, to see that the prices of our books shall not be cut down.
I say, therefore, in summing up, after an observation of thirty years, that I am confident that the library of this century is going to assume those educational functions, and that among the most prominent of these is the putting into the hands of the people who wish to make their lives wealthier in arts or trades the books of power and of inspiration. The public library cannot afford not to put into their hands at a minimum price the books they want to read. And, logically we shall be forced in that direction. You will find that this tendency is growing all the while, and we will have to put the library squarely alongside the high school. Indeed the library in its development is following exactly the line of development of the tax-supported high school and for that same reason, that in the high school we now offer instruction free, the library will offer books for sale without profit—there should be no profit in the library—and will lend books freely, and will with regret kill the local book store and supplant it by something that is worth a great deal more.
W. I. Fletcher: I have been so long on the Publishing Board with Mr. Dewey that I have got thoroughly in the habit, when he gets through, of saying something on the other side. It seems to me that a few words might be said to clarify this subject. It is undoubtedly true, as Mr. Dewey has said, that a book store that is worth anything could not be established in every place in the country. There ought to be something of the sort, even if it is a public library. The book stores exist only in places where it is commercially possible, and that number of places is very limited. Now I suppose that if we could ascertain the communities where it is not commercially possible for a book store to be carried on, we should none of us have any objection—it seems to me most of us would favor the idea—that the public library should, to some extent, take the place of the book store in supplying books to the would-be owners in such a community. That leaves the question confined to those places where a book store is commercially impossible, probably to those places where book stores have been, even with difficulty, maintained under past conditions. I should be willing, for my own part, to do all I could in securing the establishment of a good book store where there is not one, where it is commercially possible to maintain one. Where it is not, it would be a good thing to let the library sell the books. I am greatly impressed with the argument as to the advantages of a book store in a community where it can be maintained. So it seems to me that there is not very much difference of opinion among us, after all, as I dare say those who spoke this morning would not object seriously to the distribution of books for sale through the libraries, where there is no hope of having a local book store. As to the amount of discount under this new arrangement, I am entirely in accord with Mr. Dewey in wishing that the Association might present whatever are the views of the Association. On the subject of the amount of discount that we ought to have, I should hardly feel that the booksellers were treating us right in this country if they should follow the custom of the German publishing trade and refuse any discount at all; and it is a question whether the ten per cent. which they propose to allow under this new system is enough. I have advised our library committee to express a hearty readiness to accede to the proposed arrangement, to take the ten per cent. discount, and we have given our adhesion to it. Perhaps that was somewhat hasty, before the librarians in general had an opportunity to act; but I do not believe anything very different from that will be the attitude of the librarians at large. We might in time, for example, make it fifteen per cent., but I am sure that could not be done at present. I am heartily in sympathy with the movement that will make it possible to have a good book store, which I believe every librarian would like to have in his place.
W. M. Palmer: I wish to say just this: Of course in the lack of time that was accorded me, it is difficult to say all that can be said on the subject, and explain the by-paths, and so forth; but, as I intimated at the introduction of my paper, I simply stated what I said as facts, and while we wish a great many things to be different, we realize that they cannot be reached in a certain direction all at once. In order to bring the bookselling business to a basis which will enable the bookseller to live, some reform had to take place. The publishers have seen fit to institute the reform which has been outlined to-day. When I spoke this morning, for instance, of the fact that some librarians ordered books for friends and others at the discounts which the library and they themselves received from the booksellers, I did not wish to impute any wrong motive to the librarian in doing that. It is a matter within the knowledge of the booksellers, and the booksellers wink at it. I do not think there was any element of dishonesty in it, because the bookseller who sold the book to the librarian knew it was again to be sold to some friend of the librarian.
R. R. Bowker: In offering a resolution, I wish to say just a word or two. I had not expected Mr. Dewey to make an argument in favor of the public library, for certainly there would be no disagreement on that point in this room. Where he went further and suggested that the salaried librarian should become the commercial bookseller, I think and I hope that there are few to follow him to that length of argument. As to the Booklovers' Library, of course that is not at all in analogy with the public library, and I want to take this opportunity to call attention to what seems to me an admirable use of the Booklovers' Library scheme, so long as it can hold out. Mr. Carr has told me that he has looked upon the Booklovers' Library as a very useful overflow or safety-valve for the public library. When thirty-five people come at once and want "Quincy Adams Sawyer," and a librarian sees that the two copies that could be put on the shelves would not meet the demand, he would say to himself "I cannot rightly spend the money for thirty-five copies," and therefore he would say to the thirty-three, "You can go to the Booklovers' Library and get these new books just when you want them." So this library may be a relief to the librarian who is conscientious in the spending of his money.
The resolution which I now ask to move is that the Council be requested to appoint a committee on relations with the book trade, to which this question shall be referred.