Now what do we want? We want an arrangement whereby any one may be able at a reasonable cost to get accurately made and well printed cards for any book at any time. This and nothing else will do. (Applause.)
The members of the Committee on Rules thought this session could not be better occupied, as I said before, than in a discussion of certain points, met by them in their attempts to produce a workable scheme which would meet adequate support, it having at that time become evident that the enthusiasm so manifest at Montreal had largely evaporated; probably because it had not been made clear that the proposed plan was really a workable scheme. Some of these points the chairman of the committee and myself have selected and graded roughly into three classes, and I will lay some of these before you.
One of the chief troubles is going to lie between the 32 and 33 size cards. Let us hear from you on this subject, if you have anything you wish to say about it.
Mr. Fletcher: Perhaps those present may be interested to know something about the 32 and 33 card from the point of view of the Publishing Board. The Publishing Board has been supplying the 32 or 33 size card as required by subscribers for cards for current books. I cannot speak authoritatively, but I think the board is nearly prepared to say that in future, if these cards are prepared at the Library of Congress and distributed from there, it will be found very much the wisest plan from the beginning to use only the 33 size. It has not been declared impossible at the Library of Congress to print the cards in such shape that enough could be cut off to make the card a 32 card; neither has it been decided by the board that it is not worth while to try earnestly to bring that about; but the present impression, I think, is that the 32 size will have to be left aside in the co-operative work. If there is a strong sentiment here to retain the 32 size card, let us hear of it now.
Mr. Bowker: Couldn't Mr. Hanson, of the Library of Congress, give us a report on the letters they received there in regard to the size of cards used? And let me emphasize this thought, that in coming to a uniform system we must approach as near uniformity as possible. It is impossible to meet all the variances of cards in the several libraries, but we must look towards drawing all the using libraries into as close uniformity as possible. And I think the prevailing practice is shown best by the statistics which I believe Mr. Hanson has with him.
Mr. Hanson: The statistics Mr. Bowker refers to I have not with me. As I recall the figures there are something like 19 out of 100 that use the 32 card.
Mr. Andrews: I have Mr. Putnam's figures. I was astonished to find the percentage that were using the larger card. Out of 185 reporting 138 used the 33 card, 38 used the 32 card and only 19 (true those 19 are the older, better established and larger libraries) used odd sizes.
I will take occasion to ask Mr. Hanson to answer another question on this point. I had an interview in his company last winter with the representative of the Harvard Library, which uses the smaller card. We then came to a satisfactory compromise, and I am surprised to hear Mr. Fletcher say it is all in the air. It was understood that the Library of Congress wanted for its subject headings, and we wanted for our subject headings, a sufficient amount of space, and that they were not willing to print below the punched hole. That leaves exactly the width of the 32 card in the center of the 33. And the proposition agreed to by all of us in this conversation was to print the 33 card with the broad margin above and never go below the hole, so any library that wanted to could buy the cards and cut them down on both top and bottom and have a 32 card. It was understood to be satisfactory to all the 32 users that I consulted, including Harvard, the largest, I believe, of them all. It is that point that I would like to ask Mr. Hanson to report on—whether he now feels that he must go higher or lower than the lines we then indicated.
Mr. Hanson: I don't feel it absolutely necessary; in fact we are following out the measurements laid down by the Publishing Board now. I have in my hand two cards—the title runs over on the second card at considerable waste of space, as you can see. But the printers have their measurements which provide for cutting away the space above and below to accommodate the 32 card. But I believe it is going to be objectionable, in the end, when it runs over on the second card. That is the only objection I can see.
Mr. Fletcher: I should like to have Mr. Andrews state whether this card, if it has to be cut down at the top as well as at the bottom, will allow room for headings?