DOI Seite / Zitierlink:
https://doi.org/10.11588/diglit.26753#0085
APPENDIX.
Appendix A.
Museum Library Catalogue.
It is almost impossible to write regarding the British Museum
without reverting to the much mooted subject of the catalogue, and as
one of the sufferers, I cannot refrain from entering my protest before
it is quite too late against such a noble institution being made so
nearly uselessjto satisfy the fancies of certain parties in power.
I am not, of course, going to enter here on the question of the de-
ficiencies of the Library. As I have said in another place, it is nearly
useless to me as it must be to every one who wishes to be “a la hauteur de
son siecle,” in either science or art; it is a noble museum of curiosities of
literature, but it is conducted on principles of most sublime contempt for
the utilitarian exigencies of modern times; and I cannot but consider it
as somewhat unjust that as authors are the only class of her Majesty’s
subjects specially taxed in kind, that they should not in return have
the privilege granted them, of obtaining by Government assistance,
the last information on the various subjects of their researches. I
must not, however, be tempted to digress on so sore a point; nor shall
I enter upon the “vexata questio” of whether the catalogue should be a
classed one, or merely alphabetically arranged; because I believe that
if practically stated and considered, nine men out of ten, or perhaps
rather ninety-nine in a hundred would vote for the latter. The truth
being that an alphabetical catalogue is an absolute necessity to a
public library. A classed one, on the other hand, is only a luxury ;
one, I am by no means inclined to under-rate, but I am convinced
that no classed catalogue will ever suffice of itself, to ascertain whether
a book is in the library or not; it must be considered as of secondary,
while the other is, and has always been, considered of primary, irn-
importance.
I am convinced I am stating what is literally true when I assert
that the formation of an alphabetical catalogue is the simplest and
easiest operation in literature, and I am confirmed in this opinion by
observing that there is not an auctioneer, or bookseller, or librarian
in the three kingdoms who cannot make one, and one that answers all
purposes for which it was intended—which is simply to know whether
or not a certain work is in the library in question—which is the only
purpose an alphabetical catalogue can answer. So far as my little
Appendix A.
Museum Library Catalogue.
It is almost impossible to write regarding the British Museum
without reverting to the much mooted subject of the catalogue, and as
one of the sufferers, I cannot refrain from entering my protest before
it is quite too late against such a noble institution being made so
nearly uselessjto satisfy the fancies of certain parties in power.
I am not, of course, going to enter here on the question of the de-
ficiencies of the Library. As I have said in another place, it is nearly
useless to me as it must be to every one who wishes to be “a la hauteur de
son siecle,” in either science or art; it is a noble museum of curiosities of
literature, but it is conducted on principles of most sublime contempt for
the utilitarian exigencies of modern times; and I cannot but consider it
as somewhat unjust that as authors are the only class of her Majesty’s
subjects specially taxed in kind, that they should not in return have
the privilege granted them, of obtaining by Government assistance,
the last information on the various subjects of their researches. I
must not, however, be tempted to digress on so sore a point; nor shall
I enter upon the “vexata questio” of whether the catalogue should be a
classed one, or merely alphabetically arranged; because I believe that
if practically stated and considered, nine men out of ten, or perhaps
rather ninety-nine in a hundred would vote for the latter. The truth
being that an alphabetical catalogue is an absolute necessity to a
public library. A classed one, on the other hand, is only a luxury ;
one, I am by no means inclined to under-rate, but I am convinced
that no classed catalogue will ever suffice of itself, to ascertain whether
a book is in the library or not; it must be considered as of secondary,
while the other is, and has always been, considered of primary, irn-
importance.
I am convinced I am stating what is literally true when I assert
that the formation of an alphabetical catalogue is the simplest and
easiest operation in literature, and I am confirmed in this opinion by
observing that there is not an auctioneer, or bookseller, or librarian
in the three kingdoms who cannot make one, and one that answers all
purposes for which it was intended—which is simply to know whether
or not a certain work is in the library in question—which is the only
purpose an alphabetical catalogue can answer. So far as my little