that opportunity was left to a private
individual； the munificent Sir Thomas Bodley； to
attach an individual name to one of the
famous libraries of the world。 It is interesting
to learn that municipal bodies have a share
in the honor due to monasteries and
sovereigns in the collection of books； for the
Common Council of Aix purchased books for a
public library in 1419。＇10＇
Louis the Fourteenth； of evil memory； has
at least this one good deed to his credit； that
he raised the Royal Library at Paris； founded
two centuries before； to 70；000 volumes。 In
1791 it had 150；000 volumes。 It profited largely
by the Revolution。 The British Museum had
only reached 115；000 when Panizzi became
keeper in 1837。 Nineteen years afterward he
left it with 560；000； a number which must now
have more than doubled。 By his noble design
for occupying the central quadrangle； a desert
of gravel until his time； he provided additional
room for 1；200；000 volumes。 All this
apparently enormous space for development is being
eaten up with fearful rapidity； and such is the
greed of the splendid library that it opens its
jaws like Hades； and threatens shortly to
expel the antiquities from the building； and
appropriate the places they adorn。
But the proper office of hasty retrospect in
a paper like this is only to enlarge by degrees；
like the pupil of an eye； the reader's
contemplation and estimate of the coming time； and
to prepare him for some practical suggestions
of a very humble kind。 So I take up again
the thread of my brief discourse。 National
libraries draw upon a purse which is
bottomless。 But all public libraries are not national。
And the case even of private libraries is
becoming； nay； has become； very serious for all
who are possessed by the inexorable spirit of
collection； but whose ardor is perplexed and
qualified； or even baffled； by considerations
springing from the balance…sheet。
The purchase of a book is commonly
supposed to end； even for the most scrupulous
customer； with the payment of the bookseller's
bill。 But this is a mere popular superstition。
Such payment is not the last； but the first
term in a series of goodly length。 If we wish
to give to the block a lease of life equal to
that of the pages； the first condition is that it
should be bound。 So at least one would have
said half a century ago。 But； while books
are in the most instances cheaper； binding；
from causes which I do not understand； is
dearer； at least in England； than it was in my
early years； so that few can afford it。＇11＇ We
have； however； the tolerable and very useful
expedient of cloth binding （now in some
danger； I fear； of losing its modesty through
flaring ornamentation） to console us。 Well；
then； bound or not； the book must of
necessity be put into a bookcase。 And the
bookcase must be housed。 And the house must
be kept。 And the library must be dusted；
must be arranged； should be catalogued。 What
a vista of toil； yet not unhappy toil！ Unless
indeed things are to be as they now are in
at least one princely mansion of this country；
where books； in thousands upon thousands；
are jumbled together with no more
arrangement than a sack of coals； where not even
the sisterhood of consecutive volumes has
been respected； where undoubtedly an
intending reader may at the mercy of Fortune
take something from the shelves that is a
book； but where no particular book can
except by the purest accident； be found。
Such being the outlook； what are we to do
with our books？ Shall we be buried under
them like Tarpeia under the Sabine shields？
Shall we renounce them （many will； or will
do worse； will keep to the most worthless
part of them） in our resentment against their
more and more exacting demands？ Shall we
sell and scatter them？ as it is painful to see
how often the books of eminent men are
ruthlessly； or at least unhappily； dispersed
on their decease。 Without answering in
detail； I shall assume that the book…buyer is a
book…lover； that his love is a tenacious； not
a transitory love； and that for him the
question is how best to keep his books。
I pass over those conditions which are the
most obvious； that the building should be
sound and dry； the apartment airy； and with
abundant light。 And I dispose with a passing
anathema of all such as would endeavour to
solve their problem； or at any rate
compromise their difficulties； by setting one row
of books in front of another。 I also freely
admit that what we have before us is not
a choice between difficulty and no difficulty；
but a choice among difficulties。
The objects further to be contemplated in
the bestowal of our books； so far as I
recollect； are three： economy； good arrangement；
and accessibility with the smallest possible
expenditure of time。
In a private library； where the service of
books is commonly to be performed by the
person desiring to use them； they ought to be
assorted and distributed according to subject。
The case may be altogether different where
they have to be sent for and brought by an
attendant。 It is an immense advantage to
bring the eye in aid of the mind； to see
within a limited compass all the works that
are accessible； in a given library； on a given
subject； and to have the power of dealing
with them collectively at a given spot； instead
of hunting them up through an entire
accumulation。 It must be admitted； however； that
distribution by subjects ought in some degree
to be controlled by sizes。 If everything on a
given subject； from folio down to 32mo； is to
be brought locally together； there will be an
immense waste of space in the attempt to
lodge objects of such different sizes in one
and the same bookcase。 And this waste of
space will cripple us in the most serious
manner； as will be seen with regard to the
conditions of economy and of accessibility。
The three conditions are in truth all
connected together； but especially the two last
named。
Even in a paper such as this the question
of classification cannot altogether be
overlooked； but it is one more easy to open than
to close one upon which I am not bold
enough to hope for uniformity of opinion and
of practice。 I set aside on the one hand the
case of great public libraries； which I leave
to the experts of those establishments。 And；
at the other end of the scale； in small private
libraries the matter becomes easy or even
insignificant。 In libraries of the medium scale；
not too vast for some amount of personal
survey； some would multiply subdivision； and
some restrain it。 An acute friend asks me
under what and how many general headings
subjects should be classified in a library
intended for practical use and reading； and
boldly answers by suggesting five classes
only： （1） science； （2） speculation； （3） art；
（4） history； and （5） miscellaneous and
periodical literature。 But this seemingly simple
division at once raises questions both of
practical and of theoretic difficulty。 As to the
last； periodical literature is fast attaining to
such magnitude； that it may require a
classification of its own； and that the enumeration
which indexes supply； useful as it is； will not
suffice。 And I fear it is the destiny of
periodicals as such to carry down with them a
large proportion of what； in the phraseology
of railways； would be called dead weight； as
compared with live weight。 The limits of
speculation would be most difficult to draw。
The diversities included under science would
be so vast as at once to make sub…
classification a necessity。 The olog…ies are by no means
well suited to rub shoulders together； and
sciences must include arts； which are but
country cousins to them； or a new
compartment must be established for their
accomodation。 Once more； how to cope with the
everlasting difficulty of 'Works'？ In what
category to place Dante； Petrarch；
Swedenborg； Burke； Coleridge； Carlyle； or a hundred
more？ Where； again； is Poetry to stand？
I apprehend that it must take its place； the
first place without doubt； in Art； for while it
is separated from Painting and her other
'sphere…born harmonious sisters' by their
greater dependence on material forms they are all
more inwardly and profoundly united in their
first and all…enfolding principle； which is to
organize the beautiful for presentation to the
perceptions of man。
But underneath all particular criticism of
this or that method of classification will be
found to lie a subtler question whether the
arrangement of a library ought not in some
degree to correspond with and represent the
mind of the man who forms it。 For my own
part； I plead guilty； within certain limits； of
favoritism in classification。 I am sensible
that sympathy and its reverse have something
to do with determining in what company a
book shall stand。 And further； does there
not enter into the matter a principle of
humanity to the authors themselves？ Ought
we not to place them； so far as may be； in
the neighborhood which they would like？
Their living manhoods are printed in their
works。 Every reality； every tendency； endures。
Eadem sequitur tellure sepultos。
I fear that arrangement； to be good； must
be troublesome。 Subjects are traversed by
promiscuous assemblages of 'works；' both by
sizes； and all by languages。 On the whole
I conclude as follows。 The mechanical
perfection of a library requires an alphabetical
catalogue of the whole。 But under the shadow
of this catalogue let there be as many living
integers as possible； for every well…chosen
subdivision is a living integer and makes the
library more and more an organism。 Among
others I plead for individual men as centres
of subdivision： not only for Homer； Dante；
Shakespeare； but for Johnson； Scott； and
Burns； and whatever represents a large and
manifold humanity。
The question of economy； for those who
from necessity or choice consider it at all； is
a very serious one。 It has been a fashion to
make bookcases highly ornamental。 Now
books want for and in themselves no
ornament at all。 They are themselves the
ornament。 Just as shops need no ornament；
and no one will think of or care for any
structural ornament； if the goods are
tastefully dispos