almost impossible not to agree with Mr. Cutter that some form of index or dictionary-catalogue is, in the case of general collections and for general readers, not only that which is now in practice most frequently preferred, but that it is also (within the same limitations) superior to the others.

But though this may be true of general collections and general readers, there are, I think, some kinds of libraries and some classes of readers calling for the old classed catalogue, executed, of course, with all the improvements which time and experience have been able to suggest. I do not suppose that the classed catalogue would be found equally desirable in all special libraries, but there are certainly, I think, some special libraries in which they will be found peculiarly useful. I mean what may perhaps be better described as professional libraries-the collections formed for the use of lawyers, doctors, and other professional men. It is in these libraries, perhaps, that the librarian is most frequently asked, "What books has the library on a given subject?" or, "What are the latest books on a particular subject?" and a catalogue which places this information at once before the inquirers would here therefore be of most value.

Again, it is in such libraries that classification might be attempted with the best prospect of success. They by their nature exclude by far the largest portion of that "miscellaneous" and nondescript literature which it is most difficult to classify, and the classification of which is least worth the trouble it involves. From this point of view my subject connects itself with the wider subject of classification generally. If each of the more important subjects were thus classified by and for those most familiar with it, we should have made the best possible start towards a solution of that problem which the Association has undertaken to attempt to solve-the best system of classification; and the attempt ought, it seems to me, to be made from this side. Let us begin by classifying particular subjects, and let them fall in together into a whole, and thus suggest their own system-rather than begin by projecting a general scheme into which everything must be made to fit. We shall then be more likely to work out a scheme which may be the delight of those who know everything in general but nothing in particular, but will only cause grief to the judicious in every particular subject. Could any lawyer, for instance, withhold his laughter when he found a classifier on general principles suggesting that State Trials should not be included in Jurisprudence, but be put under History; or Patent Law under Science and Art, and Copyright under Belles Lettres ? Fancy the Trial of Jack Sheppard or the Stauntons gravely treated as History, or still more surprising, Drone and Copinger's dreary treatises on Copyright as specimens of Belles Lettres! Yet we find these suggestions seriously offered in the pages of The Bibliographer as improvements upon the arrangement preferred by the rest of the world.

Having thus offered some general considerations, I will now simply call attention to the Catalogue which has furnished an occasion for these remarks.

At the date of the establishment of the Reichsgericht, the library of the former Reichs-Oberhandelsgericht was transferred to the new tribunal, which has its seat at Leipzig. The number of volumes in the Library is about 45,000. The Librarian is Professor K. Schulz, who has prepared the present Catalogue. It is printed in double column, and the main body of it occupies 968 columns.

The Catalogue is first divided into two great divisions-Law Books and General Literature (in which latter term, however, are included the Political Sciences apart from Jurisprudence). The proportion of general literature is not very large, and occupies only columns 861-968 inclusive. The first great division of Law proper is now arranged in the following order. First come general works, including encyclopædias; the bibliography and literary history of law; periodicals; collected works; reports and opinions; and works on the philosophy of law and jurisprudence generally. Classes B, C and D are devoted to Roman law. Class E embraces German law, (legal history and private law). Classes F, G and H are respectively devoted to commercial law and procedure and penal law (including forensic medicine). Class I includes fourteen sections, each devoted to the laws of a particular state included in the German Empire. Class K comprehends constitutional and administrative law, L ecclesiastical and matrimonial law; M, international law. The six remaining classes are devoted to the law of countries outside the German Empire.

If I were discussing the catalogue from a specially legal, instead of a general standpoint, I should be inclined to offer some criticism upon some points in this arrangement, but this would be foreign to my present purpose. Upon the whole, it is only fair to express one's admiration of the very great care and ability which have been bestowed upon the classification. In order to give some idea of the pains which have been spent upon it, I need only mention that each of these main classes is broken up into a large number of sections and sub-sections, and even sub-sub-sections. Thus, the subject of Roman law is divided into eighteen sections, and, further, sixty-one sub-sections, while many of these sub-sections are yet further subdivided. Criminal law, again, has ten sections, thirty-nine subsections, besides a very large number of sub-sub-sections, and even some sub-sub-sub-sections. A very important feature is that the works, even in these minuter sub-divisions, are arranged in order of publication. "The arrangement of the Catalogue," Prof. Schulz writes, "rests upon a thorough systematic classification. Within the different divisons the books are chronologically arranged. This method preserves the internal connexion of scientific development, and enables us to perceive the most recent literature of each subject at the first glance.'

دو

To the Catalogue are prefixed a "Systematische Inhalts-übersicht," and an "Alphabetische Inhalts-übersicht," while finally it is followed by an" Alphabetisches Register." The first of these, or the systematic Table of Contents, consists of 43 pages, and is followed by an alphabetical list of all the sections, sub-sections, &c., extending

to 17 pages of three columns. The index is also in three columns, and fills 69 pages. It will be perceived therefore that no consulter of this Catalogue need experience any difficulty in at once tracing any particular book, while the student or lawyer who wishes to see what the library possesses upon a given subject, or what are the latest authorities upon it, finds the Catalogue specially arranged for the purpose of promptly answering such enquiries.

It is to this classified and chronological arrangement that I wish to direct your particular attention, and it seems to me to be both interesting and profitable to compare such a Catalogue with anything in this country that can fairly be compared with it. There is indeed nothing in the nature of a special catalogue that has been executed upon a similar plan, and, so far as the subject of law is concerned, none that can fitly be placed by the side of Prof. Schulz's catalogue. The type adopted by those libraries of the Inns of Court which have published catalogues, is the ordinary alphabetical catalogue of authors, with an index of subjects. The classification attempted in these indexes is indeed useful so far as it goes, but has no claims to scientific value. The Catalogue of the Library of the Royal Medical and Chirurgical Society published by Mr. B. R. Wheatley is, perhaps, the best catalogue of a professional library which we can boast of when we consider the importance of this collection and the merit of the catalogue-and it is essentially upon the same type, except that Mr. Wheatley has very usefully arranged his subject-index chronologically.

It is not necessary to have a dogmatic opinion upon the respective merits of these systems. Each has its advantages, and I have no wish to decide in favour of one or the other; but I hope that this brief account of Dr. Schulz's Catalogue may call attention to a subject which appears to me deserving of consideration.

After a brief discussion a vote of thanks was passed to the writer of the Paper, and the Meeting adjourned.

A DISTINGUISHED LIBRARIAN.

ON the 7th of February died Cajetan Andryeevich Kossovich, the well known Russian Savant and Emeritus Professor of Sanskrit at the Petersburg University, who was also a Librarian in the Imperial Public Library. He was to a great extent self taught, and dominated by the thirst of learning, pursued knowledge during his early years, in spite of very scanty means and most discouraging drawbacks. While at the Moscow University he acquired a sound knowledge of Greek and Latin literature, and especially gained an intimate acquaintance with the philosophical writings of his favourite author, Plato. His circumstances, however, compelled him to become teacher, first in the Tambof gymnasium, and subsequently in one of the Moscow gymnasiums. He earned the reputation of a sympathetic and painstaking teacher, devoting much time to assisting his pupils privately, and he is remembered with affection on this account.

A translation of Kühner's Latin Grammar was one result of his occupation in the gymnasiums. He did not, however, confine his energies to the duties of this employment, but while teaching others, enlarged the sphere of his own studies by acquiring a knowledge of the Sanskrit language and literature. Translations from his pen, of portions of the Mahabharata, appeared in the Russkoe Slovo, and were distinguished by the excellence of their literary style. Dissatisfied with the career of teacher, he migrated to Petersburg, where he obtained an appointment as Librarian in the Imperial Public Library. In the Capital, he gave Lectures on Sanscrit Studies, then a novelty in the University of Petersburg. Into this work the young Professor threw himself heart and soul. He edited the legend of the Doves from the Mahabharata, with copious explanatory notes as a text-book for tyros in Sanscrit, and undertook, with the support of the Academy of Sciences, the compilation of a Sanskrit-Russian Dictionary, a work which, it is much to be regretted, remains unfinished. Kossovich began now to devote much of his time to the cuneiform inscriptions of Assyria. He edited a sumptuous volume of these inscriptions, with Latin translations and a glossary. This is the work by which he is most widely known. It was, however, the means of casting a shadow over his life. The work was produced on credit at a great expense; Kossovich was sued, and had to appear in Court, and although he was exonerated from the responsibility, the affair fatally influenced his health and spirits. A Hebrew Grammar and Chrestomathy which have been adopted in the ecclesiastical seminaries, were among his more recent publications.

Kossovich was a thorough man of books, unpractical and with little knowledge of the world, and to this his difficulty with his publisher is to be attributed. He was, however, of a singularly kind and philanthropic disposition; he often helped students, not with his counsels only, but often with more material aid, and actively exerted himself on their behalf in various ways. Philology in Russia owes much to Kossovich, and his death will be widely regretted.

H. W.

ESSENTIAL FEATURES OF A LIBRARY BUILDING. THE leading essential features in the internal structural arrangements of a library-building best adapted to meet the two great requirements of (1) quick service of the public, and (2) saving of space in the storage of books, are (1) the separation of the reading-rooms used by the public from, but with easy access to, the adjoining book-rooms in which the books are stored, and (2) these latter rooms being supplied with rows of standing double presses, not more than 8 feet in height, and, say, some 3 feet apart-one or more, according to the altitude of the building, of such 10 feet high storeys being superposed and similarly furnished with book-presses.

The reading-rooms, as far as could be carried out, should be (1) central, and (2) mutually adjoining. In themselves the first and all important desideratum is that they should be amply lighted (both

by day and night). It need hardly be added that they should be lofty and commodious, and withal attractive and sufficiently heated and ventilated,-lavatories too being readily accessible. The walls of these rooms should not be shelved any higher than at most 8 feet, and this for the reception solely of "books of reference," removable therefrom at pleasure by the public themselves.

Grouped around, but not in such a way as to interfere with the thorough lighting of the reading-rooms, should be the apartments, as far as possible lighted from both sides, for the reception of the rows of the 8 feet high presses (as mentioned), the ends of these presses being towards the windows. Access from one floor to another should be by straight (not spiral) stairs, of easy gradient and shallow steps, and of width sufficient to readily allow two persons to pass; there should further be "lifts" at convenient distances, for hoisting and lowering books from one floor to another.

The means of access and the approaches from the reading-rooms to these book-rooms-with a view to abbreviating distances, and therefore saving time and labour-should be as frequent, direct, and ready as might be compatible with avoiding obstruction to the lighting of the reading-rooms. With this end in view, inner open quadrangles, necessary to be left in order to provide light and ventilation for the reading-rooms, might be spanned by a few "tubular bridges," forming so many connecting links (thus being essentially so many corridors, lighted by a few windows along their length), leading from the reading-rooms to the book-rooms, thus at once rendering it possible to proceed from the centre by a short, if not the shortest, radius to any desired point, but also rendering it possible to pass round the ambit of the whole system of the building in a continuous circuit.

A very feasible and highly desirable arrangement in addition might be carried out, by having books stored immediately under the reading-rooms in the central block, access therefrom to the room below being by several (say four) similar straight sets of stairs of easy gradient, which might be actually, so to say, outside the building, that is to say, projecting into the inner open quadrangle (these flights of stairs specially covered, of course, and lighted by a window). It is needless to say that this room should have the standing presses 8 feet high and 3 feet apart as before. It need not be more than 10 feet high, and should be over a basement storey, so as to be dry, as indeed should seemingly, all the lower floors of the building. The shelves of the presses should be loose and adjustable to various heights, and need not be longer than, say 4 feet. The height of the presses, as mentioned, being restricted to 8 feet, their length would be regulated by the width of the apartment: if it be wide there might be two rows of presses, and this would be best, leaving, say a 3 feet passage down the middle of the apartment; there need not be more than say 20 or 24 inches from the wall (or say room enough for a man to get through with ease); if the room be comparatively narrow, probably there might be only one row of presses, the distance from the wall at either end should then be say 2 feet.