The Dialectic and Philanthropic Societies'

Contributions to the Library of the University of North Carolina, 1886-1906

 

[North Carolina Historical Review, Volume LIX, Number 4, October 1982, pages 327-353.]

 

Maurice C. York*

 

            Cornelia Phillips Spencer, avid supporter of the University of North Carolina and habitual epistler, proclaimed in the North Carolina Presbyterian in the summer of 1886 that she was as "proud as a peacock" about the substantial improvement in the quality of the university library housed at Smith Hall:

 

That fine hall, what have I not seen in it, lo! these many years? Everything except books. It was the ballroom for the State. We had theatrical performances in it. We had private dances there--public entertainments. The University Normal Schools used it for kindergartens. "Walkarounds," elocutionary displays--what not? Now in the year '86, for the first time, I see it a library.[1]

 

            The Dialectic and philanthropic literary societies functioned as catalysts in a reaction that transformed the library of the University of North Carolina from small, poorly selected, and virtually inaccessible collection into a resource more responsive to campus needs.  In 1886^th e students merged their extensive libraries with the university's books in Smith Hall. During the following two decades, the members of the societies worked closely with the faculty to increase the size of the collection and to administer the library more effectively so that by 1906 the facility assumed a position of respect among southern state university libraries.

            Interaction among the university and the societies did not begin in 1886, for the growth of the student groups paralleled the development of their parent. Possibly influenced by Charles Wilson Harris, a tutor at the university who had been a member of the American Whig Society at Princeton, the students on June 3, 1795, organized the Debating Society to "cultivate a lasting friendship with each other, and to Promote useful Knowledge .  . . " The Debating Society split a month later, resulting in the organization of the Dialectic Society and the Philanthropic Society.[2] Members of the Societies debate, declaimed, and read compositions, thereby gaining proficiency in the art of public speaking, parliamentary procedure, and creative writing. The equivalent of student government, the societies exercised considerable power. Members guilty of breaking societal regulations sometimes left the university in disgrace.[3] Thus the Di and Phi, as they were known, provided instruction and discipline unavailable to the students through the university administrators.

           

            The Dialectic and Philanthropic societies collected and maintained substantial libraries to aid members in their literary exercises and to provide a diversion from the dullness of college life. Conversely, the trustees and administrators of the University of North Carolina failed to recognize the importance of a well-selected, accessible library and therefore possessed a small collection of little interest to students.

 

            Similar situations prevailed at many colleges and universities in America during the late eighteenth and early nineteenth centuries. Because the institutions offered a classical curriculum consisting of courses in ancient languages, mathematics, natural philosophy, chemistry, and moral philosophy, most academic libraries contained chiefly the classics and works on religion and theology, rather than the general literature, novels, histories, and biographies that students enjoyed reading. Students rarely used the libraries, because the recitation method of instruction that utilized only textbooks offered no incentive for outside study and because of restrictions designed to preserve the costly library books. Studies show that the growth of literary society libraries resulted from the failure of academic institutions to provide accessible libraries that appealed to students.[4] This was true at the state universities in Alabama, Georgia, and North Carolina, where society libraries flourished. Conversely, he University of South Carolina and the University of Virginia during the antebellum period supported library development; the literary societies at those schools never accumulated substantial libraries.[5]

 

            The students of the Di and phi began collecting books soon after their groups' birth and steadily increased their holdings. A successful motion of Hinton James in February, 1797, required a committee of the Philanthropic Society to order an assortment of books. The society's book catalog published in 1829 reveals that during the previous thirty-two years the students had accumulated 2,718 volumes representing 751 titles. Six years later a Dialectic catalog listed 3,057 volumes with 976 different titles.[6] By 1835,, if counted as a whole, the two libraries consisted of 6,000 volumes. Kemp Plummer Battle considered them "probably the best collection" in North Carolina.[7] Growth continued in the antebellum period, and, despite some losses during the Civil War and Reconstruction, the society libraries comprised in 1886 a total of about 15,000 volumes[8] housed on the top floors of New West and New East in rooms measuring 36 by 54 feet and elegantly furnished with tables, chairs, couches, and works of art.[9]

 

            The Society libraries contained chiefly works of fiction, poetry, biography, and history. Novels popular with the students of the pre-Civil War university included Don Quixote, Tom Jones, Gil Blas, and works by James Fenimore Cooper, Sir Walter Scott, and Washington Irving.  The students read poetry by Robert Burns, Lord Byron, William Cowper, John Milton, John Dryden, and William Shakespeare. Histories by David Hume, Tobias George Smollett, Oliver Goldsmith, Edward Gibbon, and David Ramsay graced the shelves. The student librarians maintained runs of periodicals such as Edinburgh Review, Blackwood's Edinburgh Magazine, and London Quarterly Review, among others.  The societies purchased reference tools, including Encyclopaedia Americana and Encyclopaedia Britannica. [10]

           

            The students libraries were not perfect, however. Librarians opened the libraries for very brief periods--in the 1870s and 1880s, usually on Wednesdays and Saturdays, for a total of three hours.  Owing to the regular change of librarians and alcove keepers, the condition of the libraries varied considerably. In 1879 the Dialectic Society library supposedly looked like a "second-hand book store." Samuel Field Phillips, solicitor general of the United States from 1873 to 1885, told Kemp Battle in 1886 that during his last visit to the Dialectic Society library he had been impressed with its "decadence." A thoughtful student complained in 1854 that periodicals and novels--often in several editions and handsomely bound--predominated to the detriment of the fields of science, politics, and history. Because of intense rivalry between the groups, the large number of gifts from loyal alumni and friends, and the students' failure to institute consistent selection policies, the two libraries contained many duplicates. Nevertheless, Edwin Anderson Alderman, library supervisor and later president of the university, judges that "The books that were bought . . . reflect great credit upon the young men who acted for their societies. They indicate good taste and intelligent appreciation of university needs considering the lack of unity and consistency in the plan."[11]

 

            The university's record in the area of library development is less impressive. In the 1790s generous donors and the university trustees laid the foundation for a library, but the collection suffered during the early nineteenth century because of short-sighted administrators. Between 1795 and 1797 twelve donors contributed 133 volumes to the university. The trustees spent about $200 for books in 1795 and in December of that year authorized an annual expenditure of $50.00 for library books. By 1799 the university levied on each student a fee of 50 cents a session, which was to be used by the university library committee. The fee doubled in 1813, at which time the library contained approximately, 1,500 volumes. The collection grew so slowly throughout the next decade--probably because the library fees were not spent--that President Joseph Caldwell in 1824 promised to travel to Europe at his own expe3nse to purchase needed books and supplies. Caldwell kept his word, and, with financial support from the trustees in 1824, he increased the size of the library by about 1,000 volumes. Attrition likely occurred during the following decade, however, for in 1836 librarian William Hayes Owen reported that the library, located in a recitation room on the second floor of South Building, contained only about 1,900 books.[12]

            Students of the early antebellum period showed little interest in the university's books. Kemp Battle, president of the university from 1876 to 1891, in 1907 quipped that "it was a matter of pride to borrow them, and then use them as dead-falls for the swarming mice. The tall tomes of St. Augustine were as efficacious in slaughtering these troublesome rodents as was their great author in crushing the religious heresies of his day."[13]

 

            While he served as university president (1835-1868), David Lowry Swain failed to build up the collection noticeably. Indeed, for years he refused to spend an annual appropriation offered by the trustees for books, wishing instead to increase the university's endowment fund. Consequently, the faculty depended on their personal libraries for current scholarship. Professor Charles Phillips complained in 1867 that libraries of several professors were the only sources of up-to-date literature in fields such as physics, chemistry, and mechanics. Phillips informed Kemp Battle that other members of the faculty had warned Swain "that there was nothing solid in the prosperity of the university--that scholarship & Books were not valued aright here--that original information was not disseminated hence--that only such doctrines as were found in common school & other text books were taught."[14]

 

            Though the university completed a handsome library building, Smith Hall, in 1851, the usefulness of the book collection did not improve appreciably. The doors of the Smith Hall rarely opened for students except during the annual commencement ball.[15] A student wit, "La Mar," poked fun at the collection of 3,600 volumes:

            The university library has been lately removed to a very appropriate building. The books were so few in number that it would not do to put them all together, for crowded into one corner, they would entirely escape observation. Scattered as they are, a few on each shelf, it is much feared by some that they must soon loose each other's acquaintance; whilst their beggarly appearance would make vanity in the best of them exceedingly ill-timed.[16]

 

            While decrying the smallness of the library, the age of many of the books, and the predominance of textbooks and government documents, La Mar praised the libraries holdings in the fields of mathematics, theology, and law. Indeed, he asserted that "in the scale of true value this will more than balance both the society libraries." President Swain agreed with this assessment, but Kemp Battle and most observers considered the university library less useful to the students than the literary societies' libraries. In December, 1855, Swain prepared a list of titles needed to augment the university's holdings and secured the aid of Joseph Green Cogswell, Superintendent of the Astor Library in New York, in obtaining copies for the library.[17]

 

            Regardless of the library's merit in the 1850s, the university throughout the following thirty years failed to improve the facility significantly, The library in 1880, with its meager collection of 7,000 volumes, lagged far behind the libraries of the state universities of Georgia, Louisiana, South Carolina, and Virginia. The administration slowly added volumes to the library but did little to enhance their accessibility. A visiting committee of trustees in 1884 discovered the 9,000 books and 2,000 pamphlets to be "comparatively useless for consultation" and urged the university to install accessible shelves and institute an effective classification system.[18] The university boasted of its rare editions of classics and Greek and Roman histories, but one student who received the Ph. B. degree from the university in 1884 claimed he never borrowed a book from Smith Hall. Few students did.[19]

            In fact, students and members of the faculty in the early 1880s probably patronized the society libraries almost exclusively.  The librarians of the Dialectic Society and the Philanthropic Society continued their practice of recording on pages assigned to each patron in circulation registers the books borrowed from their libraries. Each society's several extant registers reveal heavy use by the students and their professors. In contrast, just two such registers used by the university library exist today. The index in the volume used between 1883 and 1884 shows that only 65 students, members of the faculty, and townspeople borrowed books. A total of 102 readers patronized the library between September, 1885, and August, 1886. The university in the 1885-1886 academic year comprised approximately 226 students and professors.[20]

 

            Such an inadequate library was inappropriate for an academic institution that had begun to modernize its curriculum. The University of North Carolina, like many colleges throughout the country, had altered its conception of the purposes of higher education. While colleges and universities during the first half of the nineteenth century had offered a prescribed curriculum designed to sharpen minds and build the character of society's future leaders, post-Civil War institutions changed in response to the needs of a more industrialized society that would be led to a greater extent by professionals, businessmen, scientists, and trained farmers. Educators such as Francis Wayland at Brown University and Henry Philip Tappan at the University of Michigan before the Civil War and Charles William Eliot at Harvard after the war advocated the adoption of broader curricula that would allow students freedom in choosing what to learn. The gradual adoption of the elective system, as it was known, resulted during the late nineteenth century in the addition of many courses, including those of a scientific and technical nature, to the college curricula. The Morrill Act of 1862, which spurred the creation of many land grant colleges, also stimulated the growth of technical education.[21]

 

            In addition, many educators following the Civil War embraced the methods of instruction common in German universities. The regard for scholarly research as the highest goal of the university was exemplified at the Johns Hopkins University, founded in 1876 by Daniel Coit Gilman. Seminar instruction and laboratories for experimentation there allowed students to devote their time to in-depth investigations of a variety of subjects, the ideal result being a significant contribution to knowledge. The Hopkins approach quickly stimulated zeal for graduate study using similar methods at colleges throughout the United States.[22]

 

            Libraries slowly changed in response to these trends. By 1876, the year Melvil Dewey and other prominent librarians founded the American Library Association, progressive librarians and college administrators had begun to envision the library as an indispensable force in the educational process. Collections expanded in size and scope, reflecting the demands of the new curricula. Teachers assigned reading to supplement class lectures. Librarians emerged as educators who actively assisted students with their course work and research. Longer hours and freer access to library materials characterized the progressive trend.[23]Otis Hall Robinson, librarian at the University of Rochester, avidly preached the new doctrine. In an essay published in 1876 he described the ideal library as "the door to all science, all literature, all art. It is the means of intelligent and profitable recreation, of profound technical research, and at the same time of a complete general education."[24]

 

            The University of North Carolina grappled with these issues. Beginning in 1868 the faculty and trustees labored to remodel the university to accommodate more fully the new educational philosophies and vocationally oriented students. When the university reopened in 1875 following four years of inactivity, it comprised a collection of colleges: Agriculture, Engineering and Mechanic Arts, Natural Sciences, Literature, Mathematics, and Philosophy. [25]  Eleven years later President battle evidenced an appreciation of the need for a more responsive, dynamic library. He told the trustees that the library was a "disgrace to the institution. It is my ambition to have such a collection of books as will suffice the researches of not only our own professors and ambitious students but will attract the scholars and authors, and be a centre of enlightment [sic] to the State." [26]

 

            A variety of events beginning in 1885 effected an impressive metamorphosis in the Smith Hall facility. Student dissatisfaction with aspects of their own libraries, coupled with the university administration's desire to rectify the embarrassing situation in Smith Hall, meshed the gears of change. The university in 1885 asked the North Carolina General Assembly for an annual appropriation of $15,000; of that sum, $800 would be used for the library. Citing contracts for new shelving to divide the room into alcoves, and bemoaning the lack in fifty years of "material additions" to the collection, and other than public documents, the appeal stressed the need for new books and called for funding of salary for a permanent librarian. The General Assembly favorably responded to the memorial.[27]

 

            The appropriation seems to have stimulated the university to improve the library. The faculty appointed George Tayloe Winston librarian, and by June, 1885, Winston had begun the task of rearranging the library. His colleagues instituted new regulations, the most important one opening the Smith Hall facility from 3:00 to 6:00 p.m. daily and from 11:00 a.m. to 1:00 p.m. on Saturdays.[28]

 

            Concurrently, the students clamored for an adequate room in which to read periodical literature. Since the society libraries were too hot in the summer and too cold in the winter, the students removed the periodicals to their dormitories. There the magazines and journals circulated freely until returned to the libraries, often in tattered condition. An editorial in the February, 1885 issue of the North Carolina University Magazine proposed that the university spend $100 annually for periodicals and that each of the societies enhance that sum by $50.00,. Use of the periodicals would be restricted to the reading room in Smith Hall, which would be open daily and heated when necessary. At the end of each year the periodicals would be divided and bound, each society placing a portion of them in its own library.[29]

 

            On May 1, 1885, Winston proposed to both societies a plan identical to the students' idea but reduced the university's financial obligation to $50.00 for periodicals. Each society immediately voted to contribute $50.00 The university established the reading room in Smith Hall, and the plan worked well; by 1886 the new reading room offered 12 dailies, 66 weeklies, 2 semiweeklies, 23 monthlies, 3 bimonthlies, and 8 quarterlies, copies of which could be used daily from 8:00 a.m. until  6:00 p.m.[30]

 

            Further attempts to improve the university library emerged in October when the faculty and the Dialectic Society, meeting in separate sessions, discussed the possibility of merging the three libraries. University President Kemp Battle appointed professors Winston, Joshua Walker Gore, and Adolphus Williamson Mangum to a committee to study the matter.  John Frank Schenck of the Dialectic Society, at its evening meeting, moved that, providing the Philanthropic Society concurred, The Dialectic Society appoint a committee of three to petition the trustees to accept propositions that would consolidate the three collections. Schenck's colleague's tabled the motion. The next morning the Philanthropic Society appointed a conference committee to consider the idea. Schenck continued his efforts the following week, but after a "long and exciting" debate the motion failed by a vote of twenty-eight to fifty-six. The Philanthropic Society declined to vote on the measure.[31]

 

            Professor Winston in January, 1886, defended the concept of consolidation, arguing that the cost of fuel and salaries of the librarians and servants would be reduced by two thirds and that a joint committee of faculty and students could purchase books more intelligently and with less duplication.[32] Winston's position reflected current thought at a large number of colleges and universities throughout the eastern United States. Because of a gradual decline in importance of the literary societies at many of these schools,[33] members found it increasingly difficult to maintain their libraries. This factor, coupled with the parent institutions' realization of the need for better academic libraries, led to a spate of mergers during the last quarter of the nineteenth century. By 1900 very few of the society libraries in the East had not been dispersed.[34]

 

            Many students at the University of North Carolina disagreed with Winston's ideas. According to the editors of the North Carolina University Magazine, "the policy of 'letting good enough alone' is always safe and never too conservative":

 

economy and convenience are cold and barren terms to the hearts of those who feel that by moving our libraries we sacrifice our interests as individual and separate organizations--that we surrender the legacy which has been handed down to us despite the ravages of a civil war--our legacy--ours, not to deliver up, but "ours to enjoy and ours to protect": that we show a lack of respect and tender feeling due to those loyal men of days gone by who labored for the societies when they did not do so for the university, "not that they loved the University less, but the societies more"![35]

 

Winston and other members of the faculty, with the notable exception of Professor Mangum, rejected these arguments and continued to press for an agreement. The faculty library committee presented to the faculty on March 18, 1886, a draft contract, and Professor Winston submitted the agreement to both societies at their April 3 meetings. The Philanthropic Society on April 10, accepted the stipulations with near unanimity and agreed to confer with the Dialectic Society and the university to consider regulations for the consolidated library.

 

            The sister society procrastinated. Mangum and Colonel Walter Leak Steele on April 24 discussed the matter with the Dialectic Society. The members asked Mangum to present both sides of the issue, but one interested observer claimed, "He slurred over the affirmative, and bent his whole strength on the negative. His speech was poor in the extreme. His arguments as flimsy as could be, and his whole performance was as unbecoming to himself as it was amusing to his opponents." Following Mangum, Colonel Steele "gave a rambling talk, the gist of which was--nothing."[36] The students were left to decide the matter for themselves. The measure, amended so that books of the two societies would be segregated when moved to Smith Hall, was passed by the Dialectic Society on May 1 by a vote of forty-two to thirty.[37]

 

            Professors Winston, Thomas Hume, and Francis Preston Venable accepted the task of devising a means for effecting the merger.[38] They recommended to the faculty on May 14 that the permanent librarian be instructed to remove duplicates and useless books from the university library. The committee was to request the societies cull their collections. Winston, Hume, and Venable calculated that the new library would contain 20,000 volumes; no new shelving would be needed at Smith Hall. The faculty appointed James Lee Love, instructor of mathematics, as university librarian to succeed Winston.

 

            The physical transfer and arrangement of the libraries began on June 14 and continued during the summer. Librarian Love received the assistance from Claudius Ferdinand Smith of the Philanthropic Society and William James Battle of the Dialectic Society. Carrying books in their arms and in wheelbarrows, the workers transferred to Smith Hall the Dialectic Society's collection from the library on the upper floor of New West Hall and the books of the Philanthropic Society from the upper floor of New East. Because most of the university's books were relatively useless owing to their obsolescence, the new library officers stored many of them in the old Philanthropic Society library. The useful titles from the university's collection were equally divided between the society libraries. Not surprisingly, the students continued to charge the majority of their books from their own collections. In fact, Love decided to use the classification system favored by the students. He and the society librarians also maintained the students' practice of preparing catalogs or finding aids listing book titles alphabetically in registers.[39] Thus, the consolidation virtually represented a merger of student libraries.

 

            Friends of the university praised the new arrangement. The Raleigh News and observer noted that the consolidation would result in more rapid growth of acquisitions and increased accessibility. Samuel Field Phillips also forecast a rapidly expanding collection. He envisioned the new library as a more dynamic facility: "The Books have been mouldering, & decaying out; now let them be worn out!"[40]

 

            The predictions were accurate. The consolidation stimulated library development and minimized duplication. With the three groups working together, the library added new titles at a faster rate than earlier. The increased accessibility of the books facilitated the students' preparation of lessons and debate queries. Circulation increased significantly. In the 1885-1886 academic year, users borrowed 3,659 volumes from society libraries and, as in the past, a relatively small number of volumes from the university library. Patrons during the 1886-1887 academic year charged 4, 761 volumes from the consolidated library.[41]

 

            These improvements impressed the students. In September, 1886, student Stephen Beauregard Weeks described the merger in the North Carolina University Magazine and reasoned  that "Had this consolidation taken place ninety years ago, we would have had a much larger collection now." A year later the journal's editors announced that all fear concerning the students' loss of interest in their libraries had been dispelled. Indeed, the merger heightened rivalry between the societies.[42]

 

            The administration and students during the fall of 1886 amplified the improvements by developing a set of regulations. The faculty defined the duties of the university librarian as cataloging, labeling, and shelving new acquisitions in addition to performance of secretarial work from the university library committee. He was to assist society librarians in the general care if the library and to report to the faculty flagrant violations of rules devised by a joint committee of the societies. The position carried an annual salary of $125. The student librarians supervised circulation and collected fees and fines for "Loud talking, wearing of hats, lack of proper apparel, spitting on floor, putting feet on furniture, heavy walking, smoking or eating. . . . "[43]

 

            The students and university administration continued to cooperate to upgrade the Smith Hall facility. The society book committees, presumably after consultations with the faculty, recommended books to be purchased for their collections. The three groups in the fall of 1889 contributed a total of 700 books. Books were purchased so rapidly that many old but usable volumes were removed from the shelves to make room for the new accessions.[44]

           

            Smith Hall played an increasing role as a locus for learning and research. By 1890 the university's courses were designed partly to give interested students an opportunity to utilize the library's resources. These included fewer new works of fiction and an increasing number of books in the fields of English literature, history, political science, and biography. New periodicals such as Classical Review and Modern Language Notes supplemented older journals in a variety of field. The Shakespeare Club and the Elisha Mitchell Scientific Society depended on these and other materials for their work. The editors of the North Carolina University Magazine stressed the need of students to use research tools such as Poole's Index to Periodical Literature and the vast store of information contained in the Congressional Record, Journal of the House of Representatives, and Abridgements of the Debates of Congress. They considered these ideal sources of information pertaining to debate topics.[45]

 

            In June, 1889, a nine-member committee chosen from members of the faculty and the societies agreed to select the chief librarian from among graduate students in the societies. The committee's new regulations required the librarian to open an manage the library and reading room five hours each day except Sunday. As before, the librarian supervised the conduct of the patrons and reported violations of the societies' rules. He was responsible for the repair and binding of books and for the compilation of lists of all books donated to the student collections. The agreement also required the librarian to provide reference service. The students were to maintain a staff of monitors to enforce decorum.[46]

 

            During the 1890s a trend toward control of the library by the university emerged. A conference committee of the societies suggested in April, 1891, that their collections be consolidated and classified by subject and author. Perhaps in the hope of pleasing the students, the university that summer appointed Professor Eben Alexander chief librarian. This action violated the 1889 agreement, which from 1889-1891 had resulted in the appointment of graduate students in the societies as librarian.[47] Alexander and his assistants merged the three collections physically and classified the books on a "rational basis, and catalogued [them] under the card catalogue system by subject and author." Alexander completed the project by September at a cost to each of the societies and the University of $97.00. The library sold many of the books the following year, after publishing a catalogue listing duplicates.[48]

 

            Though the students appreciated the effectiveness of Alexander's improvements, they resented the violation of the 1889 agreement. Each society in March, 1892, created a committee to inform President George Tayloe Winston that it objected to the arbitrary appointment of a member of the faculty as head librarian. The complaints had no apparent effect, for Alexander's successor in 1893, Edwin Anderson Alderman, also was a professor.[49]

 

            The most noteworthy developments of the period occurred under the leadership of Alderman, who served as librarian from 1893 to 1894 and as library supervisor from 1894 to 1896. The library for the first time maintained an accession book in which titles added to the 24,400-volume collection were recorded. The librarians minimized the purchase of fiction, buying only about 5 percent of its books in that area.[50] Moreover, the societies and the university adopted a second major contract during 1894 and 1895. The students in January and February, 1894, considered the possibility of relinquishing control of their merged collections. The three groups agreed on formal stipulations on February 23, and President Winston reported to the trustees that the societies had "donated" their joint library and had also suggested a plan for permanent endowment of the library. The agreement became effective on September 1, 1894.[51]

 

            The agreement allowed the faculty and its librarian to assume more complete control of the library, though the students were supposed to help develop policies.[52] The editors of the North Carolina University Magazine supported the agreement, stating that it would further eliminate waste in planning and purchasing. The students also approved of the concept of a qualified librarian who could instruct the students in efficient use of the library. The faculty appointed as the new university librarian Benjamin Wyche, who during the summer of 1894, had studied library management under the direction of William Isaac Fletcher, librarian of Amherst College.[53]

           

            By the beginning of the twentieth century the library faced another turning point. It contained in 1901 over 38,000 volumes, but the collection still lacked effective organization. Furthermore, Smith Hall had become so crowded that little serious work could be done there. Fortunately for the university and the students, Dr. Eben Alexander, library supervisor and chairman of the library committee, hired Louis Round Wilson as librarian. Wilson assumed control of the library in September, 1901, and with determination he began to build a research library on the foundation laid by his predecessors.[54]

 

            Wilson's first major task involved reclassifying the entire collection according to the Dewey Decimal System. With financial assistance from the societies and the university, Wilson continued the project begun during the summer of 1901 by former librarian William Stanly Bernard and his assistant, Katherine McCall, a recent graduate of the New York State Library School. Bernard and McCall had at the end of six weeks reclassified 4,000 volumes of English literature, sociology, economics, and fine arts.[55] By May, 1905, the number of re-cataloged volumes totaled 15,000, an accomplishment that was facilitated by the use of printed cards supplied by the Library of Congress and new "Library typewriting machines."[56]

 

            Twenty years of active cooperation between the students and the university ended in 1906. Wilson convinced the university that a new building was necessary if the library were to grow and serve its users as a vital part of the educational process, and President Francis Preston Venable secured from Andrew Carnegie a $55,000 matching grant for construction of a new facility and an endowment for book purchases. Before the university completed plans for the building, however, Wilson persuaded the literary societies to forfeit their option of transferring their books to the society halls from the library.[57]

 

            The university and the students supported the final contract, signed in January, 1906, as a prerequisite for further growth. Librarian Wilson sought abolition of the university's practice of returning library fees to members of the societies at the end of each school year. He observed that between 1894 and 1906 the university had refunded $6,500 in fees that could have been used for purchasing books. While acknowledging the importance of the societies' books and their assistance in re-cataloging the collection, he warned that a continuation of past policies would retard rather than foster growth. The students satisfied Wilson by agreeing to funnel annual fees into an endowment fund for books. They also relinquished the title o their books. They expressed further concern for the library by urging the university to support the facility as if it were an academic department. The societies joined Wilson in prodding the Venable administration to "do all in its power to make the Library a strong force in the University's life."[58]

 

            Wilson's effective policies and the completion in 1907 of the Carnegie Library signaled the University of North Carolina library's emergence as the leading southern state university library. The new facility represented, in the words of Wilson, a "change from a library once partaking of the nature of a museum, to a working efficient, modern instrument, which stimulated and vitalized every part of the University's endeavor."[59] The foundation on which Wilson built had slowly been laid by students working in concert with university faculty and administrators. The university continues to acknowledge this spirit of cooperation, for most new bookplates still bear the inscription, "The Library of the University of North Carolina Endowed by the Dialectic and Philanthropic Societies."

 

APPENDIX

Abstract of Agreement re Consolidation of the Dialectic and Philanthropic Societies;' Libraries with the University of North Carolina, 1886

 

[The parties agreed]

 

1.      To receive into the University Library Building the libraries of the two societies--said libraries to remain the property of the societies as heretofore

2.      To paste on the back of each book a label marked Dialectic of Philanthropic Library

3.      To bear all expense of transportation and rearrangement, with such assistance as the Society Librarians and Subs. [sublibrarians] may be able to give.

4.      That the Dialectic and Philanthropic Societies elect one Librarian each, annually, who shall attend to the Consolidated Library and shall be paid $75.00 and also

5.      That all fines for violation of Library rules be collected by the Societies & go into the Society Treasuries.

6.      That the Consolidated Library shall be open at least two hours a day and five hours Saturday for the taking out of books; and as soon as practicable all day; and that the same books may be taken out and under the same regulations as now govern the Society libraries.

7.      That the University agree to bear all expense of heating and lighting and caring for the library and to contribute not less than $200.00 a year for the purchase of books.

8.      That each Society agree to contribute not less than $150.00 a year for the purchase of books, each Society retaining the ownership of the books purchased with its money.

9.      That the books shall be selected by a joint committee of the Faculty and each Society, which committee shall have power likewise to adopt regulations to properly govern the library as necessity may arise.

10.  That if either society becomes dissatisfied with this arrangement, it may withdraw from the agreement after six months notice and the University agrees in such case to restore its books and furniture back to its hall free of charge.

11.  That the privilege of taking out books of the societies by non Society members be regulated by the Committees of the two Societies.

 

SOURCE: Faculty Minutes, March 18, 1886, University of North Carolina Library, University Archives. Copies of this agreement in the Dialectic Society Minutes (April 3, 1886) and in the Philanthropic Society Minutes (April 17, 1886), University Archives, differ slightly from the above. The transcript of the agreement in Louis Round Wilson (comp.), "Papers on the Library of the University of North Carolina, 1776-1927" (2 volumes, 1966), I, 303-305, incorporates numerous corrections in spelling punctuation, and syntax.

 

APPENDIX

Abstract of Agreement re Consolidation of the Dialectic and Philanthropic Societies' Libraries with the University of North Carolina Library, 1894-1895

 

[The parties agreed that]

 

1.      The general management of the Library shall be given to the Faculty and a "Library Fee" shall be charged to each matriculate whether in the college or professional schools. This fee shall be to the members of the Dialectic and Philanthropic Societies, the same as at present, that is two dollars per year; but may be higher to non-members, and all money thus collected shall be applied to the purchase of books and periodicals, the Faculty obligating themselves to pay the Librarian's salary, binding, and all other expenses from the funds.

2.      The Title of the Library shall be "The Library of the University of North Carolina" (Endowed by the Dialectic and Philanthropic Societies) [.] This inscription shall be placed in the books, on the stationery, in the catalogue and in all other places where the library is mentioned.

3.      There shall be appointed by the President of each Society at the same time as the annual committees, a member of the Senior Class who shall be known as the Library Director and who shall serve one year. These two students together with the Faculty Librarian shall constitute the governing board. The duties of the board shall be

·        To make the laws for the government of Library and to enforce the same.

·        To select the books and periodicals to be purchased.

·        To have all power not expressly given to others.

4.      The Librarian shall be elected by a committee of the Faculty and shall serve so long as he gives satisfaction.

5.      There shall be given annually to each Society a scholarship to be known by [the] name of [the] Society. This shall be awarded each year to some deserving person who has been a member of the Society at least one year, and in return the recipient shall assist the Librarian as he shall be needed.

6.      The Library shall be open from 8:30 am to 6:00 pm with the exception of a half hour for dinner.

7.      A catalogue of the books now belonging to each Society shall be made and preserved.

8.      If at any time two-thirds of the members of either Society shall desire that their Society withdraw from this agreement, that Society shall have the right to withdraw all books belonging to it at the present time.

9.      A legal contract shall be drawn up and signed in duplicate by the President of the University . . .and the Committees, one copy of which shall be filed in the archives and the other to be held by the President of the University.

10.  When the contract is drawn up, any article in it may be amended at any time by consent of a majority of each Society and the Faculty.

 

It is hereby mutually agreed between the Dialectic Society and the Philanthropic Societies and the University of North Carolina that the above rules shall govern the consolidation of the three libraries and shall be carried into effect.

March 22, 1895

 

Holland Thompson, Di

Fred L. Carr, Phi

Geo. T. Winston, President

Edwin A. Alderman

Supervisor of the Library

 

Committee of Di Society

C.H. White

Holland Thompson

J.L. Patterson

 

Committee of Phi Society

N. Toms

G.R. Little

F. L. Carr

 

SOURCE: This version of the 1894-1895 agreement is a conference report of the DI and Phi Societies which was transcribed into the Trustee Minutes, February 23, 1894, and accepted. See University of North Carolina Trustees Minutes, University Archives. The official signatures, shown in square brackets above, appear in the typed transcript in Louis R. Wilson (comp.), 'Papers on the Library of the University of North Carolina, 1776-1927," (2 volumes, 1966), I, 305-309. The official agreement apparently has not survived.

 

APPENDIX

Abstract of Agreement re Consolidation of the Dialectic and Philanthropic Societies' Libraries with the University of North Carolina Library, 1906

 

[The parties agreed that]

 

1.      The University shall administer the Library as a department of the University and shall do all in its power to make the Library a strong force in the University's life.

2.      The University shall use the money received after 1905-6 from the Societies as an endowment fund for the general library, and shall complete, with as great dispatch as possible, the work of recataloguing which has bee aided by the Societies during the past four years.

3.      The University shall award annually a scholarship to one member of each society. The recipient shall be a capable, deserving student who has been a Society member for two years at least. He shall be chosen  by his Society, his election being subject to the approval of the University, and he shall assist in the Library as at present. His additional reward for services shall be $35 per year as at present.

4.      Beginning with the session 1906-7 the Societies shall not receive a further return of the Library fees imposed by the University upon matriculates, and shall make their endowment of March 22, 1895, complete.

5.      Each Society shall appoint annually a member of the Senior Class or a post-graduate to be known as the Library director. The duties of these directors shall be to confer with the President of the University, or the Library committee, or the Librarian relative to matters which affect alike the interests of the Societies and the Library.

6.      The name of the Library shall be, as at present, The Library of the University of North Carolina, Endowed by the Dialectic and philanthropic Societies. This inscription shall appear in the University Catalogue, upon the Library letter paper, upon the book plates of all new books purchased for the general Library, and in all places where the name of the Library is mentioned.

7.      This agreement shall be duly passed by the Societies, signed by their Conference Committees and the President of the University, and shall go into effect at the beginning of the academic year, 1906-7. Three copies shall be made to be filed by the parties to the agreement.

 

Francis P. Venable

For University of North Carolina

 

Di Society                        Phi Society

W.L. Mann                        John A. Parker

T. B. Higdon                        T. W. Dickson

Stahle Linn                        W.H. Pittman

 

 

SOURCE: Louis R. Wilson (comp.), "Papers on the Library of the University of North Carolina 1776-1927" (2 volumes, 1966), I, 311-313. In his notes concerning this agreement, Wilson stated that his handwritten document was modified in the negotiation and signed January 13, 1906. Wilson's preliminary, handwritten copy of the agreement will be found in the North Carolina Collection, University of North Carolina Library, catalogued under "N.C. --University--Dialectic Society. Articles of agreement between the Dialectic society and the Philanthropic society and the University of North Carolina [1865-1906]. (VCp027.7/N87u." A rough copy of this agreement was transcribed in the Philanthropic Society Minutes, University Archives, as of December 11, 1905; no copy was found in the Dialectic Society, Faculty, or Trustees Minutes.