FURTHER REMARKS ON THE POLICY OF LENDING BODLEIAN PRINTED BOOKS AND MANUSCRIPTS. BY HENRY W. CHANDLER, M.A. FELLOW OF PEMBROKE COLLEGE, OXFORD; WAYNFLETE PROFESSOR OF MORAL AND METAPHYSICAL PHILOSOPHY, AND A CURATOR OF THE BODLEIAN LIBRARY. Oxford: B. H. BLACKWELL, 50 AND 51, BROAD STREET. 1887. Price Sixpence. _Further Remarks on the Policy of Lending Bodleian printed Books and Manuscripts._ There are several reasons why it is in the highest degree improbable that I should take any part in the debate on the Bodleian Statute, but I reserve the right to handle in my own fashion any arguments that may be used, and to supplement, if need be, any facts or supposed facts that may be brought forward during the discussion. Those who are in favour of changing the whole character of the Bodleian, and who wish to convert it from a library of reference into a library of circulation, do not seem to feel much confidence in the strength of their case; at all events, they have made no serious attempt to meet the facts and arguments with which they are confronted, but show a disposition to wander off into side issues of little or no importance. Before examining the letters of Mr. Sanday, Mr. Ellis, and Dr. Rost (as far as I know the only advocates of lending that have yet ventured into print), it may be well to add some further evidence on the lending system, which was omitted from the ‘Remarks’ by inadvertence. The Advocates’ Library is, as we all know, a lending library, and in 1852, or thereabouts, the librarian informed Dr. Bandinel that they had already _lost_ nearly _seven thousand_ works. In 1849 Mr. Maitland told a Committee of the House of Commons that ‘all the ordinary readable books, for which there is a great demand, are now reduced into a state and condition so bad that it is perfectly disgraceful’; and he was of opinion that ‘the only satisfactory and practical reform in the Advocates’ Library would be to put an end to the circulation of the books.’ Mr. Panizzi--a splendid librarian and a man with a head on his shoulders--addressed a string of queries to thirty-six large continental libraries, and asked, _inter alia_, whether they lent their books, whether those books were in consequence lost or damaged, whether the practice was complained of, and whether readers were inconvenienced by it. Six libraries out of the thirty-six never lent under any circumstances whatever; thirteen returned either no answer or no clear answer as to the consequences of the practice; _three_ (the Public Library at Basle, the University Library at Turin, and St.