It is not suggested that all out-of-print books should be reprinted, nor do we suggest that the fact that a book has appeared in many library catalogues is conclusive evidence of its permanence; but there are certainly numbers of books which are frequently mentioned in other books, or in the newspapers, which have been allowed to run out of print; and the combined efforts of librarians might induce publishers to republish these. Usually speaking, however, the fact that a book has remained out of print for more than a year or two is evidence of the absence of public demand for it, and seeing that novel-writing is probably at a higher general level now than at any earlier period (in spite of the lack of individual Fieldings or Jane Austens), we are of opinion that such out-of-print books may be withdrawn from the library records, and the gaps left made good by more modern works of equal merit and greater popularity. After all, and especially so far as imaginative literature is concerned--and these remarks apply almost exclusively to that--it is no part of the work of the library to revive what public opinion, the soundest _ultimate_ guide, has permitted to perish; more especially as booksellers charge exaggerated prices for out-of-print novels, whatever their merit may be. In the case of some of the older books which form landmarks in literary history, it is absolutely necessary to have well-edited modern reprints for the benefit of the students who are being formed in every school in the kingdom. Books which are purchased to replace worn-out copies need not receive new numbers, but may be given the numbers of the books which they replace. =188. Doubtful Books.=--Censorship on books admitted into public libraries has been exercised much more frequently and rigorously in the United States than in the United Kingdom. Instances are common in both countries of books being excluded for sectarian or political reasons by Public Library Committees. Any action of this kind on the part of a Public Library Committee should be confined to protecting junior readers from coming into contact with demoralizing literature, and preventing the library from becoming a dumping-ground for feeble and trashy books of all kinds. No one can object to a committee electing to sit in judgment on any book which may be thought to endanger public decency, or inculcate ideas of morality counter to those generally adopted, but such explorations in search of the improper should not be confined to fiction. The question of buying certain _free_ classics, such as Rabelais and Boccaccio, is quite another matter. All libraries ought to possess them, provided reasonable means are taken to keep them out of the hands of the immature reader. As regards what constitutes maturity, every library authority will doubtless frame its own rules.