At Columbia University the office of each professor is in telephonic communication with the central library. When a book is wanted the library is notified by telephone, the book is found and sent out at once. Within ten minutes from the time that the request reaches the library the book is generally in the instructor's hands. He may lose two or three minutes' time, but the amount lost is more than compensated by the readiness with which others can use the books of the department, and by other advantages to be considered later. At Columbia, too, the system of stack study rooms provides in a very satisfactory way for the second objection. There, as many of you have seen, the stacks are distributed through a series of small rooms, the light side of which is supplied with tables and used for study rooms and for seminar purposes. If the instructor can use the departmental library for his work room, he can certainly use this room to as good advantage, for here he has the entire collection and not a selected few of his books. I believe fully that an instructor who is sufficiently interested in the reading of his students to watch over it carefully in his departmental library, will find that he is able to keep just as close a relation to it, if his students are working in a central library. He may be obliged to make slight changes in his methods, but the result ought to be the same. The third argument in favor of the departmental library system is of a different nature. Is the librarian or the professor best qualified to direct the growth and watch over the interests of the different departments of the library? So far as I know, this argument is given more consideration at Chicago than anywhere else. It may be true, in certain cases, that the professor has the greater qualification for this work, but when this is the case it argues that the professor is an exceptional one or that the university has been unfortunate in the selection of its librarian. It is quite needless to say that the librarian should be in constant conference with the teaching force regarding purchases, but that he should delegate all of his powers of purchase in any given field, admits of the gravest doubt. Laude, in his recent work on the university library system of Germany, attributes a great deal of the success of those libraries to the fact that they are independent and autonomous institutions, enjoying a much greater measure of freedom than is accorded to any similar American institution. Too many professors are apt to buy books in their special field and slight other lines of research in their own subject. For example, a zoologist, who is doing research work along the lines of embryology, is very apt to overload the collection at that point and neglect other equally important lines.