by Paul R. Spitzzeri
Continuing our delving into the 1904 report from the Los Angeles City Auditor, we look next at the public library, which was established over thirty years earlier with a board of trustees that included Thomas W. Temple, eldest child of Antonia Margarita Workman and F.P.F. Temple. The board of directors for 1903-1904 included Rabbi Sigmund Hecht, of the Reform denomination of Judaism and who was the fifth rabbi at the Congregation B’nai B’rith, serving in that position from 1899-1919; Willoughby Rodman, a lawyer who, in 1909, wrote a history of attorney and judges in Los Angeles; and Isidore B. Dockweiler, a native Angeleno who was also an attorney and a powerful figure in the Democratic Party in the early 20th century.
The staff included librarian Mary L. Jones, who assumed the role in 1900 and whose controversial firing five years later was followed by the hiring of the well-known literary figure (and eccentric) Charles Fletcher Lummis, and assistants Celia Gleason and Nora A. Miller, while the dozen department heads, twenty-eight attendants and nine substitutes were all women. In addition to the main library, which was packed into insufficient space in the City Hall on Broadway between 2nd and 3rd street (and which was already too small for municipal purposes, but continued in that role until the current City Hall opened in April 1928), there was a recently opened newspaper room at the Chamber of Commerce.
In addition, there were eight branches, including at Garvanza, bordering Pasadena; East Los Angeles, soon to be renamed Lincoln Heights; Boyle Heights; on Central Avenue east of Exposition Park; south of that at Vernon Avenue; on Washington Boulevard east of Hoover Street; north of the Plaza; and in Pico Heights; and in Pico Heights along Pico Boulevard west of downtown. There were also delivery stations in East Los Angeles and the Hollenbeck Home for the Aged in Boyle Heights.
The board report noted that Hecht and Rodman were recent additions, having been appointed after the resignations of their predecessors. It added that the prior June, the Board of Education agreed to allow the use of a store room at the Grand Avenue School for keeping of part of a school library, which assisted in loans to students as well as “relieved the congestion which has constituted the only serious obstacle encountered by the library staff.” It also thanked the Chamber of Commerce for the “commodious room” provided for newspaper reading by patrons.
In letting the City Council know that the number of volumes in the library’s holdings reached 110,000, the Board observed that a milestone was passed, at 100,000, that “has been considered as entitling an institution to be classed among the large libraries of the country.” In fact, it was proudly noted that Los Angeles had a larger library than almost two dozen cities with bigger populations, while circulation topped 750,000, an indicator of “a degree of intelligence and culture” in the Angel City.
The board also felt it necessary to correct an assumption that “the library is a repository and source of circulation of trashy or ephemera fiction alone,” but it hastened to add that “such is not the case” as the librarian’s report showed circulation of some 270,000 volumes of fiction but over 480,000 of non-fiction, while the former was only a little more than a third of the total. Moreover, “the shelves containing works of fiction are not open to the public, the books are taken from the library and read at home,” while works of history, science, travel and others were readily available to patrons at the facilities, while most use of these were not recorded as circulating. It was also observed that “the reading of novels is not necessarily injurious” and that the best of fiction works could be considered educational, while “trashy” works were removed and new ones excluded from acquisition.
The directors also exhorted the council to act on the “urgent and immediate” need for more space and that an additional 50,000 square feet was required beyond the existing 14,000 just for current volume. Additionally, for serious students of economics, history, science and suchlike, a rule prohibiting use of shelf space was generally overlooked as “the reference room is manifestly inadequate to the demands upon it” as “readers and students are so closely crowded together as to be uncomfortable.” On the 1st of December, it was decided to remove illustrated magazines and papers from the reference room because readers of those “do so simply for the purpose of amusement” and interfered with those engrossed in “serious study.”
It was also stated that the voters at the last election gave approval for a new structure in Central Park, renamed Pershing Square after World War I” and the board members “respectfully recommend[ed]” that the city immediately begin work on the edifice. A problem was that the municipality had $200,000 in unsold bonds, while local banks that purchased $1.4 million in sewer and storm drain bonds were only able to find buyers for half that amount. While the board thanked Jones and her assistants for a “clear, elaborate and thorough” report and stated appreciation for “the capable and efficient manner” in which they “discharged their respective duties,” her firing later in 1905 belied these words.
As to Jones’ report, the sixteenth annual one submitted to the council following the reorganization of the city and the establishment of its charter in 1888 when William H. Workman was mayor, she began with a financial statement, which noted total receipts of $56,000. This included a small balance of $550, apportionments from the city of just north of $50,000, fines of above $2,300 and other incidental revenue.
Expenses, however, were actually less than that, leaving a petty cash balance of not far under $500. Not surprisingly almost half of the expenditures comprised salaries for the library staff and janitors, while book and periodical purchases and binding comprised about 42%. Rent for five branches, furniture, insurance, printing, supplies and other items made up the balance.
As to the holdings, there were just shy of 97,000 volumes as of 1 December 1903 and nearly 15,000 added (still over 1,900 fewer than in the prior year) in the reporting year, though over 200 were lost (80% paid for), so the total was above 110,000. Also added were 633 periodicals (for a total of well more than 7,000), five maps (with 675 in the collection), and 998 pictures (above 7,500 in all). In addition to the binding of nearly 9,000 of the new items, with another 4,300 in preparation, there were north of 53,000 repairs made to volumes. Of the acquisitions, more than a quarter came from a school fund, while 286 were gifts and 600 were public documents, with the residue paid for from the book fund, and Jones commented that the library’s rate of acquisition was beyond that of most libraries of its size.
The librarian did note that “the supply does not keep up with the demand” and that there was “the constant complaint at the library that books called for are not upon the shelves,” though she stopped to praise the binding department, only fifteen months in existence, noting that almost 3,000 of the items so handled were periodicals and nearly 6,800 works of fiction. A reorganization of work areas also meant that crowded conditions were somewhat relieved, including the move of cataloging to a separate space and an attic room set aside for binding.
For circulation, adult fiction rose slightly, about 2%, but juvenile fiction leapt by 17%, while general classes of materials increased by about 20% and there was a small decline in magazines. At the branches, circulation nearly doubled to almost 104,000, compared to 750,000 at the central library, and pictures were checked out at a rate of 80% higher. The busiest day out of 301 in the system was 26 November at nearly 7,700 items, while the slowest was 11 February with 765. It may not be surprising that women comprised 62% of borrowers and the total number of card holders surpassed 25,000, but it was added that the attempt to count readers or materials used in libraries was given up as hopeless.
A notable fact mentioned by Jones was that there was a significant decline in circulation during the summer because “the floors of the city hall . . . showed signs of weakening from the excess of weight placed upon them” and the publicity led to a slowing in visitation. When, in August and September, iron piers were installed from the foundation to the attic, this continued to limit patronage. The librarian also discussed the closing of the fiction section because of the lack of space, though new novels and other works were placed on a tray for visitors until a change in policy about the “trashy” fiction led to the display of works “above the average in merit.” Proudly, Jones noted that, while Los Angeles was the 36th largest city in the nation (it is now second after New York City), the library was 12th in circulation among U.S. libraries.
In the School and Juvenile section, it was noted that there were almost 13,500 volumes in the school portion with another nearly 3,800 added in the reporting year, while juvenilia began with 18,500 and added almost 2,500 more, for a grant total of just about 38,200. As for pictures, 475 were added to bring the total to short of 3,600. School circulation topped 231,000 and juvenile numbers were over 77,000 in the main library and just south of 37,000 in the branches, with more than 345,000 combined.
Jones reported that “nowhere is the crowded condition of the library felt more than in the children’s room,” noting the main library space was all of 1,120 square feet,” which is why the Grand Avenue Elementary space was so badly needed as 10,000 volumes were moved there. There were, however, restrictions on access to children to some shelved areas, these being available to teachers and, sometimes, parents, though the librarian countered that there was more selectivity in the acquisition of books and a consequent improvement in quality. She suggested that, even if the old system was possible, if would likely not be reintroduced because “this process of exclusion has worked with such success.”
For the reference and reading room, almost 2,700 volumes were added during the year bringing the total to over 26,000, while 523 pictures acquired increased the grand total to just shy of 3,300. Over 850 magazines and 90 newspapers were also in the holdings. Jones stated that “the circulating departments encroach more and more upon the reading rooms, and the space for readers is constantly being taken for the storage of books.” Though the Chamber of Commerce agreed to house newspapers, she noted that “the public complain of its inconvenience” in having to go to a separate location. A basement document room was “declared unfit for readers and attendants, there being no means of ventilation except through one small door,” so a page had to bring materials to the third floor reading room for viewing.”
The librarian went into some detail about specific collections, including on irrigation in the Southwest, the Municipal Art Commission, California writers and others, while the photo collection was well augmented. Not knowing who her successor would be, Jones credited Lummis with his work on acquiring materials on “Spanish American” history, including typed copies of otherwise unavailable items.
With respect to the branches, two were opened during the year, including one on Washington Street in June and the other on East Main Street the following month—these were “supported by the citizens of their respective neighborhoods during the probationary year, so far as incidental expenses go.” The Boyle Heights and Pico Heights (this latter in a business building) were just out of their probation periods with all operational costs assumed by the library system, while, in December, the Garvanza branch moved to a dedicated structure, which applied in November to the Central Avenue facility. With five-year leases in place, it was assumed that, by the end of the term, “each will have outgrown its respective accommodations.”
The oldest of the branches, on Macy Street, opened 5 1/2 years previously, while the Central Avenue was launched three years ago, Vernon just shy of that period, and Garvanza opened 2 1/2 years prior. Jones compared the branches to libraries in such outlying areas as Anaheim, Covina, Long Beach, Orange, Pomona, Redlands, San Pedro, South Pasadena and Whittier. There were, however, two delivery stations that closed, at Hoover Street and the Westlake neighborhood, leaving the two at the Hollenbeck Home and in East Los Angeles, though this latter was on the verge of being shuttered. There were loaning programs with the fire department, Los Angeles Coffee Club, the Stimson Lafayette Industrial School and the Third Presbyterian Sunday School.
With respect to administration, Jones reported on a reorganization in February 1904, with the abolishment of night, branch and half-day attendants and the rescheduling of staff accordingly, so that the reconstituted attendants worked 42 hours per week, with no one working more than five nights weekly and night hours beginning at six instead of five. Also changed were branch hours, with all but Macy Street, which was open for just two hours, operating for six and an attendant worked three days at a branch and three eight-hour shifts at the main library to get to the hours mentioned above. Personnel changes, the giving of a pair of civil service exams, and the 17th edition of a training class for fifteen women were also mentioned, as was the three-person janitorial staff.
Jones concluded her report with the observation that the library almost doubled in size in volume and circulation since 1900, while the number staff rose from 31 to 44, almost half brought in during that time. After discussing changes in salary, she added,
The difficulties under which the members of the library staff perform their work are greater each year and I am glad of an opportunity to commend them for the cheerful and efficient discharge of their duties.
She added that she and attendant Grace White went to the St. Louis conference of the American Library Association and then thanked the board “for the cordial support and co-operation . . . in the administration of the library for the past year.” Appendices included a table on the types of works acquired, with more than 20,000 being juvenile fiction, almost 10,500 being documents and above 9,700 comprising magazines, while works of literature, language, history, travel, social science and science involving significant numbers of new works.
For circulation, 36% were adult fiction works, 14% were juvenile fiction (so half in the aggregated category), and large numbers were magazines and works involving language, history, literature, science, social science and travel. For school specifically, language was far and away the most popular subject, at a third of the total, with history, science and fiction combined just a small amount more. For juvenile circulation, fiction reigned supreme at about a third of the total, and language at about a quarter, while history, science and social science combined being about a quarter. The busiest month of the year was October with almost 83,000 circulation and the slowest was July, with August very close, but, again, the low amounts of about 46,000 each were due to the structural issues at city hall mentioned above.
An interesting comparative statement from 1889 to 1904 showed circulation at 48,300 with 18,000 volumes in 1889-1890 and, while volumes doubled by 1893, circulation jumped nearly six times. By 1900, there were 60,000 volumes and over 390,000 items in circulation. Lists of donors, periodicals, and weekly and daily newspapers rounded out the roster of appendices. This report is another great contribution from the broader document, showing the state of the public library system in a rapidly growing urban area at the turn of the 20th century—it also provokes thought about the future of the library as we move toward the end of the first quarter of our own century and remarkable transformations in information systems.