l. 1, while Money
is in Vol. 3; and for Wages, one must go to Vol. 5, while Labor is in
Vol. 3. But there are two valid reasons for this. First, the reader who
wants to know about banks or wages may care nothing about the larger
topics of money or of labor; and secondly, if he does want them, he is
sent to them at once by cross-reference, where they belong in the
alphabet; whereas, if they were grouped under Political Economy, as in
classed catalogues, he must hunt for them through a maze of unrelated
books, without any alphabet at all.

It is often forgotten by the advocates of systematic subject catalogues
rather than alphabetical ones, that catalogues are for those who do not
know, more than for those who do. The order of the alphabet is settled
and familiar; but no classification by subjects is either familiar or
settled. Catalogues should aim at the greatest convenience of the
greatest number of readers.

It is noteworthy that the English Catalogue (the one national
bibliography of the current literature of that country) has adopted,
since 1891, the dictionary form of recording authors, titles and subjects
in one alphabet, distinguishing authors' names by antique type. It is
hoped that the American Catalogue, an indispensable work in all
libraries, will adopt in its annual and quinquennial issues the
time-saving method of a single alphabet.

It is not claimed that the dictionary catalogue possesses fully all the
advantages in educating readers that the best classed catalogues embody.
But the chief end of catalogues being to find books promptly, rather than
to educate readers, the fact that the dictionary catalogue, though far
from perfect, comes nearer to the true object than any other system,
weighs heavily in its favor. Edward Edwards said--"Many a reader has
spent whole days in book-hunting [in catalogues] which ought to have been
spent in book-reading." It is to save this wasted time that catalogues
should aim.

Nothing can be easier than to make a poor catalogue, while nothing is
more difficult than to make a good one. The most expert French
bibliographers who have distinguished themselves by compiling catalogues
have been most severely criticised by writers who no doubt would have
been victimized in their turn if they had undertaken similar work. Byron
says

"A man must serve his time to every trade,
Save censure;--critics all are ready made."

When De Bure and Van Praet, most accomplished bi