NO. I ETHNOGEOGRAPHIC BOARD BENNETT 57 



mation shows immediately that the most extensive use of the service 

 was made by the Navy and the Army, particularly the Intelligence 

 Divisions. This can probably be attributed to the facts that the Board 

 itself was most eager to serve these organizations, that the War and 

 Navy Departments had the greatest needs for the area information, 

 and that effective liaison was established from the beginning. All the 

 emergency agencies made some use of the Board, principally in re- 

 spect to personnel. Some of the civilian agencies did likewise but 

 with less frequency. Outside of Government there were occasional 

 requests from the Councils and the universities, and, rarely, an in- 

 dividual scholar. Again the outside requests were generally about 

 personnel. On the whole the academic institutions had their own 

 facilities for seeking bibliographical and factual information, and 

 it is doubtful that the Board would have cared to handle many 

 such requests for them. 



The staff itself, with its Area Roster and information files, an- 

 swered most of the questions. The Smithsonian's staff was second 

 as a source of answers. In fact, many of the questions that were 

 channeled through the Board would probably have reached the 

 Smithsonian in any event. The Sponsors, particularly the American 

 Council of Learned Societies, furnished the answers to some ques- 

 tions, and the cooperating committees handled a few. Only rarely 

 was the Board forced to seek an answer outside of Washington. 

 This can be interpreted either as a tribute to the versatility of the 

 staff or as a reflection on the complexity of the questions. The 

 former is naturally more flattering. 



Evaluation 



This description of the information service seems in many ways 

 like an account of the 3 years' experience of a group of good ref- 

 erence librarians. In fact, some of the large museums might match 

 the quality, quantity, and variety of the requests, and show an equally 

 good record of obtaining answers. In over-all review, some of the 

 questions were petty, some vague, and some a reflection of laziness on 

 the part of the asker. Few questions really taxed the resources of the 

 Board and its Sponsors. A majority of the questions could undoubt- 

 edly have been answered with equal competence in a dozen other 

 places, particularly with the aid of an Area Roster similar to the 

 Board's. Was there, then, a need for this service? 



The answer lies again in wartime Washington. To be sure there 

 were a dozen places where a question might be answered, and the 

 5 



