4 22 psocezdinos or the eciziranc association. 
mittee that “it was nothing more than what was already 
conceded to the public by the regulations of the Library.* ' 
This decision, of which I have given the very words, whilst 
'admitting that the apjdicants could have admission as any 
one could, conveys a false impression in two ways : Pirst, 
it ignores the vexatious renewal of ticket every three 
months, necessary under the Lib rary regulations : Second 
it conveys the idea, that that which is a public right, ac- 
knowledged in the Ordinance constituting the Library, is a 
concession to the public. I would not quarrel with words 
unnecessarily ; but I think that in this matter the words 
lead to wrong inferences, and the appearance of grudging 
to the public the privilege of reading in the Library seems 
to have had prejudicial effect. At any rate tne practice of 
our Library is anything but encour aging to readers : the 
general impression being that no one but subscribers have 
a right of admission into the Library. It should hence* 
forth be a recognised principle of the Library manage- 
ment, that the use of the institution is primarily designod 
for readers, and not for subscribers. The benefit of the 
former should be studied in preference to that of the latter. 
In fact the reason for retaining the class of subscribers is 
merely the greater convenience found by many in having 
ths books at their own houses. For this privilege they 
should pay a subscription. Bearing howover in mind that 
the subscribers are not the class for whoso exclusive or 
principal benefit the Library was founded and is main- 
tained, I should recommend that they should elect a fixed 
number not exceeding four of the members of the Board of 
Directors. It would indeed bo far better that the sub- 
scription should bo abolished altogether, than that the 
'benefits of so useful a public institution should be confined 
to a favored few. 
