Those of you who know me know that I’m an “unreported documents” nerd and have LONG advocated that it is every government information librarian’s duty to hunt for and send “unreported documents” to the Government Publishing Office (GPO) so that they can capture and catalog them for inclusion in the National Collection of U.S. Government Public Information. Heck, I’ve even written a guide to unreported publications with step by step instructions and wrote an article titled: “‘Issued for Gratuitous Distribution:’ The History of Fugitive Documents and the FDLP” in a special issue of Against the Grain: “Ensuring Access to Government Information” (29(6) December 2017/January 2018).
So that’s why I was particularly interested in the research that my friend and colleague Marie Concannon at University of Missouri Library recently shared with the regional librarians Listserv (and me!) about the history of the printing of Congressional hearings and their distribution (or lack thereof!) to FDLP libraries. It turns out Congressional hearings were not distributed to FDLP libraries as part of the FDLP until 1939! I’ll let Marie take over from here (posted with her permission!):
I recently discovered that hearings first became available for distribution to depository libraries in 1939.
What this means is that hearings pre-dating 1939 are not federal property, and are not subject to FDLP rules. For us today, that means selectives are not actually required to offer these items to their regionals. However, before anyone starts rampant weeding, let’s remember that these are among the rarest of titles in government collections, and well worth saving and/or digitizing.
In his 1939 book Government Publications and Their Use, Laurence F. Schmeckebier explained why congressional hearings had initially been ineligible for depository distribution. Simply put, they were not publications of either chamber of Congress, so the 1895 Printing Act missed them. Orders for hearings were placed by the committees themselves, which wanted copies primarily for their own use. They typically ordered a few extra copies for handing out, but the total number would have been very few. The “inadequate methods of distribution,” Schmeckebier noted, made these hearings “the most elusive.” (page 155).
Librarians could obtain hearings, but it took effort. Some would write to their own congressional delegates to ask for copies. Some might have contacted committees directly. An article in the August 1936 ALA Bulletin (Vol. 30 #8, page 742, Report of the Public Documents Committee, the precursor to ALA Government Documents Round Table (GODORT)) said that congressional hearings were “vital publications being denied” to depository libraries, regretting that they could “be obtained by depository libraries only upon subscription.” [JRJ: interestingly, both Laurence Schmeckebier and GPO Superintendent of Documents Alton Tisdel were in attendance at that meeting! Tisdel submitted his report “Processed Material and Depository Libraries” which was later published as part of the serial Public documents … Papers presented at the 1936 conference of the American Library Association (p.36-47). Marie kindly scanned Tisdel’s piece for me so I’m making it available here on FGI. But do check out that volume, there are some really interesting and useful pieces in it!]
The subscription aspect was not spelled out, but the 1934 Annual Report of the Public Printer indicates that some were available to purchase in those early days. ALA’s 1938 edition of “Public Documents” corroborates this in an article reporting on the successful passage of H.R. 5471 in 1938, announcing that “for the first time, congressional hearings shall be distributed to depository libraries without charge.” Whatever path librarians took to acquire hearings before 1939, it was clearly a lot of work.
I imagine that all regional librarians know that some gov docs in their SuDoc collections did not come through the FDLP. I’ve never found a universally efficient way to tell these apart from the depository materials. One way to see what was included in the early FDLP is to check prior editions of the “List of Classes.” The title varied over time. The edition most relevant to the 1930s was titled: Classified list of United States government publications available for selection by depository libraries, December 31, 1935. Yet even tools like previous “Lists of Classes” do not always make it easy to mentally capture the broad categories. Congressional hearings may be an exception, because it’d easy to keep a mental note that hearings came into the program in 1939.
Now, for the references. The inclusion of hearings in the FDLP was made possible through H.R. bill 5471, introduced on March 9, 1937 in the 75th Congress, 1st session. It was signed by the President on June 25, 1938 and went into effect in January 1939. It carried the title “To amend the laws relating to the distribution of public documents to depository libraries” and was published in the U.S. Statutes at Large (52 Stat. 1206).
If you read these materials, you’ll see that there was a great deal of concern about “processed documents” being missed for FDLP distribution, and librarians wanted them. “Processed” meant that the copy was made on a duplication machine, not in a professional print shop. Duplication equipment at the time would be something like an early mimeograph or ditto machine. This bill allowed congressional committee hearings to become eligible for FDLP distribution, but it didn’t make allowance for processed materials. The language of the 1895 law clearly specified print shops. So, “unreported” documents have truly been a problem for generations!
I hope you find this historical information helpful. As the library world moves forward, more institutions may feel the “squeeze” to reduce the size of collections. De-duplication and shared print decisions will probably become a more significant aspect of our jobs as regional librarians.
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike 4.0 International License.