GIRARD'S AND MIDDLETON'S SCHEMES. 779 HISTORIOGRAPHY; IV. PHILOSOPHY; V. PHILOLOGY; VI. 1. Discipline. (i.) Christian; (ii.) Nétéronome. 2. Civil Law. (i.) Politics; (ii.) Jurisprudence. 3. Corporology. (i.) Cenobitical; (ii.) Associative. 4. Ethicology. (i.) Treatises on Morals; (ii.) Characters. 5. Thesmology. (i.) Usages: (ii) Modes. 6. Praxetonomy. (i.) Ediology (Domestic Economy); (ii.) Ludicro logy (Games of Chance, &c.) Whimsically absurd as this scheme may appear, it has not been without imitators. BOOK III. Chapter II. Classificatory Systems. ton's Scheme. In 1723, Dr. Conyers Middleton submitted to the Conyers MiddleSenate of the University of Cambridge a Scheme for the classification of the University Library, which by various munificent gifts had recently been much enlarged. The following were the principal divisions: Class I.-THEOLOGY: 1. Holy Bible. 2. Hermeneutics. 6. Mystical Theology. 7. Hortatory Theology. 3. Greek and Latin Fa- 9. Councils; Canon and thers. 4. Scholastic Theology. Pontifical Law. 10. Sacred and Ecclesias 5. Moral Theology. tical History. 5. History of the Western Class VIII.-POLITE LITE Empire. 6. History of the Saracens RATURE: 1. Works of Orators. 2. Works of Poets. 7. History of Particular 3. Works of Letter-writ This publication had the result-singular for a prelection on so harmless a topic-of subjecting its author to a prosecution for libel, but of other result it seems 2 Bibliothecæ Cantabrigiensis ordinandæ methodus. (Miscell. Works, iv, 74-82. 8vo. London, 1755). 2 At the time of its appearance, it may be remembered, the vexed question respecting the right of appeal from decisions of the Vice-Chan BOOK III. Chapter II. Systems. to have been barren. The present University Librarian, Mr. Power, stated in his reply to the questions of the Classificatory recent Commission of Inquiry into the state of Cambridge University, that "the books are not arranged generally in classes," and that "there is no classed catalogue of this Library;" and he adds, somewhat too sweepingly, "the formation of such a catalogue would be very laborious and expensive, and its use is very much superseded by such books as Brunet's Manuel du Libraire, Watt's Bibliotheca Britannica, &c." Even if these books could themselves be fairly placed in the category of "classed catalogues," it is not very easy to perceive in what way they could be used as substitutes for the proper catalogues of an individual Library. As I have said already, the minor modifications which Marchand introduced into the bibliographical system of Bouillaud were received with more favour than were those cruder innovations which he embodied in the Faultrier catalogue. Gabriel Martin adopted the former in most of the catalogues which he published between the years 1711 and 1760-a series then certainly unprecedented in the annals of bookselling-and De Bure followed in the same track. The result of their successive labours has since been designated "the system. of the Paris booksellers," and its main divisions run thus: Modifications of the scheme of Bouillaud by Martin and De Bure, resulting in the "Scheme of the Paris booksellers." cellor or Senate to the Courts of Law at Westminster was hotly disputed, and a sentence in Middleton's dedication was construed into a contempt of the jurisdiction in question. 1 Report of Cambridge University Commissioners, 1852. (Evid., 57.) 2. Rhetoric. 3. Poetry. 5. Polygraphy. mena. 2. Geography. 4. Ecclesiastical History. 8. Antiquities. 9. Literary History and Bibliography. 10. Biography. 11. Historical Extracts. This is the system of which Charles Nodier has said, "It is simple, clear, easy. It can include, without strain, all the capricious and innumerable sub-divisions which it has pleased human fancy to introduce into the literary form of books;" and (which appears to me of still more importance) it is embodied in catalogues which have become classics in their kind. CHARACTERISTICS OF THE ENUMERATED SCHEMES. 783 BOOK III. Chapter II. Systems. Essential chathe Schemes racteristics of hitherto enumer ated. All the Schemes which have been particularized, however diversified in their respective details, may be Classificatory grouped, I think, in one or other of two classes; the first of which aims at the systematic and consecutive arrangement of all human knowledge, in accordance with some theory either of the power and functions of the mind itself, or of the order and sequence in which the phenomena of the material world may be conceived to present themselves to its contemplation; and the second of which, with far humbler pretensions, seeks but to assort after some convenient and manageable fashion the instruments of knowledge for ordinary employment and daily use. The system-maker, in the former case, aspires to solve some of the problems which have occupied and divided metaphysicians in all ages; in the latter, he is content if he be found to have facilitated the buying and selling, the shelving and the finding of books, by all who handle them or seek them, whether their quest be for the Dialogues of Plato, or for the last edition of the favorite Cookery Book. I am far from contending that it is necessary to apply to catalogues precisely the same rules as to that avoidance of subtle distinctions, and complex subdivisions, which will be found indispensable in the actual arrangement of books on their shelves. Whatever plan may be adopted, it is certain that a good catalogue will require a much more minute classification than would be either useful or practicable in the presses of a Library. It is also certain that the preferability of one plan over another will greatly depend on the character and contents of the collection which has to be |