Hicks Classification System

Hicks Classification System

The Hicks Classification System is a locally developed classification system used, in some libraries, for early primary source material, such as statutes and reports, in American and British law. The Hicks scheme or system is used, in general, in law libraries (mainly, in the Yale law library, where the scheme was created), for original material only; reprints of early material are classed, in those law libraries, using the Dewey classification system or the Library of Congress scheme.

Classification in a Modern Law School Library

The following was written by Frederick C. Hicks, in “Cataloguing and Classification in a Modern Law School Library” (1932, Faculty Scholarship Series, Paper 4707):

“What are the purposes of library classification? Answer: To enable readers and staff easily to find (a) specific books known to be in the library; and (b) groups of books brought together for convenient consultation.

How many kinds of classification schemes is it possible to devise? Answer: As many kinds as there are criteria of similarity in law books. Chief of these criteria are subject matter, political division and form of issue. The choice of the criteria, which determine the classification, should be made wholly on the basis of convenience. Subject classification is only one of the kinds of classification. It may be used for one class of books, political division classification for another, and form classification for another, in the same library.

All bound sets of periodicals, for example, merely because they are issued at stated intervals in a recognized format may make up one broad classification group; or they may be divided into sections, by subjects to which they relate, or they may be divided by country of issue, or by language, or the periodicals on such a topic as international law, may be withdrawn to be put with books on international law. Whichever is done, the sets are being classified by a system, either simple or more or less complex.

What is the relation between card catalogues and classification? Answer: They are complementary. To be in two places at the same time is a feat equally difficult for books and men. It is impossible, for example, to put one and the same copy of a book both in a general alphabet of treatises, and in a subject group of works on contracts. Without duplication of books you have to choose one of your shelf classification divisions and put your book physically there. But cards representing this book may be duplicated as often as you please, and they may thus, in your catalogue, provide numerous avenues of approach to information about the book.

In a library of 400,000 volumes, what device is essential in order that the catalogue and the classification scheme may complement each other in a practical manner, without dependence on human memory?. Answer: A complete system of call number-classification symbols and book numbers- must be available so that, if you so desire, each book may have its own distinctive symbol, to be placed also on all cards representing that book. (…)

We sought for some ready-made scheme of classification which might be adopted “in toto”, thus saving us all of our specific questionings. Sympathetically and with care, the Dewey Decimal system and the Cutter scheme were examined anew, and rejected. Mr. Thomas S. Debagh’s recent intelligent scheme (of cataloguing), published in the Law Library Journal (22:30.: 41, April, 1929) came nearer to meeting our needs, but involved features which we did not wish to adopt. The Library of Congress was entreated to say when, if ever, its law schedules would be prepared. An effort was made to induce that library to cooperate with the writer in devising a scheme which both libraries might use, but this effort did not meet with success. Reluctantly it was realized that if we were to have a definite scheme to be used as we developed our catalogue, we must make it ourselves, getting such help from the experience of others and of ourselves as we could. We decided, however, for international law, to use the JX class, simplified considerably, of the Library of Congress scheme.

We were therefore face to face with the question, What criteria of similarity should we use in forming our classification? It was not difficult to decide that certain books would be most usefully grouped if subject criteria were used. These subjects, fifteen or sixteen in all, we set down by names which seemed to us to be in common use. A few examples are the following: Ancient Law, Bibliography, International Law, Roman Law, Trials. The next decision was that the rest of the library should be separated logically, although perhaps not physically, into two groups, first, those books relating to the Common Law, and second, those relating to all other systems (note that this system is similar to the one used years later by Moys).

The two divisions are fairly well characterized by the terms, Anglo-American Law, and Foreign Law. The Common Law was then thought of as being divided into two chief groups, first, books relating to the United States and the British Isles, and second, those relating to the British overseas colonies and dominions, without regard to their geographical location. Books relating to the law of the United States and the British Isles, were to be divided into about twenty classes according to various criteria of similarity. These classes we set down on paper by their common names, of which the following are examples: Attorney-General’s Reports, Dictionaries, Periodicals, Reports, Statutes, Treaties.

The books for the overseas British jurisdictions were to be divided into two groups (but all British overseas treaties and periodicals go with T (treaties) and P (Periodicals), respectively), the first made up of the Dominions, i.e. Australia, Canada, India, New Zealand, South Africa; and the second, of all of the colonies. These subdivisions were chosen, it will be seen, on the basis of political (not geographical) criteria of similarity.

Having provided for (1) general subject groups, and (2) Anglo-American law books, we now had to deal finally with the third grand division, namely the rest of the legal world, roughly characterized by the expression Foreign Law. For Foreign Law, we provided two general groups, chosen by form criteria, namely, foreign law periodicals (no matter where published or in what foreign language), and general Foreign law treatises (those which do not deal chiefly with the law of a particular foreign country). For example, a book on the subject obligations in Europe (as distinguished from a book on the German law of obligations) would go in this group.

All other foreign law books were to be grouped by political divisions and these political divisions were to be arranged alphabetically, regardless of their geographical location. The one exception was that Latin American countries were to form a separate alphabet. For example, there would be a division in which such geographically dispersed states as Albania, Abyssinia, China, France, Germany, and Switzerland would appear in alphabetical order, and a second division in which Latin-American states would be alphabeted, for example, Argentina, Brazil, Costa Rica, Cuba, and Mexico.

By the above method, we hoped that we had created on paper, groups of one kind or another, into which we could put every book likely to be found in any law library. We had not, however, provided a system of symbols, either to indicate the relation of these groups to each other, or to show how these groups should themselves be subdivided. (see below)

THE ARRANGEMENT OF CLASSES WITH RESPECT TO EACH OTHER

The first problem required us to decide whether we should try to weld our groups into a unified whole that would stand the test of scientific criticism, or whether we should build up our scheme according to our own sweet will, with a view only to practical results and convenience. To illustrate: In the Dewey system, the ten groups of books numbered from 000 to 900, if arranged in that order, would be both in numerical sequence, and in what may be considered a logical order. We had never seen a library which for long retained the logical order of these groups, so that the three hundreds physically followed the two hundreds and so on. The groups were arranged with respect to each other in the library, according to convenience, or necessities of space. The exact location of groups in a library usually has to be indicated by a chart or guide.

Why then stress the order or sequence of groups in our scheme? We decided not to do so, conceiving it to be of more practical importance to concentrate on the groups rather than upon the sequence of them with respect to each other. Nevertheless, we set down the names of the groups that had been decided upon, in something of a logical order, but without being much disturbed by scientific inconsistences, and assigned to these groups in consecutive order decimal numbers from 00 to 90. This list and these numbers, we preserved for use in case they might be useful in making call numbers. The process was thought of chiefly as an exercise in classification making. But it had the advantage of making it fairly certain that we had thought of nearly every important subdivision or group of materials likely to be found in any law library. The scheme could be adopted, including its decimal symbols, by any library that chose to do so. (…)

CLASS SYMBOLS

Having rejected the plan of logical sequence of groups to be shown by decimal numbers, or by any other symbols, and having decided that the actual location of groups should be shown in our library charts, nevertheless we still had to have symbols for our groups, so that call numbers could be made. For these major class symbols we chose sometimes letters, sometimes abbreviations of words, seeking always to select symbols that might have an obvious meaning to readers and staff, or be of mnemonic value. To illustrate briefly, S stands for Anglo-American statute law books, R for Anglo-American reports, FLP stands for Foreign law periodicals, Switz stands for Switzerland, and France (the whole word) stands for France.

Subdivision of Classes

But how should we subdivide out classes, and by what symbols indicate the subdivisions so that full call numbers could be made?. For the subdivisions of political divisions (France, for example), we adopted the idea used in the Law Library of Congress, but we elaborated it extensively and used decimal numbers, so that the subdivision might be indefinitely expansive. We assigned a number to every class of material for each state, even though in this library we did not plan to use some of the numbers. For example, as will be recalled, we group all Foreign law periodicals together in one alphabet, regardless of country of issue; under the symbol FLP. Nevertheless in our scheme for subdivisions of states we have a decimal number (OS) which stands for periodicals, and which could be used if a library desired to put French periodicals, for example, under France. Illustrations of decimal numbers that we both have and use are the following: 14 (the decimal point before the number is not written, but is understood to be there) stands for Session Laws, 221 stands for Civil Codes, 36 stands for Reports, and 46 stand for Treatises. Whenever, in order that each book might have its own, unduplicated, call number, some other symbol was needed to complete the call number, we would use Cutter numbers, or dates, or a combination of the two.

For divisions of Anglo-American law, such as S (Statutes), which would naturally be sub-divided by political divisions, the scheme calls for using:

  • two arbitrary numbers, 10 (United States) and 12 (British Isles),
  • abbreviations for the names of the states, and
  • the applicable decimal numbers (subdivisions for states) referred to above when discussing Foreign law.

Other subject divisions, such as Bibliography, Trials, etc, were provided with arbitrary subdivision symbols. Some of the more difficult ones have not yet been fully worked out, as for example Roman Law. For international law, as has been said, we decided to follow, in the main, the JX Library of Congress schedules. In order that precise directions to cataloguers might be given in regard to the use of the general classification, its subdivision, and the making of call numbers, loose leaf books were provided in which there is a page for each heading of the classification. For each group, decisions as to method are recorded in this book as we go along.

It would be impossible in a brief article to explain fully the whole classification scheme in all of its details. At the end of this (entry) are given skeleton outlines of the scheme, with the letter and word symbols used in the Yale Law Library. It should be noted that number symbols could be substituted for the latter and word symbols, if a library preferred them.

Perhaps, however, enough has been said in the way of description of the Yale Law Library scheme. In criticising it, the fact should be remembered that we deliberately and not through lack of information, chose not to build up a logically perfect scheme on paper, and that we chose rather cumbersome class symbols deliberately, because we thought that they would be preferable in this library. Experience in explaining our system of classification orally to visiting law librarians tells me that numerous questions immediately come to mind.

I will try to answer some of them in advance: 1. Why did not you make your scheme primarily a subject classification rather than a form classification? It would have been perfectly feasible to do so. We could, for example, have provided for a group of books on constitutional law into which all physically separable material relating to that subject for all countries of the world would have been gathered and subarranged according to a definite scheme indicated by symbols by means of which the call numbers would be constructed.

Such a class might contain as subdivisions:

  • the constitutions of all countries,
  • commentaries on them,
  • treatises and constitutional histories,
  • periodicals relating chiefly to the subject,
  • constitutional decisions so far as published separately.

Similarly there might have been groups on criminal law, real property, contracts, torts, workmen’s compensation, or any other subject. By such means a large part of the material in law libraries could be rearranged with some benefit to persons interested in the study of particular subjects.

The plan is applicable to law books just as it is to those on non-legal topics. In law, however, much of the most important material on the subjects indicated is not physically separable from other material with which it is published. In constitutional law, for example, the reader would still have to turn to the law reports, the statutes and the periodicals, all three of which must be retained as primary or secondary form groups. In them he would find material as large in amount, and quite as important as that contained in the subject group. In any case he would have to consult the subject catalogue, the digests and the periodicals indexes, to find all of the library’s resources in constitutional law. No shelf arrangement can make the subject catalogue superfluous.

A more persuasive argument against predominance of the subject arrangement, however, is that most users of law libraries carry on their investigations within jurisdictional boundaries. The grouping by jurisdictions, which would be obscured by the subject arrangement, is important to them. If they had to make a choice, they would prefer having all books of a jurisdiction together, rather than all on a subject for all jurisdictions together. In our scheme, we have compromised between the two schemes. We have a limited number of general subject groups (at present, sixteen); and a division of the remaining material into major groups relating to Anglo-American, and to Foreign law.

Anglo-American treatises and periodicals are contained in two large alphabetical form groups. Other material for the United States and the British Isles is subdivided into form groups (Attorney Generals’ reports to Workmen’s compensation reports) including Statutes and Reports. Material for the overseas British possessions is segregated by jurisdiction, each subdivided by form groups (but all British overseas treatises and periodicals go with T and P respectively).

Foreign law begins with two general form groups, foreign law general treatises (those which do not relate primarily to one country) and foreign law periodicals. All other foreign material is grouped by jurisdictions subdivided by the number schemes of subdivisions for States. Scientifically, therefore, the plan is faulty. It is not consistant with itself. For one class of material, one device is used, and for another, an entirely different device. The choice of device is made entirely on the basis of convenience. What is convenience to a reader, depends on his method of work. The lawyer is accustomed to seek his material through digests and indexes. Legal literature is more completely and minutely indexed than is any other class of literature. Therefore the lawyer goes first to the indexes. Having there gotten his citations, he calls for specific books. These books, so called for, can be found more quickly if the arrangement is simple. Subject arrangements tend to become complex. The form arrangement subdivided either alphabetically or chronologically, is notoriously simple, and it corresponds usually to the scheme of citations which the reader gets from the digests and indexes.

The above are the reasons why we did not give more prominence to subject arrangement in our classification scheme. We hope, however, following out the traditions of law book publishing, to compensate for the disadvantage of form arrangement by supplying a dictionary card catalogue which will adequately supplement the published legal indexes.

Subject Groups

(Symbols) … (Name of Class):
Ancient L …… Ancient law
Bibl ……….. Bibliography
Biog ……….. Biography
Canon L ……. Canon law
H …………. History (non-legal)
JS …………. Judicial statistics
JX ………… International law
LE ……….. Legal education
Libs ……….. Libraries and Library economy
Medieval L ….. Medieval law
ML ……….. Medical jurisprudence
Moham L …… Mohammedan law
ML ………… Military, Naval and Martial law
Roman L ……. Roman law
SS ………… Social science
Trials ……… Trials

Anglo-Amercan law

Form groups (United States and British Isles)

(Symbols) … (Names of Class)

  • AG ………… Attorney-General’s reports
  • AP ………… Appeal papers
  • BA ………… Bar Association reports
  • CC ……….. City charters and ordinances
  • CH ………… Congressional hearings
  • Const Conv ….. Constitutional conventions
  • D …………. Dictionaries
  • Dig ………… Digests (superseded)
  • Dir ………… Legal directories
  • Doc ………. Government documents
  • E ………….. Encyclopaedias (superseded)
  • Forms ……. Form books
  • JC ………… Judicial Council reports
  • P ……. Periodicals (All Anglo-American)
  • PU …….. Public Utility Commission reports
  • Pam ……….. Pamphlet collection
  • R ………… Court reports
  • S …………. Statutes
  • T …………. Treatises (All Anglo-American)
  • WC ……….. Workmen’s Compensation Commission reports

Political Groups:

(a) Br Col …. British Colonies (alphabetically) Antigua to Zanzibar
(b) Dominions:
Australia ……. Australia
Canada …….. Canada
India ………. India
New Zealand … New Zealand
S Africa ……. South Africa, Union of

Foreign Law

(1) Form Groups:

(a) FLG …… Foreign law treatises not relating exclusively to our country
(b) FLP …… Foreign law periodicals

(2) Political Groups:

(a) All foreign law states and colonies except Latin-America, using the name of the political division, or an abbreviation for it, for the first line of the call number, e.g. France.
(b) LA …….. Latin America Under this symbol, all states of Latin America, to be treated as in Form Groups. For example La Mexico.

Subdivisions for States (Decimal Symbols)

01 …………. Bibliography
O5 ••••••••••••• Periodicals
07 ………… Bar Association Reports
10 ………… General collected works (e.g. Sirey)
14 …………. Session laws
16 ………… Statutory Ru1es and Orders
18 …………. Collected laws (Compilations, revisions, etc.)
22 …………. Codes (collections)
221 ……….. Civil codes
222 ………… Civil procedure codes
223 ………… Criminal codes
224 ………… Criminal procedure codes
225-239 …….. Other codes
24 …… Court rules
26 …. Laws on special subjects
28 …… Constitutions
30 …………. Constitutional Conventions
32 ••••••••••••• Miscellaneous statutory material
322 ………… City charters
323 •••••••••••• City ordinances
34 …………. Customs
36 …………. Court reports
40 ……….. General digests and encyclopaedias
42 ………. Appeal papers
44 …………. Citation books
46 …………. Treatises
47 …………. Form books
48 …………. Dictionaries
50 …………. Legal directories
52 …………. Theses
54 …………. Attorney Generals’ Reports
55 …………. Public Utility Commission Reports
56 …………. Legislative Hearings
57 ……… Workmen’s Compensation Commission Reports
58 ……….. House and Senate Journals
62 •••••••••••. Other government documents

Comments

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *