THECONCEPT OF FEDERATIONS of libraries and

its application for the large, sparsely populated state of Montana was admirably presented by Raymond E. Mahoney, in an article written for the January 1,1952issue of the Library Journal: It is easier to arrange a federation than a consolidation in which in-dividual libraries lose their identity. Many small and medium libraries are well-established units of local government having vested property rights and a long tradition of local autonomy. The struggle for larger units of service has often failed because of a head-on collision with localism. In many cases advocates of unity have attempted to do too much too quickly. They have tried to take over a series of smaller units (libraries, librarians, and lockers), dissolve their distinctive character-istics, and establish a closely integrated consolidation. But localism is a continuing force in the American way of life; local library boards have worked too hard and too long to agree to preside at a ceremony for their own dissolution. Federation preserves the advantages of local libraries, adding the in-creased efficiency and specialization of larger units. I t satisfies the desire for “home rule ” and parallels the historic American principle of in-dependence in local self-government. Basically it is an agreement to sur-render certain rights for the greater rights which they enjoy through membership in a large organized system.... A federation system of libraries may be the difference between suc-cess and failure when trying to organize service on a metropolitan, county, or regional basis. It offers the strong framework around which independent libraries may unite, improve, and go forth to better serv-ice.l Prior to the adoption of the present plan for library development in Montana, two concepts were considered by library leaders in the state: (1)regional library headquarters as branches of the state agency, an