Revolution at the London Library

The Stalinists have taken over the London Library

Paul Barker

10 November 2007

High drama at the AGM of a literary institution

In the debate we had reckoned without the chairman of trustees, Sir Thomas Legg. He took over, in 2004, from the amicable historian of typography Nicholas Barker (no relation). A bencher of the Inner Temple, Legg joined the Lord Chancellor’s department in 1962, and rose to the top, as permanent secretary, from 1989 to 1998. This department of state has always been described as ‘arrogant’, ‘secretive’ and ‘out of touch’. At the library meeting, Legg came across as the very model of a modern mandarin, oleaginous but ruthless, with the art of literally looking down his nose. He knew all the rules, oh yes; he reminded me of the old proverb that a bad judge knows the law; a good judge knows what the law is for.

Everything was take-it-or-leave-it. Names of four new trustees were presented. No discussion or questioning: we had to swallow the list as it was. The names were as obscure as most of those who are trustees at present. On the subscription — no reference back was permitted. We had to accept or reject, and in the latter case the trustees ‘would have to consider their position’. (‘Not a bad idea,’ someone murmured.) I switched my motion to a call to reject, as the only way to get a debate of any sort, though we were warned that rejection ‘could destroy this great library’. My argument was that this abrupt way of conducting business destroyed any spirit of mutuality.

From the hall, the journalist and biographer Terry Coleman recalled the gentler way the MCC had acted when facing another supposed financial crisis. A vice-president and former trustee, Lewis Golden, made a moving speech in which he said the issue wasn’t just financial but also moral. He’d be ‘deeply ashamed’ if the subscription proposal were pushed through. An endowment, he reminded everyone, had been raised specifically to subsidise subscriptions and attract new members (which it did); this money had now been raided for the new extension. He said he would willingly ease the dilemma by putting £250,000 into the kitty ‘in memory of my lovely wife’. This offer was ignored by the chairman and the central committee of trustees, sitting beside him.

Previous page 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 Next page

More articles from: Paul Barker | this section

Print this article | Email to a friend | Permalink | Comments (1)

Post this entry to: del.icio.us | Digg | Newsvine | NowPublic | Reddit

Post comment

Margaret Gaskin

November 11th, 2007 3:06pm Report this comment

As a member of the Library who swallowed the increase but didn't attend the meeting, can I thank all those who did for putting up a fight –not against higher prices, which may be inevitable, but against an apparently high-handed attitude that does indeed seem to go against everything I have ever felt about this great institution. The committee may feel they have been preaching to the choir for years now and this sudden increase has at least stirred members from their desks. Well, clearly, all members who care about the institution must stir their stumps and be prepared to give more (in time and commitment) in return for their great inheritance to ensure that a genuine democracy of intellect prevails. We none of us created the London Library, but we should be ashamed to feel that we stood by while its spirit, if not its substance, was destroyed.

Post comment