Nearly all libraries in the Federal Republic of Germany are publicly owned, and their employees are placed in the same position as government servants. Library employees enjoy the same advantages and benefits as persons engaged in other branches of government, and their conditions of service are regulated in effect by the same or similar provisions of law. As the Federal Republic of Germany is a federation of several states (Länder), competence to make laws for the regulation of government employees rests concurrently in the federal legislature and the legislatures of the individual states. In this respect there are separate laws for the regulation of federal employees and the employees of the individual state governments, but for all practical purposes such federal and state laws are substantially similar. The respective laws establish systems of different ranks for government employees and prescribe educational qualifications as well as other requirements for the entry into employment at different service levels. There are no specific federal laws for the education and admission of library employees. According to the laws of the individual states, however, library employees are divided into four categories:

1. (1) Senior library service (Höherer Bibliotheksdienst) which is open to persons with academic qualifications (preference being given to persons with doctoral degrees according to the laws of most states) upon completion of a prescribed period of practical library training and a formal educational course in librarianship.

2. (2) Advanced library service (Gehobener Bibliotheksdienst) which is available to persons who undertake a formal course of study in librarianship (which is different in content from the course established for the senior library service) upon completion of high school education.

3. (3) Intermediate library service (Mittlerer Bibliotheksdienst) which does not require high school education but in several states a formal training in librarianship.

4. (4) Subordinate library service (Einfacher Bibliotheksdienst) which does not require an secondary educational or practical qualifications.

By way of a general guide to readers, who are not familiar with the German system of library positions, it should be added that this classification system does not have precise equivalents in the Anglo-American countries. The senior and to some extent the advanced library services may, however, be compared to professional library positions, and the intermediate and subordinate service levels to supporting staff positions in the United States libraries.

The Federation of Malaya received her independence from Britain in 1957. On September 16, 1963, the eleven states of this Federation, the former colonies of Sarawak and Sabah on the western coast of Borneo and the State of Singapore united to form Malaysia. In August 1965, however, Singapore seceded from this newly-formed federation to become an independent republic. Malaysia as it is known to-day consists of eleven states of the peninsula that constituted Malaya in 1957, (this is referred to as peninsula Malaysia) Sabah and Sarawak. Peninsula Malaysia is separated from Sabah and Sarawak by the vast South China Sea.

The performance of duties which law librarians consider professional varies in quantity and in quality among different types of law libraries. It is hoped that this small paper will reflect these differences and yet provide information typical enough of American librarians to provide an adequate picture for comparison. Noting the essential differences, this paper will briefly describe the organization of professional law librarians in their jobs and in their relationships with other librarians, their educational status and requirements, and other indicia of professionalism which affect their status. It will undoubtedly reflect the biases of a librarian from a university law library.

American standards for law librarianship have been frequently cited and widely used as guidelines in law library literature. It is understandable how one not fully conversant with the problems inherent in American law librarianship might well regard the present standards with the kind of awe expressed in the above quotation. After all, academic law librarians in the United States have a doubledegree standard of education, possess full faculty rank and status as members of law school faculties, and require certification in accordance with their own professional association standards. Committees of the American Association of Law Libraries are engaged in writing canons of professional ethics for law librarians while another is producing a code of job security. A committee of concerned librarians is dealing with questions of social importance and probing the possible response of law libraries to those issues. The law library literature itself is filled with articles presenting various philosophies of law librarianship. Surveys are taken on topics of constant interest ranging from salary scales and book counts to the very latest topical problems such as sex discrimination. Members even voice concern about the possibilities of unauthorized practice of law in their daily work and raise questions concerning the need for malpractice insurance coverage for reference librarians. Thus, at first glance, it does seem entirely possible to conclude that “everything is up-to-date” in American law librarianship.