Depoliticizing the California State Library: The Political and Professional Transformation of James Gillis, 1899–1917

Abstract

This article examines the career of James Gillis, California’s state librarian from 1899 to 1917. It reviews the role politics played in library staffing prior to Gillis’s appointment and considers the extent to which Gillis filled his own staff with patronage hires. It then discusses why and how Gillis ended the state library’s spoils system and professionalized operations. While duly crediting Gillis’s importance as a library administrator, this article highlights the role California’s Progressive movement played in the state library’s modernization. During his 1899–1917 administration, California State Librarian James Gillis made a remarkable transformation from political hack to library reformer. Gillis not only professionalized the state library’s staff but also instituted a legislative reference department, library services for the blind, a traveling library program, and, most significantly, a statewide county library system. What makes these accomplishments both impressive and intriguing is Gillis’s lack of formal library training or experience. Gillis was not a lawyer or a scholar, and he was not schooled in rare books. Instead, his state library appointment was based strictly on his political connections and personal ties to the Southern Pacific Railroad. This background notwithstanding, Gillis became the California libraries’ principal modernizer. Set against California’s Progressive movement, this study examines California state library politics prior to 1899 and considers the extent to which Gillis filled his staff with patronage hires. It discusses why and how Gillis dismantled the state library’s spoils system and assesses professionalization’s impact on library operations. While duly crediting Gillis’s role in refashioning California’s state library, this article illuminates the importance of Progressivism in state library modernization. James Gillis has received more professional and scholarly attention than any of California’s state librarians. 1 Indeed, for four decades after