[DCRM-L] Estates as personal vs. corporate donor name

[Matthew C. Haugen]

Thank you for all of the replies, both on and off list. I appreciate the
help in thinking through the best practice for this.

In this case, I will have to confirm some details, but probably plan to
name the estate as such in a 541 note, and will likely add a 700 for the
individual as a former owner instead of as a donor. We don't routinely add
access points for all donors or former owners. The items donated by this
estate are of some institutional importance, as part of the libraries of
the first and third presidents of Kings College/Columbia, Samuel and
William Samuel Johnson, of whom the donor former owner in question was a
descendant.

To follow up on Kathryn's reply, I also have encountered situations in
which existing records credit a man as the donor, when his widow actually
donated her late husband's collection and may even have been a former
owner/collector in her own right. Perhaps as a result of these sorts of
conflations or omissions, I find that when either or both of them have been
recorded as access points, there has been inconsistent practice in the
assignment of relationship designators "donor" and/or "former owner" to
those names. When the wife is identified in donor documentation at all, it
often follows the earlier convention of "Mrs. Husband" but more recently we
have been attempting to update records with her own given name in 541
fields, archival finding aids, collection names, name authority records,
etc., whenever possible (e.g., using Madeleine Berol
<http://id.loc.gov/authorities/names/no2020004459.html> rather than Mrs.
Alfred C. Berol). In the current case, I hope to give proper credit to
Geraldine Woolsey Carmalt for her role in this collection that is named
after her ancestors rather than a husband (it seems she never married).

Thanks again,

Matthew

On Wed, Aug 5, 2020 at 1:57 PM Moody, Honor M. <honor_moody at harvard.edu>
wrote:

> If you don’t have access to the donor agreement, or if it doesn’t specify
> who made the gift decision, I would add the personal name as a former
> owner, and not say anything about the donor, since you don’t know if the
> gift was made on behalf of Carmalt on her explicit instructions, or if it
> was a decision made by the estate executors after her death.
>
>
>
> I probably wouldn’t include the estate at all, outside of a 541, even if I
> knew it to have made the gift decision unless my shop routinely recorded
> all donors as added entries.
>
> *From:* DCRM-L <dcrm-l-bounces at lib.byu.edu> *On Behalf Of *Kathryn Downing
> *Sent:* Wednesday, August 5, 2020 1:52 PM
> *To:* DCRM Users' Group <dcrm-l at lib.byu.edu>
> *Subject:* Re: [DCRM-L] Estates as personal vs. corporate donor name
>
>
>
> I recently had a conversation at my library related to this, as some of
> our older rare book record notes weren't input very clearly in terms of
> donors. On our records "Mr.  Smith" (for example) is recorded as a donor,
> but recent archival digging shows his wife actually donated the book after
> her husband -- who has his bookplate in the book -- passed away. (I'm
> thinking whomever created them way-back-when conflated bookplate provenance
> and the actual donor)
>
>
>
> My recommendation would be to input the donor as a corporation, the
> estate, since "estate of" is in the NAF. It clarifies that the item was
> willed, not handed over by the live person, which could be an important
> distinction for future researchers who could then go to estate records.
>
>
>
> I would also record the individual as a former owner, distinguishing
> provenance from donor. Such a record thus traces the book as going from the
> owner to the estate to your library, and covers all possible searching for
> Carmalt.
>
>
>
> I also agree with Erin's reply, in that you're bound by what the
> documentation explicitly says.
>
>
>
> Kathryn
>
>
>
> *Kathryn Downing*
>
> *Technical Services Librarian*
>
> Helen Fowler Library
>
> Denver Botanic Gardens
>
> 909 York Street
>
> Denver, CO 80206
>
> 720-865-3570 Phone
>
> *www.botanicgardens.org
> <https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=http-3A__www.botanicgardens.org_&d=DwMFAg&c=WO-RGvefibhHBZq3fL85hQ&r=gfxDZP5m9KyeWhmono1ADELcLUOEQEwGHybTpd5N2Wk&m=zoaCraxTTCzFyp2eFLlcEFx6nXsSprQxHevPxfsr51o&s=trRlDARSLctuwNH5xFoE9KyunGyaemgKU8mTKx1dNS4&e=>*
>
>
>
> *My work week is Sunday - Thursday.*
> ------------------------------
>
> *From:* DCRM-L <dcrm-l-bounces at lib.byu.edu> on behalf of Erin Blake <
> erin.blake.folger at gmail.com>
> *Sent:* Wednesday, August 5, 2020 11:40 AM
> *To:* DCRM Users' Group <dcrm-l at lib.byu.edu>
> *Subject:* Re: [DCRM-L] Estates as personal vs. corporate donor name
>
>
>
> If the documentation says "Estate of", I'd use:
>
> 710 2_ Geraldine Woolsey Carmalt Estate, $e donor. $5 NNC
>
>
>
> We have a few instances where both are the case: donor explicitly left "x"
> and "y" to the Folger in their will, but they didn't say anything in the
> will about "z".  Later, his executors said "Hey, we're sending x and y to
> you..... do you also want z? Or should we throw it away?"  Items x and y
> get the personal name as former owner, item z gets the name of the estate.
> I don't know what the legal implications are, I just see it as important
> for provenance research: Firstname Lastname *knew *x and y would go to
> the Folger, but z was someone else's decision.
>
>
>
> Erin.
>
> ______________________
> Erin Blake, Ph.D.  |  Senior Cataloger  |  Folger Shakespeare Library  |
> 201 E. Capitol St. SE, Washington, DC, 20003  |  eblake at folger.edu  |
> www.folger.edu
> <https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__protect-2Dus.mimecast.com_s_-2Dt5RCjRgpBtArRXC7R7-5F2-3Fdomain-3Durldefense.com&d=DwMFAg&c=WO-RGvefibhHBZq3fL85hQ&r=gfxDZP5m9KyeWhmono1ADELcLUOEQEwGHybTpd5N2Wk&m=zoaCraxTTCzFyp2eFLlcEFx6nXsSprQxHevPxfsr51o&s=NatADg1r_MjapU0YO4vHPA7TFi6-00XnSddvXze5JXY&e=>
>   |  Pronouns: she/her/hers
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> On Wed, Aug 5, 2020 at 1:05 PM Matthew C. Haugen <mch2167 at columbia.edu>
> wrote:
>
> Hello all,
>
>
>
> For the purposes of local access points for donors, if the source of
> information indicates that an item was the gift of a person's estate, would
> you record the individual person, or the estate as a corporate body?
>
>
>
> For example, some items I am cataloging have either library-supplied
> bookplates or card-catalog records saying:
>
>
>
> "Gift of the Geraldine Carmalt Estate"
>
>
>
> I also find the statement "Gift of the Estate of Geraldine Woolsey
> Carmalt" related to several items on the Yale University Art Gallery
> website.
>
>
>
> Which access point would you use?
>
>
>
> 700 1_ Carmalt, Geraldine Woolsey, $d 1875-1967, $e donor. $5 NNC
>
> 710 2_ Geraldine Woolsey Carmalt Estate, $e donor. $5 NNC
>
>
>
> I would have probably defaulted to using a personal name, but I do find a
> few "Estate of" headings in the NAF.
>
>
>
> Thanks in advance for any advice,
>
>
>
> Matthew
>
>
>
> --
>
> Matthew C. Haugen
> Rare Book Cataloger | Columbia University Libraries
> matthew.haugen at columbia.edu | 212-851-2451 | he/him/his
>
>

-- 
Matthew C. Haugen
Rare Book Cataloger | Columbia University Libraries
matthew.haugen at columbia.edu | 212-851-2451 | he/him/his
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://listserver.lib.byu.edu/pipermail/dcrm-l/attachments/20200805/992c3bb6/attachment-0001.html>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: image001.png
Type: image/png
Size: 6099 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://listserver.lib.byu.edu/pipermail/dcrm-l/attachments/20200805/992c3bb6/attachment-0001.png>