Morning journal and courier., 1880-12-15
Registrar Doherty's Bill.

The Opinion of Hon. Henry B. Harrison
 and Hon. Triton E. D0olittle Regarding
 the Same.
 At the meeting of the Board of Selectmen last evening an opinion by Hon. Henry B. Harrison and Hon. Hilton E. Doelittle, who were selected by the Board to give their views on the opinions of John w. filling, Esq, and Col D. R. Wright, was read.
 The counsel report in substance as follows; We have carefully examined the statutes un- der which the said question has arisen, and we have read with due care the written com munications addressed to the Selectmen by D. R. Wright, Esq, and J. ". filling, Esq., respectively, in which the same question has been elaborately discussed.
 After referring to the creation of the office of Registrar, which is prescribed by the stat- ute of 1852, entitled stAn Act Relating. to the Registration of Marriages and Deaths, " the attorneys proceed to say: By the terms of that statute and also by the terms of the stat ute now in force on the same subject, the Registrar is required to ascertain, as accurate ly as he can, all the births, marriages and deaths occurring in this town," and to record the same in book or books kept by h i'm for that purpose.
 The word Occurring" as used in said stat utes, refers Gin our opinion) to births, mar riages and deaths occurring during the Regis trar's own term of office, and does not refer to births, etc., which may A0Ue occurred prior to the commencement of his term. We cannot believe that the statute intends to impose upon the Registrar, under oath, the oY16 1oxiTa 7v7fTy 1f and correcting the records of all his prede- cessors, or the duty of extending his investi- gations to any point of time prior to the be- ginning of his own term, and it would be in our opinion an unjust and unreasonable inter pretation of the law to say that a Registrar who has faithfully ascertained and recorded all births, marriages and deaths occurring during his own term, and has omitted to push his inquiries back of that term, can be deemed guilty of 8 violation of his oath because he has refused to record births, etc., which had occurred years, or even generations before his term began.
 Again-If it is the duty of the Registrar to go back of his own term in ascertalning and recording births, &c., we see no limit to the distance to which he must go short of the dates of the first birth, &c., that ever oc- cured in his own town.
 They further say that if the Legislature had intended to go back to 1929, or back to any pOlnG or time prlOr CO the D0S1nn1ng or his term, such an intention would have been plainly and unequivocally set forth by ex- press words in the statute. Certainly it is not SO set forth and we are unable to, see that it is set forth in any manner however obscure"
 The conclusions of the attorneys are:
 First-That it was not the official duty of Dr. Doherty to ascertain and record births, &c., which occurred before his term of office began.
 Second-That the law does not authorize the payment of any fees to him except for services which it was his official duty to per form.
 Third-Consequent that he is not le- gally entitled to payment for any of the ser vices specified in the bill mentioned by you in your communication to us
 In conclusion the attorneys say: "We can easily imagine that valuable services not re- quired by the law may have been rendered in good faith by Registrar, and that efforts may therefore properly be made to obtain some modification of the law in order that fair and reasonable compensation may be made for such services. But it is not our business to enquire whether Dr. Doherty's case is such case or not. We have there fore only undertaken to give herein our opin- ion on the question before us as question of law, pure and simple, to be determined by Q true interpretation of the law as it now stands"
 The report is signed by both attorneys