Lancaster daily intelligencer. [volume] (Lancaster, Pa.) 1864-1928, 1882-01-10
AaEsastet fmtclligrnrer
TUESDAY EVENING. JAN. 10, 1852.
The Law In the Case.

Nothing is palmer than that the law con-
templates the county ficersshall keep the
public records and papers in their respec-
tive offices in good order and properly in
dexed. It is equally clear that the right
and duty Of examining them regularly to
see if this is done, is imposed upon the
judges, and that when any neglect is
apparent they must have the deficiency
performed, assessing, = a Just and reason
able compensation "-not recommending
IA very liberal compensation''--to be paid
Immediately by the county, and then to
be collected by the commissioners from
the officers whose neglect rendered the
extra expense necessary. 1t is plain, too,
from the provisions of the law which we
print on our first page, in further re-
view of this big bill'' business, that if
the judges do the work of examining the
offices as often as their incumbents are
superseded the county will never be sub
ject to such extraordinary expenses
as have just been imposed upon
il "by order Of court" in the
payment of S3,sOO for rearranging the
disarrangcd papers in the prothonOtary'
and registers offices. For nearly half
a century the law has been on the stat
ute books by the simple operation of
which any disorder occurring in the files
and records of the county offices should
have been detected every three years
at least. and the responsibility for it so
fixed that whatever it cost the county to
supply the deficiency could be collected
back from the derelict official whose
neglect of duty caused it. Admitting
that the papers in these two Offices were
in such condition that it properly cost
s3,s0O to rearrange them last year, it is
plain that the. judges did not regularly,
in conformity with the laws direction
" ascertain if the records, books, indexes
and bills of the respective offices be kept
and left as the law cOntemplates - and
wien neglect was apparent s. direct the
deficiency to he performed by the proper
officers"
The complaint of the public is that
when by the long continued neglect of
officials their offices got into this condi
tion, and wien 10y equally-lOng con
tinucd neglect of the judges to examine
and repair the deficiency, the extraordi-
nary occasion fora supply of this de
fciency arose, at great expense to the
county, which could NOT be imposed upon
derelct officials, the proper thing to have
done would have been to have had the
work contracted for in advance: and
not left it to the party who did it to
fix grossly exaggerated amount of re-
compense, and get the court to recon-
mend that a very liberal compensa-
ton: be paid for it, instead of Il 6 just
and reasonable" "a fair and equitable"
compensation rs The law directs.
The court is properly authorized to
change the mode of in.lexing the public
records when it shall appear advisable,
and no doubt the work in this direction
done last year in the registers office was
as necessary rs that done some years
ago in the recorders and prOthOnOtary S
offices, the occasion for which did not
arise from any neglect of former officers,
but from improvements made in methods
of indcxing, and was therefore only
chargeable upon the county. But then it
will he remembered there was competi-
tion for the work, the price was fixed in
advance, the contractors had to give
heavy bonds for its correctness, on which
they were liable for six years and, con.
sidering their labor and responsibility, it
is Il fair estimate that the county paid
for the late work of rearranging the
papers four fold the cost of the new in
deXing.