Montgomery County sentinel. [volume] (Rockville, Md.) 1855-1974, 1883-11-30
The Indexing Case settled by the

| Inc tn0exlhg case SettIed Dy the
COurt.-As was stated in the last issue OF
the SENTINEL, the argument was heard in
the injunction case, restraining the County
Commissioners from paying Mr.. Il. b. Pret-
lyman bill for indexing the Land Records,
by full Bench, on Saturday last. On Mon
day Judges Richie and Lynch filed the an
| nexed opinion in the case in the Clerk s
Office. In the absence of Judge Wilson's
name from the opinion filed the supposi.
ton would be that he dissented therefrom,
though there was no dissenting opinion
filed:
George Peter vs. Elijah B. Prettyman ct al.
10 the Circuit Court for Montgomery coun-
ty, sitting as Court of Equity. No. 513.
The claim OF Elijah B. Prettyman, the
payment of which is sought to be enjoined,
is for services in making up a general index
OF the Land Records in the particular form
known as 1.-THE Campbell Index" in obedi-
ence to an order of the Circuit Court passed
June 4th, 1877. This claim, after examina-
ton, was approved and its payment by the
County Commissioners recommended by the
Circuit Court, July End, 1888, amplified No
yember 5th, 1888, and the Commissioners
having subsequently decided to pass it and
order il to be placed upon the levy, the pres
ent bill was filed.
As the objections urged by the complain
ant to the correctness Of said claim were
substantially heard and passed upon by the
said Court at the time of atfixng its recon-
mendation of payment, it is not necessary,
now, to say more in regard to the claim
itself, than that the Court sees no sufficient
reason to change the conclusion il then
reached.
In his present proceeding the complain
ant not only assails the claim but invokes
the Court to interfere with the discretion
the Commissioners have exercised in deter
mining to pay it, upon the ground that they
are without authority in law, express or i'm
piled, so TO determine.
As we are of opinion that by Section 10,
Article 4, of the Constitution, it was com.
petent for the Court, looking TO the intere SITS
of the public in facilitating the scare h of
these records to require Mr.. Prettyman, as
the County Clerk, To perform the work Of
indexing the records in method not before
practised, and so greatly conducive to the
expedition of business that the Commission.
ers themselves had previously purchased the
right TO use this approved method, desig-
udtcu OdtuI,DtIiS lnueA, III Tue Sitrk
office, it follows that Mr.. Prettyman was en-
titled TO be compensated for the extra labor
the peculiar character of the index invol we'd.
II follows further, in our judgment, that as
no specified fees for such work was pre-
scribed by law, his only resort Tor compen
sation was to the County Commissioners for
fair and reasonable allowance by them
They are expressly required 10 pay all
claims for which the county is expressly or
implicitly responsible.-5 Sec. Art. %, Re-
vised Code.
As the prayer of the bill rests upon the
proposition that the County Commissioners
have no authority, however willing, Ia pay
such a claim, and we cannot concur in this
proposition, for this reason alone, without
pausing TO consider other objections raised
To the bill, the injunction must he refused
and the bill dismissed
JNo. RITCHIE,
JoHN A. LYNCH,
Iu1ts.lQ al the (tircuit { ipurt