Montgomery County sentinel. [volume] (Rockville, Md.) 1855-1974, 1885-01-09
For the Montgomery County Sentinel.
General Index of Land Records.
To THE PUBLIC:

made for the past two years, and by the same
persons, who are too well known in this com
munity TO make il necessary 10 name them,
to misrepresent the facts in connection with
this cause, is still being made. Not content
with the publication OF the Decree and opin-
ion Of the Court OF Appeals, which was en-
inently proper, these persons continue in ev-
cry possible way TO endeavor to make the i'm
preston upon the public that my action in
reference TO the General Index OF the Land
Records has been in some manner 90rong.--
That this is not so, ! am not only perfectly
conscious myself but am satisfied that no
upright citizen of this county will think so,
when he knows the facts. | now propose to
state the facts and shall then confidently leave
every fair and just man to decide for himself
was not present in the Court of Appeals
when the cause was argued. But my counsel
inform me that the Court asked them whether
the County Commissioners of this county had
been authorized by any ldw, passed by The Ley
isiature, to purchase the patent right 10 use
The Campbells Index. The reply was that no
such law had ever been passed by the Legis-
lature This cause evidently hinged right at
that point, in the minds Of the Judges of the
Court of Appeals. The 9th Section of Ar
ticle 90 of the Code of Public General Laws,
as quoted in the opinion of the Court OF APP
peals, provides that, the County Counts.
sioners shall "pay and discharge all claims
on or against the county which have been
expressly or implicitly authorized by law -
II a idw had authorized the County Commits
pioners 10 purchase said patent-rght, then the
use Of the Campbells Index would have been,
at least, implicitly authorized by law, and it
would have been the duty of the County
Commissioners TO pay my claim for the 5000,
as recommended by the Circuit Court. My
counsel informs me that such was the clearly
indicated opinion of the Court of Appeals
And this view is sustained by the following
extract from the published opinion of said
Court, viz: 'If there be any law requiring
the Clerk TO do this work for which his claim
is made either expressly or implicitly at pub
lie expense, it would be the duty OF the Com
missioners to provide for its payment" SO
that in the opinion of the Court of Appeals,
the frs, unlawful step in this General Index
business was the purchase Of the right 10 use
Campbells Index 1OiUom an Act of Assembly
authorizing them TO do So pause to state
under what circumstances the County Com
missioners did purchase said right The
Campbell Index had been in use for some
years 10 other counties, and had proven 10 be
a very great and valuable improvement upon
the old system of ndexiug. The right to
use said Index had been purchased by other
counties Oithom any Act OF Assembly author
izing such purchase. The members of the
bar here, without exception ! believe, were
anxious for its introduction into our county
public offices. The complainant in the case
! am discussing went personally before the
County Commissioners and urged its purchase
and explained how it would facilitate bust
ness. was sent for by the County Commits
sionerS and asked my opinion as Clerk. My
opinion was given as favorable TO the Camp
bell system, and TO iis purchase. Nobody
raised, or thought of raising, the question OF
the Legality of the purchase il the absence OF
any express law giving authority. The Couu-
ty Commissioners thereupon purchased the
right, and paid for it with money raised by
taxation. The Court of Appeals, during the
last month, years after the transaction, ie-
cides the purchase was beyond the lawful au-
thority OF the County Commissioners. But
does any sane and fair man undertake noio to
charge that the County Commissioners acted
uoJustly or made wrongful application of
the public money in SO making said purchase
| Could they, by some prophetic instinct, in
tie absence OF any such suggestion from those
learned 10 the law who urged the purchase,
| imagiue that near the close Of the year 1884
The Court Of Appeals would declare the pur-
chase TO be Illegal Every upright man will
answer that the County Commissioners were
perfectly blameless and entirely justified ia
acting as they did.
| only claim 10 be judged by the same stand
ard, and am confident that my own action 10
every respect, in connection with the General
Indexes in question, will be seen TO have been
sustained by very much greater authority
even than that of the County Commissioners.
ask the psIli4ePttt-And careful attention of
every one who wishes TO form fair aud cor
| rect personal opinion, 10 statement OF the
| facts involved.
After the right 10 use the Campbell Index
had been purchased, as above described, the
members of the bar here desired, without ex-
oeplion ! believe, and very naturally, that
said purchase should be utilized, so as TO IA
cilitate the examination of titles, which, as
all know, is very important and responsible
branch Of their professional work They
conferred with The fp0 Judges of the Court
then resident in this county, Judges Bowie
and BOuic aud with myself Clerk on the
subject.
! A careful, and, as believe, an exhaustive
examination of the provisions of the laws and
| Constitution of the State, bearing upon the
subject revealed the following facts, viz The
| first and only Public General Law ever passed
by the General Assembly of Maryland an
thorizing and providing for the max ing of
General Indexes of the Land Records is Chap
ter 80 OF the laws Of 1888. | wish that date
! TO be especially noted, MS ! shall refer 10 it
hereafter.
/ Ti0O sections Of this law are to be found in
Art. Is, SECTIONS 50 and SO of the Code. The
other section OF said chapter SO, Laws of 1913,
Section 2, is not in the Code. II provided
that said Clerks shall receive for making said
| record (lndex) such sum as the Levy Courts
/ or County Commissioners, us the case may be-
E OF their respective counties may deem fair
4 compensation for the making of the same !;
lob L>tied and collected az other eountv charges
sole ass. This I'd Section OF said law was re
pes1-d and Fe-shseted by Laws ofls34, Chap
ter 32s IL provided that the 0ompensation
sooald be the same compensation 10 which
tney THE Ciefksl are now entitled by law for
recording any matter or thing required to be
rsenfted, q b feried and collected as other
eaga,y shaszss nov ARE ; Provided that any
90 ~ TIE @l9gss oS the County Courts shall
certify 10 the I.svy Court or County Commits.
aiSneFs that The services have been par-
fofn@t Tbs was The law and the only
Passe 1snefsl Las concerning the making OF
6susrtl ls4sEss 10 the Land Records and for
t.e T'sgs>sf q The zane, nniii the MARYLAND
Cas.s Ma s!s1ss4 70 1850.
Tss ssffssrs eft cot Of the Code the above
usasasos. L1s % iSzt, Chapter 32s. They
were ~ tssaofizss b. the Law apuoluting
fi's'r - ssevs cat suy Fable Law then er-
Htg.
Ys ast lea. - es4rs-, is,sa4si 10 embrace
II fns cf'bs ~ sssisz lsss. Bot not
erfJrH.pT liiss q IT, Hs'egis.. ,ssx assigned
,i'eu tn,g iu iesg 90 &. iais inssuce' and
~ vn'sa - aEusa MIA ssEsfSi interest.
leave pm. ppapseptsgrIlF, IT cOsrse. lava
lher existing Tia 49, - ASSEMBLY passed
iA't ans VI astne'F ssf. ess,;ss The Code
30 iiap VI nne ~ epts lssfs for 90 the
fuViic Genaro Lowt and ciss petite Local
Lave he'esVioes passot ~ tbs i>s1isistsre Of
Maryland fnpt IL tnrss Eu.s. ail Iass
aceiaepiel, Vssr,potet ~ rhs egs iEsrs were
sseln Oui of existence
1ns oppibers lnsrrset IA thr Co.'S ,ts two
sscii0nsio shs Law ~ lssI Chayls, s.. bro.
fiaioE fw rDae % SensrSi lrsffsf. e.s -,
on ths 0ihef seoti9t. sllrt psoYiSs4 ios ray.
H.sg ios ghs SVak reqpltes = ~ AGO. ~ ,be
ODER t~g sselisis he Vgaef Ps4fit q .ssfsl
Las that saip Lave ~ lSSs Chay'ss -
eifhsf before ~ aiUoe l<5s " tals dsr. ever
enaeise srf spseitt Dfgrbs.ss tsf psJioy
Cen io' tnttl.g Densftl lngsE u 10 L.and
ksu0fcf ! tsTs Fistss he srse, condition
u ne siststs So % Nsrgias8 spon The sob.
Jet Of Genera ln9sIss shea The Maryland