Evening star. [volume] (Washington, D.C.) 1854-1972, 1889-12-17
THE RECORDER OF DEEDS.
What IL Thought Of MIR. Dawes Bill tc
Make the Once Salaried One.

The bill introduced by Senator Dawes yester-
day to make the Office Of recorder OF deeds
salaried one at 5000 year and abolishing the
present system by which the recorder is paid
by fees has been very generally discussed.
wHAf THE COMMISSIONERS SAY
The District Commissioners in speaking Of
the proposed change in the recordership Of
deeds in the District by the bill introduced in
the Senate yesterday by Mr.. Dawes expressed
themselves as generally favoring it
Mr.. Douglass said the plan in its general
features Was an excellent one, although he
thought the salary (s3.OoO), was rather
small for 30 important an office.
Major Raymond said the matter did not
come in his department., but that far as he
was acquainted with Washington there seemed
to be a general desire to have some such bill
passed.
Mr.. Hine thought the Office should
most certainly be salaried one
and the official in charge be
obliged to report to the Commissioners
monthly, as it would greatly facilitate the
record OF exchange VI property.
NIB. rRorrER HAS NOTHING TO SAT-.
Mr.. Trotter, the present recorder, politely
declined TO be interviewed on the subject
VIEWS OF REAL ESTATE MEN.
The real estate brokers are largely interested
in the management Of the Office of recorder of
deeds. In talking with number Of brokers
this morning STAR reporter found that they
had all read In The STAR the provisions of Mr..
Dawes bill All who were seen expressed
themselves as being heartily in favor of the
bill.
Mr.. NJ. M. Parker said that the proposed
salary OF $1,000 year to be paid the recorder
was ample compensation for performing the
duties OF that position. which largely a
sinecure. He further thought that 1t would
have the effect of taking the Office out of poll
tics. he said that the place ought to be filled
by District man and this provision of the bill
especially met with his hearty approval.
MIR. John A. Prescott said that the compensa-
ton OF the recorder at present was unknown
quantity, but ii was supposed to be some large
amount The result was that il had become a
political prize. In his opinion this was all
wrong. The proposed change would remedy
the present evils and would make il possible to
MI the place with competent District man.
Mr.. X. o. Hoffman expressed himself as be-
ing strongly in favor Of the bill. He said that
1t proposed much-needed change. While he
was Of the opinion that the proposed salary for
the recorder was ample he thought that the
deputy ought to receive the same salary, as he
did nearly all the work.
VIEWS OF LAWYERS
Mr.. W. R. Woodward said that the Office
should be salaried one, but the salary should
be good one, commensurate with the respon-
sibility.
Judson s. Gull thinks the principle of the bill
is all right The office should be salaried. but
the sum named is not high enough. To secure
the best service the employees should be salaried.
Il. L. Wallach endorsed the principle of max
ing it salaried office, but said the receipts
should not all be paid to the District for much
was needed for conveniences in the Office.
John Ridout said: 1.-THE principle is all right
but the salary should be on the bond proposed,
81, 0O0."
Mr.. Joseph F. Scaggs: 'By all means the
Office should be salaried and the salary a good
one. That proposed is too low. and the receipts
should go to completing the record and putting
the Office in the best possible condition.
w. A. Gordon: Il don't see why the Office
should not be salaried, but the salary proposed
Is too low"
NJ. Q. Barnard: ut is a grand scheme to make
the office ii salaried one. but grander in provid-
ing that the appointee should be a District one.
The surplus shonld be spent in the Office, how
ever, rather than be paid to the Commission
ers, at least until the Office is complete"