Evening star. [volume] (Washington, D.C.) 1854-1972, 1904-02-25
MEETS WITH O|SFAvOR
Removal Of. City Hall Offices
to Municipal Building.
DECIDED OPPOSITION
THE SEPARATION OF COURT FROM
ITS RECORDS.
Transfer Of Recorder of Deeds and
Register Of Wills Regarded as
Very Objectionable.
DECIDED OPPOSITION

appropriation bill to remove the offices of
the recorder of deeds and register of wills
to the new municipal building meets with
general disfayor at the city hall. Lave
yers and title examiners are outspoken in
their opposition to the scheme.
The removal of the Office Of the recorder
of deeds, it is suggested, would retard the
completion of the examinations of titles to
real estate and would entail increased
work on the examiners by separating the
land records from the records Of the
clerks Office. where the files of equity suits
and judgments are kept, reference to
which enters so materially into the exami-
nations of titles to many tracts of land
within the District. This disadvantage, 1t
is said, would not be confined to the title
examiners, but the delay in their work
would be felt by the real estate dealers,
who are always clamoring for early re-
ports on titles under exaIpination, and
would also be felt by the general public in
what is denominated the unnecessary
waste of time before their loans could be
contaminated and their transfers Of prop
erty effected
The transfer of the Office of the register
of wills would be in effect. it is pointed
out, the separating of court from ITS
clerks Office and it's records.
The register OF wills is clerk of the Pro-
bate Court, and in his office every day is
held the sessions of the Probate Court.
Views of an Attorney.
ct is not to be presumed" remarked an
attorney in discussing the proposed removal,
that the justice presiding over the Probate
Court would hold court outside of the city
hall. and to suggest the removal Of the
registers office would be to take the clerk
and the records of the court and remove
both to a place most announcement, to the
court and the presiding justice, and a law
yer would have to go to the DISTRICT Dulio-
ing to file his papers and then make trip
to the court to present them to the judge.
1t is thought by many lawyers that to re-
move the office Of register from the city
hall is SO palpabiy mistake that II need
only be called to the attention OF Congress
to have it stricken from the measure
The retention of the records of the reg
listers office in the city hall would add to
the argument, it is. contended, that the
Office of the recorder of deeds should not
be removed, because the disposal of prop
erty by will enters largely into title ex-
aminations, and great Inconvenience would
be felt If these records were kept at a
distance from the land records
Neither of these offices has any place IN
a municipal building, it is urged by OPP
ponents to the removal, because neither
has any connection with the executive gov
eminent of the District the Commissioners
having no authority over the recorder or
the register, both of whom are presidential
appointees.
No Dealings With Register.
The District Commissioners have no
dealings with the register of wills Office.
ard their dealings with the recorders Of
flee is on the same footing as any indi-
yidual, the District paying the same fee
for recording every deed made to 1t as
does any individual real estate dealer or
purchaser.
The only advantage to be gained by the
ce>S vol (f
said, would be the housing Of the land rec
ords in a f1reproof building, but this Sc
curity could be obtained, some lawyers say,
by the erection of metal cases In the pres
ent office and 1t is suggested that 1t might
have been to avoid making an appropria-
ton of SO 600 asked for by Recorder Dancy
for euuipping his Office with these file cases
that led to the insertion OF the proposed
removal in the municipal building appro-
priation
two offices and the courts been understood
by the House committee, it is believed, the
removal scheme would never have been re-
ported in the bill. Daily the land RECORDS
are required in the courts, and the danger
Of sending them distance Of ten blocks,
the possible loss in transit, not to consider
how great would be the inconvenience to
the office and to title examiners, is urged
as strong argument against removal.
Probate Courts Daily Session.
The YProbate Court does not hold it's ses-
sions lone afternoon in the week., as was
suggested by member of the House COM
mittee, but holds daily sessions, and SO
large is the volume of business brought be-
fore it that the presiding justice finds little
or no time to give to other business.
The consensus of opinion at the city hall
is that the offices of the recorder and reg
lister should remain where they are, and
that whatever additional safeguards are
necessary for the records should be given
by equipping the Offices with fireproof
metal cases until such time as Congress
shall see At to appropriate the necessary
money to erect a modern fireproof build
ing for the District Supreme Court.