Belt v. Prince George's County Abstract Co.

Citation20 A. 982,73 Md. 289
PartiesBELT, CLERK, ETC., v. PRINCE GEORGE'S COUNTY ABSTRACT CO.
Decision Date12 December 1890
CourtMaryland Court of Appeals

Appeal from circuit court, Prince George's county.

Argued before MILLER, IRVING, BRYAN, MCSHERRY, and ROBINSON, JJ.

C C. Magruder and Joseph S. Wilson, for appellant.

William Stanley, F. H. Stanley, and Fillmore Beall, for appellee.

ROBINSON J.

The appellee is an abstract-title company chartered by the legislature of the state, and the question is whether its officers and employes have the legal right themselves to examine and make abstracts or copies of the public records in the office of the clerk of the circuit court for Prince George's county, without paying the fees, which the law provides shall be paid to the clerk for such services. The broad contention is that the public records are public property, and kept for the public benefit, and, although their custody and safe-keeping is committed by law to the clerk, yet every one has the right to examine them, and to make such copies as he may see fit, free of charge. It is not pretended that this right is a common-law right, and, if it exists, then it must be founded upon statutory law. What then are the provisions of the Code, upon the construction of which this question depends? Section 1, art. 17, provides that every clerk shall have the custody of the books and papers pertaining to his office, and shall carefully keep and preserve the same, and shall give a copy of any paper or record in his office to any person applying for the same upon being paid the usual fees for transcribing such paper or record. Then section 12, art. 36, prescribes the fees which shall be paid to the clerk for such copies, and for making searches in regard to any "matter above a year's standing if found." Section 44, art. 17, further provides, as one of the conditions of his official bond, that he shall duly look after and preserve, and shall deliver to his successor, all papers and records, in good order and repair. There is no provision in the Code, such as will be found in the statutes of the several states referred to at bar, that all persons shall have free access to the public records of a county, and shall have the right to examine and make copies or abstracts from the same. On the contrary while our Code provides that every one shall be entitled to copies of the records, and to the right of such information as they may afford, yet it provides that such copies and searches shall be made by the clerk himself, and on the payment of such fees as the law prescribes. And the reason of this is obvious. Upon the safe-keeping and preservation of the matters of record in the clerk's office the most important and valuable public and private rights depend. Here all deeds, mortgages, decrees, judgments, and liens are recorded. Here, too, are to be found all papers, proceedings, and docket entries in every suit at law, and in equity. And if every one, whether known or unknown to the clerk, whether trustworthy or untrustworthy, has the right to demand of the clerk that these records and papers shall be delivered to him, and that he himself shall examine and make abstracts from the same, then the law affords every facility to designing and interested persons to mutilate and to impair the integrity of such records. Every one knows that the mere dash of the pen, the addition or alteration of a word, may change entirely the legal effect and operation of papers, matters of record; and, if the appellee's contention be sound, then the law, in requiring that the clerk shall safely keep and preserve such records, has imposed upon him a duty which it is impossible for him to perform. We have no hesitation in saying that nothing less than the plain and explicit terms of the statute could justify a construction so fraught with danger to the highest public interests. There is nothing certainly in our Code which sustains such a construction. On the contrary, as we construe the several sections bearing upon the question, it would, in our opinion, be a breach of duty, on the part of the clerk, to permit any one to examine and make searches of the records in his office, unless it be under the supervision of himself, or one of his deputies.

And such being the case, we cannot suppose for a moment that the legislature meant to confer upon the appellee a privilege in this respect which is denied to the public. The appellee is a company chartered solely for its own private purposes, and the examination and copies of the records, which it proposes to make, are to be used by it in its business of guarantying titles to property, upon compensation to be paid for such services. And though its business may be a legitimate one though it may be entitled under its charter to copies of the...

To continue reading

Request your trial

VLEX uses login cookies to provide you with a better browsing experience. If you click on 'Accept' or continue browsing this site we consider that you accept our cookie policy. ACCEPT