40 THIRTEENTH ANNUAL REPORT

A Survey of Salisbury, Maryland, prepared by Mayor and Council of Salis-
bury, County Commissioners of Wicomico County, and Chamber of
Commerce, Salipbury, Salisbury, Maryland, 1945. Gift.

UNITED STATES BUREAU OF EDUCATION, Contributions to American Educa-
tional History, edited by Herbert B. Adams, Washington, D. C., 1894.

———— History of Education in Maryland, edited by Bernard C. Steiner,

Washington, D. C., 1894.
UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE, Soil Survey of Cecil County,

Maryland, by S. O. Perkins and W. H. Moore, Washington, D. C.,

1927.

———— Soil Survey of Howard County, Maryland, by William T. Carter,
Jr., and J. P. D. Hull, Washington, D. C., 1917.

———— Soil Survey of Somerset County, Maryland, by J. M. Snyder and J.
Hall Barton, Washington, D. C., 1924.

UNIVERSITY OF MARYLAND, The Struggle for Party Government, by E. E.
Schattschneider, College Park, Maryland, 1948. Gift of the University
of Maryland.

WEEMS, DOUGLAS ANDES, History of the Weems Family, Annapolis, 1945.
Gift of Captain P. V. H. Weems.

WILLIAMS, THOMAS J. C., A History of Washington County, Maryland,
Hagerstown, Maryland, 1906. Purchase.

WOLMAN, ABEL, Municipal Water and Sewerage Costs in Maryland. Re-
printed from the Journal of the New England Water Works Associa-
tion, Vol. XLI, No. 4. Gift of the author.

WRIGHT, Louis B., The Atlantic Frontier, Colonial American Civilization
(1607-1763), New York, 1947. Purchase.

OPINION OF THE ATTORNEY GENERAL
The members of the Hall of Records Commission will recall that
after long study it was decided that transfer of county records to the
Hall of Records should be made mandatory in the case of those records
created before April 28, 1788. A bill providing for such mandatory
transfers was prepared and a hearing held before the Legislative Coun-
cil The bill was introduced in the General Assembly of 1945 and after
full consideration was passed (Acts 1945, Chapter 248).

A large proportion of the county records transferred to the Hall
of Records between June 1, 1945 and April 1948 were sent here as a
result of this Act, and it was, therefore, a serious problem for us when
the Act was challenged. Fortunately, the Attorney General held that
the Act was mandatory and not directory. Because of its importance
to us and also because the opinions of the Attorney General have not