66 TWENTIETH ANNUAL REPORT

Parole and Probation is required to "maintain a record of its ac-
tions", but no proviso appears which requires the maintenance of
original records. In my opinion, the intendment of the law is that a
record be maintained, but not particularly the original record. Ac-
cordingly, you may, in accordance with the provisions of Sections
153 through and including 157 of Article 41 of the Code (1951
Edition and 1954 Supplement), arrange with the Hall of Records
Commission for appropriate, lawful disposition of your original re-
cords after you have completed the proper microfilming thereof.

If you should desire further clarification of our views, I will be
happy to furnish the same upon request.

Sincerely yours,
Norman P. Ramsay
NPR-h Assistant Attorney General

October 31, 1955

DR. MORRIS L. RADOFF

Archivist and Records Administrator

Hall of Records

Annapolis, Maryland

DEAR DR. RADOFF:

You have asked that we summarize for you the general effect
of the past formal and informal rulings of this office with respect to
destruction of original records after the same have been microfilmed
by your Department. As you know, this has been a matter of consid-
erable correspondence and discussion.

The basic difficulty which arises in the situation is that the Act
of the Legislature, which permits microfilming of records by your
Department (Article 41, Sections 152-157, 1951 Code, as amended),
contains as a part thereof the requirement that no public record re-
quired by statute to be maintained permanently shall be destroyed.
The statute likewise forbids the destruction of permanent books of
account. The difficulties which have arisen have been occasioned by
the fact that where we have found statutory provisions with respect
to a State Department which require the maintenance of original
records and reports, we have been compelled to advise you that, even
though your Department provided for the microfilming of those re-
cords, the originals could not be destroyed. We have no option except