SO TWENTY-THIRD ANNUAL REPORT

OPINIONS OF THE ATTORNEY GENERAL

We asked for no help from the Attorney General during the course of
fiscal year 1958, but shortly thereafter we consulted him twice in regard to
the Maryland Guide. I thought it proper to include his opinions in this report
since they resulted from action taken by the Hall of Records Commission at
its April 9, 1958 meeting. The opinions are self-explanatory; their importance
to us is explained in my Letter of Transmittal.

July 1, 1958

Dr. Morris L. RadofT

Archivist and Records Administrator

Hall of Records

Annapolis, Maryland

Dear Dr. RadofT:

I have reviewed the contract between the State of Maryland and the
Oxford University Press New York, Inc. and am of the opinion that
the State is bound by the agreement. It is my view that you may call
upon the publisher under the provisions of clause 5 of the agreement
to publish the new edition of the work which you have prepared,
after giving them due notice thereof. If, at that time, they refuse to
print the new edition, I believe that the State would then be in a po-
sition to enter into an agreement with some other publisher to pub-
lish the new edition.

Since the original agreement is silent concerning the price to be
charged for any new edition, I am of the opinion that the publisher
would have a right to charge for the new edition a fair and reason-
able amount, considering current day prices for materials and labor
involved in the publishing of the new edition.

I would advise against publishing the new edition under a different
title until such time as the new edition has been written which will
not conflict with the copyright as provided for under the old agree-
ment. It would be rather risky to publish the new edition if it is so
similar to the old that it would probably violate those rights.

Very truly yours,

STEDMAN PRESCOTT, JR.
Deputy Attorney General
SP:MH