8 THIRTY-FIRST ANNUAL REPORT

President of The Johns Hopkins University:

DR. MILTON S. EISENHOWER ..................... Baltimore

President of the Peabody Institute:

JOHN M. NELSON III........................... Baltimore

The Hall of Records Commission met once during the fiscal year,
September 21, 1965. The meeting was called to order by the Vice
Chairman, Dr. Richard D. Weigle, at the Hall of Records in
Annapolis at 2 p.m. The retirement of Judge Frederick W. Brune,
the former Chairman, from the Court of Appeals, made a new elec-
tion of officers necessary. Immediately after the approval of the min-
utes of the previous meeting, the meeting was opened for nominations
for Chairman and Vice Chairman. Chief Judge Stedman Prescott,
Judge Brune's successor, was chosen Chairman, and Dr. Weigle was
reelected Vice Chairman.

After the new Chairman had taken the chair, the Archivist sub-
mitted a list of staff members who had been employed since the previous
meeting. They were all approved including two employees who had
been appointed to newly-created positions, Archivist IV and Clerk-
Typist II.

The Archivist reported on his efforts to retrieve from the Librar-
ian of Congress certain early records of Maryland. In his negotiations
he had been ably assisted by Congressman Charles McC. Mathias, Jr.,
of the Sixth District, but all efforts were in vain in view of the fact
that the Librarian of Congress maintained, first, that these records were
not fugitive Maryland Archives, and second, even if they were, he
could not return them unless they were declared surplus. The Com-
mission asked the Archivist to enlist the aid of the entire Maryland
Delegation in this effort.

The Archivist advised the members of the Commission that at the
1963 session of the General Assembly, Mr. Medairy, Delegate from
Baltimore County, had introduced two bills (Nos. 410 and 427)
which provided for the abolition of the office of Land Commissioner
and the transfer of the functions and records of that office to the Hall
of Records. This action was taken without consultation with the Archi-
vist and when the Chairman of the Committee on Judiciary called him
to ask whether he wished to be heard he declined since the matter
had not previously come before the Commission. Both bills were lost
in committee.