FYI, I received this email today from Dr. Armstrong. Patti >From: "Fredrick Armstrong" <fharmstrong@wvculture.org> >To: "Patti McDonald" <mcd@access.mountain.net> >Subject: Re: Hampshire Records >Date: Tue, 4 Apr 2000 15:40:36 -0400 >X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 4.72.2106.4 > >Ms. McDonald: > I have been able to discuss the Hampshire County records with Ms. Link >and Mr. Rice. It appears a quantity of the records have been process and the >index completed for these. The records are secured in the vault in the >basement in a new filing cabinet. Access to these records is restricted but >arrangements are in place to service public requests for research and >copies. There will be a charge for the copies but I am uncertain as to >whether it includes a research/retrieval fee. > Regarding the microfilming of these records, I have discussed this with >Ms. Link and asked that this be presented to the County Commission. I have >also discussed with Mr. Rice arrangements to include the index he prepared >so as to assist access to the records filmed. Filming the records would >reduce, it could eliminate, handling of the fragile originals thus >indirectly preserving them. It would also provide security by eliminating >access to the originals. It would require removing the records to Charleston >to film them but we would service requests for research and copies while >here. Ms. Link will present this to the commission at its next meeting, if >time on the agenda permits and if not at the following meeting. I will let >you know if this works out. > In any event, the records are in better condition now than they were and >much more accessible because of the index, if everything is working as >described to me. While this may not redress your months of stress and worry >over access to the records and unanswered questions, if it provides a better >future for the records, I hope you will find it an acceptable level of pain. >If you have any questions or additional concerns regarding these records, or >other county public records, let me know and I will do my best within the >limitations of this office, time and resources to assist you. > >Sincerely, > > >Fredrick H. Armstrong

Which records are these that are being discussed? I visited the courthouse in Romney last Friday and found little of value. Perhaps the records being discussed may be of help to me. Douglas Armstrong -----Original Message----- From: Patti McDonald [mailto:mcd@access.mountain.net] Sent: Tuesday, April 04, 2000 5:30 PM To: WVHAMPSH-L@rootsweb.com Subject: [WVHAMPSH-L] Fwd: Re: Hampshire Records FYI, I received this email today from Dr. Armstrong. Patti >From: "Fredrick Armstrong" <fharmstrong@wvculture.org> >To: "Patti McDonald" <mcd@access.mountain.net> >Subject: Re: Hampshire Records >Date: Tue, 4 Apr 2000 15:40:36 -0400 >X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 4.72.2106.4 > >Ms. McDonald: > I have been able to discuss the Hampshire County records with Ms. Link >and Mr. Rice. It appears a quantity of the records have been process and the >index completed for these. The records are secured in the vault in the >basement in a new filing cabinet. Access to these records is restricted but >arrangements are in place to service public requests for research and >copies. There will be a charge for the copies but I am uncertain as to >whether it includes a research/retrieval fee. > Regarding the microfilming of these records, I have discussed this with >Ms. Link and asked that this be presented to the County Commission. I have >also discussed with Mr. Rice arrangements to include the index he prepared >so as to assist access to the records filmed. Filming the records would >reduce, it could eliminate, handling of the fragile originals thus >indirectly preserving them. It would also provide security by eliminating >access to the originals. It would require removing the records to Charleston >to film them but we would service requests for research and copies while >here. Ms. Link will present this to the commission at its next meeting, if >time on the agenda permits and if not at the following meeting. I will let >you know if this works out. > In any event, the records are in better condition now than they were and >much more accessible because of the index, if everything is working as >described to me. While this may not redress your months of stress and worry >over access to the records and unanswered questions, if it provides a better >future for the records, I hope you will find it an acceptable level of pain. >If you have any questions or additional concerns regarding these records, or >other county public records, let me know and I will do my best within the >limitations of this office, time and resources to assist you. > >Sincerely, > > >Fredrick H. Armstrong

To make a long story short, some very old records (late18th-early 19th century) were discovered in the Hampshire Co. Courthouse basement last year by Mr. Rice. Mr. Rice, a private individual from another county, was granted sole access to the records and commenced to create an index of the records and place the documents in acid-free sleeves at his expense. Other people were allowed to see his index, but not copy it. A great furor arose over the situation, and Dr. Armstrong (an expert on preservation of old documents from, I believe, WVU) was consulted. Mr. Rice resigned from the project and is publishing his index. Patti's message from Dr. Armstrong explains the current status of the situation. Anyone wishing to read the MANY messages that flew back and forth on the list should check the list archives. Douglas Armstrong wrote: > Which records are these that are being discussed? I visited the courthouse > in Romney last Friday and found little of value. Perhaps the records being > discussed may be of help to me.

Douglas, I forgot to add that Mr. Rice's index can be seen at the courthouse and at the county library down the street. Also, according to a message that appeared on the list, Mr. Rice resigned from the project before all the records were indexed. Elaine