In criminal proceedings all parts of the record must be interpreted together, and a deficiency in one part may be supplied by what appears elsewhere therein; St. Clair v. U. S., 154 U. S. 134, 14 Sup. Ct. 1002, 38 L. Ed. 936.
Altering records of a court is a crime pun ishable at common law ; 2 East, P. C. 866. See Saunders v. People, 38 Mich. 218; State v. Williams, 30 Me. 484 ; 1 Bish. Cr. L. § 468 (6). An attorney may be disbarred for alteration of the record by falsifying the ste nographer's transcript of the evidence to de ceive an appellate court ; State v. 129 Mo. 291, 31 S. W. 889.
Laws for the registration of deeds are of statutory origin, and the statute must be ex amined to determine what instruments are to be recorded, where they are to be recorded, and the effect of a failure to record them; First Nat. Bank of Claremore v. Keys, 229 U. S. 179, 33 Sup. Ct. 642, 57 L. Ed. 1140.
The fact of an instrument affecting prop erty being recorded according to law is held to operate as a constructive notice to all sub sequent purchasers of any estate, legal or equitable, in the same property ; Parkist v. Alexander, 1 Johns. Ch. (N. Y.) 394. And even if not recorded, if it has been filed for record and its existence is necessarily im plied from the existence of another instru ment already of record, purchasers will be deemed to have had notice of its existence; 14 Cent. L. J. 374.
But all conveyances and deeds which may be de facto recorded are not to be considered as giving notice : in order to have this effect, the instruments must be such as are author ized to be recorded, and the registry must have been made in compliance with the law, otherwise the registry is to be treated as a mere nullity, and it will not affect a subse quent purchaser or incumbrancer unless he has actual notice ; 2 Sch. & L. 68 ; Astor v. Wells, 4 Wheat. (U. S.) 466, 4 L. Ed. 1 Story, Eq. Jur. § 403 ; Bullard v. Hinckley, 5 Greenl. (Me.) 272; but where a statute makes it discretionary to record an instru ment, the effect of recording is in no wise lessened, but is deemed a constructive notice the same as if the recording had been re quired ; Appeal of Pepper, 77 Pa. 373. The record of a deed is not constructive notice of its contents when it is not entitled to be re corded under the recording acts ; Prentice v. Storage Co., 58 Fed. 437, 7 C. C. A. 293. Where a proper book is kept for the purpose of showing when an instrument is left for record, delay or negligence in entering it in other books will not affect it as a lien upon the property ; Appeal of Woods, 82 Pa. 116.
But it is held that it is the duty of a mort gagee to see that his mortgage is correctly recorded ; a mortgage defectively recorded and indexed by changing the first initial of the mortgagor's name, the correct name be ing entirely omitted from the record, is not binding on a subsequent purchaser, without notice, from the mortgagor ; Prouty v. Mar shall, 225 Pa. 570, 74 Atl. 550, 25 L. R. A. (N. S.) 1211. So a judgment docketed against Amanda Haring is not notice as to property standing in the name of Melvina Hornig; Haring v. Murphy, 60 Misc. Rep. 374, 113 N. Y. Supp. 452. See cases cited in Burns v. Ross, 215 Pa. 293, 64 Atl. 526, 7 L. R. A. (N. S.) 415, 114 Am. St. Rep. 963.
A recorder, if errors in transferring should occur, should explain them and not erase ; Glasgow v. Kann, 171 Pa. 262, 32 Atl. 1095.
An action will lie against a recorder of deeds for neglect ; Rising v. Dickinson, 18 N. D. 478, 121 N. W. 616, 23 L. R. A. (N. S.) 127, 138 Am. St. Rep. 779, 20 Ann. Cas. 484.
Records of a public office (here a card index of assessments made by the official, though not required by law to be kept) are public property ; Robison v. Fishback, 175 Ind. 132, 93 N. E. 666, Ann. Cas. 1913B, 1271.
See, as to recording acts, 3 Law Mag. & Rev., 4th sec. 412 ; Judge Cooley's Paper in 4th Rep. Am. Bar Asso. (1881); Lecture of W. H. Rawle before the Law Dept. Univ. of Pa., 1881; as to mortgages, see MORTGAGE ; as to falsification of a record, see FORGERY. As to giving full fa/1th and credit to judi cial proceedings, under the United States constitution, see FOREIGN JUDGMENT. The constitutional provision applies in terms to public acts, records, and judicial proceedings, and it is held that the term records in the Judiciary Act of May 26, 1790, which pro vides how the'y shall be proved and admitted in evidence, includes all acts, legislative, ex ecutive, judicial, and ministerial, composing the public records of the state ; White v. Burnley, 20 How. (U. S.) 250, 15 L. Ed. 886. Questions as to what is or is not a part of the record have arisen, principally on writ of error or appeal, as to what parts of the record and proceedings of the court below are to be considered as parts of the• record before the appellate court. In many of these cases, matters which were actually a part of the record below are only such in the court above when made so by being em bodied in the bill of exceptions. Among the matters and things which have been held not to be a part of the record, but to be consid ered with reference to the foregoing qual ification, are : Trial list ; Moore v. Kline, 1 Pen. & W. (Pa.) 129 ; bond for costs ; Mont gomery v. Carpenter, 5 Ark. 264 ; Maynard v. Hoskins, 8 Mich. 81; writing sued on; Williams v. Duffy, 7 Humphr. (Tenn.) 255 ; Clark v. Gibson, 2 Ark. 109 (unless made so by oyer or otherwise; Pelham v. Bank, 4 Ark. 202) ; an affidavit made to supply a part of the record which has been lost ; Troy v. Reilley, 3 Scam. (III.) 259 ; papers present ed to a court and acted upon merely as mat ters of evidence ; Kirby v. Wood, 16 Me. 81; the registry of a mechanic's lien ; Davis v. Church, 1 W. & S. (Pa.) 240; the statement of demand, in the court for the trial of small causes ; Vandyke v. Bastedo, 15 N. J. L. 224; a warrant of attorney to confess judgment and an affidavit showing the death of one of the signers of it ; Magher v. Howe, 12 Ill. 379 ; instructions to the jury ; Pierce v. Locke, 11 Ia. 454 (contra, where they were signed by the judge and filed ; Allen v. Dav ison, 16 Ind. 416); letters copied into the transcripts as exhibits ; Stodder v. Grant, 28 Ala. 416 ; papers filed after an appeal prayed, taken, and signed by the judge ; Gray v. Na tions, 1 Ark. 557 ; a plea stricken from the files ; Kelly v. Matthews, 5 Ark. 223; Schmidt v. Colley, 29 Ind. 120; minutes of the court taken at the trial ; Dawley v. Hovi ous, 23 CaL 103 ; or clerk's minutes ; People v. Mining Co., 33 Cal. 171; a bill of particu lars ; Eggleston v. Buck, 24 Ill. 262 ; a sum mons or other writ; Childs v. Risk, Morr. (Ia.) 439 (otherwise where there was no appearance ; Stanton v. Woodcock, 19 Ind. 273).