
    NEVILLE v. BOARD OF HEALTH.
    
      N. Y. Supreme Court, Chambers;
    
    
      September, 1892.
    1. Records ; inspection.] Under section 50 of the Consolidation Act {L. 1882, ch. 410)—providing that all books, accounts and papers in any department of the government of New York City, or bureau thereof, shall be open to the inspection of any taxpayer, and authorizing a taxpayer, in case such inspection is refused, to apply by petition for an order directing that inspection be allowed,—a taxpayer, who has been refused inspection of the records of deaths kept by the Bureau of Vital Statistics of the Health Department is entitled upon petition to an order for inspection.
    2. Forms!) Forms of a petition and order, under section 50 of the Consolidation Act (L. 1882, ch. 410) for inspection by taxpayer of records kept by a department of the government of New York City.
    
      Petition by a taxpayer under the Consolidation Act, § 50 (L. 1882, ch. 410) for an order directing that he be allowed to inspect a record kept by a bureau of a department of the city government of New York.
    Timothy F. Neville, having been refused inspection of the death records kept by the Bureau of Vital Statistics on the ground that it was contrary to the regulations of the Health Department to permit inspection, presented the following petition.
    “To the Hon. Miles Beach or one of the Justices of the Supreme Court sitting at Chambers thereof:
    “Your petitioner respectfully shows: That he is a citizen and taxpayer of the City of New York. That he has also been for over twenty years a Counsellor of the Supreme Court. That in connection with a certain matter which your petitioner has been professionally employed to prosecute, it is necessary for him to examine the records of deaths in said city. That for the purpose of prosecuting the same your petitioner on the 31st day of August, 1892, called at the Bureau of Vital Statistics of the Health Department of said city, and requested of the clerk in charge to be permitted to inspect the records of deaths in said city. He told me that it was against the rules of the Department to allow sjich inspection. I then applied to Gen. Emmons Clarke, the secretary of said board. That notwithstanding your petitioner explained to them the object for which he wished to make said inspection, such inspection was refused, said secretary informing petitioner that it was a rule of said board not to allow inspection of said records, on the ground that they are not public records, but said he would have a search made for me fora fee of about $3.70.
    “ And your petitioner further shows that said information is necessary and is sought for the purpose of removing or to aid in removing an alleged flaw in the title of lands which was originally derived by a grant from the United States government to the soldiers of the army and their heirs. The person whose death your petitioner desires to ascertain being an heir of one of said soldiers, from and through whom the title of said lands has descended. The soldier Hiram Corwin died prior to May, 1812, and the heir Watts Corwin subsequent to November 30, 1818, but at what dates petitioner is unable to state.
    “Your petitioner further says that he again called on the first day of September, 1892, at said Department, and requested the president of said Board, Hon. Chas. G, Wilson, to see said records, he also refused, and said it was against the rules of the department.
    “ Wherefore, your petitioner prays for an order that he be allowed to inspect said records of deaths.”
    [ Verification.] [Signature. ]
    Upon the above petition the following order was made: “Upon reading and filing the petition in the above entitled matter and , upon the proceedings thereon : . . . Ordered and directed that the prayer of petitioner be granted with costs, and that said Timothy F. Neville, during regular office hours and free of all charges and expenses, shall be allowed and permitted to make such personal inspection of the records of deaths in the Bureau of Vital Statistics of said Board of Health as he may require, under such reasonable regulations as the said Bureau may make known.”
    
      Timothy F. Neville, petitioner, in his own behalf.
    
      
      Henry Steinert, for respondent.
    
      
       This principle applies to a number of classes of cases. As to compelling amendment of an erroneous record, see People ex ret, Haase v. German Hospital, 8 Abb. N. C. 332. •
      Section 50 of the Consolidation Act {L. 1882, c. 410) provides that;—
      “ All books, accounts, and papers in any department or bureau thereof, except the Police Department, shall at all times be open to the inspection of any taxpayer, subject to any reasonable rules and regulations in regard to the time and manner of such inspection as such department, bureau, or office may make in regard to the same m order to secure the safety of such books, accounts, and papers and the proper use of them by the department, bureau, or office, in case such inspection shall be refused, such taxpayer on his sworn petition, describing the particular book, account, or paper that he desires to inspect, may upon notice of not less than one day to such department, bureau, or office, apply to any justice of the Supreme Court for an order that he be allowed to make such inspection as such justice shall by his order authorize, and such order shall specify the time and manner of such inspection.
    
   Beach, J.

The Consolidation Act, § 50, fully covers this application favorably to the petitioner. Motion granted.  