THIRTY-THEKD CONGRESS, 1853-1855. 57 1 



or of the heads of departments; but there must be exceptional cases, and, considering 

 tlie persons who are heads of departments and the knowledge and ability by which 

 they are and ought to be distinguished, it seems impossible to suppose that the trus- 

 tees would not derive the greatest assistance from immediate, full, and unreserved 

 communication with them on questions arising in the administration of their respec- 

 tive departments. We find, however, there is scarcely one of the highest officers of 

 the Institution who has not complained of systematic exclusion from the board when 

 the affairs of his department are under consideration, as equally disparaging to him- 

 self and injurious to the interests of the department, giving no opportunity of explain- 

 ing their reports or meeting the objections and criticisms to which they may have 

 been subject; and their own absence, joined to that of the principal librarian, leaves 

 them under the painful but natural impression, where their suggestions are dis- 

 allowed, that the interests with which they are charged have not been fully repre- 

 sented. We can not but ascribe to this cause the unfortunate and unseemly jeal- 

 ousies which the evidence shows to have long existed among the principal officers 

 of the Museum — their distrust in the security of the means by which they commu- 

 nicate with the board, their misgivings as to the fullness and fairness of the consider- 

 ation which their suggestions receive, and their feelings of injustice done to their own 

 department, arising, it may be, from an overzeal for its interests or overestimate of 

 its importance. 



Finally, they use this language in reference to what they judge to 

 be the too overshadowing power allowed to the secretary by the trus- 

 tees: 



From his control of the business, constant intercourse with the trustees, and attend- 

 ance at all their meetings, he has arisen to be the most important officer in the estab- 

 lishment, though without that responsibility which attached to the principal librarian 

 and the heads of departments. The influence possessed by this officer in the affairs 

 of the museum has followed the usual course where the secretary is permanent and 

 where the administrative board is fluctuating, and must depend mainly upon the 

 secretary for the information required in the dispatch of ordinary business. (Report 

 of Commission.) 



The case of the British Museum confirms the conviction that what- 

 ever power is lodged in the secretary — and we do not advise to 

 encroach upon or to diminish his authority — it is all important to have 

 it defined and guided and guarded by express regulation. Gentlemen 

 of education and refined sensibilities will be willing to conform to 

 rules in the shape of law, but will always reluct against and resent 

 the exercise of absolute and unrestrained power. Ever}^ American 

 heart instinctively resists arbitrary authority; no reasonable mind 

 objects to conformity to established regulations and obedience to 

 defined, permanent, and uniform rules. Beyond those rules the rights 

 of a subordinate officer are as perfect as those of any other man. 

 Within them he feels that it is no degradation to obey. It is not at 

 all improbable that many of the difficulties that have been encountered 

 in the British Museum and in the Smithsonian Institution have arisen 

 not so much from lodging too much power in the secretary as from 

 the absence of by-laws fully defining the powers, duties, and relations 

 of all the officers employed in them. The committee is particularly 



