THIRTY -THIRD CONGRESS, 1853-1855. 587 



prevent the President, who is a member of the establishment, from 

 directing a suit in the name of the United States. If it denies legal 

 rights to any officer or other person, the same remedy exists as in an}' 

 other case of claim against the United States. No instance of a denial 

 of legal right has been shown to the committee. An attempt to do so 

 was indeed made on the part of an emplo3'ee of the Institution, who 

 claimed to be entitled to larger compensation than had been paid to 

 him. But the attempt was a signal failure. His own receipts con- 

 tradicted his claims and satisfied the committee that he had been paid 

 all he could legally demand; and the assertion of extraordinary merit 

 in his labors, alleged as an equitable ground of claim, failed when a 

 resort was had to testimony other than his own. 



The committee therefore conclude that there is no necessity for addi- 

 tional legislation. 



4. Maladministration. 



The first of Mr. Meacham's complaints under this head is "that the 

 Regents have made the Secretar}' the organ of communication between 

 them and the other officers of the Institution, cutting off other officers 

 from direct official intercourse with the board, neglecting or refusing 

 to procure or make by-laws defining the position and power of persons 

 employed in the Institution, and expressing the opinion that all the 

 assistants are removable at the pleasure of the Secretary." 



This complaint seems to be founded on an entire misapprehension of 

 the act of Congress creating the Institution, and the proper relations 

 of the Secretary and his subordinates. By the act of Congress the 

 Secretary is the sole administrative officer of the Institution. The 

 other ofiScers are not only his subordinates, but are nothing more than 

 his assistants, who are employed to assist him in his duties, because it 

 is ph3'sically impossible for him to perform all of these duties himself. 

 The law charges the Secretary alone with the duties enumerated, and 

 therefore devolves upon him the sole responsibility, unless when it is 

 shared with the executive committee of the Regents, whose functions 

 are not precisely defined in the law, but who act as a board of control 

 or council to the Secretary. We adopt on this subject the reasoning 

 of the special committee of the Board of Regents in their report of 

 the 2Uth of May last, as follows: 



The law is declaratory and positive in charging the Secretary with the enumerated 

 duties, and therefore invests him and him alone with the corresponding powers. 

 But as it must have been manifest that no secretary could be able of himself to per- 

 form personally everything required for the discharge of his enumerated duties, pro- 

 vision is made for aid to him in the clause which says that he "may, with the con- 

 sent of the board, employ assistants," etc. 



The positions of the persons so employed are determined by the word which desig- 

 nates them in the clause authorizing their employment. They are called ' ' a.ssistants. ' ' 

 To whom? Not to the Regents, but to the Secretary. Their position is necessarily 

 subordinate; and, as their duties are those of a.ssistants to their principal, they can 



