158 MEMORIAL OP JOSEPH HENRY. 



reviewing the wholesubject at great length, reciting what the Institu- 

 tion had done, and justifying t lie small appropriation for the library. 

 The report rinsed with resolutions repealing the compromise arrange- 

 ment, and leaving the apportionment among the different objects to 

 the judgment of the Regents. 



In the meantime the difference between the Secretary and the 

 Librarian reached a stage at which the further co-operation of both 

 in the affairs of the Institution was no longer practicable. The 

 Secretary made known his intention of removing the Librarian, 

 taking the ground that while the Board of Regents had power to 

 remove either the Secretary or his assistants, the Secretary himself 

 could remove the latter without reference to the Board. A resolu- 

 tion to this effect was introduced by Mr. James M. Mason, of 

 Virginia. The question was, in principle, the same which has been 

 raised from time to time since the foundation of our Government 

 relative to the general power of superior officers over their subordi- 

 nates in eases where the law makes no express provision. Under 

 the terms of the organic act the Secretary and the Board of Resents. 

 so far as the assistants were concerned, stood in nearly the same 

 relation to each other that the President and Senate stand under 

 the National Constitution. The Secretary, as executive, had the 

 power of appointment, with the consent of the Board of Regents, 

 but the law was silent on the subject of removal. Mr. Mason's 

 resolution, after several amendments had been voted down, was 

 adopted by a vote of 6 to A, and the position of the Secretary as the 

 responsible head of the Institution was thus fully defined. 



It would however appear that Mr. Jewett continued his efforts 

 to secure a larger appropriation for the library than the Secretary 

 or the executive committee considered desirable, and carried his oppo- 

 sition to such a point that the Secretary removed him from office on 

 the 12th of January following. 



The resolution of the executive committee repealing the compro- 

 mise and leaving future annual apportionments to the judgment of 

 the Regents was then passed by a vote of 9 to 5. A further reso- 

 lution to the effect that a compliance in good faith with the letter 

 and spirit of the charter required a large proportion of the income 

 of the Institution to be appropriated for a library was lost. 



