886 HEARINGS BEFORE COMMITTEE ON AGRICULTURE. 
depended on the law department. I contracted for a piece of land, to 
be paid for out of the appropriation that would be available on July 1. 
I contracted in May for that property. The man who sold to me was 
old and feeble and was anxious to sell because he wanted to divide 
this money. We got the deed and abstract and submitted them to the 
Department of Justice, and the man I bought from died in Januar 
(the 26th or 27th) and in September (six or eight months after) we 
got the title that we requested early in May; we got the opinion of 
the attorney. 
Mr. Bowiz. After the man’was dead ? 
Mr. Burcn. The man was dead; and then it took two or three weeks 
longer, until the administrator was appointed, before we could pay 
for it. 
Mr. Bow1s. The point I wanted to make by my question was, that 
when you transfer an officer of this sort from the lump-sum to the 
statutory roll that increases the statutory roll and ought to increase 
the lump-sum roll. Now, does it have that effect? : 
Mr. Burcu. It does, in a measure. It only takes the expense off of 
one Bureau and puts it on to another, and properly. 
Mr. Bowre. Is there a lump-sum reduction in the whole estimate? 
Mr. Burcu. I do not suppose there is; because the Department is 
growing and the necessities are more. You can see very plainly they 
all have to increase, have to continue to do the same work they are 
doing, with the prospect of more; and the duties of the Department 
are growing each year, and the demands are greater. 
The CHarrman. The committee has always opposed this on the 
ground I have mentioned, that it is a part of the work of the law 
department. I notice also, Colonel, that heretofore you have esti- 
mated at $2,000 and now you raise him to $2,500? 
Mr. Burcu. He is getting $2,500 now. 
The Cuarrman. The last two years he has been stated as of $2,000 
on the statutory roll? 
Mr. Burcu. That is very true. He has been considered by the Sec- 
retary as being valuable and not overpaid at that. 
The Cuarrman. What would you have done, supposing we had 
_ allowed him at $2,000? 
Mr. Burcu. We would have asked you for an increase. 
The Cuarrman. The Department submitted at $2,000 for him last 
year and the year before that, and the committee took the ground 
that it is a part of the work of the law department to furnish its offi- 
cers to do this work, at any rate. If you have been paying him $2,500 
on the lump sum and we put him on the statutory roll at $2,000, how 
would the Department meet that question? ; 
Mr. Burcu. It would be for him to determine whether he would 
accept it or go to some other department where he could get more. 
Mr. Scorr. What are you paying your present law clerk? 
Mr. Burcn. $2,500. 
The Cuarrman. How long have you been paying him that? 
Mr. Burcu. Three or four months—some time in September, I think, 
* August or September—I do not remember. : 
Mr. Grarr. Is he a regularly admitted lawyer. 
Mr. Burcu. Oh, yes; admitted to the bar here. 
Mr. Grarr. How long has he been in practice here? 
Mr. Burcu. I could not tell you. 
