ALASKA-Continued. does not constitute such a compliance with the proviso in the act of Congress of June 6, 1900 (31 Stat., 321), as will authorize the Secretary of the Interior to order the removal of the seat of government of Alaska from Sitka to Juneau. 613. ALEXANDER ARCHIPELAGO FOREST RESERVE. ALASKA, 1. AMERICAN REGISTRY. See VESSELS, 1-3. ANNAPOLIS, MD. SEA WALL. APPOINTMENT. See CONTRACT, 1. See OF ENGINEER AT UNITED STATES MILITARY ACADEMY. See MILI- OF SPECIAL DISBURSING AGENTS, TREASURY DEPARTMENT. See OF SUPERINTENDENT OF STATE, WAR, AND NAVY BUILDING. See APPROPRIATIONS. Support of Armies.-The inhibition of Article I, section 8, clause FOR GUNS, CARRIAGES, ETC. See ARMAMENT OF FORTIFICATIONS. REVENUE-CUTTER SERVICE. See TREASURY DEPARTMENT, 21. ARKANSAS. LAWS IN FORCE IN THE INDIAN TERRITORY-DISTRIBUTION OF LOYAL ARMAMENT OF FORTIFICATIONS. 1. Contract--Royalty on Guns and Carriages-Appropriation for Armament of Fortifications.-The United States is authorized to enter into a contract for the payment of royalty on account of the construction of certain guns, carriages, etc., payable out of appropriations "for the armament of fortifications, and for other purposes," approved May 25, 1900 (31 Stat., 185), March 1, 1901 (31 Stat., 874), and June 6, 1902 (32 Stat., 388), notwithstanding the fact that the fulfillment of such contract might extend over a period of more than two years. 105. 2. Same--Support of Armies.-The inhibition of Article I, section 8, clause 12, of the Constitution is confined to appropriations to raise and support armies in the strict sense of the word "support," and does not extend to appropriations for the various means which an army may use in military operations, or which are deemed necessary for common defense. Ib. ARMY OFFICERS. 1. Advancement-Retirement-Rank.-The act of October 1, 1890 (26 Stat., 562), does not authorize the advancement of an officer, found physically disqualified, to the next higher grade, when his right to such advancement has accrued, and, having been so advanced, to be retired with the rank of such higher grade. 514. Opinion of March 26, 1904 (ante, p. 158), adhered to. Ib. 2. Retired Army Officers-Advancement-Rank and Pay.-An officer of the Army retired under the provisions of the act of October 1, 1890 (26 Stat., 562), for physical disabilities contracted in the line of duty, and placed on the retired list of the Army with the rank and retired pay of one grade above that actually held by him at the time of retirement, is not entitled to an additional advancement under the provisions of the army appropriation act of April 23, 1904 (33 Stat., 264). 158. 3. Retired Army Officer-Advancement-Public Office.-Officers of the Army on the retired list hold public office; but an advancement of such an officer, as authorized by the act of April 23, 1904 (33 Stat., 264), does not create an office, and is not accomplished by an exercise of the appointing power. 185. 4. Same-Rank and Pay.-The Attorney-General declines to express an opinion upon the question whether a retired officer advanced in rank and pay by the Executive under the act of April 23, 1904, may be paid at the advanced rate before the Senate has consented to the advancement, as that question has been decided by the Comptroller of the Treasury, whose decision, under section 8 of the act of July 31, 1894 (28 Stat., 208), is conclusive in law. Ib. 5. Retired Army Officers-Pay of.—Officers of the Army, retired under the act of April 23, 1904 (33 Stat., 264), who were duly nominated for promotion by the President for this purpose and confirmed by the Senate on December 16, 1904, "to date from April 23, 1904," are entitled, respectively, to the pay of the higher grade to which they have been promoted, from the date of the act, viz, April 23, 1904. 299. 6. Same. The general rule is that laws speak from the date of their enactment, and where something remains to be done, not inconsistent with a relation back when it is done, the general rule may be applied. Ib. 7. Deceased Retired Army Officer-Nomination for AdvancementApproval of Senate.-The President may send to the Senate for approval of his action the names of officers on the retired list of the Army nominated by him for advancement under the act of April 23, 1904 (33 Stat., 264), after the adjournment of the last session of Congress, but who died before the convening of the present session; and, upon approval by the Senate, the personal 13243--VOL 25-04 41 ARMY OFFICERS-Continued. representatives of the deceased officers will be entitled to receive the advanced pay due such officers without further action by Congress. 312. 8. Same.—Where, however, a person is appointed to office either during a session or in a recess of the Senate, and dies before confirmation, his personal representatives must be remitted to Congress for the payment of salary earned by such officer. Ib. 9. Same. The opinion of July 11, 1904 (ante, p. 185), holding that an advancement under the act of April 23, 1904, of an officer on the retired list of the Army does not create or constitute an office and is not accomplished by an exercise of the appointing power, confirmed. Ib. ASSISTANT TREASURER OF THE UNITED STATES. ATHOS (steamship). See Vessels, 3. ATLANTIC AND PACIFIC CANAL COMPANY ACT. ATTORNEY-GENERAL. 54. See (Act of OPINIONS. 1. Civil Service Commission-Executive Order.-The Attorney-General declines to express an opinion upon the question submitted by the Civil Service Commission as to whether the Secretary of the Interior in employing persons to make the transcripts of records and plats in the General Land Office authorized by the act of April 28, 1904 (33 Stat., 483), may select such persons without regard to the civil service act and rules, for the reason that the Secretary of the Interior and the Civil Service Commission have had no conference respecting the question and no disagreement thereon, as is required by the Executive order of November 29, 1904, before the matter may be submitted to the AttorneyGeneral for his opinion. 492. 2. Construction of a Departmental Regulation not a Question of Law.-The question as to whether or not a citizen of Porto Rico, legally a resident of New York, is eligible for appointment in the Marine-Hospital Service under a departmental regulation which requires the applicant to be a citizen of the United States, or, if of foreign birth, to furnish proof of American citizenship, does not involve any question of law within the meaning of section 356, Revised Statutes, and is not, therefore, one properly calling for an opinion of the Attorney-General. The requirement not being demanded by law, its interpretation may properly be leit to the department or bureau responsible for its existence and execution. 18 Opin., 521; 20 Opin., 649; 21 Opin., 255, followed. 183. 3. Judicial Questions.-The Attorney-General declines to express an opinion as to the liability of the postmaster at Baltimore, Md., ATTORNEY-GENERAL-Continued. for a sum of money paid by him to a former clerk in the Baltimore post-office, and for which no service was performed, for the reason that the question is essentially a judicial one, amounting to an inquiry whether in regular legal proceedings a court and jury would hold that officer liable. Advised, however, that the circumstances may be regarded as showing a prima facie case of liability, and calling for action in the way of securing a judicial determination of the question of liability. 97. 4. Same. The Attorney-General declines to express an opinion upon the question whether a willful refusal to give true answers to inquiries concerning statistics which, by section 6 of the permanent census act of March 6, 1902 (32 Stat., 52), the Department of Commerce and Labor is authorized to collect, would subject a person to the penalties prescribed by section 22 of the act of March 3, 1899 (30 Stat., 1020), for the reason that the question is preeminently one for judicial and not executive determination. 369. 5. Matters Belonging to the Department of Justice-Proceedings in a Civil Court for Assault-Hazing.-The Attorney-General declines to express an opinion upon the question whether proceedings by court-martial would bar proceedings in the civil courts for an assault or other crime involved in the offense of hazing, for the reason that it would be of no assistance to those officers in the proper discharge of their duties, and should such action be taken, the matter would peculiarly be one for the consideration of his Department. 543. S. Question not Arising in the Administration of a Department.—The Attorney-General declines to express an opinion upon the question propounded by the Secretary of the Interior as to whether the preliminary draft of Title LXVIII, "Railway and Telegraph Companies," submitted to him by the Commission to Revise and Codify the Laws of the United States, correctly embodies the provisions of existing law upon the subject, for the reason that the inquiry does not present a question of law arising in the administration of his Department. 584. 7. Question not Involved in a Matter Pending before a Department. The Attorney-General declines to answer the question whether citizens of the Philippine Islands are entitled to the benefits of the patent laws of the United States, there being no case involving that question pending before the Department making the inquiry. 179. 8. Questions of Propriety Involving Executive Discretion.-The Attorney-General declines to express an opinion upon the question of the propriety of the Secretary of the Interior permitting one, Boysen, to go upon the Shoshone Indian Reservation and make examinations prior to the completion and approval of the surveys of the ceded portion (33 Stat., 1020), it not being within ATTORNEY-GENERAL-Continued. his province to pass upon the propriety of the exercise by the Secretary of the Interior of his official discretion. 524. 9. Same. The Attorney-General declines to express an opinion as to the propriety of a proposed instruction to customs officials to inquire into the bona fides of the journey and the ownership of goods imported in such cases, as he is not authorized to express his views upon matters of propriety involving executive judgment and discretion; neither may he express an opinion as to whether the above provision can be enforced on proof that the object of the journey was to purchase goods, as the latter is a hypothetical as well as a judicial question. The legality of such an instruction, however, can not be seriously questioned. 94. 10. Question Already Decided by the Comptroller Involving a Payment.— The Attorney-General declines to express an opinion upon the question whether a retired officer advanced in rank and pay by the Executive under the act of April 23, 1904, may be paid at the advanced rate before the Senate has consented to the advancement, as that question has been decided by the Comptroller of the Treasury, whose decision, under section 8 of the act of July 31, 1894 (28 Stat., 208), is conclusive in law. 185. 11. Questions of Unusual Importance Involving a Payment of money where the Comptroller concurs or joins in the request for an opinion. 271. 12. Questions Involving Payments to be Made from Treasury-Rule not Without Exception.-The authority conferred upon the Comptroller of the Treasury by section 8 of the act of July 31, 1894 (28 Stat., 208), to decide questions involving payments to be made from the Treasury is complete; but that act does not establish a rule which is universal and without exception. Congress did not, by that enactment, intend to shorten the reach of sections 354 and 356, Revised Statutes, or to repeal pro tanto those sections. 301. 13. Same. Where a question is presented to the Attorney-General in accordance with law for decision, and he is of opinion that the nature of the question is general and important in other respects than disbursement, and therefore conceives that it is proper for him to deliver his opinion, it is final and authoritative under the law, and should be so treated by the accounting officers of the Treasury, even though the question involves a payment to be made from the Treasury. Ib. 14. Same. When the Comptroller of the Treasury waives his right to determine a matter involving disbursements within the scope of his authority under the law, and requests or suggests a ruling by the Attorney-General, the Attorney-General's opinion should be controlling upon the accounting officers of the Treasury, and should be followed by them unless contrary to some authoritative judicial decision. 7b |