The requisition of the head of the Department is not before me, but notice of the "adverse opinion" of the Commission is given as follows:

UNITED STATES CIVIL SERVICE COMMISSION,
Washington, D. C., April 3, 1891.

SIR: In response to your request, No. 1087, for the reinstatement of William H. Evans in the Bureau of Pensions, stating that he resigned January 15, 1884, and that he served in Company C, One hundred and fourteenth Indiana Minute Men, you are respectfully informed that in a report from the War Department it is stated that the records do not show that such an organization as the One hundred and fourteenth Indiana Minute Men was in the service of the United States, and therefore Mr. Evans does not seem to be entitled to the benefit of the proviso of Departmental Rule X. Very respectfully,

The SECRETARY OF THE INTERIOR.

CHAS. LYMAN,

President.

While the service performed by Mr. Evans may have been important and valuable, the Commission upon investigation and deliberation has decided that it does not constitute him one who served in the military service of the United States, under Rule X, and the Secretary of the Interior was duly informed of this decision. As, under the rule, the certification rests with the Commission, it is not apparent that any question connected with the matter is now pending in the Interior Department.

If the Commission determined the question in accordance with law no further proceedings in the premises are authorized.

Even if the Commission erred in its judgment of the law it does not appear that the question is pending in the Interior Department.

No statute is found which authorizes the Secretary of the Interior or the AttorneyGeneral, upon the suggestion of the Secretary, to reverse or review this action of the Commission.

It is provided by statute that "the head of any Executive Department may require the opinion of the Attorney-General on any questions of law arising in the administra tion of his Department." (R. S., sec. 356.)

It is properly held by Mr. Attorney-General Bates (10 Opin., 220) that "When the solution of the question is not necessary to the discharge of any duty properly belonging to any Department, it is not the duty of the Attorney-General to give an opinion thereon, and such opinion would consequently be extra-official and unauthorized."

This decision is approved by Mr. Attorney-General Garland (19 Opin., 8), and the principle that there must be a case of present executive consequence pending in the Department from which the request comes in order to authorize an official opinion has been affirmed many times.

As the Civil Service Commission is not included in the Interior Department, and as the rule formulated pursuant to the law vests the Commission with authority to give or to withhold certification, in accordance with its judgment, and as it has exercised that authority, it is not apparent that any question in the premises remains with the Interior Department upon which the statute permits me to act.

I am compelled, therefore, to say, without considering the position occupied by Mr. Evans, or such opinions as may be entertained as to his eligibility for reinstatement by those not authorized to determine the question, that the limitations of the statutes and the precedents established by learned predecessors preclude me from now reviewing the decision made by the Civil Service Commission.

All inclosures received are returned herewith.

Very respectfully,

WM. A. MAURY, Acting Attorney-General.

STATISTICAL TABLES.

NOTE a.-There have been published in the last three reports of the Commission tables showing the number of applications filed from the different States and Territories for the Departmental service, and in the last report a table furnishing similar information in regard to the railway mail service. Those tables served no purpose except to show the excess of applications over examinations and are therefore omitted from this report. NOTE b.—In addition to the examinations reported in the following tables there were examined for the railway mail service forty persons, and for the Departmental service sixty-six persons, whose papers, after being marked, were canceled because they failed to perfect their applications as required by the rules.

There were also four examinations held in Washington, D. C., at which only supplementary subjects were taken and which are therefore not included in the table showing the total number of examinations held. Of the total number of examinations shown in the tables, 85 were held in Washington and 244 in other places.

NOTE C.-The following table shows the per cent. of competitors in Washington who passed and who failed to pass the copyist, clerk, and special examinations, and the per cent. of those in other places who passed and who failed to pass. The ratio remains almost exactly as it was the preceding year. A larger per cent. pass the clerk and copyist examinations outside of Washington than in Washington, but the reverse is true in regard to the special examinations.

1

1

6

5

བྲལ་བ་

Sept. 23, 1889

1

2

3

4

May 12, 1890

May 31, 1890

4

2

1

41

46

Aug. 6, 1889

35

47