and ninety, there shall be retained from the pay of each enlisted man of the Army the sum of four dollars per month of his monthly pay for the first year of his enlistment, which said sum shall not be paid him until his discharge from the service, and shall be forfeited unless he serves honestly and faithfully to the date of discharge: Provided, That the Secretary of War shall determine what misconduct shall constitute a failure to render honest and faithful service within the meaning of this act; but no soldier who has deserted at any time during the term of enlistment shall be deemed to have served such term honestly and faithfully." The last contention of the claimant is that "The discharge being with bad conduct and not being by reason of a sentence of court-martial is void." This claim is without merit, for the laws and regulations all recognize the authority of the Secretary to discharge an enlisted man, as was done in this case. The Supreme Court has recog nized this authority in the case of United States v. Kingsley (138 U. S., 87), where it was held "that a private in the Marine Corps of the United States, discharged from the service as a person of bad character and unfit for service by order of the Secretary of the Navy, through the commandant of the Corps," forfeited his retained pay. But if his contention were correct it would simply cut the ground from under him as to his whole claim, for this class of pay is predicated upon the termination of his enlistment, and if he is still in the service he can not claim the retained pay. Accordingly the Auditor's decision upon this matter is sustained. EDW. A. BOWERS, PAYMENT OF SALARIES OF EMPLOYEES OF THE SUPERVISING ARCHITECT'S OFFICE FROM AP. PROPRIATION MADE FOR REPAIRS AND IMPROVEMENTS OF A PUBLIC BUILDING. An appropriation for "improvements" to a public building can be used to pay salaries of employees in the Supervising Architect's Office who are engaged upon that work, such an appropriation being treated as one for a public building within the meaning of the act providing for the compensation of such employees. TREASURY Department, OFFICE OF COMPTROLLER OF THE TREASURY, November 12, 1895. SIR: I am in receipt of your letter of the 8th instant calling my attention to the appropriations in the act of August 5, 1892, and August 18, 1894, for "post-office and court-house at New York, N. Y.,"which provide "for general repairs and improve. ments." You state that there have been charged against said appropriations various sums for salaries of the employees of the office of the Supervising Architect, this action having been taken under the acts which provide for "The services of skilled draughtsmen, civil engineers, computers, accountants, assistants to photographer, copyists, and such other services as the Secretary of the Treasury may deem necessary and specifically order, employed in the office of the Supervising Architect exclusively to carry into effect the various appropriations for public buildings, to be paid for from and equitably charged against such appropriations." You ask whether such practice is authorized and may be continued in the future. The appropriations for the court-house and post-office at New York were considered to be in the nature of appropriations for public buildings and not merely for incidental repairs, because of the word "improvements," which would practically authorize reconstructions and additions. As the language quoted by you applies to public buildings and as these appropriations were considered as appropriations for public buildings, it follows that the practice to which you refer was justified and may be continued as that required by law. Respectfully, yours, R. B. BOWLER, The SECRETARY OF THE TREASURY. SALARIES IN OFFICE OF REGISTER OF WILLS, DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA. The act of July 14, 1892, prohibits the register of wills of the District of Columbia from increasing, beyond the amount paid in 1891, the salary of any clerk in his office, even though, by a reduction in the salaries of others, the aggregate expense for clerk hire is not increased. TREASURY DEPARTMENT, OFFICE OF COMPTROLLER OF THE TREASURY, SIR: I am in receipt of your letter of the 9th instant in reference to the following clause in the act of July 14, 1892 (27 Stat., 153): "Provided, That the number of clerks and others employed in the office of the Register of Wills shall not be increased, nor shall the salary or compensation of clerks and others be increased beyond the salaries or compensation paid during the fiscal year eighteen hundred and ninety-one." You ask whether this clause will preclude a rearrangement of salaries, provided the aggregate does not exceed the amount paid during the year specified. In reply, I have to inform you that in my opinion the clause above quoted prohibits you from increasing the salary or compensation of any clerk or employee of your office, notwithstanding a corresponding reduction may be made in the salaries of others so that the aggregate is not increased. When, in a suit in a State court to condemn land for the improvement of a river, a judgment for damages and costs is rendered against the United States, the costs, which form a part of the judgment as well as the damages, are properly payable from the War Department appropriation made for the work. TREASURY DEPARTMENT, Office of COMPTROLLER OF THE TREASURY, November 12, 1895. SIR: I am in receipt, by your reference, of a letter of the 4th instant from Lieut. James F. McIndoe to the Chief of Engineers, United States Army, stating that in a suit to condemn certain property for the improvement of the Tennessee River below Chattanooga damages were awarded by the probate court of Colbert County, Ala., amounting to $1,159.50 for the land and $80.05 for costs of the proceedings; that the AttorneyGeneral had decided that upon payment in court of the amount awarded for damages and compensation, together with the taxed costs, a valid title to said land would become vested in the United States, subject to certain liens which have since been released, and that payment of said amount has been ordered by you. You ask, however, in view of the Comptroller's decision of October 17, 1895 (ante, p. 201), relating to the expenses of jurors in a condemnation proceeding in the northern district of Illinois, whether payment of the $80.05 may be made from the appropriation: "Improving Tennessee River below Chattanooga, Tennessee, Alabama, and Kentucky." The decision of October 17, 1895, to which you refer, related to proceedings in the United States courts, and it was there held that the expenses were a proper charge against the appropriations under the control of the Department of Justice and not against the appropriations for the work for which the property sought to be condemned was needed. That decision has no application to the present case, where, in a State court, a judgment has been rendered awarding damages for the property and providing that upon the payment of said damages and the costs of the proceeding a valid title shall be vested in the United States. While costs are not taxed against the United States in the Federal courts, where, in a proceeding in a State court, the title to property is made to depend upon the payment of a judg. ment and costs, it is manifest that the costs are a portion of the judgment which must be paid from the appropriation for the work for which the property is to be used. The appropriations for the Department of Justice do not provide for the payment of costs, but only for the fees of officers of the United States courts and the expenses of those courts. The item of costs, $80.05, is, therefore, properly payable from the appropriation: "Improving Tennessee River below Chattanooga, Tennessee, Alabama, and Kentucky." Respectfully, yours, The SECRETARY OF WAR. R. B. BOWLER, EXPENSES OF JUDGES OF TERRITORIAL COURTS. The appropriation made for the expenses of district judges and judges of the circuit courts of appeals is not available for payment of the expenses of judges of the Territorial district courts. TREASURY DEPARTMENT, OFFICE OF COMPTROLLER OF THE TREASURY, November 12, 1895. SIR: I am in receipt of your letter of the 28th ultimo, in which you ask for my decision upon the question whether the expenses of Territorial judges who hold court outside of their Territorial districts may be paid from the appropriation: "Pay of bailiffs, etc., United States courts," when they are directed to do so by the chief justice or one of the associate justices of the Territory. The clause in the appropriation referred to is as follows: "Expenses of district judges directed to hold court outside of their districts and judges of the circuit courts of appeals." It relates to the expenses of United States district judges and judges of the circuit courts of appeals only, and is not available for the payment of expenses of the judges in the Territorial district courts. Respectfully, yours, Mr. E. L. HALL, R. B. BOWLER, United States Marshal, Santa Fe, N. Mex. Comptroller. SERVICES OF PRIVATE PHYSICIAN AT MILITARY POST IN ABSENCE OF POST SURGEON. A private physician employed at a military post in the absence of the post surgeon is entitled, under the regulations, to payment for attendance at the daily sick call, although there may not be patients requiring his attention at each call. TREASURY DEPARTMENT, OFFICE OF COMPTROLLER OF THE TREASURY, November 12, 1895. SIR: I have to acknowledge the receipt of the papers forwarded October 25, 1895, by the Surgeon General, in response to my request in reply to your reference of October 11, 1895, concerning the account for medical attendance at Jackson Bar |