Oklahoma City, according to the report of the Census Office, has a population of about 4,100, and this donation would be equivalent to nearly $10 per capita.  Very little real estate, whether town-site or country property, in this Territory is yet subject to assessment for taxation.  The people have not yet had time to accumulate, and Congress has received appeals for aid to relieve a prevailing distress which the Territorial authorities have found themselves unable to deal with.  It does not seem to me, in view of all these facts, that the wholesome rule prescribed by the general statute should be departed from.

BENJ.  HARRISON.

EXECUTIVE MANSION, February 26, 1891.

To the Senate: 

I return to the Senate without my approval the bill (S. 4620) “to establish the Record and Pension Office of the War Department, and for other purposes.”

This bill proposes to change the designation of one of the divisions of the War Department.  It is now the “Record and Pension Division,” and it is proposed that it shall hereafter be the “Record and Pension Office” of the War Department.  The scope of the work assigned to this division or office is not changed, but the organization now existing under a classification made by the Secretary of War is by the bill made permanent and put beyond the control of the Secretary.  The change of designation seems to have been intended to add dignity to the position, and the effect of the bill is probably to require that the chief of this office shall hereafter be appointed only by and with the advice and consent of the Senate, though it is not clear that any provision is made for a chief after the particular person designated in the bill has been separated from the place or in case he is not appointed.

The real object of the bill is disclosed in the following clause: 

The President is hereby authorized to nominate and, by and with the advice and consent of the Senate, to appoint the officer now in charge of said Record and Pension Division to be a colonel in the Army and chief of said office.

It is fairly to be implied from the bill that in the opinion of Congress the public interests would be promoted by making the contemplated change in the grade of this office and by giving the rank and pay of a colonel in the Army to the chief.  A new and rather anomalous office is therefore created—­that of “colonel in the Army and chief of the Record and Pension Office of the War Department”—­but upon the condition that the President shall nominate a particular person to fill it.  I do not think it is competent for Congress to designate the person who shall fill an office created by law, and practically nothing remains of the bill under consideration if this person is not to be appointed.  The office is an important one, connected with the active civil administration of the War Department.  I can not agree that the selection of the officer shall be taken out of the discretion of the Executive, where the responsibility for good administration necessarily rests.  It is probably true that the officer intended to be benefited is peculiarly deserving and has had remarkable success in the discharge of the duties of the office; but these are considerations for the appointing power, and might safely have been left there.