and the President of the Senate, who may be considered as the legal representatives of the very legislature that enacted the law, and therefore well fitted to interpret its provisions.

They found that the law of Congress admitted of a more rational and liberal construction than that to which Mr. Jewett is desirous to restrict it. The very first section of the act indicates something more extended than a mere organization for the purpose of forming a library and museum. It constitutes an establishment by the name of the Smithsonian Institution, consisting of the President and certain other officers of the United States government, and the mayor of Washington, "for the increase and diffusion of knowledge among men." This body has the character of a learned society, with the power of choosing honorary members, of holding meetings, and enacting by-laws for the gov ernment of the Institution. Such an organization is wholly at variance with the narrow views which would limit the duty of the members to a single agency in collecting a library and museum, having no choice of the means by which the important objects of the corporation were to be effected.

The business is to be conducted by a Board of Regents, consisting also of some of the highest functionaries of government, and citizens of different States of the Union, who shall elect a presiding officer under the scholastic name of chancellor, and a secretary, who shall also be secretary of the "Institution." Has the first part of this act no significance? Are the ex officio members of the "establishment," and the honorary members, whom they are authorized to elect, merely intended as supernumeraries? This body "may advise and instruct the said Board of Regents." Now, if the law of Congress gave such precise instructions to the Regents that there was no latitude or 100m for discretion, of what use would be the separate organization of the establishment, with its members, honorary members, and its specially appointed secretary; and if they have power, then it must follow that they may inquire in what way the increase and diffusion of knowledge can be best effected.

It would seem indeed to require no latitude of construction to discover in the whole spirit of the law, and especially in the provisions of the 9th section, complete warrant and authority for the Board to look to the true meaning and design of the testator, whose very language is incorporated into the law itself, as the guiding and controlling principle both of the organic legislation and of all future administrations under it.

At the beginning of an untried experiment, with respect to the shaping of which many discordant opinions existed, Congress thought proper to impress upon the Institution certain features which should be embraced within its organization, but for the execution of these, excepting for the building, no time was specified, and no scale of expenditure definitely prescribed. The building, indeed, being calculated for all time and all contingencies, was to be projected "on a liberal scale," and it is to the building that these words in the act apply, and not, as Mr. Jewett would make it appear, to the library and museum. It is true that in due time the building will be filled with specimens of natural history, a library and a gallery of art, and the liberal scale will then also apply to these objects.

The question as to the introduction of the active operations, warranted by the 9th section of the act is purely one of time. Mr. Jewett contends that a library and museum on a liberal scale must not only be provided for, but actually established before anything else can be done with the money, but the act, as we have said before, applies the words "liberal scale" to the building, and leaves the regents free to adopt a more judicious course, namely, to proceed cautiously, and to expand the scale of the collections as circumstances may offer. The very words of the act for the "gradual formation of a library," indicate this course. Of a similar opinion was the committee of organization, who, after enumerating the specific recommendations of the charter, added: "Your committee are of the opinion that the task assigned them would be ill performed if they stopped short here and neglected to avail themselves of the authority liberally and wisely, they think, conferred upon the Board, after providing for the above special objects, to such extent as they may think necessary and proper to dispose of the funds actually accruing in such manner as they shall deem best suited for the promotion of the purpose of the testator."

The Regents have, therefore, decided this matter. On them and not on the secretary devolved the construction of the charter. The secretary has, indeed, always entertained an opinion on the subject, but with due submission to the judgment of the Board, to which its determination is referred by law.

The secretary is also charged with a violation of honor and faith in presenting suggestions to the Board which would tend to change a set of resolutions adopted prior to experience in order to harmonize conflicting views. These resolutions were known by the name of the "compromise," a term which has at present a political significance, which gives to the suggestions of the secretary a color which, in justice, they ought not to bear.

But what is the real history of the case? An Institution was left to the management of a number of intelligent men, each desiring, it is to be supposed, to adopt the plan best calculated not to advance the interest of himself or his friends, but to produce the greatest amount of good. One party was of opinion that a certain course should be taken, another party, that another plan should be adopted, and, in order that both might be tried an intermediate provisional course was chosen. Experience, however, has since proved, in the opinion of the secretary, that this intermediate course after fair trial is attended with evils. Is it not his duty to present his views on the subject to the Board, who are supposed to have no predilections, but to be governed by an earnest desire to ascertain the truth?

In answer to the charge that the secretary has "actually commenced a violation of the compromise," it might be sufficient to repeat the remark made in his report for 1852, "that if all the items which might properly be charged to the side of the library and collections were added to that side of the account, the balance up to the present date would be in favor of the active operations," and further, that the library and museum, during the past year, have received within a few dollars of one-half of the whole appropriation made for that period. It is true the secretary expended during 1853 a part of the income de

rived from the building fund, but not wanted for the building, in order to anticipate in a measure some of the pressing publications which have been long on hand and which will be issued at the beginning of the pesent year; but this excess of expenditure on one side, if the Regents think proper, may hereafter be compensated by an additional expenditure on the other side. The transactions have not been kept secret. On the contrary, the facts have been fully presented to the Board. The insinuation therefore of dishonesty is an unjust aspersion of the character of the secretary, and considering the source from which it emanates, it assumes even a worse complexion.

But I deny that any obligation has existed as yet, to make an equal distribution of the income between the two classes of objects mentioned in what is called the "compromise." The 7th resolution of this compromise, adopted the 26th of January, 1847, reads thus:

"Resolved, That for the purpose of carrying into effect the two principal modes of executing the act and trust pointed out in the resolutions herewith submitted, the permanent appropriations out of the accruing interest shall, so soon as the buildings are completed, be annually as

follows:"

By a subsequent resolution of the Board, adopted December 21, 1847, one-half of the annual income, or $15,000, was to be devoted to the current expenses of the Institution, and out of this, by another resolution of the same date, the books to be purchased were restricted to "such valuable works of reference as the secretary or the building or executive committee may consider useful for present purposes, or otherwise likely to be immediately demanded in the prosecution of the plans of the Institution."

The other half of the annual income was to be devoted to the building, which was not to be finished under five years from the time of its commencement. The progress of the building was, however, arrested by an accident, which has still further extended the time when the equal division of the income will be obligatory.

So far therefore from the compromise having been violated in order to favor the publications and researches, the fact is, that much more money has been expended on the library and museum, up to the present time, than they were entitled to under the resolutions of the Board. If the question be asked, why a sum much larger than was contemplated by the resolutions has been thus expended, the answer is, that at the earnest solicitation of Mr. Jewett to come into the Institution before the time specified in his appointment, and his pressing desire to have a library under his control, which might justify the payment of his full salary, the executive committee were induced to make a more liberal appropriation for the library, and to begin before the time specified in the resolutions to carry out the division of the income.

Another cause why a larger appropriation was made for the library than was intended, was the desire of Mr. Jewett to experiment on a new stereotyping process, in the success of which he was deeply interested.

Professor Jewett cannot plead ignorance of the precise language of the foregoing resolution relative to the compromise, for he h mself quotes a part of it, and yet afterwards declares that "the under officers have felt that so long as these restrictions remained unrepealed they were to be

obeyed; that they could not, without guilt, connive, even for their own personal advantage, or the greater prosperity of their particular departments, in any variation from the letter and spirit of these resolutions." These remarks scarcely come with good grace from a person who, for several years past, has been constantly importuning the secretary to allow him to expend large sums of money from the appropriation, for the collections on experiments, which belong rather to the active operations than to the formation of a library or museum. The truth is, that if any errors have occurred in the administration of the secretary, they have arisen entirely from his endeavor to gratify as far as possible the wishes of those with whom he has been associated.

In the last two reports the secretary has made suggestions with reference to the tendency of the Institution, and has stated "that it would be impossible to continue, with the present income some of the most important operations, and rigidly adhere to the resolutions of the Regents of 1847, viz: to devote one-half of the whole income to the library and museum, besides defraying all the expenditures still required for completing and furnishing the building; that an attempt has been made in good faith to carry out these resolutions; that the plan has not been found to work well in practice; that the income is too small to support properly more than one system of operations, and therefore the attempt to establish and sustain three departments, with separate ends and separate interests, must lead to inharmonious action, and consequently to diminished usefulness." The secretary has also stated that "however proper such a division of the income might have been in the beginning in order to harmonize conflicting opinions, the same considerations do not now exist for its continuance, changes having since occurred which materially alter the conditions on which the resolutions were founded. The plan of active operations was not at first fully understood, even by the literary men of the country. It was considered chimerical and incapable of being continued for any length of time; and hence it was thought important to provide for the means of falling back upon a library and collections. The experience of six years has, however, established both its practicability and its importance, and it is now considered by the great majority of intelligent persons who have studied the subject, the only direct means of realizing the intention of the donor. Again, the building was to have been finished in five years, and the income after this was to be increased by the interest on the remaining surplus fund; but the Regents have found it necessary for the better security of the library and museum, to add fifty thousand dollars to the cost of the edifice; and ten years will have elapsed from the beginning instead of five, before the income from this suplus fund will be available. This additional expense is not incurred for the active operations, and the question may be asked, whether they ought to bear any part of this additional burden: Furthermore, at the time this division was made, it was thought obligatory on the part of the Institution to support the great museum of the exploring expedition; but the Regents have since concluded that it is not advisable to take charge of this collection; and Congress, by its appropriation for the enlargement of the Patent Office, concurred in the opinion expressed in the Senate by the Hon. Jefferson Davis, that it was a gift which ought not to be pressed upon

the Institution. The inquiry may also in this case be made, whether it is advisable in the present state of the funds and the wants of the active operations, to expend any considerable portion of the income in the reproduction of a collection of objects of nature and art. Again the active operations are procuring annually for the library by exchange a large number of valuable books, which, in time, of themselves wil form a rare and valuable collection, and even if the division of the income is to be continued, a sum equal in amount to the price of these books ought to be charged to the library, and an equal amount credited to the active operations."

On these remarks Professor Jewett has made a series of criticisms founded on incorrect statements on postulates which cannot be granted, and a play upon words unnecessary in the support of a good cause.

He constantly introduces the sophism that the division of the income called "the compromise" is to be considered as a business transaction between different parties with different pecuniary interests at stake, while it should really be regarded as the most probable means prior to experience of attaining a desirable end with reference to the good of

men.

The following "petitio principu," to use a favorite expression of Mr. Jewett, is also apparent in his reasonings and criticisms upon the views and suggestions of the secretary, and in fact underlies the whole series of statements contained in the first twenty pages of his communication, namely that the act of Congress gives no warrant for the active operations until a library, museum, gallery of art, &c., have been established "on a liberal scale."

Thus, in commenting on the secretary's statement relative to the smallness of the income and the want of harmony produced by attempting to sustain different departments, he remarks, "if the income is too small to properly support more than one system of operations, it is too small to support anything beyond the system required by the act of Congress; all the income is required for the purposes provided in the act, and it is only in case that there is more money than is needed for the purposes provided in the act, that there is a shadow of authority for introducing anything not specified in the act. The only logical and legal inference then from this statement is, that the active operations are utterly illegal and should be completely displaced. If, as is abundantly manifest, the plan proposed by the secretary is permitted by the charter, only in the event of a surplus of income, an argument built upon the inadequacy of income is most singularly baseless.”

The postulate on which the foregoing is based, as we have shown before, is neither granted by the Regents nor its admission warranted by the facts in the case, and hence the "logical and legal inferences" deduced from it fall to the ground. First, the Regents have made ample provision for the distinct requirements of the law in the construction of the building; and second, they are at liberty to introduce other operations than those which relate to the mere collection of a library, mu seum, &c.

A library such as the Institution may collect by its exchanges and judicious purchases, and a museum of special objects of research, though not absolutely necessary to carry on the active operations, would form