Mr. JOHNSON. The objec t of this amendment, as I understand, is to provide a Solicitor for the State Dept. The opinion I am about to express I have entertains ever since I have had any knowledge of the actual operation of the Government. It is certainly advantageous to the several Depts of the Government, as far as the ordinary business of each Dept is concerned, that they should have some one who would undertake what might be considered rather the clerical duty, or the duty that should belong to the head of the Dept; but since these Solicitors have been provided for, as is the case in the Treasury Dept and in the War Dept and, I believe in the Navy Dept, the practical result, I think, has been that the AttyGen has very seldom been consulted on any question. Another result of the failure to consult the AttyGen has been that different constructions have been placed upon the same laws, very much, as I think, to the injury of the public service. I had supposed that when an Asst SecyTreasury was provided for, and an Asst SecyWar we have 2 or 3 of them and an Asst SecyState and I believe my friendfrom Massachusetts proposes to increase the number, to which certainly I have no objection that with the aid of these Asst Sec retaries the business of the offices weald be properly conducted, and that there could be no occasion at all for an extra aid upon questions of law other than that which is to be had by a reference to the AttyGens office. The honorable member from Illinois is right in saying that the act of 1789 and there is no subsequent law, that I am aware of whieh creates the office of AttyGen, makes it his duty to answer allquestions propounded by the President or by the heads of Depts. No bureau officer, no one less than the head of a Dept, has a right to consalt the AttyGen. It is very obvious that the wholesome operation of the Government depends very much upon the uniformity of the construction which can be given to the aws. Now, in relation to the Dept of State, the honorable member from. Massachusetts, who from his situation as chairman of the ComForRel has become very famil iar with the actual condition of the Dept, says there are pressing now upon the Dept claims made by citizens efforeigu countries and claims which 1 our citizens suppose they have upon foreign Governments; but it seems to me that claims of that dese ri)HOH, of all others, are the claims which should e submitted to the AttyGen I mean, not the details of the claims, but the principle upon which those claims are to be placed. It would never do, and I do not know that the SecyState, or that the President would consent if the SecyState was disposed to do it, to make a claim upon a foreign Government without taking the advice of the law officer of the government; but it may be that actin upon the authority of the Solicitor, and throwmg imself upon that authority, the Secretary might present claims against a foreign Government or might resist claims upon our Government made by the subjects of a foreign Government which ought to he submitted to the judgment of the higher officer of the Government. I do not mean to say anything of the actual condition of things as they exist; but it is to be presumed, and suppose it is true now, that the AttyGen of the U.S. must he more competent to advise on all questions of this description than any subordinate legal officer who may be employed by the Government at a salary of $3,000 or $3, 500. So far, therefore, as my opinion is concerned, I am adverse to the creation of the office of Solicitor in any of these Depts.