Mr. GUTI IRIE. This whole measure seems to me perfectly useless for an good results. We now have a Secretary at the head of the Interior Dept, and he has charge of Indian affairs; the administration of Indian affairs is oneof the branches of his office. This bill does not propose to de rive him of that duty or to take it away from im, but we leave him there as the trusted organ of the Government to carry out the legislation of the nation in relation to the Indians: and now you propose to appoint a board of supervising inspect ors. Is it to see how he discharges is duty? On that principle, you would want a board over the SecyState, and another over the SecyTreasury, another over the PostMGenl, and probably one over the AttyGen of the U.S. We cannot tell how far this thing is to o. If our legislation in regard to the In ians is not right, amend it, get the legislation right, and then let the SecyInterior carry out the laws. I do not know what is to be gained by these commissioners and superin tendents; but I know that an ounce of common practical sense is just exactly what. we want, and what we on ht to have in the head of the Dept an the agents he employs, and if we do not get it there our Government is a fail ure and we shall never get it by these supervisors, paid to travel over the country and make a book against the management of the SecyInterior and his agents and bring interminable quarrels into Congress. My judgment is against the whole bill. In point of fact, it is not the right course to set overseers over one of your bureau officers or over one of the Secretaries of the President. The Secretary is the man to select the proper agents to go among the Indians and carry out the laws; e can do it better than anybody else. Suppose he does not make the soundest and the wisest selections in all cases, he will make a better and a more consistent one than on will make by these supervising inspectors. The Senfrom Illinois has heard a great deal abut stealings and the great fortunes that have. been made in dealings and contracts with the Indians. I do not know how that is. There is not a single thing done under this Government that has not been from the beginning charged more or less with indirection and improper conduct; and no inspectors or supervisors or spies or detectives that you have ador ever will have, have given you a remedy or ever will, in my judgment, and then the expense is totally out of proportion to any possible good that can result from it. My judgment is against the whole bill. If there is any revision of the system needed, and the judgment of Congress is thatit is wrong, let us take anew direction. If we have not a properman as SecyInterior, let us hold the appointing power responsible. He is the man selected to carry out the laws of this government in relation to the Indians. We can have or ought to have but one head to that Dept who is administering it by consultation and by advice with the POTUS, whose duty it is to see that all the laws are executed properly and carried out in a just and properspirit for the safety and prosperity of alI. I intend to vote against this bill, because I think it is unnecessary, because I think no good can come from it, and I think the money you are giving to these men will be an utter waste.