Morning journal and courier., 1885-10-10

ehS So1clGOr general acts TOT n1nS6lf lie IS not responsible to the Attorney General and the Attorney General can exercise no control over his discretion; so, in the case present ed, being disabled or disqualified from act ing, as Attorney General simply ''sat out, 7" as It were, as the reports show that justice Of the Supreme court and of other courts does when he has, previous to coming out on the bench, or otherwise, been connected with a case before the court. This independent character of the solicitor general in matters ot this sort makes him even Cabinet off, cer Tn the absence of the Attorney General
 The Attorney General then cites number of precedents to enforce this view that the so- hcitor general was the proper officer to act in thls case. Among others, that of the Rancho Gaudaloupe claim in California when Solleitori General Phillips, while MT. Will hams was Attorney General, gave an opinion to the Interior department and submitted his opinion in this note:
 ''Ihe Attorney General having been consulted office referred the communication of the Secretary ssa 1f the Interior to the solicitor general January lo'3, to answer the questions propOunded therein ana took no further action in the matter.''
 MT. Garland concludes his statement as follows: 'The case to my mind is perfectly clear that had no authority then to consid- CT it. My disability still exists and if had eiysn ..se were re 1smovea ve9d my stock or had ceased by direct order to be attorney for the company, the simple fact that l had once been counsel or had been counselIed in the interests of the company offering to make the application would dis able or dlsaualify or incapaeitate from acting in the premises and took, as thought, the most prudent course to have nothing to do with it. And am still, as the head of this department, the Attorney General, for these reasons disabled from interfering with it. The only course for me then was not to touch it and it is the same thing now. In answering the question propounded to me at the Cabinet meeting by yourself and others as to the course of procedure governing such matters, I wish to say that there is custom in this department any fixed adopted rule, but 8 practice-to have these questions all re- ferred before they are finally passed upon here to the department from which the origi- nal transaction enaanates. There have been q few applications to me since have been Attorney General for the use of the name of the United States to test patents for lands as well as patents for inventions, and I have had them in each case referred to the department from which the particular patent is issued for information and suggestions be- fore I acted upon them finally here, not that any suggestion or advice from that department would be binding or con- elusive upon this, but for the sake of a more harmonious and regular administration of tue AualrS or the executive department IS this custom or practice observed. I do not say that action could not be had by this de- partment independent of this court, but in the few cases that have been before me have followed this precedent and within the last four days I have done the same in an ap- plication for the use of the name of the United States to test patent for an inven- tion."
 The Presidents letter to Solicitor General Goode suggests for the latter's consideration the proposition whether he could not take such action as would protect the precedent and custom of referring such matter to the department with which it is connected-the Interior. The solicitor generals reply says that his omission to refer the a. plication tu the Interior department was due to his con- viction, from an examination of the papers presented to him in the case, that such &C., tion was right and proper. He agrees, how ever, with the President that it is best to follow precedent, and so has written H. W. McCorry, Esq, United States district attor- ney of the western district of Tennessee, di- recting him to discontinue the suit which he was directed to institute in the name of the United States for the purpose of vacating and annulling the letters patent issued to Alexan- der Graham Bell on March 7, 1876, and num- bered TIA, ,455.