direction of the secretary as to the newspaper or papera in which the publication should be made.
Neither can the objection be that the order under which the defendant claims to have acted was made before he went into the office, for any general order or direction of the secretary concerning the conduct or management of this suporintendency continued appli- cable and in force until revoked or superseded, unaffected by any change of superintendents. �The onlyother objection that could be made or bas been suggested to the authority to publish, is that it did not "come" from tho head of the department — the secretary of the interior — but only the com- missioner of Indian affairs, by whom it was signed. The secretary of the interior is charged with the "supervision of public business" relating to the Indians. Section 441, Eev. St. In the department of the interior there is a oommissioner of Indian affairs, who "shall, under the direction of the secretary of the interior, and agreeably to such regulations as the president may prescribe, have the manage- ment of all Indian affairs, and of all matters arising out of Indian relations." Section 463, Eev. St. Upon these provisions of lawthe oommissioner was the proper person for the superintendent to apply to for authority to advertise in the Statesman and Oregonian; and although, under section 3828, supra, the authority to do so must "coœe" from the secretary, it would, nevertheless, come to the super- intendent through the oommissioner. �Was it necessary also for the secretary to sign the order, as well as direct the oommissioner to make it ? I think not. The statute does not in terms require that he should, nor does the nature of the busi- ness or the relation between the parties make it necessary. The oommissioner, as to Indian affairs, is the deputy or representative of the secretary, and the lawful channel of communication with Indian superintendents and agents. Upon the authority of bis office, and as the representative of the secretary, he informed the defendant that by the direction of that officiai he was authorized to publish the ad- vertisement in the newspapers mentioned. The authority professed to come from the head of the department, and it came through the proper officer. No one questions the hoiia fides of the transaction. The money bas been honestly and beneficially used for the govern- ment, and the defendant ought to be oredited with the amount, unless there is some technical difficulty in the way, and I see none. �The demurrer is overruled. ��� �
