In Keim v. United States18 it was held that the action of the Secretary of the Interior in discharging a clerk in his department for incompetency was not subject to review in the courts either by mandamus to reinstate him or by compelling the payment to him of his salary. The court say:

"The appointment to an official position in the government, even if it be simply a clerical position, is not a mere ministerial act, but one involving the exercise of judgment. The appointing power must determine the fitness of the applicant; whether or not he is the proper one to discharge the duties of the position. Therefore it is one of those acts over which the courts have no general supervising power.

"In the absence of specific provision to the contrary, the power of removal from office is incident to the power of appointment. 'It cannot for a moment be admitted that it was the intention of the Constitution that those offices which are denominated inferior offices should be held during life. And if removable at pleasure, by whom is such removal to be made ? In the absence of all constitutional provision or statutory regulation it would seem to be a sound and necessary rule to consider the power of removal as incident to the power of appointment.' Re Hennen, 13 Pet, 225; 10 L. ed. 136; Persons v. United States, 167 U. S. 324; 17 Sup. Ct. Rep. 880'; 42 L. ed. 185. Unless, therefore, there be some specific provision to the contrary, the action of the Secretary of the Interior in removing the petitioner from office on account of inefficiency is beyond review in the courts either by mandamus to reinstate him or by compelling payment of salary as though he had not been removed."

18 177 U. S. 290; 20 Sup. Ct. Rep. 574; 44 L. ed. 774.