In United States v. Perkins16 it was held that when Congress by law vests the appointment of inferior officers in the heads of departments, it may at the same time limit and restrict the power of removal. The opinion, quoting with approval the Court of Claims, declares: "We have no doubt that when Congress, by law, vests the appointment of inferior officers in the heads of departments, it may limit and restrict the power of removal as it deems best for the public interest. The constitutional authority in Congress to thus vest the appointment implies authority to limit, restrict and regulate the removal by such laws as Congress may enact in relation to the officers so appointed. The head of a department has no constitutional prerogative of appointment to offices independently of the legislation of Congress, and by such legislation he must be governed, not only in making appointments, but in all that is incident thereto. It follows that as the claimant was not found deficient at any examination, and was not dismissed for misconduct under the provisions of Revised Statutes, § 1525, nor upon and in pursuance of the sentence of a court-martial to that effect or in commutation thereof, according to Revised Statutes, § 1229, he is still in office and entitled to the pay attached to the same."