and ammunition to belligerents, it will probably continue to be drawn." Viewed in the light of the above, I am of the opinion that this statute does prohibit the release and transfer to the British Government of the so-called "mosquito boats" now under construction for the United States Navy. If these boats were released to the British Government, it would be legally impossible for that Government to take them out of this country after their completion, since to the extent of such completion at least they would have been built, armed, or equipped with the intent, or with reasonable cause to believe, that they would enter the service of a belligerent after being sent out of the jurisdiction of the United States. This will not be true, however, with respect to the over-age destroyers, since they were clearly not built, armed, or equipped with any such intent or with reasonable cause to believe that they would ever enter the service of a belligerent. In this connection it has been noted that during the war between Russia and Japan in 1904 and 1905, the German Government permitted the sale to Russia of torpedo boats and also of ocean liners belonging to its auxiliary navy. See Wheaton's International Law, 6th ed. (Keith), vol. 2, p. 977. IV Accordingly, you are respectfully advised: (a) That the proposed arrangement may be concluded as an Executive agreement, effective without awaiting ratification. (b) That there is Presidential power to transfer title and possession of the proposed considerations upon certification by appropriate staff officers. (c) That the dispatch of the so-called "mosquito boats" would constitute a violation of the statute law of the United States, but with that exception there is no legal obstacle to the consummation of the transaction, in accordance, of course, with the applicable provisions of the Neutrality Act as to delivery. Respectfully, ROBERT H. JACKSON. APPORTIONMENT OF NON-CIVIL-SERVICE EMPLOYEES Where the required computation under the State quota provision of the Appropriation Act of June 26, 1940, indicates that a State is entitled to a fractional part of an employee, one employee may be appointed. Referees and arbitrators appointed by the National Mediation Board are not to be regarded as "employees" and are not subject to the State quota provision. The PRESIDENT. AUGUST 28, 1940. MY DEAR MR. PRESIDENT: I have the honor to comply with your request of August 26 for my opinion on the following questions submitted by the Chairman of the National Mediation Board. "(1) Do the State quota provisions of Section 702, Labor-Federal Security Appropriation Act, 1941, apply to the selection of referees and arbitrators whose salaries are paid from appropriations provided in said act, for temporary service to render awards in specific cases under the provisions of the Railway Labor Act? "(2) In the filling of non-civil-service positions, as contemplated in section 702 of the Labor-Federal Security Appropriation Act, 1941, may staff employees or referees and arbitrators, if adjudged within the provisions of the act, be appointed from a State which is entitled under its quota to only a fractional part of an employee; if so, must the fraction be in excess of one-half before an appointment therefrom can be made?" Section 702 of the Appropriation Act of June 26, 1940 (c. 428, 54 Stat. 574, 597), to which reference is made by the Chairman, reads as follows: "None of the funds appropriated in this act shall be used to pay the salary of any person appointed to a non-civilservice position, under the appropriations in the respective titles in this act, if the effect of such appointment is to increase the number of non-civil-service employees from the State of residence of any such non-civil-service appointee beyond the number of non-civil-service employees to which such State is entitled, under the appropriations in the respective titles of this act, on a basis of population: Provided, That this section shall not apply to any position, the appointment of which is made by the President: Provided further, That this section shall not apply to positions in the Civilian Conservation Corps outside the District of Columbia." It is my opinion that referees and arbitrators appointed by the National Mediation Board under sections 3 and 5 of the Railway Labor Act (U. S. C., title 45, secs. 153, 155) for the special and temporary services indicated therein are not to be regarded as "employees" under section 702 of the act of June 26, 1940, and that the section is therefore inapplicable to such appointments. In connection with staff employees of the Board who are subject to the provisions of section 702, it is my opinion that in cases where the required computation indicates that a State is entitled to a fractional part of an employee, one employee may be appointed. This conclusion is required because any other would lead to absurdity and make the statute unworkable; and this is particularly true with respect to the National Mediation Board whose employees are less in number than the States among which they are to be apportioned. Respectfully, MATTHEW F. MCGUIRE, COPYRIGHT REGISTRATION FEES The Register of Copyrights should collect a fee of $6 for registration of a print or label (not a trade-mark) published in connection with the sale or advertisement of articles of merchandise. The PRESIDENT. SEPTEMBER 4, 1940. MY DEAR MR. PRESIDENT: I have the honor to comply with your request of August 26 for my opinion on the following question submitted by the Register of Copyrights: "When an application is made to the Copyright Office for registration of a contribution to a periodical as such, which contribution is a commercial print, shall a fee of $6.00, or a fee of $2.00, be paid by the applicant?" The question arises under the act of July 31, 1939, c. 396, 53 Stat. 1142, entitled "An act to transfer jurisdiction over commercial prints and labels, for the purpose of copyright registration, to the Register of Copyrights." Section 1 repealed section 3 of the act of June 18, 1874, c. 301, 18 Stat. 79, which had provided for registration of such prints and labels in the Patent Office. Sections 2 and 3 read as follows: "SEC. 2. Section 5 (k) of the act entitled 'An act to amend and consolidate the acts respecting copyright' approved March 4, 1909, is hereby amended to read: '(k) Prints and pictorial illustrations including prints or labels used for articles of merchandise.' [The italicised words are added by this amendment.] "SEC. 3. That commencing July 1, 1940, the Register of Copyrights is charged with the registration of claims to copyright properly presented, in all prints and labels published in connection with the sale or advertisement of articles of merchandise, including all claims to copyright in prints and labels pending in the Patent Office and uncleared at the close of business June 30, 1940. All such pending applications and all fees which have been submitted or paid to or into the Patent Office for such pending applications, and all funds deposited and at the close of business June 30, 1940, held in the Patent Office to be applied to copyright business in that Office, shall be returned by the Commissioner of Patents to the applicants. There shall be paid for registering a claim of copyright in any such print or label not a trade-mark $6, which sum shall cover the expense of furnishing a certificate of such registration, under the seal of the Copyright Office, to the claimant of copyright." [Italics supplied.] The Register of Copyrights points out that section 12 of the act of March 4, 1909, c. 320, 35 Stat. 1075, 1078 (U. S. C., title 17, sec. 12) provided for registration in the Copyright Office of "a contribution to a periodical," and states that matter appearing in periodicals, irrespective of its nature, had been regarded by the Copyright Office as constituting contributions to periodicals under this section and subject to registration in the Copyright Office for a fee of $2. On the other hand, he states that the Patent Office inter preted the provision now superseded as subjecting "advertisements in magazines" to registration in the Patent Office for a fee of $6. The purpose of the statute and the conditions which brought about its enactment, as viewed by the Congress, are indicated by the following excerpt from the report of the House Committee on Patents (Rept. No. 70, 76th Cong. 1st sess.): "In 1874 Congress enacted a patent, trade-mark, and copyright law which provided, among other things, that 'prints or labels' designed to be used for articles of manufacture not connected with the 'fine arts' should not be entered under the copyright law but should be registered by the Commissioner of Patents. Thus was created a hybrid registration which eventually had to be given the status of a copyright registration in order to give it any effect whatsoever. The word 'prints' was held to mean advertisements of not more than one page or sheet. Eventually, Congress enacted new patent and trade-mark laws and in 1909 a new and consolidated copyright law. The Commissioner of Patents thereupon ceased to register 'prints and labels.' The Attorney General ruled, however, that this provision of the 1874 act had not been specifically repealed, and the Patent Office resumed jurisdiction over the registration of these labels and advertisements. Eventually, the courts were called upon to decide cases involving such registrations. In practically every instance the courts held that Congress intended by the 1909 copyright law to vest all copyright jurisdiction in the Register of Copyrights, but since the contrary administrative ruling had been in effect so long and so many registrations would be invalidated by a reversal thereof, Congress and not the judiciary should remedy the situation. To date, Congress has failed to act, although the Senate approved an appropriate bill in the Seventy-fourth Congress. "The practice in the Patent Office is quite different from the practice in the Copyright Office and governed by an entirely separate set of rules and decisions. The Patent Office fee is $6; the Copyright Office fee is $2. * Certain * |