have the same meaning as in section 2 of the National Labor Relations Act." As defined in section 2 of the National Labor Relations Act (49 Stat. 450) the term "representative" includes "any individual or labor organization." Thus, nothing in the War Labor Disputes Act alone supports the view that the notice required by section 8 is to be filed only by the representative of a majority of the employees in an appropriate bargaining unit within the meaning of section 9 (a) of the National Labor Relations Act. Moreover, the legislative history of the War Labor Disputes Act shows that such a restrictive interpretation was considered by the Congress and rejected. In the House, the committee in charge of the bill proposed an amendment to the section dealing with balloting, providing that "no ballot shall be conducted under this section when any issue involved in the intended strike has been determined by the statute or by any rule, regulation, or order pursuant thereto" (Cong. Rec. June 2, 1943, p. 5324). Apparently, the adoption of this proposed amendment would have precluded a poll of employees of a plant at the request of an organization whose petition for an election had already been denied under the National Labor Relations Act, either because of the existence of another bargaining representative or because the unit sought was inappropriate. But the committee amendment was not adopted. * One of the purposes of section 8 is to give the employees of a war contractor "an opportunity to express themselves, free from restraint or coercion, as to whether they will permit labor disputes which threaten seriously to interrupt war production," and to apprise the President of such labor disputes. The legislative history shows that the Secretary of Labor, the Acting Secretary of War, and the Acting Secretary of the Navy pointed out the possible disturbing effects of taking strike ballots in plants where labor relations had been stabilized by collective bargaining agreements and by the "no strike" pledge. The President in his veto message on the bill gave a similar warning. Notwithstanding these warnings, the Congress enacted the legislation, and in so doing expressed the congressional policy that the taking of secret ballots would tend to retard strikes and to prevent serious interruptions of war production. Labor disputes threatening seriously to interrupt war production might arise with groups of employees other than those comprising an appropriate bargaining unit. Therefore, the purpose of section 8 might be defeated if no representative other than a representative of a majority of employees in an appropriate bargaining unit could give the notice provided for in section 8. Respectfully, FRANCIS BIDDLE. MEMBERS OF ARMED FORCES REPORTED MISSING OR CAPTURED The act of March 7, 1942, 56 Stat. 143, relating to pay and allowances of members of the armed forces officially reported as missing, captured, etc., is applicable to members of the Army of the Philippines who were ordered into the service of the armed forces of the United States. The SECRETARY OF WAR. AUGUST 5, 1943. MY DEAR MR. SECRETARY: Your letter dated June 15, 1943, requests my opinion whether the benefits of the act of March 7, 1942, c. 166, 56 Stat. 143, made available for persons officially reported missing, missing in action, interned in a neutral country or captured by an enemy were intended to be applicable to the members of the Army of the Philippines who were ordered into the service of the armed forces of the United States. It is my opinion that the provisions of that act relating to such benefits are applicable to members of the Army of the Philippines. Section 2 of the act of March 7, 1942, provides in part: "Any person who is in active service and is officially reported as missing, missing in action, interned in a neutral country, or captured by an enemy shall, while so absent, be entitled to receive or to have credited to his account the same pay and allowances to which such person was entitled at the time of the beginning of the absence or may become entitled to thereafter." Subsequent related sections of the act are also applicable to the persons embraced by section 2. Section 1 (a) defines the term "person" to mean 66* commissioned officer, warrant officer, enlisted person (including persons selected under the Selective Training and Service Act, as amended), member of the Army or Navy Nurse Corps (female), wherever serving 66 * * Section 1 (b) defines the term "active service" to mean * active service in the Army, Navy, Marine Corps, * and Coast Guard of the United States * * Section 2 (a) (12) of the Philippine Independence Act (approved March 24, 1934, c. 84, 48 Stat. 456, 457) provides that the Constitution of the Philippines shall contain a provision to the effect that, pending the complete withdrawal of the sovereignty of the United States, the President of the United States shall have the right to call into the service of the armed forces of the United States all military forces organized by the Philippine Government. Compliance with that requirement is found in section 1 (12) of the Ordinance Appended to the Constitution of the Philippines. Acting pursuant to the above authority, the President of the United States on July 26, 1941 (6 Fed. Reg. 3825) issued a Military Order reading as follows: 66* * * I hereby call and order into the service of the armed forces of the United States for the period of the existing emergency, and place under the command of a General Officer, United States Army, to be designated by the Secretary of War from time to time, all of the organized military forces of the Government of the Commonwealth of the Philippines * ** In an opinion dated April 27, 1942, to the Administrator of Veterans' Affairs, the Attorney General concluded that, as a result of that Military Order, members of the Army of the Philippines are considered in "active service in the land or naval forces of the United States" for the purpose of granting insurance under the National Service Life Insurance Act of 1940, as amended (October 8, 1940, c. 757, 54 Stat. 974, 1008; December 20, 1941, c. 602, sec. 10, 55 Stat. 844). 40 Op. A. G. 185. I find no substantial difference between the term "active service in the land or naval forces of the United States," as used in the National Service Life Insurance Act of 1940, as amended, and the term "active service," as defined in the act of March 7, 1942. Accordingly, since no congressional intent to exclude members of the Army of the Philippines can be found in the legislative history of section 2 and of the related sections of the act of March 7, 1942, I conclude that such members are "persons" in "active service in the Army *** of the United States" within the meaning of section 2. Respectfully, CHARLES FAHY, IMPORTATIONS OF WAR MATERIAL When an administrative officer has determined that an importation is "war material" within the meaning of the act of June 30, 1914, and Executive Order No. 9177, the importation is entitled to dutyfree entry. The customs officials are entitled to rely upon the. determination embodied in the administrative officer's certificate and are not required to make an independent determination. The SECRETARY OF THE TREASURY. AUGUST 26, 1943. MY DEAR MR. SECRETARY: Your letter dated August 13, 1943, requests my opinion whether Collectors of Customs are required to determine whether importations which are made pursuant to the provisions of the act of June 30, 1914, 38 Stat. 399, set forth in U.S.C., title 34, sec. 568, and pursuant to Executive Order No. 9177, are, in fact, importations of war material entitled to duty-free entry or whether the Collectors may rely upon a certificate made in accordance with section 2 of Executive Order No. 9177. It is my opinion that when an officer authorized to do so has made a certificate in the form set forth in section 2 of Executive Order No. 9177, the Collector of Customs may permit such material to be entered duty-free on the basis of the certificate alone. The provision of the act of June 30, 1914, 38 Stat. 399, set forth in U. S. C., title 34, sec. 568, provides as follows: "The Secretary of the Navy is authorized to make emergency purchases of war material abroad: Provided, that when such purchases are made abroad, this material shall be admitted free of duty." By Executive Order No. 9177 the Secretary of the Navy, the Secretary of War, the Secretary of the Treasury, the Secretary of Agriculture and the Reconstruction Finance Corporation were authorized to exercise the functions, powers and duties vested in the Secretary of the Navy by the above-quoted provision of the act of June 30, 1914. Section 2 of Executive Order No. 9177 provides as follows: "The Commissioner of Customs, with the approval of the Secretary of the Treasury, shall issue regulations governing the entry and admission free of duty of articles as to which an officer or the agency designated in section 1 of this order shall make a certificate to him in the following form: ""The procurement of this material constituted an emergency purchase of war material abroad and it is accordingly requested that such material be admitted free of duty pursuant to the act of June 30, 1914 (34 U. S. C. 568) and Executive Order No. 9177."" The act of June 30, 1914 and Executive Order No. 9177 make it the function of the officers entitled to make duty-free importations to determine whether such material is war material within the meaning of the act of June 30, 1914. When any such officer has determined that the material being imported is a war material entitled to duty-free entry under the statute and has executed the certificate provided for in Executive Order No. 9177, the customs officials are not required to make an independent determination of the matter, but may rely upon the determination made as embodied in the certificate referred to. Respectfully, FRANCIS BIDDLE. HEAD OF A DEPARTMENT CERTIFYING VOUCHERS When the head of a department or agency certifies vouchers he is required by the act of December 29, 1941, to be bonded. SEPTEMBER 28, 1943. The SECRETARY OF THE TREASURY. MY DEAR MR. SECRETARY: In your letter of July 27, you requested my opinion whether the head of a department, |