PUBLIC RECORD OFFICE
C.O.
Reference :-
885
14 PUBLIC RECORD OFFICE, LONDON
ALLY WITHOUT PERMISSION OF THE BE REPRODUCED PHOTOGRAPHIC- COPYRIGHT PHOTOGRAPH-NOT TO
2
That the only point in Sir R. Goldsworthy's despatch of the 3rd of May to which Mr. Wingfield was especially to direct our attention was the Governor's contention (in paragraphs 6 and 7) that he was entitled by virtue of section 12 of Ordinance 4 of 1871 to insert in any new lease to be granted under Ordinance 9 of 1882 to the holders of an expired lease reservations, conditions, and restrictions which were not contained in the expired lease, including apparently a condition that the quantity of land comprised in the new lease should be subject to correction by survey.
"
That with reference to the Governor's observation that in the definition of " section in section 3 of Ordinance 4 of 1871 the words "as near as may be" did not occur, Mr. Wingfield was to point out that that definition appeared to be superseded by section 10 of the same Ordinance in which those words were inserted.
That Mr. Wingfield was further to request that we would take the papers into our consideration and inform your Lordship whether after perusing them, we saw any reason to modify our Report of the 27th February 1892.
That Mr. Wingfield was further to request us to favour your Lordship with our opinion upon the four questions asked by the Governor in paragraph 11 of his despatch of the 13th of April and upon the following further question, viz. :-
1. In cases in which the boundary lines of land comprised in a lease as drawn on the official chart might be found by measurement on the chart to be more extensive than the boundary lines stated in the lease, was the statement in the lease or the description on the chart to prevail?
2. Was the Governor entitled to insert in a new lease granted under Ordinance 9 of 1882 to the holder of an expired lease reservations, conditions, or restrictions not contained in the expired lease? And if so, could he insert a condition that the land comprised in the lease should be surveyed, and the statement of the acreage and the amount of the rent reserved, should be corrected in accordance with the result of the survey
We have taken the papers into our consideration and, in obedience to your Lordship's command, have the honour to
Report
That, except in one matter referred to in paragraph (4) hereof, we do not see any reason to modify our Report of the 27th February last.
That on the questions asked by the Governor in paragraph 11 of his despatch of April 13th, we are of opinion:-
(1.) That upon the expiration of a lease, the late lessee could not claira any right to purchase, by virtue of Ordinance 9 of 1890, and so prevent the land being put up for sale under Ordinance 9 of 1882.
(2.) That the section should be put up for sale at the acreage which it may on survey be found to contain.
(3.) That if put up and bought in by the Government, the upset price not being bid, the land cannot be looked upon as “ sold," and unless sold on some subsequent occasion,
it would be compulsory on the Government to re-lease it to the original lessee if he has given the prescribed notice.
(4.) That if re-leased to the original lessee it must be upon the same conditions as before, and at a rent at the rate of 201. for each section of 6,000 acres contained in the land leased.
That on the two further questions raised we are of opinion-
(a.) That if the boundary lines as drawn on the chart be found by measurement on the chart to be more extensive than the boundary lines as stated in the lease, the description on the chart must prevail.
(b.) That the Governor is not entitled to insert in a new lease, granted under Ordi- nance 9 of 1882 to the holder of an expired lease, reservations not contained in the expired lease.
The Right Hon. Lord Knutsford,
&c.
&c.
&c.
We have, &c. (Signed)
RICHARD E. WEBSTER. EDWARD CLARKE.
19246.
GENTLEMEN,
No. 17A.
(CANADA.)
FOREIGN OFFICE to LAW OFFICERS.
Foreign Office, August 13, 1392.
I HAVE the honour, by direction of the Marquis of Salisbury, to transmit to you the papers noted in the annexed list, which relate to the right of United States citizens to copyright in Canada.
This
In the year 1891 an Act (Paper A) was passed in the United States to amend title 60, cap. 3, of the Revised Statutes of the United States, relating to copyrights. Act grants copyright in the United States to aliens under certain conditions stated therein.
The final section of the Act provides for its application to the subjects or citizens of foreign States, under certain circumstances, by Proclamation of the President..
On the 16th June 1891 a note was addressed by the Marquis of Salisbury to the United States Minister at this Court (Paper B), in which it was stated "that the law "of copyright in force in all British possessions permits to citizens of the United States of America the benefit of copyright on substantially the same basis as to "British subjects."
On the faith of this assurance, the President of the United States issued his Pro- clamation applying the Act to subjects of Great Britain. (Mr. Lincoln, 2nd July 1891: Paper C.)
On the 4th January 1892 a complaint was received from the United States Government that citizens of the United States were refused copyright in Canada. (Sir J. Pauncefote, No. 35, Treaty, 22nd December 1891: Paper D.)
This complaint was repeated on the 9th January 1892 by the United States Minister at this Court (Paper E).
The Canadian Government were requested to furnish a Report upon the subject, which was received on the 26th July last. (Colonial Office letter, 26th July 1892: Paper F.)
The contention of the Canadian Government is, that the Canadian Copyright Act (cap. 62 of the Revised Statutes of Canada: Paper G) is the only Act under which copyright can be granted in Canada, and that it does not apply to citizens of the United States not domiciled in Canada, because no International Treaty relating to copyright exists between Great Britain and the United States.
No such Treaty does in fact exist.
The whole question is discussed in paragraphs 44 to 48 and 51 of the Report of a Departmental Committee (Paper H) appointed to consider a Canadian Copyright Act which was passed by the Dominion Government in 1889, but which has not been con- firmed, and is not now in forco.
It would seem that, irrespective of the Canadian Copyright Act now in force (cap. 62 of the Revised Statutes of Canada), any literary or artistic work first produced in Canada, or simultaneously first produced in the United States and Canada, is entitled under section 8 (1) of "The International Copyright Act, 1886" (Paper I), to copyright throughout Her Majesty's dominions, and, therefore, in Canada; and that if no pro- vision for registration has been made in Canada under section 8 (1) (a) of the said Act of 1886, then any person, whether a British subject or an alien, whose work has been first published in Canada, or simultaneously first published in Canada and the United States, can entitle himself to a remedy against infringement by registering at Stationers' Hall under the Imperial Copyright Acts.
No Order in Council has been issued under section 8 (3) of "The International Copyright Act, 1886;" no Act such as is contemplated in section 8 (4) of the Act of 1886 has since been passed or is now in force.
The Canadian Copyright Act could probably be made to apply to citizens of the United States by the conclusion of a Copyright Treaty between Great Britain and the United States in the sense of the assurances given in Lord Salisbury's note of the 16th June 1891 (Paper B); but it would be preferable to avoid this course, which would probably be distasteful to Canada.
0 70451.-28. 93.—10/92.