I might say that, this clause was taken from a draft of a Bill made some years ago by the present Deputy Minister of Justice, and that is what called my attention to it in the first place. On discussing the matter with him he left me under the impression-and I can secure the different instances which he gave- that authors had exercised the right. Of course what they can do to suppress a book is a question which depends on many practical considerations. I do not think there is any right recognized in the author,-after he has let the book be published and I have bought it-to come to me and say "You must turn your copy over to me." If no license were granted if course it would be in his hands to, stop all further publications. By reason of the license being grantd, however, the publication has passed into the hands of somebody else, and the purpose of this clause is to prevent the fact of the license being issued leaving the author powerless to stop the future circulation of his work. Now, in this clause, what was in mind was that when the circumstances indicated exist, it should be the duty of the minister to grant the license, but with regard to the terms and conditions upon which it should be issued, that it would be in the exercise of his discretion-it would rest with him to determine what are the fair terms and conditions as to the royalty, duration of the license, and so forth. I do not know which particular clauses might perhaps require modification to make that clear.
Subtopic: COPYRIGHT ACT AMENDMENT