of the present appeal. Since the Privy Council refused to give an extended meaning to the wordgramophone, the beneficial interpretation given to s. 10B(6a) under the decision of Vigneux v. C.P.R.S., 2C.P.R. 251, , 3 D.L.R. 369, S.C.R. 348 [revd 4 C.P.R. 65, , 2 D.L.R. 1, A.C. 108] is not applicableto the instrumentalities in question.For recent decisions of applying the ordinary popular meaning to the interpretation of words of astatute reference may be made to The Queen v. Universal Fur Dressers & Dyers Ltd.,  Ex. C.R. 247and cases there cited.APPEAL from the judgment of the Ontario Court of Appeal, 16 C.P.R. 33, reversing the judgment of Schroeder J., 14 C.P.R. 81, dismissing an action for infringement of copyright in certain musical works.Affirmed.H. G. Fox, Q.C. and W. Stuart Bevan, for appellants.H. E. Manning, Q.C. and F. E. Skone-James, for respondent.The judgment of their Lordships was delivered byVISCOUNT SIMONDSVISCOUNT SIMONDS:--The short question in this appeal, which is brought by special leave from an Orderof the Court of Appeal for Ontario, is whether the appellants have infringed the copyright in certainmusical works which, so far as concerns the sole right to perform those works in public throughoutCanada, is vested in the respondents, The Composers, Authors and Publishers Association of Canada Ltd.The answer to this question turns on the true meaning and effect of s. 10B(6a) of the CopyrightAmendment Act, 1938 (Can.), c. 27, s. 4, which is in these terms:In respect of public performances by means of any radio receiving set or gramophone inany place other than a theatre which is ordinarily and regularly used for entertainments to which anadmission charge is made, no fees, charges or royalties shall be collectable from the owner or user[21 C.P.R. Sec. II - p. 81]of the radio receiving set or gramophone, but the Copyright Appeal Board shall, so far aspossible, provide for the collection in advance from radio broadcasting stations or gramophonemanufacturers, as the case may be, of fees, charges and royalties appropriate to the new conditionsproduced by the provisions of this subsection and shall fix the amount of the same. In so doing theBoard shall take into account all expenses of collection and other outlays, if any, saved or saveable by,for or on behalf of the owner of the copyright or performing right concerned or his agents, inconsequence of the provisions of this subsection.It is not disputed either that copyright subsists in the works in question or that it is vested in therespondents or that they have been performed in public. The performances were in fact given in certainpremises in Toronto occupied by the appellants Reibsten, Dennis and Westminster Hotel Ltd.