to the Archivist, the Executors were discharged from any
further responsibility with respect to them. The Executors,
therefore, are protected by the Court Decree if they adopt
the hands off policy indicated by (a) above. If, however,
they adopt the alternative position, (b) above, and assume
the right to control the publication of any letters of
which copies are in the files now in the possession of the
Library, they assume corresponding responsibilities and
liabilities. It is axiomatic that every right carries with
it corresponding obligations. However, aside from all other
considerations, it is necessary to examine the legal
arguments in support of each position.
 
     (a) When F.D.R. Gave His Papers and Title Passed to the
          Government. All Rights Which He Had, Including the
          Common Law Exclusive Publication Rights in his   
          Letters, Passed to the Government--In Other Words,  
          There Was a Complete Dedication to the Public for
          all Purposes.
 
      There are no cases or precedents directly in point on 
the question. The principles and conclusions set forth in my
memorandum to the Trustee dated January 15, 1948 logically
apply to the letters under discussion. It can be fairly
assumed that by delivering copies of the original letters
to the Library, F.D.R. intended that they be made available
to the general public for all purposes and that his action
was in effect a publication of the contents of the letters
and a complete dedication to the public. Under the theory
of cases such as Pushman v. New York Graphic Society, Inc.,
287 N.Y., 302, and Chamberlain v. Feldman, N.Y.L.J.,
January 15, 1948, if F.D.R. had intended to reserve any
rights in the letters including publication 
 
                       -13-