
    ARTHUR B. BARRINGER v. THE UNITED STATES.
    [37 C. Cls. R., 1; 188 U. S. R., 577.]
    
      On the defendants’ Appeal.
    
    The question involved in this case is whether a temporary erhployee in the Government Printing Office, serving for fractional parts of years, is entitled to leaves of absence, or pro rata pay, for unused leaves during the periods of his employment.
    The court below-decides:
    1. The Act llth June, 1896 (29 Stat. L., 453), granting and regulating leaves of absence to employees in the Government Printing Office, extend “to those serving fractional parts of a year,” but nevertheless continues to lodge the granting of leaves of absence in the discretion of the Public Printer. He may determine the time when leave may be granted or refuse it altogether.
    2. The words in a statute, “It shall he lawful,” are mandatory, and the words “It shall he lawful to allow pay for pro rata leave” in the act llth June, 1896, impose upon the Public Printer the duty of allowing leaves of absence with pay to those who serve only during fractional parts of a year.
    3. The general policy of the eight-hour laws has been to restrict work, but not to increase compensation. The act llth June, 1896, abandons ' the policy of the previous laws. Under it a temporary employee is entitled to leave or, if leave be refused him, to pro rata compensation.
    The decision of the court below is reversed on the ground that the provisions of the statutes in regard to leaves of absence to the employees of the Government Printing Office, and for pro rata extra pay to those not receiving leaves, relate only to permanent employees, and that this construction is in accordance with the interpretation of the Public Printer and of Congress.
   Mr. Justice White

delivered the opinion of the Supreme Court February 23, 1903.  