Evening star. [volume] (Washington, D.C.) 1854-1972, 1929-11-04
-FOUR RADIO ISSUES
~
ADJUSTED IN COURT
Decisions Rendered on Ap-
peaIs Taken From Rulings of
Federal Commission.

The District of Columbia Court o
Appeals today rendered opinions b.
Chief Justice George E. Martin in fou
appeals made to it from actions of thu
Federal Radio Commission. In three
Of the cases the action of the commits
sion was af1rmed. and in the fourth
case it was reversed.
The order of the commission denying
fill-time operation to Station WNYC
conducted by the city of New York, was
Upheld by the court. The commission
had ordered the station to share time
with WMCA, which has its studio in
New York and its tranSmitter In New
Jersey and which operated at the same
frequency. The city of New York, IN
its appeal, commended that it had &C
Quired q property right to operate at
full time and the attempted restriction
amounted to q taking Of property with
out process of law. It was also claimed
that the city of New York was con-
Quoting a governmental function in the
operation Of the station.
Holds Neither Claim Tenable.
Chief Justice Martin declares that
neither claim is tenable, because the in
terstate broadcasting of radio commu-
nication Is a species of interstate COM
Yfnerce and as such is subject to Federal
regulation, and that. while the city IS
a municipal corporation, in the opera
ton OF its radio station it exercises
private and not governmental powers
and is not acting as a municipal cor
poration, but as a corporate legal IN
dividual.
The court points out that the COM
mission could not grant the request OF
the City of New York for full time with
out eliminating WMCA, which serves
the same public and which has won
public esteem by the high character OF
Its service"
Approval is given by the court to the
decision Of the commission to discon-
tinue the licensing of portable broad
casting stations which are migratory In
character and which having no fixed
place had been permitted to operate
at any place to which its transmitting
equipment may be transported by the
licenses. C. L. Carroll had licenses for
seven such stations and after four OF
them had been made stationary APP
piled for renewals for the other three.
The commission refused his request and
Carroll appealed.
Scope of Ruling Cited.
Chief Justice Martin points out that
no complaint is made as to the conduct
of CAROLS stations, but the ruling uf
the commission relates to all portable
stations alike, and the appeal challenges
the authority of the commission to make
and enforce it's rule against the licensing
Of portable broadcaSting stations as
class.
The commission claimed that the
licensing of portable stations Is not IN
s.aAA
necessity and that under the ALLEGATIONS
of ations AZ at present established, the
operation of migratory transnitters
would result in harmful interference
and would deprive the public OF the
service of the stations with which they
would come in contact.
The court declined to act on the sug-
gestion that the commission should az
low Carroll to anchor" these remaining
three stations, declaring that question
not before the court, which Is only de-
Gliding that the commission has the
right to deny renewals as portable sta
tons.
Laboratory Loses Appeal.
:. The Technical Radio Laboratory,
which operates station WTRL at Md
land Park, N. j., lost its appeal from
the action Of the commission in ferus-
ing to renew its license to operate on
q wave length Of 206 meters WIN
maximum power Of is watts. Inc com,
pany claimed that, the commission nae az
no Authority to "order the station on
the air' and that its refusal to renew
q license amounts to a taking OF prop
erty without compensation ana oue
The chief Justice declares he cannot
agree with this contention ana points
out that because OF the location OF tne
station its electric waves may cross
state lines and may also interfere MltIi
the reception of radio communications
fro,,, other states. It is also ques-
tionable, he states, If radio broadcasting
ear in any case be so restricted IN
nractice as to be wholly interstate.
The court also points out that pc
cause of the stations maximum power
of Is watts the record dlScloses tnat
il has been of no actual benent 10 aus
owners or to- the community OF bergen
County. The appellant does not seek
a renewal of the old license, but a
modification of It's terms, the CHEZ
Justice saws, so that it could be re-
moved to a more advantageous point
where 1t could be used on regular
commercial basis, but that question is
not before the court.
Commission Again Reversed.
'I0e REVERSAL VI Vic
IN the fourth case. in which the Rich
rnond Development Corporation asks
additional time to complete the con-
struction of a station at Roanoke. va
The company applied for construc-
ton permit in August, 1927, which was
granted in April. 1928, to be completed
bv Nav 81, 1928. Arrangements went
forward by the company for purchase OF
equipment and erection Of building, out
owing to delays caused by contractors
by engineering difficulties and oy
weather conditions construction was nol
completed by June l, and an extension
was granted by the commission until
September. On September is another
extension was asked until october 81
One of the members of the commission
refused to vote on the question, two
voted to grant the extension but ms
remaining two voted against it. AS the
application did not receive majority
of the votes cast, 1t was regarded as
denied and an order entered to thai
effect. from which the company ap-
pealed :,
The court says it is convinced that u
was the duty Of the commission te
grant the application.