Evening star. [volume] (Washington, D.C.) 1854-1972, 1931-07-26
SLASH IN STATIONS
PLANNED FOR FALL
Congestion to BE AHeviated
by Federal Commission
After Chicago Verdict.
BY MARTIN CODEL.


Armed with the legal authority it
has awaited four years, the Federal
Radio Commission plans to inaugurate
mailed fist policy in its dealings with
broadcasting stations this coming Fall,
Sharp reduction in the number Of
stations. to alleviate the congestion IN
the broadcast spectrum, will be the
objective of the campaign. The COM
mission is likely to begin the pruning
operations shortly after 1t conveneS In
September. The opinion of the Circuit
Court of Appeals in Chicago, upholding
the Governments contention that
broadcasting stations have no vested
property rights to the channels as
gives it ample legal ground upon which
TO justify the projected station cur
tailment.
The overcrowded condition in the
broadcast band is admittedly the worst
ailment Of broadcasting. Engineers
called in by the commission at techni-
cal conferences repeatedly have said
that the only way general improve
ment can be accomplished Is by an
arbitrary reduction in the number Of
stations, to bring about less duplica-
ton of assignments on the same chan
mel and greater geographical separation
between stations, both essential factors
in the curtailment Of interference.
610 Stations Now.
On the 80 wavelengths available TO
the United States there are about $40
stations, all of which, of course do not
operate at the same time And Of
these 80 channels a dozen are shared
with Canada. The inevitable result
has been hopeless muddle on most Of
the So-called regional" and local"
channels. On the 40 exclusive wave
lengths, with only one high-powered
station operating during evening hours,
the reception has been clear and un-
marred, true to the predictions Of en-
gineers.
Up to this time, however, the COM
mission has been most cautious in its
dealings with stations, removing from
the air only those stations whose Of
lenses have been intolerable, and when
1t was clear that the courts would Sus-
tain its actions. So long as doubt ex-
isted as to whether stations possessed
vested rights TO their channels, because
OF their capital investments, the COM
mission felt it could not attempt an
arbitrary reduction in the station
roster, even though the radio act of
1927 seemed to give it that power.
Col. Thad H. Brown, general coun-
sci for the commission, is authority for
the statement that the commission will
WELD "flrmer hand" in its control of
broadcasting as result of the courts
ruling. The decision in the case of
station WMBB-WOK of Chicago. which
was deleted by the commission in 1923
to reduce interference, sustained q
previous opinion in the same year by
Judge J. H Wilkerson Of the Chicago
Federal District Court.
Decision Backs Commission.
The decision, said Col. Brown. lends
a greater sense of security to the COM
missions future actions. and confirms
the view that has been held by the
legal division Of the commission since
the enactment of the law. It strength
ems the commissions position in its
efforts to improve broadcasting by
eliminating inferior stations" he de-
clared
How severe the commissions action
will be cannot be foretold 1t has
learned from the courts that hearings
must be held on issues clearly de-
fined before it can take station of
the air. or reduce its facilities. There
fore it Is to be expected that general
hearings will be held, and that any
reallocation, if that course is decided
upon, will be brought about gradually,
to avoid an upheaval such as was &C
casioned in 1928, when the assignments
Of nearly all stations were changed al
most overnight.
In the WMBB-WOK case there yet
may be an appeal to the Supreme Court
Of the United States for q final adjudi-
cation. The decision Of the lower court.
however was so sweeping that lawyers
believe such an attempt would be
futile for the American Bond g.
Mortgage Co. which owned the for
mer 5,000-watt Chicago stations. This
company claimed that the commits
sion's action was unconstitutional, In
that its property. in the nature of sta
ton facilities, investment and good
will, had been destroyed without COM
pensation and due process of law.
The court, however, in its opinion,
would not countenance this contention.
We are well satisfied" said the court,
that there Is a vital difference between
the rights of one whose property Tin
coal land such as was considered IN
Pennsylvania Coal Co. against Mahon,
$50 U. S., 393) is conflscated by judicial
decree and the rights of one to the
use of the air, which right is dependent
upon a Government permit limited
both as to extent and time. The for
mer is vested. The latter Is permits
sive."