Evening star., 1951-10-15
Transit Radio
Review Granted
by High Court
Petition by Opponents
Of Music on Buses
Also to Be Heard
By Robert K. Welsh

The Supreme Court agreed to-
day to decide whether CONNER
cial. music and similar types Of
radio broadcasts on Capital
Transit buses and streetcars
violate the Constitutional rights
of passengers.
The tribunal granted review to
an appeal by the District Public
Utilities Commission, Capital
Transit Co.. and the Washington
Transit Radio Association from a
United States Court of Appeals
unanimous opinion last June that
commercial broadcasts were un-
constitutional, under those cir
cumstances.
The Supreme Court also ac-
cepted for review a petition by
opponents of the broadcasts.
These opponents asked that the
court rule not only against adver-
tising broadcasts but also against
broadcasts of all kinds, including
music, on Capital Transit vehicles.
Other Cities Affected.
The controversy has attracted
national attention because more
than dozen other major cities
have radio broadcasting on buses
or streetcars.
One of the main questions con-
fronting the Supreme Court is
whether presumed" minority
of passengers who object to radio
broadcasts are deprived of their
liberty" without due process Of
law.
Opponents of the broadcasts
have stressed the term captive
audiences" in contending that the
Constitutional rights of passengers
are violater when such passengers
ARE subjected" to radio programs
Iof any kind on public transporta-
tion vehicles.
| The United States Court of Ap-
peals decision last June set aside
rulings in favor of the broadcasts
by the PUG and District Court.
The opinion. written by Judge
Henry w. Edgerton and concurred
in by Judge David L. Bazelone
and Charles Fahy, stated that we
are not called upon to decide
whether occasional broadcasts of
music alone would infringe on
Constitutional rights.
The opinion went on. however,
ito condemn such commercial
broadcasts as 'depriving object
ing passengers of liberty without
due process of law"
Freedom of Attention Stressed.
This loss of freedom of atten-
tion," the Appeals Court contin-
Iued, "is the more serious because
many people have little time to
read, consider, or discuss what
they like or to relax. The record
makes it plain that the loss is a
serious injury to many passen-
gers. The suffer not only the dis
comfort of hearing what they
dislike but also a sense of out
rage at being compelled to hear
whatever Transit Radio chooses"
/ The Supreme Courts move to
review the case means that oral
arguments will be heard, prob
ably late this fall, and that a
decision may be handed down
before the end of the current
term next June.
! The fight against Transit Radio
was engineered by a group known
as the Transit Riders Associa-
tion. numbering fewer than 500
Iof the thousands who ride buses
and streetcars daily.
Claude Palmer Heads Group.
/ President of the group is Claude
N. Palmer, 66, who hailed the
Court of Appeals decision against
commercials on transit vehicles
as recognition of "an entirely new
area of human rights"
Two attorneys, Franklin S. Pol
lax of 1888 Twenty-seventh street
NV, and Guy Martin, BIT
Woodley road NV, were credited
with taking initial action for the
protesting organization, and fol-
lowing through with the required
legalistics.
The leaders later were joined
by another lawyer, Paul M. Segal
of 2750 Brandywine street, a trade
(See BUS MUSIC. Page A-6.)