Skip to main content

Full text of "Intercity Radio Telegraph Co. v. Federal Radio Commission (D.C. Cir. 1929)"

See other formats


United States Court of Appeals 

for the 

District of Columbia Circuit 



TRANSCRIPT OF 
RECORD 








TRANSCRIPT OF RECORD 


Court of Appeals of the District of Columbia 

OCTOBER'TERM, 1929 


No. 4987 

INTERCITY RADIO TELEGRAPH COMPANY, APPELLANT, 


FEDERAL RADIO COMMISSIO 
FILED JUNE 24, 1929. 


No. 4988 

WIRELESS TELEGRAPH & COMMUNICATIONS COMPANY, 

APPELLANT, 


FEDERAL RADIO COMMISSION 


FILED JUNE 24, 1929 


No. 4990 

R. C. A. COMMUNICATIONS, INC., APPELLANT, 

v$. 

FEDERAL RADIO COMMISSION. 


FILED JUNE 27, 1929. 

AND 

^ No. 4991 

MACKAY RADIO & TELEGRAPH COMPANY 


FEDERAL RADIO COMMISSION 


FILED JUNE 29, 1929 


APPEALS FROM THE FEDERAL RADIO 


PRINTED FEBRUARY 27, 1930, 





Court of Appeals of the District of Columbia 


OCTOBER TERM, 1929 


No. 4987 

INTERCITY RADIO TELEGRAPH COMPANY, APPELLANT, 

vs. 

FEDERAL RADIO COMMISSION. 

. 

FILED JUNE 24, 1929. 

No. 4988 

WIRELESS TELEGRAPH & COMMUNICATIONS COMPANY, 

APPELLANT, 

vs. 

FEDERAL RADIO COMMISSION. 

i 

FILED JUNE 24, 1929. 

No. 4990 

R. C. A. COMMUNICATIONS, INC., APPELLANT, 

vs. 

FEDERAL RADIO COMMISSION. 

FILED JUNE 27, 1929. 

AND 

No. 4991 | 

MACKAY RADIO & TELEGRAPH COMPANY, APPELLANT, 

vs. 

i 

FEDERAL RADIO COMMISSION. 

FILED JUNE 29, 1929. 


APPEALS FROM THE FEDERAL RADIO COMMISSION. 


VOL. I 

! 

— 

i 

i 

! 

INDEX. 

Original Print 

Notice of appeal of Intercity Radio Telegraph Company and 

Wireless Telegraph & Communciations Company.j.. 1 1 

Petition for stay order.|.. 30 22 

Answer of Federal Radio Commission to petition fj>r 
stay order and motion to dismiss said petition_j.. 33 25 

Judd & Detweiler (Inc.), Printers, Washington, D. C., January 4, 1930. 





INDEX, 


Original Print 


Brief of Federal Radio Commission in opposition to 


petition for stay order. 48 30 

Opposition to motion to dismiss stay order. 60 45 


Brief of Intercity Radio Telegraph Co. and Wireless 
Telegraph and Communications Co. in opposition to 
motion of Federal Radio Commission to dismiss the 


petition of appellants for stay order. 63 4S 

Notice of appeal of R. C. A. Communications, Inc. 77 60 

Notice of appeal to Mackay Radio & Telegraph Co. 110 90 

Statement of facts and grounds for decisions filed by Fed¬ 
eral Radio Commission. 115 95 

Minutes of the Federal Radio Commission. 300 283 

Short-wave hearing of January 17, 1928. 534 474 

Statement of Eugene O. Sykes, acting chairman. 53S 476 

Dr. J. H. Dellinger. 540 477 

Mr. Joseph Pierson. 549 4S3 

Mr. John D. Costello. 556 487 

Mr. L. M. Loeb. 566 494 

Mr. Charles E. Hughes, Jr. 5S6 500 

Mr. Manton Davis. 595 506 

Mr. Frank B. Jewett. 619 522 

Mr. Frederick C. Scofield. 631 531 

Dr. Frank B. Jewett. 636 533 

Dr. J. II. Dellinger. 637 5:54 

Dr. Frederick C. Scofield. 

Mr. Manton Davis. 639 535 

Major W. R. Blair, U. S. Army. 657 536 

Chptain S. C. Hooper. 659 538 

Lieut. E. M. Webster. 66S 544 

Mr. H. J. Walls. 672 547 

Mr. Dave P. Carlton. 677 548 

Prof. C. M. Jansky, Jr. 683 552 

Mr. Joseph Pierson. 734 558 

Mr. Swagar Sherley. 737 560 

Mr. Edward N. Nockels. 763 570 

Mr. George D. Cochrane. 799 574 

Dr. A. M. Goldsmith. S10 579 

Mr. C. W. Horn. S2S 590 

Mr. R. N. Con well. 847 602 

Mr. William Roy Vallance.•.... 898 604 

Mr. Lloyd Espenschild. 910 605 

Exhibit (letter, January 3, 192S, J. V. L. Hogan to 

O. H. Caldwell). 942 615 

Transoceanic hearing of May 14. 1928 . 946 617 

Statement of Dr. Frank B. Jewett. 953 620 

Mr. Oswald F. Schuette. 970 031 

Mr. C. M. Bracelen of New York City.... 1005 653 

Mr. Charles E. Hughes, Jr. 1007 654 

Mr. Manton Davis. 1037 674 

Dr. Alfred N. Goldsmith. 1038 675 














































index. ! iii 

| 

Original Print 

Statement of Mr. Lloyd A. Briggs.j. 1073 696 

Mr. C. W. Latimer.1107 717 

Mr. Manton Davis.L 112G 729 

Mr. Charles F. Hughes.|. 1160 750 

Mr. Joseph Pierson.j. 1213 756 

Mr. Louis M. Loeb.j. 1234 76S 

Mr. W. E. Beakes.j. 1253 770 

Hearing of September 25-26. 192S.j. 1267 7S5 

Testimony of Universal Wireless Communication Coj., 

Inc.j. 1260 785 

Testimony of Howard L. Ford.j. 1275 700 

Testimony for Radio Corporation of America.j. 1288 70S 

Opening statement on behalf of applicant.i. 1201 700 

Testimony of William A. Wintefbottom. i. 1205 802 

Testimony of Lloyd A. Briggs.j. 1311 813 

Exhibit Xo. 1—Affidavit of Mr. Winterbottom.j. 1338 831 

Xo. 2—Affidavit of Mr. Briggs.j. 1340 830 

Xo. 3—Statement “Proposed R. C. A. National 

Radio System”.,|. 1350 847 

Xo. 4 .j. 1360 84S 

Xo. 5 .j. 1361 S50 

Xo. 6 .J. 1361 S52 

Xo. 7 .. 1362 S53 

Testimony for Maekay Radio and Telegraph Co.,!. 1370 857 

Testimony of A. Y. Tuel.J. 1373 858 

Testimony of Haraden Pratt.J. 1304 872 

Testimony for Intercity Radio Telegraph Company., j. 130S 875 

Testimony of Emil A. Simon.j. 1408 S81 

The transcript of hearing of December 18, 1928, on behajlf 
of Texas Pipe Line Co., Humble Pipe Line Co., Marland 
Pipe Line Co., Philips Petroleum Co., Skelly Oil Co., Illi¬ 
nois Pipe Line Co., Anderson Pritchard Oil Co.J. 1420 880 

Testimony of C. M. Jansky, Jr.j. 1427 81)4 

E. A. Eckhardt.j. 1464 920 

J. S. Dewar.j. 14S7 936 


Exhibit Xo. 2, introduced at hearing before Federal 

Radio Commission, dated January 17, IS, 192S.J. 1513 953 

Exhibit Xo. 3, introduced at hearing before Federal 

Radio Commission, dated March 24, 192S.j. 1520 960 

Exhibit Xo. 4, introduced at hearing before Federal 

Radio Commission, dated March 20, 192S.j. 1521 961 

Exhibit Xo. 5, introduced at hearing before Federal 

Radio Commission, dated March 30, 192S.1. 1527 968 

Exhibit Xo. 6, introduced at hearing before Federal 

Radio Commission.i 152S 969 

Exhibit Xo. 7, introduced at hearing before Federal 

Radio Commission, dated April 25, 192S.i. 1534 976 

Exhibit Xo. S, introduced at hearing before Federal 
Radio Commission.j. 1536 97S 










































IV 


INDEX, 


Original Print 


Exhibit No. 0, introduced at hearing before Federal 

Radio Commission. 1541 OSS 

Exhibit No. 13. introduced at hearing before Federal 

Radio Commission, dated November 10, 11)28. 1542 081) 

Exhibit No 14, introduced at hearing before Federal 

Radio Commission, dated November 13, 102S. 1545 004 

Motion to (consolidate the eases of above companies, 


dated January 26, 1020. 1557 1003 

Letter of Fayette B. Dow. 1560 1006 

Testimony for Wireless Telegraph & Corns. Co., April 

24, 1020. 1562 1007 

Testimony of Jirah D. Cole, Jr. 1565 1000 

Testimony of Abel C. Thomas. 1574 1014 

Testimony for Intercity Radio Telegraph Co. 1581 1010 

Testimony of Emil J. Simon. 15S6 1022 

Testimony of Abel C. Thomas. 1607 1037 

Minutes, May 10, 1020. 1611 1030 

Testimony for Intercity Radio Telegraph Company.... 1613 1010 

Testimony of E. J. Simon.. 16132 10- ' 

Abel C. Thomas. 16S0 100 

Joseph D. R. Freed. 1604 1090 

Charles J. Michel. 1608 1000 

Boyd Phelps. 1704 1103 

James F. Orr. 1742 1128 

D. W. Wilson. 1745 1130 

Lewis R. Compton. 1747 1132 

Exhibit 1—Affidavit of Harry M. Warner. 1750 1140 

Exhibit No. 2, introduced at hearing before Federal 

Radio Commission, dated May 22, 1020. 1760 1141 

Exhibit No. 3, introduced at hearing before Federal 

Radio Commission, dated May 22, 1020. 1761 1142 

Exhibit No. 1, introduced at hearing before Federal 

Radio Commission, dated May 22, 1929. 1762 1143 

Exhibit No. 5, introduced at hearing before Federal 

Radio Commission, dated May 23, 1029... 1770 1161 

Exhibit No. 7, introduced at hearing before Federal 

Radio Commission, dated May 23, 1929. 1783 1165 

Testimony for R. C. A. Communications, Inc. 170S 1175 

Testimony of W. A. Winterbottom. 1S05 1180 

Original of assignment of station and licenses.... ISOS 11813 

List of transatlantic radio services... 1S27 1207 

List of radio services from New York to South America 

and West Indies. 1831 1209 

List of transpacific radio services. 1832 1210 

Radio rates via R. C. A... 1S35 1212 

List of comparison of rates prior to the advent of radio 

with present rates. 1S71 1246 

List of most important American cities. 1889 125S 

Chart of R. C. A. Communications. 1900 1265 





































INDEX, 


'Original 

I 


List of important American cities to which domestic j 


radio service will be extended.j 1906 

Cities included in proposed R. C. A. national radio sys-j 

tern .I 19S7 

List of frequencies included in R. C. A. application and 


assignments .j 

Exhibit 6 of Intercity Company being annual report of ! 
R. C. A. for 192S.! 

I 

Presentation on behalf of Mackay Radio & Telegraph Co.j 
Annual report of 192S of International Telephone & 

Telegraph Corporation, Intercity Exhibit No. S.i 

Presentation on behalf of Western Radio Telegraph Co.j 

Testimony of C. M. Jansky, Jr.j 

Order, dated December 22, 1928, granting applications..' 
Technical prospectus on engineering features, being Ex¬ 
hibit A.I 

Certificate of incorporation.! 

Memorandum in re applications for point to point allo-j 

cation .j 

Second supplemental memorandum.j 

Brief .I 

Letter of May 7, 192S, from Milton J. Blanchard to thej 

Commission .j 

List of directors of Universal Wireless Communications 


2007 

2108 

2122 


2146 

21S2 

2186 

219S 


2199 

2219 


2230 

2235 

2239 


2249 


Co. j 

List of cities.j 

Letter, dated November 9, 1928, from John M. Baer to 
the Commission and statement of Dr. Nathansohnj 

which accompanied that letter. J 

Universal station licenses at Plainfield, Ill., and Scobey} 

ville, New Jersey.j 

Universal construction permits. (To be followed by the 

statement) .j 

Statement of the stations.i 

Press release of December 27, 1928, allocation of higl| 

frequency assignments.i 

Order extending license of Wireless Company to Jul^ 

7, 1929.i 

Affidavit of Jirah D. Cole, president of the Wireless Coi. 
Letters and telegrams between Intercity Co. and Fedi- 

eral Radio Commission, November, 1927 .;_j. 

Memorandum for Intercity Co. and Wireless Co. L 

Inspectors’ reports of November 24-25, 192S.j. 

Appellants’ Exhibit No. 2, being a card of Intercity 
Radio Telegraph Company, showing rates of service tp 

Chicago, Columbus, Detroit, and Buffalo. L 

Application of Intercity Radio Telegraph Company of 
May 26, 1928, for construction permit for a station 

in Philadelphia, and application of Wireless Tele- 


2252 

2254 


2256 

2264 

2265 

2270 

2271 

2281 

22S2 

2281 

2294 

2304 


2312 


V 

Print 

126S 

1324 

1343 

1414 

1429 

1447 

14S3 

1486 

1494 

1495 
1509 

1516 

1519 

1521 

1532 

1533 
1535 


1536 

1541 

1543 

1545 

1546 

1556 

1557 

1559 

1564 

1570 


15S1 



























VI 


INDEX 


Original Print 


graph & Communication Company of August 23, 192S, 

for construction permit for a station in Los Angeles. 2313 1581 

Memo, as to applications filed, etc. 2322 15SS 

August 26, 1927. and December 27, 1927, R. C. A. appli¬ 
cations for construction permits for four transcon¬ 
tinental stations using high frequencies between New 
York ahd San Francisco hereto attached. (Not at 

present in record as submitted by Commission). 2323 1588 

Letter of Briggs, dated May 13, 1929, enclosing 76 
amended applications of R. C. A. Communications, 

Inc., foi* radio station construction permits, covering 
point to point national radio system, filed May 14, 

1929, and superseding applications, dated April 5, 


1928, of R. C. A. 2343 1604 

Specimen application of R. C. A. Communications, Inc., 

of May 14, 1929 . 2344 1G05 

Memo, as to other 75 amended applications referred 

to in Briggs letter. 2352 1610 

Letter of May 20, 1929, Briggs to Commission, referring 

to six transoceanic wave channels. 2353 1611 

Letter of May 22, 1929, Commission’s reply to Briggs’ 

letter of May 20. 1929. 2356 1613 

Memorandum brief, dated June"4, 1929, filed by counsel 
for R. C. A. Communciations, Inc., in reply to state¬ 
ments of Intercity and Mackay. 2357 1613 

Letter of Commission to R. C. A. Communications, Inc., 

dated June 13, 1929. 2364 1618 

Letter of L. A. Briggs to Carl H. Butman, secretary, 
dated June 14, 1929. (A printed copy of this letter 
can be found on pages 14, 15, 16, and 17 of notice of 

appeal of R. C. A. Communications, Inc.). 2365 1619 

Federal Rudio Commission list of assignments in 10 to 

550 kc. band, dated July 26, 1929. 236S 1623 

Federal Radio Commission list of assignments in 1,500 

to 6.000 kc. band, dated July 26, 1929. 2397 1666 

Memorandum in support of Mackay applications. 2460 1754 

Application of Mackay Radio & Telegraph Company of 

April 4, 192S. 2466 1757 

Application of Mackay Radio & Telegraph Company of 

December 30, 1927 . 2470 1760 

Certificate by the secretary of the Commission. 2481 1767 

Designation of record. 2483 1768 



















Court of Appeals of the District of Columbia 


No. 4987. 

Intercity Radio Telegraph Company, Applicant Appel¬ 
lants, 

vs. 

i 

Federal Radio Commission, Appelle0. 


No. 4988. 

i 

i 

Wireless Telegraph & Communications Company, Appli¬ 
cant Appellants, 

vs. | 

Federal Radio Commission, Appellee. 

_ j 

i 

1 In the Court of Appeals, District of Columbia. 

No. 4987. ! 

j 

Intercity Radio Telegraph Company, Applicant Appel¬ 
lants, 

i 

vs. 

Federal Radio Commission, Appellbe. 

No. 4988. j 

Wireless Telegraph & Communications Company, Appli¬ 
cant Appellants, 

j 

vs. i 

I 

Federal Radio Commission, Appellee. 

Notice of Appeals to the Court of Appeals of the District 
of Columbia , and Reasons Therefor. 

Intercity Radio Telegraph Company and tireless Tele¬ 
graph & Communications Company, by Frank J. Hogan, 

1—4987a 


i 




2 


INTERCITY RADIO TELEGRAPH CO. ET AL. VS. 


Edmund L. Jones, John W. Guider, Attorneys. Frederic 
C. Scofield, of Counsel. 

Court of Appeals, District of Columbia. Filed Jun. 24, 
1929. Henry W. Hodges, Clerk. 

2 In the Court of Appeals, District of Columbia. 

No. —. 

Intercity Radio Telegraph Company, Applicant-Appel¬ 
lants, 

vs. 

Federal Radio Commission, Appellee. 

No. —. 

Wireless Telegraph & Communications Company, Appli¬ 
cant-Appellants, 

vs. 

Federal Radio Commission, Appellee. 

Notice of Appeals . 

Now this 24th day of June, 1929, comes the Intercity Radio 
Telegraph Company and the Wireless Telegraph & Com¬ 
munications Company, applicant appellants in the above- 
entitled proceedings, and say that they are aggrieved by 
the decisions of the Fedtral Radio Commission ren- 

3 dered on their following applications: 


For Station Licenses. 


Date of 
Application. 

Applicant. 

Place for which 
application made. 

Nov. 2, 1927 

Intercity Radio Telegraph Co . 


Jan. 12, 1927 

a 

Detroit. 

Jan. 12, 1928 

44 

Cleveland. 

Jan. 12, 1928 

44 

Buffalo. 




FEDERAL RADIO COMMISSION 


3 


Date of 

For Construction 

Permits. 

Place for which. 

Application. 

Applicant. 


application made. 

May 26, 1928 

Intercity Radio Telegraph 

Co. 

... Bcfston. 

New Bedford. 

May 26, 192S 

4 4 


Jan. 12, 192S 

44 


New York. 

May 26, 1928 

44 


Providence. 

May 26, 1928 

44 


Philadelphia. 

May 26, 192S 

44 


Baltimore. 

May 26, 1928 

44 


Fcjrt Worth. 

May 26, 1928 

44 


Waco. 

May 26, 1928 

44 


New Orleans. 

May 26, 1928 

44 


Pittsburgh. 

„ May 26, 192S 

44 


Atlanta. 

May 26, 1928 

44 


Memphis. 

May 26, 1928 

44 


Chicago. 

May 26, 1928 

44 


Stj. Louis. 
Galveston. 

May 26, 1928 

44 


May 26, 1928 

44 


Hbuston 

May 26, 192S 

Wireless Telegraph & Communications i 


Company. 


.. .Milwaukee. 

Aug. 23, 1928 

44 


Oiaaha. 

Aug. 23, 1928 

44 


Minneapolis. 

Aug. 23, 1928 

44 


Kansas City. 

Aug. 23, 1928 

44 


Indianapolis. 

Aug. 23, 192S 

44 


Des Moines. 

Aug. 23, 1928 

44 


Denver. 

Aug. 23, 1928 

44 


Cincinnati. 

Aug. 23, 1928 

44 


Seattle. 

Aug. 23, 1928 

44 


Portland. 

Aug. 23, 1928 

44 


Sin Francisco. 

Aug. 23, 1928 

44 


Sait Lake City. 

Aug. 23, 1928 

44 


Lps Angeles. 

Aug. 23, 1928 

44 


Dallas. 

Aug. 23, 1928 

44 


Tampa. 

Aug. 23, 1928 

44 


'VV’ashington, D. C. 

Jan. 12, 1928 

44 


Chicago. 

June 22,192S 

44 


Chicago. 

Jan. 12, 1928 

44 


Njew York. 

May2S, 1928 

44 


Njew York. 

June 22,1928 

44 


New York. 


which decisions were rendered against them bn the 7th day 
of June, 1929, effective the 10th day of Jijme, 1929, and 
constituted a denial of the aforesaid applications 
4 for station licenses and for construction permits. 

These applicants also say they are aggrieved by 
the decisions of the Federal Radio Commission on the 
applications of R. C. A. Communications, tnc., and Uni¬ 
versal Wireless Communications Company, Inc., which de¬ 
cisions were also rendered on June 7, 192£), effective the 
same date, insofar as (1) those decisions involved a dis¬ 
position of all available channels, to the exclusion of these 
appellants; (2) those companies were authorized to con¬ 
struct stations or operate stations in cities where the ap- 





4 


INTERCITY RADIO TELEGRAPH CO. ET AL. VS. 


pellants now have radio stations: and (3) channels previ¬ 
ously held by the Commission as trans-oceanic channels 
were made available to R. C. A. Communications, Inc., for 
domestic use. 

The Wireless Telegraph & Communications Company 
says it is aggrieved by the decision of the Federal Radio 
Commission on its application of June 25, 1927, for the 
renewal of its existing station license, which decision was 
rendered against it on June 7, 1929, effective June 10, 1929, 
and constituted a denial of the said application for renewal 
of its existing station license. 

Wherefore, the Intercity Radio Telegraph Company and 
the Wireless Telegraph and Communications Company 
hereby give notice of their appeals from the aforesaid de¬ 
cisions to the Court of Appeals of the District of Columbia, 
and assign in support thereof the reasons for appeal here¬ 
inafter set forth. 

INTERCITY RADIO TELEGRAPH 
COMPANY and 

WIRELESS TELEGRAPH & COM¬ 
MUNICATIONS COMPANY, 

By JOHN W. GUIDER, 

Their Attorney. 

5 Reasons for Appeal. 

The reasons for this appeal are: 

(1) The decisions of the Federal Radio Commission 
rendered on June 7, 1929, and effective June 10, 1929, were 
not in the public interest, convenience and necessity. 

(2) It was not in the public interest, convenience and 
necessity to encourage newcomers in the domestic commer¬ 
cial radio communication field and at the same time to 
deny the applications of companies previously engaged in 
that field. This the Commission did, and thereby com¬ 
mitted error. 

(3) It would have been in the public interest, convenience 
and necessity for the Commission to encourage the pioneers 
in the field by granting them the facilities for which they 
applied. In denying those applications, and granting simi¬ 
lar facilities to newcomers in the field, the Commission 
erred. 

(4) The said decisions, from which this appeal is taken, 
were so manifestly arbitrary and unreasonable as virtually 



FEDERAL RADIO COMMISSION. 


5 


to transcend tlie authority conferred by Congress on the 
Commission. 

(5) The Commission has discriminated unfairly against 
the applicant appellants and in favor of other pommunica- 
tion companies and proposed communication; companies 
whose rights in the domestic radio communication field are 
inferior to those of the appellant companies.; 

(6) The decisions of the Commission violate the provi¬ 
sions of the Constitution of the United States I in that the 
acts of the Commission, herein complained of, constitute a 

prohibition of interstate commerce and nbt a regula- 
6 tion thereof, and are in excess of the pojwers of the 
Congress itself. 

(7) The decisions herein appealed from constitute a vio¬ 

lation of the provisions of the Constitution of! the United 
States, in that these decisions, if effected, will deprive the 
applicant companies of their property without due process 
of law, or just compensation. *j 

(8) The acts herein complained of further j violate the 
provisions of the Constitution of the United States in that 
these decisions attempt to take away from the applicant 
companies the right to do business. 

(9) The Commission in assigning forty specific high fre¬ 
quencies to the Universal Wireless Communication Com¬ 
pany, Inc., on June 7, 1929, and twenty high frequencies 
to R. C. A. Communications, Inc., on June 7, j.929, and in 
permitting R. C. A. Communications, Inc., by its action of 
June 10, 1929, to use thirty-two of its formerly assigned 
transoceanic channels in the domestic service which the 
company proposes to establish, and in grafting to the 
Western Radio & Telegraph Company five high frequency 
channels and four low frequency channels, yith certain 
limitations on their use, on June 7, 1929, has disposed or is 
about to dispose of all the available frequencies for do¬ 
mestic radio telegraph communication and has left the 
applicant appellant companies in such a position that if 
this Court should find them entitled to additional facilities , 
the Commission would have no frequencies available for 
further assignment. 

(10) The Commission in denying to the applicant com¬ 
panies the opportunity to expand their services and to 
compete with other proposed communication companies in 
other cities has discriminated against the appellant com- 





6 


INTERCITY RADIO TELEGRAPH CO. ET AL. VS. 


panies in that it lias deprived them of the same op- 

7 portunity to do business that it has previously 
granted to other applicants and that it has by its 

decisions of June 7 and June 10 further granted to com¬ 
panies intending to compete. 

(11) By its decisions, the Federal Radio Commission 
prohibits the applicants from engaging in competition with 
other companies while it permits its prospective competi¬ 
tors, the R. C. A. and Universal companies, to operate in 
the cities formerly and at present served only by the ap¬ 
plicant companies. 

(12) The Commission has erred in granting to companies 
not yet in active operation, permission to do business in 
territories hitherto unserved bv radio communication, 
while at the same time denying to the applicant comjianies 
the same or equivalent privileges. 

(13) The Commission erred in its decision of June 7 in 
that the Commission granted to other applicant companies 
the right to enter the territory already served by the ap¬ 
pellant companies without properly considering (1) whether 
the said appellant companies are adequately serving or 
are prepared to adequately serve that territory and (2) 
whether by permitting competition in that territory by 
companies licensed to operate in a much larger territory, 
the appellant companies will be so injured by the said 
competition as to almost immediately force them out of 
business. The Commission’s decision in this respect gives 
the newcomers an unfair advantage and one that the ap¬ 
pellants cannot overcome. 

(14) The Commission erred in not considering the priority 
of the appellants in the domestic radio telegraph field and 
in granting facilities requested by them to other communi¬ 
cation companies who had not previously been engaged in 

that business. 

(15) The Commission erred in not taking into 

8 consideration the scale of rates charged or pro¬ 
posed to be charged by the various applicants for the 

radio telegraph service involved. It would have been in 
the public interest to determine which companies would 
provide the lowest rates and this the Commission did not 
do. 

(16) The action of the Commission denying the applica¬ 
tions for renewal of station license of the applicant Wire- 



FEDERAL RADIO COMMISSION. 


7 


I 



less Telegraph & Communication Company! is tanta¬ 
mount to a revocation of the license of that company. 
It is in plain disregard of the property rights of the owner 
of the station, acquired under the radio law of 1912, and in 
deprivation of its property without due process of law or 
just compensation. 

(17) The Commission erred in ruling that the applica¬ 
tions tiled by the appellants herein would be considered as 
directed only to the so-called “transcontinental jband”, and 
not as directed also to a daytime use of tile so-called 
“transoceanic band.” 

(18) The Commission's decision to permit! only com¬ 
panies already engaged in transoceanic radio telegraphy to 
use the so-called “transoceanic” frequencies for day¬ 
time operation in the field of domestic telegraphy was ar¬ 
bitrary, unfair and discriminatory against tho^e who were 
not engaged in the transoceanic business and in! which class 


the appellants here find themselves. 

(19) The action of the Commission in denying to the ap¬ 
plicants frequencies formerly held for transoceanic com¬ 
munication, which frequencies by their nature are neces¬ 
sarily impractical for transoceanic use during daylight 

hours and which frequencies are also by [their nature 
9 most practical and economical for use during day¬ 
light hours in domestic communication^ constituted 
error and gave to the proposed competitors of the appel¬ 
lants an unfair advantage. 

(20) The Commission erred in assigning bands of fre¬ 
quencies to the Universal Company and the Rl C. A. Com¬ 
munications, Inc., in that it gave to those companies a num¬ 
ber of frequencies greatly in excess of that necessary either 
for their immediate use or for the development which 
might reasonably be expected for a number of years. 

(21) The Commission erred in refusing to reallocate the 
frequencies previously assigned for transoceanic communi¬ 
cation and in giving to the P. C. A. Communijcations, Inc., 
exclusive use of a large number of such frequencies in ex¬ 
cess of the actual needs of that company. j 

(22) The Commission erred in its decision to permit the 
newly created mid-channels, resulting from the Commis¬ 
sion’s General Order No. 62, to benefit only those com¬ 
panies already holding blocks of frequencies. \ 


8 


INTERCITY RADIO TELEGRAPH CO. ET AL. VS. 


(23) The Commission erred in granting forty frequen¬ 
cies to the Universal Company as that number was greatly 
in excess of the number needed by that company for the 
system it proposes to establish. 

The facts and proceedings which cause this appeal, as 
shown by the record before the Federal Radio Commission, 
appear from the following, to-wit: 

At the hearings, held before the Federal Radio Commis¬ 
sion, testimony was offered to show that arrangements had 
been made to take over the Wireless Telegraph & Commu¬ 
nications Company, and merge it with the Intercity Radio 
Telegraph Company. The evidence further showed 
10 that in the event that certain requested facilities 
were granted, these two companies would be merged 
under the same management and would operate as a single 
concern. 

For the purposes of this statement, the interests of the 
two companies will be considered together, except that such 
differentiation will be made as is necessary to state the 
facts clearly. 

The Intercity Company operates six stations. Except 
for an interruption in the service in 1922, the company and 
its predecessors have conducted a radio telegraph service 
in competition with existing wire lines since 1920; a station 
has been operating in Cleveland since 1920, and except for 
a short interval of non-operation in 1922 has continuously 
operated since that time. The stations at Buffalo, (New 
York) and Duluth, (Minnesota) have been in operation 
since 1923. The station at Detroit was added in 1925, and 
one at Columbus in 1926. At the hearing held May 22, 
1929, it was further testified that the Intercity Radio Tele¬ 
graph Company was operating a station at Chicago, Illi¬ 
nois, under an agreement with the owner of the station, the 
Chicago Federation of Labor. The Intercity Radio Tele¬ 
graph Company also has a traffic arrangement with the 
Michigan Limestone & Chemical Company at Rogers City, 
Michigan, which company operates a station at that point. 
The Intercity Company also has an operating agreement 
with the Wireless Telegraph Company, its co-appellant 
here, covering certain business originating in Chicago. 

It is also in testimony that this company in addition to 
operating a point to point radio telegraph business in com- 



FEDERAL RADIO COMMISSION. 


9 


petition with the wire lines, conducts a radio service from 
its stations to ships on the Great Lakes, jin this re- 

11 spect, the Intercity Company has for six! years per¬ 
formed an important duty to the public jand to the 

United States Government. It has protected Gteat Lakes’ 
navigation, one of the most important arteries of United 
States traffic, at a time when there was no other means 
of communication from ships to the American shore. 
It has aided air navigation and air mail,! rendering 
better service to the operating companies thaii they were 
able to get from any other system. 

Together with other applicants, the Intercity kadio Tele¬ 
graph Company and the Wireless Telegraph & Communi¬ 
cations Company applied to the Federal Radio Commission 
for permission to extend their services. In order to do this, 
it was necessary for them to receive permits to construct 
radio transmitting stations in the various cities to which 
they desired to extend their service and licensed to employ 
wave lengths or frequencies additional to those! already al¬ 
lotted to them. 

The Intercity Radio Telegraph Company applied to the 
Federal Radio Commission for construction permits and 
necessary frequencies for stations to be operated in the 
following cities: New York; Boston; Providence (R. I.); 
New Bedford (Massachusetts); Philadelphia;! Baltimore; 
Pittsburgh; St. Louis; Atlanta (Georgia); Memphis (Ten¬ 
nessee); New Orleans; Waco; Houston; Galveston; Fort 
Worth (Texas); Chicago. The Intercity Company also 
asked for additional frequencies for its stations in Colum¬ 
bus, Detroit, Buffalo and Cleveland. 

In addition, the Wireless Telegraph & Communications 
Company, with which the Intercity Radio Telegraph Com¬ 
pany proposes to merge, applied for permission to 

12 build stations in sixteen additional cities; Milwaukee; 

Minneapolis; Cincinnati; Washington (D. C.); 

Tampa (Florida); Salt Lake City; Denver | (Colorado); 
Kansas City (Missouri); Omaha (Nebraska); Seattle; 
Portland (Oregon); San Francisco; Los Angeles; Indian¬ 
apolis; Des Moines (Iowa); Dallas. It also applied for 
permission to construct stations in New York hnd Chicago. 

The Intercity Radio Telegraph Company lias, at great 
expense, developed an intercity business in j radio teleg- 




10 


INTERCITY RADIO TELEGRAPH CO. ET AL. VS. 


rapliv in the Great Lakes territory. Its service was of a 
pioneer nature, and until this time its intercity business 
has been free from competition by radio telegraph com¬ 
panies. 

Hearings were held by the Federal Radio Commission at 
different times during 1928 and 1929. The Intercity Radio 
Telegraph Company, for example, appeared before the 
Commission for a hearing on its applications in January, 
1928, September, 1928, April 24, 1929, and finally on May 
22 and May 23, 1929. On the latter date hearings were 
also held on the applications of the following companies: 
R. C. A. Communications, Inc., Mackay Radio & Telegraph 
Company, and Western Radio Telegraph Company, as well 
as Wireless Telegraph & Communications Company. 

The Commission not only heard these cases together, but 
it acted upon the applications all at one time. One other 
company, the Universal Wireless Communication Company 
had also filed applications, but on December 22, 1928, the 
Commission indicated an intention to give this company 
forty frequencies and granted a large number of construc¬ 
tion permits in anticipation of the actual assignment of 
frequencies. At the time it made its decisions with respect 
to the other applicants, the Commission specifically 
13 assigned forty frequencies to the Universal Wireless 
Communication Company. 

The Wireless Telegraph & Communications Company is 
the successor of Jirah D. Cole, Jr. Its first station was at 
Highland Park, Illinois, and in October, 1926, was licensed 
for six months’ operation, but said license was continued 
under extensions granted by the Commission. The station 
was later moved to Northbrook, Illinois, where an applica¬ 
tion was made for a construction permit, and such a per¬ 
mit was issued by the Commission. No formal license to 
operate that station was ever received, although Mr. Cole 
received operating authority in a wire from Admiral Bul¬ 
lard, then chairman of the Federal Radio Commission. 
That operating authority is still in effect, but expires on 
June 30, 1929. The license issued to Mr. Cole by the De¬ 
partment of Commerce licensed him to operate a point to 
point limited public service. Although the Wireless Com¬ 
pany filed application for a large number of construction 
permits in cities other than those listed in the foregoing 



FEDERAL RADIO COMMISSION. 


11 


Notice of Appeal, the Wireless Company notified the Com¬ 
mission that it would not stand on those applications which 
duplicated requests for facilities made by tlic^ Intercity 
Company, except for those applications requesting facil¬ 
ities in New York and Chicago. j 

The Wireless Company has been notified by tlie Commis¬ 
sion that the last extension of its license expires on June 
30, 1929. No new license has been issued to tjiis station, 
and on June 7, 1929, the Commission denied all the appli¬ 
cations of that company. This is tantamount tb a revoca¬ 
tion of the license previously held by the Wireless Com¬ 
pany. Although the statute provides that in case of 
14 revocation of license, certain steps may be taken to 
hold the matter in status quo until a decision on ap¬ 
peal has been made, no statutory provision for stay is pro¬ 
vided in such cases as the instant one, the Wifeless Com- 
pany is now faced with the prospect of being forced to dis¬ 
continue its operation on July 1, 1929. Unless! this Court 
orders the Commission to permit the station! to operate 
after that date, a serious injustice will be done the company 
by the Commission’s act. j 

The Commission’s decision in refusing to |permit the 
Wireless Company to remain in business, while permitting 
other companies desiring to enter the field the bpportunity 
to inaugurate an identical business, is arbitrary, unfair, 
unwarranted, in plain disregard of the prior rights of the 
Wireless Company, and constitutes a taking of the prop¬ 
erty of that company without due process of! law or the 
payment of just compensation. It is submitted that so far 
as the Radio Act of 1927 authorizes property to be so taken 
at the discretion of the Commission, that law isj unconstitu¬ 
tional. 

The action of the Commission is so obviously arbitrary 
that the station should not be required to go out of business 
pending a determination of its rights. Our courts as yet 
have not had an opportunity to settle the law jn respect of 
such cases. The appellants respectfully subihit that this 
Court should hold the matter in status quo imtil such a 
determination has been made. 

It is impossible to understand the true situation as it 
was presented to the Federal Radio Commission, without 
taking into consideration the applications of j other radio 







12 


INTERCITY RADIO TELEGRAPH CO. ET AL. YS. 


communication companies for facilities in this field, and 
for that reason the applicant appellants have ap- 
15 pealed not only from the denial of their own appli¬ 
cations but also from the granting of the applica¬ 
tions of certain other companies. 

The applicant, Universal Wireless Communication Com¬ 
pany has never held, prior to the recent assignment, any 
license to operate radio telegraph stations, nor has it ever 
been engaged in the communication business. 

The Radio Corporation of America has for a long time 
been engaged in the business of transmitting messages to 
foreign countries and to ships at sea. The commercial 
communication business of this company has been trans¬ 
ferred to a recently organized company named R. C. A. 
Communications, Inc., the latter being the operating com¬ 
munication subsidiary of the Radio Corporation of Amer¬ 
ica. This company has recently decided to enter the do¬ 
mestic field for the first time, and proposes to extend this 
new service to practically all of the leading cities in this 
country. The R. C. A. has conducted a comprehensive ma¬ 
rine communication service on the Great Lakes only since 
1927. It was preceded in this field by the Intercity Com¬ 


pany. 

The first operation by the Radio Corporation of America 
on a domestic communication circuit and in competition 
with the wire companies, occurred on May 15, 1929, be¬ 
tween New York and San Francisco. 

The R. C. A. Company has maintained stations for ma¬ 
rine and foreign service for years, but until recentlv re- 
framed from entering the domestic field. As late as the 
meeting held in January, 1928, the Radio Corporation ad¬ 
vised the Commission that it had no interest in the do¬ 
mestic field. 

Applications for facilities in the same field were also 
made by the Mackay Radio & Telegraph Company, and 
those applications were denied. The Mackay Radio 
16 & Telegraph Company, as successors of the Federal 

Telegraph Company, have operated a radio tele¬ 
graph system in competition with the wire lines between 
cities of the Pacific Coast since 1912. The predecessor of 
the Mackay Radio & Telegraph Company was the first in 
the field of domestic radio telegraphy, competing with the 


FEDERAL RADIO COMMISSION. 


13 


telegraph companies. The appellants were the j second in 
that field. The two companies occupied non-cpmpetitive 
territories. The applications of both of these companies 
were denied by the Commission in its decisions of June 7, 
1929. The applications which were granted on those dates 
were the applications of companies who had not previously 
engaged in domestic radio telegraphy. 

This Court is already familiar with the limited number 
of frequencies available to broadcasting stations.; The situ¬ 
ation is somewhat different in the band which lias been as¬ 
signed for point to point telegraphy, both domestic and 
transoceanic. The Federal Radio Commission has arbi¬ 
trarily set aside the band of frequencies from! 1500 kilo¬ 
cycles to 6000 kilocycles as the so-called “transcontinental 
band” or “domestic band.” It has also set aside the band 
from 6000 kilocycles to 23000 kilocycles for transoceanic 
communication. There is a further useful band jfrom 23000 
kilocycles to 28000 kilocycles which has been Reserved by 
the Federal Radio Commission, and for the usje of which 
no commercial license has been issued. 

In considering the applications filed by the various com¬ 
panies for frequencies to be used in domestic communica¬ 
tion, the Federal Radio Commission, through! its Chair¬ 
man, ruled that the hearings would be confined to the do¬ 
mestic band, or transcontinental band. This barred 
17 the applicants, including the appellants^ from any 
consideration of their applications so far as the lat¬ 
ter were directed to any use of frequencies outride the do¬ 
mestic band. This ruling was arbitrary, and dnnecessarv. 
The Commission, by its own action, has indicated that cer¬ 
tain frequencies outside the domestic band may be, and in 
some instances must be, used for economical and satisfac¬ 
tory domestic service. It has authorized R. CJA. Commu¬ 
nications, in its decisions of June 7 and 10, 1 6 use thirty- 
two of that corporation’s previously assigned transoceanic 
channels in the domestic field. 

R. C. A. Communications, Inc., on May 15, 1;929, for the 
first time entered the field of commercial dofnestie radio 
telegraphy. On the other hand, the Intercity Radio Tele¬ 
graph Company has for many years been engaged in this 
field. The act of the Commission constitutes an unwar¬ 
ranted discrimination in that it permits R. C.j A. Commu¬ 
nications, Inc., to enjoy the use of frequencies for domestic 



14 


INTERCITY RADIO TELEGRAPH CO. ET AL. YS. 


communication for which the Intercity Radio Telegraph 
Company was even denied a hearing. It gives to the R. C. 
A. Communications, Inc., without any record of prior serv¬ 
ice in this field, channels or frequencies sought by the Inter¬ 
city Radio Telegraph Company, although the Commission 
refused to even consider the application of the Intercity 
Radio Telegraph Company for those same channels or fre¬ 
quencies. It has permitted a newcomer in the business, 
without any prior record of business in this field, to have 
that which the Intercity Radio Telegraph Company needs 
for the proper development of business now immediately 
available to it from customers already using its service. 

The evidence in the record before the Commission 
18 shows that for manv vears the Intercitv Radio Tele- 
graph Company has been actively engaged in devel¬ 
oping this difficult branch of the radio art. The initial costs 
of such a project were very large. Apparatus was built 
and used, then discarded and newer apparatus developed 
and substituted. The testimony before the Commission 
shows that the cost of selling this type of service to users 
who were previously not familiar with it and who had to 
be educated to its advantages was exceedingly high. The 
record further shows that the Intercity Radio Telegraph 
Company, after years of pioneering, has reached the point 
where its income is as great as its expenses. There were 
filed with the Commission below affidavits from one hun¬ 
dred thirty-five important customers of the Intercity Radio 
Telegraph Company. In most of these affidavits the affiants 
stated that they had used the service for a long time, found 
it extremely reliable, satisfactory, fast and economical, in 
many instances far superior to the other telegraphic fa¬ 
cilities of the country, and that it was the desire of these 
customers that the service of the Intercity Radio Telegraph 
Company be extended to include many other large cities 
throughout the nation, especially New York. 

The Commission also was informed bv witnesses that the 
mere granting of licenses for operation in these additional 
cities would greatlv increase the total traffic immediatelv 
available to the Intercity Radio Telegraph Company, since 
a number in excess of six hundred customers were already 
familiar with the advantages of Intercity Radio Telegraph 
service, and were using it even with its present limited 


FEDERAL RADIO COMMISSION. 


15 


scope. A large percentage of these customers are 

19 companies with nation-wide distribution.) It would 
not be necessary to induce these same cijistomers to 

use the business in a larger field. They are anxious to have 
that opportunity. It is a pertinent fact that at the hear¬ 
ings the Intercity Company was the only company which 
furnished to the Commission a list of customers. 

The effect of the Commission’s action is to iprevent the 
Intercity Radio Telegraph Company from taking advantage 
of the difficult and costly pioneer work it has! performed, 
and on the other hand it gives to companies novF in the field 
the unearned advantage of rendering or attempting to ren¬ 
der a sendee denied to the Intercity Radio Telegraph Com¬ 
pany. Further, the Federal Radio Commission jhas granted 
to these newcomers the opportunity to engage jin the radio 
telegraph business in and between Chicago, Buffalo, Cleve¬ 
land, Columbus and Detroit, and has thereby treated com¬ 
petition which will unquestionably result in all immediate 
decrease of the business of the Intercity Radib Telegraph 
Company, since it is not permitted to operate over the wide 
territory that is afforded to its new competitors. 

By its decisions of June 7 and June 10 the (Federal Ra¬ 
dio Commission has assigned all of the frequencies which, 
under the arbitrary rules of that body, are available for the 
class of service in which the applicants are Engaged. In 
other words, there is nothing left for the appellants in this 
case, and its desire to receive sufficient additional frequen¬ 
cies to permit it to extend its business to other cities is 
definitely denied it. Obviously, it is completely barred 
from an opportunity to compete with the newcomers in the 
field, since they are given facilities sufficient to afford a na¬ 
tional scope to their operations and the applicants have 
been denied any additional facilities. 

20 The applications of the appellants asked not only 
for additional frequencies but for an opportunity to 

do business in certain other principal cities of the United 
States. They have not only been denied additional frequen¬ 
cies on which they might operate, but they havie been denied 
the opportunity to extend their present business beyond the 
territory now covered by it. 


i 



16 


INTERCITY RADIO TELEGRAPH CO. ET AL. VS. 


The Commission, by its decisions of June 7, 1920, as¬ 
signed forty named frequencies to the Universal Wireless 
Communication Company, Inc. The R. C. A. Communica¬ 
tions, Inc., the same date, was assigned twenty new fre¬ 
quencies, five of which were assigned to replace frequencies 
this company previously had used under Department of 
Commerce licenses and extensions thereof. The same com¬ 
pany was also permitted to use thirty-two of its sixty-five 
transoceanic channels in the domestic service it proposes 
to establish. The numbers here given, although they are 
the Commission’s, are misleading as the Universal Wire¬ 
less Company actually, under that decision, received sev¬ 
enty-six frequencies. The R. C. A. Communications re¬ 
ceived thirty-three new frequencies. This gives to R. C. 
A. Communications, Inc., a total of 65 channels they may 
use for domestic operation. The reason for the differences 
appears below. 

The Commission had heretofore recognized that an in¬ 
terval of two-tenths of one per cent of the frequency or 
wave length was the proper separation between channels. 
Under its general order No. 62, dated April 5, 1929, the 
Commission reduced the width of all channels by fifty per 
cent, provided, however, that this order affected only such 
adjacent frequencies as were controlled by the same li¬ 
censee. For example, at a frequency of 6000 kilo- 
21 cycles the proper interval was two-tenths of one per 
cent of that number, or twelve kilocycles. There¬ 
fore, the two adjacent channels to that frequency were at 
5988 on the one side and 6012 on the other. When the Com¬ 
mission reduced this interval by fifty per cent, it created 
two ne\\ f channels, in the above illustration, at 5994 and 
6006. One limitation however was made upon this change. 
The newly created intervening channels, termed mid-chan¬ 
nels, could be utilized only when the adjacent channels were 
both controlled or operated by the same licensee. By its 
action, therefore, the Commission almost doubled the avail¬ 
able number of channels. But while this large number of 
additional channels were thus created, the increase was of 
benefit only to those companies holding channels in blocks. 
Since the available channels were practically all assigned 
in blocks, other applicants desiring channels found that 
none of the newly created facilities were available to them. 
It was the contention of the appellants below that a reallo- 


FEDERAL RADIO COMMISSION. 


17 


cation should be made. It was contended that it would be 
highly unfair to give to companies already possessing large 
blocks of frequencies, sufficient to their needs, all the ad¬ 
ditional frequencies created. The Commission made no 
such reallocation. 

With reference to the channels assigned for domestic use, 
the Co mm ission by its decisions of June 7 assigned not 
forty channels to the Universal Wireless Communication 

v I 

Company, Inc., but rather the forty channels Separated by 
the formerly required interval plus thirty-six knid-channels 
created by general order No. 62. The twenty new frequen¬ 
cies given to the R. C. A. Communications, | Inc., by the 
Commission’s action of June 7, when the mid-dhannels were 
so included, were increased by thirteen additional 
22 channels. In addition, the R. C. A. Communications, 
Inc., was authorized to use thirty-two of its trans¬ 
oceanic channels in the domestic service it proposes to es¬ 
tablish. 

Evidence was offered to the Commission to show that 
the Intercity Company had completed arrangements to ad¬ 
equately finance the erection and operation of ithe proposed 
stations it would build if its applications were approved. 
It was stated at the hearing that a firm agreement in writ¬ 
ing had been effected whereby the Intercity Company 
would have available $1,600,000, if from its jown applica¬ 
tions or through the applications filed by the Wireless Com¬ 
pany, it received an assignment of facilities sufficient to 
permit and authorize its expansion. 

The argument may be made by the Commission that the 
applications of the appellants here if granted would not 
provide as comprehensive a system as that covered by the 
applications of the Universal Wireless and ithe R. C. A. 
Communications, Inc. The appellants submit that if the 
Commission’s action was based on this reason, that it 
thereby erred and that public interest, convenience and 
necessity demanded that the Intercity Company and the 
Wireless Company be permitted to develop their systems 
of radio telegraphy. It is and has been the contention of 
the appellants that their plan for extending their service 
is economical, practical and in the interest 6f the people 
since it will provide an orderly development of the art; 

2—4987a 




18 INTERCITY RADIO TELEGRAPH CO. ET AL. VS. 

whereas the applications of the Universal Company, which 
applications were granted, are impractical, uneconomical, 
and may retard rather than promote the development of 
domestic radio telegraphy. 

On the other hand, the principle underlying the 

23 selection of the cities in which the R. C. A. Com¬ 
pany intends to operate does not bear out the con¬ 
tention that its system will be comprehensive. The cities 
were selected not on the basis of the domestic radio tele¬ 
graph business available, but rather in the order in which 
those cities stood in the use of the transoceanic facilities 
operated by the R. C. A. Company. It is obvious, therefore 
that the R. C. A. proposes not to establish a system with 
its primary purpose the serving of the domestic needs of 
the United States, but rather a service which will be pri¬ 
marily in the interest of the company’s own transoceanic 
communication business. 

The evidence presented to the Commission on behalf of 
the Radio Corporation of America clearly established that 
it was not able to fully utilize the frequencies which had 
been previously assigned to it for transoceanic communi¬ 
cation. Despite this fact, the R. C. A. Communications, 
Inc., was give- almost as many channels again as a result 
of general order No. 62, establishing the midchannels. 
Most of the former licenses covering the R. C. A. Commu¬ 
nications, Inc., transoceanic frequencies expired between 
June 1 and June 6, 1929, and were renewed for another 
year notwithstanding the petition by the appellants, tiled 
with the Commission prior to that time, requesting that 
upon the expiration of the previous licenses, a reallocation 
be made. The result has been to definitely remove from 
the available list a large number of frequencies which R. 
C. A. Communications, Inc., has no immediate need for, 
and cannot utilize for a long time to come, in the trans¬ 
oceanic field. 

Not only was R. C. A. Communications, Inc., thus fa¬ 
vored but it was authorized to use thirty-two of these 

24 transoceanic channels in the domestic service it pro¬ 
poses to establish, while other applicants were not 

permitted to apply for any use of channels found in the 
transoceanic band, even though they requested only a part- 
time use of those channels. 


FEDERAL RADIO COMMISSION. 


19 


I 

i 

i 

I 

i 

; 

i 


With respect to the assignment made to the Universal 
Wireless Communication Co., Inc., the Co mm ission erred 
in assigning forty channels to that company. It should be 
borne in mind that these forty channels are Spaced at the 
old intervals and constitute seventy-six channels under the 
new intervals recognized by the Commission.) 

The Universal Wireless Communication Cpmpany, Inc., 
asked for forty frequencies, and stated to the Commission 
that this number would be sufficient to permit it to operate 
stations in one hundred ten cities. It may bie seen, there¬ 
fore, that the Universal Wireless Communications Com¬ 
pany, Inc., despite the fact that it has no record of past 
performance in the field, was encouraged to!the extent of 
being given the full number of frequencies! for which it 
asked. The appellants submit that the Commission erred 
in so favoring a company whose only claim! to these fre¬ 
quencies was a statement of intention to build stations in 
one hundred ten cities before 1932. 

i 

At the hearings below, witnesses for the appellants, the 
Mackay Radio & Telegraph Company, and R. C. A. Com¬ 
munications, Inc., all experienced operators in commercial 
radio telegraphy, agreed that it was economically unsound, 
at this time, to operate radio stations in competition with 
wire lines in more than thirty to forty cities |of the United 
States. In support of this opinion, it was stated that the 
smaller cities, not included in this number, could not sup¬ 
port radio service in competition to the wire lines. 

25 This last point is worthy of some [little elabora¬ 

tion. All of those with experience in this field have 
agreed that only a limited number of the lhrger cities of 
the United States can support domestic rpdio telegraph 
facilities. When the smaller cities are considered, not only 
is the reduced amount of total present telegraph business 
a factor, but a large percentage of that total business is 
directed not to the large cities where radio connections 
could be established, but to other small citiejs. Obviously, 
the total amount of business from any one of these smaller 
cities would be limited to the amount of business directed 
toward the large cities. 

In view of the considerations stated above^ it is earnest¬ 
ly submitted to this Honorable Court that tl^e Federal Ra¬ 
dio Commission committed a serious error ip assigning to 
the Universal Company seventy-six frequencies for a serv- 



20 


INTERCITY RADIO TELEGRAPH CO. ET AL. YS. 


ice not even begun, and impractical in its proposed scope. 
There would seem to be no legitimate reason to support 
this action when other companies previously in the field, 
rendering satisfactory service to large lists of important 
customers, rendering that service at lower rates, and with 
better results than the service afforded by the competing 
wire telegraph companies, are thereby barred from having 
facilities sorely needed by them, not for visionary schemes 
and plans of comprehensive service, but rather for the im¬ 
mediate needs of their development. 

One more point remains to be made on this subject. The 
action of the Commission assigns to the Universal Com¬ 
pany frequencies to be used in establishing radio circuits 
to relatively small and unimportant cities of the United 
States. It is not controvertible that these circuits will lie 
idle a great percentage of the time. The same facilities 
granted to the appellants could be utilized to their 

26 utmost in promoting the development of the art, and 
in filling the needs of those who desire an extension 

of its service. The public interest can best be served not 
by using these facilities to only a limited extent, but by em¬ 
ploying them to their full utility. 

Because of the reasons herein set forth, the Intercity 
Radio Telegraph Company and the Wireless Telegraph & 
Communications Company have appealed from the deci¬ 
sions of the Federal Radio Commission and pray this 
Honorable Court will, under the statutory provision gov¬ 
erning the matter, determine the rights of the appellants 
in the premises. 

INTERCITY RADIO TELEGRAPH 
COMPANY and 

WIRELESS TELEGRAPH & COM¬ 
MUNICATIONS COMPANY, 

By E. J. SIMON. 

Washington, D. C., June 24, 1929. 

27 Verification. 

District of Columbia, ss : 

Emil J. Simon being first duly sworn, deposes and says 
that he is the President of the Intercity Radio Telegraph 
Company; that he has read the foregoing Notice of Appeal 



FEDERAL RADIO COMMISSION 


21 


and Reasons Tlierefor; that the matter andj things therein 
set forth on personal knowledge, are true, and those therein 
stated on information and belief he verily; believes to be 
true. 

[Seal of Marie McDonald, Notary Public, District 

of Columbia.] 

marie McDonald, 

Notary Public, D. C. 

i 

My commission expires May 9, 1930. 

Notice to Federal Radio Commission. 

The Federal Radio Commission will please take notice 
that the foregoing Notice of Appeals and Reasons There¬ 
for will be filed forthwith in the Court of Appeals of the 
District of Columbia pursuant to the provisions of the 
Radio Act of February 23, 1927; and that itj will forthwith 
petition the said Court of Appeals to issue ^ stay order, a 
copy of the said petition and of the proposed stay order 
being attached hereto. The Commission will please take 
further notice that following the two-day period after filing 
of the petition, which period is provided by the rules for the 
filing of opposition thereto, the appellants xvfill request the 
Clerk to forward, by mail, copies of the said petition and the 
proposed stay order to the several Justices of the 

28 Court of Appeals of the District of Columbia. 

JOHN W. GLIDER, 
Attorney for Appellants Intercity Radio 
Telegraph Company and Wireless Tele¬ 
graph £ Communications Company. 

Washington, D. C., June 24,1929. j 

29 Certificate. j 

| 

The undersigned, John W. Guider, personally appearing 
before Marie McDonald, Notary Public in arid for the Dis¬ 
trict of Columbia, the said John W. Guider being first duly 
sworn, deposes and says that he is one of the attorneys for 
the Intercity Radio Telegraph Company and the Wireless 
Telegraph & Communications Company, and I that the fore¬ 
going is a true copy of the Notice of Appeals and Reasons 


- 


99 


INTERCITY RADIO TELEGRAPH CO. ET AL. VS. 


Therefor to he filed forthwith in the Court of Appeals of the 
District of Columbia. 

JOHN W. GUIDER. 


Subscribed and sworn to before me this 24th day of June, 
1929. 


[Seal of Marie McDonald, Notary Public, District 

of Columbia.] 

marie McDonald, 

Notary Public, 1). C. 
My commission expires May 9, 1930. 


Acknowledgment of Service. 

Service of a certified copy of the foregoing Notice of 
Appeals and Reasons Therfor and of the petition of appel¬ 
lants for stay order is acknowledged this — day of-, 

v '»w- 7 %/ 7 

1929. 


30 In the Court of Appeals of the District of Columbia. 


No. 4987. 

Intercity Radio Telegraph Company, Applicant, Ap¬ 
pellant, 

vs. 

Federal Radio Commission, Appellee. 

No. 4988. 

Wireless Telegraph & Communications Company, Appli¬ 
cant, Appellant, 

vs. 

Federal Radio Commission, Appellee. 

Petition of Appellants for Stay Order. 

To the Honorable the Chief Justice and the Associate Jus¬ 
tices of the District of Columbia: 

Come now the Intercity Radio Telegraph Company and 
the Wireless Telegraph & Communications Company, ap- 



FEDERAL RADIO COMMISSION. 


23 


pellants in the above-entitled causes, and respectfully show 
unto your Honors: 

(1) That under certain decisions of the Federal Eadio 
Commission, rendered on June 7, 1929, and effective June 
10, 1929, certain valuable and important property rights 
of the appellants are placed in jeopardy. 

(2) That pursuant to the governing provisions of the 

Radio Act of 1927, appeals from those decisions are forth¬ 
with being filed in the Court of Appeals of the District of 
Columbia. j 

(3) That the nature of the aforesaid decisions of the 
Federal Radio Commission, and the property! rights which 
are threatened by the Commission’s action, ais well as the 
probable results of that action, are fully sit out in the 
Notice of Appeal and Reasons Therefor filed in the above- 
entitled causes. 

The said Notice of Appeal and Reasons Therefor are in¬ 
corporated herein by reference, and it is prayed that they 
be considered as a part hereof. 

Wherefore, the premises considered, your petitioners be¬ 
ing without other remedy, by appeal or otherwise, pray: 

That a stay order pending the determination of these ap¬ 
peals be issued out of this Honorable; Court to the 
31 Federal Radio Commission— j 

(1) Prohibiting the said Commission from grant¬ 
ing licenses for so many of the available frequencies re¬ 
quested by the appellants as to reduce the remaining num¬ 
ber of available frequencies below the number sufficient to 
give effect to the decisions of this Court if it Should be held 
that the applications should have been granted; 

(2) Prohibiting the said Commission from issuing con¬ 
struction permits or station licenses for domestic radio tel¬ 
egraph point-to-point stations to be located in the cities 
where the applicants now operate; 

(3) Requiring the Federal Radio Commission to main¬ 

tain the status quo in relation to the station at Northbrook, 
Illinois, of the Wireless Telegraph & Communications 
Company until such time as it may be determined whether 
the Commission erred in not renewing the Station license 
of that company. | 

i 

i 

i 

i 

i 





24 


INTERCITY RADIO TELEGRAPH CO. ET AL. VS. 


A proposed form of the stay order is respectfully sub¬ 
mitted herewith. 

E. J. SIMON, 

• _ _ _ ' 

President Intercity Radio Telegraph Company. 

FRANK J. HOGAN, 

EDMUND R, JONES, 

JOHN W. GUIDER, 

Attorneys. 

District of Columbia, ss: 

Emil J. Simon, being first duly sworn, says that he is 
the President of the appellant, Intercity Radio Telegraph 
Company, and that he has read the foregoing petition by 
him subscribed as President of the Intercity Radio Tele¬ 
graph Company, and that the facts therein stated upon his 
personal knowledge are true, and those stated upon infor¬ 
mation and belief he believes to be true. 

E. J. SIMON. 

Subscribed and sworn to before me this 24th day of June, 
1929. 

[Seal of Marie McDonald, Notary Public, District 

of Columbia.] 

marie McDonald, 

Notary Public , D. C. 

32 [Endorsed: Nos. 4987 & 4988. Intercity Radio 
Telegraph Company, Applicant, Appellant, vs. Fed¬ 
eral Radio Commission, Appellee. Wireless Telegraph & 
Communications Company, Applicant, Appellant, vs. Fed¬ 
eral Radio Commission, Appellee. Petition of appellants 
for stay order. Hogan, Donovan, Jones, Hart son & Guider, 
Colorado Building, Washington, D. C. Court of Appeals, 
District of Columbia. Filed Jun. 24, 1929. Henry W. 
Hodges, Clerk. 



FEDERAL RADIO COMMISSION. 


25 


33 In the Court of Appeals of the District of Columbia. 

i 

No. 4987. 

* I 

Intercity Radio Telegraph Company, Appellant, 

v. ! 

i 

Federal Radio Commission, Appellee. 

No. 4988. 

j 

i 

Wireless Telegraph & Communications Company, 

Appellant, 

i 

V. 

Federal Radio Commission, Appellee. 

Answer of Federal Radio Commission to Petition of Inter¬ 
city Radio Telegraph Company and Wireless Telegraph 
& Communications Company for a Stay Order, Filed 
June 24, 1929, and Motion of Federal Radio! Commission 
to Dismiss said Petition. 

j 

To the Honorable the Chief Justice and the Associate Jus- 
ticcs of the Court of Appeals of the District of Colum¬ 
bia : 

I 

Now comes Federal Radio Commission, appellee herein, 
and respectfully shows the-following: 

1. The Notice of Appeals and Petition herein show that 
the Intercity company and the Wireless company are ap¬ 
pealing from several decisions of the Commission dated 
December 22, 1928, and June 7 and 10, 1929, granting cer¬ 
tain applications of Universal Wireless Communication 
Co. Inc., RCA Communications, Inc., and Western Radio 
& Telegraph Company, (who are not impleaded as 

34 parties herein), and denying certain applications of 
the Intercity company and Wireless company for 

construction permits and licenses to establish! and operate 
stations from point-to-point radio communication within 
the United States. Although the Notice of Appeals and 
Petition for Stay Order represent an attempt to consoli¬ 
date all applications filed by the Intercity company and 


26 


INTERCITY RADIO TELEGRAPH CO. ET AL. VS. 


Wireless company for the purpose of said appeals, the two 
cases present different issues in law and in fact, and for 
the purpose of clarity will be treated separately herein. 
Moreover, since the Notice of Appeals attempts to bring 
before this Court several decisions of the Commission ren¬ 
dered at different times and founded on a record of great 
bulk, accumulated by the Commission at a number of hear¬ 
ings, it will be necessary briefly to refer to each of said 
decisions and the parties involved therein. 

Universal Wireless Communications Co. Inc. 

2. On December 22, 1928, the Commission found that 
public interest, convenience, and necessity would be served 
by granting certain applications of Universal Wireless 
Communications Co. Inc., for construction permits to erect 
stations for the purpose of point-to-point communication 
between some 110 cities located at various places within 
the United States. Certain rigid conditions were attached 
to said authorization, and it involved the designation of 40 

I * 

frequencies enumerated in recommendations of the Engi¬ 
neering Division of the Commission, which were then con¬ 
tained in the files of the Commission. On June 7, 1929, the 
Commission directed its secretary to list and publish the 
40 frequencies so designated for the Universal company, 
and said frequencies were accordingly listed in the minutes 
of the Coihmission for June 7, 1929. The Commission is 
advised, and has reason to believe, that the Universal com¬ 
pany has proceeded at considerable expense to erect 
35 stations under said authorization and the construc¬ 
tion permits issued pursuant thereto. Accordingly, 
in view of the fact that the construction permits have been 
issued, and in view of the fact that said Universal company 
is not a party to these appeals, for the reason that the de¬ 
cision of December 22, 1928, granting its applications, long 
antedated the two decisions of June 7, 1929, denying the 
applications of the Intercity company and Wireless com¬ 
pany, the only decisions from which said companies can 
take appeals under Section 16 of the Radio Act of 1927, as 
amended, the Commission respectfully shows this Honor¬ 
able Court that the petition for a stay order cannot be 
granted without doing irreparable injury to said Universal 
company. 


FEDERAL RADIO COMMISSION. 


27 


RCA Communications, Inc. i 

j 

3. On June 7, 1929, the Commission granted 1 certain ap¬ 
plications of RCA Communications, Inc., for Construction 
permits and licenses covering the erection and operation 
of stations for domestic point-to-point servicd. This au¬ 
thorization involved the designation of 20 high frequency 
channels, 5 of which were designated to replace channels 
heretofore for a long period of time employed by said com¬ 
pany in its point-to-point service, and 5 of which, according 
to the North American Radio Conference Agreement of 
1929, to which the United States is a party, must be used 
on a shared basis with Canadian stations. Qn June 10, 
1929, the applications of said company were further 
granted, insofar as they requested the auxiliary use for 
point-to-point service within the United States j of high fre¬ 
quency channels heretofore designated for the transoceanic 
service of said company. The action of the Coinmission on 
June 7 and 10, 1929, had the effect of partially! denying the 
applications of said company, and from such! denial said 
company has taken an appeal to this Honorable Court. 
36 And in this connection the Commission respectfully 

shows this Honorable Court that the 'decisions of 
June 7 and 10,1929, relating to RCA Communications, Inc., 
are not the same decisions from which these; appeals can 
be prosecuted. Said decisions have a different! docket num¬ 
ber and appear in a separate minute entry, aijid since they 
are not decisions refusing applications of the Intercity 
company or the Wireless company, cannot be made the 
basis for appeals by said companies under the provisions 
of Section 16 of the Radio Act of 1927, as amended. 

RCA Communications, Inc., is a subsidiary !of the Radio 
Corporation of America, a company engaged since 1919 
in radio communication on an extensive scale. The fre¬ 
quencies designated by the Commission fdr the trans¬ 
oceanic service of Radio Corporation of America, and now 
likewise designated to a limited extent for ;the domestic 
service of RCA Communications, Inc., have been used in 
conjunction with applications and grants to which the Inter¬ 
city and Wireless companies are not and hage never been 
parties, and in respect to which they cannot prosecute these 



28 


INTERCITY RADIO TELEGRAPH CO. ET AL. VS. 


or any other appeals under the provisions of Section 16 
of the Radio Act of 1927, as amended, for the reason that 
said Act limits the right of appeal to decisions of the Com¬ 
mission refusing applications of the appellant. 

And the Commission further shows this Honorable Court 
that it is advised by affidavit that RCA Communications, 
Inc., has, on the strength of construction permits and 
licenses authorized by the Commission’s action of June 7 
and 10, 1929, granting certain applications of said com¬ 
pany, placed orders for apparatus having a value in excess 
of a half million dollars, and that said company, at a con¬ 
siderable expense, has embarked upon a program for train¬ 
ing employees to operate stations erected under said per¬ 
mits, and that any delay in the installation of its domestic 
service will entail loss of revenue in connection with trans¬ 
oceanic as well as the proposed domestic traffic of said 
37 company. Wherefore, the Commission shows this 
Honorable Court that the issuance of the proposed 
stay order would cause irreparable loss to RCA Communi¬ 
cations, Inc., a company which has not been brought before 
this Court by these appeals, because of the fact that said ap¬ 
peals do not and cannot involve decisions of this Commis¬ 
sion granting or denying applications of said company. 

Western Radio & Telegraph Company. 

4. This company is a merger of several small radio 
companies doing business in sparsely settled regions of the 
Southwest, where satisfactory wire facilities have not been 
available. 7 of the 9 frequencies designated for use by 
this company by the Commission’s-action of June 7, 1929, 
were designated to replace frequencies heretofore utilized 
by the companies whose assets are now merged in the West¬ 
ern company, and 3 of the frequencies so designated are ex¬ 
clusive Canadian channels, under the North American Con¬ 
ference Agreement of 1929, to which the United States is 
a party, and can only be used because, in the section where 
the company operates, no interference will be caused with 
Canadian stations using the same frequencies. 

And the Commission further shows this Honorable Court 
that the action of the Commission on June 7, 1929, insofar 
as the same involved an authorization to the Western com- 



FEDERAL RADIO COMMISSION. 


29 


pany, cannot be 1 4 stayed ? ’ on these appeals,; since the 
Intercity and Wireless companies have no right under Sec¬ 
tion 16 of the- Radio Act of 1927, as amended,! to appeal 
from decisions of the Commission granting the applica¬ 
tions of other applicants. 

i 

Intercity Radio Telegraph Company! 

5. In view of the foregoing, the Commission denies that 

by its decision of June 7, 1929, refusing the applica- 
38 tions of Intercity Radio Telegraph Company, it has 
left said company in such a position that, if this 
Court should find it entitled to additional facilities, the 
Commission would have no frequencies available for fur¬ 
ther assignment. 

6. The Commission admits that this companjy operates 
a point-to-point radio communication service in!the region 
of the Great Lakes, under licenses from the Commission, 
but the Commission denies that under its decision of June 
7, 1929, upon applications of the Intercity company, cer¬ 
tain valuable and important property rights o^ said com¬ 
pany have been placed in jeopardy; and the Commission 
respectfully shows this Court that under the Radio Act 
of 1927, as amended, no person (licensee or applicant) does 
or can possess property rights in the use and ownership 
of the ether as against the regulatory power of the United 
States and the administrative authority duly! conferred 
upon the Commission by said Act, since said Act limits the 
use of the ether to applicants who satisfy the Commission 
that public interest, convenience, and necessity would be 
served by granting their applications. 

7. Further answering the Commission admits that its 
decision of June 7,1929, has the effect of confining, for the 
time being, the business of the Intercity company to serv¬ 
ice between cities in the region of the Great Lakes which 
it now serves under licenses from the Commission, but the 
Commission denies that it deprived said company of its 
property rights by refusing some 21 applications of said 
company for construction permits which, if granted, said 
company intended to use for erecting a network of sta¬ 
tions covering the entire United States; and the Commis¬ 
sion denies that any property rights in service already 

i 

; 

| 






30 


INTERCITY RADIO TELEGRAPH CO. ET AL. VS. 


established and maintained under license from the Com¬ 
mission have been taken away or affected in any way by 
the refusal of said additional applications. 

39 8. The Commission denies that its decision of 
June 7,1929, refusing applications of Intercity Radio 

Telegraph Company resulted in illegal discrimination 
against said company, in that it restricted the Intercity 
company to the territory of the Great Lakes, while at the 
same time it authorized companies newly engaged in domes¬ 
tic communication to compete with the Intercity company 
in such manner and to such extent that the business of the 
Intercity company will be immediately destroyed. Assum¬ 
ing but not conceding that the Intercity company can com¬ 
plain on these appeals of decisions of June 7 and 10, 1929, 
and December 22, 1928, and other decisions heretofore ren¬ 
dered, granting applications of Universal Wireless Com¬ 
munications Co. Inc., Western Radio & Telegraph Com¬ 
pany, and RCA Communications, Inc., the Commission de¬ 
nies that any of said decisions illegally discriminate against 
the Intercity company; and the Commission respectfully 
shows that Sections 13 and 15 of the Radio Act of 1927, as 
amended, as well as the Act of July 2, 1890, commonly 
known as the Sherman Act, expressly negative any right 
of the Intercity company to establish or maintain a monop¬ 
oly of radio service in any section of the United States; 
and the Commission further shows that no authority is 
conferred upon it to require fair and equal rates, to regu¬ 
late service, and to prevent uneconomic expansion or aban- 
doment of stations, but all of such power, insofar as the 
same is conferred by law, may be exercised by the Inter¬ 
state Commerce Commission; and the Commission further 
shows that its power is limited to regulation of the use of 
radio apparatus, but only to the extent that the same may 
be used so as to cause interference and obstruction of the 
ether, thus impairing radio reception throughout the United 
States. But in any event, since the only decision the Inter¬ 
city company can question by appeal is the single decision 
of June 7, 1929, (not even including a decision of the same 
date relating to Wireless Telegraph & Communica- 

40 tions Company), refusing its applications, the Com¬ 
mission shows that said company has no standing to 

allege that it has been discriminated against by the Com¬ 
mission. 


FEDERAL RADIO COMMISSION. 


31 


9. The Commission denies that it did not consider the 
priority of the Intercity company in the domestic radio 
telegraph filed, and shows the Conrt that there; is no basis 
whatever for the allegation of the company in this respect; 
and the Commission further shows that all the evidence 
and arguments presented at the several hearings accorded 
said company were carefully considered by it before its 
decision on the applications of the Intercity company was 
rendered. 

10. The Commission denies that the Intercity company 
has any rights whatever with reference to any of the so- 
called transoceanic frequencies. The Intercity 'company is 
not and never has been engaged in transoceanic communi¬ 
cation. The Commission respectfully shows that in setting 
aside the frequencies from 6000 kc to 23000 kc ior primary 
use in transoceanic communication, it acted upon the rec¬ 
ommendations and requirements of the International Radio¬ 
telegraph Convention of 1927, to which the Uhited States 
is a party, as well as upon the advice of leading radio engi¬ 
neers, including independent consultants and employees of 
the United States Government, who have no personal inter¬ 
est whatever in this subject. And the Commission further 
shows that the greatest beneficial use of su^h channels 
(which are ordinarily best adapted to long distance com¬ 
munication) can be made when the same may jbe diverted 
quickly and easily from their primary (transoceanic) to 
their secondary (domestic) use, depending upon the hour 
of the day, the season of the year, and the condition of the 
atmosphere. 

And further answering the Commission denies 
41 that appellant can appeal from the decision of June 
10, 1929, granting application of RCA Communica¬ 
tions, Inc., to make secondary (domestic) use of channels 
which for a long period of time it has been licensed to use 
in transoceanic service; and therefore the Commission 
shows that the petition for an order staying the rights of 
RCA Communications, Inc., to use such frequencies in its 
domestic service is not well founded. 


i 

Wireless Telegraph & Communications Company. 

11. The Notice of Appeals and Petition for a |Stay Order 
are signed by E. J. Simon, president of the Inijercity com- 





32 


INTERCITY RADIO TELEGRAPH CO. ET AL. VS. 


pany. Said Notice of Appeals and Petition attempt to in¬ 
corporate a separate decision of June 7,1929, refusing cer¬ 
tain applications of the Wireless company, although there 
is nothing contained in the Notice or Petition to show that 
Simon has been authorized to represent said company. The 
Commission respectfully shows the Court that the assumed 
identity of interests for the purpose of these appeals is 
based on a proposed merger of the two companies, said 
merger being conditioned upon favorable action of the 
Commission upon the applications of the two companies. 
And the Commission further shows that the applications 
of the Wireless company were given a docket number dif¬ 
ferent from that assigned to applications of the Intercity 
company, and the minutes of the Commission reveal the 
fact that they were refused by the Commission in a sep¬ 
arate decision; and the Commission therefore denies that 
Simon or the Intercity company have any interest in said 
decision which can be brought before the court on an appeal 
of the Intercity company. 

12. The Commission further shows this Honorable 
Court that the Wireless company has never been engaged 
in point-to-point communication on a commercial basis, 
but has been authorized to erect and operate one station, 
first at Highland Park and later at Northbrook, Illi- 
42 nois. The station was first licensed to operate on 
October, 20,1926, under the authority of the Depart¬ 
ment of Commerce. On June 8, 1927, a construction per¬ 
mit was issued authorizing the station to remove to North¬ 
brook, Illinois. Since that time, by authorizations issued 
from time to time, the station has been allowed to operate 
until June 30,1929, at which time as the result of the Com¬ 
mission’s decision of June 7,1929, its authority will expire. 

The Commission denies that its decision of June 7, 1929, 
is tantamount to revocation of station license or results 
in a deprivation of the company’s property without due 
process of law; and the Commission respectfully shows 
(and the record before the Commission reveals the fact) 
that said company had ample opportunity on a number of 
occasions to show the Commission that further operation 
of the station would serve public interest, convenience, and 
necessity. The Commission has authority, at the end of 
a license period or an extension thereof, to require stations 


FEDERAL RADIO COMMISSION. 


33 


to make a showing that continued operation! will serve the 
public interest, convenience, and necessity, gnd no station 
failing to make such showing can assert a property right 
in the use of ownership of the ether. Section 14 of the 
Act provides a procedure for revocation, jwhich can be 
attempted only for specified causes, none of 'sfliich are pres¬ 
ent in this case; and the Commission denies! that the deci¬ 
sion refusing renewal of the authority of the 'Wireless com¬ 
pany to operate its station can properly be stayed by order 
of this Court, for such a stay would have the effect of 
giving said company a license which, under the Act, it can 
only obtain after it has satisfied the Commission that pub¬ 
lic interest would be served. 

13. Further answering, the Commission denies that the 
Wireless company can appeal from decisions of the Com¬ 
mission of December 22, 1928, and June 71 and 9, 1929, 
granting applications of RCA Communications, Inc., West¬ 
ern Radio & Telegraph Company, dnd Universal 

43 Wireless Communications Co. Inc.; and the Commis¬ 
sion shows that appellant can only appeal from the 
decision refusing its applications and it cannot, appeal from 
other decisions affecting other applicants. 

14. And further answering the Commissioii respectfully 
shows that the rights of the Wireless company are lim¬ 
ited by and must be based upon some 20 applications for 
construction permits which, if granted, said company pro¬ 
posed to use in conjunction with similar authorizations 
sought by the Intercity company for the establishment of a 
network of stations covering the entire United States. 
Except for a single station, the Wireless company had no 
priority which was entitled to consideration;, and for the 
reasons hereinabove enumerated in connection with the 
Intercity company, has no claim which would warrant the 
issuance of a stay having the effect of arresting all develop¬ 
ment in the field of point-to-point communication. 

i 

Motion to Dismiss Petition for a Stay Order 

lf>. Wherefore, the Commission moves that this Hon¬ 
orable Court will enter its order dismissing the petition of 
Intercity Radio Telegraph Company and Wireless Tele- 

3—4987a ; 


34 


INTERCITY RADIO TELEGRAPH CO. ET AL. VS. 


graph & Communications Company for a stay order, filed 
June 24, 1929, and, in addition to the considerations and 
facts hereinabove presented, assigns the following reasons: 

(a) That the facts set forth in the Notice of Appeals 
and Petition for a Stay Order do not warrant the extra¬ 
ordinary relief sought by appellants. 

(b) That no authority is conferred upon this Court by 
the Radio Act of 1927, as amended, or any other Act, to 

issue the proposed or any other stay order. 

44 ( c ) That if the Petition for a Stay Order consti¬ 

tutes, in substance, a petition for a writ of injunc¬ 
tion pendente Lite, the same must be governed by the prin¬ 
ciples which apply to the issuance of such writs, and a writ 
of injunction cannot be granted because (1) necessary and 
indispensable parties have not been and cannot be im¬ 
pleaded herein, and (2) appellants have failed to set forth 
facts showing substantial property rights which are entitled 
to protection pending the appeals, or the threat of irrepara¬ 
ble injury. 

( d) That if the Petition for a Stay Order constitutes, in 
substance, a petition for a writ of supersedeas, the same 
must be governed by the principles which apply to the 
isuance of such writs, and a writ of supersedeas cannot 
be granted for the reasons set forth with reference to in¬ 
junctions. 

(e) That if the Petition for a Stay Order constitutes, 
in substance, a petition for a remedial prerogative writ in 
aid of the appellate jurisdiction of this Court, the same 
cannot be granted because it would involve matters not 
within the appellate jurisdiction of this Court as attempted 
to be invoked by these appellants. 

(/) That a stay order, if granted, would settle the rights 
of parties who have not been and cannot be impleaded as 
parties herein, and said parties would be irreparably in¬ 
jured without an opportunity for a hearing before this Hon¬ 
orable Court. 

(g) That appellants do not undertake under or pursuant 
to said petition to indemnify parties whose interests would 
be severely and unjustly affected in the event that the relief 
sought on these appeals cannot be granted. 

(//) That the proposed form of stay order will prevent 
the Commission from issuing construction permits and 


FEDERAL RADIO COMMISSION. 


35 


licenses to parties whose rights were settled by decisions 
other than those from which appellants can prosecute their 
appeals to this Honorable Court. 

45 (/) That the proposed form of stay order is vague 
and indefinite and provides no standard by which 

the Commission can be guided in complying therewith; that 
specification (1) of said proposed order is so ambiguous 
that attempted compliance therewith would result in suits 
against the Commission for mandamus to compel the issu¬ 
ance of licenses, since the Commission cannotj safely pro¬ 
ceed with the issuance of any licenses for point-to-point 
communication within the United States; that specification 
(2) of said proposed order would require the Commission 
to establish and maintain a monopoly of radio jcommunica¬ 
tion business in the region of the Great Lakes for the bene¬ 
fit of the Intercity company; that specification! (3) of said 
order will have the effect of granting a license to the Wire¬ 
less company to operate its station, although said company 
has failed to show the Commission that public interest 
would be served bv such license. 

FEDERAL RADIO COMMISSION, 

By BETHUEL M. WEBSTER, Ji, 

General Counsel. 

PAUL W. SEGAL, j 

Assistant General Counsel. 

46 Sirs : j 

Please take notice that the attached Answer of Fed¬ 
eral Radio Commission to Petition of Intercity Radio 
Telegraph Company and Wireless Telegraph & Communi¬ 
cations Company for a Stay Order, filed June 24, 1929, 
and Motion of Federal Radio Commission to Dismiss said 
Petition was filed with the Clerk of the Court of Appeals of 
the District of Columbia July 1, 1929. 

FEDERAL RADIO COMMISSION, 

By BETHUEL M. WEBSTER, Jr., 

General Counsel. 

i 

To Messrs. Hogan, Jones & Guider, Washington, D. C., 
Counsel for Appellants. 

I 

47 [Endorsed:] No. 4987. Intercity Radio Telegraph 
Company, Appellant, vs. Federal Ra4io Commis- 




36 


INTERCITY RADIO TELEGRAPH CO. ET AL. VS. 


sion. No. 4988. Wireless Telegraph and Communications 
Company, Appellant, vs. Federal Radio Commission. An¬ 
swer to petition for stay order. Court of Appeals, District 
of Columbia. Filed Jul. 1, 1929. Henry W. Hodges, 
Clerk. 

48 In the Court of Appeals of the District of Columbia. 

No. 4987. 

Intercity Radio Telegraph Company, Appellant, 


v. 

Federal Radio Commission, Appellee. 

No. 4988. 

Wireless Telegraph and Communications Company, Ap¬ 
pellant, 


v. 

Federal Radio Commission, Appellee. 

Brief of Federal Radio Commission in Opposition to Peti¬ 
tion of Appellants for Stay Order and in Support of Mo¬ 
tion to Dismiss the Same. 

Introduction. 

i 

This Court having only that jurisdiction which lias been 
given by statute, it is of •first importance to determine the 
nature of the relief requested in the Petition for a Stay Or¬ 
der. {Sheldon v. Sill, 8 How. 441, 12 L. ed. 1147) 

Viewed judicially, such an order might be either: 

1) An order for a writ of injunction, or 

2) An order for a writ of supersedeas. 

49 And it is upon either or both of these theories that 
the petition itself has been drawn for it alleges that 
property rights are placed in jeopardy, a conclusion of law 
which must be supported by ultimate facts in an application 
for either injunction or supersedeas. 

(The proceeding for a writ of supersedeas is in the na¬ 
ture of a bill in equity. See Fleming v. Moore , 213 Ala- 


FEDERAL RADIO COMMISSION - . 


I 


37 


bama, 592, 105 So. 679. Authorities on statutory “stays of 
execution” are not applicable.) 

Section 11 of the Act creating this Court gives it “power 
to issue all necessary and proper remedial prerogative 
writs in aid of its appellate jurisdiction.” 

(Section 230, District of Columbia Code) j 

This Court has considered writs of maiidamusj certiorari, 
prohibition, supersedeas and injunction as within the au¬ 
thority conferred by that statute. 

Supersedeas was specifically held to be within it in King 
v. Nuchols, 38 App. D. C. 441 and injunction was granted in 
Gritts v. Fisher, 37 App. D. C. 473. 

The writ of supersedeas suspends the execution of judg¬ 
ments of a court. There is no reported instance of its hav¬ 
ing been issued to an administrative tribunal.; Since, in 
the instant case, the petition and the proposed order are 
of the same effect, considered as for either injunction or 
supersedeas, and since, further, the equitable property 
right must be established in either case, and the procedure 
is identical, we may well consider the application as for an 
injunction. 

In all cases decided by this Court under Section 11, the 
application has been considered as original aiid as inde¬ 
pendent of the appeal itself. See In Re MacFarland, 
50 30 App. D. C. 499, In Re Dahlgren , 30 Apjo. D. C. 588, 

Goldsmith v. Valentine, 35 App. D. C. 299. And pe¬ 
titions for writs have been denied where relief would not 
have been granted upon an application of equal j persuasive¬ 
ness independent of the pendency of an appeal. See also 
Beal v. Cox, 14 App. D. C. 368, U. S. ex rel. Morris v. Scott, 
25 App. D. C. 88, U. S. ex rel. Hohnead v. Barnard, 29 App. 
D. C. 431. 

Such being the case, there is a fatal defect apparent on 
the face of the pleading. 

Point I. I 

The Petition Ought Not to be Granted as to I|ts First Re¬ 
quested Order. 

i . 

The Notice of Appeals, embodied by reference into the 
Petition, attempts to question certain decisions; of the Com¬ 
mission authorizing the issuance of construction permits 










38 


INTERCITY RADIO TELEGRAPH CO. ET AL. VS. 


to corporations not parlies to this suit. These authoriza¬ 
tions, according to the allegations, have been heretofore 
made under decision of the Commission. It would follow 
from these allegations that the issuance of the formal docu¬ 
ments of authorization is a purely ministerial act. It is 
this issuance which is sought to be enjoined. In asking 
such action, the Petitioners must first claim that a property 
right—at least of an equitable character—exists in an ap¬ 
plicant entitled to permits under the Radio Act of 1927 but 
arbitrarily denied them bv the Commission. If such reason- 

i %/ 

ing be valid, how much greater are the property rights of 
a corporation actually found to be entitled and for which 
these permits have already been authorized and in some 
cases even issued! 

51 It is plain that the Petitioners cannot ask this 
Court for an order the effect of which is to prevent 
the issuance of construction permits to specifically named 
corporations unless they be made parties defendant. 

In Minnesota v. Northern Securities Company , 184 U. S. 
199, 46 L. ed. 499, it was so held, the Court, by Mr. Justice 
Shiras, saying p. 235): 

The established practice of courts of equity to dismiss the 
plaintiff’s bill if it appears that to grant the relief prayed 
for would injuriously affect persons materially interested 
in the subject-matter who are not made parties to the suit 
is founded upon clear reasons, and may be enforced by 
the court, sua sponte, though not raised by the pleadings 
or suggested by the counsel. 

And in King v. Nitckols, supra , this Court denied an ap¬ 
plication for supersedeas under Section 11 for the reason, 
inter alia, that the petition could not be considered for want 
of necessary parties. 

Nor is it an answer to this to say that the proposed stay 
order does not apply to the corporations named in the No¬ 
tice of Appeals but would be merely a direction to the Com¬ 
mission to 4 ‘reserve frequencies”—of a number and char¬ 
acter not revealed by the petitioners’ papers. Any at¬ 
tempted compliance by the Commission with an order of 
that character would, under the pleading herein, involve a 
discretion on its part as to who should be denied and, to 
what extent, in order to make the reservation. Such discre- 


FEDERAL RADIO COMMISSION. 


39 


tion cannot be controlled by injunction. Gaines v. Thomp¬ 
son, 74 U. S. 347, 352,19 L. ed. 62, 64. 

And this Court, in Right v. McCoy, 46 App. D. C. 238, 
a case in which a writ of mandamus was sought under Sec¬ 
tion 11 in connection with an appeal, similarly refused to 
attempt the control of the discretion of the j Justice be¬ 
low. 

52 Even if the characterization of injuiiction or su¬ 
persedeas be abandoned and the proposed order be 
regarded merely as an informal protection of the subject 
matter of the appeal, Section 11 and the decisions of this 
Court construing it expressly negative the possibility of 
such an order. The power of the Court is to be exercised 
only in connection with the subject matter of its appellate 
jurisdiction. Section 16 of the Eadio Act j of 1927, as 
amended, permits appeals only from the refusal of appli¬ 
cations of the appellant. No appeal exists from orders 
granting the applications of others. 

Where there is no appellate jurisdiction, there can be no 
action by this Court. See In Re MacFarland, supra, King 
v. Nuckols, supra, Truck Co. v. Motor Co., 41 App. D. C. 

261. i 


Thus far it has been assumed that a property right might 
exist in the petitioners to engage in radio communication. 
This assumption must be abandoned. A property right 
of this character is expressly denied by the Eadio Act and 
by decisions well known to this Court, including its own in 
the General Electric case. 

It must also be noted that the property rigljit claimed by 
the petitioners in this case is not one to continue in the 
business of communication by short-wave radio telegraphy, 
but an alleged right to become so engaged in !the future. 

In addition to a property right, an essential prerequisite 
to the writ requested is a threat of irreparable injury. 
“The mere assertion that the apprehended acts will inflict 
irreparable injury is not enough. Facts mujst be alleged 
from which a court can reasonably infer that such would 
be the result, * * V’ Cruickshank v. Bidwell, 176 U. S. 

73, 44 L. ed. 377, 382. j 

If the allegations of the Petition and Notice herein 
•53 be taken as true (disregarding conclusions of law) 
irreparable injury is not alleged. It ib denied. At 




40 


INTERCITY RADIO TELEGRAPH CO. ET AL. VS. 


page 15 of the Notice, it is contended that there are further 
useful frequencies available for the petitioners if the ap¬ 
peal should succeed. These frequencies are described as 
others than those designated for the use of the corporations 
against whose permits the proposed injunction is de¬ 
signed. At pages 16 and 21 of the Notice, the petitioners 
reveal that only a portion of the frequencies designated for 
transoceanic use have been designated for auxiliary do¬ 
mestic use, thus leaving others available for similar desig¬ 
nation should the Court so order. 

It is further plain that since Section 3 of the amendatory 
Act of March 28, 1928, provides that these licenses can not 
now be issued for periods longer than one year, the priv¬ 
ilege of the petitioners to apply for the facilities of others 
can not be precluded. Hence there is no danger of irre¬ 
parable injury. Such was the decision of the Supreme 
Court of the District of Columbia in the recent case of Na¬ 
tional Radio Press Association v. Federal Radio Commis¬ 
sion. That case dealt with an application for an injunction 
of this same character, against the designation of frequen¬ 
cies to others than the plaintiff. In his decision, Mr. Jus¬ 
tice Bailev said: 44 The allocations to be made by the Com- 
mission are for a year only; * * * no irreparable in¬ 

jury will be done to the plaintiff that would justify the 
Court in interfering with the action of the Commission.” 

These considerations call for the denial of the applica¬ 
tion for the first specification of the 44 Stay Order” propos¬ 
ing that 


The Federal Radio Commission refrain from granting 
licenses for so many of the available frequencies requested 
by the appellants as to reduce the number of available fre¬ 
quencies below the number sufficient to give effect to the 
decisions of this Court if it should be held that the 
54 applications should have been granted. 


The wording of this proposal indicates at once the im¬ 
possibility of its enforcement. No answer is given the 
following questions which at once suggest themselves: 

1) Must the Commission reserve frequencies throughout 
the entire short wave spectrum, including those best suited 
for transoceanic communication according to the theory 
expressed on page 15 of the notice? 



FEDERAL RADIO COMMISSION. 


41 


2) Or shall the Commission he controlled onjy as to the 

frequencies set aside by International Agreement for pri¬ 
mary domestic use, in which case the number of |frequencies 
requested by the petitioners is so great as to almost usurp 
that field? ! 

3) Must the Commission reserve the identical frequen¬ 
cies applied for by the petitioners many of which are set 
aside for ship and aircraft use, thus endangering life at 
sea and in the air? 

4) Similarly, as to those of the frequencies japplied for 
which are now designated for the use of others, must li¬ 
censes be revoked? 

5) Similarly, what is to be done with reference to fre¬ 
quencies applied for by the petitioners and also set aside 
by Executive Order under the Radio Act for Government 
use? 

i 

6) If, on the other hand, specific frequencies ineed not be 
reserved but only an equivalent number, what standard 
shall the Commission adopt as to the field front which they 
are to be selected and as to the applicants front whom they 
are to be withheld? 

7) Similarly, during the pendency of such an order, how 
will the Commission proceed to register the j frequencies 
with the International Telegraph Bureau at Berne, Swit¬ 
zerland in order to preserve prior American rights to the 
frequencies by registry and actual use by American sta¬ 
tions ? 

8) Similarly, in selecting the number of equivalent fre¬ 
quencies to be reserved, may the Commission consider any 
frequency as the equivalent of another or must two fre¬ 
quencies of the type useful for only 12 hours: per day be 
reserved to take the place of one 24 hour frequency no 
longer available and how many frequencies useful only in 
winter must be considered the equivalent, for| reservation 

purposes, of one frequency useful the year around? 
55 9) In reserving such frequencies, must the Com¬ 

mission be guided by the standard of frequency sep¬ 
aration allowed other applicants as described at page 19 
of the Notice or need it reserve but half this ‘ ‘.space in the 
ether’’ for the petitioners as suggested at page| 20? 

These questions are not answered in the papers of the 
petitioners. Unless they are answered the jCommission 


42 


INTERCITY RADIO TELEGRAPH CO. ET AL. VS. 


cannot comply with the order requested. If, to follow a 
rule applicable in other fields of jurisprodence, the burden 
of selecting* the correct compliance with the order is to be 
placed on the Commission, at its peril under the powers of 
the Court to punish for contempt, the Commission will be 
compelled to suspend all licensing in all point-to-point 
radio communication pending the outcome of this compli¬ 
cated litigation, because the frequencies applied for by the 
petitioners run literally from one end of the spectrum to 
the other. 

Point II. 

The Petition Ought Not to be Granted as to Its Second Re¬ 
quested Order. 

The second specification of the proposed order would 
enjoin the Commission 44 from 

issuing construction permits or station licenses for domes¬ 
tic radio telegraph point-to-point stations to be located in 
the cities where the applicants now operate.” 

What the singular guilt might be of the cities of Cleve¬ 
land, Detroit, Columbus, Buffalo and Duluth which should 
deprive them of radio service other than that offered by 
the petitioner Intercity Company does not ai)pear from the 
papers. 

56 The plain purpose of this proposal is to seek for 

the Intercity Company a complete monopoly of radio 
communication among these cities. 

On page 4 (paragraph 6) of the Notice, the petitioners 
say that the Commission has no power to prohibit inter¬ 
state commerce, yet they ask the Court on appeal from the 
Commission to do that very thing. Throughout the Notice, 
the petitioners claim a right to compete with others, 
while now asking the Court to prevent those others from 
competing with them. 

The establishment of such a monopoly is prohibited by 
law. The policy of the law is written into Sections 13, 15 
and 17 of the Radio Act. 

Section 15 provides: 

All laws of the United States relating to unlawful re¬ 
straints and monopolies and to combinations, contracts, or 


FEDERAL RADIO COMMISSION. 


43 


agreements in restraint of trade are hereby declared to be 
applicable to * * * interstate and foreigh radio com¬ 

munications. 


It is unconscionable that the petitioners should seek to 
invoke the equity powers of this Court to accomplish an 
unlawful purpose. 

Point III. 

i 

The Petition Ought Not to be Granted as to Ijts Third Re¬ 
quested Order. 


The third specification of the proposed “St^y Order” is 


that the station of the Wireless Telegraph & | Communica¬ 
tions Company at Northbrook, Illinois, be and the same is 
hereby permitted to operate with the same privileges and 
limitations as if its present license had been| extended or 
renewed by the Commission. 

i 

That means the issuance of a license by the! Court. The 
station license expired June 30, 1929. The application for 
renewal has been denied. In its appellate function, 
57 this Court has been called upon to consider that de¬ 
nial. That denial may be reversed or affirmed only 
upon a consideration of the record and evidence. But the 
Petition for a Stay Order asks the Court, sittijng in equity, 
to make an initial decision granting a license beyond the 
date fixed by law for the expiration of the former license. 

To grant such a request is to overthrow the licensing 
system created by the Radio Act. It is to create a new 
body of rights arising from applications to i ]le Court for 
initial decisions granting licenses independent of statutory 
provisions. It is to substitute the Court for jthe Commis¬ 
sion or, at least, to create a division of licensing authority. 
It is to bring about the very confusion sought to be avoided 

bv the enactment of the Statute. 

•/ 

This is the reasoning of the Supreme Court of the United 
States in an analogous transportation case. Proctor and 
Gamble v. United States , 225 U. S. 282. 

* i 

Nor is the proposed stay order in this connection within 
the scope of an injunction, a supersedeas, or a stay order. 
Self-executing orders cannot be stayed, enjoined or super- 


44 


INTERCITY RADIO TELEGRAPH CO. ET AL. VS. 


seded. Nor can orders of a purely negative character such 
as denials of applications. Nor can that be prevented 
which is already accomplished. See Lacassogne v. Chapins , 
144 U. S. 119, 36 L. ed. 368. 

There is no merit in the contention of the petitioner that 
the denial of an application for the renewal of a station 
license is tantamount to a revocation thereof. 

It is the policy of the Radio Act that licenses expire after 
short intervals in order that new findings may be made 
from time to time as to the compliance or non-compliance 
of the station with the standards prescribed by the 
58 law. In the absence of a finding by the Commission 
that the operation of a station will be in the public 
interest, convenience or necessity, the Commission has no 
power to renew its license. (Sections 9 and 11). This has 
no connection with the procedure under Section 14 for the 
revocation of a station license upon different terms and for 


different reasons. 


Even the provisions for appeal differ 


in the two cases. 


A distinction so clearly observed in the Act cannot be 
brushed aside by the petitioner’s claim that a license issued 
to its predecessor under the re-appealed Radio Act of 1912 
has now lately been “revoked” and property taken away, 
when the petitioner’s own Notice, at page 12, specifically 
alleges that original license to have been for six months 
only. 

It is respectfully submitted that the Petition for a Stay 
Order should be denied and the Commission’s motion to 


dismiss the Petition should be granted. 

FEDERAL RADIO COMMISSION, 

By BETHUEL M. WEBSTER, Jr., 
BETIIUEL M. WEBSTER, Jr., 

General Counsel. 


PAUL M. SEGAL, 

PAUL M. SEGAL, 

Assistant General Counsel. 


59 [Endorsed:] No. 4987. Intercity Radio Tele¬ 
graph Company, Appellant, vs. Federal Radio Com¬ 
mission. No. 4988. Wireless Telegraph and Communica¬ 
tions Company, Appellant, vs. Federal Radio Commission. 
Brief in opposition to petition for stay order. Court of 



FEDERAL RADIO COMMISSION. 


45 


Appeals, District of Columbia. Filed Jul. 1, 
W. Hodges, Clerk. 


1929. Henrv 


60 In the Court of Appeals of the District df Columbia. 

I 

No. 4987. i 


Intercity Radio Telegraph Company, Appellant, 


Federal Radio Commission, Appellee. 

No. 4988. j 

i 

Wireless Telegraph & Communications Company, Appel¬ 
lant, 

i 

VS. 

Federal Radio Commission, Appellee. 

i 

Opposition of Intercity Radio Telegraph Company and 
Wireless Telegraph & Communications Co\npany to Mo¬ 
tion of Federal Radio Commission to Dismiss Appel¬ 
lantsd Petition for Stay Order and Brief in Support 
Thereof. 

\ 

Now come the appellants in the above-entitled causes, by 
John W. Guider, their attorney, and oppose the granting 
of the motion of the appellee tiled herein to dismiss the ap¬ 
pellants’ petition for a stay order for the following reasons: 

(1) Unless the requested stay order be granted the Fed¬ 
eral Radio Commission will be able to rendeij these appeals 
futile. The status quo should be maintained during the 
pendency of the appeal. 

(2) The Commission may not, by promptly disposing of 
requested facilities to other parties, render futile an ap¬ 
peal to this Court by setting up the inconvenience which 
may be caused the beneficiaries of its erroneous act. 

(3) The appellants have indisputable pi-operty rights 
which will be irreparably injured if the Commission is not 
stayed from its proposed disposition of radio frequencies. 

(4) The subject-matter sought to be controlled by this 
Court through the medium of the stay order is properly 


i 





46 INTERCITY RADIO TELEGRAPH CO. ET AL. VS. 

within the jurisdiction of the Court. The Court has the 
jurisdiction sufficient to support the granting of the relief 
necessary to support its appellate power. 

61 (5) If this Court should hnd that under the statute 

no appeal lies from the granting of the requested fa¬ 
cilities to others, such a finding will in no way diminish 
its jurisdiction over the subject-matter of this appeal. The 
said facilities are involved in the appeals from the denial 
of the applications of the Intercity Radio Telegraph Com¬ 
pany and the Wireless Telegraph & Communications Com¬ 
pany. In any event, no other facilities than those requested 
can be involved even if the decisions on the R. C. A. and 
Universal applications are appealable by these appellants. 

(6) The petition for a stay order does not request this 
Court to establish a monopoly of radio communication in 
the cities mentioned in the petition. On the contrary, it re¬ 
quests this Court to prevent the Federal Radio Commis¬ 
sion from forcing the appellants to compete with companies 
which actually enjoy a monopoly of the right to engage in 
a service of national scope until such time as it is deter¬ 
mined whether the Commission erred in granting to these 
competitors and denying to the appellants the right to en¬ 
gage in such a business. 

(7) The stay order requested is not impossible of en¬ 
forcement. The objections urged by the Commission in 
its motion to dismiss are without merit. Most of them 
seem to be imaginary rather than real, and all are an¬ 
swered in the brief filed in support of this opposition. 

(8) All objections addressed to the alleged lack of prop¬ 
er parties to the appeals and to the petition for a stay order 
are without merit. Any interested party may doubtless ap¬ 
pear as amicus curiae, or secure leave to intervene. It is 
not the duty of the appellants to engage in a controversy 
with those parties favored by the decisions of the Commis¬ 
sion. 

(9) The threatened property loss of the appellants is 
real, obvious and imminent, and the alleged loss which the 
proposed communications companies will suffer if the stay 
order is granted is vague, doubtful, and consists only of 
a slight delay in starting operations, even if this Court 
should hold that the Commission acted correctly in making 
the decisions complained of and appealed from. 



FEDERAL RADIO COMMISSION. 


47 


(10) The Commission may not deny the appellants the 
full effect of their right to appeal by disposing of the re¬ 
quested facilities and by withholding the entry thereof on 
its minutes until the statutory period for an appeal 
62 has expired. 

(11) The Commission has failed in itis answer to 
show this Honorable Court that it has not disposed of an 
excessive number of frequencies to the R. C. A. and Uni¬ 
versal companies. The position of the appellants is that 
there are frequencies enough to adequately carje for all the 
appellants if equitably and scientifically allotted. 

(12) The Commission has entirely failed to 1 answer the 
points made in the appellants’ Notice of Appeal and Rea¬ 
sons Therefor on pages 19 to 24. The points! there made 
are sufficient in themselves to warrant the grajnting of the 
proposed stay order so far as it concerns the reservation 
of frequencies pending this appeal and the prevention of 
unjust competition and the destruction of thd appellants’ 
established business. 

(13) The separate appeals of the appellants are each 
taken in accordance with the provisions of ithe statute. 
Counsel have filed their appearance for each appellant. The 
interests of the appellants are inseparable. The affidavit 
accompanying the petition is complete. There jis no irregu¬ 
larity in considering together the appeals jof the two 
parties. 

(14) The Commission has failed to answer the allegation 
that it erred in removing from consideration,j and making 
unavailable to the appellants, certain frequencies set aside 
for other appellants, which frequencies can ndt be utilized 
by them for a period of time in excess of the olne-year term 
prescribed as the maximum license period by the Radio 
Act, as amended. 

(15) The point made in the preceding paragraph is par¬ 
ticularly apparent in the case of frequencies “reserved” 
for the use of the Universal Company, which company has 
been given until 1932 to complete the construction of sta¬ 
tions to utilize the frequencies so reserved. (Appellants’ 
Notice of Appeal, page 23.) This is in plain controvention 
of the spirit of the amended act and gives to ilie Universal 
Company an exclusive right to these frequencies, for a pe¬ 
riod of almost three years, during which time other appli- 






48 


INTERCITY RADIO TELEGRAPH CO. ET AL. VS. 


cants may not, under the Commission’s decisions, be heard 
on applications for the said frequencies. 

For these reasons, more fully set out in the brief filed 
herewith, it is respectfully submitted by the appellants that 
the motion to dismiss should be overruled and the 

63 requested stay order granted. 

INTERCITY RADIO TELEGRAPH 
COMPANY and 

WIRELESS TELEGRAPH & COM¬ 
MUNICATIONS COMPANY, 

By JOHN W. GUIDER, 

Their Attorney. 

64 [Endorsed:] Nos. 4987 and 4988. Intercity Radio 
Telegraph Company, Appellant, vs. Federal Radio 

Commission, Appellee. Wireless Telegraph & Communi¬ 
cations Company, Appellant, vs. Federal Radio Commis¬ 
sion, Appellee. Opposition of Intercity Radio Telegraph 
Company and Wireless Telegraph & Communications Com¬ 
pany to motion of Federal Radio Commission to dismiss ap¬ 
pellants ’ petition for Stay Order. [Copy.] Hogan, Dono¬ 
van, Jones, Hartson & Guider, Colorado Building, Washing¬ 
ton, D. C. Court of Appeals, District of Columbia. Filed 
Jul. 6, 1929. Henry W. Hodges, Clerk. 

65 In the Court of Appeals of the District of Columbia. 

No. 4987. 

Intercity Radio Telegraph Company, Appellant, 

vs. 

Federal Radio Commission, Appellee. 

No. 4988. 

Wireless Telegraph & Communications Company, Ap¬ 
pellant, 
vs. 

Federal Radio Commission, Appellee. 

Brief of Intercity Badio Telegraph Company and Wireless 
T ele graph and Communications Company in Opposition 
to Motion of Federal Badio Commission to Dismiss the 
Petition of Appellants for Stay Order. 

The relief requested is sought in order that the appel¬ 
lants may not be deprived of the right of appeal. Section 



FEDERAL RADIO COMMISSION. 


49 


i 


j 

16 of the Radio Act of 1927 provides for an j appeal from 
decisions of the Federal Radio Commission denying appli¬ 
cations for station license or construction permits. 

The Congress thereby provided a check on the powers of 
the licensing authority. The Commission should not be per¬ 
mitted to avoid that limitation of its power, j This Court 
has been requested to prevent the Commissibn from dis¬ 
posing of the subject matter of the appeal until a deter¬ 
mination has been made of the rights of the parties. 

In Goldsmith vs. Valentine, 35 Appeals Di C. 299 this 
Court said that a certain action would * 4 render futile the 
appeal taken. Such a situation cannot, of cojurse, be per¬ 
mitted. The parties to an appeal are entitled to have a 
status quo maintained during its pendency.’ 7 The language 
there used is peculiarly applicable to the facts pi the instant 
case. 

Section 11 of the Act creating this Court (Section 230 
D. C. Code) provides as follows—“The said Court 
66 of Appeals shall have power to issue jail necessary 
and proper remedial prerogative writs, in aid of its 
appellate jurisdiction.” Unless the court j invokes this 
power in the present case, the status quo will not be main¬ 
tained. 

The brief filed on behalf of the Commission ignores the 
fact that an equally strenuous argument was! made in the 
case of General Electric Company vs. Federal Radio Com¬ 
mission , but that there this Court granted a st[ay order, the 
provisions of which were made permanent in the decision 
rendered after the hearing on the merits. It |is impossible 
to calculate the injury which would have been bone the Gen¬ 
eral Electric Company in that case if this (pourt had re¬ 
fused to exercise its power to maintain the status quo. It 
is also a pertinent comment that the arguments here made 
are similar to those presented in the General ^Electric Case. 
There the Commission protested that it copld not carry 
into effect the proposed stay order, and that jthe entire re¬ 
allocation would be in effect set aside. It was earnestly 

* 

charged that great interference would result and that chaos 
would ensue. It was further impressed upon the court that 
the granting of the stay order would constitute the grant¬ 
ing of a license and that this power was reserved to the 


i 

i 

i 

i 

i 


4—4987a 



50 


INTERCITY RADIO TELEGRAPH CO. ET AL. VS. 


Commission. Several months have passed since that stay- 
order was issued by the court, and it is not necessary to 
point out that the fears of the Commission were unfounded. 

The majority of the authorities cited in the Commis¬ 
sion’s brief deal with points of law not in dispute. 

An effort has been made to challenge the power of the 
court to give effect to its appellate jurisdiction. The law 
is and must necessarily be that this Court can exercise 
whatever power is necessary to give force and effect to the 
appeal provided by the Radio Act of 1927. 

Again in this case an effort is made to give a complex 
appearance to a simple problem. In its brief, on pages 7 
and 8, appear a long list of questions. They represent the 
problems the Commission feels it would face in executing 
the proposed stay order. While it is not necessary’ for the 
court to consider them, a statement of the views of the ap¬ 
pellants may be helpful. 

There is nothing in the present case, or in the operation 
of the requested stay order which will alter or 
G7 affect the registration of the frequencies at Berne. 

The Commission should reserve sufficient frequen¬ 
cies to grant the applications of the appellants if this Court 
holds that thev are entitled to that action. These fre- 
quencies extend “throughout the entire short wave spec¬ 
trum,” and either the specific frequencies or equivalent 
frequencies should be held available by r the Commission 
pending this appeal. 

The Commission should be controlled as to frequencies 
not set aside by International Agreement for primary do¬ 
mestic use, since as appears in the notice of appeal, certain 
of these (trans-oceanie) frequencies have been alloted to 
R. C. A. Communications, Inc., for secondary domestic use, 
and the appellants here ask only a similar allotment. The 
Commission will not find it any more embarrassing to con¬ 
trol those frequencies pursuant to a stay’ order than they 
did when controlling them by assignment of a part for 
R. C. A. domestic use. 

The Commission need not reserve the identical frequen¬ 
cies applied for. The right of the appellants would be 
served by the granting of equivalent frequencies, that is 
frequencies having the same technical characteristics as 
the ones requested. 


FEDERAL RADIO COMMISSION. 


51 


Several of the questions are directed to the proposition 
that the Commission would not know which frequencies to 
reserve, or whether the two frequencies useful for only 
12 hours a day would have to be reserved to tike the place 
of one 24 hour frequency no longer available. I These ques¬ 
tions may easily be answered by the Commission itself. No 
good purpose is served by presenting them to this Court. 
That action can only result in confusing a .simple legal 
proposition with unnecessary technical problems. The 
Commission knows what facilities would have been involved 
if it had granted the licenses requested by the appellants. 
It should reserve either those specific facilities, or facilities 
which, in its judgment, are equivalent. It cannot be denied 
that the Commission is in a position to determine which 
facilities would be equivalent to those requested. And it 
is not to be assumed that this Court would be obliged to 
“punish the Commission for contempt” if afi effort were 
made in good faith to carry out the provisions of the stay 
order. 

68 The Commission exaggerates the difficulties at¬ 
tendant upon the execution of such a stay order. 
There is not a single sound reason why such an order could 
not be effectively and simply observed. 

This very argument however proves the Contention of 
the appellants that the Commission contemplates the dis¬ 
position of all available frequencies. True, tjhe appellants 
did point out a band of frequencies from 23,000 kilocycles 
to 28,000 kilocycles which were not assigned, but in the 
same sentence it was stated that these frequencies had been 
reserved bv the Commission. Tliev are therefore not avail- 

* m/ 

able. 

The decision of Mr. Justice Bailey in the Supreme Court 
of the District of Columbia, in National Press Association 
vs. Federal Radio Commission is cited to show that irrep¬ 
arable injury will not be done the appellant^. The cases 
are entirely different. The entire decision appears below: 

i 

“The Commission has reserved twenty frequencies for 
general press service for intercontinental use, without al¬ 
lotting any particular frequency to any oneJ Apart from 
any other question I do not think that the plaintiff is a 
“press” association, despite its name. Nor do I think that 



52 INTERCITY RADIO TELEGRAPH CO. ET AL. VS. 

the Commission is under any obligation to re-open its hear¬ 
ings whenever a corporation, which has just come into ex¬ 
istence, applies to it for that purpose. 

The allocations to be made by the Commission are for a 
year only, the parties have a right to appeal from any er¬ 
roneous action of that body; no irreparable injury will be 
done to the plaintiff that would justify the Court in inter¬ 
fering with the action of the Commission. 

The application for a temporary injunction will be de¬ 
nied. 

BAILEY, J” 

'This opinion strengthens the contentions of the appel¬ 
lants. There the petitioner for an injunction was in the 
position of the companies in this case who propose to es¬ 
tablish a domestic radio telegraph service. Obviously they 
have no such established rights as may be compared to 
those of a company whose business, developed at great ex¬ 
pense and hardship is threatened by competition which it is 
not permitted to meet on equal terms. What harm can be 
done these new companies if they are delayed for a short 
time in commencing a new business? 

The situation of the appellants is entirely different. For 
example, suppose one of its new competitors enters the city 
of Buffalo,. N. Y., where the Intercity Company has been 
operating a successful radio telegraph business to 
69 the other five cities now included in its radio cir¬ 
cuits. If the newcomer can offer precisely the same 
service and in addition can offer service to one hundred ad¬ 
ditional cities, or even to only twenty additional cities, is it 
not obvious that the customers of the Intercity Company, 
limited to six cities, will immediately abandon that com¬ 
pany and employ the services of the new company because 
of the greater scope of service afforded ? 

Great emphasis is laid by the Commission on the hard¬ 
ship which will be suffered by the applicants who were 
granted the facilities requested by the appellants if a stay 
order is granted. Obviously these successful applicants 
have no rights greater than the Commission can give them. 
The privileges so received are necessarily subject to the 
law which provided that such an action might be “revised’’ 
by this Court. Further, the stay order does not attempt to 



FEDERAL RADIO COMMISSION. 


53 


remedy the wrong committed but only to maintain tlie pres¬ 
ent situation until the appeal is decided. 

It is only equitable to ask that the Intercity Company be 
given the same opportunity as is afforded its competitors. 
The position of the applicants in this respect has been 
strangely misunderstood by the Commission. . The second 
paragraph of the requested stay order requests that the 
appellants be protected from unjust competition in the 
cities where it is now located, until the rights of the appel¬ 
lants have been determined . 

The Commission’s brief says that this protection would 
be unlawful and in contravention of the provisions of the 
Sherman Act. This position is clearly untenable. The 
appellants do not seek to avoid competition. Conceding but 
not admitting that their priority in the field (floes not en¬ 
title them to the exclusive right to do business with cus¬ 
tomers thev have already obtained at great effort and ex- 
pense, they submit that the business so obtained should be 
protected by giving to them the SAME right to! do business 
as is given to newcomers in the field. 

Since it is obvious that if these newcomers ate permitted 
to operate in the same cities as the appellants, with priv¬ 
ileges denied to the appellants and that such an oppor¬ 
tunity would result in the virtual destruction of the appel¬ 
lants’ business, then they should not be permitted to begin 
that operation until it has been decided by this Court that 
the denial of the appellants’ applications was a cor- 
70 rect and lawful decision. 

In reply to Point III of the Commission’s brief, it 
is only necessary to sav that the same argument was made 
when the Court was requested to extend the license of Gen¬ 
eral Electric Company station WGY. In no sense does 
such a decision “overthrow the licensing system created by 
the Radio Act.” Section 16 of that Act gives tjo this Court 
the right and duty “to take additional evidence in such 
manner as it may deem proper” and to “hear^ review and 
determine the appeal upon the record and the evidence, and 
to alter or revise the decision appealed from arid enter such 
judgment as to it may seem just.” In othej- words, the 
Court may take additional evidence, and in a s(pse consider 
the case de novo. It may exercise, in any particular case 
where an appeal has been properly taken, by direction and 




54 


INTERCITY RADIO TELEGRAPH CO. ET AL. VS. 


control, all of the power given to the Federal Radio Com¬ 
mission, plus the power to reverse, change or alter the deci¬ 
sion of the Commission. 

it is impossible, therefore, to apprehend how this Court 
in consideration of an appeal properly before it might im¬ 
properly assume power of the Commission. And the powers 
of this Court are as complete in the issuance of a remedial 
writ in aid of that jurisdiction as it is in the final deter¬ 
mination of the appeal on the merits. 

Throughout the Commission’s brief is the reiterated sug¬ 
gestion that the petition should be denied because if the 
appeal is successful, the maximum license period is only 
one year, and even if all facilities were disposed of, the 
appellants might apply to the Commission anew for those 
facilities at the end of the current license periods. 

It is patent that such a possibility would not place the 
appellants in the position they are now in, for the following 


reasons: 

1. An interval may elapse during which competitors can 
unjustly take from the appellants their established busi¬ 
ness. 

2. During the license period, new rights would accrue to 
the holders of licenses covering frequencies which should 
have been assigned to the appellants and it would be 
against these new rights that the appellants would have to 
prevail. 

3. Valuable and important existing rights of the appel¬ 
lants would be lost at a future date, and their present rights 

would have become moot. 

71 4. An unjustified and avoidable hardship would 

have been imposed on the appellants, and only re¬ 
markable perseverance would permit them to exist until 
such a future date. 

On page 5 of the brief filed by the Commission is found the 
following: 


“Thus far it has been assumed that a property right 
might exist in the petitioners to engage in radio communica¬ 
tion. This assumption must be abandoned. A property 
right of this character is expressly denied by the Radio Act 
and by decisions well known to this Court, including its own 
in the General Electric case.” 


FEDERAL RADIO COMMISSION. 


00 


This excerpt does not correctly state the law.; This Court 
in the General Electric decision at 31 Fed. (2d): on page 633, 
held that if the regulatory power of the United States were 
improperly exercised, an order of the Commission attempt¬ 
ing to accomplish that end should be overruled, and that a 
property right existed in the owner of the station to attack 
such a decision. 

i 

The property right in a station was recognized by Judge 
Francis S. Wilson in the Circuit Court of Cook County, 
Illinois, in Tribune Company vs. Oak Leaves Broadcasting 
Station. The decision was unreported but whs quoted in 
the Congressional Record, Volume 68, Part 1, page 216-219. 
There Judge Wilson held upon established principles that 
‘‘under the circumstances of this case, priority in time 
creates a superiority in right” and granted a temporary in¬ 
junction restraining the interfering operation of the sub¬ 
sequently established radio station. The righ|t Judge Wil¬ 
son was protecting was necessarily a property right or it 
would not have been so protected. 

And in the General Electric case, this Couft quoted the 
language of Judge Wilkerson in White v. Federal Radio 
Commission , 29 Fed. (2d) 113 in which that jurist limited 
the conceded property rights in a station by bolding them 
subject to a “proper exercise” of the regulatbry power of 
the United States. i 

The notice of appeals and reasons therefor^ on pages 19 
to 24 inclusive, presents the following facts to this Court: 

1. The Universal Company, by the Comihission’s de¬ 
cisions of June 7tli was assigned 40 new frequencies. The 
R. C. A. Communications, Inc., on the sanke date, was 
assigned 20 new frequencies, 5 of which replaced frequen¬ 
cies previously held and used by the Company. The latter 
company was permitted to use 32 of its 65 jtrans-oceanic 
channels in the domstic service it proposed to establish. 

2. Because of a reduction in the interval ;between fre¬ 

quencies, more fully explained in the notice of 
72 appeals, these assignments represent a much larger 
allotment than is at first apparent. 

3. By utilization of 36 mid-channels the Universal Wire¬ 
less Company received 76 frequencies. 

4. Similarly, the R. C. A, Company receive^!, not 20 new 
frequencies, but 33. 



56 


INTERCITY RADIO TELEGRAPH CO. ET AL. VS. 


5. These assignments represent unwise distribution in 
that neither of the two companies so favored will be, for a 
long period of time, able to fully utilize the frequencies 
they received. 

6. The Universal Company has received a large number 
of frequencies and since that number represents the full 
amount requested by them, is concededly sufficient to carry 
into execution its plan for building and operating stations 
in 110 cities. ■ The Commission, in reserving for this com¬ 
pany a large block of frequencies, definitely removed from 
availability to the applicants a great many frequencies 
which cannot be employed by the Universal Company until 
its building program is completed. Since the Commission 
in making the reservation of wave lengths for the benefit 
of the Universal Company conceded that the building pro¬ 
gram did not need to be completed until 1932, its action has 
resulted in reserving this block of frequencies for a period 
longer than that for which a license mav be issued. 

The law specifically provides that the term of any such 
license .shall not exceed one year (Amendatory Act, ap¬ 
proved March 4,1929). The Commission argues in the last 
page of its brief, “It is the policy of the Radio Act that 
licenses expire after short intervals in order that new 
findings may be made from time to time. * * *” The 
Commission has clearly violated that policy in making un¬ 
available to other applicants a large group of frequencies 
which cannot be employed by the Universal Company for 
more than a year from the time the assignments were made. 

The Commission has also failed to take any notice of the 
allegation of the appellants that irrespective of the time 
when the frequencies are to be employed, an excessive 
number of frequencies were allot-ed to the R. C. A. and 
Universal Companies. 

It is precisely upon this proposition that the appellants 
stand. The Commission erred in that it could have 
73 satisfied the needs of these two newcomers bv allot- 
-ing to them a smaller number of frequencies and in 
that event there would have been sufficient frequencies avail¬ 
able to grant the request of the appellant companies. 

It must be conceded that these two companies will not 
need all their frequencies during the first year of their 
domestic operation. It might be argued they will not need 



FEDERAL RADIO COMMISSION. 


57 


them for a much longer period. But taking only the first 
proposition, was it not error i*or the Commission to de¬ 
prive the appellants, who have an immediate need for those 
frequencies and use thereof, until such time as| its competi¬ 
tors could show a superior need! 

Certain other objections have been made to! granting of 
the petition for a stay order. While it is not felt any 
extended argument is necessary to show the fallacy of those 
contentions, the following points are briefly made for the 
assistance of the Court: 

I. Appellants concede that the law is not blear on the 
question of whether an appeal may be taken from a deci¬ 
sion granting to other applicants the precise facilities which 
were denied to one applicant, after all the i applications 
were heard together and where decisions werej made simul¬ 
taneously. 

It would seem logical to contend that to give full force 
and effect to the appeal provided by the statute, this Court 
would have to consider the disposition so made of the con¬ 
tested facilities. There are two ways in which this may be 
done—first, in an appeal from the decision denying the 
facilities to the unsuccessful applicant. Second, it may be 
considered where the applicant appeals not ojily from his 
own decision, but from the other decisions granting the 
use of the same facilities. 

Except for some convenience which might bej afforded the 
Court by employing the latter procedure, there is no dis¬ 
tinction between the two methods. In any eve^t, the Court 
would have the right to control the subject-nfatter of the 
application in the exercise of its appellate jurisdiction. Un¬ 
less the Court has that right, the Commission! may at any 
time strike at the heart of an appeal to this Court by dis¬ 
posing of the requested facilities. No additional jurisdic¬ 
tion is gained by the Court if appeals are taken from deci¬ 
sions granting the facilities to other applicants. 

74 A different situation might arise if thb appellant’s 
denial had not ocurred simultaneously with the dis¬ 
position of the facilities to companies about Ito enter the 
field. The Commission states in its answer that it desig¬ 
nated 40 frequencies to the Universal Compan^ on Decem¬ 
ber 22, and that it followed recommendations of the Engi¬ 
neering Division of the Commission then in the Commis- 



58 INTERCITY RADIO TELEGRAPH CO. ET AL. VS. 

sion’s files. It further states that “on June 7, 1929, the 
Commission directed its Secretary to list and publish the 
40 frequencies so designated for the Universal Company 
and said frequencies were accordingly listed in the min¬ 
utes for the Commission on June 7, 1929.’ ’ 

Fortunately, the appellants are protected in this instance 
because the formal grant to the Universal Company oc¬ 
curred on the same date as the denial of the appellant’s 
applications. But suppose that in December the Commis¬ 
sion had disposed of all the available frequencies and had 
withheld any entry thereof upon the minutes until the stat¬ 
utory period for an appeal had passed, could it then be 
said— 

1. That other applicants, thus barred from successfully 
prosecuting their applications, since the frequencies would 
all be allotted, would be deprived of any right of appeal 
from that decision, and 

2. That by withholding any notice until the statutory 
period for appeal had elapsed the applicants would thereby 
be deprived of their right of appeal. 

II. An attack is made upon the joint appeal taken by 
Intercity and the Wireless Telegraph Company. It is sub¬ 
mitted that the Notice of Appeals sets up— 

(a) The applications of these companies were heard to¬ 
gether ; 

( b ) The record below showed arrangements had been 
made for th6 Intercity Company to take over the Wireless 
Telegraph & Communications Company and for the two 
companies to be merged under the same management and 
to be operated as a single concern; 

( c ) The appeals were taken by counsel who filed their 
appearance on behalf of each appellant; 

75 (d) The affidavits supporting the Notice of Appeals 

and Reasons Therefor and the petition for stay 
order were, on their face, regular in every respect. 

In view of those considerations, there is no irregularity 
in the joint presentation of these two appeals, and the inter¬ 
ests of the pparties are so inseparable that any separate 
consideration of the appeals would be impracticable. 

III. A great deal of space in the Government’s brief and 
answer have been devoted to the question of alleged lack 
of proper parties to the appeals and to the petition for stay 


I 

i 


FEDERAL RADIO COMMISSION. 


59 


order. Authorities are cited to establish thi well recog¬ 
nized principle of Courts of Equity to dismiss a plaintiff’s 
appeal if it appears that to grant the relief prayed for 
would injuriously affect persons materially interested in 
the subject-matter who are not made parties to the suit. 

This is equivalent to saying that the Federal Radio Com¬ 
mission can vitiate an appeal to this Court bvj disposing of 
requested facilities to other parties, unless the appellant 
from the unfavorable decision engages in aj controversy 
with the other parties thus benefited. This cannot be the 
law. It was not the intention of the Radio Actjthat in order 
to prosecute an appeal successfully, an appellant had to 
attack parties with whom it had no controversy. 

The Court has complete jurisdiction of the! subject-mat¬ 
ter and it is interested only in bringing before it the Fed¬ 
eral Radio Commission. It is immaterial thatjthe Commis¬ 
sion may have planned to dispose of the contested facil¬ 
ities to a third party. The Court, in the exercise of its ap¬ 
pellate jurisdiction, can properly order the Commission to 
refrain from any such disposition, irrespective of whom the 
third party may be. 

Because of the foregoing reasons, it is respectfully sub¬ 
mitted that the motion to dismiss the petition for a stay 
order should be overruled. 


INTERCITY RADIO TELEGRAPH 
COMPANY and 

WIRELESS TELEGRAPH & COM¬ 
MUNICATIONS COMPANY, 

By JOHN W. GUIDER, j 

Their Attopiey. 

7G | Endorsed:] Nos. 4987 and 498’8. Intercity Radio 
Telegraph Company, Appellant, vs. Federal Radio 
Commission, Appellee. Wireless Telegraph affd Communi¬ 
cations Company, Appellant, vs. Federal Raldio Commis¬ 
sion, Appellee. Brief in Support of Opposition Filed by 
Appellants to Motion of Federal Radio Commission to Dis¬ 
miss Appellant’s Petition for Stay Order, ijlogan, Dono¬ 
van, Jones, Hartson & Guider, Colorado Building, Wash¬ 
ington, D. C. Court of Appeals, District of Columbia. 
Filed Jul. 6, 1929. Henry W. Hodges, Clerki 


l 


i 




GO 


INTERCITY RADIO TELEGRAPH CO. ET AL. VS. 


77 Court of Appeals, District of Columbia. Filed Jun. 

27, 1929. Henry W. Hodges, Clerk. 

In the Court of Appeals, District of Columbia. 

No. 4990. 


R. C. A. Communications, Inc., Appellant, 

v. 

Federal Radio Commission, Appellee. 

Notice of Appeal to the Court of Appeals of the District 
of Columbia and Reasons Therefor. 


Swagar Slierley, Frederick De 
son, Attorneys for Appellant. 
Manton Davis, of Counsel. 


C. Faust, Charles F. Wil- 


78 In the Court of Appeals of the District of Columbia. 

No. — 

Docket No. 212 of the Federal Radio Commission. 

R. C. A. Communications, Inc., Appellant, 

v. 

Federal Radio Commission, Appellee. 

Notice of Appeal from Decision of Federal Radio Com¬ 
mission. 

On this 27th day of June, 1929, comes R. C. A. Communi¬ 
cations, Inc., Appellant, and says that it is aggrieved by 
the decision of the Federal Radio Commission rendered on 
the Appellant’s amended applications for construction per¬ 
mits and for renewals and/or modifications of appellant’s 
radio station licenses, a statement of which amended appli¬ 
cations is as follows: 


1 For Construction Permits. 

Details of Amended Applications for Radio Station Construction Permit Covering Point to Point 

National Radio System 

Filed May 14 , 1929 . 


FEDERAL RADIO COMMISSION. 


■ 

© 


tO 

© 

f .. 


a 


es *-> 
s as 

i—t r 

to 

a 


o 

Ch 


O 


£ 

o 


02 

c> 

CS 

P 


61 


£ 

w 

o 


cc 

CS 


£ 

l—H 

O 


t- 



& 

< 4-3 

rF 

<1 

lH 

< 


o 

<3 

P 

|Q 

Q 


• Cm 



1 




•w 


1 



II 

© r 72 

■? S 

•^F 

f- 

O 

<W 

§ 2 " 

02 r 

• rH H 

oj ^ 

o! 5 aC 

COj o 

CO 


a 

G 

s s 

• 1 

O! O 

CS 

00 

CM 

Ci 

rH 

Si A 

^ Cw 

s .2 I 
es 3 

•fH 

pm 

a 

p 02 

2 w 

r C 3 

P « 4 H 

rH . 

P ;^2 

o> 

O 

»v 

lO 

a r © 

© to ~ 

O 

© 

o 

s >r* 
cs ^ 

rH 1 

Hi HH 

CS! HH 

o 

• F-H 

a a o 
^ a > 

rr> ^ 

H 

02 w 

02 ;'—" 



ft 

HO 

© 

CS 

P 

CO 

rH 

o 

• fH 

C5 

a 

au 

cX) 


o 

CO 

rH 

o 

ft 

O 

02 


© tr 
•i~i es 


© 

& 


« ss 

83 ] 

5£«-*3 o 

a O 

•+H 

-V 

cS 

CM f 

^9 

c? P 

So 

S,P* 

^ © _ 

•*H 

o 2 ? 

q°P 


H-» «-F r 

^ o S ^ 

FT 

o 

© >H 

p!>h 


of .2 o 

rr* r- < -1 —* 

W 

HH 

rH 

rn|^ 

ih fz; 


o © 

-w ^ 
r— — O ^ 
w w C k ^ 

2 « a >4 

*»— 

TO 

to 

cs 


0 S? 

si 


SC 


© 

5 g 


1 55 
>..o 

'C — 

*w «w 

p a 
—* 

52 S.Q - 
sr ^ 

o >>0 p 

s s ^ 01 
Is a? 
o' 

o — 

tL G 

Vh ^ P 
^ G 

* * ts &o 

° O % *3 

, EH 


' e* 0 if 


© © 
cc M 


^ •“’ « 72 

Si «H . 
JS..S3 

H H >■- 
££2 = 
«-s 5 

^ ^ c y? 
FH ^ 2 
CS ei © J 3 
' 5 ' 3 - 5 

h : 

o o -© z 

© © ^ 
02 02 <3 
* .2 


V2 


SC 

© 

•-H 

© 

© 

CT 

© 

Vh 

r P 

g 

’ w 

rF 

r* 

G 

FF 

a 

<; 


H O 
P G> 


o o 
^ zo 
O 00 00 

H 00 t> O 

ro H H CM i 

O # # LC0 


H m 
G’Q 

h"-_ H<-_ 


o 

o 


iO 
00 
O loo Cl 
CO CO 


cs 

w 

to 

<H 

o 


pH 

m 


pH i 




g o 
5 p 


►<r 

© 

o 

p 


o 

p 

AH 

o 

o 

M 


02 P 
0*0* 
> > 

i r T 

lO o 

rH Tft 

iO Ci c. 

C 5 CO t>- 
H H rH 
lO * #■ 


PH 

£ 


O 

P 


o 

o 

a 













Details of Amended Applications, etc.—Continued. 


62 


INTERCITY RADIO TELEGRAPH CO. ET AL. YS 


C3 

2-5 4 

a es 

(-H ->-> 

aa 

s 



> 

> 

> 

o 

p- 

r- 

r"~ 

if 

© 

M 

i—i 

P 

w 

A 

HH 

O 

O 

O 


rh 

HP 

Hi 

• 

rz 

CO 

• 

CO 

© 

O 


o 


Cw 


CS 


p 

• 

p 

-L 




<5 

P 

Xfl 

P 

.fl 

•TH 



• 


o 


be 


o 

—i 

ci 

ca 


P 

2 

a 

o 

<y 

§ 


a o 


CO 

O o 

^=2 

C3 ^ 

o ^ 

»i-H r^i 

L3 L2 

o — 


co y. 

Cw ^ 
CO cs 

r-t O 

3-s 
W o 


o 
o 
Eh 
o . 

S’® 

C> • 


o 


r-^ r*^ 

k> M 


oq m 


o 

p 


o 

> 

o 

5 



Vi xn w 


C 5 

r"H 

be 

rH 

rH 


rH 

r* 

rH 

r-> 

rO 

o 

• *—h 

o 

r~* 

CO 

CfH 

* 4 —* 

r-l 

rH 

O 

• r“H 

CL 

O 


S 


< 




o 

t 


w 

«w 

CS 

tO 

Ci 

ixj 

o 

Ci 

o 

Ci 

I 

l-L 

Ci 

Ci 

© 

a 

O 

o 

1 

O 

p 

1 

O 

O 

o 

-w 
r• 

o 

PL 

>H 

PL 

>h 

PL 

>H 

PL 

■c 

i—• 

rH 

55 

rH 

55 

rH 

55 

rH 


a 


H 

S P 

O 

rH HH 

Sn 

O 

rH 

P 

P 

1 

o 



O 

| 

£h 

pH 

P >H 

pH 

P 

>H 


rH^ 

rH 

rH 

T—i 

y< 


ai 

o 

o 


a 


55 


cr 

o 

a 

H 

O 

<M 

H 


cy 

r w 

pH 

'T 

> 

O 


IQ 

T 

o 

j i 

o 

[L 

_ to 

q 

lO CO 

iO o 

O CO 


rH Ci 

O Htt 

O t— 


CO 00 

CO t— 



iC : *= 

ifO * 

to #. 



O 
o ^ 

Ci t'- 
Ci 
'rh * 


P 

P 


o 

lO T—1 

r— t— 
Ci co 
Ttt * 



I 

w 

o 

I 

>H 

55 

I 

iO 
H"l tH 

OO CO 
CO iO 
Hh -1- 


P 

U1 

>H 

55 

CO iO 
H- 


kH 


• 

A 

55 

• 

• 

• 

• 

o 



• 

• 

CS 

as 

<w 

O 

r-* 

** 

• rH 

O 

P 

kH 

• 

55 

>H 

• 

55 

a 

o 

CS 

o 

>v< 

o 

r* 
r-H 
• rH 

o 

r\ 

• rH 

o 

rs 

-+-> 

H 

• rH 

o 

o 

iL 

O 

P 

P 

p 

p 



r i 

k> 

r j 

>-» 

K> 

'o 


80 

W 

o 

w 

o 

o 


P 

p 

p 


5>H 

5* 

5>h 

5>h 

• 

55 

• 

• 

55 

• 

55 

r\ 

-4- 
<—< 

•s 

«4-> 

rs 

-4-H 

r-H 

r\ 

H 

rH 

f“H 

• rH 

o 

• rH 

o 

• ^H 

O 

• 

o 

P 

p 

P 

p 

rH. 

L4 

K- 

r% 

CJ 

rH. 

>> 

^ i 

rH. 

M 

o 

o 

o 

w 

o 

o 

o 

p 

p 

p 

p 














FEDERAL RADIO COMMISSION 





I 


i 

• ! 




U1 

CO 

CO 

CO 

CO 

co| 





c; 




CO 


HH 




© 






© 


r» 

h| 



tJO 


' W 

©j 

© 

Is 

o 

r-n 

c 

• rH 

£ 

rn 

cS 

'So 

o 

rH 


-*- 1 

Cu 

cc 

a 


r-H 

o 


© 

o 

• rH 

O 

o 

CQ 

CO 

- i 



Ph 



:n 

. 1—\ 

© 




©i 

CN 

00 

kO 

c© 

O r 

rH pH 


rH j 
rH <! 

Sh 

O uh 
rH r*"} 

So 

0*7 



o^f 


o^f 

Ph 

Ph >H 

Ph >h 

Ph >H 

Ph|* 


^ >c 

rH ^ 

rH ^ 

rH ^ 

rH ^ 

rH &! 


C> 


I 

o 
'M O 

l— 00 

Ol iCO 

-H * 


PhP 

OH 


PP G> 

M o> 


> fe 

> > 





o ‘O 

»o © 


C© rH 

C© CM 


O (M X 

O H C 

© 

O rH ^ 

o co co 

Oi 

H Ol H 

rH rH rH 

tH 

kCO * * 

iCO *■ *■ 

u© 


W 

! 


M 

t-H 

HH 

Ph 

G> 


w 

o 

1 


1 

pH 

CO 

1 

£ 

<i 

5 


kH 

1 ‘ 


1 

00 

CM 


IQ 


© 

© 

C 5 

GO 

o 

o 

o 

oo 

l>- 

C© 

<01 

rH 

CM 

rH 

rH 


ICO 

00 

ICO 

* 

* 


-i— 

00 

H— 


I 





• 

• 

• 

«K 

#•» 

t ^ 

rH 

• rH 

O 

• rH 

O 

• rH 

o 

Ph 

Ph 

Ph 

>v 

*■> 

»■.«* 

>» 

k> 

o 

TI 

o 

CJ 

o 

Ph 

Ph 

Ph 







• • 

£ fc 





I 


I 


Rooky Point, N. Y. 3307 1 PC 107 

f5195-NY-NO XY-WN Washington S . 1KW 

Rocky Point, N. Y. 3304 1 PC 108 

15105-XY-SE NY-BO Boston S . 1 KW 
























Details of Amended Applications, etc.—Continued. 


64 


INTERCITY RADIO TELEGRAPH CO. ET AL. YS 


00 

o 

£ 

£ 

M 

>—H 

* 

M 

i—i 

& 

X 

£ 

W 

£ 

W 

& 

W 

> 

yy 

M 

© 

r*^ 

C5 w 

.3 a ^ 

p 

I • 

rH 

rH 

o 

O 

Hi 

rH 

O 

rji 

O 

H 

•#H r—» 

3 3 

1 







• 

k—( -T 

50 

3 

HH 

Mod. 

• 

• 

■ 

CO 

a 

C3 

Facs, 

• 

• 

CO 

C> 

CS 


Ant. 

Xfl 

m 

DA 

DA 

m 

x/i 

DA 


h-» 

•r* 

s: 



g-cT 

o • 
a 60 


cc 

r-* 

r-H 

© 


cS 

C0 • 

CO o 


ci 

"S 

© 

r» 

r* 

3 

r* 

00 

ri 

03 

c5 

o 

o 

r* 

t 

• ^ 
r* 

[P4 

’’o 

03 

cs 

*3 g 
?-S 

C5 ^ 
rY C5 

Ph «n 

*3 O 

^H • 

pH 02 

rH 

a 

P> 

o 

rH 

o 

00 

© 

© 

c; 

rH 

5 £ 

r HH 

C3 h*H 

T 

1—1 

o 

o 

§ 

o 

Ul 

CP 

xn ^ 

Xfl ^ 

Q 



>H £ 

r • rH 

CO 

£ % 
o « 

& tp 


1 rH O 
£ r . Xfl 
r O i 
s Ph 

2 rH^ 



< 

PP 

Ci 

o M 

rH 3^ 


S&l 

pH 

O 1 

o^ 2 

g“ 

>H 

2_| H-l 

«T ^ 

C_| Hrl 

rH^ 

rH O 

^ o 


00 K. 

SO K' 

g® 
^ K 

Tf O 


S O 

o 

o*r 

a?? 

<^K 

fH H 

Hi O 

H 1 O 


yj 



© 

3 


's 


O 
rH o 

O rH 
CO iO> 
CO -5— 



VO 


° £ 
t'- o 

(M 00 C5 

^ cc N 

00 rH H 

1(0 * * 


X 3 

H O' 


T ^ 

O O 
1(0 CO 

io h* o 

00 CO 


if2 *' * 


IS3 

o 


^0 

M 


o § 
00 

T T! ci 

KO * 


w 

o 

o 

rH 

L(0 * 


o 


3 

cc 


o 


kH 



K* 



o 

&0 

C3 

O 


3 

© 

• rH 

o 

o 

A 


© 

It 

Ph 

Ph 

o 

‘CD 


>■* 

k^% 

►>* 

cS 

A \ 


o 

o 

o 

w 

• rH 
fH 


Ph 

pp 

s 


o 

60 

C3 



o o 

cC CO 

CS c 5 

o cy 

• t «t 


5 


GO 


Q O 













FEDERAL RADIO COMMISSION 


65 


£ 

£ 

£ 

£ 

& 


£ i E 

ft ! 1 

M 

M 

M 

M 

K> 

pH 

K/< 

HH 

pH 

O 

O 

O 

rH 

rH 

rH 

^ < 







, 


CO 

o 

a 

! fe 


M o 

S-Seh 

o ^ [S CC 

O ffl 


ci ffl 

bi ft 


r-1 

I 2 cC 
O 

hP § 


O #r ^ 

Pi CS 
cs q 

g fl 
P *0 


m o ^ o 


j r-t CO 

1° o 

p= >■> 
i O _Q 

f? ^ 


lO ^ 

n O CO ^ 

C ffo^ 

O -f O 


07 

ph td 

TdH O 


go 

07 

Ph td 

-* o 


C£> )-d ^Og 

O O "f 
Ph a 

^ o ^ o 


co fe 

in £ 

o ^ 

^ w 

^ o 


IS >H 

b5? 
IP-i [^ 
jo C£ 


m o 
momw 

03 CTl t*I cn 

o co t*» co 
in * hh * 


02 

pp 

H 

pp 

5 

5 

o 

in 

m m 

O CO 

r>- r*H 

05 C5 

rH 05 

03 CO 

m * 

in * 


in 
m cs 

CO 03 

m m 


_ 03 
O CO 

S3 oo 

Q m 


o 

o 

o 

o 

o 

be 

be 

be 

bo 

bo 

cS 

cS 

oS 

cS 

cd 

o 

<o 

o 

o 

o 

• rH 

• rH 
rH 

i—M 

• ^H 
rH 
r-»H 

• fH 


A 

Q 

o 

o 

O 

O 


W 

O 

<± 

g & 

$ 03 

S3 ^ 

CO -»— 


!gfc 

iW t= 

IM M 

S3 

iO co 
in ico o 
GO ICO 00 
03 irH i—i 
*0 |# * 


5—4987a 


San Francisco . 5165 

*10400-KEZ 5 PC 79 New York 

*15445-KKW SF-NY-B (H. S. Teleg.) DA . 40 KW 


















Details of Amended Applications, etc.—Continued. 


66 


INTERCITY RADIO TELEGRAPH CO. ET AL. VS 






<1 ^ W. OQ QQ 

Q P 


bo 

, s o 

O 'o 


o 

too 

S3 

rH 

• 

O ^ 
bO • 

u 

o 

C 

CS 

CO 

cs m 

> 

-M 

o 

o 

o 

rH 

- 4 -n 

CS 

• ^4 

s 

cS 

CM 

^3 h-i 

O ^ 

o 

A 

o 

U1 



cS 

<C3 


<1 


09 



vo co 


P 

mH 1 

CO . 


o 

CO |xj 

So > 

CO H 

vO 

09 

o 9 


o 

p 

p 

^P 

p 

VO CQ 

vO CO 

uo in 

VO 



a 


p 6 

CO ^5 


SC 

O 

i 

o 


o 


c 

o 


o 


s 

$ 


3 


N 


5 P 

P K/. 

m i-r 1 


OQ ^ 

P G> 

* W 



K> K/ 
I—l HH 


O 

Cl 

VO 


O 

Cl 

Cl 

TtH 


o o 

Cl to 
vO CO 
N O O 
N H H 
vO *■ * 


H 

§ ^ 

P K/ 


K/. 


VO 
O rH 
CO c— 

vO * 


O 

P 

M 


O 
vO t- 
co CO 
t— VO 
* 



c— 



CS 

xn 


o 

O 

o 


CO 

CO 

a Mai 

• rH 

o 

o 

o 

ss 

cS 

cs 

H 

H 

P 

P 

S 3 

S 3 

cs 

CS 

GG 

GO 


o 

O 

CO 

• rH 

o 

13 

cd 

H 

P 

13 

cS 

OQ 


O 

o 

co 

• rH 

o 

3 ! 

cs 

H 

P 

53 

cs 

m 









FEDERAL RADIO COMMISSION. 


67 


£ £ 
KJ K/ 
pH pH 

rH tH 


m m 


xn. m 


CO 

rH 

r 1 

c3 

o 

• ^ 
rH 

o 

rH 

rn 

rH 

V 

to 

Ph 

a 

-4-J 

CO 

=2 

rn 

C5 

H 

<3 

© 

• rH 

© 

O 

03 

rH 

M 

f=5 

a 

X/l 

O 


o 

5=1 

H e3 

O u 

5>> 

>■ <-* 
O S 
525 20 


07 

PH O 

CO 5*5 


C* HH 

O HH 

o'f 
Pho 
co 55 


07 

PH O 


o 

xO> £> 


PH 6 

co ^5 


U-l 

o £4 

og 

eo S5 


-2 

00 >-l 

Ph gq 
O OQ 


c3 

oo 

qCO 

iO> CO 


to 0 


CM w, 
Ci 

g*f 

PH M 
co PH 


§s 

o9 


lO 

o <M 

co i>* 

L— CO 
-r^l * 


_ VO 

O uo 
^ CO 
r— no 
* 


O 

£ 

i 

lO o 

c— co 

iO VO 
tH H— 


lO 

tH 
O iO 
O Gi 

co co 

lO * 


lO 0 

co o 

9 r 

>iO * 


Ph S 
Mg 
E M 
i 7 

g o 
® 00 
O c— r>. 

CO CO o 
o w 

iO * * 


o 

O CM 
rH lO 

o t- 

iO * 


CO 

o 

CO 

CO 

• 

£ 


p 

P5 


c3 

fe 

g3 

03 


© 

© 

<D 

rH 

© 

t 1 


H 

O 

525 

o 

Jh 

O 

© 

£ 


£ 


-H 

C3 

<35 

84 

© 

© 

<15 

525 

525 


OQ 


CO tH 
CO iO 
CM lO 
CO j-H 


o 00 

CO O 
oa io 
CO —T“ 


1 


















Details of Amended Applications, etc.—Continued. 


68 


INTERCITY RADIO TELEGRAPH CO. ET AL. VS. 



r • 

r* 

o 

£ 

£ 

& 

£ 

& 


S; 


M 

M 

M 

M 

PH 

o 

o 

pH 

pH 

i—i 

t—1 

HH 

r-H *«—< 

C3 +-> 

Ph 

o 

tH 

rH 

tH 

rH 

sain 

G ci 

'G 





. 

M 

•H 

O 

s 





• 


V. 





• 


Ant. 

02 

zn 

02 

ZJ1 

02 


£ 

M 


zn 


o 

■*-> 

a 


G 

a 

a 

o 

s 


>1 


o 

£ 


o 

o 

CO 

o 

r-< 

C3 

H 


c3 

02 


o 

o 

co 

• pH 

O 

c 

C5 

Ph 


Cw 

02 


o 

&C 

Cw 

o 

• r—4 

rH 

o 


7^ 

o 

kH 

£ 

o 


M 




CO 

O *£ 
CC r Q_ 

cS & 

« S 

03 


^ o s 


o 

■W 

cS 

5 >H 

oo ft 

O 

O ^ 


-4—» 

pH 

M 

O 


pH <j 

Ht 

o p 

vO hP 


cj 

^2 

rO 

*>• >H 

g ft 

C3 HH 
VO HH 

§ kH 

o°? 

o'? 

Ph> 


o* 


ft A 



vO P 

CO S 

cq O 


03 

O 

o 

G 

o 

rj 

c 

o 

u 


o 

'w 

a 

o 

3 

<5 


hP G> 

7 7 

w 3 

ifi i> o 

N CO GO 
O tH rH 
VO * * 


Ph 

hP 

HH 

r i 

H 

HH 

M 

Ph 


H 

£ 

£ 

W 

£ 

I 

i 

o 


o 

o 


o 

O VO 

VO -rtl 

o CO 

vO I>- 

tH C5 

tH C3 

C3 O 

Ci HH 

VO CO 

O 00 

O tH 

CO Ci 

-*H * 

VO # 

vO * 

Hfl * 


t- 


> 

H 


i 

vo 

C? 

HH 

CO 

CD 

* 


a 

o 


CD 

© 

a 

■*-> 

cj 

o 

o 

Hi 


CO 

CO 


<33 

. 


o 

<33 


> 



1—H 

<33 

to 

1—H 

<33 

tsC 


s 

<33 

• 

• pH 

-H» 

C5 

£ 

o 


P 



<1 

<1 

<x> 

> 


•rH 

a 

fl 

*s 

CO 

CO 



s 


o 

hP 

O 

HP 

<33 

ft 

VO 

00 


•^H 

o 


Savannah . 4585 3 PC 51 (New Orleans 

•6852.5-KEB SV-NO (Norfolk S . 1KW 
















M 


FEDERAL RADIO COMMISSION 


£ 

£ 

£ 

M 

HH 

M 

pH 


£ 

M 


£ 

M 


69 

£ £ 

M W 


02 


VI 


VI 


VI 


VI 


VI 


VI 


VI 


VI 




CO 









CO 




Ad 

u 

O 

© 

rH 

PH 

Cu 

© 

r# 

- 4 -* 

• pH 

O 

0 

o 

Ac! 

rH 

o 


Ad 

rH 

o 

O 


0 

as 

© 

r-H 

Sh 

CO 

• rH 

*25 

• ^H 

H-H 

as 

rH 

1 


CJO 

O 

CO 

c 3 

o 

H-H 

£J 0 ^ 

CO 

>H 

bJO 

O 

Va 

o 

O 

PH 

PH 

! o 

W i 

te 

Cu 

© 


CO 

H 

C£ 

JZj 

Cu 

© 

£ 

a 

£ 

OS 

© 

• pH 

qc 

Cu 

£ 

P 

• »"H 
© 

pH 

© 

• ^H 

P*H 

© 

C 3 

o 

• r*^ 
p-• 

© 

^™H 

C 3 

© 

pH 

© 

• pH 

© 

• 

h-^» 

H 
• ^ 

! ^ 


3 


K> 

Ph 

w 

8 


P 

£ 

8 

H 

8 



o 

j © 

ISs 


xn 

0 

Cu 

© 

T3 

O 

£ 


oo 

ci 


Ad i—< 
o 65 

X g 

te « 


£ 'ce © § 

£ Q g,® 


I 

H 

ft 


XO 

xO 

o 

p 

cc 


O 

£ 

A 

ft 


p° 
Ph o 


CO 

t>- 


gw 

Q 

o I 
P P 


>H 

o* 

^ p —, 

oq O t*h S CO 


S8 o 

O I 
P IH 
§ 


SjjH 

o!^ 

cq P 


CO /«. 
xo O 

P O 

CO M 


O >H 

cq£ 


523 

H 

M 


xo 

O 

O 00 
t>- co 

Th # 


• 4 ^ 
• rH 

o 

u 

© 

Q 



O* 


^0 




Iz: 


g 


P“H 

K> 

Ph 

1 

XO 




H 

w 

1 


a* 


% 

XO 


oq 


o 


o 

xO 

XO 



o 

CO 

XO 

CO 

XO 

CO 

CO 

o 

tH 

oo 

C'- 

tH 

00 

oq 

00 

o 

oq 

XO 

t^- 


co 

b- 

co 

b- 

CO 

t— 

xO 

xO 

co 


* 

hH 

# 


* 

tH 

*• 


* 


cc 

ji 

"S 

p 


I 

>> 

**-p> 

• pH 

o 

xn 

Cu 

co 

rH 

*-h 

as 

M 


CO 


|pH 

ft 

;P 

GQ 
! I 
ixo 
ooo 

CTi 03 

xO'iO 


f 

0 | 

A^l 

©I 


c? 

P 

VI 

W 

o 

to 

3S 


P 

vi 

i 

P 

VI 

<4 

xo co 
00 oq 
xO xO 
+- 


TS 

as 

o 

& 

eS 

xn 

• pH 

r3 

P; 

0 

o 

Ad 

"© 

> 

© 

I" 


-H> 

xn 

0 

o 

© 

• 1^ 

© 

86 

O 

o 

8 

§ 


w 

52 ; 





















Details of Amended Applications, etc.—Continued. 


70 


INTERCITY RADIO TELEGRAPH CO. ET AL. VS. 


_ © 

C3 —> 

s *3 


03 


• 

H 

© 

s= 

© 

£ 

M 

Hh 

£ 

M 

rH 

£ 

M 

HH 

£ 

M 

M 

Ph 

£ 

M 

Ph 

£ 

KJ 

pH 

£ 

Ph 

M 

rH 


tH 

tH 

rH 

rH 

rH 

rH 

rH 

tH 

rH 

• 

'S 

© 

t ‘ 

• 

■ 




• 




•■H 

i*S 

• 

• 




. 




Ant. 

02 

02 

02 

02 

02 

02 

02 

02 

02 


© 

— 

C5 

© 


O 

© 






O 

fa 


co 

O 

3’f 

.2 S 

tf H © 

5 os 


o 


fa 


M 

?H 

o 

£ 

O 

fa 




O 


K> 


K ° o 
>H fcC 
ccS 
> o 

• l-H 

o fa o 


h 

o 

kH 


o 

fa 


o 


C5 

o 

02 


o 

&c 

C3 

o 


O 


W t>“ Sj 

J 

r 

§ ^ fa 

2hW 


00 

00 

O 

fa 


>H 

fa 

A 

fa 


a 

Sk 

oo 

^ J? 

^ CO 


CO 

t- 

O 

fa 


525 

l 

O 

fa 


tH 

© 

O 

fa 


I* 

fa 

£ 


© 


tH 

rH 


© 

fa 

© 

fa 

00 

pH 

tH 

00 

© 

o 

O 

525 

I 

o 

fa 

1 

O 

02 

o 

J 

fa. 

1 

o 

fa 

o 

fa 

l 

O 

fa 

£ 

1 

rH 

fa 

rH 

02 

© 

fa 

fa 

<3 


CO 

© 

© 

© 

c* 

© 

' © 
© 


© _ 
a © 
J3 00 
" VO 


> 

fa 

i 

fa 

02 

I 

vo 

h- 

cm 

vo 


w 

O 

I 

fa 

02 

I 

o 
o t— 
© CM 
VO VO 
rtf 


H 

o 

i 

W 

fa 

i 

VO 

vo OS 

CO © 
vO »o 

fa 


HH 

l-H 

‘V 

w 

o 

I 

vO 
VO t>» 
fa rH 
VO VO 

fa 


a 

fa 

I 

fa 

02 

I 

VO 
vO © 
vO tH 
vO vO 

—f- 


>H 

£ 

W 

o 

i 

o 

fa t>- 
t>- 1—1 
CM vO 
CO -!— 


fa 

I 

<1 

fa 

VO 
r- t'~* 
c- © 

CM VO 
CO ■+- 


O 

fa 

I 

w 

o 

A 

CO 00 
00 rH 
CM VO 
CO 


HH 

HH 

O 

I 

o 

fa 

I 

VO 
tH 00 
O- © 
CM VO 
CO -5— 


a 

© 


«0 

<w 

© 


e£ 

© 

© 

- 


© 

§ 


cc 


o 

©r 

r-* 

rH 

• rH 

O 

O 

fa 

0 

cc 

0 

&0 

£ 

• rd 

0 


-4-i 

Hi 



CO 

rrt 

-4^> 

CO 

fa 

O 

fa 

H-» 

02 

O 

fa 


0 

fa 


c3 

H-3 

o 

© 

© 

H 

'© 

02 


© 

Hi 

o 

©5 

£ 

C3 


O 

fa 


<z> 

o 

as 

cS 




















FEDERAL RADIO COMMISSION. 


71 


87 For Station Licenses. 

j 

Identification. 

1 MC 295 Rocky Point, N. Y., WIR 4276 KC.i-instead of 
4050 KC. licensed, and 4052 heretofore ap¬ 
plied for. Neither of these frequencies is now 
available, being assigned to exclusive U. S. 
Government use. To communicate with Goth- 
enberg and Montreal. 

1 MC 18 Rocky Point, N. Y., WQN 5265 KC.-— instead of 
5260 KC. licensed, but not now designated as 
a standard channel. To communicate with 
London, Madrid, Lisbon and Havana. 

1 MC 18 Rocky Point, N. Y., WQN 5305 KC .{—instead of 

1 PC 756 5501 KC. licensed, and 5495 KC. heretofore 

applied for. The former, 5501 KC., now falls 
just inside an international mobile band; the 
latter, 5495 KC., is now assignee), exclusively 
to Canada. To communicate with San Juan, 
St. Martin and Berlin. 

1 MC 18 Rocky Point, N. Y., WQN 5855 KC\ —instead of 

1 PC 756 5822 KC. licensed, and 5825 K. C. heretofore 

applied for. The former, 5822 KC., is not a 
standard channel but is within the width of 
standard channel 5825 KC., the latter now 
being assigned exclusively to Cuba. To com¬ 
municate with Oslo, Gothenberg |and Bogota. 

5 LC 296 Kahuku, T. PL., KRO 5870 KC. —instead of 5845 
KC. licensed, and 5840 KC. heretofore ap¬ 
plied for. The former, 5845 KC., is not a 
standard channel but is within the width of 
standard channel 5840; the latter now being 
assigned exclusively to “Other nations.” To 
communicate with San Francisco, Tokio, 
Manila and Suva. 




72 


INTERCITY RADIO TELEGRAPH CO. ET AL. VS. 


88 The decision complained of was rendered June 10, 
1929, and was as follows : 

The Federal Radio Commission of the United States. 

Docket No. 212. 

In re Applications of RCA Communications, Inc., for Con¬ 
struction Permits and / or Licenses. 

Order. 

Upon due consideration of the evidence and arguments 
heretofore presented to the Commission in the above en¬ 
titled case, and 

It appearing that public interest, convenience, and neces¬ 
sity will be served by granting said applications in part, 
now, therefore, 

It is ordered that the following frequencies be assigned 
for use by applicant in accordance with the amended appli¬ 
cations hereinafter provided for: 

Exclusive U. S. Channels. Shared U. S. & Canada. 


4268 5035 3268 

4284 5045 3274 

4535 5055 3280 

4545 5065 3286 

4555 5255 3332 

5005 5265 

5015 5275 

5025 


89 It is further ordered that said applications be 
granted, insofar as the same request the use for 
point-to-point service within the United States of high fre¬ 
quency channels heretofore granted for transoceanic serv¬ 
ice of applicant, and 

It is further ordered that said applications be denied, ex¬ 
cept insofar as the same are expressly granted by the terms 
of this order, and 

It is further ordered that applicant shall furnish the 
Commission with amended applications specifying points 



FEDERAL RADIO COMMISSION. 


73 


of communication and frequencies in accordance with the 
grants herein made, and 

It is further ordered that construction permits and/or 
licenses covering and limited to the frequencies herein 
granted be issued in accordance with the terms of this or¬ 
der and said amended applications. 

This order to be effective on the date hereofJ 

FEDERAL RADIO COMMISSION, 
By IRA E. ROBINSON, 

Chairman . 

June 10,1929. 

Attest: 

CARL H. BUTMAN, 

Secretary. 

The appellant appeals from said order in so far as the 
same is a denial in whole or in any part of any and/or all 
of its amended applications hereinbefore stated and listed. 

The twenty frequencies granted in the order aforesaid 
were on a separation basis of approximately tivo-tenths of 
one per cent pursuant to general orders of the Federal Ra¬ 
dio Commission defining channels, particularly General 
Order No. 62. 

90 Good current engineering practice, hjowever, and 
as well the said orders of the Federal jRadio Com¬ 
mission, permit closer operation provided the limits of the 
channel be not exceeded. Appellant’s said amended ap¬ 
plications were accordingly made on a separation basis of 
one-tenth of one per cent. j 

Certain frequencies previously allocated to the Appellant 
for transoceanic service are capable of supplemental use 
in domestic service at hours of the day when nbt useful for 
transoceanic service. In order to make the baost efficient 
use possible of all frequencies, as well those previously 
granted as those asked for, Appellant sought gnd received 
the right to make such supplemental use in domestic service 
of transoceanic frequencies previously awarded to it. 

Recognizing that the broad channels granted might be 
used on a closer separation basis than two-tenths of one 
per cent and that additional use might be m^de of trans¬ 
oceanic frequencies previously allocated to the Appellant, 
the Federal Radio Commission in its said ordet of June 10, 











74 


INTERCITY RADIO TELEGRAPH CO. ET AL. VS. 


1929, directed and required the Appellant to specify its 
intended points of connection and frequencies in accordance 
with the grants in said order made, and further directed 
issuance of construction permits and/or licenses in accord¬ 
ance with the terms of said order. 

On June 14, 1929, the Appellant, because of said direc¬ 
tion, furnished the data required, as follows: 



FEDERAL RADIO COMMISSION. 


75 


05 

03 




© 

ft 

ft 

l”5 


00 

53 

i 

00 

C3 


co 
co 

» 

a 

a 

o 

Q 


ft 

M 


O 


P 

g S rf 

ft o o 

ij a> co 
ft ft 

P >,3 

C co 

* ^ ft 


w 


© 


ft 0 
ft c} 

o m 


^ © ' 
O fe 'g 

^3 O 

§ 

s 5 « 

bO-S 


N.S o 

^-i -M © 

03 © -r; 
© ^ 


k> ^ 

'o 


© 

cc 


X rrt «*“< 

-§ a ° 

ft © 

© ft* 
ft g 

.a 


C5 ^ 


ft 


03 © ~ 


05 


CO 

CO CO 

rH ft 

© A 
ft © 

n © 


oo 

5Tr © 
CJJ ..—i 

© 


© 

ft 

cr 1 

© 

ft 


© ft 
nft > O 

£ ce :£ 
ft 
© 


03 


© 


© 


oo 

© 

»H 

© 

A 

© 


I 


c 4 § 

ft © ° 
ft ft cm 
0^0 

CO 

q_i © -M 

o« s 

UJ © O 

ft2a 

• M ft 
© CO M 

© £3 

£ .2 •$ 

o-s : 

e 

% S-S 

7^ jj ® 

§ a s 

S3 m3 3 

© © © 
03 =3 O 


ft 

a 

ft 

o 

CM 


© 


Cw 


‘©0 


CJO 

•s 

r3 

© 


02 

02 


03 

-M 

03 

©D 

ft 


o 


© 


© 

© 

ft 

• pH 

'ft 

cc 


i—• c3 © k' ft 

rft P r* © • 

ft ft ±S ft >■ 


X ps 

-4—> 

•r 1 ©3 
ps - 
© 


i" o 

CM 
CO M 


« 

PH 

02 

a 

a 


CO 

* pH 

ft 


>>«M 


© 


© 

© 


S 4 © 


o 

o 


a 

■4-J 

50 

v 


0 

y 

y 

o 

50 

5 

t* 


o 

ft 

c 

0 


■8 

S3 

U0 

•p4 

GO 

50 

0 

>» 

•o 

a 

o 


ftft 3 


« Si¬ 
’S © 

M Ui 

« bo 

t4 O 

Mi rr 
OJ 2 

© © 

o '© 

•—< ei 
ft i- 

ci 

© 
0 

9 
y 
o 
60 
c 
0 


m 

o 


ft 

O 1 

© 


S". o 

© a 

S3 

© © 

c*-2 

2© 
«w © 
Sh 

<M M 
O 50 

©S 
§ © 

O o 
3^ 

-*-> S3 
>* O 

Si 

- c> 
**% 

II 

S3 < 5 

© n 
02^ 
• * o 


o 


r* m 

P S « 
O *S S3 

rj O -rH 

ga© 

h 0 : 
©^3 

C7*J 

<y a a 

: aS 
S|g 
a £> 

5*1 


<35 

k> 

M 


50 

ss 

ft 

S3 

© 




■5 ©Z^®5 

© flrfS . .8° 


. 5 ft 

© S © 

Mrv! 


S 

s 

3 

a 

8 S3 

I 


© 

Ml ou 

es © ^ 
y y 

•pH «N _ 

ss e o 


•M -_ 

t- 50 ^ 

© — fi 

PH § © 

lJ © 
fe M > 

s - © 


0002^^020 


50 

■§> 

S3 

© 

0 

8* 

z* 

$ 


I 

M 

O 


0 

y 

I© 


i© 


OlOO^ 

go a oo oo 

CD CO CO CD 


I© 


S M xji C- © CO 
l-NNOOOO 
<N<NMN<NOJ 
CO CO CO CO CO CO 


ScJO 

^oS - 

<5 SR ^ 

y . M HH 

—T 04 

y 'p ^ 

— Ms3_^ 

0 50 S C3 2, 

3 “ 

a ■<■ ‘S-sl 

o ja 


CO 


oO 


jdS^oS 

ocajOQO 


|M 

0 

ly 


<u 

© 

50 

s 


© 

Q 

X 

ft 


0 

o 

ft 


3 

© 

ft 


© 

ft 


© 

ft 


o 

Q 

X 

ft 


oooooo 


>•>! vi 

^ Z 0C2 


s3; 

© 


f I I 

JSS 


^ftft 

C5l 

ago «! 

« o . 33 
a Q H « 

y 


05 


a m & 

a ra oflo 

Jjb I*-*-® 

p, CO W 3 O Q Q 
§* 0 JO ft ft ft 

£ £ S©» ^ 
ooo 

ft ft ft 

_kl —md \r\ 


M 

a 




















INTERCITY RADIO TELEGRAPH CO. ET AL. VS. 


© 

'O . 

© »- . 
> cs 

fee © 

. s-i As 

© & iJ 

•2 S? o 

§3* 


o 

S 

y-s — 02 


0 ~- 02 

_ O >—l 

G - 5 —* 

« S — 1 


io.5 t* 

• ~ o ~ • 


5 o fi N ~ r^. 

= 3^ So*- 

2 a © © _r 

*~ > © > — ~ 

O © © .3 ,2 © 3 

o^ooSta 


~ ;© 3 © © .- ~ 

sgSig^ss 

s5o55*« oa 


X >1 


55 *5 
cs 

•* k.^ 

it ? 

o - 
X * 

•4-1 

CJ s 
55 a: 


10 


CO CM 

O O 

CO 


1— Tf 

▼H ■'C 1 

os 


CM © 

t~* t— 

0 


10 CO 

CO CO 

* 


* * 

* * 

CO 

CM 

00 Tt< 

is 0 0 

00 

CO 

CO 00 

00 T* rp 

CM 

eo 

CM CM 

xo 10 »o 

CO 

00 

Tf Tt< 

■tji 


S3 Q 

GG 

II 

s a 

O 3 

•d 


w w • 

oae 

a a a 

ooa 


3* ?§ = 

j *? x J a 

B I 5h 

M 3 0 *~ 
sgg 

Go GOO 
a a ^ Pn h 

10 CM rH tH lO 


OOOOO O^o 

S oooocjooomocoOo 

WOOCOrt'f OOOH<tHT}t 

'jus TH ^ o o CO 00 O t- O O w 
C* c* C5 C5 O rt rl rtrt rl C“ »“l CS i— 
**■»*****•»■»**** 


OlOiOOlSO 

Ifl LS O H th IM 

o »© © © © ® 
"? 'f o o o is 


*-» ** ^ ^ d 

a a 3 2 a g 

©OOOOO 

909999 

Jawii 

cb ^ a a a 

GGGGGG 


<599 


G& 

O CQ 


o 10 

11 


• 

• 

• 

X 

» • 

• • 

• • 

XX . 

• 

w,. 

(n • • • • • 

• 

• 

• 

ct 

• 

• 

• 

55 

• 0 

• 

• A 

• • • 

55 53 ,-’ 

E 

55 j • • • • 

• 

• 

• 

Gh * 

• 

•» 

• 

4 -T 

GO 

•G G 

g!jjjg 

0*4 

co • 

G 

*0 

- 

G S 

3 3 rj 

O O 

•3 ^ o g a g 

w 

G 

gG 

•k 

O 

fee 

3 

0 

a 

>» 

it 

- 3 
x a 

3 5 

JS 0 

a a s - 

►» >>o 2 
it m 2 

Cg •« m *> 

H ,.*0 0 0 a 

►^,2 fee fee fee a 

2 * 4 _i a a a a 
>- 5 , ■*■>©©© ©s 

of 

a 

O | 

✓ S 

•H 

ZJ 

O 

05 

C? ZJ 

0 0 3 

x C 2 

O 0 53 3 J J 3 O 

a 02 g g g a 

© 

O O 

G 

a 

a g 

a ate 

a 



10 00 

OG 

a a 

CO 1© 


3 PC 54b NO—CH. CPA—Dorn. New Orleans, La. 5045 *10010 Chicago, Ill. 

5 PC 59b DV—CH. CPA—Dom. Denver, Col. 5050 *10020 Chicago, Ill. 

1 PC 95 NY—CII—A. CPA—Dom. Rocky Point, N. Y. 5055 *8930 Chicago, Ill. 

5 PC 59a DV—SF. CPA—Dom.Denver, Col. 5000 *8940 San Francisco, Cal. 






























































FEDERAL RADIO COMMISSION 


77 


Q g J 

« s 05 

2 5 c 

■ Hoc; 

r C5 ii 


. c3 

•a - O 

S3 * 

|s“o 
g> g -g w 
face £ 5> 


O-H Sg, 

: a &)£ *3 

£ K ©MO 

.h i-J *o h 3 02 fa O 0 


a 

• £ 
a % 

lb 1 

© BS 5JD 
n £ h 

Jj 

© ^ S3 

4_i O 

© O'* 3 


• B9 
OQ 

o« 

C§ 

►h © 

fa ^ 


woo© 

*-> -H r- © 
Ci O oo O 
oq t- eo t- 

rl H r( H 
* * * * 


O © 

Q Q 




• 

X 

/—s 


* 

* 

© 

w 

£ 

• 


t— 

4-1 

• 

4 _r 

O 

fa 

r-< 

*© 

HH 

s 

—■4 

© 

tH 

A 

1-4 

«s 

o 

fa 


>> 

a 

o 

fa 

tft 

C 5 

O 

*pm4 

** 

5 

Rocky 


® g 

oo ao 

CO t- 


w 

w 

o 

W 

o 

w 

o 

w 

o 

© 

t- 

t- 

o 

<N 

<N 

(M 

N 

<N 

w 

o 

LO 

© 

W 

O 


: ho 

* s 


v O 
*S w 

.© t- 

mO 
£ iH 

fa w 


g © 
© 

q 


fa fa 

o o 


• 

• 

• 

• 

• 

• 


• 

• 

• 

• 

• 

<3 


<3 

1 

a 

1 

fa 


1 

fa 

If 

m 

i 


SC 

42 

1 

£ 

1 

00 

X 


1 

fH 

£ 

X 

>—< 
O 

t- 

O 

© 

©j 

rH 

X 

<3 

w 

tH 

tH 

rH 

O 


o 

o 

«- -* 

fa 

—44 

fa 

■TH 


© 

■H 

rH 


















78 


INTERCITY RADIO TELEGRAPH CO. ET AL. VS. 


95 Appellant states that the Federal Radio Commis¬ 
sion has ordered that construction permits and/or 
station licenses be issued to the Appellant in accordance 
with the data so furnished. 

The Appellant’s amended application for domestic point- 
to-point radio communication were for 38 circuits to fur¬ 
nish service to 29 cities in a comprehensive, intercommuni¬ 
cating and interrelated system. The order complained of 
grants to appellant frequencies which, when used on a. sepa¬ 
ration basis of one-tenth of one per cent in accordance with 
good current engineering practice, and supplemented by 
domestic use of frequencies previously awarded Appellant 
for transoceanic service, permit Appellant to establish do¬ 
mestic service in but twelve cities instead of twenty-nine, 
as requested, and permit of no duplicate service. 

The effect of the said order has been, and is: 

To deny Appellant construction permits for any and all 
radio stations at, and to prevent Appellant rendering any 
radio service from or establishing radio connection with, 
the cities of 


Miami, 

Savannah, 

Dallas, 

Cleveland, 

Minneapolis-St. Paul, 
Memphis, 

Pittsburgh, 

Houston-Galveston, 

Norfolk, 


Buffalo, 

Portland, Maine, 

Rochester, 

Washington, 

Boston, 

Schenectady, 

Portland, Oregon, 

Milwaukee, 

Philadelphia. 


To deny Appellant construction permits for stations at 
New- York to communicate with radio stations at— 


Los Angeles, 
Seattle, 

96 Norfolk, 
Buffalo, 

Portland, Maine, 

Rochester, 

Washington, 


Miami, 

Pittsburgh, 

Boston, 

Schenectady, 

Kansas City, 

Philadelphia. 


i 


FEDERAL RADIO COMMISSION. 79 

i 

To deny Appellant construction permits for radio sta¬ 
tions at Chicago to communicate with radio stations at,— 

Philadelphia, Minneapolis-St. Paul, 

Boston, Milwaukee. 

i 

To deny Appellant construction permits fot radio sta¬ 
tions at New Orleans to communicate with radio stations 
at— 

i 

Savannah, Memphis, 

Dallas, Houston-Galveston. 

To deny Appellant construction permits for radio sta¬ 
tions at Seattle to communicate with radio stations at— 

New York, Portland, Oregon. 

To deny Appellant Construction permit for rhdio station 

at Los Angeles to communicate with— 

° 

New York. 


The Appellant says it is aggrieved in so far j as the Fed¬ 
eral Radio Commission’s said order, dated June 10, 1929, 
is, in effect, a denial of Appellant’s applications as 
amended and, in effect, denies the Appellant’s construction 
permits to establish the radio stations, circuits and serv¬ 
ices likewise above enumerated. 

The Appellant also says it is aggrieved by the decisions 
of the Federal Radio Commission of June 7, 1929, and of 
December 22, 1928, on the applications of thje Universal 
Wireless Communications Company, IncJ, and by the 
97 decision of the Federal Radio Commission on June 
20, 1929, and on December 22, 1928, on the applica¬ 
tions made on behalf of the American Press, certain news¬ 
papers and news services enumerated in the Federal Radio 
Commission’s Minute No. 32 of December 22, 1928, and by 
the decision of the Federal Radio Commission made on 
June 20, 1929, in favor of one Joseph Pierson, Trustee, 


American Publishers Committee, acting for and on behalf 
of a single public utility corporation to be organized, as 
stated in the said order of June 20, 1929, in sp far as the 
decisions aforesaid involve (1) frequencies applied for by 


this Appellant, or (2) disposition of available 
to the exclusion of this Appellant. 


frequencies 



80 INTERCITY RADIO TELEGRAPH CO. ET AL. VS. 

Wherefore R. C. A. Communications, Inc., hereby gives 
notice of its appeal from the decisions aforesaid to the 
Court of Appeals of the District of Columbia and assigns 
in support thereof the reasons hereinafter set forth. 

R. C. A. COMMUNICATIONS, Inc., 
By SWAGAR SHERLEY, 

Its Attorney. 

MANTON DAVIS, 

Of Counsel. 

Reasons for Appeal. 

The reasons for this appeal are: 

1. R. C. A. Communications, Inc., is a public service 
corporation organized under the laws of Delaware and 
as such is engaged in public service communication by 
radio, which business it has conducted since March 22, 1929, 
as the assignee and successor of the Radio Corpor- 
98 ation of America, of which it is a subsidiary created 
to carry on point-to-point radio communication serv¬ 
ice theretofore carried on by the Radio Corporation of 
America. 

The Radio Corporation of America, referred to herein¬ 
after as RCA, from the time of its organization in 1919, 
until the creation of the Appellant as its operating sub¬ 
sidiary, had operated direct transoceanic services to thirty 
foreign countries including trans-Atlantic radio services, 
South and Central American services, trans-Pacific serv¬ 
ices, and a Canadian service between New York and Mon¬ 
treal, connecting directly at Montreal with Australia. 
These transoceanic services, together with a continental 
service between New York and San Francisco, are now 
operated by the Appellant. The radio station licenses and 
the construction permits for point-to-point service held by 
RCA prior to March 22, 1929, were, on that date, by con¬ 
sent in writing of the Federal Radio Commission, referred 
to hereinafter as the Commission, assigned to the Appel- 
lent and RCA’s pending applications for like licenses and 
construction permits were, with like consent, amended sub¬ 
stituting the Appellant as applicant in place of RCA. 

The American termini of the international radio circuits 
operated by the Appellant are in New York and San Fran- 


BMSv 


FEDERAL RADIO COMMISSION". 


cisco. The Appellant maintains offices in Boston and Wash¬ 
ington, connected by wire with its New York ra(lio terminus. 
At these four points and at no other places in the United 
States are there facilities available for direct use by the 
public of Appellant’s international circuits. ! 

A large portion of the international communications 
business of the United States originates in otr is destined 
to points other than the four cities above named. 
99 The public, save only in said four citied, attempting 
to use the international radio communication serv¬ 
ices of the Appellant, is dependent, for the handling of its 
messages to and from the radio termini, on |the domestic 
wireline systems of the United States, which means prac¬ 
tically the systems of the Western Union Telegraph Com¬ 
pany and the Postal Telegraph Company, both of which 
own and control or are owned and controlled by cable com¬ 
panies engaged in international telegraphy competing di¬ 
rectly with the international radio services of Appellant. 

The evidence discloses that prior to the deyelopment of 
efficient short-wave, or high frequency, rad^o devices, a 
comprehensive system of domestic radio telegraphy was 
impracticable because there were not sufficient long waves, 
or low frequencies, available in the world, ahd the great 
cost of erecting and operating many long-wave, high-power 
stations was prohibitive. 

The evidence further shows that RCA for years has 
been engaged in developing short-wave, or high frequency, 
radio devices and has spent large sums of mpney in such 
development work with a view to utilizing such devices in 
domestic radio communication service; that as soon as such 
development had proceeded sufficiently far to make a com¬ 
prehensive domestic service utilizing high frequencies prac¬ 
ticable RCA filed with the Federal Radio Cohamission on 
April 7, 1928, applications for construction pdrmits for an 
intercommunicating domestic radio system Utilizing high 
frequencies and sufficiently comprehensive to serve twenty- 
nine cities in the United States; that these | applications 
were assigned as aforesaid to the Appellant. The denial in 
part of these applications as finally amended, furnishes the 
basis for this appeal. 

6—4987a 




INTERCITY RADIO TELEGRAPH CO. ET AL. YS. 


The applications as amended were filed and prose- 

100 cuted with a desire to afford the public relief from 
dependence upon one competitor in order to use the 

facilities of* another and as well to afford to the public a 
domestic point-to-point service in competition with the 
domestic telegraph companies. 

The evidence discloses that there is a highly limited num¬ 
ber of short waves, or high frequencies, available for point- 
to-point radio service, this because of the inherent charac¬ 
teristics of feuch frequencies, the division of frequencies be¬ 
tween classes of service imposed by the terms of the In¬ 
ternational Radio-Telegraph Convention, Washington, 
1927, the restrictions arising out of the North American 
Radio Agreement made in Ottawa, Canada, March 1, 1929, 
those imposed by the executive orders of the President of 
the United States setting aside certain frequencies for the 
exclusive use of the government, and as well those imposed 
by general orders of the Commission itself; that prior to 
September 25, 1928, applications were filed with the Com¬ 
mission by many applicants and for frequencies in excess 
of those known to be available, and greatly in excess of 
those which remained after the Ottawa agreement and the 
President’s orders aforesaid became effective. 

The record shows that the Federal Radio Commission 
ordered that all pending applications for frequencies in the 
so-called domestic bands should be set down for hearing 
on September 25, 1928, and thereupon all applicants were 
summoned and notified and they then appeared and were 
heard all together, including the plaintiff’s assignor, RCA, 
the Universal Wireless Communication Company, Inc., 
Joseph Pierson, Chairman of the American Publishers 
Committee, representing certain publishers and press asso¬ 
ciations, and others; that thereafter on December 22, 1928, 
the Commission announced, in connection with an order 
issued by it, that it would award forty channels on a 

101 separation basis of two-tenths of one per cent to the 
Universal Wireless Corporation, Inc., and that it 

would award twenty such channels to a corporation neither 
then nor thereafter formed, but designated by the Federal 
Radio Commission as, “The Press Radio Communication 
Corporation,” and stated it was “with the requirement 
that they handle press messages for any newspapers.” 


FEDERAL RADIO COMMISSION. 


83 


i 
i 

i 

I 
i 

The aforesaid orders of December 22, 1928, in favor of 
the Universal Company and of the Press, designated no 
particular frequencies. The Commission i at that time 
neither allowed nor denied the applications of RCA and of 
certain others, but announced that said applications 1 ‘were 
passed for further consideration.’ ’ Neither tlien nor there¬ 
after, until June 7, 1929, did the Commission declare or 
permit to be known the specific frequencies f;o be awarded 
to the Universal Wireless Communication Company, Inc., 
or to the so-called Press Radio Communications Corpora¬ 
tion. 

The division of frequencies in the so-callqd continental 
band between the several countries of the North American 
continent had not then been made and was iiot made until 
March 1, 1929. Under all the circumstances it was then 
impossible, in the state of the record as it existed, to know 
whether the frequencies to be awarded to the Universal 
Company and for the Press would so deplete the frequencies 
available as to make impossible the granting of RCA’s 
applications as made, and it was impossible to know if the 
frequencies to be awarded the Universal Company or for 
the Press were those sought by RCA. 

In the state of the record so made, RCA could neither 
appeal nor know the specific frequencies or j;he number of 
frequencies remaining available for the deipands of itself 
or other applicants. 

Thereafter the Commission designated May 22, 
102 1929, for further hearing of applicant^ for construc¬ 

tion permits and licenses for the use of high fre¬ 
quencies for point-to-point communication within the United 
States, and pursuant to notice the Appellant and others 
appeared and were heard. 

The record shows that the Commission, at the hearing on 
May 22, 1929, ruled that the applications theft to be heard 
concerned only the frequencies remaining after forty un¬ 
designated frequencies on a separation basis of two-tenths 
of one per cent had been awarded to Universal Wireless 
Communications Company, Inc., and twenty undesignated 
frequencies on the same separation basis had been awarded 
for the benefit of the press and to a corporation to be or¬ 
ganized by and for the press; that the Appellant objected 
and excepted to such ruling; stating that the hward of such 

i 

i 

i 

i 

i 


84 


INTERCITY RADIO TELEGRAPH CO. ET AL. VS. 


a number of frequencies would so reduce the number of 
frequencies available that Appellant’s amended applica¬ 
tions could not be granted as made. Appellant says that 
the failure of the Commission to grant or to deny RCA’s 
applications, December 22, 1928, when the Commission de¬ 
clared its intent to award the frequencies in the number 
aforesaid to the Universal Company and for the press, and 
the refusal of the Commission on May 22, 1929, to deter¬ 
mine the relative merits of Appellant’s applications and 
those of the Universal Company and of the press, and the 
award on June 7, 1929, of designated frequencies to the 
Universal Company and the award on June 20, 1929, of 
designated frequencies for the benefit of the press have pre¬ 
vented RCA’s applications and the Appellant ’s ever being 
considered by the Commission in comparison with those of 
the Universal Company and the press, or if so considered 
on December 22, 1928, RCA was thereby effectively, wrong¬ 
fully and illegally denied its statutory right of appeal, the 
Commission having failed then and there to act upon its 
applications. 

103 Appellant says that such result is not in accord¬ 
ance with public interest, convenience and necessity, 
and it prays this Honorable Court to hear and to determine 
the relative merits of the Appellant’s applications and those 
of the Universal Company and of the press or that it direct 
the Federal Radio Commission so to do. 

2. The record discloses that the organization of which 
the Appellant is a part and is the radio operating subsidi¬ 
ary has had long experience in the art of radio communica¬ 
tion, is a leader in such art, has a position in the art recog¬ 
nized the world around, has demonstrated the technical skill 
of its engineering and operating staffs, has ample financial 
ability, has thousands of customers, operates radio services 
to thirty foreign countries, has spent large sums of money 
and years of time developing radio apparatus necessary 
for domestic point-to-point service, is able to render such 
service acceptably, is now successfully operating the long¬ 
est and most difficult domestic circuit possible to establish 
in the United States—that between New York and San 
Francisco—has an established record of always having 
brought reduced rates and better service wherever it has 


FEDERAL RADIO COMMISSION. 


85 


i 

i 

i 

i 


gone, and by developing new reservoirs of traffic has 
diminished neither the gross nor the net revenues of its 
competitors, urgently needs domestic outlet^ so that the 
public may have the benefit of its world-wide wireless sys¬ 
tem and that without domestic radio outlets its interna¬ 
tional services may be strangled by its competitors upon 
which otherwise it must depend for domestic service. 

On such a record Appellant submits that the public in¬ 
terest, convenience and necessity would be better served 
by granting from the all too few frequencies available, 
facilities to it sufficient to meet its requirements and 
104 in accordance with its applications rhther than to 
deny it, and to grant such frequencies t|o: 

(a) The Universal Wireless Communications Company, 
Inc., an organization shown by the record to be without ac¬ 
tual operating experience, and which has not demonstrated 
by service its ability to serve; 

(b) The press, or for the press, which on the record has 
no corporate communications organization, ^nd which by 
its own showing intends to use the facilities dedicated by 
the Federal Radio Act to the service of all t^ie public for 
the use and benefit of only such class of the public as is 
engaged in publication or in the operation of news agencies; 

(c) The Western Radio & Telegraph Coniipany, which 
on its own showing intends to use the frequeiicies awarded 
to it for the benefit of a limited part of the public interested, 
in a particular field of work only. 

3. Available frequencies being all too few; to meet the 
needs of all who seek them, Appellant urges that public in¬ 
terest, convenience and necessity would best! be served if 
the Federal Radio Commission and this Honorable Court 
would apply the principle following: 

No frequency will be granted to any organization unless 
that organization has adequate facilities and a demonstrated 
ability to serve and has the obligation under th$ law to serve 
all the public equally, fairly, and without discrimination. 

The application of any other principle would make the 
government the instrumentality for bringing about the very 
discrimination the Radio Act was designed to prevent. 

4. Appellant urges that the limitations on the number of 
.available frequencies as disclosed by the record makes the 


86 


INTERCITY RADIO TELEGRAPH CO. ET AL. YS. 


public interest, convenience and necessity to be best served 
when allocations are so made; 

105 (a) That their use is open to all classes of the 
public and for their benefit as contradistinguished 

from a use limited to a particular class or part of the public. 

The evidence discloses that the Appellant is a public 
service corporation engaged as such exclusively in public 
service radio communications. That the frequencies ap¬ 
plied for by it, if granted, will be used in a domestic point- 
to-point service open to all classes of the public upon equal 
terms. 

(b) That in order that the public may be best served by 
a domestic point-to-point system, such system should be 
used in conjunction with a public international point-to- 
point radio communication system. That by such use of a 
domestic system, interior cities embraced within the sys¬ 
tem would be given advantages of transoceanic communi¬ 
cation now enjoyed by the cities of New York, San Fran¬ 
cisco, Washington, and Boston only. That for the efficient 

use of such domestic svstem in connection with a trails- 

* 

oceanic system, control of both systems by the same agency 
is necessary. 

The evidence shows that the Appellant maintains and 
operates for the public direct, commercial, international 
radio communication services between the United States 

i 

and thirty countries in Europe, Asia, Africa, North and 
South America, and is the only company that at this time 
maintains such transoceanic services. 

(c) That their use may be supplemented by a secondary 
daytime use of frequencies assigned primarily to interna¬ 
tional point-to-point service. Unless they be so allocated 
and used, the limited number of frequencies available for 
domestic point-to-point communication service will not be 
at all adequate for a domestic point-to-point communication 
service between the chief commercial centers of the United 

States. 

106 The evidence shows that such daytime use of fre¬ 
quencies assigned to and used in international night¬ 
time service, is only practicable where the same operating 
agency conducts such double use and that Appellant is the 
owner and operator of stations using, under license, in inter¬ 
national communication service, frequencies that it could, 



FEDERAL RADIO COMMISSION. 


87 


and that its application to the Commission stated it would, if 
authorized, use in connection with the frequencies requested 
for its domestic point-to-point system. That bty the assign¬ 
ment of frequencies for domestic point-to-point communi¬ 
cation service to applicants unable to supplement their use 
with frequencies previously assigned for and qsed in inter¬ 
national point-to-point communication service, and by deny¬ 
ing such frequencies to this Appellant, the Commission pre¬ 
vents the fullest effective use, both of international and of 
domestic frequencies; 

(d) That awards of frequencies should be niade to those 
who are legally, financially, technically, and frpm the view¬ 
point of experience and demonstrated ability! are capable 
of making the best use thereof. 

The evidence shows that the Appellant is financially able 
to incur, not only the expense necessary to install, but also 
to maintain through the initial years of unprofitable de¬ 
velopment, a full and adequate domestic point-to-point com¬ 
munication system; that it has had an experience excelled 
by no other organization in the art of radio communication 
in the world, and has demonstrated its ability therein, and 
possesses the legal right to manufacture and use all requi¬ 
site devices and apparatus for the most modern and efficient 
system of radio communication. 

To the extent that the Commission denied jthe construc¬ 
tion permits and frequencies requested by the Ap- 
107 pellant, the Commission disregarded the above- 
enumerated considerations and such action of the 
Commission was, and is, contrary to public interest, con¬ 
venience and necessity. 

5. The Federal Radio Commission in granting to others 
the frequencies applied for by and denied to Ajppellant, pre¬ 
vented the establishment of a comprehensive domestic 
point-to-point communication system for use iin connection 
with a world-wide transoceanic radio communication sys¬ 
tem, and the Commission’s action in so granting to others 
and refusing Appellant the use of said frequencies, was con¬ 
trary to public interest, convenience and necessity. 

6. The Appellant states that it is in the public interest, 
-convenience and necessity that in the operation and mainte¬ 
nance of its transoceanic radio communication system, Ap¬ 
pellant .should have under its ownership, management and 




88 


INTERCITY RADIO TELEGRAPH CO. ET AL. VS. 


control a comprehensive domestic point-to-point system as 
a means for the collection and delivery of messages of the 
public, and that the actions and orders of the Commission 
herein complained of have prevented the establishment 
of such an adequate system. 

7. Appellant states that the decision of the Federal Radio 
Commission of June 10, 1929, in denying the licenses, con¬ 
struction permits and frequencies requested by the Appel¬ 
lant, as aforesaid is contrary to and not warranted by the 
evidence in the record. That said decision as aforesaid is 
contrary to law and is against the public interest, conveni¬ 
ence and necessity, and in violation of the rights of this 
Appellant. 

Because of the reasons herein set forth and those appear¬ 
ing in the record of the hearings before the Commission 
of Appellant and other applicants for assignment of 
108 frequencies for domestic point-to-point service, Ap¬ 
pellant, R. C. A. Communications, Inc., prays this 
Honorable Court to entertain and consider this, its appeal, 
and to enter such order as vrill require the Federal Radio 
Commission to grant to Appellant such licenses and con¬ 
struction permits and requisite frequencies, in addition to 
those already granted Appellant, as will enable Appellant 
to establish the domestic point-to-point communication sys¬ 
tem by it requested of the Commission and hereinabove 
set forth. 

R. C. A. COMMUNICATIONS, INC., 
By SWAGAR SHERLEY, 

Its Attorney. 

MANTON DAVIS, 

Of Counsel. 

Verification. 

District of Columbia, ss: 

Loyd A Briggs, being duly sworn, deposes and says that 
he is Traffic Engineer of R. C. A. Communications, Inc., and 
as such is in charge of the selection and designation of, and 
application for radio frequencies used and sought by the 
Appellant; that he has read the foregoing notice of appeal 
and reasons therefor; that the matters and things therein 
set forth on personal knowledge are true and those therein 



FEDERAL RADIO COMMISSION. 


89 


stated on information and belief he verily believes to be 
true. 

LOYD Aj BRIGGS. 

i 

j 

Subscribed and sworn to before me this 27th i day of June, 
1929. | 

JOSEPHINE L. HAYES, 

Notary Public, D. C. 


109 Notice to Federal Radio Commission. 

i 

The Federal Radio Commission will please take notice 
that the foregoing Notice of Appeal and Reasons Therefor 
will be filed by R. C. A. Communications, Inc.,j forthwith in 
the Court of Appeals of the District of Columbia, pursuant 
to the provisions of the Radio Act of February 27, 1927, 
and amendments thereto. 

SWAGAR SHERLEY, 
Attorney for Appellant. 

MANTON DAVIS, 

Of Counsel. 


Certificate. 

\ 

District of Columbia, ss: 

i 

The undersigned, Swagar Sherley, personally appearing 
before me Josephine L. Hayes, a notary public in and for 
the District of Columbia, being first duly svrorn, deposes 
and says that he is one of the attorneys for R. C. A. Com¬ 
munications, Inc., appellant herein, and that the foregoing 
is a true copy of the notice of appeal and reasons therefor 
to be filed forthwith in the Court of Appeals ip the District 
of Columbia. 

SWAGAR SHERLEY. 


Subscribed and sworn to before me this 27th day of June, 
1929. 

JOSEPHINE L. HAYES, 

Notary Pyblic, D. C. 





90 


INTERCITY RADIO TELEGRAPH CO. ET AL. VS. 


Acknowledgment of Service. 

Service of a certified copy of the foregoing Notice of 
Appeal and Reasons Therefor is acknowledged this 27th 
day of June, 1929. 


110 In the Court of Appeals, District of Columbia. 

No. 4991. 

Mackay Radio and Telegraph Company, Appellant, 

against 

Federal Radio Commission, Appellee. 

Notice of Appeal to the Court of Appeals, District of Co¬ 
lumbia, and Reasons Therefor . 

Now comes Mackay Radio and Telegraph Company, ap¬ 
plicant-appellant in the above entitled proceeding, and says 
that it is aggrieved by the order of the Federal Radio Com¬ 
mission rendered herein against it on June 10, 1929, notice 
of which order was received by appellant on June 23, 1929, 
and appeals therefrom and assigns in support thereof the 
reasons hereinafter set forth: 

The reason for this appeal is that the Federal Radio 
Commission has refused to grant to Mackay Radio and Tel¬ 
egraph Company the share of available frequencies or wave 
length to which it is justly, legally and equitably entitled, 
and which are necessary to enable Mackay Radio and Tele¬ 
graph Company to continue and develop its existing busi¬ 
ness as a communication company actually engaged in ren¬ 
dering public point to point radio service in the United 
States, but on the contrary has granted practically all of 
the wave lengths or frequencies available for point to point 
service to other companies, not heretofore engaged in ren¬ 
dering point to point radio service in this country, with the 
result and effect of hindering and preventing the normal 
and reasonable development of Mackay Radio and Tele- 



FEDERAL RADIO COMMISSION. 


91 


j 
i 
I 

i 
| 

graph service to the public, and thereby impairing the value 
of its existing facilities against public interest, convenience 
and necessity. 

The radio communication business of Mackay Radio and 
Telegraph Company has been built up at great Expense and 
as a result of seventeen years of consistent effort and 
111 public service. During the year 1928, approximate¬ 
ly 800,000 messages were sent by its radio point to 
point system. There is and can be no complaint as to its 
service. It numbers among its customers some 8000 lead¬ 
ing institutions including banks, insurance companies and 
brokerage houses which regard the Mackay Radio and Tel¬ 
egraph Company as the accepted means of transmitting 
messages between their offices. Through its affiliation with 
Postal Telegraph and Cable Company it has and will have 
available an elaborate service for the pick-up and delivery 
of messages. An extension of the service of Mackay Radio 
and Telegraph Company to other important points in the 
United States will increase the usefulness to the public of 
the Company’s radio facilities and will enable postal Tele¬ 
graph and Cable Company to overcome difficulties created 
by storms, floods, fires and other disasters causing destruc¬ 
tion of pole lines and disruption of service. By the action 
of the Radio Commission Mackay Radio and Telegraph 
Company has not only been denied the frequencies or wave 
lengths necessary to enable it to carry on and extend its 
present service in a normal and reasonable manner, but it 
has been denied even an equal opportunity with others, who 
have subsequently come into the field, to develop its facili¬ 
ties and widen its sphere of usefulness in the public service. 

The decision of the Radio Commission in: refusing to 
grant any additional frequencies to Mackay Rhdio and Tel¬ 
egraph Company for point to point service iii the United 
States arbitrarily and unjustifiably and contrary to the 
principles of the Radio Act limits the Company to its pres¬ 
ent facilities against public interest, convenience and neces¬ 
sity. | 

Because of the reasons herein set forth Mackay Radio 
and Telegraph Company has appealed from the refusal of 
the Federal Radio Commission to allow it any wave lengths 

| 

i 

i 

I 


i 


92 


INTERCITY RADIO TELEGRAPH CO. ET AL. VS. 


or frequencies for the development and extension of its 
present service. 

MACKAY RADIO AND TELEGRAPH 
COMPANY, 

By COVINGTON, BURLING & RUBLEE, 
HUGHES, SCHURMAN & DWIGHT, 

Its Attorneys. 

State of New York, 

County of New York , ss: 


112 A. Y. Tuel, being duly sworn, deposes and says 
that he is Vice-President of Mackay Radio and Tele¬ 
graph Company, the applicant-appellant herein, that he has 
read the foregoing notice of appeal and reasons therefor 
and knows the contents thereof; that the same is true to his 
own knowledge except as to the matters therein stated to 
be alleged upon information and belief and that as to those 
matters he believed it to be true. 

A. Y. TUEL, 

I 7 

Vice-President. 


Sworn to before me this 28 day of June, 1929. 

[Seal of Lelia Wellington, Notary Public, New 

York County.] 

LELIA WELLINGTON, 
Notary Public, New York County. 

New York County Clerk’s No. 130. 

New York Register’s No. 0-50. 

Commission expires March 30, 1930. 

Notice to Federal Radio Commission. 

Federal Radio Commission will please take notice that 
the foregoing notice of appeal and reasons therefor will be 
filed forthwith in the Court of Appeals of the District of 
Columbia pursuant to the provisions of the Radio Act of 
February 23, 1927, as amended. 

Covington, burling & rublee, 

HUGHES, SCHURMAN & DWIGHT, 

Attorneys for Applicant-Appellant, 
Mackay Radio and Telegraph Company. 



FEDERAL RADIO COMMISSION. 


93 


i 

i 


i 


113 Certificate . 

Personally appeared before me, Pearl M. Hhuser, a No¬ 
tary Public in and for the District of Columbia, Allen S. 
Hubbard, who, being first duly sworn, deposes and says 
that he is a member of the firm of Hughes, jSchurman & 
Dwight and is one of the attorneys for Mackay Radio and 
Telegraph Company, applicant-appellant herein, and that 
the foregoing is a true copy of the notice of appeal and rea¬ 
sons therefor to be filed forthwith in the Court of Appeals 
of the District of Columbia. 

ALLEN S. HUBBARD. 

v 

Subscribed and sworn to before me, this 29th day of June, 
1929. 

I 

[Seal of Pearl M. Hauser, Notary Public,jDistrict 

of Columbia.] 

PEARL M. HAUSER, 

Notary Public, D. C. 

Service of certified copy of the foregoing notice of appeal 
and reasons therefor is acknowledged this 29th day of June, 
1929. 

FEDERAL RADIO COMMISSION, 
By B. M. WIKAR, Jr. 

i 

i 

114 [Endorsed:] Court of Appeals, District of Colum¬ 
bia. Filed June 29, 1929. Henry W. Hodges, Clerk. 

i 

i 

i 

! 

i 

i 

i 

i 

j 

i 


i 

i 

I 


i 

i 

i 

i 




In the Court of Appeals of the District 

of Columbia 


- \ ' No. 4987 ' 

Intercity Radio Telegraph Company, appellant 


Federal Radio Commission 


Wireless Telegraph^ & . Communications Com¬ 
pany, appellant 


Federal Radio Commission 


R. C. A. Communications, Inc., appellant 


Federal Radio Commission 


Mackay Radio & Telegraph Company, appellant 


Federal Radio Commission 


STATEMENT OF FACTS AND GROUNDS FOR DECISIONS 
OF FEDERAL RADIO COMMISSION ' 


Filed in Each of the Above-Entitled Causes Pursuant to Section 16 
" of the Radio Act of 1927, as amended 








TABLE OF CONTENTS 


I 

I 



| 

| 


l 

I 

j 

i 

i 

i 

i 

Page 


I. Preliminary Statement Showing Nature and Scope' of 

Appeals_ L _ 1 

II. Historical Considerations Bearing Upon the Decisions! 5 

III. Analysis of Applications and Decisions_i 15 

A. Intercity Radio Telegraph Company Applications__ 15 

B. Wireless Telegraph & Communications Company 

Applications_j_ 20 

C. Intercity Radio Telegraph Company and Wireless 

Communication Company—Combined Proposal- 23 

D. The Mackay Radio & Telegraph Company Appli¬ 

cations_|_ 24 

E. The R. C. A. Communications, Inc., Applications.- 25 

F. Communications Agencies not Parties to Appeals-. 27 

1. Universal Wireless Communication Compahy. 27 

2. Reservation for Press or the Press Communica¬ 

tion Companies_L— 31 

3. The Western Radio Telegraph Company_j_ 32 

IV. Action of the Commission with Reference to Applications 

of Appellants_j_ 34 

A. Intercity Radio Telegraph Company_I_ 34 

B. Wireless Telegraph & Communications Coinpanjy_ 35 

C. Intercity Radio Telegraph Company and Wireless 

Telegraph Company—Combined Proposal_j_ 36 

D. The Mackay Radio & Telegraph Company_j 36 

E. R. C. A. Communications, Inc_! 37 

F. Summary of Domestic Communication Systems 

Authorized .by the Commission_j_ 41 

V. Limitations Imposed Upon the Commission Prior to any 

Consideration Upon the Merits_j_ 42 

A. Limitations Imposed by Law_!_ 43 

1. Limitations imposed by international law land 

treaty obligation_j_ 43 

a. International Convention_!_ 43 

b. North American Agreement-j_ 54 

2. Limitations imposed under Section 6 of! the 

• Radio Act_I— 57 

3. Summary_4— 61 

63493—29 - 1 (!) 


I 

i 


I 


I 























II 



V. Limitations Imposed Upon the Commission Prior to any 

Consideration Upon the Merits—Continued. Page 

B. Limitations Imposed by Physical and Scientific 

Factors_ 62 

1. The necessity for a standard channelling 

system_ 62 

a. What is a radio-communication channel?- 63 

b. Need there be a uniform system of station 

band allocation?_ 69 

c. What shall be the width of standard 

station bands?_ 71 

d. What is the effect of the standard station 

band system on the availability of 
station bands?_ 75 

2. Technical limitations on duplication of service 

on the same station band_ 76 

3. Technical limitations on the secondary use of 

international station bands for domestic use. 78 

C. Limitations Imposed by the Paramount Demands 

of Other Services_ 83 

1. As to medium high-frequencies_ 83 

a. Mobile services_ 84 

b. Amateurs_ 85 

c. Experimental visual broadcasting_ 87 

d. Experimental services_ 87 

e. Reduction of the general communication 

station bands_ SS 

2. As to low and intermediate frequencies_ 89 

VI. The Exercise of the Licensing Power- 91 

A. Basis of the Power_ 91 

B. Necessity for a Licensing Standard_ 92 

C. The Application of the Standard is a Fact-Finding 

Function in Each Case and the Standard is not 
Susceptible of Explicit Definition_ 92 

D. There are Certain Undisputed Rules for the Appli¬ 

cation of the Standard_ 94 


1. Point to point domestic communication facili¬ 
ties should, in the main, be granted only to 
general public service and limited public serv¬ 


ice communication companies- 95 

a. The press communication classification_ 96 

2. The statutory standard must be applied from a 

national viewpoint_ 100 

a. The Western Radio Telegraph Company.. _ 101 

b. The Intercity Radio Telegraph Company... 104 

c. The Mackay Radio & Telegraph Company. 105 























m 


QS 


VI. The Exercise of the Licensing Power—Continued. 

E. The Application of the Statutory Standard to 

Point to Point Domestic Communication_j_ 

1. Economic considerations_j_. 

a. Existing communication facilities must be 

considered_1_ 

b. The international communications of an 

applicant for domestic service must 
be considered__ 

c. Competition between radio services must 

be considered_[_ 

d. A proposal should conform generally to 

sound economic principles_|_ 

2. Technical Considerations_[_ 

a. Preliminary_4_ 

b. Service-station band ratio_}_ 

c. Development possibilities_ \ _ 

d. Technical resources__ j_ 

e. Technical feasibility of the plan_ 

f. Coherence__ 

F. The Decisions of the Commission_j__ 

1. The decisions of December 22, 1928. 

a. In general___ 

b. The Universal Wireless Communications 

Company, Inc_ 

c. The press communication companies. J.. 

2. The decisions of June 7 and 10, 1929_ 

a. In general_ 

b . R. C. A. Communications, Inc_ 

c. The Mackay Radio & Telegraph Com¬ 

pany... j— 

d. The Intercity Radio Telegraph Company 

and the Wireless Telegraph Comnjiu- 
nications Company_j_ 

e. The Western Radio & Telegraph Cojm- 

pany.. 

3. The press communication classification j of 

June 20, 1929_ 

VII. Conclusion_ 

A. As to Finality of Decisions_ 

B. As to Finality of Definitions_ 

C. As to Revision of Decisions_ 

VIII. Appendix... 


‘1 


A. Analysis of applications on page 2 of Notice of 

Appeal, Intercity Company_L. 

B. Analysis of application refusals not appealed from, 

Intercity Company- 

C. Index to applications analysis by frequencies, Inter¬ 

city Company_j— 


Pas« 

106 

107 

107 


110 

113 

114 
116 
116 
117 

117 

118 

119 

120 
120 
121 
121 

122 

126 

126 

126 

128 

131 


132 

136 

136 

138 

138 

138 

139 

140 

140 

144 

146 


i 

i 



































IV 



VIII. Appendix—Continued. p a w 

D. Index to applications analysis by number, Inter¬ 

city Company_ 148 

E. Licensing History of Intercity Company stations.. 149 

F. Analysis of Mackay Company applications_ 153 

G. History of Licenses, Mackay Company_ 155 

H. Analysis of R. C. A. applications..Face.. 162 

I. Analysis of Western company applications. Face.. 162 

J. Text of North American Agreement_ 163 

K. List of Frequencies Designated by Executive Order 

of March 30, 1928_ 168 

L. General Order 62_ 169 

M. Frequency versus distance table, 1,500 to 6,000 kilo¬ 

cycles. 171 

N. Frequency versus distance table, 6,000 to 23,000 

kilocycles_ 172 

O. Skip-distance and distance-effect graph.._ Face.. 172 

P. General Order 55_ 173 

Q. Conditions attached to construction permits of 

Universal Company_ 176 

R. List of United States station bands, showing desig¬ 

nations_ 177 


INDEX TO STATEMENT—BY COMPANIES 

APPELLANTS 


Intercity Radio Telegraph Company: 

Applications summarized_ 15 

Applications analyzed_ 140-148 

Combined proposal summarized_ 23 

Action of the commission stated_34, 36 

Continuance of existing system explained_ 104 

Reasons for adverse decision_ 132 

l _ 

Wireless Telegraph & Communications Company: 

Applications summarized_ 20 

Applications analyzed_ 140-148 

Combined proposal summarized_ 23 

Action of the commission stated_ 35, 36 

Reasons for adverse decision_ 132 

Mackay Radio & Telegraph Company: 

Applications summarized_ 24 

Applications analyzed_ 153 

Action of the commission stated_ 36 

Continuance of existing system explained_ 105 

Reasons for adverse decision_ 131 

R. C. A. Communications, Inc.: 

Applications summarized_ 25 

Applications analyzed_Face.. 167 

Action of the commission stated_ 37 

Reasons for decision_ 128 


































I 
i 

i 
j 

i 

I 

v 

COMPANIES NOT PARTIES TO APPEALS 

Universal Wireless Communications Co., Inc.: 

Decision stated_L _ 

Reasons for favorable decision_L. 122 

Western Radio Telegraph Company: 

Decision stated_ J— 32 

Applications analyzed_Face 161 

Reasons for favorable decision (including exception from 

nation-wide system requirement)_ \ 101,136 

The reservation for press communication: 

Decision stated_ i _ 31 

Reasons for classification (including limitations on broadest 

test of public service)_ j _ 96 

Decision of December 22, 1928_L_ 126 

Classification of June 20, 1929_ 4_ 136 


i 0 0 


Pact 

97 


i 

j 

i 


i 

i 


j 

i 


| 

i 

j 


i 


i 














In the Court of Appeals of the District 

of Columbia 


No. 4987 I 

Intercity Radio Telegraph Company, appellant 

v. ! 

i 

Federal Radio Commission 


No. 4988 

Wireless Telegraph & Communication^ Com- 

pany, appellant 

v . j 

Federal Radio Commission 


No. 4990 ! 

j 

R. C. A. Communications, Inc., appellant 

v. 

j 

Federal Radio Commission 


No. 4991 | 

i 

Mackay Radio & Telegraph Company, appellant 

v . | 

Federal Radio Commission 

i 

— 

STATEMENT OF FACTS AND GROUNDS FOE DECISIONS 
OF FEDERAL RADIO COMMISSION | 

Filed Pursuant to Section 16 of the Radio Act of 1927, as amended 

i ! 

I 

preliminary statement showing nature and 

SCOPE OF APPEALS 

i 

These appeals are based upon decisions of the 

Commission refusing certain applications for licenses 

(i) 





and construction permits involving the use of fre¬ 
quencies for point to point communication within 
the United States. While, in each case, certain ap¬ 
plications have been denied, appellants rely in part 
on action of the Commission with reference to ap¬ 
plications which are not before the Court on these 
appeals. This necessitates an explanation of prior 
decisions granting certain applications in this field; 
and, since appellants are competitors for licenses and 
permits authorizing the use of frequencies for domes¬ 
tic point to point communication, it is necessary to 
set forth the underlying facts and considerations 
which governed the decisions from which these ap¬ 
peals are taken. 

This statement is offered in this form to clarify 
the facts and legal issues presented for review on 
each of these appeals, but it does not constitute an 
abandonment of the position heretofore maintained 
by the Commission that an appellant can not, under 
Section 16 of the Act, appeal from action of the 
Commission denying or granting the application of 
another applicant. The Act makes no provision for 
joint or consolidated appeals, giving the Court the 
power to make a comparative review. Nevertheless, 
on these appeals, because the facts before the Com¬ 
mission were substantially identical in each case, the 
statement of facts and grounds for decisions applies 
in each of the four appeals, except where distinguish¬ 
ing facts and considerations are expressly indicated.. 

Since appellants rely not only upon decisions deny¬ 
ing their applications, but also upon decisions here- 



3 

j 

j 

tofore rendered granting other applications for the 
same type of service, it is apparent their attack 
involves and requires an explanation of all action 

I 

taken by the Commission with reference to domestic 
service. 

j 

Although the Act presupposes a Commission of 
competent experts, acting impartially with refer¬ 
ence to all the technical and historical considera¬ 
tions in reaching its judgment on the public interest 
in each case, the appellate provision of the Act 
(Section 16) recognizes the possibility of error and 
vests the court with wide powder of revieW. For 
an intelligent review of the action of ap expert 
administrative body, to determine whether the 
judgment of the licensing authority is supported 
by relevant and competent evidence in th^ record, 
it is necessary for the Court to have a statement 
of the facts and considerations w T hich the adminis- 
trative body found controlling. This is especially 
true in a case of this character where appellants 
were competitors for the same facilities and where 

i 

the Commission at all stages appears in an iknpartial 
capacity. The individual appellants will present 
the arguments and evidence supporting the separate 
applications; it is the duty of the Commission to 
furnish the comparative study on which its judg¬ 
ment was based. 

Before stating the facts and grounds for decisions, 
the Commission respectfully shows this Honorable 
Court that its judgment can only relate to the 
applications of these appellants which were refused 

I 

i 

i 

j 

i 



4 



by the Commission. It can not relate to decisions 
which were rendered granting or refusing the appli¬ 
cations of other applicants; for (1) Section 16 of the 
Act specifically limits the appeal to applications of 
an appellant which were refused, and (2) any other 
judgment would constitute a determination of the 
rights of parties which are not and can not be brought 
before the Court on these appeals. 

By virtue of decisions of the Commission, certain 
other applicants have been granted rights to con¬ 
struct new stations or to operate existing stations 
using frequencies and power and communicating 
between points designated by the Commission. As 
against the regulatory power of the United States, 
the Commission submits no property rights have 
been granted; as against other appellants seek¬ 
ing the same or similar privileges it is apparent 
certain rights have been created. Therefore, when 
parties other than appellants are mentioned herein, 
it is only for the purpose of showing the Court what 
has heretofore been done. Such parties are not and 
can not be impleaded herein, and their interests can 
not be effected by these appeals. 

While the Commission recognizes the power of 
review conferred on this Court and welcomes an 
exercise of the same on these appeals, the Com¬ 
mission submits that its findings of fact must be left 
undisturbed. By giving the Commission special 
facilities for collecting all the facts with reference to 
radio communication, Congress presumably intended 
that the findings of the Commission should have 



5 


binding force, unless it is plain from an examination 
of the record that such findings were reached arbi¬ 
trarily and capriciously and without reference to the 
evidence. Although the reviewing power | of this 
Court is larger than that ordinarily conferred in 
appeals of this character, it was never intended tnat 
findings of the Commission should have no weight. 
If not absolutely binding, where they are supported 
by competent evidence, they at least h^ve the 
authority usually accorded to the findings of a jury 
or the findings of a special master. 

Moreover, partial review of the findings: of fact, 
especially in these cases, would have the effect of 
compelling the Commission to revise its allocation, 
although such revision by the Commission would 
necessarily affect rights conferred on other applicants. 
The judgment of the Court would therefore indirectly 
amount to an adjudication of the rights of parties 
not before it, and the Commission would be faced 
with numerous legal obstacles to the exercise of the 
authority conferred upon it by the Act. 

11 I 

HISTORICAL CONSIDERATIONS BEARING TJPdN THE 

DECISIONS 

i 

The applications involved herein relate! to do¬ 
mestic point to point communication by companies 
already engaged, or proposing to engage, in such 
communication on a public service basis. It is 
therefore unnecessary to discuss the development of 
transoceanic, marine, aircraft, broadcasting, and 
other services, except in so far as the sanie has a 



bearing on the action of the Commission with refer¬ 
ence to the domestic public service field. 

R. C. A. Communications, Inc., is a subsidiary of 
Radio Corporation of America, a company which 
has been engaged in point to point communication 
for a decade. Its facilities for transmission between 
ships at sea and between ships and coastal stations 
have been transferred to Radiomarine Corporation, a 
subsidiary, whereas the assets employed in its far 
reaching and well developed transoceanic service 
have been transferred to appellant, R. C. A. Com¬ 
munications, Inc. Until recently, and then on a 
very limited scale, neither Radio Corporation of 
America nor any subsidiary or agency thereof has 
been engaged in domestic communication. R. C. A. 
now operates a circuit between New York and San 
Francisco, using high frequency channels heretofore 
designated primarily for its transoceanic service. 

By virtue of (1) patents it owns or controls, (2) 
traffic and other agreements between it and foreign 
communication agencies, (3) the resources at its dis¬ 
posal by arrangement with leading manufacturing 
companies, and (4) the energy and ability of its execu¬ 
tives and employees, R. C. A., in a period of ten years, 
has become a dominant figure among the great com¬ 
munication companies of the world, and at the same 
time it has developed a marine service of unques¬ 
tioned excellence and utility. This unusual develop¬ 
ment at home and abroad in fields of communication 
requiring immediate attention partly explains its 
delay in filing applications based upon a considered 



t 


1 /'i *7 

jlL I 


program for domestic development. But more po¬ 
tent factors, the extreme shortage of low-frequency 
channels and the great expense involved! in the 
erection and operation of low-frequency apparatus, 
governed, and for a period required, the delay. 

Owing to the undeveloped state of the art, prior to 
1927 practically all communication on a commercial 

i 

scale was carried on by means of low-frequency 
channels, that is, channels having a frequency of 

i 

less than 550 kilocycles per second; and the equip- 

i 

ment required to carry on efficient and continuous 
long-distance communication on low frequencies was 
almost prohibitive in cost. A single complete instal¬ 
lation of low-frequency apparatus (i. e., ohe trans¬ 
mitter, one antenna, for use on a single frequency) 
adequate for efficient and uninterrupted long-distance 
service cost approximately $1,500,000. Partly for 
this reason, commercial communication has until 
recently been unprofitable. 

For certain purposes, under certain conditions, and 
between certain points, low-frequency transmission is 
still employed. But for ordinary use in commercial 
service between relatively distant points high fre- 
quencies are almost universally used. a| modern 
high-frequency transmitter is less expensive and much 
more efficient. But the use of high frequencies 
depended upon developments in the art,; 1 and the 
transition from the old to the new form of transmis¬ 
sion has required time and expense. 

Low-frequency transmission was affected by an¬ 
other limitation which is partly responsible for the 



delay in development of domestic service. Practi¬ 
cally all available low frequencies were in use for old 
established services, mobile and fixed, and it was 
therefore impracticable if not impossible to inaugu¬ 
rate a new and extensive domestic service requiring 
additional low frequencies. Hence development in 
the art making a number of short waves available 
made it possible to reconsider and develop programs 
for satisfactory domestic service. 

In spite of the limitations hereinabove indicated 
and more fully explained in Part V of this statement, 
domestic service reaching a limited number of cities 
had been successfully developed prior to the Com¬ 
mission’s decisions of June 7 and 10, 1929. 

The Federal Telegraph Company of California has 
operated a successful point to point service between 
Portland, San Francisco and Los Angeles, with land 
line connections reaching Seattle, and San Diego, 
since about 1911. Before August, 1927, when the 
assets of the company which were employed in 
marine and point to point service were purchased by 
Mackay Radio and Telegraph Company, Inc., the 
Federal Company actively competed with the land 
lines of the Western Union and Postal systems, and 
in 1927 it transmitted approximately 800,000 mes¬ 
sages at rates lower than those charged by the tele¬ 
graph companies. Since 1927 the company has been 
operated as part of the Mackay system, and the 
applications which were denied June 7, 1929, repre¬ 
sent its program for expansion in the domestic field. 



I 


**• *-» 


, I 

I 
I 

The Intercity Radio Telegraph Company has been 
licensed to use low and high frequency channels in 
the point to point service it has established ajb Cleve¬ 
land, Buffalo, Duluth, Columbus, and Detroit, and it 
has purchased the station of the Chicago Federation 
of Labor at Chicago and has certain traffic arrange¬ 
ments with other stations located at Rogejrs City, 
Michigan, and Sheboygan, Wisconsin. Applications 
involving a comprehensive extension of the Intercity 
Company's system were denied by the Commission 
on June 7,1929, from which this appeal is prosecuted. 

Before the advent of the Commission's i control, 
when the Department of Commerce had, limited 
authority to restrict the number and character of 
stations, and before the shortage of frequencies 
became critical, a number of private enterprises were 
licensed for point to point communication. Notable 
among these were several oil companies operating 

i 

in a section of the Southwest where other communica¬ 
tion facilities were not available. Western Radio and 
Telegraph Company, a merger of the communication 
interests of said oil companies, was authorised by a 
decision of June 7, 1929, to use low and high fre¬ 
quency channels in a public service communication 
business. I 

Because of the severe limitation on the number of 
available frequencies, the Commission has hot con¬ 
sidered that it would serve public interest to authorize 

i 

the use of frequencies- by private agencies, and it 

| 

has generally required proof that applicants were 
organized and qualified to carry on service on a public 

j 

i 

j 

i 

t 


i0‘9 







service basis as a prerequisite to favorable action on 
applications for point to point service. 

In this connection the Commission respectfully 
shows the Court that it did not before June 7, 1929, 
exercise its judgment with reference to the projects 
of the Federal or Intercity companies. The licenses 
of these companies were extended and enlarged to 
meet the requirements in the restricted localities 
where the companies operate, but in each case the 
service was first licensed and largely developed under 
authority issued prior to February 23, 1927, by the 
Department of Commerce. 

During the first year of its existence the Commis¬ 
sion felt obliged to recognize the pressing and para¬ 
mount interests of existing radio service. Broad¬ 
casting had been reduced to a state of chaos by 
the breakdown of governmental regulation; and the 
first step taken to correct the situation was a res¬ 
ervation of the frequencies between 550 kilocycles 
and 1,500 kilocycles for this type of service. Marine 
stations were usually licensed to use lovr-frequency 
channels, and licensing in this field continued under 
Commission control. High-frequency channels were 
sparingly granted, for the reason (1) that the Com¬ 
mission did not then think it was sufficiently well 
informed to make an allocation in this band; (2) it 
was the general principle to wdiich the Commission 
then adhered that licenses should not be granted 
where the projects involved duplication of existing 
communication facilities; (3) it had not been decided 
how many high frequencies would be required for 


11 



governmental service, aircraft, ships, etc.; (4) there 
was no general agreement among engineers as to the 
number of frequencies which were available, the 
separation it was necessary to maintain, the service 
and nuisance ranges of particular frequencies, etc.; 
and (5) until the proclamation of the International 
Radiotelegraph Convention in January, 1929, there 
was no authoritative guide by which frequencies, 
which have an international service and interference 
range, could be administered. 

All these factors were presented and discussed at 
great length during the general public hearings on 
short waves held by the Commission Janizary 17, 
and 18, 1928. At that time 148 individuals, repre¬ 
senting practically every radio interest in the Country, 
governmental as well as private, appeared j and re¬ 
ceived a hearing. j 

Charles E. Hughes, Jr., speaking for Mackay 
Radio & Telegraph Company, correctly sunlmarized 
the purpose of the hearing, as follows: 

This honorable body has proceeded with 
great circumspection in the assignment of these 
very scarce, relatively speaking, and,I because 
scarce, very valuable, short wave lengths. 
Any other policy would mean chaos and a 
congestion of the air that would make their 
use by anyone impracticable; and thi^ hearing 
has been brought on, as we understand it, in 
order that the relative public importance of 
the different applicants may be intelligently 
considered and air congestion and chaos may 
be avoided. 

C3493—29-2 

| 

| 

I 

! 




12 



In May, 1928, following additional hearings re¬ 
stricted to transoceanic communication, the Com¬ 
mission authorized certain companies, including 
Radio Corporation of America and Mackay Radio 
and Telegraph Company, Inc., to use frequencies 
above 6,000 kilocycles for transoceanic communica¬ 
tion. This was a field in which communication had 
been developed, both in this country and abroad, 
and in order to facilitate further development and to 
retain for the use of the United States an ample share 
of the high-frequency channels above 6,000 kilocycles, 
which have an international service and nuisance 
range, the Commission decided it would serve public 
interest to make an immediate allocation. 

At the same time the Commission was collecting 
information needed to guide it in acting with refer¬ 
ence to applications for domestic communication. 

A technical committee, composed of Captain S. C. 
Hooper, U. S. N., Drs. Dellinger and Jolliffe, of the 
Bureau of Standards, Mr. Downey, of the Radio 
Division, Department of Commerce, and Dr. Taylor, 
of the Naval Radio Research Laboratory, presented 
various recommendations dealing with underlying 
scientific considerations as well as the relative 
national importance of the various types of service. 
These recommendations recognized an order of 
precedence in the fixed and mobile bands. In the 
fixed band the order was as follows: 

(1) Government—National defense. 

(2) Government—Civil airways. 


13 


i 

i 

I 

i 



(3) Emergency communication systems* for 
emergency use only. 

(4) Systems for communicating where land- 
wire service impracticable or can not be secured 
and maintained without prohibitive expense. 

(5) Public service transoceanic ahd inter¬ 
continental radio service communication sys¬ 
tems. 

(6) Certain important experimental and de¬ 
velopment work. 

(7) Private transoceanic and intercontinen¬ 
tal radio communication for very important 
purposes of national interest, not well served 
by public service radio companies. 

(8) National (within the U. S.) radio com¬ 
munication, by radio companies, for public 
service in connection with wire lines. 

(9) National (within the U. S.) radio com¬ 
munication, by nonradio public service com¬ 
panies, for limited uses by special interests, 
which could be handled by wire or by public 
service radio companies. 

The suggested priority illustrates the fear of lead¬ 
ing radio men that there would be insufficient 
frequencies to satisfy the claims of all radio interests, 
and it constitutes their evaluation of the public 
interest supporting the applications of thej various 
services. Thereafter, in November, 1928, Vhen the 
frequencies appropriated by Executive Order for 
Governmental use were known, and after tlie Inter¬ 
national Radiotelegraph Convention had been rati¬ 
fied, Lieut. Commander T. A. M. Craven, IJ. S. N., 
technical advisor of the Commission, presented a 

i 

i 

i 

i 

. i 

i 

• i 

i 

i 

i 

i 


14 



comprehensive memorandum on the subject of 
high frequency allocation in the so-called continental 
band (between 1,500 kilocycles and 6,000 kilocycles), 
which had the approval of Dr. J. H. Dellinger, of the 
Bureau of Standards, who was then serving as the 
Commission’s Chief Engineer. 

As an introduction to his specific recommendations 
Commander Craven said: 

The high-frequency part of the radio 
spectrum must be considered largely experi¬ 
mental. This and other governments should 
tread with caution before final commitments 
are made so as to avoid the danger of guid¬ 
ing the art along fines so definite as to handi¬ 
cap technical progress. Any plan must be 
such as to provide for expansion and devel¬ 
opment in the future. It is necessary never¬ 
theless to decide something definite because 
at the present moment the demands are so 
insistent and so numerous that unless some 
general principles of allocation are adopted 
and enforced, there is grave danger of finding 
the situation in the high-frequency spectrum 
so confused and entangled as to reduce con¬ 
siderably its value as a medium of commu¬ 
nication. The same situation confronted the 
nations of the world at the International 
Radiotelegraph Conference at Washington 
a year ago. Since that time, the conditions 
have become more acute. Since high-fre¬ 
quency communication is more or less inter- 
! national in character because of the wide 
interference areas, it seems logical to apply 
closely the general recommendations of that 


Conference. Furthermore, in the more de¬ 
tailed application of these principles, this 
country must follow closely definite Arrange¬ 
ments made with our more immediate neigh¬ 
bors, Canada, Mexico, Cuba, and the West 
Indies. It is by following such arrangements, 
that some of the confusion can be avoided. 

Commander Craven's memorandum, approved by 
Dr. Dellinger, contained specific recommendations for 
the allocation of the so-called continental frequencies 
(1,500 kilocycles to 6,000 kilocycles) to thei various 
services. This memorandum, together with: the in¬ 
formation obtained from the short-wave hearings and 
the short-wave committee, persuaded the Commission 
that the public interest would be served by ai definite 
reservation of the frequencies in this band for each 
type of service. Specific frequencies in the band 
were reserved for marine stations and for aircraft and 
aeronautical stations. Certain frequencies were set 
aside for railroad, tug, and portable stations. Pro¬ 
vision was made for amateur and experimental sta¬ 
tions, as well as stations devoted to the interest of 
agriculture. And by General Order No. 55 specific 
frequencies were reserved for domestic point to point 
business; 70 frequencies were set aside for this 
purpose. 

Ill 

i 

ANALYSIS OP APPLICATIONS AND DECISIONS 
A. Intercity Radio Telegraph Company applications 


At the time of filing the applications herein dis¬ 
cussed, the Intercity Radio Telegraph Company was 
engaged in point to point communication by low- 





frequency radio at Cleveland, and Columbus, Ohio, 
Duluth, Minnesota, Detroit, Michigan, and Buffalo, 
New York. From time to time the company had 
arrangements for the interchange and delivery of 
.messages with privately operated stations at Rogers 
City and Wyandotte, Michigan, Sheboygan, Wis¬ 
consin, and Chicago, Illinois. 

A full description and history of this service and 
of others conducted by this company and of other 
companies hereinafter mentioned will be found infra 
at pages 34, 41, 149-152. 

The proposals on behalf of the Intercity Company 
for the extension of this service in so far as involved 
in this appeal are contained in two groups of appli¬ 
cations filed with the Commission. 

The first group of applications was filed during 
January, 1928, contemporaneous with the short wave 
hearings then held by the Commission. The plan 
presented involved the extension of the company’s 
netw r ork to New York City only and the designation 
of high frequencies for some of the existing stations. 
The proposed extension to New York is represented 
by two applications filed January 23, 1929. One of 
these is for a construction permit and is referred to by 
the seventh item on page 2 of the Intercity Company’s 
Notice of Appeal. The other application is for a 
license to operate the proposed station and is not 
referred to in the Notice. The frequencies requested 
to be designated are substantially as follows: In the 
international high-frequency band, 18,750, 11,540, 
8,330, and 6,520 kilocycles; in the intermediate 


17 



frequency band, 181.8 and 153.8 kilocycles. 1 The 
proposed designation of high frequencies for stations 
at cities already having Intercity stations is repre¬ 
sented by six applications, two for construction 
permits, and four for licenses. These applications 

i 

were filed January 14, 1928. By an application 
for a construction permit not referred to in the Notice 
and by the application for license referred to by the 


second item on page 2 thereof (but erroneously as 
filed in 1927), the Company requested the designation 
for use at Detroit, Michigan, of substantially the 
following frequencies in the international high- 
frequency range: 19,355, 11,765, 8,571.4,| 8,450, 
6,666.6, 6,590 kilocycles. 

By an application for a construction permit not 
referred to in the Notice and by the application for 
license referred to by the fourth item on page 2 
thereof, the Company requested the designation for 
use at Buffalo, New York, of substantially the follow- 

i 

ing frequencies in the international high-frequency 


1 The following nomenclature is henceforth used to clesignate 
the portions of the radio spectrum indicated: 

10-100 kc., low-frequency range. 

100-550 kc., intermediate-frequency range, j 
550-1,500 kc., broadcast-frequency range. 

1,500-6,000 kc., medium high-frequency range. 
6,000-23,000 kc., high-frequency range. 

23,000 kc. up, super-frequency range. 

Where frequencies are designated from the standpoint 
of their effective communication range— 

1,500-6,000 kc., domestic high-frequency. 
6,000-23,000 kc., international high-frequency. 


i 

I 

i 

! 

i 





range: 18,180; 11,320; 8,571.4; 8,220; 6,666.6, and 
6,450 kilocycles. By the application for license 
referred to by the first item on page 2 of the Notice, 
the Intercity Company requested the designation 
for use at Columbus, Ohio, of the following frequencies 
in the international high-frequency range: 12,000; 
8,571.4; and 6,666.6 kilocycles. (This application, 
though listed as bearing date of November 2, 1927, 
was nevertheless filed, as above stated, on January 
14, 1928.) By the application for license referred to 
by the third item on page 2 of the Notice, the Com¬ 
pany requested the designation for use at Cleveland, 
Ohio, of the following frequencies in the international 
high-frequency range: 17,650 and 11,110 kilocycles. 

Thus remained the status of the system proposal 
of the Company until the month of June, 1928, when 
it began the filing of a second group of applications. 
These are all applications for construction permits 
and they are referred to in the fifth and sixth, and 
in the eighth to twentieth items on page 2 of the Notice 
as bearing date of May 26, 1928. They w^ere filed 
with the Commission at various times from June 4 
to September 10, 1928. 

Stations are proposed at— 

Waco, Tex., to use 4 frequencies. 

Providence, R. I., to use 2 frequencies. 

New Orleans, La., to use 3 frequencies. 

Ft. Worth, Tex., to use 4 frequencies. 

Houston, Tex., to use 2 frequencies. 

Chicago, Ill., to use 3 frequencies. 

St. Louis, Mo., to use 3 frequencies. 



19 


i 

i 


Boston, Mass., to use 3 frequencies, j 

j 

New Bedford, Mass., to use 2 frequencies. 
Pittsburgh, Pa., to use 3 frequencies. I 
Galveston, Tex., to use 4 frequencies.: 
Memphis, Tenn., to use 3 frequencies. 
Atlanta, Ga., to use 3 frequencies. 

Baltimore, Md., to use 4 frequencies, j 
Philadelphia, Pa., to use 5 frequencies. 

Most of the frequencies mentioned in the applica¬ 
tions are in the international high-frequency range. 
Generally speaking, the frequencies requested are in 
the neighborhood of 15,000 and 8,000 kilocycles. For 
each station there is also requested one intermediate 
frequency. The requests, like those of January, do 
not conform to any uniform channeling scheme nor 
are they confined to frequencies set aside fyy Inter¬ 
national Convention for point to point services. 
They include frequencies reserved for mobile^ aircraft, 
foreign, government, and amateur stations. Most of 
the cities in which stations are sought to be built are 
cities wherein, by applications of January 12, 1928, 
and May 25, 1928, the George H. McFadden & Bro. 
Company, a cotton brokerage house, sought to con¬ 
struct stations for the handling of its private corre- 

i 

spondence to save its expensive telegraph; charges. 
All the cities mentioned in the McFadden applica- 

i 

tions are included in the Intercity applications 
bearing approximately the same dates. 

i 

I - 


! 

I 


20 



B. Wireless Telegraph & Communications Company 

Applications 

The Wireless Telegraph & Communications Com¬ 
pany operated a small public point to point station 
upon a frequency of 6,660 kilocycles at Ravinia and 
later at Northbrook, Illinois. 

Its first proposal for the extension of this service 
was made during January of 1928 when it filed four 
applications for construction permits. Two of these 
are referred to by the thirty-seventh and thirty- 
ninth items on page two of its Notice of Appeals. 
They are for a station at Chicago, to use the frequen¬ 
cies of 17,844, 6,446 and 4,026 kilocycles and for a 
station at New York to use the frequencies of 12,711, 
6,741 &nd 3,465 kilocycles. The two applications 
not referred to in the Notice are for a station at 
Boston on a frequency of 4,026 kilocycles and at 
St. Louis on a frequency of 3,465 kilocycles. A 
fifth application which bears a date of January 12, 
1928, but was not filed until June 9, 1928, apparently 
relates to this same proposal. It is not mentioned 
in the Notice of Appeal. It is for the erection of a 
station at Detroit, Michigan, to operate at a fre¬ 
quency of 3,465 kilocycles. 

This group of applications proposes a communica¬ 
tions system among six cities—Chicago, St. Louis, 
Detroit, Pittsburgh, New York, and Boston. No 
application was filed for a station at Pittsburgh, 
however. 

Thus remained the status of the system proposal 
of the Company until the month of June, 1928, when 



21 


121 


it began the filing of a second group of applications. 
By application for construction permit filed June 7, 

i 

1928, and not referred to in the Notice of Appeals, 
it requested the use of the frequencies of 5,660 and 
4,000 (instead of 6,660) at the Northbrook! station. 
On June 28, 1928, it requested a construction permit 
for an intermediate frequency station (169 kilocycles) 
at Chicago, as referred to by the thirty-eighth item 
on page two of the Notice of Appeals. On July 9, 
1928, it requested a construction permit for an inter¬ 
mediate frequency station (156 kilocycles) at New 
York, as referred to by the forty-first item on page 
two of the Notice. Additional high frequencies were 
also requested. An application was filed j June 2, 
1928, referred to by the fortieth item on page two of 
the Notice, for the use of the frequencies of 5,681 
and 4,021 kilocycles at New York. An application 
was filed June 9, 1928, but not referred to in the 
Notice of Appeals for the use of the frequency of 
3,465 kilocycles at Detroit. At about the same time, 
on June 1, 1928, the Company extended its proposal 
to cover a service to Milwaukee, Wisconsin, filing 
an application for a construction permit for ! a station 
at that city upon a frequency of 4,000 kilocycles. 
This application is referred to by the twenty-first 
item on page two of the notice. 

Thus remained the status of the system proposal 
of the Company until the month of August, 1928, 
when it began the filing of a third group ojf applica¬ 
tions for construction permits. These applications, 
which were filed during August, September, and 

j 

i 

i 




22 


9 9 


October, proposed an extension of the Company’s 
system to the following cities: 


Mentioned in Notice of Appeal 


Cincinnati_3, 465 

Des Moines_3, 529 

Denver_6,410 

Omaha._3,529 

Minneapolis_3,465 

Kansas City_6, 741 

Indianapolis_3, 465 

Dallas_4, 000 

San Francisco_6,493 

Salt Lake City_6, 000 

Los Angeles_6, 660 

Washington_4, 026 

Seattle_6, 660 

Portland_6, 666 

Tampa_4, 000 


Not Mentioned in Notice of Appeal 


Buffalo_ 

Columbus_ 

Cleveland_ 

New Orleans 

Baltimore_ 

Philadelphia . 

Atlanta_ 

Memphis_ 


_4,026 

_3,465 

_4,026 

14,634,6,660 

_4,026 

_4,026 

_4, 000 

_4,000 


























23 


: 


I 

l 

1 

e 
ft 

i 

C. Intercity Radio Telegraph Company and Wireless 
Telegraph & Communications Company—Combined 
Proposal 

j 

The proposals of these two companies were com¬ 
petitive for the establishment of similar Systems. 
They remained unrelated and competitive until April 
24, 1929. At a hearing on that date, a proposed 
merger and financing scheme was presented to the 
Commission which was conditioned upon the granting 
of a substantial portion of the requests of both Com¬ 
panies. Thus conditionally, the Wireless Company 
proposed to abandon applications for all cities 
covered by applications of the Intercity Company 
except New York and Chicago. The conditional 
combined system thus tendered involved service to 
36 cities including the 35 mentioned in the Notice of 
Appeals and Duluth, Minnesota. The scheme in- 

i 

volved four stations in New York and three in 
Chicago. The frequency plan involved in the appli- 

i 

cations was not revised and was very complicated, 
avoiding, as was above pointed out, any uniform 
system of channeling or separation. Practically none 
of. the frequencies requested by reason of inter¬ 
national rules, prior classification, executive order, 
and other factors, was available for designation. 

As Appendices A, B, C, and D, there are attached 
to this statement, a tabulated analysis of all appli¬ 
cations on behalf of both Companies, showing the 
frequencies requested for designation, the Status of 

i 

these, the various proposed points of communication, 

i 

! 




etc., together with indexes to the tabulation according 
to frequency, system-proposal groups, etc. 

D. The Mackay Radio & Telegraph Company 

Applications 

As successor to the Federal Telegraph Company, 
the Mackay Radio & Telegraph Company is engaged 
in domestic point to point public service communica¬ 
tion by radio between Portland, Oregon, San Fran¬ 
cisco, and Los Angeles, California, and between San 
Francisco and New York, and is licensed to use 32 
frequencies, including many upon a separation basis 
of 0.1%. These are high, medium-high, interme¬ 
diate, and low frequencies. 

From December, 1927, until April, 1928, by the 
filing of twenty applications for construction permits, 
the Company proposed the extension of this service, 
requesting designation of sixty additional frequencies. 
It proposed to use fourteen of these for increasing 
established Pacific Coast facilities, of vrhich three 
were extension of service at Seattle, Washington. 
Forty-six frequencies were proposed for four trunk 
fines, one from New York to San Francisco, via 
Chicago, Kansas City, and Denver; one from Chicago 
to New Orleans, via Memphis and Birmingham; one 
from Kansas City to Galveston via Dallas, and one 
from New York to Miami via Savannah and Jack¬ 
sonville. The frequencies requested for designation 
range from 4,020 to 17,960 kilocycles, distributed as 
follows: 



25 


125 


Frequencies 

Cearwater, California_ j _ 3 

(Los Angeles.) 

Memphis_!_ 2 

i 

Savannah_i_ 2 

Kansas City_1_L-- 4 

Palo Alto, Calif_10 

(San Francisco.) 

i 

Chicago_ j _ 6 

Denver_I_ 2 

Jacksonville_ j _ 2 

New Orleans_ j _ 4 

Galveston_ j _ 4 

Seattle_!_ 3 

New York__ 7 

Hillsboro, Oreg_ j _ 3 

(Portland.) j 

Dallas_!_ 2 

Bigningham_ j _ 2 

Miami_!_ 4 


Total_ 1 _ 60 

As Appendix F, there is attached to this statement, 
a tabulation of these applications showing their 
requests in greater detail. 

j 

aE. The R. C. A. Communications Inc. Applications 

i 

The R. C. A. Communications, Inc., is the sub¬ 
sidiary of Radio Corporation which handles point to 
point communications. Its only domestic circuit is 
in operation between New York and San Fijancisco. 




















This company, under date of April 9, 1928, filed 65 
applications for construction permits for stations in 
29 cities. Amended applications to take the place of 
these were subsequently filed under date of May 14, 
1929. These requested authority to erect 76 stations 
in the 29 cities. The frequencies requested to be 
designated for use at the stations are: 

40 frequencies at standard 0.2% separation in the 

medium high-frequency range. 

36 frequencies at 0.1% separation interspersed 
among these 40. 

6 domestic frequencies for international communi¬ 
cation. 

41 frequencies in the international high-frequency 

range at 0.2% separation for domestic auxili¬ 
ary daytime use, which frequencies had there¬ 
tofore been designated for use in international 
communication by this company. 

22 frequencies at 0.1% separation interspersed 
among these. 

145 frequencies at separation of 0.1%. 

The cities proposed to be served by this system are: 
New York, Chicago, San Francisco, New Orleans, 
Seattle, Philadelphia, Los Angeles, Denver, Miami, 
Cincinnati, Savannah, Detroit, Dallas, Kansas City, 
Cleveland, Minneapolis, Memphis, Pittsburgh, Hous¬ 
ton, Norfolk, Buffalo, Portland, Me., St. Louis, 
Rochester, Washington, Boston, Schenectady, Port¬ 
land, Oreg., Milwaukee. 

A general analysis of these applications appears at 
pages 2 to 9 of the Company’s Notice of Appeals. 



27 



A detailed analysis is attached to this statement as 
Appendix H. 

This summarizes the applications of the appellants. 

Before summarizing the decisions of the commis¬ 
sion relating to these applications, it is well to sum¬ 
marize the decisions of the Commission with refer¬ 
ence to point to point public communications systems 
authorized to be created by organizations not parties 

i 

to any of these appeals. 

F. Communications Agencies not Parties to Appeals 
1. Universal Wireless Communication Company 

The most extensive domestic system of point-to- 
point communication which has been authorized by 
the Commission is that of the Universal Wireless 
Communication Company, Incorporated. The first 
decision of the Commission with reference to this 
Company was rendered on August 13, 1928, when the 
Commission decided to issue authorizations for three 
stations to this company upon an experimental basis. 
On August 14, 1928, construction permits were issued 
for a station at New York City to use a frequency of 
5,885 kilocycles and for a station at Chicago (Plain- 
field, Illinois) to use a frequency of 5,900 kilbcycles. 

On December 22, 1928, the Commission granted 
the applications of the Universal Company numbered 
(according to file designations) P-C 120-225, P-C 
650-657, P-C 661-670, and P-C 681-708, a total of 
152 construction permits. The authorization com- 
tained specific conditions discussed elsewhere herein. 
Inasmuch as the applications were based upon the 

63493—29-3 

j 

i 

• i 

i 

i 



28 


t 9 -S 

_£_ O 


proposed use of a block or group of 40 frequencies (at 

i 

a separation of 0.2%) and the proposal was to use 
these frequencies interchangeably at various stations 
according to a plan to be developed, specific frequencies 
were not at this time designated for use at individual 
stations. 

i 

The communications system thus authorized to be 
established was for a service covering the following 


112 cities: 

Akron, Ohio. 

Albany, N. Y. 
Amarillo, Tex. 

Athol, Mass. 

Atlanta, Ga. 

Atlantic City, N. J. 
Augusta, Fla. 
Augusta, Me. 

Austin, Tex. 
Bakersfield, Calif. 
Baltimore, Md. 
Billings, Mont. 
Birmingham, Ala. 
Boise, Idaho. 

Boston, Mass. * 
Buffalo, N. Y. 

Butte, Mont. 
Burlington, Vt. 
Carson City, Nev. 
Cedar Rapids, Iowa. 
Charleston, S. C. 
Charleston, W. Ya. 


Chattanooga, Tenn. 
Cheyenne, Wyo. 
Chicago, Ill. 
Cincinnati, Ohio. 
Cleveland, Ohio. 
Columbus, Ohio. 
Concord, N. H. 

Dallas, Tex. 

Dayton, Ohio. 

Denver, Colo. 

Detroit, Mich. 

Duluth, Minn. 

Elko, Nev. 

Fargo, N. Dak. 
Fresno, Calif. 
Galveston, Tex. 

Grand Forks, N. Dak. 
Harrisburg, Pa. 
Hartford, Conn. 
Helena, Mont. 
Houston, Tex. 
Indianapolis, Ind. 


i 


29 


Jackson, Miss. 
Jacksonville, Fla. 
Jefferson City, Mo. 
Kansas City, Mo. 

La Crosse, Wis. 
Lincoln, Nebr. 

Little Rock, Ark. 
.Louisville, Ky. 

Los Angeles, Calif. 
.Madison, Wis. 
Medford, Oreg. 
Memphis, Tenn. 
.Miami, Fla. 
Milwaukee, Wis. 
Minneapolis, Minn. 
Mobile, Ala. 

Moline, Ill. 
Montpelier, Vt. 
Muskegon, Mich. 
Nashville, Tenn. 

New Brunswick, N. J. 
New Haven, Conn. 
New Orleans, La. 

New York, N. Y. 
Norfolk, Ya. 

North Platte, Nebr. 
Oklahoma City, Okla. 
Omaha, Nebr. 

Palm Beach, Fla. 
Peoria, Ill. 

Phoenix, Ariz. 


Philadelphia, Pa. 
Pierre, S. Dak. j 
Pittsburgh, Pa. ' 

j 

Pocatello, Idaho, 
Ponca City, Okla. 
Portland, Me. 
Portland, Oreg. j 

j 

Providence, R. IL 
Rock Springs, Wyo. 
Sacramento, Calif. 

Salt Lake City, Utah. 
San Angelo, Tex. 

San Antonio, Tepc. 

San Francisco, Calif. 
Santa Fe, N. M&x. 
Sault St. Marie, | Mich. 
Savannah, Ga. 
Schenectady, N.j Y. 
Seattle, Wash. ! 
Shreveport, La. j 
Spartanburg, S. C. 

I 

Spokane, Wash. ! 
Springfield, III. j 
Springfield, Mass. 

Springfield, Ohio. 

| 

St. Louis, Mo. I 

i 

Tampa, Fla. 

Trenton, N. J. j 
Tucson, Ariz. j 
Utica, N. Y. | 

Waco, Tex. j 






Walla Walla, Wash. Wilmington, Del. 

Washington, D. C. Winston-Salem, N. C. 

Wichita, Kans. Youngstown, Ohio. 

On April 23, 1929, the Commission authorized the 
removal of the New York station of the company to 
ScobeyVille, N. J., and ordered the issuance of licenses 
for a period of one year to this and the Chicago 
station. Accordingly on April 24,1929, licenses were 
issued to expire April 23, 1930, for station WKDA, 
50 kilowatts, 5,885 kilocycles, Scobeyville, N. J., and 
for station WKDE, 50 kilowatts, 5,900 kilocycles, 
Plainfield, Ill. 

On June 7, 1929, the Commission directed the 
Secretary to list and publish the continental high- 
frequency channels recommended by its Engineering 
Division for designation for use by Universal stations, 
as follows: 

Exclusive TJ. S. channels (in kilocycles ): 4,565,4,575, 
4,585, 4,595, 4,605, 4,615, 4,625, 4,635, 4,645, 4,655, 
4,665, 4,675, 4,685, 4,695, 4,705, 5,095, 5,105, 5,115, 
5,125, 5,135, 5,145, 5,155, 5,165, 5,175, 5,185, 5,195, 
5,205, 5,215, 5,225, 5,235, 5,245, 5,855, 5,870, 5,885 
(licensed), 5,900 (licensed). 

Shared TJ . S. and Canada (in kilocycles ): 3,298, 
3,304, 3,310, 3,316, 3,324. 

The actual construction permits for the various 
stations, subject to future designations of exact fre- 

i _ 

quency, had been issued during the month of Feb¬ 
ruary, 1929. 



2. Reservation for Press or the Press Communication Companies 

Under the power of classification of frequencies for 
specific services, under Section 4 (c) of the Radio Act 
of 1927, the Commission, on June 20, 1929, entered 
an order setting aside twenty frequencies (at a sep- 

• i 

aration of 0.2%) for point-to-point communication 
within the United States and stated that construction 
permits for stations to use these frequencies would 
be granted to a public-service corporation if, as, and 
when duly formed and approved as meeting certain 
standards prescribed by the Commission. j 
The frequencies thus classified are: 


4,715 

4,935 

4, 985 

5,315 


4,725 

4,945 

4,995 

5,325 


4,735 

4,955 

5,285 

5,335 


4,745 

4, 965 

5,295 

5,345 


4,925 

4,975 

5, 305 

5,355 


It should be 

observed, however, that 

in the case of 


Universal Service Wireless Company v. Federal Radio 
Commission , numbered 5005 in this Court, which 
purports to be an appeal from this and other rul¬ 
ings of the Commission, the contention is made by 
the appellant that this order of the Commission is 
unlawful. It is claimed in that appeal that there are 

certain rights in eleven communications companies, 
viz: 

San Francisco Chronicle Wireless Co., Ltd. 
United Press Wireless, Inc. 

Scripps Howard Wireless, Inc. 

i 

Chicago Tribune Wireless, Inc. 

Consolidated Wireless, Corp. 


32 



Universal Service Wireless, Inc. 

Press Publishing Wireless, Inc. 

American News Traffic Corp., Inc. 

New York Herald Tribune Wireless, Inc. 

New York Times Wireless, Inc. 

Los Angeles Times Wireless, Inc. 
which entitle these companies to construction per¬ 
mits as of December 22, 1928, a contention which is 
denied by the Commission. 

Just what are the frequency designations claimed 
for these companies by the appellant does not appear 
from the papers. If it were true, however, that these 
companies are entitled to construction permits, then 
either of two frequency allocations would prevail: 

1. The frequencies last above enumerated are to 
be assigned among these companies according to a 
plan not as yet known, or 

2. These companies are severally entitled to use 
either 20 or all of the following 26 frequencies repre¬ 
senting 25 channels at 0.2% separation: 4,324, 4,332, 
4,340, 4,348, 4,356, 4,455, 4,465, 4,475, 4,485, 4,495, 
5,193, 5,205, 5,215, 5,225, 5,235, 5,243, 5,245, 5,255, 
5,285, 5,295, 5,305, 5,720, 5,735, 5,750, 5,765, and 
5,780 kilocycles. 

3. The Western Radio Telegraph Company 

The Western Radio Telegraph Company operates 
a communication service in the oil producing and 
refining sections of Texas, Oklahoma, Kansas, and 
New Mexico. It has taken over the radio communi- 
ation facilities of various oil companies in that 



33 



area which have been in existence for a considerable 


length of time. 

The Commission ordered the issuance of construc¬ 
tion permits and licenses for these stations on June 
7, 1929. The frequencies ordered to be designated 


are: 


Exclusive United 
States channels 

Exclusive 
Canadian channels 

“Low" 

frequency 

5, 075 

1 5, 780 

182 

5, 085 

1 5, 795 

186 


1 5, 810 

188 


193 




i 



The communities served and to be served by this 
Company are: ! 


Station 


Tulsa, Okla_ 

Eldorado, Kans__ 
Skellytown, Tex._ 
Bartlesville, Okla. 

Borger, Tex_ 

Breckenridge, Tex 
Bungs Mill, Tex__ 
Burkburnett, Tex. 
McCamey, Tex_ _ 
Ponca City, Okla. 

Jal, N. Mex_ 

Crane, Tex_ 

Wink, Tex_ 


WEH. 

WAH. 

KIEL 

KJ1V|. 

KJSj and KEH. 
KSU. 

KYI. 

KYtJ. 

KSt. 

KF£. 

New station. 
NeW station. 
NeW station. 


The authorizations thus made involve the granting 
of 14 applications, 11 for licenses and 3 for construe- 
tion permits. j 

There is attached to this statement as Appendix I, 
a detailed analysis of the applications filed by this 
Company showing the actions of the Commission 
with regard to them. 


j 

j 

i 



















ACTION OF THE COMMISSION WITH REFERENCE TO 
APPLICATIONS OF APPELLANTS 

The applications of organizations proposing ex¬ 
tensive domestic communications services have been 
summarized above. There has also been indicated 
the action taken by the Commission in authorizing 
the establishment of such services by organizations 
not parties to appeals to this Court. There follows 
a statement of the decisions of the Commission as to 
the various appellants. 

A. Intercity Radio Telegraph Company 

By decision of June 7, 1929, effective June 10, 
1929, the Commission denied the applications of the 
Intercity Radio Telegraph Company. The effect of 
this decision was to refuse the Intercity Company 
any authorization to extend the service in which it 
was then engaged. By other decisions the Com¬ 
mission had continued the existing authorizations of 
this Company. In addition to an extensive marine 
service on the Great Lakes, the Intercity Company 
is licensed to conduct a point to point domestic 
service as follows: 


City 

Station 

Fre¬ 

quen¬ 

cies 

Traffic 

Date and nature of last 
authorization 

Cleveland. 

WTL 

165 

171 

4,116 

8,630 

Point to point public.. 

Mar. 21,1929; license. 

Cleveland. 

WTK 

165 

171 

Point to point public.. 

Mar. 21,1929; license. 

Cleveland. 

WTK 

4,116 

8,630 

Point to point public; 
marine relay only. 

May 23,1929; license. 






City 

Station 

Fre¬ 

quen¬ 

cies 

Traffic 

Date and nature of last 
autholrization 

Detroit. 

WDI 

165 

171 

Point to point public.. 

Mar. 21,1929; license. 

Duluth. .. 

WME 

165 

171 

Point to point public.. 

Apr. 29, 1929; license or¬ 
dered to tie issued. 

Duluth. 

WME 

4,116 

8,630 

Point to point public; 
marine relay only. 

May 31, 1929; license. 

Buffalo. 

WAM 

165 

171 

Point to point public.. 

Mar. 21,1929; license. 

j 

Buffalo. 

WAM 

4,116 

8,630 

Point to point public; 
marine relay only. 

May 29,1929; license. 

Columbus. 

WCL 

165 

171 

Point to point public.. 

Mar. 21,1929; license. 

Chicago. 

WFL 

153.8 

Point to point public.. 

May 27,1929, and June 13, 
1929; consent to sale of 
station toj Intercity Co. 
by Chicago Federation of 
Labor. 

Rogers City, Mich.i. 

WLC 

117 

4,116 

8,630 

Point to point public.. 

Mar. 30,1929; license. 

! 

j 

Sheboygan, Wis.*__. 

WSK 

171 

Point to point public.. 

Mar. 21, 1929; license. 


1 Station WLC is a public service station belonging to the Michigan Limestone and Chem¬ 
ical Company, licensed to communicate with stations of the Intercity Company. There is 
an agreement between the two companies for a mutual interchange of traffic. WLC is, 
for all practical purposes, a part of the Intercity system. 

* Station WSK is a public service station belonging to the C. Reiss Coal Company, 
licensed to communicate with stations of the Intercity Company. There i$ an agreement 
between the two companies for a mutual interchange of traffic. WSK is, for all practical 
purposes, a part of the Intercity system. 

The system above described involves the use of 
four intermediate frequencies and two high j frequen¬ 
cies at nine stations in eight communities, j A com¬ 
plete history of the operations licensed to tlie Inter¬ 
city Company is attached hereto as Appendix E. 

B. Wireless Telegraph & Communications Company 

By decision of June 7,1929, effective June 10,1929, 
the Commission denied all applications of the Wireless 
Telegraph & Communications Company both for 
authority to establish a communications system and 
for the renewal of its one station license. 










C. Intercity Radio Telegraph Company and Wireless Tele¬ 
graph & Communications Company—Combined Proposal 

By its two decisions last mentioned the Commission 
also refused the contingent and conditional merger 
proposal for the extended service of both companies. 

D. The Mackay Radio & Telegraph Company 

By decision of June 7, 1929, effective June 10, 
1929, the Commission denied the applications of the 
Mackay Radio & Telegraph Company. The effect 
of this decision was to refuse the Mackay com¬ 
pany any authorization to extend the service in 
which it was then engaged. By other decisions the 
Commission had continued the existing authoriza¬ 
tions of this Company. In addition to its extensive 
international communication service, the Mackay 
Company is licensed to conduct a point to point 
domestic service as follows: 

(1) Station WKI, Sayville, L. I., N. Y. (to com¬ 
municate with Palo Alto, California, and other 
Mackay stations licensed by the Commission). 

Medium High Frequencies ( kilocycles ): *4,396 

4.400.5, *4,405, 4,410, *4,415, *5,975, 5,982.5, *5,990. 

Auxiliary use , high frequencies: 7,662.5, 7,737.5, 

7.752.5, 8,980, *10,170, 10,820, *10,890, 13,015, 
*17,140, 17,680. 

(2) Station KWT, near Palo Alto, California (to 
communicate with Portland, Oregon, Los Angeles, 
California, and other Mackay stations licensed by 
the Commission). 


* Indicates standard channel frequency. 


37 


1 O 


13 


Low frequencies (kilocycles): 39.39 (39.20*), 51.68 
(51.95*), 63.18 (63.20*), 68.92 (69.20*), 83.96 (84.20*), 
97.50 (97.70*). j 

i 

Medium high frequencies: Same as at WKI, plus 
7,762.5 and *8,850 kilocycles. j 

Auxiliary use , high frequencies: Same as at WKI. 

(3) Station KNR, Clearwater, California (to com¬ 
municate with San Francisco, Portland, and other 
Mackay stations licensed by the Commission). 

Low frequencies: 55.36 (54.95*), 79.32 1(79.70*), 
92.76 (92.45*). j 

i 

Medium high frequencies: Same as at WKI. 

Auxiliary use high frequencies: Same as; at WKI 
except 17,680 kilocycles. 

(4) Station KCH, Hillsboro, Oregon (to com¬ 
municate with San Francisco, Portland, and other 
Mackay stations licensed by the Commission). 

Low frequencies: 34.50 (34.40*), 47.50 I (47.70*), 
71.26 (71.45*). | 

Medium high frequencies: Same as at WKI. 

Auxiliary use high frequencies: Same asj at WKI, 
except 17,680 kilocycles. 

All these licenses "were issued June 15, 1929, and 
expire June 14, 1930. | 

E. The R. C. A. Communications, Inc. 

By decisions of June 7, 1929, and June 10, 1929, 

i 

the Commission granted in part and denied in part 
the applications of R. C. A. Communications, Inc. 
These applications were granted in so far aS the Com¬ 
mission authorized R. C. A. to make auxiliary use 


* Indicates standard channel frequency. 





for point to point service within the United States 
of the high-frequency channels theretofore designated 
for the transoceanic service of the applicant. These 
applications were further granted in so far as the 
following additional frequencies were designated for 
use by R. C. A. in domestic service: 

Exclusive U. S. Channels {kilocycles): 4,268, 4,284, 
4,535, 4,545, 4,555, 5,035, 5,045, 5,055, 5,065, 5,255, 
5,265, 5,275, 5,005, 5,015, 5,025. 

Shared U. S. and Canada ( kilocycles): 3,268, 3,274, 
3,280, 3,286, 3,332. 

Reducing this designation to channels expressed in 
separations of 0.1% so as to afford the type of utiliza¬ 
tion proposed in the applications, we have the follow¬ 
ing frequency designations: 3,268, 3,271, 3,274, 3,277, 
3,280, 3,283, 3,286, 3,332, 4,268, 4,284, 4,535, 4,540, 

4,545, 4,550, 4,555, 5,005, 5,010, 5,015, 5,020, 5,025, 
5,030, 5,035, 5,040, 5,045, 5,050, 5,055, 5,060, 5,065, 

5,255, 5,260, 5,265, 5,270, 5,275, a total of 33 fre¬ 
quencies in the medium high-frequency range. 

Thus R. C. A. had designated to it, as of June 10, 
1929, in response to its applications (see analysis 
supra) the following: 

41* frequencies in the international high-frequency 
range at 0.2% separation for auxiliary domes¬ 
tic use. 

22* frequencies at 0.1% separation interspersed 
among these. 

*R. C. A. has many more than these 63 frequencies desig¬ 
nated to it for transoceanic use. Its total assignment in 
that field is 65 frequencies at 0.2% separation, so arranged 
that 37 additional 0.1% frequencies may be interspersed, 
making a total of 102. However, 63 is the largest number 
R. C. A. ever proposed to use thus. 




39 


20 frequencies at standard 0.2% separation in the 
medium high-frequency range. I 

13 frequencies at 0.1% separation interspersed 
among these. 

i 

96 frequencies at separation of 0.1% as against 145 
such requested. 

The Commission’s decision of June 10, 1929, 
directed R. C. A. to furnish the Commission with 
amended applications specifying points of communi¬ 
cation, frequencies, and types of service in accord¬ 
ance with this reduction. 

R. C. A. chose to comply with this direction by 
eliminating from its proposal 17 cities: Miami, 
Savannah, Dallas, Minneapolis, Memphis, Pittsburgh, 
Houston, Norfolk, Buffalo, Portland (Maine), Roches¬ 
ter, Washington, Boston, Schenectady, Portland 

i 

(Oregon), Milwaukee, and Philadelphia. 

The statement appearing at page 18 of the ft. C. A. 
Notice of Appeals that the company is prevented 
from serving the city of Cleveland is incorrect and 
probably inadvertent. 

The amended plan thus prepared is contained in 
a letter from R. C. A. dated June 14, 1928 and re¬ 
produced at pages 14 to 17 of the Notice of Appeals. 
The proposal is to serve twelve cities of the original 
29: New York, Chicago, San Francisco, New Orleans, 
Seattle, Los Angeles, Denver, Cincinnati, Detroit, 
Kansas City, Cleveland, and St. Louis. 

Under this amended plan five frequencies in the 
domestic band were requested for designation for 
international communication. 

i 

[ 

i 

! 







40 



Fre¬ 

quency 

1 

Location 

To communicate with— 

3, 332 

Rocky Point, N. Y_ 

Canada, Sweden. 

4,545 

Kahuku, Territory of 
Hawaii. 

Fiji Islands, California, Philippine 
Islands, and Japan. 

5, 065 

New Brunswick, N. J___ 

i 

Porto Rico, Danish West Indies, 
and Germany. 

5, 265 

Rocky Point, N. Y_ 

Cuba, England, Spain, Portugal. 

5, 275 

Rocky Point, N. Y_ 

Colombia, Norway, Sweden. 


Another feature of the amended applications thus 
submitted is that they request the designation for 

I 

auxiliary domestic use of only 30 transoceanic fre¬ 
quencies of standard 0.2% separation and only five 
of the 0.1% separation frequencies interspersed among 
these, a total of only 35 such frequencies. Of the 30 
frequencies thus referred to as transoceanic, three 
amount to auxiliary domestic uses of three out of the 
five really domestic frequencies which R. C. A. 
requested for transoceanic use, these three being 
5,065, for St. Louis, 5,275 for Bolinas, California 
(San Francisco), and 5,265 for Chicago. 

This amended plan was approved by the Commis¬ 
sion June 18, 1929, and it was ordered that construc¬ 
tion permits and/or licenses (as the case might be) 
should forthwith be issued. The actual issuance, 
however, has been withheld by the Commission 
because of the pendency of a petition of the Inter¬ 
city Radio Telegraph Company to this Court for an 
injunction or stay order. 










41 



F. Summary of Domestic Communication Systems 
Authorized by the Commission 

A view of all domestic radio communications sys¬ 
tems thus far authorized by the Commission can best 
be given in tabulated form. The following table 
indicates the more important features of thd systems: 


Licensees 

Num¬ 
ber of 
cities 

Num¬ 

ber 

0.2% 

chan¬ 

nels 

1,500- 

6,000 

Num¬ 

ber 

0.1% 

chan¬ 

nels 

1,500- 

6,000 

Num¬ 

ber 

0.2% 

chan¬ 

nels 

6,000- 

23,000 

Num¬ 

ber 

0.1% 

chan¬ 

nels 

6,000- 

23,000 

Num¬ 
ber low 
and 
inter¬ 
medi¬ 
ate fre- 
quency 
chan¬ 
nels 
10-550 

Comment 

j 

I 

j 

Universal Wireless 
Comm unication 
Co. 

112 

40 

76 ! 

0 

0 

0 

General ipublic service, 
point to point; nation¬ 
wide system. 

Press... 

Indefi¬ 

nite. 1 

20 

36 

0 

0 

0 

Public service to all news¬ 
papers land press asso¬ 
ciations on equal terms, 
multidirectional; also 
nation-wide system. 

Western Radio Tele¬ 
graph Co. 

13 

5 

8 

0 

0 

4 

General j public service, 
point to point, south¬ 
west. 

Intercity Radio Tel¬ 
egraph Co. 

8 

1 

1 

1 

1 

4 

General j public service, 
point to point, Great 
Lakes. 

Mackay Radio & 
Telegraph Co. 

4 

5 

8 

4 

12 

12 

General public service, 
point Jo point. Pacific 
coast. 

R. C. A. Communi¬ 
cations, Inc. 

12 

20 

33 

30 

35 

0 

General j public service, 
domestic and interna¬ 
tional j feeder: nation¬ 
wide, trunk-line system. 


1 The number of cities to be served by the domestic press communications service is not 
ascertained because permits have not yet been issued, this being merely a classification. 
The number of cities served must always be variable due to the multidirectional service to 
be offered by press associations and syndicates in the distribution of news items to a great 
many points. 

i 

It should be observed that no analysis is here 
made of point to point services of small scope or of 
those for specialized traffic such as for communica¬ 
tion between airports, etc. 

The character of the standard channels, at 0.2% 
separat : on, within the band from 1,500 to 6,000 







42 



0 


kilocycles, which are assigned to these systems, is 
shown by the following table: 


Medium high-frequency channels 



United 

States 

exclusive 

Canadian 

shared 

Canadian 

exclusive 

Universal_ 

35 

20 

15 

2 

5 

5 


Press_ L _ 


R. C. A____ 

5 


Western. __ 

2 

Mackav_ 


Total_ 



77 

10 

2 

Total United States exclusive and Ca¬ 
nadian shared_ 

| i- 

87 





y 


LIMITATIONS IMPOSED UPON THE COMMISSION PRIOR 
TO ANY CONSIDERATION UPON THE MERITS 

In entering into a consideration of the problems 
presented by hundreds of applications for construc¬ 
tion permits and licenses for domestic communication, 
the Commission was first confronted with the task 
of clearly laying out the boundaries of its delibera¬ 
tions. The rules of international law, the physical 
and scientific limitations of the radio communica¬ 
tion art as now in practice, the demands of services 
having paramount claims to facilities—all these and 
similar factors have the effect of severely limiting the 
subject matter under consideration and of confining 
the Commission’s designations of frequencies to cer¬ 
tain restricted bands. 




















A. Limitations Imposed by Law 

1. Limitations Imposed by International Law and Treaty Obligations 

a. International convention 

The provisions of treaties to which the United 
States is party must be carefully analyzed at the 
very outset. This is necessary in order to deter min e 
what bands or ranges of frequencies are available for 
designation to domestic services and which of the 
frequencies within these bands are assignable to 
point to point public service. 

In this connection it will be observed that decisions 
of the Commission from which appeals have been 
taken involve three frequency ranges: (1) Interme¬ 
diate frequencies (Intercity and Wireless Companies) ; 
(2) medium high frequencies (ail appellants); and (3) 
high frequencies (Intercity, Wireless, and! Mackay 
companies). 

The first International Convention dealing with 
peace-time use of radio transmission was the Inter¬ 
national Wireless Telegraph Convention concluded 
at Berlin November 3, 1906. This convention was 
not ratified until April 22, 1912. ! 

i 

Article 8 of the Berlin Convention provided: 

The working of the wireless telegraph sta¬ 
tions shall be organized so far as possible in 
such manner as not to disturb the Service of 
other wireless stations. 


63493—29 - 4 


Article 13 provided: 

An International Bureau shall be charged 
with collecting, coordinating, and publishing 
information of every kind relating to wireless 
telegraphy, * * *. 

While the provisions of the Berlin Convention were 
generally applicable to coastal and ship-board stations 
only, Article 8 was specifically made applicable to all 
transmitting installations, thus establishing the prin¬ 
ciple that stations should not be authorized to inter¬ 
fere with other services. 

The next treaty was the International Radiotele¬ 
graph Convention concluded at London July 5, 1912. 
This treaty was ratified by the United States on 
February 5, 1913. The convention became effective 
July 1, 1913. 

Article 8 of the London Convention provided: 

The working of the radio stations shall be 
organized as far as possible in such manner as 
not to disturb the service of other radio sta¬ 
tions. 

Article 13 provided: 

The International Bureau of the Telegraph 
Union shall be charged with collecting, coor¬ 
dinating, and publishing information of every 
kind relating to radio telegraphy, * * *. 

Article 21 provided: 

The High Contracting Parties shall preserve 
their entire liberty as regards radio installations 
provided for in Article 1 (coastal and ship¬ 
board), especially naval and military installa- 


45 


i 

l 



tiOns, a : nd : stations used for comttninica'tions 
between fixed points. AH such installations 
and stations shad be subject only to the 
obligations provided for in Articles 8 and 9 of 
the present convention. 


\# • * • S 

Paragraph 3 of Article V of the Service Regulations 

affixed to the Convention, dealing with the list to be 

| . 

prepared by the International Bureau, provided: 


The list shall also contain such data relating 
to radio stations other than those specified in 
Article I of the Convention as may be commu¬ 
nicated to the International Bureau by the 
management of the Radio Service admin¬ 
istration”) to which the stations are sub¬ 
ject, * * * 


Thus the necessity of avoiding interference with 
existing radio services was reestablished by the 1912 
treaty and provision was made for the registration of 
radio stations with the International Bureau at 
Berne, Switzerland. 


Under this treaty there was no great problem of 
interference. For a long time after it became effec¬ 
tive, radio services were few and the frequency 
spectrum was sufficiently free from congestion to 
enable new point to point communication stations 
to be freely established while still avoiding inter¬ 
ference with existing services. 

The situation has changed a great deal since 1912. 
The development of radio communication; and its 
extension into the higher frequencies has required a 
more precise international law and more rigid 
requirements. 


4 


i 

i 


% 


i 


* r* 

■ J 


46 

These are contained in the International Radio 
Telegraph Convention concluded at Washington 
November 25, 1927. Ratification of the Convention 
was advised by the Senate of the United States on 
March 21, 1928, and it was ratified by the President 
October 8, 1928. By its terms, the treaty became 
effective January 1, 1929. The treaty consists of the 
Convention and the general and supplemental regu¬ 
lations attached thereto. The United States is not 
party to the supplemental regulations. 

While the Commission gave consideration to do¬ 
mestic communications systems and took action in 
regard to them at times prior to the date on which 
the treaty became effective, it has nevertheless been 
guided by its provisions, so far as applicable, at all 
times. Otherwise the Commission’s licensing plan 
would have required complete revision on January 1, 
1929. 

The provisions of the Convention which are ap¬ 
plicable to the present problem are as follows: 

Article 2. §1. The contracting Governments 
undertake to apply the provisions of the pres¬ 
ent Convention to all radio communication 
stations established, or operated by the con¬ 
tracting Governments, and open to the inter¬ 
national service of public correspondence. 
They undertake, likewise, to apply these 
provisions to the special services covered by 
the Regulations annexed to the present Con¬ 
vention. 

§2. They agree, moreover, to take or to 
propose to their respective legislatures the 


47 


147 


necessary measures to impose the observ¬ 
ance of the provisions of the present Conven¬ 
tion and the Regulations annexed thereto 
upon individuals and private enterprises 
authorized to establish and operate radio 
communication stations in the international 
service, whether or not open to public 
correspondence. 

Article 10. §2. All stations, whatever their 
purpose, must, so far as practicable, be estab¬ 
lished and operated so as not to interfere with 
the radio communications or services; of other 
contracting Governments and of individuals 
or of private enterprises authorized by these 
contracting Governments to carry pn public 
radio communication service. 

Article 16. §1. The International Bureau of 
the Telegraph Union shall be changed with 
collecting, coordinating and publishing in¬ 
formation of all kinds relative to radio services, 
* * * and generally with performing all 

administrative tasks with which it shall have 
been charged in the interest of international 
radio services. 

Article 22. §1. The contracting j Govern¬ 
ments retain their entire liberty regarding 
radio installations not covered in Article 2, 
and especially with reference to naval and 
military installations. 

§2. All these installations and stations must, 
so far as practicable, comply with; the pro¬ 
visions of the regulations regarding help to be 
given in case of distress and measures to be 
taken to prevent interference. They must 
also, so far as practicable, observe such 


i 






Q 


provisions of the regulations as concern the 
types of waves and the frequencies to be used, 
according to the land of service which these 
stations carry on. 

§3. When, however, these installations and 
stations are used for public correspondence 
or participate in the special services governed 
by the Regulations annexed to the present 
Convention, they must, in general, conform 
to the provisions of the Regulations for the 
conduct of these services. 

Article 4 of the General Regulations annexed to the 
Convention: 

§3. The interested administrations shall fix 
the tolerance allowed between the mean 
frequency of emissions and the recorded fre¬ 
quency; they shall endeavor to take advan¬ 
tage of technical improvements progressively 
to reduce this tolerance. 

§4. The width of a frequency band occupied 
by the emission of a station must be reasonably 
consistent with good current engineering prac¬ 
tice for the type of communication involved. 

Article 5 thereof: 

§1. The Administrations of the contracting 
countries may assign any frequency and any 
type of wave to any radio station within their 
jurisdiction upon the sole condition that no 
interference with any service of another 
country will result therefrom. 

§2. These Administrations, however, agree 
to assign to stations, which by their nature 
are believed capable of causing serious inter¬ 
national interference, frequencies and types of 



49 


14 9 


waves in conformity with the rules for allo¬ 
cation and use of waves as set forth below. 

§3. The Administrations agree also to con¬ 
sider the table of allocation of frequency bands 
(see section 7) as a guide giving, for the differ¬ 
ent services, the limits which must be observed 
by all new stations and to which they shall 
adapt all existing stations with the least prac¬ 
ticable delay, without diminishing the quality 
of the service which these existing I stations 
carry on and taking into account the present 
state of their installations. 


§7. The following table shows thfe alloca¬ 
tion of frequencies (approximate wave lengths) 
among the various services: 


Frequencies 
in kilocycles 
per second 
(kc/s) 


10 - 100 
100 - 110 
110- 125 
125- 150 

150- 160 


160- 194 


Approximate 
wave lengths 
in meters 


30,000-3,000 
3,000-2,725 
2,725-2,400 
2,400-2,000 

2,000-1,875 


1,875-1,550 


Services 


Fixed services. 

Fixed services and mobile services, j 

Mobile services. 

Maritime mobile services open to public correspond^ 
ence exclusively. 

Mobile services. 

(а) Broadcasting. 

(б) Fixed services. 

(c) Mobile services. 

The conditions for use of this band are subject to 
the following regional arrangements: 

All regions where broadcasting sta¬ 
tions now exist working on fre¬ 
quencies below 300 kc/s (above 
1,000m) j 

~. (Fixed services. 

Other “tf 005 Mobile services. 

Regional arrangements will respect the rights of 
other regions in this band. 


broadcasting. 


i 

j 


I 







50 


Frequencies 
in kilocycles 
per second 
(kc/s) 


Approximate 
wave lengths 
in meters 


Services 


194- 285 
4 


1,550-1,050 


(a) Mobile services. 

(i>) Fixed service. 

(c) Broadcasting. 

The conditions for use of this band are subject to 
the following regional arrangements: 

(а) Air mobile service exclusively. 

(б) Air fixed services exclusively. 

(c) Within the band 250-285 kc/s (1,200- 

\ Europe) 1,050m). Fixed service not open to 
public correspondence. 

(<t) Broadcasting within the band 194-224 
kc/s (1,550-1,340m). 

(a) Mobile services except commer¬ 
cial ship stations. 

Other regions (6) Fixed air services exclusively. 

(c) Fixed services not open to public 
correspondence. 


285- 315 

1,050- 950 

Radiobeacons. 

315- 350 

950- 850 

Air mobile services exclusively. 

350- 360 

850- 830 

Mobile services not open to public correspondence. 

360- 390 

830- 770 

(а) Radio-compass service. 

(б) Mobile services, on condition that they do 

not interfere with radio-compass service. 

390- 460 

770- 650 

Mobile services. 

1 460- 485 

650- 620 

Mobile services ( except damped waves and radio- 
telephony). 

485- 515 

620- 580 

Mobile services (distress, call, etc). 

515- 550 

580- 545 

Mobile services not open to public correspondence 
(except damped wares and radiotelephony). 

550-1,300 

545- 230 

Broadcasting. 

1,300-1,500 

230- 200 

(а) Broadcasting. 

(б) Maritime mobile services, waves of 1365 

kc/s (220m) exclusively. 

1,500-1,715 

200- 175 

Mobile services. 

Mobile services. 

1,715-2,000 

1 

175- 150 

• Fixed services. 

Amateurs. 

2.000-2,250 

150- 133 

Mobile services and fixed services. 

2,250-2,750 

133- 109 

Mobile services. 

2,750-2,850 

109- 105 

Fixed services. 

2,850-3,500 

105- 85 

Mobile services and fixed services. 

[Mobile services. 

3,500-1,000 

$5- 75 

• Fixed services. 

[Amateurs. 

4,000-5,50C 

75- 54 

Mobile services and fixed services. 

5,500-5,700 

54- 52.7 

Mobile services. 

5,700-6,000 

52.7- 50 

Fixed services.* 

» 

* 

• • • 


Note.— It is recognized that short waves (frequencies from 6,000 to 23,000 kc/s 
approximately—wave lengths from 50 to 13 m approximately) are very efficient 
for long-distance communications. It is recommended that as a general rule 
this band of waves be reserved for this purpose in services between fixed points. 


! 

i 


51 

§16. (1) The frequencies assigned by Ad¬ 
ministrations to all new fixed land or radio 
broadcasting stations which they may have 
authorized or of which they may have under¬ 
taken the installation must be chosen in such 
a manner as to prevent so far as pr4cticable 
interference with international services carried 
on by existing stations the frequencies of which 
have already been notified to the International 
Bureau. In the case of a change of the fre¬ 
quency of an existing fixed land or broad¬ 
casting station, the new frequency assigned 
to this station must comply with the above 
conditions. 

* * * * * 

§17. * * * (2) In the case of a fixed 

short wave station intended to carry on 
regular service and the radiation of which 
would be likely to cause international inter¬ 
ference, the Administration concerned, must 
as a general rule, before the completion of 
the station and in any case before itj is open 
for service, notify to the International Bu¬ 
reau the frequency assigned to that station. 

(3) Such notification, however, shall be 
sent only when the Administration concerned 
shall have ascertained that the service in 
question can be established within a reasonable 
time. 

i 

The contention is made in the Notice of Appeal 
filed by the Intercity Company that certain of the 
demarcations made by the Commission are arbitrary. 

j 

Applications for domestic service have been filed by 
that company based upon the use of mobile frequen¬ 
cies in point to point service. Applications have 



also been filed for frequencies above 6,000 kilocycles 
for day time use by companies not using those fre¬ 
quencies at night. The Commission therefore places 
before the Court its understanding of the effect of 
the treaty provisions above quoted. 

The Commission believes that in the designation 
of frequencies in the low-frequency range, the inter¬ 
mediate-frequency range and the medium high- 
frequency range, it is governed by the following: 

(1) That the frequency allocation plan contained 
in the treaty is binding upon the Commission in so far 
as bands of frequencies are set aside for mobile 
services because foreign mobiles (when within the 
distance through which interference would result 
between them and fixed American stations) would 
have a superior right to the use of these frequencies 
over fixed American stations. 

(2) That the frequency allocation plan contained 
in the treaty is binding upon the Commission be¬ 
cause the treaty makes it applicable to all stations 
causing international interference and because the 
interference range of American stations must be 
reckoned as of the most favorable season 2 and time 
and because international interference occurs where 
there is interference in the nearest foreign country. 

In this connection, it should be noted that, regard¬ 
less of the question whether the treaty allocation plan 

2 The Commission believes that regularity and perma¬ 
nence are desirable characteristics for public point to point 
stations and hence follows the policy of issuing licenses in this 
field for the maximum period allowed by statute—one year. 


I 


53 

•» V 

must be followed, it is nevertheless wise to follow 
that plan. It represents the best judgment of an 
international group of experts as to the relative needs 
for allocation of various services, and since some sysr 
tematic plan must be adopted, it would seem that 
such a ope is best. 

With reference to designations of frequencies in the 
high-frequency range, the commission believes that it 

j 

is governed by the following: 

(1) That this band should be reserved for long¬ 
distance communication except where a plan can be 
developed whereby these frequencies may be used 
domestically under conditions that will guarantee 
against interference with foreign services. 

(2) That American priority to the use of frequen- 
cies in this range can only be obtained by the licensing 
of their use primarily for the international service of 
public correspondence and that, when licensed, these 
frequencies must be so used to the fullest! possible 
extent. 

■ i 

(3) That the frequency allocation plan contained in 
the treaty is binding upon the Commission. 

The United States of America exercises ! a world 
leadership in radio communication. This it has at¬ 
tained through the invention and development of 
apparatus, its business enterprise, and its resources. 
The International Radio Telegraph Convention now 
in effect was signed in Washington. The proposals 
of the delegates of the United States for uniformity 
of assignments throughout the world and for the 
prevention of interference were more stringent than 




the text finally adopted for these purposes. The 
Commission believes that our country should be the 
last to violate either the form or the intention of the 
treaty. 

Under the allocation plan of the treaty, the follow¬ 
ing bands of frequencies are the gross legally available 
for assignment for point to point stations in domestic 
systems: 

In the low-frequency range: 10 to 100 kilocycles. 

In the intermediate-frequency range: 100 to 110 
kilocycles (fixed and mobile), 160 to 194 kilocycles 
(fixed and mobile). 

In the medium high-frequency range: 1,715 to 
2,000 kilocycles (mobile, fixed, and amateur), 2,000 to 
2,250 kilocycles (mobile and fixed), 2,750 to 2,850 
kilocycles, 2,850 to 3,500 kilocycles (mobile and 
fixed), 3,500 to 4,000 kilocycles (mobile, fixed, and 
amateur), 4,000 to 5,500 kilocycles (mobile and 
fixed), 5,700 to 6,000 kilocycles. 

b. North American Agreement 

The gross total thus legally available was further 
materially reduced by the provisions of .“An Agree¬ 
ment between United States, Canada, Cuba, and 
Other North American Nations Relative to the 
Assignment of Frequencies on the North American 
Continent/ 7 This agreement, known as the North 
American Agreement, was concluded at a conference 
held at Ottawa, Canada, commencing January 21, 
1929. It became effective March 1, 1929. Its full 
text is reproduced as Appendix J to this statement. 


I 



This Agreement is based upon the necessity of 
avoiding interference between the radio stations of 
the different North American nations using frequen¬ 
cies in the medium high-frequency range. It recog¬ 
nizes that for the present special administrative ar¬ 
rangements are essential. It provides that the par¬ 
ticipating Governments are free to assign £ny fre¬ 
quencies where interference will not result; 'that an 
allocation plan outlined therein shall be followed in 
the allocation of frequencies among services. It 
makes a distinction between frequencies below and 
above 3,500 kilocycles, recognizing that those below 
will not normally cause interference at distances 
greater than 1,000 miles and may be used by! stations 
separated by such distances while those above are 
sources of interference especially at nigbt. The 
Agreement provides for - taking advantage, of this 
situation and provides an allocation among the na¬ 
tions of the general communication channels, the 
Governments agreeing not to assign to stations within 
their respective jurisdictions any general conimunica- 
tion channels allocated to other Governments unless 
it can be accomplished without causing interference. 

Articles 13 and 14 of the agreement provide as 
follows: 

(13) For the purpose of this agreement a 
channel 3 shall be regarded as a band of 
frequencies, the width of which varies with its 
position in the range of frequencies under 

for this channelling system 
an explanation thereof will 

I 
i 

i 
i 


3 A discussion of the necessity 
from a technical standpoint and 
be found below at pp. 62 ff. 


consideration, blit which progresses numferi- 
cally from the lower to the higher frequencies, 
as shown in the following table— 


Frequency 

Channel 

width 

Kilocycles 

Kilocycles 

1, 500-2, 198 

4 

2, 200-3, 313 

6 

3, 316-4, 400 

8 

4, 405-5, 490 

10 

5, 495-6, 000 

15 

••• 

1 . •«. • • * • - ♦ 


(14) The Governments agree to adopt for 
the present in their national plan of allocation 
a separation of 0.2 per cent between radio 
frequency channels; and to permit stations 
under their respective jurisdiction to occupy 
the assigned frequency and the adjacent 
frequencies to the limit permitted by the 
frequency maintenance tolerances and neces¬ 
sitated by the type of emission the station 
may be authorized to use. * * * 

This Agreement has the effect of reducing the gross 
available spectrum in two ways, (1) by providing for 
the allocation to specific services of frequencies 
which are classified by the International Convention 
as shared between fixed and other services, and (2) 
by allocating general communication channels among 
the North American nations. 

The effect of the first of these reductions, through 
assignment of channels to mobile services (air, mari¬ 
time, and general mobile), to experimental visual 
broadcasting and to amateurs is to reduce the avail¬ 
able general communication channels to the following: 



57 


$ r ■ 

• xi) 


Band 

Number or 

ffhftnnftls 

Shared at separation of 1,000 miles of more.. 

KilocycUi 

2, 200-2, 296 

16 


3, 004-3, 0S8 I 

9 


3, 148-3, 412 

40 

Exclusive to but one nation__ 

3, 996-4,100 ! 

13 


4, 196-4, 745 | 

60 


4, 795-5, 495 

70 


5, 690-6, 000 

1 

20 

Total shared_ 


65 

Total exclusive__ 


163 

Grand total_ 


228 


; 


The effect of the second reduction, in assigning 
specific frequencies for the use of other nations, is to 

i 

give the United States, out of this total, the following: 

Channels shared with Canada and New¬ 
foundland___ j_ 34 

Exclusive_ j_ 112 


Total 


146 


general communication channels available in gross 
for assignment in the medium high-frequency band 
for point to point domestic communication services 


under International Law. 

I 

2. Limitations Imposed under Section 6 of the Radio Act 

Section 6 of the Radio Act of 1927, as amended 
provides: j 

Radio stations belonging to and operated 
by the United States shall not be siibject to 
the provisions of sections 1, 4, and 5 of this 
Act. All such Government stations shall use 
such frequencies or wave lengths as shall be 










58 



assigned to each or to each class by the 
President. 

An Executive Order of President Coolidge under 
date of March 30, 1928, amended June 4, 1928, made 
an extensive allocation of frequencies to Government 
services, including the Army, Navy, Coast Guard, 
etc. For reasons of State the specific allocations to 
individual stations and services are not published. 
A list of the frequencies assigned is attached hereto 
as Appendix K. 

The Executive Order covers frequencies in all 
bands. Inasmuch as the Order was promulgated 
prior to the adoption of the standard channel plan 
contained in the North American agreement and 
hereinafter discussed, the President’s frequency desig¬ 
nations do not coincide with generally accepted 
channels. 

The number of frequencies designated in the 


Executive Order is as follows: 

Low frequency range_ 26 

Intermediate frequency range_ 174 

Medium high-frequency range: 

Individual frequencies_ 117 

0.2% channels contained in “bands”_ 5 

High frequency range_ 102 


Total.. 424 


In order for the Commission to determine the effect 
of the Executive Order upon its authority to license 
stations, it was necessary for it to relate the various 
frequencies contained therein to the nearest standard 
frequencies in its channelling system. Eliminating 
Government frequencies in the 3,500 to 4,000 kilo* 








59 



cycle shared amateur band and relating all Govern¬ 
ment frequencies to standard channels, the order 
designates 89 channels for Government us0 in the 
medium high-frequency band. 

Of these 89 channels, 15 are channels above de¬ 
scribed as general communications channels shared 

with Canada and Newfoundland, 32 are exclusive 
United States general communications channels, 1 

i 

is an exclusive Canadian general communications 
channel and 41 are in bands not available for point- 
to-point service. 

The effect of the Executive Order, then, is to re- 

I 

duce the number of channels in the medium high- 
frequency range over which the Commissioii may be 
said to have jurisdiction by 46, leaving the following, 
number: ! 


Channels shared with Canada and Newfoundland_ i _ 19' 

Exclusive_ j _ 80 

j 

Total....... i .« 99 


4 This calculation is based upon the assumption that the 
channels 3,190 and 4,036 kilocycles are covered by the Execu¬ 
tive Order. The order specifies 3,195, which is closer to* 
3,196, a frequency shared between Canada and Newfound¬ 
land, than it is to 3,190, but comity would seem to require that 
it be related to the nearest frequency to which t|he United 
States has some right. The order specifies alsp the fre¬ 
quencies 4,025 and 4,030, both of which are nearer to 4,02S 
than to other frequencies and might be considered las relating 
both of them to that one only, except that two services are 
sought to be established and the order seems to contemplate 
the designation of all frequencies from 4,012 to 4,100. Hence, 
the Commission considers 4,036 as designated alsb. 

63493—29 - 5 








60 


s r a 
1 * • ? 


The Executive Order also has the effect of reducing 
the number of channels available for designation in 
the low and intermediate frequency ranges. The 
standard channelling system, 5 the reasons for which 
are given below, makes each channel width a band 
of frequencies, the wddth of which varies with its 
position in the range of frequencies under considera¬ 
tion, but which progresses numerically from the 
lower to the higher frequencies, as shown in the 
following table: 


Gross channels; fixed services 


Frequency (kc.) 

Channel 
width (kc.) 

Number of 
channels 

10-21___ 

0. 2 

56 

21.25-26.______ 

. 25 

20 

26.3-30.2....... 

. 3 

14 

30.55-37.2........ 

. 35 

20 

37.7-49.7_____ 

. 5 

25 

o0.4o—99.2________ 

. 75 

66 

Intermediate (shared with mobile): 

100-109_____ 

1. 00 

10 

160-194...... 

1. 00 

35 



Total gross channels: 

Low frequency_____201 

Intermediate frequency_ 45 


Total gross channels: 

Low frequency_____201 

Intermediate frequency_ 45 


Total____ 246 


In these ranges, just as in the medium high- 
frequency range, the Executive Order, in its designa¬ 
tion of frequencies, does not adhere to a standard 

5 The standard channelling system has not yet been made 
specifically applicable to the low and immediate frequency 
ranges by General Order of the Commission. It is being 
adhered to as much as possible and is followed where it will 
not disturb existing services and assignments. 



















61 


i 

i 



channelling system. The various assignments are 
related to the nearest standard channels. The Exec¬ 
utive Order thus designates for Government services 
25 channels in the low-frequency range and 16 chan- 

i 

nels in the intermediate range so far as now material, 
leaving a gross of— ' j 

Low frequency_ 176 j 

Intermediate frequency_ 29 j 

- 

Total.205 

i 

In considering the availability of these channels, 
it is necessary to refer back for a moment to the 
International Convention. Low frequencies are not 
subject to the phenomena of “skip distance effect.” 
Their effective range bears a relationship |to the 
power used. Under the treaty the priority of low- 
frequency stations of international range open to 
public correspondence must be recognizedl The 
Commission believes (and no appellant will dispute 

i 

it) that it is bound to recognize the priority of foreign 
low-frequency stations using power in excess of 10 
kilowatts. There are 60 such stations rendering 60 

i 

channels unavailable to the Commission. Thus the 
total legally available for designation by the: Com¬ 
mission in the low and intermediate frequency ranges 
is reduced to 120 channels. 

3. Summary 

It is thus observed that in the field p] 
available for the establishment of domestic 
munication systems, the number of channels 


rimary 
com- 
! avail- 


i 

i 

I 

i 





able for designation is severely limited by direct legal 


restrictions to the following: 

Low-frequency channels (available for both domestic and inter¬ 
national communication)_ 116 

Intermediate frequency channels (available for both domestic and 

international communication)_ 29 

Medium high-frequency channels for station 1,000 or more miles 

from Canadian stations_ 19 

Exclusive medium high-frequency channels_ 80 


Gross_244 


This may be figuratively referred to as the subject 
matter to which the Commission must first apply the 
requests of services having paramoimt demands. It 
must then consider the technical and scientific limi¬ 
tations upon the utilization of these frequencies. In 
applying the standard of public interest, convenience, 
and necessity the Commission can designate only 
such frequencies as remain after these depletions. 

B. Limitations Imposed by Physical and Scientific Factors 
1. The necessity for a standard channelling system 

Thus far the existence of a standard frequency 
channelling system has been assumed and the state¬ 
ment has taken it for granted that the necessity for 
such a system is undisputed. As a matter of fact 
such necessity has been conceded by practically all 
parties concerned in the development of communica¬ 
tion by radio. 

However, the appellants Intercity Company and 
Wireless Company, by paragraphs numbered 21 
and 22 (page 8) of their joint Reasons for Appeal, 
attack the channelling system. At pages 19 and 20,. 
they incorrectly describe it. 







63 


i 

j 

i 

i 



j 


For the purpose of correcting the misapprehension 
of these appellants in this regard and of clarifying 

i 

the references heretofore made to a “ channels” and 


“percentages of separation/’ the following discussion 


is given. 


a. What is a radio-communication channel? 

i 


Above all else, it must always be borne in mind 
that the term “channel” when used in connection 
with radio communication is a figure of speech. It is 
used metaphorically to compare the amount of 
“ether space” occupied by a radio transmission to 
analogous space occupied by physical, dimensional, 
moving bodies in the air, on the earth, and through 
the water. It is used only as a symbol an$ has no 
value beyond that purpose. To attempt to use it 
further is to lay the foundation for serious juristic 
errors. It too readily lehds itself to the formation of 
phrases such as “the granting of a channeji,” “the 
occupancy of a channel,” etc., as though! a radio 
communication facility were like a railroadj right of 
way, a highway, or a canal. 

i 

The medium of radio communication is incapable 
of such classifications. It contains no adjacent 
pathways. A radio transmission sets into motion 
an infinitely complicated series of moving j electro¬ 
magnetic and electrostatic fields, bearing relation- 
ship to each other and to the type of transmission 
apparatus employed. They are definitely j affected 
by the laws of physics and their behavior is known 

i 

I 

| 

• i 



I 

i 




-4 1 

10 ~ 

64 

and predictable in proportion as those laws and their 
application are known. 

The number of changes per second in the direc¬ 
tion of current flow in the antenna of a radio trans¬ 
mitter indicates the frequency of that transmitter. 
A hopeful imagination might conceive of a situation 
under which radio stations would operate upon the 
one frequency assigned and no other. Under such 
circumstances radiotelegraph stations might operate 
in infinite numbers because the frequency spectrum 
is capable of infinite subdivision. Under such happy 
circumstances a station might be established at a 
frequency of 3,000 kilocycles without interfering with 
the service of another at 2,999 kilocycles or even at 
2,999.99 kilocycles. 

A moment’s analysis shows how far such a con¬ 
cept is from actuality. A station must be operated, 

! • 

not at a single frequency but at a band or group of 
adjacent frequencies. The width of this band is 
determined by the following factors: 

Factor 1 . —The width of the actual communica¬ 
tion band itself. By this is meant the frequency 
band due to modulation or keying actually occupied 
by the emission for the type of transmission employed. 

As explanatory of this, the following extracts 
are given from the “ Material Submitted by Technical 
Experts of the United States of America for Discus¬ 
sion at the Meeting of the C. C. I. R. 6 at The Hague 

6 International Technical Consulting Committee on Radio 
Communications, established by the Washington Convention. 
(Article 17; Regulation 33.) 


65 




* n .r 

ih o 


i 

i 


in September, 1929.” Inasmuch as this statement 
concerns itself with telegraphic services only, portions 
dealing with those services are the only ones quoted. 

The process of modulating a carrier wave by 
a signalling wave having a single frequency, in 
actual practice, results in the production of 
two series of side frequencies, one series on 
either side of the carrier, of which side fre¬ 
quencies the most important is that pair 
which is nearest to the carrier. These side 
frequencies are separated from the carrier by 
frequency intervals which are successive mul¬ 
tiples of the frequency of the signalling wave. 
For example, in the case of a 100-kilocycle 
carrier which is modulated by a signalling 
frequency of one kilocycle, side frequencies 
occur in pairs at 101 and 99, 102 and 98, 
103 and 97 kilocycles, etc. The side fre¬ 
quencies farther removed from thej carrier 
are normally of substanitally lower amplitude 
than the first. The extent to which they may 
be further reduced depends largely upon the 
operating characteristics of the transmitter 
and upon the degree to which it is practicable 
to include circuits of suitable selectivity. 
* * * These levels may, fairly j readily, 

be further reduced. * * * | 

Radio emissions are classified in paragraph 
1 of Article.. 4 of the International Radio 
Regulations of Washington, 1927. These 
classes, * * * are listed below. ! Under 

each, there is given a statement of the fre¬ 
quency band required by the signalling waves 
corresponding to various methods and speeds 
of signalling. 


i 


i 

i 

i 



66 


;*> 

i 


Class A .—Continuous waves 

Waves the successive oscillations of which 
are identical under permanent conditions. 

Type A-l .—Unmodulated continuous waves 

Continuous waves, the amplitude or fre¬ 
quency of which is varied by means of tele¬ 
graphic keying. * * * 

The speed of telegraphic signalling may be 
conveniently expressed as a number of dots 
per second and is defined as the number of 
signal elements per second divided by two. 
(For example, a telegraphic dot and space 
together comprise two signal elements and 
are counted together as one “dot” (i. e. dot 
cycle) in determining the speed of signalling.) 

The frequency band occupied by the sig¬ 
nalling w^ave is proportional to the speed of 
signalling in dots per second. * * * 

The following table gives pertinent in¬ 
formation relating to the signalling band 
width required for several telegraph systems 
on the foregoing basis: 


System 

Approxi¬ 

mate 

number of 
dot cycles 
per five- 
letter word 
and one 
space) 

Frequency 
band in 
cycles for 
! transmis¬ 
sion of 100 
words per 
minute 
(for double 
side-band 
transmit 
sion) 

International Morse Code, plain English.. 

24 

160 

Start-stop printer_ 

22 

150 

American Multiplex 5-unit printer_ 

15 

100 




Type A-2 .—Continuous waves modulated at 

audible frequency 

j 

Continuous waves, the amplitude or fre¬ 
quency of which is varied in a periodic manner 
at audible frequency, combined with tele¬ 
graphic keying. j 

The width of the frequency band occupied in 
this case is equal to that employed iii case A1 
plus twice the maximum modulating frequency. 

Factor 2 —Frequency tolerance: By this is meant 
the extent to which the frequency of the radiation 
from a station may be permitted to vary on either side 
of the station frequency assignment. 

It is obvious that the maintenance of frequency of 
transmissions at a uniform standard, day in and day 
out under all conditions, while a scientific ideal, is a 
practical impossibility in the routine of coipmunica- 

j 

tions. This is affected by a number of circumstances 
which need only be mentioned to be appreciated, 
such as current possibilities in the design of equip¬ 
ment, the availability of measurement standards, va¬ 
riation in operating conditions, etc. 

Article 12 of the North American Agreement, deal¬ 
ing with the frequency range of 1,500 to 6,000 kilo¬ 
cycles, provides as follows: j 

The governments agree to require all sta¬ 
tions, likely to cause international interference, 
other than mobile and amateur stations, to 
maintain their frequency with an accuracy of 
0.05 per cent, or better, at all times, i 


The technical experts of the United States of 
America, in their material for the meeting of the 
C. C. I. R. above referred to, recommend a world 
standard in this respect to be effective July 1, 1930, 
as follows (so far as it relates to frequencies and 
services here material): 


Frequencies 

Tolerance 

15 to 100 kilocvcles_ 

±0. 1% 
±0. 05% 
±0. 05% 

100 to 110 kilocvcles_ __ 

1,500 to 6,000 kilocvcles_ _ __ 



The tolerance is listed “plus or minus” because 
frequency variations may occur either above or be¬ 
low the frequency designated for station use. 

The band of frequencies regarded as used by any 
radio station must therefore, in addition to the actual 
communication band, include space for the permit¬ 
ted frequency variations in two directions. 

The term “overall communication and tolerance 
band” means that portion of the station band within 
which the communication band may lie in view of 
the permitted frequency tolerance; it is made up of 
the following elements, (1) the “communication 
band,” and (2) twice the “frequency tolerance.” 

Factor 3 —The selectivity of radio receivers: Some 
consideration must be given to the type of receiving 
apparatus used in detecting radio transmissions. A 
transmission frequency separation which is free from 
overlapping is nevertheless unsatisfactory if the type 






69 


-# O A 

! . 

j 
j 

I 

i 

of receiving apparatus available is unable to properly 
discriminate between adjacent transmissions. This 
calls for the placing of “interference guard b&nds” be¬ 
tween “overall communication and tolerancfe bands.” 
The term “interference guard bands” means the 
frequency bands additional to the commjunication 
band and frequency tolerance which must be allowed 
in order that there shall be no interference between 
stations having adjacent frequency assignments. 

Thus, to continue the use of the nomenclature of 
the Technical Experts: 

The term “station band” means a portion 
of the radio spectrum of a width sufficient to 
permit of its use by a station for radio com¬ 
munication; it is made up of the following three 
elements: 

(1) The “communication band,” 

(2) Twice the “frequency tolerance, ” 

(3) The “interference guard bands.” 

Figure 1 is a graphical presentation of la station 
band as taken from the technical material. | 

This is what has been metaphorically! called a 
radio channel. The term “station band’!’ is more 
accurate and more scientific and will be used ihereaf ter. 

i 

i 

i 

b. Need there be a uniform system of station band allocations? 

I 

It being plain that assignments of frequencies for 
station operation must in effect be by station bands 
rather than by specific frequencies, it follows as a 
corollary that the station band assignments must be 
made according to a uniform system whereby the 
licensing authority designates to a station (1) the 


center frequency of the band upon which it is to 
operate, and (2) the width of the station band. 
Under such a standard system, a uniform width, 
expressed in terms of percentages of the center 


8012 kc 



Fiq. 1 


Fig.1 Illustration of Definitions. 

i Frequency assigned to 

Station '1 is 8000 kc 

£ Frequency assigned to 
Station*? is 8008 kc . 

2, Station requires 1000 
cycles on either side of 
Carrier Frequency. 

4 Station '2 requires 500 
cycles on either side of 
Carrier Frequency. 

5 Frequency Tolerance is 
0025% 

§. Station Band width 
is equal 8 kc • Oil % 


frequency, should be designated throughout the 
frequency range being classified. 

Only in this manner can there be a maximum 
utilization of frequencies. Any other plan would 
bring inevitable interference between stations. Early 7 


7 October 4, 1928 



71 


in the study of high-frequency-transmission problems 
by the Commission, Lieut. Comdr. T. A. M. Craven, 
U. S. Naval radio expert, who was then detailed to 

I 

serve the Commission as technical advisor, made the 
following recommendation: 

As a general principle it is best to select a 
definite percentage separation for telegraph 
services as the basis of all allocations. This 
will subdivide the spectrum into definite 
channels and will avoid confusion; while at the 
same time it will create a potential reserve for 
future expansion as the technique improves. 

This is a world-wide opinion. W. D. Terrell, Chief 
of the Radio Division of the Department ! of Com¬ 
merce and Chief of the American Delegation of ob¬ 
servers at the European Radio Conference ait Prague, 
Czechoslovakia, April 4-13, 1929, in his report on 
the discussion at the conference of point-to-point 

i 

short-wave communication, said, “It was recognized 
that it is fundamentally important to have a sys- 

i 

tematic series of channels to which stations can be 
assigned. * * ! 

c. What shall be the width of standard station bands? 

Since technical considerations .require I standard 
station bands, it is necessary to ascertain the best 
width for the bands. At the outset, two principles 
suggest themselves: 

(1) As between adjacent station bands utilized 
by different communication agencies, the separation 
should be as great as is consistent with economical 
use of frequencies. 


i 

i 


(2) As between adjacent station bands utilized 
by the same communication agency, every effort 
should be made to compel the use of the narrowest 
possible station band. 

The following of these principles offers a means 
for encouraging scientific progress wdiile at the same 
time avoiding interference and giving stability and 
reliability to communication services. Encourage¬ 
ment is given to licensees to increase the technical 
efficiency of their apparatus. 

Applying these principles to the medium high- 
frequency band, it will be observed that in the ex¬ 
ample contained in the illustration above the station 
band width of 0.1% was based upon a frequency 
tolerance of 0.025%. If the tolerance were increased 
to 0.05%, a station band width of 0.1% would 
contain only the tolerance band and would leave no 
room for either the communication band or the in¬ 
terference guard bands. 

As the commission is now advised technically, as 
between station bands used by different communica¬ 
tion agencies, a frequency separation of approxi¬ 
mately 0.2% is the most reasonable standard. This 
is particularly necessary in view of practical in- 
spectional and monitoring difficulties and in view of 
a patent situation winch does not render equipment 
of the greatest technical merit equally available to all 
communication agencies. As between adjacent sta¬ 
tion bands used by the same agency, a separation of 
0.1% or less is available. 


73 



The Commission gave effect to these technical con¬ 
siderations on April 5, 1929, by the promulgation of 
its General Order Number 62 which reaffirmed the 
approximate 0.2% separation basis but also per¬ 
mitted agencies using adjacent station bands to 
make the fullest possible use of the bands jby sub¬ 
dividing them, with the consent of the Commission, 
into bands of 0.1% or less. The General Order is re¬ 
produced as Appendix L. 

i 

An important technical advantage of this standard 
station band system at once suggests itself. It affords 
to any applicant for licenses the opportunity of 
offering to the public, through its applications to 
the Commission, the most advanced scheme pf which 
it is technically capable. The plan can be compared 
to the plans of others and the relative technical 
ability thus gauged. Licenses may be issued and 
should be issued, so far as practicable, to agencies 
for groups of adjacent station bands. At once the 
licensee is able to use the narrowest station band 
separation of which he is capable. He caii reduce 
this separation, if he is licensed to conduct a national 
communication system, by a judicious geographical 
separation of the stations operating on adjoining 
channels, narrowing or widening the separation as 
the demands of his service require, all under the 
supervision of the Commission which may control 
these matters through conditions attached to the 
licenses and the necessity for annual renewals thereof. 

A fortunate coincidence is thus turned to advan¬ 
tage. Domestic radio communication is j a new 

I 

i 

! 

i 

i 

i 

! 


74 


i n 9 

X 4 zc 

enterprise. It must go from small beginnings to 
great development. Any system that is entitled to 
license must grow. As it grows, its requirements 
for station bands must increase. It can not be dis¬ 
puted that as time goes on, frequency maintenance 
tolerances will decrease. Thus, in any system of 
domestic communication, the natural increase of its 
facilities through scientific progress will keep pace, 
in some measure, with the growth of its business. 
It is of interest to observe that circumstances will 
generally tend to keep this growth equal because 
the communication agency most successful in obtain¬ 
ing business will, by reason of that, be most anxious 
and most able to make technical progress. 

The recommendation to the Commission in this 
regard of Captain S. C. Hooper, now Director of 
Naval Communications, was: 

Frequencies should be assigned in blocks to 
individual agencies as far as practicable in 
order to permit the more progressive agencies 
to increase the number of channels within 
their respective blocks as rapidly as their skill 
permits. 

A technical committee composed of Captain 
Hooper, J. H. Dellinger, C. B. Jolliffe, G. C. Blackwell, 
W. E. Downey, A. H. Taylor, and W. J. Ruble, rep¬ 
resenting the Army, the Navy, the Bureau of Stand¬ 
ards, and the Radio Division of the Department of 
Commerce, reported to the Commission on March 
24, 1928: 

• Band assignments are advisable in the case 
of individual organizations operating several 


75 


i 

i 

i 

I 

i 


stations. An agency should be given the use 
of several adjacent channels and eventually 
would be permitted to place any number of 
stations within the limits of the bands, if 
study by the licensing authority showed this 
to be feasible, bearing in mind the frequencies, 
power, and geographical locations I of the 
stations. 

i 

It is regretted that some have misunderstood the 
meaning of this order as completely revising the 
standard station band system. The Commission had 
always adhered to 0.2% station bands and by this 
order merely encouraged technical development. 

It will be further noted that this 0.2% plan must 
be followed by the commission if it is to comply with 
the provisions of Articles 13 and 14 of the North 
American agreement. 

^ i 

The General Order does not apply to the low 
frequencies. The station bands system in effect in 
that range, established on principles analogous to 
those above discussed does not admit of jfurther 
subdivision than is indicated in the standard j station 
band system, supra at page 60, which is in j accord 
with the recommendations of the American Committee 

. t 

of Technical Experts described above. 

d. What is the effect of the standard station land system on the 

availability of station lands? 

An examination of the 99 medium high-frequency 
standard station bands above described as available 
for general communication, with reference tb their 
grouping, to determine how many fractional bands 

63493—29-6 


I 


I 


are available, reveals that at a separation of 0.1%, 
if all available facilities were assigned to one com¬ 
pany, there vrould be but 187 such station bands. 
As the juxtaposition of bands is broken up in assign¬ 
ments, to that extent are the available 0.1% frac¬ 
tional bands reduced. 

To this extent the necessity for a standard station 
band system operates as a limitation on frequency 
bands assignable. 

2. Technical limitations on duplication of service on the same station 

band 

The possibility of duplication by the assignment of 
two or more stations (at a sufficient geographical sepa¬ 
ration) to the same station band, suggests itself. 

This, however, is not extensively possible in the 
range 3,000 to 6,000 kilocycles because of the peculi¬ 
arities of the frequencies. They have extensive inter¬ 
ference possibilities which do not bear any definite 
relationship to the powder used. The radio emissions 
from an antenna in this range proceed in two ways. 
One is the so-called “ground wave/ 7 the range of 
which is extremely limited in the high frequencies. 
The other w’ay is by a w^ave which is described as 
leaving the antenna at an angle away from the surface 
of the earth and directed toward the upper atmos¬ 
phere where varying conditions of that atmosphere 
bend or refract the radio waves (much as rays of 
light are refracted by prisms) until they are again 
directed toward the surface of the earth, striking it 
over an area where reception is possible. Between 
this area and the area covered by the weak ground 


77 


* n ‘7 

k. 3 2 


wave, there is an area where reception is not satis¬ 
factory. This gives the wave a skip distancq effect. 

It will be noted than when a white ray of light is 
passed through a prism, it is broken up intq many 
colors, giving a rainbow effect. This is because the 
white ray is composed of all the colors found in the 
rainbow. They are separated in passing through the 
prism because light rays of different colors have 
different frequencies or wave lengths and the angle 
of refraction bears a fixed ratio to the frequency of 
the ray. This same law applies to the refraction of 
radio waves in the upper atmosphere. The higher 
the frequency, the less the angle of refraction and 
hence the greater distance will be obtained by its 
“sky wave.” Also, the refractive quality of the 

i 

atmosphere, which might be called its refractive 
density, varies according to natural law, depending 

i 

upon the angle of the sun and similar factors. It 
changes from day to night and from summer to 
winter. This behavior of a radio emission is pre¬ 
dictable within fairly accurate limits. There is at¬ 
tached hereto as Appendix M, a table showing the 
relationship between frequency and distance iri the 
medium high-frequency band. j 

From this table it will be observed that the Com¬ 
mission’s technical advisors were correct in their rec¬ 
ommendation that for continuous service dayi and 

i 

night the year round—as is required in the public 
service of radiotelegraphic communication, duplica¬ 
tions should not be made. Where slight daytime 
duplication may be possible, the character of the 


78 



various systems proposed is such that duplicated use 
of station bands is to be made within the system using 
the band upon the principles that the growth of traffic 
requires the expansion of facilities and that any 
agency is best suited to prevent interference between 
its own services. 

3. Technical limitations on the secondary use of international station 

bands for domestic use 

At this stage in the discussion of technical limita¬ 
tions it is well to consider the technical aspects of 
the auxiliary use of the station bands above 6,000 
kilocycles during certain hours for domestic com¬ 
munication. 

There is attached hereto as Appendix N the Com¬ 
mission’s tabulation of the distance effects of radio 
emissions of the frequencies in the range from 6,000 
to 23,000 kilocycles. From this tabulation it appears, 
for example, that a transmission at a frequency of 
6,000 kilocycles would have a “sky wave” maximum 
reliable range of over 7,000 miles at midnight in 
midwinter and of approximately 4,900 miles at mid¬ 
night in midsummer. Its ground w^ave would extend 
but 80 miles. Its sky’s distance would range from 
100 to 360 miles, depending upon the season. A 
transmission at a frequency of 12,000 kilocycles 
would have a “sky wave” maximum reliable range 
of over 7,000 miles at night both summer and winter 
with a ground w’ave of but 50 miles and a skip dis¬ 
tance of from 260 to 2,060 miles. 

It requires but the most passing examination of 
this chart, or of the graphs on the same subject pre- 


79 


i 

i 

i 


i 

i 


* 

* 

JL 


79 


pared by the Bureau of Engineering of the lUnited 
States Navy, attached as Appendix 0, to learn that 

i 

there is nothing “ arbitrary ” s about the recognition 
of the international effect of these frequencies either 
by the commission or by the International Radiotel¬ 
egraph Convention. It is, on the other hand, quite 
arbitrary to contend that frequencies having so inter¬ 
national an effect and useful for such great distances, 
should be used without limitation for domestic com¬ 
munication in a country so well supplied with wire 
services as the United States. 

However, it is noticeable from the chart that there 
are limited times during the day at certain seasons 
of the year when some of these frequencies jdo not 
have an international effect and can be used dbmesti- 
cally. For example, while a transmission at 8,000 
kilocycles has a 7,000-mile range at night the year 
around, yet at noon in midwinter its maximum 
range is 1,180 miles, and at noon in midsummer its 
maximum range is 420 miles. 

This indicates the possibility that an auxilihry use 
of this frequency may be had for domestic coipmuni- 
cation. 

i 

The technical limitations upon these auxiliary uses 
must be considered. 9 

It will first be observed that such auxiliary use is 
very greatly limited. 

8 See Intercity and Wireless Companies’ Notice of Appeal, 
page 15. 

9 A legal limitation in so far as the International Conven¬ 
tion is applicable was pointed out, supra at page 53. 


80 



Referring back to the example of 8,000 kilocycles, 
since that frequency has a maximum midsummer 
midday range of 420 miles and a maximum midwinter 
midday range of 1,120 miles, it might be thought that 
a domestic daytime circuit could be established for 
steady and reliable service between cities less than 420 
miles apart. But such is not the case. As the year 
progresses from summer to winter, the midday skip 
distance increases from 140 miles to 540 miles and as 
the winter day progresses from noon to midnight, the 
skip distance increases from 540 miles to 670 miles. 
Therefore the 420-mile circuit at 8,000 kilocycles 
would be useful but a few hours on some of the days 
of the year. The time of transition of this frequency 
from a useful domestic frequency to one having a 
world-wide interference effect would change from day 
to day, from season to season and (because of meteor¬ 
ological conditions), to some extent, from year to year. 

As has been pointed out, these phenomena are 
independent of the quantity of power used. The 
same power which will put a signal into Cleveland 
from a transmitter operating in Washington at noon 
in midsummer, will put a signal into India at night. 
As is stated in the recommendations to the C. C. I. R. 
of the American Technical Experts, 

although differences in station power are im¬ 
portant with respect to the reliability and 
grade of communication, they are compara¬ 
tively unimportant with respect to duplica¬ 
tion of assignments. Frequency assignments 
above 3,000 kilocycles can not be duplicated 
by reason of low power only. 


It must also be noticed that there is a time and 
light difference between different points ion the 
earth’s surface. There can be daylight in New 
York and night in London. 

Based upon these various factors, the Apierican 
Technical Experts have made the following analysis 
of auxiliary use of the high frequencies: 

i 

Frequencies in the band 6,000 to 9,000 kilo¬ 
cycles forming a part of the spectrurff recog¬ 
nized as international in its scope permits 
considerable daytime duplication of j assign¬ 
ment for use during periods when the trans¬ 
mitting station is in full daylight with the 
nearest sunrise or sunset wall at least two 
hours away. 

Frequencies in the band 9,000 to 23,000 kilo¬ 
cycles are not adapted for duplication of 
assignment, except for such cases as (may be 
possible by reason of special agreements 
concerning cases in which such use has 
been demonstrated as being possible without 
interference. 

Certain principles follow from these technical con¬ 
siderations which must govern the Commission’s 
consideration of applications for the licensing of 
stations to conduct domestic communication using 
station bands in the high-frequency range, j These 
principles may be stated as follows: 

(1) A station so authorized must cease the 
domestic service at the very moment the 
transmission becomes internationally effective, 
the time of so ceasing being seasonably and 
annually variable. 




82 



(2) The station so ceasing must have fre¬ 
quencies available in other ranges for the dis¬ 
patch of its accumulated message traffic after 
the high-frequency station band is relin¬ 
quished. 

(3) The plan of designation must be such 
that the relinquished station band is regularly 
used in international service within a very 
short time after it is relinquished from domes¬ 
tic service. 

(4) The international communication agency 
thus commencing the use of the relinquished 
station band must have assigned to it other 
station bands useful for international commu¬ 
nication during the time it was deprived of the 
auxiliary band, in order that its message serv¬ 
ice may be sufficiently continuous for the in¬ 
ternational handling of public correspondence. 

(5) The designation of station bands must 
be such that the shifting about thus required 
is compelled independent of a constant and 
minute supervision by the licensing authority 
and should preferably involve considerations 
of self-interest on the part of licensees which 
would tend to compel full compliance with 
the requirements set forth. 

(6) The station bands in the high-fre¬ 
quency range which are designated for aux¬ 
iliary use in the United States should be 
selected from among those assigned primarily 
for international communication to stations 
located in the United States to avoid interna¬ 
tional complication. 

There is only one way of putting these principles 
into practise: Station bands in the high-frequency 


83 


range can only be assigned to agencies using the same 
and other station bands in international communica- 
tion and then only at stations which are also licensed 
to use station bands in the domestic range. 

C. Limitations Imposed by the Paramount Demands of 

Other Services 

1. As to medium high-frequencies 


The North American Agreement allocated the 639 
standard station bands in the medium high-frequency 


range as follows: 

Mobile services_ 

Amateurs_ 

Experimental visual broadcasting 

Experimental_ 

General communication services. . 

Total_ 


190 

134 

S4 

3 

228 


639 


A very similar scheme of proportional recognition 
had been previously announced by the Commission 
on December 22, 1928, by its General Order numbered 
55, attached hereto as Appendix P. Tike General 
Order has been modified to some extent by the 
North American Agreement and a few definite 
assignments. I 

None of the appellants attack either the allocation 
made by the North American Agreement or the 
similar one of the General Order. It mky be well, 
however, to briefly indicate that point to point com¬ 
munication has not suffered in the distribution of 

j 

station bands. I 


j 

i 


i 

i 









a. Mobile services 


The 190 station bands assigned to mobile services 


are distributed as follows: 

Maritime mobile services exclusively_ 47 

Air mobile services exclusively_ 33 

Air and maritime mobile services_ SI 

Mobile services generally_ 29 


Total...... 190 


This group of assignments must take care of the 
short-wave requirements of ship stations, shore sta¬ 
tions, marine relay traffic, aircraft stations, ground 
stations to communicate with aircraft, airport inter¬ 
communication, and all the innumerable safety de¬ 
vices wherein radio is employed in connection 
■with transportation by ships and aircraft. The 
assignments must also take care of such facilities 
as it may be decided to accord moving railroad trains. 
The assignments must also provide for geophysical 
services which can be conducted only by radio, such 
as the location and measurement of bodies of ore, 
oil, water, etc. 

There is no doubt that mobile services present a 
most important demand for radio facilities. Fixed 
points can have communication channels by wire, 
mobiles can not. 

The priority of mobile over all other demands, save 
those of the national defense, has been uniformly 
conceded. 

The extreme rapidity of the development of air¬ 
craft transportation would make it seem that 190 
station bands will soon be scarcely adequate for that 
service alone. 







It is only by providing for the most! extensive 
possible duplication of assignments that aiiy attempt 

can be made to accommodate the demands for fre- 

! 

quency bands for the mobile services. \ This du¬ 
plication of assignments is made possible by the facts, 
first, that mobiles do not use their transmitters 
constantly and, second, that of the 190 station bands 
assigned to these services 134 are in the lortev portion 
of the spectrum, between 1,500 and 3,0041kilocycles, 
where duplication is possible. 


b. Amateurs 


Amateurs are persons engaged in radio commu¬ 
nication for personal and altruistic reasons. They 

i 

are precluded by the International Convention and 
the General Orders and Regulations of the Com¬ 
mission, from gaining any financial benefit from 


their transmissions. Prior to February! 23, 1927, 
they were entitled to use the entire rahge of fre- 

I_ 

quencies from 1,500 kilocycles upwards. They were 
the fir t to make practical use of short waves and 


demonstrated their efficacy to the world by feats of 


the most dramatic character. Their contributions 


to the science of radio communication have only too 
often been the demonstration of the utility of fre- 

i 

quency ranges only to arouse the desires of com- 

i 

mercial interests to deprive them of the use thereof. 

i 

At the various National Radio Conferences, speak¬ 
ing through their authorized representatives, they 

i 

offered to relinquish most of their territory for com¬ 
mercial development. During the breakdown of the 



law they policed their own frequency bands and ful¬ 
filled their pledges. 

It is only upon the North American Continent that 
they have been extensively encouraged, to which 
some are inclined to attribute much of America’s 
leadership in radio. European governments were 
inclined at the Washington Conference to impose the 
most drastic reductions upon amateur frequency 
bands. In spite of the great efforts in their behalf of 
the North American delegates, very serious reduc¬ 
tions were made in the width of the bands. As a 
result, in the range now under consideration, over 
17,000 amateur stations in the United States are 
crowded, for domestic communication, into the bands 
1,712 to 2,000 kilocycles and 3,500 to 3,996 kilocycles 
and they suffer an even worse congestion in their 
international bands. Nevertheless, through coop¬ 
erative effort, they have expended large sums of 
money and have exerted great effort and ingenuity 
toward the development of new types of apparatus 
and circuits to enable them to survive under these 
circumstances. 

They communicate by radiotelegraph and radio¬ 
telephone and experiment in facsimile and television 
transmissions. They operate training communica¬ 
tion nets for both the Army and the Navy. They 
afford communication service in times of emergency, 
flood, and tornado to railroads and the general public. 
For sixteen years they have offered a free message 
service to all who desired to use it as a means of pro¬ 
viding the traffic for their tests, communications, and 



87 



experiments and they have developed a World-wide 
relay organization for this purpose. 

In recognition of their utility and in realization 
that from the amateur ranks came the radio operators 
who gave our Army and Navy their communications 
during the late war as well as most of the radio in¬ 
ventors, engineers, technicians, and operators, it is 
to be regretted that the provisions of tne Interna¬ 
tional Radiotelegraph Convention have afforded them 
so little in the Tvay of frequency bands. 

| 

c. Experimental visual braodcasting I 

I 

The possibility of broadcasting the actual view as 
now the actual sound is broadcast makes the greatest 

i 

appeal to the imagination of any radio service. 
Visual broadcasting to-day is but an experiment. It 
can not be conducted in the broadcast band (550 to 
1,500 kilocycles). The only range wherein there is 
room for this type of experimentation is in the 
medium high-frequency range. The reservation of 
84 station bands for this type of experimentation is 
the reservation of only 4 television bands because of 
the fact that television may require a baud 100 kilo¬ 
cycles in width. 

It would be the utmost nearsightedness to deny 
this wonderful possibility the means of its develop¬ 
ment. 

d. Experimental services 

The North American' Agreement assigus only three 
station bands for radiotelegraph experiment, 1,604, 
2,398, and 4,795 kilocycles. j 

i 

i 



e. Reductions of the general communication station hands 

It will be remembered that there were shown to 
be 99 standard station bands available, after the re¬ 
ductions above indicated, for assignment to point-to- 
point domestic communication. In this field there 
are'certain demands for assignment that must be 
met before plans can be made for the establishment 
of public service communications systems. 

Experimental: The three station bands set aside 
by the North American Agreement are not sufficient. 
The experimental work being conducted for the de¬ 
velopment of high-frequency apparatus requires at 
least one additional band, and hence the wave band 
at 3,256 has been set aside for that purpose. 

Emergency: Only seven station bands (and those 
in' the Canadian-shared range) have been set aside 
for emergency services. These bands must provide 
communication between power distribution company 
substations and along their lines in order to provide 
for the necessary contracts and repair traffic in case 
of wire failure. Because of the duplication of 
assignments which must be made in these bands, the 
stations are only permitted to use their facilities 15 
minutes per day for testing purposes except in case 
of actual line failure. On these bands also the 
Commission has made assignments for police services, 
a most important requirement. 

Agriculture: Three, station bands have been as¬ 
signed to agricultural communications of a public 
character such as the telegraphic distribution of 
market renorts to broadcasting stations. 


89 




These assignments reduce the station bapds avail¬ 
able as follows: 


Gross bands available_4_ 99 

Reductions: 

; 

Experimental___*_1 

Emergency-police_j__ 7 

Agriculture_i__ 3 


Total_j_ 11 

Net bands available for assignment_|_ 88 

; 


As will be observed from the table at page 42, the 
communications agencies authorized by the Commis¬ 
sion have assigned to them 87 station bands.! 

i * 

Thus, for the present, all available station bands 

* i 

except one, 4,276 kilocycles, have been designated. 

i 

This band lies between the 4,268 and 4,284 kilocycles 
station bands designated for use by R. C. A. j 
As of May 24, 1929, based upon the Commission’s 
decisions of December 22, 1928, outstanding assign¬ 
ments covering 70 or 75 of these bands had been 
designated for use, depending upon the interpretation 
given to the Commission’s decisions with reference to r 
applications on behalf of the press communications 

i 

agencies. 

2. As to low and intermediate frequencies i 

j 

A discussion of the availability of station bands in 
the low and intermediate frequency ranges is included 
because these bands are within the commission’s 
legal power of designation. 

There has been no application made on behalf of 
any appellant for the licensing of stations for domes¬ 
tic service in the low frequency range between 10 
and 100 kilocycles. The reason for this, as explained 


I 

i 

j 








90 


above, is the tremendous expenditure required to 
establish and maintain stations capable of reliable 
communication. The stations which are licensed to 
use these bands in the United States were erected long 
before the development of apparatus capable of high 
frequency communication. These stations could be 
erected at that time only for transoceanic service 
wherein the high cost of erection of low frequency 
stations was less than that of cable installation. The 
stations having been erected and being now’ in oper¬ 
ation, their use in competition with cable services is 
still economical. In the present stage of radio 
technique these stations w’ould not be replaced. In 
the 116 available low frequency bands there are now 
operated 12 stations of the R. C. A., 12 stations of 
the Mackay Company, two stations of the Tropical 
Radio Telegraph Company, one geophysical explora¬ 
tion station, one communication station of the 
American Telephone & Telegraph Company using five 
standard station bands, and one experimental station 
of that company licensed to operate over 28 station 
bands. 

The intermediate frequency bands available for 
licensing for fixed services contain 29 station bands 
wdiich must be shared with mobile services. The 
Intercity and Wireless Companies made application 
for designation of 17 station bands in this general 
range. The four bands at the lower frequency end of 
the range, at 101, 103, 107, and 109 kilocycles having 
much the same characteristics as the low frequency 
bands, were not indicated in the applications. They 
are used in coastal and experimental service. 


91 


m 


Upon the remaining 25 station bands, the follow¬ 
ing are licensed: ! 

i 

Twenty-one stations engaged in maritime com¬ 
munication (coastal, mobile, and marine! relay) on 

L 

the Great Lakes, the Mississippi River, and in Alaskan 
waters, including stations of the Intercity; and asso¬ 
ciated companies. 

Twenty-six stations engaged in point! to point 
communication, most of them in the region of the 
Great Lakes, including stations of the Intercity and 
associated companies. 

Seventy-two stations engaged in poinli to point 
communication within and from the Territory of 
Alaska at points where other communication facili- 
ties are not available. 

i 

It is therefore to be noted that the extension of the 
Intercity and Wireless Companies systems is im¬ 
possible in this range of frequencies. j 

VI I 


THE EXERCISE OF THE LICENSING POjWER 

! 

A. Basis of the Power 

i 

The Radio Act of 1927, as amended, creates the 

i 

Federal Radio Commission to license the construction 
and operation of radio transmitting stations. The 

I 

practical basis upon which the licensing power rests 
is the physical fact of interference. The legal basis 
is the fact that transmissions and interference have 
an interstate effect. Were it not for interference, 
there would be no necessity for the exercise of the 

63403—29-7 


i 

i 





licensing function and were it not for the effect of 
that interference upon the interstate transmission 
of messages and intelligence, there would be no legal 
validity to the Federal control. 

B. Necessity for a Licensing Standard 

The mere prevention of interference, however, can 
not be the criterion for the licensing of stations. If 
it were, radio communication would be permanently 
hampered. A condition of fixation would result 
wherein existing stations, regardless of merit, would 
remain permanently established, in that new services 
could not be permitted to interfere. No test of merit 
would be available. 

It is therefore necessary that a standard be devel¬ 
oped to govern licensing. The standard by which 
applications are to be tested must be in accord with 
the nature of the art to which it is applied. To be 
applicable to radio communication it must be broad 
enough to cover all the aspects of that art. It must 
provide a full control of technical standards while at 
the same time encouraging scientific development. 
It must provide the utmost of protection and facilities 
to the public which uses radio. The essential charac¬ 
teristics of such a standard must be breadth and 
flexibility. 

C. The Application of the Standard is a Fact-Finding Func¬ 
tion in Each Case and the Standard is Not Susceptible of 
Explicit Definition 

There are many instances where a standard, such 
as reasonableness, wholesomeness or professional fit¬ 
ness, is prescribed by law, and its application en- 


93 


trusted to an administrative body. In most of these 
cases it has not been possible for the body to translate 
the standard into greater definiteness before applying 
it directly to concrete cases. Only by a process of 

exclusion and inclusion can a line of distinction be 

■ 

gradually established. 

In a field such as radio communication, where every 
case involves a multitude of factors of varying im¬ 
portance, it is practically impossible to select any 
particular facts or factors and apply them as a cri¬ 
terion over the whole field. 

Where public interest is involved in the standard, 
its many forms make it expedient to place the applica- 

# • # i 

tion of the standard in the hands of an adifiinistra- 
tive tribunal which represents the public. It| is there 
that the standard can be best applied, because the 
administrative body is at liberty to attach decisive 
weight to the distinguishing, special circumstances in 
each case that seem to deserve recognition in view of 
all other circumstances. 

In the Radio Act of 1927, as amended, the standard 
established must be applied to many different classes 
of cases and types of situations. The decision as to 
compliance in any given case must be madd by the 

I 

weighing of many factors and the application of 
discretion as to what is proper under the circumstances. 

i 

The Commission must first find from sworn Applica¬ 
tion forms and from testimony what are the! special 
facts in any case. Then there is a gap to be bridged 
between the special facts in each case and the ulti¬ 
mate fact, i. e., the presence of public interest, con- 

■ I 

i 

j 

i 

i 

! 


venience or necessity. The bridging of this gap is 
one of functions of the Commission as an adminis¬ 
trative tribunal, which may well be called the “stand¬ 
ard applying 77 tribunal. 

It is plain that the standard prescribed by the Act 
is not capable of definition with mathematical 
certainty. Even were such a definition possible, it 
wx)uld vary with the types of stations to which it 
would be applied. Necessarily, the application of 
the standard must vary from time to time in con¬ 
sonance with the development of the radio com¬ 
munication art and the growing needs of the public 
for communication facilities. 

D. There are certain undisputed rules for the application 

of the standard 

The Commission must apply the standard pre¬ 
scribed by law to the innumerable applications before 
it for licenses and construction permits for domestic 
service. It is the application of the standard by the 
Commission which the appellants seek to have 
reviewed in their several appeals to this Court. 

It has been determined what facilities remain for 
consideration after the legal and technical depletions 
of the spectrum. The general principles underlying 
the application of the standard should now be stated 
in so far as they are undisputed by the appellants. 


95 


1. Point to point domestic communication facilities should, 
in the main, be granted only to general public service and 
limited public service communications companies 

As was indicated in the Statement of the Com- 

j 

mission in the By-Product Coal Company case and in 
the J. P . Burton Coal Company case, tlkre were 
pending before the Commission, at the tinie of the 
last hearings on the applications of thp present 
appellants, 444 applications requesting a total of 

I 

457 frequency assignments for domestic j point to 
point communication, there being but a small number 
of station bands assignable to such services. As of 
December 22, 1928, and at various other times, the 
Commission denied a vast number of oljher such 
applications. So tremendous a demand for assign¬ 
ments in a frequency range where the total number of 
available station bands is but 88, dictate thkt assign¬ 
ments be made only to services that will afford the 
greatest beneficial use to the greatest part of the 
public. 

Many, if not most, of the applications before the 
Commission have been on behalf of private indi¬ 
viduals and enterprises seeking the use of jexclusive 
radio facilities for the purposes of their own businesses 
in order to save telegraphic tolls and other! expense. 
Examples of this have been the applications pf motion 
picture producing companies for facilities to enable 
them to communicate between their New York and 
Hollywood offices. Some of these motion picture 
producers, after the denial of their applications, 
offered to assist in the financing of the proposed 


! 


Intercity Radio Telegraph system. Other examples 
are packing companies, cotton brokers, and depart¬ 
ment stores having branches in several cities. One 
organization requested the designation of frequencies 
for the operation of distant bookkeeping machines it 
proposed to use in its business. 

Obviously the designation of facilities to one private 
enterprise in aid of its internal economy would require 
the equal designation to other enterprises of equal 
claims, else the Commission’s decision would be 
arbitrary and unreasonable. In view of the limited 
number of station bands, the Commission could not 
embark upon the licensing of stations for such private 
enterprises. Nor would such designation comply 
with the statutory standard, for each private designa¬ 
tion would be pro tanto a depletion of facilities open to 
the general public. It was therefore necessary that 
the Commission adhere to the rule in this field that 
only public service communications companies might 
be considered as applicants. All the appellants now 
before the Court are or propose to be organizations of 
this character, and hence do not contest this policy. 

a. The press communication classification 

The International Radio Telegraph Convention 
(Article I) recognizes two classes of public service, 
one for the use of the general public and another 
which may be used only by specified persons or for 
specific purposes. 

In complying with the provisions of Section 4 (a) 
(c) of the Radio Act of 1927, the Commission, on 
June 20, 1929, classified 20 station bands as available 


97 


* 

w 


19 

for assignment to public service on equal tetms to all 
newspaper and press interests. 10 This classification 
came after 11 the decisions complained of by the 
appellants; they were not parties to it and have no 
appeal from it. Nevertheless one of the appellants 

i 

(and only one; see R. C. A. Notice of Appeal pp. 20, 
28) has expressed its dissatisfaction with the classifi¬ 
cation, and a brief explanation may be made of the 
Commission's partial modification of the broadest 
public service test in this case. 

It is well known that in the wire communication 
business it is the practice of the telegraph companies 
to lease wires to newspaper services. One of the 
reasons for this situation is that the flow of press 
traffic is practically continuous. By far t^ie largest 
part of published news is telegraphic hews, the 
essence of news being the smallness of j the time 
intervening between the event and the publication. 
From this it follows that, insofar as radiotplegraphic 
communication is capable of either supplanting or 
supplementing the wire telegraph services, news 
traffic will form a large part of the material trans- 
mitted by radio. 

Where a wire telegraph company, with its special 
facilities, has constructed telegraph lines at great 
expense, there can be no objection to the lease of 
those lines so long as others are available for public 

10 The contention made in another case, if approved by 
this Court, would amend this sentence to read “On Decem¬ 
ber 22, 1928, the Commission designated 20 (25) station 
bands to eleven public utility companies for press service.” 

11 Or “long before.” 


9S 


IQ , 

jl u 




use. The medium of radio communication is not 
created or constructed by communication companies. 
It is a natural facility. The Commission can not 
believe that station bands may be assigned to one 
for lease to another. Any such lease would in¬ 
evitably involve a compensation to the lessor, not 
only for apparatus and personnel but also for the 
channel itself. Hence the Commission does not 
feel that it can permit leased radio circuits. There¬ 
fore, if this important press traffic is to have its 
proper share of radio facilities, assignments should 
be made to press communication agencies. 

In this manner, important economies in the use of 
station bands can be effectuated. The situs of im¬ 
portant news events changes from day to day and 
from hour to hour. An important governmental 
event in Washington may be followed by a note¬ 
worthy sporting event in New York City, to be in 
turn supplanted in the public eye by local floods, 
tornadoes or earthquakes. The proper utilization of 
radio in the collection and distribution of news will 
thus require a rapid shifting of the number of operat¬ 
ing station bands from point to point entirely from 
a standpoint of news values. The general public 
service communications company with its require¬ 
ments for constant availability of facilities through¬ 
out its system, is unable to accommodate itself to 
news events. The economies of utilization thus 
indicated as available through press assignments 
will benefit both the press and the general communi¬ 
cations companies, relieving the latter of the necessity 


99 


i | 0 Q 

JL 1/ cJ 
i ' 

I 

i 

for complying with heavy and sporadic demands for 
service at individual localities. The public must 
benefit both as a user of the general communication 
service and as a “consumer” of news. 

Another consideration indicates the desirability of 
a reasonable designation of facilities to thb press. 
Radio is a multidirectional service, the wires are not. 
Press associations, distributing news to hundreds of 
member and subscriber newspapers, can take exten¬ 
sive advantage of this natural phenomenon! by the 
multidirectional distribution of news services to in¬ 
numerable newspapers which are unable tcj obtain 
those services by wire because of excessive expense. 

i 

This can only be accomplished by the designation of 
station bands for the use of the press—if leased cir¬ 
cuits are to be avoided—inasmuch as general com¬ 
munications companies are compelled to keep their 
facilities open for the demands of unidirectional traffic. 

These are some of the considerations underlying 
the Commission’s classification of June 20, 1929, 
for limited public service, open to all newspapers and 
press associations on equal terms, and in no way 
representing an abandonment of the public service 
principle. j 

Construction permits have been held up (1)! because 
of the pendency of an application of the Intercity 
Company for an injunction or stay order, and (2) 
because the terms of the Commission’s brder of 
June 20 have not been fulfilled, with reference to its 
proposed domestic service, by the press. 

I 

i 


I 

| 


i 



u \ •' • 


100 


2. The statutory standard must be applied from a national viewpoint 

The principle that the standards of public interest, 
convenience, and necessity must be applied from a 
national or nation-wide point of view would seem to 
follow logically from the undisputed principles here¬ 
tofore discussed. It is particularly imposed upon the 
Commission by the facts of scarcity of station bands 
and of the nation-wide interference effect of transmis¬ 
sions in the band 3,154 to 5,990 kilocycles wherein 
the United States general communications channels 
are located. 12 

The band scarcity requires that the utmost utili¬ 
zation be made of facilities to accomplish the greatest 
possible communication both in distance and geo¬ 
graphical breadth. These considerations are fortified 
by the fact that, in any event, the transmissions are 
apt to extend for large distances. 

Moreover, the utility to the public of a radio com¬ 
munication system increases in geometric proportion 
as the number of communities are increased. A 
system between two cities, A and B, can accept mes¬ 
sages from A to B and from B to A, a total of two 
services. But if the circuits are doubled, the range 
of the system for public use is increased by the multi¬ 
pier 6. By adding cities C and D, messages can be 
sent from A to B, A to C, A to D, B to A, B to C, 
B to D, C to A, C to B, C to D, D to A, D to B, and 
D to C, a total of 12 services. 

12 A list of these channels, indicating the agencies to which 
they are designated, is found at Appendix R. 


I 

i 


All considerations would seem to point, therefore, 
to the desirability, generally speaking, of establishing 
systems of comprehensive scope. 

There are, however, certain very important limiting 
factors to be considered in the application of this 
test, wdiich may be briefly summarized as follows: 

(1) The geometric increase of service rangd involves 

also a geometric increase of the amount of traffic 
handled. Hence a system using a restricted number 
of station bands can not increase the number of cities 
served beyond the point at which the station bands 
will be completely saturated. Thus any giyen com¬ 
munication system is self limited, the point of limita¬ 
tion in the case of any system being determined by 
(a) the amount of radio traffic available at the cities 
chosen for station location, and (b) the number of 
stations the system is able to operate upon a standard 
station channel because of technical ability^ duplica¬ 
tion, and band shifting. | 

(2) The comprehensiveness of the system must be 
scrutinized to determine its effect upon other services, 
its reasonableness and its choice of cities with respect 
to other factors to be considered in determining the 

I 

requirements of public interest. 

A. The Western Radio Telegraph Company 

The general test of comprehensiveness must, how¬ 
ever, be subject to reasonable exception. Op June 7, 
1929, the Commission granted applications filed by 
the Western Radio Telegraph Company for 14 sta¬ 
tions in 13 towns in Texas, Oklahoma, and New 

* 

i 

i 

i 

i 


i 

i 

i 

i 


•• > \ 9 

6 ” " 102 

Mexico. The decision related to no applications 
filed by any of the appellants; they were not parties 
to it and have no appeal from it. Nevertheless one 
of the appellants (and only one—see R. C. A. Notice 
of Appeal, page 27) has expressed its dissatisfaction 
with the decision and a brief explanation may be 
made of the Commission’s partial modification of the 
broadest test above indicated. The exception made 
on behalf of the Western Company has not been in 
connection with the number of communities served 
but rather in their separation. The Western Com¬ 
pany’s system is regional rather than national. 

The special circumstances upon which the decision 
rests may be briefly summarized as follow’s: 

(1) The territory served by this Company is an 
oil-producing territory. Many competing enter¬ 
prises are there engaged in the production, transporta¬ 
tion, and refining of oil and are in urgent need of 
communication facilities. Nevertheless, there are 
no adequate wire communication channels. All 
general rules relating to the licensing of radio stations 
are subordinate to the necessity of providing radio 
facilities to localities where a large volume of traffic 
of national importance and an inadequacy of other 
communication channels exist together. 

(2) The Western Company is a general public 
communication company which has taken over the 
radio stations of The Marland Pipe Line Company, 
The Phillips Petroleum Company, The Texas Pipe 
Line Company, and the Skelly Company, which, in 
the past, have been dependent upon radio for the 


conduct of their business. By establishing itself as 
a public utility, the Western Company id able to 
afford more service on a demand for fewer station 
bands and is able to handle the messages of the 
general public in addition to those of the oil 
companies. 

(3) No other applicant before the Commission has 
presented any plan which will afford these much 
needed facilities to this territory. 

(4) By reason of the great distance between this 
territory and the Canadian border, and of the short 
distances between the Western Company’^ stations, 

i 

the Commission has been able to take advantage of 
Articles 2 and 7 of the North American Agreement in 
licensing the Western Company without materially 
depleting the number of station bands available for 
national systems. This has been accomplished by 
designating for use three exclusive Canadian station 
bands at 5,780, 5,795, and 5,810 kilocycles, Subject to 
limitations of powrer and hours of operation prevent¬ 
ing interference with Canada. Power limitations of 
an extent sufficient to prevent this interference can 
be imposed in this case only by reason of the short 
distances required to be traversed. There are but 
two United States channels assigned to the Western 
Company. The Commission has also, in this 
instance, been able to designate four station bands 
in the intermediate frequency range at 182, 186, 188 
and 193 kilocycles. These are shared mobile bands 
which can be designated for use by this company 
because of the distance of its stations j from the 



seaboard and particularly from Alaska, where these 
bands are primarily used. 

~b. The Intercity Radio Telegraph Company 

Another exception has been made by the Commis¬ 
sion, although for reasons of less weight, in the case of 
the Intercity Company. The Commission has per¬ 
mitted it to continue a purely regional communica¬ 
tion system in the Great Lakes territory. The cities 
served by the Intercity Company, with the exception 
of Rogers City, Michigan, which has a station not 
owned by the Intercity Company, are quite ade¬ 
quately provided with wire-communication circuits. 
However, the Commission has felt some deference for 
the length of time during which this Company has 
conducted its system and the reliance which seems 
to be placed upon it by some few hundred local enter¬ 
prises which patronize it. 

The Commission has also borne in mind the state¬ 
ment made to it during the January, 1928, hearings by 
Mr. Frederick C. Schofield, representing the Intercity 
Company and the Michigan Limestone and Chemical 
Company of Rogers City, Michigan, in support of 
the application: 

Now there is one peculiarity about the Great 
Lakes situation. In order to furnish that ship 
to shore service 13 there must be a permanent 
organization, there must be stations capital¬ 
ized, equipped, ready to operate during the 
navigation season, but from an economic point 


13 Stations for communication with vessels on the Great 
Lakes are maintained at all cities except Columbus, Ohio. 



of view unless they can be supported during 
the balance of the season by point-to-point 
traffic that service would very promptly dis¬ 
integrate and be lost to the shipping operators. 

In designating frequencies for the point-jto-point 
services of the Intercity Company, the Commission 
has been compelled, in order to least disturb the 
existing stations of the Company, to depart some¬ 
what from the standard band system. The frequen- 
cies 165 and 171 kilocycles are in use at all Intercity 
stations and in addition two marine relay frequencies, 
4,116 and 8,630 kilocycles, are authorized at Cleve¬ 
land. This designation of frequencies wak being 
revised in order to conform it to the uniform system, 
and modifications of station licenses were being pre¬ 
pared at the time the Intercity Company filed its 
petition for an injunction or stay order. j 

No appellant takes exception to the licensing of 
the present Intercity Company stations. 14 

c. The Mackay Radio and Telegraph Company 

An exception to the rule requiring the licensing of 
only comprehensive national systems has also been 
made in permitting the continuance of the!Pacific 
Coast circuits of the Mackay Radio and Telegraph 
Company. The considerations underlying this action 
by the Commission may be briefly summarized as 
follows: 

i 

(1) The service conducted by the Compafiy and 
its predecessor, as well as an extensive ship-to-shore 

14 There are also a number of mobile station bands assigned 
to the Intercity Company’s stations for the point ^o point 
relaying of marine traffic which are not here material. 








106 



service, have been excellently conducted for a great 
many years, and it would not be proper for the Com¬ 
mission to put that service out of business. 

(2) The Mackay Company is a substantial com¬ 
pany enjoying patent rights sufficiently broad to en¬ 
able it to manufacture and supply adequate equip¬ 
ment for commercial radio telegraphy and allied pur¬ 
poses. It is independent of the Radio Corporation 
of America, which dominates the radio patent situa¬ 
tion. The Mackay Company affords an opportunity 
for competition. 

(3) The connection of the radio circuits of the 
Mackay Radio and Telegraph Company with the 
marine and international services of that company, 
with the telegraph circuits of the Postal system, and 
with the cable circuits operated by the Commercial 
Cable Company and Commercial Pacific Cable Com¬ 
pany, afford a comprehensive service to the public 
in any event. 

No appellant takes exception to the licensing of 
the present Mackay Company stations. 

i 

E. The application of the Statutory Standard to Point to 
Point Domestic Communication 

It has been pointed out how fixed physical and 
legal factors limit the number of station bands assign¬ 
able for domestic communication. 

The general rules for the application of the stand¬ 
ard of public interest, convenience, or necessity have 
been pointed out in so far as they are agreed to by 
the Commission and all appellants. Certain limita- 


107 



tions on and exceptions to these general rules, which 
have encountered but little objection on tile part of 
any appellant, have been indicated. 

It is plain that the Commission could not by ex- 

I 

tended discussion prescribe a definite set of rules by 
means of which the statutory standards can be ap¬ 
plied to all contemplated systems of domestic com¬ 
munication. Controlling features, as has been pointed 
out, differ from case to case. 

i 

The Commission can here present only a general 
outline of considerations of public interest in so far 
as it has conceived them to be applicable to applica¬ 
tions here involved or mentioned. 

1. Economic considerations 

I 

a. Existing communication facilities must be considered 

It has already been pointed out that the 1 Commis¬ 
sion takes into consideration the availability of wire 
communication facilities in considering applications 
for licenses for the establishment of a regional radio¬ 
telegraph system. 

In March, 1927, when the Commission was organ¬ 
ized, the position was taken that applications would 
not be granted for service which would duplicate that 
already furnished by land line companies. The 
public was well and widely served with; facilities 
operated on a public utility basis, and the Commis¬ 
sion's decision that, for the time being at least, 
parallel radio service would not be authorized was 
dictated by a desire to conserve the limited number 

G3493—29-8 



n ■ \ Q 
Cj * > O 

108 

of frequencies available for domestic service until 
such time as a provident allocation could be made. 

It may be that the Commission owes the wire tele¬ 
graph companies no duty to protect them from com¬ 
petition by radio services. But there is a much 
broader consideration than this. The Commis¬ 
sion, while encouraging the development of radio, 
should nevertheless, in applying the statutory stand¬ 
ard, take into consideration the possibility of a radio 
company competing unfairly with a wire service to 
such an extent that the general public may suffer. 
On December 31, 1928, the Western Union Tele¬ 
graph Company service extended to 24,842 offices. 
The Postal System reaches 2,127 offices in the 
United States. Telegrams can be sent by wire to 
and from thousands of hamlets and remote villages. 
These systems cover almost the entire United States, 
and they must do so in order to be of great impor¬ 
tance in national communication. 

No commercial enterprise can be expected to 
operate at a loss. ‘A wire system is entitled to a 
reasonable profit from its operations. 

Obviously there is no constant relationship between 
the capital, personnel, and maintenance expenses of a 
wire circuit on the one hand and its volume of traffic 
on the other. The company's cost of a wire circuit 
between small communities is not always justified by 
the income from traffic. The offices in small com¬ 
munities must be maintained to preserve the utility 
of the entire service to all the people of the Nation. 
The charges for message traffic over the more profit- 


109 



able circuits between large centers of population 

must include some charge for the maintenance of the 

| 

less profitable circuits. The wire companies 7 charges 
for their readiness to serve are thus equitably dis¬ 
tributed. 

With the wire communication companies thus 

i 

situated, the Commission can not, from the stand¬ 
point of the national welfare, encourage the establish¬ 
ment of radio communication systems based solely 
upon the selection of the most profitable points 
of communication. Radio companies taking the 
“cream 77 of the business at reduced rates might 
impair the utility and the economic structure of the 
wire companies, for the latter, in order |to meet 
competition, might be compelled to abandon un¬ 
profitable circuits. 

On the other hand, this principle is limited by 
physical factors which, in the present state of the 
radio communication technique, prevent the estab¬ 
lishment of radio services in any way approaching 
the extent of the wire systems. 

This being true, the Commission must exercise a 
discrimination between the penetrating radio system 
and the selective one, between the radio! system 
offering service on a nation-wide basis and that 
offering a service only on the most profitable Circuits. 
Upon the same considerations, the Commission 

j 

must not lend itself to the establishment of radio cir¬ 
cuits which will rely upon the handling at reduced 

i 

rates of the bulk traffic of individual large corpora¬ 
tions between their various offices, to the practical 


exclusion of the less profitable occasional traffic of the 
general public, especially under circumstances where 
the wire communication companies are prevented by 
law or regulation from making such preferential and 
discriminatory arrangements. To this extent, where 
there are wire communication facilities available, the 
Commission must carefully scrutinize the location of 
the proposed stations of any radio communication 
company. 

This discussion is not intended to indicate that 
proper competition by radio with wire fines is not 
desirable. 

b. The international communications of an applicant for 
domestic service must be considered 

Early in the Commission’s consideration of the 
problems of licensing in the higher frequency ranges 
it became apparent that it must proceed with the 
allocation of frequencies for transoceanic service if 
a fair share of the high frequencies useful for long 
distance communication were to be reserved for use 
by the United States. A substantial portion of the 
useful frequencies have an international service and 
interference area, which means that, generally speak¬ 
ing, they must be used exclusively by one station 
in order to avoid interference in other parts of the 
world. And the Commission was bound by inter¬ 
national agreement—if not by its own interest in 
similarly protecting the use of frequencies it allo¬ 
cated—not to designate such frequencies if they had 
been registered by another country at Berne. More- 


Ill 


over, because of the competition factor, viz., the 
desire on the part of the American companies to 
maintain leadership in world communication, the 
projects before the Commission for this type of serv¬ 
ice were mature and satisfactory. Therefore, in 
May, 1927, applications were granted on the follow¬ 
ing basis: 

Tropical Radio Telegraph Company, 7 station 
bands. 

American Publishers Committee, 20 station bands. 

Robert Dollar Steamship Company, $ station 
bands. 

American Tel. & Teleg. Company, 14 station bands. 

Radio Corp. of America, 65 station bands. 

Mackay Radio and Teleg. Co., 37 station bands. 

(Intercity Radio Telegraph Company, Wireless 
Communications Company, and Universal Wireless 
Communications Company were not applicants for 
this type of service.) 

All these were standard 0.2% station bands in the 
international range, use of which has now been 
materially expanded by General Order 62 permitting 
the subdivision of station bands. I 

Two station bands were similarly designated for 
shared use by Firestone Plantations Company for 
service to Liberia and by Standard Oil Company for 
service to Bolivia, but it was stipulated that such 
frequencies should be used on a public service basis. 

i 

! 


i 

| 


! 

I 


I 


On May 24, 1928, in granting applications for 
transoceanic service, the Commission announced the 
following principle: 

All construction permits issued for trans¬ 
oceanic short wave service are to be for general 
service stations. 

Radio Corporation of America, Mackay Radio & 
Telegraph Company, and the American Publishers 
Committee also filed applications for permits and 
licenses authorizing their entry into domestic com¬ 
munication. They intended to operate in connec¬ 
tion with the designations made in May for trans¬ 
oceanic communication. Though it can not be said 
that thk two types of service are absolutely inter¬ 
dependent, since the Intercity and other companies 
were willing to attempt operation without the use of 
foreign circuits, it was nevertheless apparent that the 
two services are interrelated. 

The interrelationship, of course, lies in the fact 
that international facilities are useless without inter¬ 
national traffic. It is not possible for a communica¬ 
tion agency to successfully operate international 
circuits on the basis of traffic available to and from 
the seaboard cities in which its transmitters are 
located. The success of the company’s operation 
and its utility to the Nation as a whole depend upon 
its having facilities for the collection and delivery of 
messages to and from foreign countries. 

Hence, in applying the statutory standard to 
problems of licensing domestic communication, the 
Commission must consider the status of agencies 


113 


i 

i 


9 I 9 

£■' -L. <2> 


licensed to conduct international communication with 
respect to facilities available to them for the collection 
and distribution of their traffic domestically. 

i 

c. Competition between radio services must be considered 


If there were a sufficient number of station bands 
available to make frequency designations possible to 
all applicants desiring to establish domestic com¬ 
munication services, economic considerations would 
nevertheless make it contrary to the statutory stand¬ 
ard to permit the establishment of too many such 
systems. 

A very small fraction of available domestic tele- 
graph business is now handled by radio. ]jt is plain 
that a profitable quantity of such business will not 
be available overnight upon the opening of radio 
circuits. The volume of traffic must be developed 
in competition with existing circuits upon |the bases 
of rates, service, popular appeal, and the! develop¬ 
ment of new traffic. 

The field from which radio traffic will come is, to 

j 

some extent, a selective field. Too many competing 
radio services can not be established to serve the 
same localities. Ruinous competition between radio 
companies for a limited volume of traffic yrould im¬ 
pair the development of radio communication. The 
public is the ultimate loser from competition of this 
character. 

At the same time the Commission can ! not lend 


itself to the creation of a monopoly in radio com¬ 
munication. While it is true that the wire companies 






will preserve competitive conditions in the com¬ 
munication field, the Commission should, so far as 
station bands are available, bear in mind the desir¬ 
ability of fostering a healthy competition between 
radio services. 

It is hardly necessary to mention that factors of 
competition can not be considered from an individual 
or local standpoint but that the considerations must 
be applied in the broadest manner. Nor may these 
considerations control , 15 so as to require the granting 
or denial of licenses regardless of other aspects of 
public interest. 

It is equally plain that tests and standards can be 

i 

applied only to actual applications before the Com¬ 
mission, and that a competitive ideal can only be 
approached to the extent that there are proper 
proposals on file. • 

<L. A proposal should conform generally to sound economic 

principles . 

As was mentioned above, this statement can not 
point out all the factors which enter into the de¬ 
termination of whether a communication system 
complies with the statutory standard, particularly 
with reference to the very important economic 
principles involved. 

The Radio Act contemplates that the Commission 
shall consider the “financial ability” of an applicant 
to carry out its proposal. This is due not only to the 
large expense of installing apparatus but also to the 

16 See Intercity Company Notice of Appeal, p. 6. 


115 


-t. -J 


I 

necessity of continuous operation in the paramount 
interest of the public. It may, and probably will, 
be necessary for domestic communication systems to 
operate at a loss during a developmental period. 
Such has been the experience of radio companies in 
the past. The mere fact of loss must not j interfere 

i 

with efficient operation if public interest is to be 
served. 

However, the testimony before the Commission 
indicates that all 16 the applicants have the hecessary 
finances for this purpose. Some, it is true, might be 
able to so continue for a longer time than others, but 

i 

the Commission does not expect any interminable 
period of unprofitable operation. The conduct of a 
losing system for too long a period would be inimical 
to the public interest and convenience. 

It may be a restatement of this same principle to 
say that a proposed communication system must be 
economically feasible. Part of the burden resting 
on an applicant before the Commission is to Convince 
it that the proposed system will succeed, for certainly 
considerations of public interest prevent the Com¬ 
mission from licensing a system doomed tp failure. 
Various factors which may be taken into consideration 
in this connection are proposed rate schedules, the 


16 The evidence in this respect on behalf of the: Intercity 
Company was not entirely conclusive. Its financing scheme 
was subject to severe conditions precedent involving a 
number of assignments by the Commission and the sub¬ 
sequent assumption of a measure of control by the financing 
syndicate. While this has somewhat the semblance of the 
sale of radio station licenses, the Commission jnakes no 
point of this feature in its decision. 


i 





availability of message traffic and the demand for 
service, the location of the circuits with respect to 
railroads, waterways, and air routes, and similar 
matters. 

2. Technical considerations 

a. Preliminary 

In testing proposals by a technical standard, it 
first became apparent to the Commission that the 
technical proficiency of any scheme could not be 
tested only on the basis of what the proponent had 
done on a large scale in the past. The rapid develop¬ 
ment of the radio technique, the radio patent situation 
and many other factors require the Commission to 
hold an open mind in connection with plans outlined 
by new enterprises. 

Any other attitude would result in a frozen condi¬ 
tion in the communication field, because the extensive 
demonstration of technical proficiency in actual 
practice involves the holding of licenses. A probabil¬ 
ity of monopoly inheres in the granting of licenses 
to only those who have been already engaged in 
communication. 

A technical program must, of course, be severely 
scrutinized, particularly if new. In this connection 
the Commission is fortunate in having within its 
organization a competent Engineering Division with 
a large personnel of trained radio technicians who are 
able to give the Commission impartial scientific 
advice on the engineering aspects of communication 
systems, existing or proposed. The Commission has 
also availed itself of the advice available to it from 


117 


| 

i 

! 

the radio experts attached to the Army, the Navy, 
and the Bureau of Standards. 

b. Service—station band ratio 

Other factors being equal, it is plain that hn appli¬ 
cant is most entitled to assignments who, by reason of 
advanced equipment or methods, is able td furnish 
the most service on the fewest number of station 
bands. Otherwise expressed, that applicant should 
prevail whose plan will provide the highest! ratio of 
service to number of station bands. j 

This rule should apply in any event from economic 
principles but it becomes of the utmost importance 
in the present field because of the scarcity of station 
bands, the variety of circuits and channelling pro- 
posed by various applicants, the economic necessity 
of providing comprehensive national systems and 
the general principles underlying the Commission’s 
General Order 62. i 

j 

c. Development possibilities 

Another important consideration in subjecting any 
proposed communication system to technical test 
is the possibility which it contains for development. 
Radio communication systems must develop and 
grow. No system can be said to be in the public 
interest unless it has reasonable provisions fof growth. 
That growth must take place internally td accom- 

i 

modate the increase in traffic which may be reason¬ 
ably expected to occur. To accommodate this, 
there must be provision for decreasing frequency 
separation (or some similar expedient) in step with 




cl 


I 


j 


growth, or the system must originally provide for that 
growth. As between different plans, in this regard, 
the Commission should prefer that which is most 
economical of station bands. There should also be a 
corresponding plan for a geographical growth by the 
reasonable addition of new points of communication 
as those may be required for the efficiency of the 
system and the needs of the Nation. 

Here also, the development feature must be gauged 
by the service-station band ratio. 

Obviously the development potentialities of a 
system must be appraised independently of any 
suggested request for the assignment of additional 
station bands. With the recognized scarcity of 
bands, no plans should be made for the growth of 
one system at the expense of another. The merit 
of a system in this connection lies in its ability to 
grow within its assignments. 

d. Technical resources of the applicant 

The Radio Act contemplates the consideration by 
the Commission of the “technical ability” of an 
applicant. The Commission should not only con¬ 
sider the technical merit of the applications and 
plans themselves but it must look to the actual in¬ 
stallation and establishment of facilities, and their 
operation throughout the license period. It must, 
so far as they are material in any case, determine the 
facts with reference to the applicant’s ability tech¬ 
nically to carry out the meritorious proposals. In so 
doing it should consider: 

(1) The personnel of the applicant organization. 


119 


(2) The ability of the applicant to obtain the 

i 

apparatus and equipment necessary for the proper 
installation and operation of its system and its rights 

under patents or licenses to make use of the apparatus. 

i 

e. Technical feasibility of the plan 

i 

The test of practicability must, of course, be ap¬ 
plied to any plan submitted to the Commission. The 
various expedients to which an applicant proposes to 
resort in order to make its plan conform to!the gen¬ 
eral rules must be examined and their feasibility 
determined. 

The American Committee of Technical Experts, in 
its material submitted to the C. C. I. R., says: 

In order that maximum world-wide! use may 
be made of the available frequencies through¬ 
out the radio spectrum it is necessary! that full 
consideration be given to such factors as: 

a. Geographical location and hours of oper¬ 
ation. 

b. Directional communication. 

c. Multiplexing. 

d. Other factors. 

As other factors, the Committee refers to power 
and skip-distance effect. 

Possibilities of the shifting of station bands from 
one point to another as traffic needs may require 

j 

must also be considered and tested. 

The merit of an application is enhanced by its 

recognition of sound engineering principles and the 

! 

application of those principles to the plan proposed. 

Similarly the merit of an application is decreased, 

# ! 


! 

I 


i 


120 


other factors being equal, by its failure to take 
advantage of expedients which are feasible. 

j. Coherence 

The Commission has always followed the policy, 
as far as its routine permits, of indicating apparent 
defects in applications presented to it. Ample 
opportunity is given for the amendment of appli¬ 
cations. Its Engineering Division has often dis¬ 
cussed proposals with applicants and has made sug¬ 
gestions when consistent with the policy and impar¬ 
tiality of the Commission. 

Nevertheless, the Commission does not consider 
itself in a position to draw up operation plans for 
applications. Neither can it revise the plans pre¬ 
sented. It feels that it may deny an application or 
grant it, or it may grant it in part. But applications 
must stand on their own bases. Otherwise the 
Commission can not act as the standard applying 
body. Hence preference must be given to that plan 
which is presented as a complete and coherent entity 
over that which is incoherent, inconsistent, or hap¬ 
hazard. The technical problems which require solu- 
tion in any plan of operation must be solved by the 
applicant, not by the Commission. 

F. The Decisions of the Commission 

The discussion above has indicated the extreme 

i 

restrictions imposed upon the Commission with 
reference to the granting of applications. The 
general considerations which should be applied to 
applications for the establishment of domestic com¬ 
munication systems have been roughly blocked out. 



I 


121 



The discussion has been somewhat detailed be¬ 
cause the Commission is thoroughly sensitive to the 
fact that its duties in applying a broad statutory 
standard to a complicated series of legal, scientific 
and economic problems involve questions and con- 

i 

siderations of great complexity. The extensive ex¬ 
perience and researches of the Commission should 
be entirely available to the reviewing tribunal and 
the Commission feels that in a group of cases of the 
present character it is under the public duty of 
laying its conclusions before the Court as fqlly as is 
made possible by the appeals provision of the Radio 
Act. 

The plan of the remainder of this statement is to 
state the reasons for the Commission’s various de¬ 
cisions, seriatim. None of the decisions was made 
upon applications alone. In each case hearings 

i 

were held, testimony taken, and exhibits, affidavits, 

and briefs were filed. I 

! 

1. The decisions of December 22, 1928 

i 

a. In general 


At the time of the filing of the various appeals, in 
each of which this is an identical statement, more 
than twenty days had elapsed since December 22, 
1928, and hence there existed no appellate jurisdic¬ 
tion over the Commission’s decisions of that date. 

The corporations to whom designations were made 
on that date are not and can not be impleaded! herein. 
However, in order to give a description of the entire 


j 

i 

i 

i 






122 





present short wave allocation, a discussion is given of 
the decisions in the cases of corporations not parties 
to the appeal. 

b. The Universal Wireless Communication 

Company , Inc . 

As was indicated above, the Commission on Decem¬ 
ber 22, 1928, granted the applications of the Univer¬ 
sal Wireless Communication Company in so far as it 
authorized that organization to construct stations in 
112 cities, in all States of the Union, these stations 
to use a total of 40 standard station bands. 

Objections are now specifically made to this deci¬ 
sion by the Intercity Company and by the Wireless 
Company (see their Notice of Appeal, pp. 5, 8, 11, 
14, 19, 20, 21, 23, and 24), and by R. C. A. (see its 
Notice of Appeals, pp. 19-20, 23-24, 25, and 27). 

It will be observed that the decisions of December 
22, 1928, were mainly based upon the extensive 
hearings held by the Commission on September 25, 
1928. At those hearings all applicants were given 
full opportunity to present their cases and to satisfy 
the Commission, if they could, that the granting of 
their applications would comply with the standards 
prescribed by law. Some point is made by R. C. A. 
(Notice of Appeal, pp. 23-24) of the fact that the 
decisions of December 22 did not pass on all the 
applications. For the Commission to decide all 
cases at that time was impossible on the record then 
before it. The nature of the applications and testi¬ 
mony before the Commission was such that it was led 


123 






C' vj 


to different conclusions in three different classes of 
cases. As to some it was satisfied that the standard 
would be complied with by the granting of applica¬ 
tions; as to some, it was satisfied that the standard 
required the denial of the applications; and as to 
others the Commission was not yet satisfied and 
hence required more time for consideration j and the 
presentation of more evidence. 

On September 25 and December 22, 1928, the 
Universal Company had filed applications presenting 
the most comprehensive and intensive systeih of radio¬ 
communication ever presented to the Commission 
before or since. It was the only applicant to propose 

i 

a scheme which permits of the sending of ljnessages 
to and from communities in every State of the Union. 

Its proposal was to serve 112 cities. The proposal 
of the R. C. A. was to serve 29 cities in 19 States and 
the District of Columbia. 17 The proposal of the 
Intercity Company was to serve 21 cities in 14 States* 
Its most westerly proposed station was to be in east¬ 
ern Texas. No proposal was made for service to 
the Pacific Coast, the Northwest, the Rocky Moun¬ 
tain region, most of the midwest, New England or 
the Southeast. The proposal of the Wireless Com¬ 
pany was to serve 29 widely scattered cities in but 23 
States and the District of Columbia. There had 
been no mention to the Commission of any proposed 

___ i 

17 Washington, D. C., and Boston are already connected 
with New York, according to the testimony, by land wire 
lines of the R. C. A. The frequencies 3,307, 5,195, 3,304,. 
5,105, 4,555, 5,165, 3,274, and 5,170 kilocycles were proposed 
to duplicate this service. 

63493—29-9 



merger, conditional or otherwise, between the Inter¬ 
city and Wireless Companies, this matter not being 
presented until April of 1929. The Mackay proposal 
was to serve 15 cities in 12 States. 

The Universal .Company was therefore before the 
Commission in the best position in that it offered 
a comprehensive plan, drawn from a national view¬ 
point, most consistent with the long-distance effect 
of the frequencies for designation of which it was 
applying. It had the only plan wdiich proposed 
to compete in any expensive degree with the wire 

i 

companies on a useful basis and which was at the 
same time relatively free from elements of unfairness 
involved in the selection of large traffic centers only. 
The cities are not selected upon the basis of the 
amount of profit to be taken from but rather to afford 
a broad service to the public. The selection of cities 
is also free from the suggestion that it is based upon 
the needs of a few groups of customers wiiose traffic 
might be handled in bulk. 

The Universal applications are also of merit in 
their conservation of station bands, showing the 
highest ratio of service to station bands of any group 
of applications. The following table indicates the 
respective ratios of various applicants: 


Company 

Cities 

Standard 

bands 

Ratio 

Universal..... 

112 

,0 

2.8 

R. C. A. (medium high frequency primary bands only). 

29 

46 

0.63 

R. C. A. (combined primary and secondary bands)_ 

29 

92 

0.33 

Intercity__ 

21 

i 63 

0.33 

Mnekav _. _____ 

15 

1 49 

0.3 

Wlroless _ _ . _ _ 

23 

18 

0.78 






’In addition to those already in use at existing stations. 












125 


An examination of the ratios then above table 

i 

shows that the proposed Universal system wns almost 
four times as effective in band conservation as its 
nearest competitor, the Wireless Company. The 
applications, testimony, plans, and apparatus before 
the Commission on behalf of Universal Company 
indicated that the technical and operating plan of 
the Company was consistent with the ratio stated 
and the Commission was so advised by its technical 
staff. | 

The Commission is aware of the fact that the ratios 
indicated in the table can not be used to judge the 
merit of applications with mathematical exactitude. 
It is understood that the ratio must be appraised as 
against the traffic demands of the cities in which the 
stations are to be located. More station bands are 
required for a circuit between New York and! Chicago 
than for one between Salt Lake City and I Denver. 

I 

Nevertheless, when viewing competing applications 

i 

on a comprehensive national basis, a ratio of this 
character forms an approximate indication of one of 
the factors which should go toward a decision. 

The Universal plan provided room for j develop¬ 
ment. There has been no question of the [financial 
ability of the company. The plan was coherently 

I 

presented. 

Because the decision of the Commission on the 
Universal Company’s applications involved the desig¬ 
nation of approximately half the station bands assign¬ 
able, the Commission, desiring to preserve itb control 
over the situation in the public interest, surrounded 

i 

i 


i 


126 


its decision with the most rigid conditions designed 
to compel the Company to comply with its plans and 
representations in the fullest manner. These con¬ 
ditions are set forth in full as Appendix Q to this 
Statement. 

c. The press communication companies 

The Commission’s minutes of December 22, 1928, 
state that on that date the Commission granted 
thirteen applications for construction permits filed on 
behalf of a number of press communication compa¬ 
nies, involving the designation of station bands in the 
medium high-frequency range for the stations to be 
constructed under the permits. 

Objection to this is expressed by R. C. A. (see its 
Notice of Appeals, pages 20, 27, which is inaccurate in 
stating the action 1S ). 

As is set forth in the Commission’s Statement of its 
decision in the case of Universal Service Wireless 
Company v. Federal Radio Commission (number 5005), 
this decision was conditional, the conditions were 
never complied with or fulfilled, the benefits were 
refused by the applicants and the decision, by June 
20, 1929, was ineffective. 

2. The decisions of June 7 and 10, 1929 

a. In general 

The decisions 19 of June 7,1929, were by their terms 
effective June 10. At the time the decisions were 

18 There was no trusteeship in Joseph Pierson with reference 
to permits for stations for domestic communication. 

19 It is, of course, understood that the order of the Commis¬ 
sion for the listing and publishing of the station bands to be 
used by the stations to be constructed by the Universal Com¬ 
pany, was not a decision and is not involved in any appeal* 



made the number of medium high-frequency station 

i 

bands available for designation was 23, including 
five Canadian shared bands and 18 exclusive United 
States bands. Two of these were designated for use 
by the Western Company, one band was reserved and 
all the remaining bands were designated for use by 
the R. C. A. The granting to this extent of the 
R. C. A. application involved the denial of the appli¬ 
cations for extension of the systems of the Intercity 
Company, the Wireless Company, and the; Mackay 
Company, and the applications for renewal of one 
station license of the Wireless Company I and one 
expired station license of the Chicago Federation of 
Labor. 

From all decisions denying applications appeals 
have been taken, in reply to each of which (except 
that of the Federation of Labor 20 ) this is an; identical 
statement of decision. 

The Intercity Company and the Wireless Company 
also take specific exception to the granting of R. C. 
A. ; s applications (see their Notice of Appeal, pp. 8, 
16, 19, 30, 21). | 

The granting of the applications of the Universal 
Company had made provision for the establishment 
of one nation wide radio communication system. 
Insufficiency of station bands prevented the estab¬ 
lishment of another. j 

20 In the case of the Chicago Federation of Labor, there 
were controlling factors outside the general principles herein 
discussed and a separate record and statement has been filed 
in that case (Number 4989). 



The Commission, on June 7, therefore believed it 
was necessary to consider in each instance the extent 
to which domestic facilities were essential to the 
international systems which were being established 
under its licenses (see page 110). In reaching the 

i 

decisions of June 7 and 10, 1929, the Commission 
gave serious consideration to the domestic needs of 
companies doing an international business. 

b. R. C. A. Communications , Inc. 

This explains in part the decisions of June 7 and 
10, 1929, granting to a substantial extent the applica¬ 
tions of R. C. A. Communications, Inc. This appli¬ 
cant was engaged in the successful operation of cir¬ 
cuits reaching at least 30 foreign countries. It had 
established a communication service of unparalleled 
utility, but it was severely handicapped by want of 
a domestic collection and delivery system. In 1928, 
the company had a gross revenue on message traffic 
of $4,500,000. On its transoceanic circuits it handles 
approximately 12,000 messages a day. These mes¬ 
sages are transmitted accurately and speedily, and 
without interruption, to the satisfaction of a large 
number of customers. In spite of the large volume of 
business it transacts, the company has offices for 
collection and delivery of messages in only four cities. 
New York, San Francisco, Washington, and Boston, 
and these offices are connected with the transmitting 
and receiving stations of the company by land lines. 
At the present time, the company transfers approxi¬ 
mately 2,500 messages a day to the land lines for de¬ 
livery at interior points. At New York, Boston, San 


329 


i 

i 

i 

i 

O S\ 

! 

I 

Francisco, and Washington, the traffic received by 

« 

the company for transmission to foreign countries 
balances the amount received in the United States 

i 

for domestic delivery. But in other cities, because of 
its reliance on the land lines, R. C. A. delivers from 
ten to twenty times the number of messages it receives 
for foreign transmission. The land line cpmpanies, 
Postal and Western Union, have cable cohnections, 
and R. C. A. must therefore depend upon competi¬ 
tors to deliver to it messages which are routed via 
R. C. A. There is some evidence that R. jC. A. has 
been unable to obtain reasonable contracts with the 
land lines for the transmission of traffic, j 

i 

It is possible, of course, for R. C. A. and other 
companies to make arrangements for collection and 
delivery of domestic traffic, but such arrangements 
do not, in the opinion of the Commission, assure the 
development of point to point communication on the 
best possible basis. It is natural thatj an inde¬ 
pendent competitive agency will develop a> more sat¬ 
isfactory domestic system than an agency I wholly or 
entirely dependent on other utilities which have 
foreign wire circuits of their own. 

Moreover, apart entirely from the convenience of 
the radio company itself, it seems clear to the Com¬ 
mission that speedier and more accurate! service is 
obtained if only one agency handles message traffic 
from point of origin to destination. One of the 
advantages of radio, speedy and direct communica¬ 
tion of messages, would be largely sacrificed if the 



130 


company were made to depend on an exchange of 
traffic with its competitors. 

R. C. A. has thus been enabled to engage in trans¬ 
oceanic communication with adequate provision for 
collection and delivery of messages in the United 
States. It has also been given the use of adequate 
facilities for installation of a purely domestic system. 
Its applications have been based upon a selection of 
cities furnishing or receiving the largest number of 
international communications, but it follows that the 
locations so chosen are the principle business and 
population centers of the United States, and hence a 
domestic service between them is entirely practicable. 

In designating the bulk of the station bands at its 
disposal for use by R. C. A., the Commission w^as 
governed by another factor—the futility of assigning 
so few frequencies to any applicant that a satisfactory 
service could not be established. It was therefore 
considered expedient not only to permit the use of 
R. C. A.’s transoceanic bands in limited daytime 
domestic service, but also to designate a sufficient 
number of the so-called domestic bands for 24-hour, 
year-around domestic communication. In view of 
the prestige of R. C. A. in world communication, in 
view of its ability to obtain and handle a large vol¬ 
ume of business, and in view of the need for a domestic 
pick-up and delivery system to strengthen the for¬ 
eign business of the company, the Commission was 
persuaded that the granting of R. C. A. applications 
would serve the public interest. Judge Ira E. Rob¬ 
inson, Chairman of the Commission, was opposed to 


granting the applications of R. C. A. and voted 
against that action. 

c. The Mackay Radio & Telegraph Company 

The applications of Mackay Radio & Telegraph 
Company were subject to different considerations. 
When the applications of the Mackay Company for 
transoceanic service were granted, the Company had 
already established a point-to-point system on the 
Pacific Coast, as well as a marine service. The 
decision of June 7, 1929, from which the company 
appeals, did not affect directly the transoceanic, 

I 

marine, and domestic service of the company, but 
confined the domestic system to the Pacific Coast. 

The Mackay Company, an operating subsidiary of 
the International Telephone and Telegraph Com- 
pany, has access to the comprehensive collection and 
delivery facilities of the Postal System. The Postal 
System reaches every city in the United States, with 
one or two exceptions, having a population of 25,000 
and over. It has 1,569 of its own offices for the 
reception and collection of telegrams and 559 offices 
which it reaches through connecting lines in the 
United States, and 1,460 offices in Canada which it 
reaches through Canadian Pacific Railway Tele¬ 
graphs. It operates in competition with I Western 
Union Telegraph Company, the latter doing about 

i 

82% of the telegraph business of the United States, 

i 

and the Postal about 18%. In brief, thej Mackay 
company is already supplied with ample means for 
supplying its marine and transoceanic circuits. 


The Mackay company did not, however, base its 
applications on a need for domestic collection and 
delivery systems for use in connection with its trans¬ 
oceanic and marine services. In the first place, the 
transoceanic system of the company has not yet 
been developed to a point where such facilities are 
needed. In the second place, the company looks 
upon radio and wire services as necessarily coordi- 
nated. It proposes, in short, a communication system 
using radio as well as wire, depending upon the type 
of message, the condition of the circuits, the season of 
the year, the state of the weather, etc. The Com¬ 
mission has never denied the utility of such a service, 
but because of the limited number of frequencies 
and the relatively greater need of other applicants, 
it did not feel it would be justified in granting the 
applications. 

In this connection it is well to point out that the 
Mackay company did not systematically apply for 
secondary daytime use of frequencies licensed for 
transoceanic communication. 

d. The Intercity Radio Telegraph Company and the Wireless 
Telegraph and Communications Company 

At hearings held before the Commission on April 
24,1929, the proposed conditional merger of the Inter¬ 
city Company and the Wireless Company, based 
upon financing agreements of officials of the Warner 
Brothers and First National motion-picture com¬ 
panies and others, was first mentioned to the Com¬ 
mission. At this hearing as well as at the hearing 


of May 25, 1929, the abandonment of some applica¬ 
tions was proposed on behalf of the Wireless Company 
to avoid the duplication at all places exdept New 
York and Chicago. 

The combined system thus proposed to serve the 
36 cities in 25 States listed on page two of the Notice 
of Appeals in addition to Duluth, Minnesota. The 
total number of standard station bands thus proposed 
for the system was the impossible total of 81 ^ of which 
17 were in the intermediate-frequency range, 17 in 
the medium high-frequency range, and 47 in the high- 
'frequency range. These figures represent the re- 
quests of the applicants as nearly as they cap be calcu¬ 
lated by converting wave length in meters into fre¬ 
quency in kilocycles and attempting to relate the fre¬ 
quencies to the nearest standard station bands. 

On the basis of radio of service to station bands, 
the combined proposal is one of the least economical 
of station bands proposed to the Commission, the 
ratio being 0.44. There is absolutely no plan or 
coherence to the combined proposal from which the 

i 

Commission or its experts could attempt to ascertain 
its feasibility or merit. The requests for frequencies 
are haphazard, the plan frequently providing for the 
use of four or five station bands at a ciljy smaller 
than another for which but one band is requested. 

The selection of cities to be covered is |not com- 
prehensive, it is not national. About the Only selec- 
tions made systematically seem to be based upon the 

i 

. traffic needs of individual businesses such as; shipping, 

| 

motion pictures and cotton brokerage. 



The applicant, in short, frankly proposes to skim 
the cream of bulk traffic between leading cities, and 
for the purpose makes an inordinate and uneconomic 
demand for more than all of the available bands. 

Much was made in the testimony of the alleged 
priority and experience of the personnel of the Inter¬ 
city Company, yet the record reveals practically no 
experience in short wave communication and there is 
little testimony of excellence either of equipment or 
operation. The applicants proposed to build very 
inexpensive stations of low power, Mr. Simon of the 
Intercity Company estimating that but $50,000* 
would have been required to expand his system had 

the Commission granted all the applications of his 
« 

company. 

Neither the Intercity Company nor the Wireless 
Company has been an applicant for the establishment 
of an international communications system. 

Prior to the broaching of the conditional merger 
plan, the Wireless Company had made representations 
to the Commission of an ability, through devices of 
the Hall Research Corporation, to make an economical 
use of station bands. The company proposed to 
modulate one carrier frequency at a number of lesser 
frequencies, each to carry telegraphic signals. After 
reception of the carrier frequency and the detection 
of the modulation frequencies, it was proposed to 
separate them into intelligible form by means of a 
series of acoustic filters. This process is known as 
multiplexing. Its practical operation may be illus¬ 
trated by this example: If a broadcasting station 


135 


were to engage in telegraphic communication and a 
number of telegraphers were to stand before its 
microphone, each making telegraphic signals with a 
flute or cornet played on a different key, the emitted 
waves would resemble those of multiplex radioteleg- 

i 

raphy. It would be necessary to provide a receiving 
apparatus wdiich would filter and segregate the sounds 
of the different simultaneous signals in ord^r to un¬ 
scramble the individual messages. 

As will be seen on referring back to the discussion 
of station communication bands (pp. 64 to 67), the 
drawback to this plausible proposal is that the com¬ 
munication band of frequencies is widened as signals 
are added. 

On this subject the Commission’s technical ad¬ 
visor, Lt. Comdr. Craven, had advised it that— 

I 

The so-called multiplex system using fre¬ 
quency modulations is another method of 
transmitting information by radiotelegraph. 
It has been considered that the j multiple 
modulation system has nojgreat advantages 
and that it will occupy as much, if not more, 

i 

space in the ether than an equivalent number 
of closely spaced carrier frequencies. I 

The American Technical Experts’ material for the 
C. C. I. It. says: 

Multiplexing .—A substantial increase in the 
number of available assignments as a result of 
multiple modulation of a single carrier has not 
thus far been realized^inj general practice. 
Further investigation is][mfjprogress in this 
direction. ! 


In any event, no data on the successful use of 
multiplexing at the Northbrook station of the com¬ 
pany was offered and the idea was apparently 
abandoned by the time of the May 25, 1929, hearings 
as it was no longer mentioned at that time. 

The Commission having been unable to grant the 
applications of the companies, there could be no 
purpose in renewing the license of the Wireless Com¬ 
pany for its one public point to point station at 
Northbrook (near Chicago), Illinois. There are no 
stations with which it could handle traffic, except 
possibly those of the Intercity Company, which on 
May 24,1929, acquired a station of its own at Chicago 
from the Chicago Federation of Labor. 

e. The Western Radio & Telegraph Company 

The granting of some of the applications of the 
Western company for station licenses and construc¬ 
tion permits has been fully discussed supra at pages 
101 to 104. 

It should also be stated that the applicant made a 
full showing of technical and financial ability to carry 
forward its program. Its predecessor companies have 
had ample operating experience. 

3. The press communication classification of June 20, 1929 

The action of the Commission on June 20, 1929, 
in making a classification of 20 station bands in the 
medium high-frequency range for public service com¬ 
munication for press is fully discussed supra at 
pages 96 to 99. 

The wording of the Commission’s order is as 
follows: 


It is further ordered that the following 
frequencies (naming them) be and the same 
are hereby, reserved for the use of the Amer¬ 
ican press for point-to-point communication 
within the United States, and that construc¬ 
tion permits covering the same shall be issued 
to said corporation (the organization of the 
same having been approved by the Commis¬ 
sion as aforesaid) if and when applications 
have been filed which satisfy the Commission 
that said applicant has a project j for the 
utilization of said frequencies which will serve 
public interest, convenience, and necessity. 


Suffice it to say in this connection, no permits or 
licenses involving the use of station bands for 
domestic service have been issued to the press, and 
such permits and licenses will only be issued in case 
the various press agencies who are seeking such 
privileges show the Commission that they have 
established a bona fide public service company which 
will operate a utility for the benefit of the entire 
American press. Twenty station bands have been 
reserved for the press in case the condition laid down 
by the Commission are fulfilled. 

. . j 

The allowance of press applications, if made, will 
be based upon the need of the press for ai compre¬ 
hensive, independent, self-regulated service reach¬ 
ing and serving all newspapers and news! agencies 
in the United States. The trans-oceanic permits 
and licenses heretofore issued to the press would be 
practically useless if corresponding domestic stations 
could not be established. 




CONCLUSION 


A. As to Finality of Decisions 

The Commission believes that in the field of public 
service radio communication, the public interest re¬ 
quires a degree of permanence and certainty. 

It does not, however, take the position that the 
designation of a frequency is the grant of a facility 
for all time. The statutory power of the Commission 
is to issue a license for the conduct of a specific com¬ 
munications service between specified points for a 
limited period of time, not to exceed one year. In 
order to prevent interference, the Commission desig¬ 
nates the frequency and power to be used by individ- 
ual transmitters. The licensing authority must al- 
ways retain control over these features to guarantee 
that the public interest shall be served. 

The Commission takes its earliest opportunity to 
state to the Court that it can not make any award or 
grant of nonexistent channels or frequencies and has 
not attempted to do so. 

B. As to Finality of Definitions 

This is a statement of decisions of the Commission. 
It is not intended as a special pleading for or against 
any one or more of the appellants. It is offered as 
an impartial discussion of the facts and the technical 
and legal principles which have actuated the decisions. 

From the standpoint that the definitions and prin¬ 
ciples herein stated may be considered by future 
applicants as governing precedents, it must be pointed 
out that this is a decision based upon the radio 
technique of to-day. 


139 


?9Q 
C \» *3 


What that technique may accomphsh in the future, 
no man can predict. Permanent definitions and 
standards can not be provided which will state accu¬ 
rate formulae to be applied to the radio art and the 
communication economics of to-morrow. 

i 

* 

C. As to Revision of Decisions 

. j 

Upon the consideration of the present appeals, the 
Court may well hold that the findings of fact made 
by the Commission upon a record which contains 
evidence to support them, should not be disturbed. 
The Court may well find that there is nothing in the 
various appeals to indicate that the Commission has 
abused the discretion vested in it by law, and confirm 
the Commission’s short wave allocation j without 
retracing its laborious and complex researches. 

If the Court, however, decides that it must review 
all the facts and considerations, economic, engineering 
and legal, which affected or controlled the judgment of 
the Commission, to determine whether reversal or revi¬ 
sion of the several decisions is justified or required, the 
Commission has taken great pains to state, in e^ch case, 
all the factors which were presented and considered. 

At the risk of criticism for the inclusion of too 
much detail and the discussion thereof, the Com¬ 
mission is submitting a full and complete statement, 
so that the Court may see the great public importance 
which will attach to any decision it may render on 
the several appeals. 

Respectfully submitted. 

Federal Radio Commission, 

By...__—4. 

E. 0 . Sykes, 

63493—29_io Acting Chairman . 


i 




Analysis of applications on page 2 of Notice of Appeal , Intercity Company 



( 140 ) 


New Bedford- A 2,750+ (*■*) 0 )--- . l-P-C-13— 

193.5 
























Jan. 12,1928 New York (see a, A 18,760 (») (»), minus New York City.. 1-P-C-l.... 186 Jan. 23 1928 

Appendix B). 11,640 (>) 



For footnotes see Appendix A, p. 143. 

















Analysis of applications on page 2 of Notice of Appeal , Intercity Company —Continued 

lA: Intercity Radio Telegraph Co. R: Wireless Telegraph & Communications Co.) 


O f 

-A. ** 


142 





































































143 


S5 

o 


g> r*- • © . o o n n 

ci h O « O O N ^ ^ 


3 » 

3 © 
■< co 


bo 

3 

■< 


Sf " a d 
a « & a 
*< O cq >-» 


^'SejMcjrtrtrtWM 



a a 

ns 

p 

§ § 

U4 04 



a 2 

cT 

oT rT 

June 

Jan. 

June 

July 

June 

S S 
**< 

2 

2 2 

1 I 

t « 

S 2 
*? 7 

1 

1 

S 

1 

l l 
l l 

a 2 

7 7 

o o 

O 

o o 

1 1 
a a 

Ph 

Cu, 4} 


4. 


J, 4, 4. 


o 

4< 

I* 

o 

>* 

I 

£ 

43 

bo 

i- 

s 

.o 

co 


9 

Q 

» • 

i2 a 

3 © 

*3 1 

• a 

•u ^ 

CQ 


43 

D 

a 

o 

4-* 

M 

O 

a 

4 

»-• 

I 


o 

q 

3 

3 


w 03 




S' S' S' S S ^ 2 s S' s 
v C/ W 5/ w Si« w • ■>* W v „* 


K ® O (O* o o 


0^*«000>^4-4«5-H"4«OJ_ 
ab-vo—ir~t--v2o*-cQ 


4«* ^ t» « ■"»< 


f) © n >o -t 


Ub ■*> 


aaaaaaaaaa 


a H 


a a a 



o 

•3 


00 CO 


o 

>< 

& 

■ <D 

:& 


o 

•3 


! o 

!fc 


? <N 


ooooooooo 

•3'3’3'3'3'3>3’3*3 


sfs" 


fl 

«S 


© 

a 

3 


8 

>» 

© 

s 


a s 

© bs 

Is 


ssssassssisjss 

0* W CQ CO CO CQ CQ CO CO 


N 

CO 


oo © 

CQ CO 


o ^ 


s 

£ 

08 

-*-> 

CO 

>> 

■«-» 

"3 

a 


© 

43 


n 

£ 

§ 

bO 

>» 

o 

4= 

© 

43 

03 

M 

CQ 

£ 


43 

o 

s 

£ 

•*> 

C-> 

CO 

© 

I 

.« 



9 K o 

V *s 


•3 ©• r 

:sl? 

!m?o 
!&**.£ 
!fe= a 
wSf 

I 0*1 
§§* 
4~s 

<33 03&< 
©2m 

> fl s 

© or*; 

0-55 

.o« 

C3 * ? 

aero 

i £?>■ 60 

•S 

£>• I 

a^ ©43 

-a © 


8 

§ 

£ 

a 

o 


S°*;& 

le®* 

3_J±i 

o« cO 

o r**® 

is^-s 

2t3 

S=«“ 

^ald 

~8~§ 

•§§£$ 

-•3 05 P 

oSgg 

® *^2 

o ©■a'* 5 . 

„ o^ 1 © 

« H _ns 

f s .|g 

CX ■ H fl 

•sojs® 
a S«S I 

as** 

olsl 

£*1S 


o ; -.--I® S 

£ aS^tS « O 2© 

to 2 H k. *« 2-r o o 55 
”3o «o S° ©*3 «o a Z 
beg— S u 5 -* >*®o ® 

2Z’3^ flf 

® © 2 w 8£5|^2°-g 

2-2Q ^a |a 

SlsgSljBSgSS 

w 5 «-P“ I* la 3 OQ _ ~ 

gbc 55 _ <u o 3 © !> 

•2to"3<5'’335'3 W fOH 

S.8§|§§S§ s -|Sg| 

«r«r©ij © © ®‘j© . .s^s 

' 4—1 1 4 I rt *2 *2 r #*I 4s lT m? a* <a 


««© -,^a««g,S«o© 

■ > >a > > s a 

as cs&c, © © « ; «5*i a 
_ *i*>n< j * , *‘* ) i-03 S 3-? 

oo.oy.oo.opp”^; 


5“ 3* 
HKm 

1 £S*o 





















































144 


<r> r f 
6-b - 


PQ 

X 

>—i 

Q 

s 

H 

P-. 

P< 

<1 


£ 

•o 

© 

tt 

R. 

R. 

© 

■M 

© 

e 


© 

oo 

i 

V. 

C 

•2 

© 

o 

’S. 

R. 

"3 


o 

O 

m 

a 

o 

I 

a 

3 

s 

a 

o 

O 


J3 

a. 

a 


o 

b> 


o 

JS 


o 

O 

A 

ft 

es 

. *— 

60 

© 


33 

03 

ft 


© 

>-. 

© 

-*-* 

C 


jo r; k- 
© © 
•gsa 

> ki c 
© So 
2 ©O 
KG'S 


© 

• 

O O 

oZ 

Q 


3 

_o 

+-> 

03 A 

=1 

ar* 

a 

< 


0 

O 

»» 

2 

•V* 

a 

3 

a 

a 

8 


& 

a 

© 

ft 


09 

3 

CS 

■— 

CO 


a 

gJ 

© « 


ft a 

O«03 


cs 

G 


•i Ik • 

^JsO 


8 

A 

s 


a 

© 


o 

Q 


a 

« 


8 o 6 © 

si ® Q Q 

3 

*< 


§ 


§ 


ao 


5S22 


U3 

s 

6 


*? 

o 

a 

cm 


ft 

i 


s s § s 

•9 o c 

6666 
■ i i i 
ft ft ft ft 

W N {i 


u 

>1 

u 

o 

>< 

* 

55 

§ 

a 

a 


J3 

a 

3 

o 

G 


X) 

a 

3 

© 

O 

m 

3 


S S § 8 °°. *5§3T8®S38T8®8 

r.AoJiftjJgMNj'OgiOiieOHNg'O 
00 , *"«r<S»«rlO>fJ 

H ^ 


N m . 
•O 00 

00" 


00 H O 00 
00 


§11 




ft ft ft ft 


a. 

< 


^ g, 

* 3 
55 


*2 

ii 

« a. 


ft 

< 


*2 

1 ° 

3 & 

ft 


3? « 


"5 

ts 

3 

ft 


•C 

ft s 

a-l 

3 > 


09 

a 

a 

© 


U O 


& 

© 

2 


cm 


o 

•o 


a 

at 


CM 

t*> 

3 

c 


© o o 
3 3 3 


33 V ^ 























145 



I 

t 

1 



























c* 

/ 

r-V 


f ^ 



Appendix C 

Index to applications analysis by frequencies 

INTERCITY COMPANY 


Fre¬ 

quency 

(kilo¬ 

cycles) 

In use as 

Nearest 

correct 

channel 

Applications 

numbered 

150 

Maritime mobile public service 1 __ 

150 

9, 19. 

151.9 

Mobile 1 _ 

152 

16. 

153.8 

_do...... 

154 

7,15, A. 

153.14 

.do. 

154 

20. 

155.8+ 


156 

13. 

156 


156 

41. 

157.9 


158 

17. 

160 


160 

12. 

162.2 


162 

18. 

165 

Coastal working May 10,1928.. 

165 

14. 

169 


169 

38. 

170+ 

R. C. A. (WQM) June 8, 1929. 

170 

10, 11. 

176.5 


176,177 

8. 

181.8 


182 

7, A. 

187.5 


187,188 

7. 

193.5 

Out 1 ___ 

193 

5,6. 

2,750+ 

Experimental visual broadcasting *. *. 

2,752 

6,12. 

2,800+ 


2,800 

20. 

2,830 


2,830 

5. 

2,860- 


2,860 

11. 

2,910- 


2,908 

19. 

2,910+ 

.do__ 

2,914 

8. 

3,000 

Maritime and air 3 _ 

2,998 

9. 

3,160- 

Newfoundland *_ 

3,160 

10. 

3,333 

Canada 1 _ j _ 

3,332 

14. 

3,465 

Aircraft 3 3 __ 

3,468 

23, 25, 28, 39, E, M, 
N. 

3,529 

Amateurs 133 _ 

3,532 

22, 26. 

4,000 

Out 1 * J 

3,996 

21, 34, 35, J, K, X. 


Cuba 3 . 

4,004 

• 

4,021 

Government * _ 

4,020 

40. 

4,026 


4,028 

36, 37, D, F, H, I, L. 

5,660 

Mobile» 3 . 

5,660 

X. 

5,681 


5,675 

40. 

6,000 

Broadcasting 1 _ 

6,005 

32. 

6,410 

Mobile 1 ___ 

6,410 

27. 

6,446 


6,440 

37. 

6,450+ 

.do_ 

6,455 

4, C. 

6,493 

.do. 

6,500 

31. 

6,520 


6,515 

A. 

6,520+ 


6,510 

7. 

6,590+ 

_do__ 

6,590 

2, B. 


1 Treaty: effective January 1,1929. 

* G. O. 55, December 22,1928. „ „ . ._ 

* North American Conference Agreement, January 21,1929, fl. to take effect March 1,1929. 

* Executive Order, President Coolidge, March 30,1928. 

( 146 ) 



















































147 


o / 


7 


Index to applications analysis by frequencies —Continued 

INTERCITY COMPANY—Continued 


Fre¬ 

quency 

(kilo¬ 

cycles) 


Nearest 

correct 

channel 

— 

i 

Applications 
i numbered 

6,660 

Mobile l - _ 


| 

29, So, 33, G. 

6,660+ 

_ do. . 

6,665 

ExX. 

6,666.6 


6,665 

1,2, B, C. 

6,670- 


6,.665 

14 . i 

6,741 

R. C. A. (WEJ), June 7,1928. 

6,740 

24,39. 

7,410- 

R. C. A. (WEM), June 7, 1928. 

7,400 

5. | 

7,450+ 


7,460 

io.! 

7,500 

15, Berne notification as of Oct. 10,1928._. 

7,505 

9. | 

7,595 

France, Japan, Nicaragua__ 

7,595 

!6- j 

7,690- 

Nauen,* Japan__ 

7,685 

15. I 

7,790+ 


7,790 

13. i 

7,890+ 

Station ISL, Italian Somaliland, 1 »5 addition- 

7,895 

17. j 


al notifcations as of Oct. 10,1928. 



7,950- 

American Publishers Committee, May 24, 

7,955 

11. 


1928. 


J 

8,000 

Station HBC at Berne on notification_ 

8,000 

12. 

8,050- 

United States Government.. 

8,045 

19J 

8.110- 

KAV, Germany,* CIAI, Chile *.. 

8,105 

18.! 

8,220 

Mobile i__ _ _ _ 

8,210,8,230 

4, Q. 

8,330 

.do. 

8,330 

7, A. 

8,450 


8,450 

2, B. 

8,571.4 

R. C. A., Apr. 16,1929; May 22,1929,2 licenses 

8,570 

l, i, B, C. 

11,110 

Mobile»(T.). 

11,110 

3. ! 

11,320 

.do. 

11,320 

4, t 

11,540 

Station CF, Quebec *. 

11,530 

7, A. 

11,765 

Broadcasting 1 . 

11,770 

2,B. 

12,000 

VIY, Australia *. 

12,010 

1- 1 

12,711 

Mobile 1 ..... 

12,700 

39 .; 

14,634 

Spain *.. 

14,620 

0.1 

14,905 

Dec. 18,1928,5 Robert Dollar C/P’s.__. 

14,890 

10.1 

14,905 

R. C. A., C/P Aug. 1, 1928, WAZ. 

14,920 

10.! 

15,000 

Holland *... 

15,010 

9. I 

15,190 

Broadcasting 1 ..... 

15,190 

16.1 

15,380- 


15,370 

15.| 

15,480+ 

R. C. A., station KEM, June 7,1928. 

15,490 

11.1 

15,580+ 

American Publisher’s Committee, May 24, 

15,580 

13.1 


1928. 


I 

15,790- 


15,790 

17.! 

16,000 

R. C. A., C/P, Aug. 1, 1928, WKQ. 

16,000 

12.i 

16,110- 


16,120 

19. 

16,220- 


16,210 

is.; 

17,650- 

Mac Elay, 5 stations from Apr. 18,1929_ 

17,660 

3. ! 

17,844 

Holland PCRR, * Germany also_ 

17,820 

37.! 

18,180+ 

CG, Quebec».. 

18,180 

4, C. 

18,750 

Holland *. 

18,740 

7, A. 

19,350 


19,340 

2. i 

19,355 


B.i 



I 

i 


1 Treaty; effective January 1, 1929. * Berne Bureau list. 


i 

I 


i 
































Appendix D 

Index to applications analysis (by number) Intercity Company 

(Construction permits only) 


Application 

No. 

Arbi¬ 

trary 

No. 

Appli¬ 

cant 


Location 

1-P-C-l_ 

7 

A 


(New York. 

2-P-C-3_ 

B 

A 

Group I. January, 1928_ _ . 

Detroit. 

l-P-C-4_ 

C 

A 


Buffalo. 

3-P-C-5_ 

12 

A m 


Waco. 

l-P-C-6_ 

8 

A 


Providence. 

3-P-C-7_ 

13 

A 


New Orleans. 

3-P-C-8_ 

11 

A 


Fort Worth. 

3-P-C-9_ 

20 

A 


Houston. 

4-P-C-10_ 

17 

A 


Chicago. 

4-P-C-ll_ 

18 

A 

(Group JT, Jutia, 1928 

St. Louis. 

l-P-C-12_ 

5 

A 


Boston. 

l-P-C-13_ 

6 

A 


New Bedford. 

2-P-C-14_ 

14 

A 


Pittsburgh. 

3-P-C-15_ 

19 

A 


Galveston. 

3-P-C-16_ 

16 

A 


Memphis. 

3-P-C-17_ 

15 

A 


Atlanta. 

4-P-C-116... 

37 

B 


Chicago. 

Boston. 

l-P-C-117_ 

l-P-C-118_ 

L 

B 

Group III. January, 1928... 

New York. 

39 

B 


4-P-C-119... 

M 

B 


St. Louis. 

4-P-C-413... 

x 

B 

Group IV. June, 1928_ 

Northbrook, HL 
New York. 

l-P-C-525_ 

41 

B 

lGroup V. June, July, 1928_... 

4-P-C-528_ 

38 

B 

i 

^ Chicago. 

2-P-C-560_ 

N 

B 


• Detroit. 

l-P-C-561 

40 

B 

[Group VT. Jnnfi, Jnly, 1928 __ 

[New York. 

4-P-C-562... 

21 

B 


Milwaukee. 

l-P-C-590... 

* D 

B 


Buffalo. 

2-P-C-591... 

£ 

B 


Columbus. 

2-P-C-592... 

28 

B 


Cincinnati. 

2-P-C-593_ 

F 

B 


Cleveland. 

4-P-C-594... 

26 

B 


Des Moines. 

5-P-C-595... 

27 

B 


Denver. 

4-P-C-596... 

4-P-C-597. 

22 

23 

24 

B 

B 

B 

.Grnnp VJT, August, 1928. . _ 

Omaha. 
Minneapolis. 
Kansas City. 

4-P-C-598_ 


4-P-C-599. 

25 

B 


Indianapolis. 

3-P-C-600_ 

Q 

B 


New Orleans. 

3-P-C-601_ 

34 

B 


Dallas. 

5-P-C-602_ 

31 

B 


San Francisco. 

5-P-C-603_ 

32 

B 


Salt Lake City 

5-P-C-604... 

33 

B 


iLos Angeles. 

l-P-C-648_ 

' 10 

A 

Group VIII. September, 1928 (added to 

| Baltimore. 

2-P-C-649 

9 

A 

Group II)..._-_ 

(Philadelphia. 

l-P-C-658... 

H 

B 


Baltimore. 

l-P-C-659_ 

36 

B 


Philadelphia 4 

2-P-C-660... 

I 

B 


Washington. 

5-P-C-671_ 

30 

B 

Group IX. September, October, 1928 
(ftddftd to Grottn VIP_ 

Seattle. 

firJP-C-672... 
3-P-C-678_ 

29 

J 

B 

Portland. 

B 


Atlanta. 

3-P-C-679_ 

K 

B 


Memphis. 

3-P-C-680_ 

35 

B 


Tampa. 


( 148 ) 











249 


i 

i 


Appendix E 

LICENSING HISTORY OF I. R. T. STATIONS 

I 

WTL—CLEVELAND 

i 

i 

Licensed October 2, 1926, by Department of Commerce, 
for 6 months, frequency 153 kilocycles, to communication 
with WCL, Columbus; WLC, Rogers City; WSK, Sheboygan; 
WME, Duluth; WAM, Buffalo; WSB, Lawrenceville, HI. 

On January 18,1927, applied to Department of Commerce, 
asking 153.1 kilocycles but no license granted. 

On November 1, 1927, applied to commission (dated May 
18, sworn October 4), applied for license (2-Lr-C-282) point- 
to-point public, for 4,012.06, 8,014.4, 170, and 153, to com¬ 
municate with WDI, Detroit; WCFL, Chicago;! and above 
. (but not WSB). j 

On March 21, granted as to 165, 171, 4,116, 8,630—P. S. 
point-to-point, for 1 year, according to minutes December 22, 
1928. 

WTK—CLEVELAND 

July 13,1923, applied for license, 165 kilocycles, communi¬ 
cate with Rogers City, Michigan, Limestone & Chemical Co. 

August 25, 1923, granted for 30 days—170 kilocycles. 

October 4, 1923, applied for renewal. 

October 9, 1923, granted for 3 months. 

January 17, 1924, applied for renewal. 

January 25, 1924, granted for 3 months. 

April 22, 1924, applied for renewal, adding Reiss Coal Co., 
Sheboygan, Wisconsin, Wyandotte Transporiation Co., 
Wayndotte, Mich., and I. R. T. stations at Duluth and 
Buffalo. 

April 25, 1924, granted for 3 months. j 

July 14, 1924, applied for renewal—Rogers City, WHT; 
Sheboygan, WSK; Wyandotte, WCV; and Detroit. 

July 17, 1924, granted for 3 months. 

February 18, 1925, applied renewal communicate with 
WAM, Buffalo; Wyandotte, WCV; Sheboygan, WSK; 
Duluth, IRT-WME. 


i 

i 

i 

I 


( 149 ) 


150 



February 24, 1925, granted 3 months. 

May 16, 1925, applied renewal. 

May 27, 1925, granted 6 months. 

November 17, 1925, applied for renewal. 

November 25, 1925, granted for 6 months. 

May 28, 1926, applied for renewal. 

June 3, 1926, granted for 6 months. 

January 27, 1927, application for renewal. 

No action taken. 

September 30, 1927, applied to commission for license 
point-to-point public—153 kilocycles—2-L-C-287. 

Februaiy 11, 1928, applied to commission for license, LP, 
for relay marine traffic only—5,570, 5,615, 8,370 kilocycles, 
2-L-C-455. 

March 21, 1929, point-to-point public license for 1 year, 
165, 171 kilocycles, authorized, according to minutes of 
December—, 1928. 

May 23, 1929, point-to-point public marine relay 1 year, 
4,116 and 8,630 kilocycles. 

WDI—DETROIT 

First application dated February 15, 1926, for limited 
public service to communicate with Buffalo, Cleveland, 
Wyandotte, Rogers City, Sheboygan, and Duluth, on 153 
kilocycles. 

March 8, 1926, granted for 6 months. 

January 18, 1927, applied to Department of Commerce 
for renewal on 170 and 153 kilocycles. 

No action taken on this. 

September 30, 1927, applied to commission for license, 
point-to-point public, 170 and 153 kilocycles, 2-Lr-C-284. 

February 23, 1929, applied to commission for point-to- 
point marine relay on 5,570, 5,615, and 8,370 kilocycles, 
2—L--C—456. 

March 21, 1929, commission granted application for public 
point-to-point, on 165 and 171 kilocycles, for 1 year, accord¬ 
ing to minutes of December 22, 1928. 


151 



WME—DULUTH 


September 16, 1924, applied for 170 kilocycle^, to com¬ 
municate with Sheboygan, Rogers City, and Cleveland, 
limited public. 

September 27, 1924, granted for 3 months. 

December 8, 1924, applied for renewal. 

January 3, 1925, granted for 3 months. 

April 4, 1925, applied for renewal. 

April 7, 1925, granted for 6 months. 

October 5, 1925, applied for renewal. 

October 12, 1925, granted for 6 months. 

April 5, 1926, applied for renewal to communicate with 
Sheboygan, Detroit, Cleveland, Rogers City, Buffalo, and 
Columbus. 

April 9, 1926, granted for 6 months. 

March 20, 1929, applied to commission for |icense for 
point-to-point marine relay, on 5,570, 5,615, 8,370—4-L- 
C-452. 


May 31, 1929, granted on 4,116 and 8,630 for 1 year. 

There has also been submitted an application for point- 
to-point public on this station—2-L-C-281—but this was 
later supplanted by the filing of an application on April 27, 
1929, 4-L-C-476, for combined maritime mobile and public 
point to point WSK, WFL, WLC, and all stations of I. R. T. 
Co. on following frequencies: 


CW and ICW 

CW 

CW and ICW 

j 

1 

Calling 

Working 

Calling 

Working 

Calling 

Working 

Calling 

Working 

j 

732 

1,754 

2,098 

1,818 

410 

171 

143 

] 165 

• 

706 




425 


i 

• 

660 




454 


i 


The minutes of April 29, 1929, show that this license was 
granted “in accordance with the recommendation of the 
Engineering Division,” as a “license on construction permit 
to replace spark set.” 


| 

i 

i 

i 

i 

| 

| 

i 























152 


9 ^ 


9 


WAM—BUFFALO 

November 15, 1924, applied for license—170 kilocycles— 
limited public to communicate with Cleveland, Rogers City, 
Sheboygan, Wyandotte. 

November 20, 1924, granted for 3 months. 

February 5, 1925, applied for renewal. 

February 9, 1925, granted for 3 months. 

November 24, 1925, applied for renewal. 

November 30, 1925, granted for 6 months. 

May 16, 1926, applied for renewal. 

May 27, 1926, granted for 6 months. 

June 3, 1926, applied for renewal, 170 and 153 kilocycles. 

October 2, 1926, granted for 6 months on 170. 

September 30, 1927, application to commission (received 
November 1,1927) for point-to-point public on 170 and 153 
kilocycles, l-L-C-285. 

February 22, 1929, application to commission for point-to- 
point marine relay on 5,570, 5,615, 8,370 kilocycles, 1-L-C- 
457. 

March 21, 1929, public service license granted for 1 year 
on 165 and 171, according to minutes of December 22, 1928. 

May 29, 1929, license granted for 1 year on 4,116 and 
8,630, for point-to-point marine relay only. 

WCL—COLUMBUS 

February 8, 1926, original application for communication 
with Cleveland, Buffalo, Detroit, Duluth, on 153 kilocycles, 
to Department of Commerce, limited public. 

March 5, 1926, granted for 6 months (never sent out). 

June 12, 1926, application for renewal, omitting Duluth 
and adding Rogers City, Sheboygan, and Lawrenceville. 

October 2, 1926, license for 6 months, 153 kilocycles. 

October 3, 1927, application to commission to communi¬ 
cate with WTK, WTL, WAM, WDI, WCFL, WSK, WLC, 
WME, point-to-point public, 170 and 153 kilocycles— 
2—L—C—288. 

March 21, 1929, granted for 165 and 171, according to 
minutes of December 22, 1928, for 1 year. 


I 

I 

I 

I 



I 


i 


Appendix F 

Analysis, Mackay Applications 


Original 

Dated 

Nature 

of 

appli¬ 

cation 

Location 

Fre¬ 

quency 

re¬ 

quested 

j 

Communication with 

Power 

(kilo¬ 

watts) 

5-P-C-20 

Jan. 9,1928 

C. P-. 

Clearwater, 

6,960 

San Francisco.. 


H 



Calif. 

8’930 



5-P-C-21 

Dec. 30,1927 

_do... 

Memphis_ 

4,480 

Chicaeo. Birmineham. 1 

5 




8,960 

New Orleans. 



3-P-C-22 

_do_ 

...do... 

Savannah_ 

4,455 

Jacksonville. Miami. 

5 





8,910 

New York. 



4-P-C-23 

_do_ 

...do... 

Kansas City, 

4,495 

Chicago, New York, 

5 




Mo. 

8,990 

Denver, San Fran- 






4,715 

cisco, Dallas^ 

Gal- 






9,430 

veston. 



4-P-C-24 

Jan. 9,1928 

...do... 

Palo Alto _ _ 

9,070 

Portland, Oreg 

Los 

H 




4,535 

Angeles. 






6,685 








5,800 


1 


4-P-C-25 

Dec. 30,1927 

_do .. 

Chinagn 

4,500 

Memphis, Burning- 

5 




9,000 

ham, New Orleans, 






4,650 

New York, Kansas 






9,300 

City, Mo., Denver, 






8,120 

San Francisco 







12,180 




5-P-C-26 

_do_ 

_do _. 

Dflnvftr ..... _ 

4,090 

San Francisco, Kansas 

5 





8,180 

City, Mo., Chicago, 







New York. 



3-P-C-27 

_do. 

...do.. 

Jacksonville... 

4,030 

Miami. Savannah. 

5 





8,060 

New York. 



3-P-C-28 

_do_ 

...do.. 

New Orleans.. 

4,595 

Birmingham, 

Mem- 

5 


' 



9,190 

phis, Chicago, 






4,040 








8,080 




3-P-C-29 

_do_ 

...do.. 

Galveston_ 

4,070 

Dallas. Kansas City. 

5 





8,140 

Mo. 







4,465 








9,530 




5-P-C-30 

Apr. 4,1928 

_do — 

Seattle_ 

8,021 

Portland, Oregi 

San 






4,026 

Francisco, Alaska. 






5,976 




6-P-C-31 

Dec. 30,1927 

-do — 

Palo Alto_ 

4,490 

Dp.nvar, Kansas City, 

5 




4’980 

Mo., Chicago, New 






13,470 

York. 







17,960 





I 

i 

j 


( 153 ) 














154 


Analysis, Mackay Applications 


Original 

Dated 

Nature 

of 

appli¬ 

cation 

Location 

Fre¬ 

quency 

re¬ 

quested 

Communication with 

Power 

(kilo¬ 

watts) 

l-P-C-32 

_do_ 

...do.. 

New York.... 

4,720 

Savannah, Jackson- 

5 





9,440 

ville, Miami, Chi- 



' 



4,550 

cago, Kansas City, 






9,100 

Mo.; Denver, San 






13,650 

Francisco. 






4,060 







8,120 



5-P-C-33 

Apr. 30,1928 

• 

1 

o 

t 

1 

i 

Hillsboro, 

7,815 

San Francisco, Los 

1 




Oreg. 


Angeles. 


5-P-C-34 

__.do._._ 

...do.. 

Palo Alto_ 

4,275 

Los Angeles, Port- 

1 





5,835 

land, Oreg. 


5-P-C-35 

.do. 

_do.. 

Clearwater, 

6,960 

San Francisco, Port- 

1 




Calif. 

land, Oreg. 


3-P-C-3S 

Dec. 30,1927 

...do.. 

Dallas.. 

4,020 

Kansas City, Mo., 

5 


1 



8, W0 

Galveston. 


5-P-C-39 

Jan. 9,1928 

_do 

Hillsboro. ... 

7,850 

San Francisco_ 

K 




9,300 


3-P-C-47 

Dec. 30,1927 

—do.. 

Birmingham.. 

4,080 

Memphis, Chicago, 

5 





8,160 

New Orleans. 


3-P-C-S4 

_...do. __ 

_do.. 

Miami _ _ 

4,600 

Jacksonville, Savan- 






9,200 

nah, New York. 






4,090 







8.180 






















Hi story of Licenses, Mackay Radio <fc Telegraph Co. t continental frequencies —Continued 

STATION KOH, HILLSBORO, OREQ.-Contlnued 


258 


156 


I 

•a 

«w 

•mm 

Be 

o 

8 

5 

3 

a 

a 

s 

o 

S< 


a 

o 

s 

-a 




o 

Q 


o 

Q 


© o 

... v t- ■» 

e?r?<5QS«gg§ 


^ • * «* « o co “ ^ 


a 

o 

a 

a 

so 

-< 


8 

*3 


M 


a « S 

o 

*-4 

Cl 

00 o' 


CO ^ 


§ *o *o 

« N J O 

f- « -J 


s 

o 


*6 

o 


s 

CO 


0Q O ^ ^ t 


s 

00100)0000 

HHNgp«h$*f 

■^•^OOO^OOi-H 

lO* o’ o" o* o“ n" 


2 

o 

<p 


fl 

8 

3 


o 

o 

JS 

o. 

£ 

00 

£ 

3 

6- 


*3 

a 

« 

>* 

a 

v 

a 


o 

•3 


*3 

o 

i- 

& 

8 


i 


CO 

8 

Q 


o 

•a 


o 

*3 


a 

3 


a 

o 


a 

o 


Cl 

o 


> 

o 

£ 


o 

a 

3 
























STATION KNft, CLEARWA'I'ER, CALI?. 

























History of Licenses, Mackay Radio & Telegraph Co., continental frequencies —Continued 

8TATION KNR, CLEARWATER, CALIF.—Continued 



































159 


i 


sy 


o 

« 


© 

Q 


© 

O 


o 

Q 





M: "mldotaannol,” 1. e, frequenoy at 0.1% separation between standard station band frequencies 












History of Licenses, Mackay Radio & Telegraph Co., continental frequencies —Continued 

STATION KWT, (NEAR) PALO ALTO, CALIF.-Contlnuod 



160 



***** f' 










10,820M 
13.016M 
39.39 
61.68 



roldchanneV’ i. e. frequency at 0.1% separation between standard station band frequencies. 























Appendix H 

AnalysiSf R. C. A. applications 


Original 


Dated 


Nature of 
application 





l-P-C-112. 

Apr. 9,192S 

1 C. P 

l-P-C-93 

1 

j 

.do_ 

.d 

l-P-C-94. 

.do_ 

| . « 

l-P-C-95 

_do_ 

.d 

l-P-C-96. 

.do_ 

.d 

l-P-C-97. 

_do_ 

.d 

l-P-C-98. 

i Apr. 9,1928 

C. P. 

l-P-C-99 

__do 

!.d 

l-P-C-100... 

_do. 

; . d< 

1 

l-P-C-101. 

j 

_do_ 

.d 

l-P-C-102. 

_do__ 

.d 

l-P-C-103. 

.do. i 

.d< 

■ 

l-P-C-104. 

.do. 

.d 

i-p-n -105 

1 

_do..._ 

.d 

l-P-C-106.. 

_do_ 

.d 

l-P-C-107. 

Apr. 9,1928 

C. P. 

1-P-C-lOS. 

' 

_do_ 


l-P-C-109 . . 

_ do__ 

.d< 

l-P-C-110. 

_do_....! 


4-P-C-57 

_do_ 

.d< 

• 

l-P-C-56 

• 

_.do...._ 

.d< 

j 

1 | 

4-P-C-68 . 

_do..._1 

_d< 

4— P—C— 67..._.......—... 

-do. 

. d< 


Location 


Now York. 


Fre¬ 

quency 

requested 


5.065 

14,680 

19,020 



Power 


Dated 

. 

Fre- 


Communication with 

(kilo¬ 

watt) 

. . —-t 

Amended by— 

Location 

quency 

requested 

Communication with 


San Francisco. 


4.465 ;.do. 

11,9.50 j 
16.220 

5.035 New Orleans. 
11,620 
14.650 


New York. 


5,055 

Chicago. 

10,110 


15,540 


4,735 


9,470 


14,710 


4,485 

_do__ 

8,970 


13,420 


4* 075 

_do.. 

8,150 


11,920 


4,715 

Detroit_ __ . 

9,430 


13,840 


4,705 

Cleveland_ ____ 

9,410 


13,450 


4,725 

Cincinnati 

9,450 


13,960 


4,745 

Pittsburch_ 

9,490 


4,475 

Norfolk. 

8,950 


8,150 

Buffalo. 

4,075 


6,980 

Portland, Me.. 

3,490 


6,965 

Rochester, N. Y 

3,4S7 


6,950 

Washington, D. C 

3,475 


6,935 

Boston, Mass. 

3,467 


6,740 

Philadelphia.. 

3,370 


6,920 

Schenectady... 

3,460 


15,700 

San Francisco. 

7,850 


5,455 


7,430 


14,860 


12,250 

Denver. 

4,995 


10,870 

New Orleans. 

5,435 

IM T' »- 


l-P-C-112a...' May 14,1929 , Rocky Point. 


l-P-C-112b. 


1-P-C-112C...do..do..... 

l-P-C-93a. . j .do....do. 

l-P-C-94a___i_do...do_ 

l-P-C-95a.|.do. j .do. 

l-P-C-96a...do..do. 

! 

l-P-C-97a. May 14,1929 :.do. 


5,310 
13,840 
17,860 
5.105 

14, S15 

21,200 

5,100 
13,465 
18.920 
5,200 
13,8S5 

15. 900 
5.195 

13.915 [ 
17,940 
5,315 
S,930 


San Francisco. 


Seattle. 

Los Angeles... 
San Francisco. 


New Orleans. 


Chicago. 


5,205 |.do.. 

7,407.5 Kansas City, Mo. 


5,000 Chicago. 
6,725 


l-P-C-9Sa.|.do. 

l-P-C-99a..do. 

l-P-C-100a..do. 


Philadelphia. 


Rocky Point. 


l-P-C-101a.do. 


5,095 .do.. 

8,950 

4,995 Detroit. 

6,740 


4,795 Cleveland.. 
6,710 

5,005 Cincinnati. 
7,400 


l-P-C-102a.do. 

l-P-C-103a. do. 

l-P-C-103b.do. 


l-P-C-104a.do. 

l-P-C-105a.|.do. 

l-P-C-106a..do. 


l-P-C-170a. May 14,1929 Rocky Point. 


l-P-C-10Sa..do. 

l-P-C-109a.!.do. 

l-P-C-110a.do. 


4-P-C-57a.....j.do. Chicago. 

l-P-C-56a.!.do...do.. 


4-P-C-6Sa__j_do. 

4-P-C-67a. _....... j _do. 



4,2S4 
5,315 
4,280 ; 

5.310 
5,190 

13,930 
17,920 
4,272 
Of 30o 
4,268 
5,205 

3.310 
5,200 
3,307 j 
5,195 
3,304 

5,105 
3,298 
4,975 | 
3,301 
5,100 i 
5, S62.5, 
13,870 
17,900 
5,185 
13,450 
16,030 
5,295 ; 
9.4S0 
5,180 
9,460 


Pittsburgh. 
Norfolk.... 
Miami. 


Buffalo.. 

Portland, Me.... 
Rochester, N. Y. 

Washington_ 

Boston, Mass_ 

Philadelphia_ 

Schenectady...., 
San Francisco..., 


Denver_ 

New Orleans.. 


- w -*: 1 ... \ 


Amended June 


(kilo¬ 

watt) 


14,1929, list 


Fre- Coxnmls- 

Location quency Communication with sion 

requested action 


40 1-P-C-I12a_ Rocky Point. 5,270 San Francisco. 

13,840 
17.S60 

40 -do_____ 


40 .do. 


40 Not amended. 


40 l-P-C-94a_... Rocky Point_! 5,255 j New Orleans, 

13,915 j 
17,940 i 

40 l-p-c-95a—.do. 5,055 , Chicago. 

8,930 


40 Not amended. 


40 .do. 


40 !.do. 


40 l-P-C-99a_ Rocky Point_ 4,540 Detroit, 

6,740 


40 j l-P-C-100a.'_do. 4,535 Cleveland. 

6,710 

40 l-P-C-101a__do___ 4,550 Cincinnati 

7,400 

40 Not amended.|_ 

40 .....do_....._____........_ 

40 .do.... 


40-do. 

I 

40 !_do. 


40 .do. 



40 4-P-C-57a..i.._ Chicago... 5,260 San Francisco_ 

13,870 

17,900 

40 Not amended___ 1 ____ D. 


40 4-P-C-68a_ Chicago_[ 5,015 Denver...._ 

9,480 

40 4-P-C-67a..__..do__| 5,005 New Orleans_ 



63493—29. (Face p. 162.) No.l 




















































































































































































































1 

4-P-C-65 . do . 

__ao_ 

i 

1 

.do.. 


7, S30 
2,775 

1 14,890 
7,445 
. 12,2S0 

4,555 

J 10,890 

.do. 

• sJ 

5 

5 

5 

5 

5 

■X—A, 

1 

4-P-C-65a_ 

• e.—UV/. 

.do. 

.do. 

9,490 

5,025 

I 6,905 
4,745 
6,920 
j 5,175 
9,450 
5,290 
6,935 
4,565 
5,295 
5,020 

5.862. 5 
3,286 
5,290 
5,075 

13.720 
18, (HO 

5,285 
13,690 
18,060 

5,165 
10,400 
15,445 
5,270 
9.010 
15,490 
4,990 
10,410 
18,020 
5,275 
10,390 
15.460 
5,280 
7,715 
15,430 
4,735 
5,870 

4.720 
10,630 

o, 085 
10,610 
5,300 

6.957.5 
4.730 

6.927.5 

4,740 

5,8oo 
4.575 
5,300 
4,700 

6,845 
4,725 
6,860 

4,710 

6.942.5 
4,585 

6.852.5 
4,585 
5,280 
4,695 
9,470 
4,555 
5,165 

: -now iorK. 

.do. 

40 

40 

40 

40 

40 

40 

40 

40 

40 

40 

40 

40 

40 

40 

40 

40 

40 

40 

40 

40 

40 

40 

40 

40 

40 

40 

40 

40 

40 

40 

40 L 

4-P-C-66a._ 

Nnt. ftmpndod 


5,010 

9,490 

New York_ 

D. 

D. 

D 

G. 

G. 

D. 

D. 

D. 

G. 

D. 

G. 

D. 

G. 

G. 

rj 

4-P-C-6 i— .i.do. 

.do.. 

1 

.do. 

4-P-C-64a. 

i 

1 .do. 

.do. 

. 

.do. 

Philadelphia... 

do 




4-P-C-63.-. 

j_do__do___ 

.do. 

New York... 

4-P-C-63a.. 

_do.. 

.do____ 

do 




4-P-C-62..-. 

._do_ 

j.do. 


5,445 

J 9,970 

Kansas City, Mo., 
Minneapolis. 

St. Louis, Cleveland 

( 

. 

4-P-C-62a. 

dn 

dn 

I Kansas City, Mo., De¬ 
troit. 

St. Louis, Cleveland 

4-P-P,-62a 


3,286 

6,935 

3,283 

5,265 

Kansas City, Mo., 
Detroit. 

St. Louis, Cleveland.. 

4-P-C-61. 

j_do. 

.do.. 

_do__ 

; 4,985 

9,130 

j 4-P-C-61a.. 

_do_ 

_do__ 

4-P-P-filo 

Ha 

4-P-C-60. 

._do. 

i 

_do.. 

.do. 

4,505 
J 9,150 

Detroit, Cincinnati 

5 

! 5 

so 

5 

5 

5 

1 

5 

; 

5 

5 

5 

5 

5 

1 

5 

5 1 

5 

5 

5 

5 

5 

5 

5 

5 

4-P-C-G0a__ 

_do. 


! Minneapolis, Cincinnati. 

Not amended 


4-P-C-5S.- 

( 

.!.do. 

I 

..do.. 

.do. 

4,575 
. 7.S50 

Milwaukee.. 

' 

i 4-P-C-5Sa... 

_do_ 


. Milwaukee_ 

_do 




5-P-C-43. 

J Feb. 25,1928 

C. P. 

. Bolinas. 

2,770 
. 13,750 

New York. 

5-P-C-43a. 

_do_ 

Los Angeles_ 

; New York... 

__do. 




5-P-C-78—. 

_j Apr. 9,1928 

.do. 

-do. 

. San Francisco. 

6, S75 
20,620 
. 18,700 

.do.. 

I 

; 5-P-C-7Sa__ 

_do. 

Bolinas.. 

!.do. 

5-P-C-7Sa 


5,025 

13,690 

18,060 


5-P-C-79. 

.do. 


10, CIO 

14,500 

10.290 

5,145 
i 15.460 
10.630 
5,315 
14,530 
9,030 
4,515 
11,560 
5,135 

10,650 

5,325 

9,050 
4,525 
11,470 
o, 73o 

9,770 I 


j 

| 

5-P-C-79a. 

.do. 

■ _do__ 

;_dO_ 

fimonrtad 

j 

iNCvv 1 OfK_...._ 

5-P-C-S0-. 

I 

J.do. 



Chicago. 

I 

5-P-3-S0a... 

.do. 


1 

1 Chicago. 

5-P-P-Sna 


5,040 

9,010 

15,490 


5-P-C-81. 

J 

.do. 

..do. 



i 

5-P-C-81a.. 

.do. 

1 

1 

: .do. 

VaI. 



5-P-C-83. 

.'.do..do. 


I Denver.... 

i 

5-P-C-83ft__ 

_do. 

.do. 

j ■■ - - - - -— 

Denver_ 

5-P-C-R3a 


5,020 

10,390 

15,460 

5,035 

7,715 

15,430 

4,268 

5,275 

5,030 

10,630 

5,045 

10,610 


5-P-C-82. 

.do_ 

.do. 


Seattle_ 

1 

5-P-C-82a... 

_do. 

.do. 

Seattle_ 

5-P-C 82* 


Denver-_ 

5-P-C-50. 

1 

.do_ 

i 

.do. 

.do. 

Los Angeles.... 

5-P-C-50a__.i__ 

_dn . 

_do.„ 

Los Angeles 


Ha 


3-P-C-54. 

.do. 

.do. 

1 

New Orleans. 

New York_ 

5-P-C-54a. 

_do_ 

New Orleans 

New Ynrk 

3-P-P 5411 


juos Angeies__ 

u. 

' n 

: 

3-P-C-52. 

.do. 

.do. 


i 

1 

Memphis_ 

3-P-C-54b.i_ 



Chicago. 

3-P-C-54b_. 

CW UiicallS__ 

- _ do 

i. U1A.._ _ _ P .- VI, 

1 r.hirftffn Cr 

3-P-C-54C.. 



Savannah.. 

Not amended_ 



D. 

3-P-C-52a. 

.do 

_do 

"Dallas 





D 

2-P-C-72 . 

j : 

j 

I 

Detroit.. 1 

4,885 | 

9,750 
4,875 
10,350 . 

Dallas. 

Houston. 

New York 

3-P-C-52b. 

May 14,1929 

.do_ 

New Orleans. 

Memphis. 

Not amended... 




D. 

i 

*pr. 9,1928 

...do. 

C. P_ 

3-P-C-52C.. 


Houston. 

_do_..._ 


j 


. D. 

2-P-C-72a 

do 

Dptroif: 


0_T> P *70 o 


•> ocn 


I 

1 

1 G 

2-P-C-73. 

do 

Cleveland... 


2-P-C-73a. 

_do. 

Cleveland. 

.do. 

2-P-C-73a 

(Cleveland 

. 5, ZSA) 

6,845 
3 277 

JL/CliOlt_....._..... 

New York 

V* 

j 

G. 

2-P-C-74. 

J 

—do.L 

—do. 

Cincinnati_ 

O f 1 4 O 

9,790 . 

dn 

o_p_p_74a 



New York, Chicago, 
Miami. 

O P P "7An 


6,860 

4,284 

6,942.1 

New York, Chicago.. 

) 

r 

J D. 

3-P-C-51. 

—do.!.. 

...dp.. 

Savannah. 

4,895 

10,310 

5,155 
10,410 
5,205 

7,730 

3,422 

7,460 

2,835 

9,210 

4,605 

9,170 

4,585 

9,270 

4. 825 , 







2-P-C-90. 

—do. 

—do. 

Norfolk. 

Now York, Savannah... 




New York, Savannah_ 

Nbw York_ 





t 

JO. 

T>. 

D. 

D. 

D. 

l-P-C-91_ 

_do_ 

* . do 


« JT v"Wa. 

....uo.. ...... 


.do_ 



- -li—-i 

O-r-L-WD. 

....ao........ 



_do... 

• 



2-P-C-02 _ 

do 


w asnington_ 

New York. _ 

l-P-C-91a. 

■ ^ 







2-P-C—75_ _ 

_do_ 

_do 

Philadelphia 


2-P-C-92a-- 

__do_ 

Philadelphia--— 

5,080 

4,590 
5,285 

4,560 
5,270 
4,580 - 

5,275 

New York.... 

40 - 

_do--- 




l-P-C-88.. 

_do_ 

-r do 


New York___ 

2-P-C-75a- 

•—.ao-— 



40 - 

_do- 




l-P-C-77 __ — _ _ 

....do- 

-do___ 

jrortiana f Me_ ... 

Buffalo. 


l-P-C-88a. 

l-P-C-77a. 

_do..__ 

_do-- 

Buffalo--- 

....do. 

40 - 

....do. 









































































































































































































I-P-C-77../- 

1 T> P 111 

....do....... - 

do 

_do-- I 

_do_1 

Boflklo—...........— 

Schenectady.... 

9. 270 . 

4,033 

7,710 . 

....do. 1 

3 

5 

l-P—C—77#_ 

1-P-C-llla. 

-<Io-- 

-do- 

Buffalo_._ 

Schenectady_ 

4.380 

5,273 

3,277 


\ 40 

40 

\--no-L. 

hBBBB 



\ r> * 

-L'HLll---- 




2.830 






5,075 







-\ x>. 



....do__ 

Rochester_j 

7,750 

-—do. 1 

5 

l-P-C-76a. 

.do_ 

Rochester. 

4.545 


40 

.do._ 





1-r-C-ib-—--- 



i 

2,840 

I 





5,175 





.i- 


. D. 



..do..___ 

Boston. 

7,475 . 

_do....! 

5 

1-P-C-S9a. 

.do. 

Boston. 

3,274 

New York and Chicago 

40 

_do_... 





l-P-L-89------ 



I 

3,430 






5.170 







. D. 



_do.__ 

Los Angeles. 

9.230 

San Francisco_ 

5 

5-P-C-S5a_... 

.do- 

Los Angeles. 

4,570 

San Francisco. 

40 

_do_ 









4,615 






6.950 







- D. 



... do.--._ 

Seattle. 

12,190 

....do.1 

5 

5-P-C-6S7a. 

.do_ 

Seattle. 

5,010 

1 —do. 

40 

5-P-C-S7ft 


1 

A CCf? 


- 

O-X , -U-0cW..--- — - --- 




5,855 

Portland, Oreg. 





7,520 

I 




IB 

ban r rancisco_ 

.. G. 



l 





5-P-C-6S7b. 

.do. 


5,0SC 

New York. 

40 

Not amended.. 








! 







13,705 







- D. 



1 








20,780 















5-P-C-6S7c. 

.do. 

.do.... 

3,268 

j Portland, Oreg. _ 

40 

.do_ 















5,010 







- D. 

tL_D P QCt 

do 

_do _ 

Portland, Oreg.- 

7,870 

Seattle . 

5 

5-P—C _ S6a_ ........... 


Portland, Oreg. 

3,283 

; Seattle. 

40 

_do........ 









2,825 






5,180 

1 






- D. 

C_X>^P t;o 

do 

_do.i 

Denver. 

11,440 

San Francisco. 

5 

5-P-C-59a. 

.do- 

Denver. 

5,015 

San Francisco. 

40 

5-P-C-59a._... 

Denver 




*- .——— - 

1 




5,720 

Chicago. 





8,940 






oan xrancisco ... 

. G. 






1 


5-P-C-59b. 

.do. 

.do. 

5,090 

Chicago. 

40 

5-P-C-59b.. 















10,620 





Etiwtt 

^mcago—_.... 

- G. 

4_T>_P._ c yiQ 

do._- 

_do__ j 

Kansas City, Mo. 

10,090 

Chicago, St. Louis, 

5 











TTt 





5,045 

Dallas. 












- u. 

il p p 71 

do .. 

_do_....... 

St. Louis. 

10,430 

Chicago, Kansas City, 

5 

4-P-C-71a. 

.do. 

St. Louis.... 

4,535 

Chicago, Memphis.._ 

40 

4-P-C-71a 

St Tannic 

2 







5,215 

Memphis. 





5,095 







G. 

I 







4-P-C-71b. 

.do. 

Kansas City, Mo. 

3,271 

Chicago, New York, 

40 

4-P-C-71h „ 

ItBrnoc Pitr Ma 

3 271 


A 

j 










6,890 

Dallas. 




6,890 


V. 

l-'P-P-M 

do _ 

.do. 

Dallas___....... 

10,330 

New Orleans, Kansas 

5 

3-P-C-55a. 

.do. 

Dallas. 

4,980 

New Orlears, Kansas 

40 

Not amended.. 




rv 



' 


5,165 

City, Houston. 





6,732.5 

City, Houston. 






aJ* 


do 

_do_ 

Houston_ 

9,250 

New Orleans, Dallas.. 

5 

3-P-C-53a. 

.do. 

Houston.. 

4,540 

New Orleans Dallas.... 

40 

_do_... 









4,625 






5,185 







*/• 

**_T>_P-AQ 

do . 

_do...___ 

Memphis___ 

10,590 

New Orleans, St. Louis, 

5 

3-P-C-49a. 

.do. 

Memphis__ 

4,550 

New Orleans St. Louis, 

40 





T\ 





5,295 

Cincinnati. 





6,717.5 

Cincinnati 






Dm 

A T> P 7 A 

Jnr 0 1928 

C. P. 

Minneapolis, Minn... 

9,810 

Chicago. 

5 

4-P-C-70a. 

May 14,1929 

Minneapolis. 

4,705 

Chicago.. 

40 

Not amended_ 




T\ 

— 



4,905 





5,265 







I/t 

a T>_r»_«o 

do 

__do___ 

Milwaukee__ 

8,170 

.do. 

5 

4-P-C-69a 

_do_ 

Milwaukee. 

3,271 


40 

_do. 




T\ 





4,085 






5,085 







D m 


i Apr 22,1927 

Renewal of L_ 

Rocky Point_ 

5,820 

Rome, Montreal.. 

SO 

1 











Superceeded by l-L-C-86. 

! Feb. 8,1928 

do 


5,825 

Porto Rico, Havana 

80 







i 




U m 



9,470 

Montreal. 

















18,940 














Superceded by l-L-C-292. 

July 31,1928 

.do_ 


5,825 

Berlin, London, Goth- 

cn 













"i. 

5,495 

enburg, San Juan, San 
















| 

5,265 

Francisco, Havana. 














Nov. 22,1928 

C. P. and Mod. 

. New Brunswick. 

5,265 

Berlin, London, Goth- 

so 

1_Vf-P ICo 

May 20,1929 

Rocky Point__ 

5,265 

London, Mdrid, Lis- 


1-M-C-lSa.. 

New Brnns^riet .... 

5,065 


A 

and 1—M—C—18. 



5,495 

enburg, Havana, San 




bon, Havjna. 




Berlin. 

u. 





5,825 

Juan, San Francisco. 




















l-A.f-r 1 1CK 

do 


Not sped- 

San Juan, S. Martins, 


l-M-C-18b. 

Rockv Point— 

5,265 


Cl 








! 



fled. 

Berlin. 




Madrid, Lisbon. 

u. 








7 AT P ICa 

do 


5,855 

Oslo, Gothaburg, Bo- 


l-M-C-18c_i 

New Brunswick 

5,275 


A 












gots 




enburg. 

U. 

Va nnmhpf 

Apr. 22,1927 

Renewal_ 

. Rocky Point. 

. 4,050 

London, Brussels 

Cf\ 













Feb. 8,1928 

__do.--- 


. 4,050 

Bogota, Dutch Guiana 

oU 





. 












Brussels. 

oU 












by l-L-C-29f 

L July 31,1928 

.do- 


. 4,052 

Gotbenberg, Montreal 

CA 


atatt on moo 

Rocky Point_ 

4,276 

Gothenberg Montreal _ . 

80 

l-M-C-295.. 

Rockv Point. _ 

3,332 

Montreal, Gothenberg 

A 

Va nnmhpr 

.. May 21,192! 

_do_ 

.. Kahuku. 

. 3,331 

San Francisco, Tokyo 

ou 


jyiay 



. 




u. 






Manila, Java , Sa S 

oU 












Smvrvdpd bv 5-L—C—80. 

Apr. 2,1925 

i .do- 

.do. 

. 5,840 

San Francisco, Japan 

CA 









w 








Manila. ’ 

oU 






KM 


• 




Superseded by 5-L-C-296 

. July 31,1925 

i .do. 


. 5,840 

San Francisco, Tokyo 




TTahnlrn _ 

5,870 

San Franco©, Tokyo, 

E3I 

5-L-C-296... 

Kahuku_ 

4.545 






Manila. ^’ 

oU 

5-L/-C-296.__ 

May ijaj 


Manila, »va. 

H 



ouva, oan i? rancisco, 
Manila, Tokyo* 

G. 


63493—29. (Face p. 162.) No. 1 

































































































































































Appendix I 

Analysis, Westei'n applications 


Original 


Dated 


Nature of ajy 
plication 


Location 


| Frequen¬ 
cy re¬ 
quested 


Marland Pipe Line Co_ 

Superseded by 3-L-C-174. 


Apr. 22, 1927 
Apr. 10, 1928 


Communication with 


Renewal L. C—J Ponca City, Okla... 
-do-1-do. 1 


6,600 

6,600 


Marland Pipe Line Co... 
Superseded by: 

3-L-C-175__ 


Borger, Tex. 
-do_ 


Apr. 22, 1927 


.do. 


Apr. 10,1928 |.do... i 


Marland Camp, Ter.. 6,600 

. do .j 6,600 


5-P-C-710. 


Phillips Pet. Co. j May 2,1927 Renewal... 

Superseded by 3-L-C-194... 


Phillips Pet. Co.. 

Superseded by 3-L-C-195.. 


Phillips Pet. Co. 
Supersededjby: 
3-L-C-196_ 


3-P-C-545. 

3-P-C-738. 


May 2,1927 
Apr. 30,1928 

June 15,1927 
Apr. 30,1928 

Feb. 27,1928 
Oct. 31,1928 



Ponca City. 

—do_ 


i 1 C. P. 

- Jal, N. Mex 

1 

1 

j 

Renewal... 

1 

I 

1 

Bartlesville, Okia.. 

1 

1 

• 

a 

l 

1 

i 

4 

1 

1 

1 

i 



BftriTAr Tor 

.do—. 

_do 

1 

1 

1 

1 

1 

§• 

1 

1 

1 

f 

1 

1 

1 

1 

Breckenridge, Tex_ 

-do_ 

_dn 

C.P.. 


-do_ 



_ 


Power 

(watts) 


150 


150 L 


5,870 Ponca City and Bor¬ 
ger. 


J69.5, Borger, Breckenridge, 
Vernon. 

168.9| Borger, Breckenridge.. 


169.5 

168.9 

168.9| 

168.9 

181.8 


168.9 

181.8 

5,810 


Bartlesville, Brecken¬ 
ridge, Vernon. 
Breckenridge, Bartles¬ 
ville. 


Bartlesville, Borger. 
-do- 


-do- 

Bartlesville. 


4,000 

4,000 

4,000 

4,000 

750 

750 

1,000 

500 


Superseded by ap¬ 
plications West¬ 
ern Radio Tel. 
Co. 

Dated 

Nature of 
application 

Location 

i 

Fre¬ 

quency 

Communication with 

Power 

(watts) 

Amended 
July 11,1929 

Location 

Fre¬ 

quency 

Power 

(watts) 

Communication 

with 













3-L-C-174a L. P.. 

i 

April 11,1929 

L_ 

Ponca Citv.. 

5,810 

5,840 

5,870 

5,735 

5,980 

Tulsa and other sta¬ 
tions of same com¬ 
pany. 

150 


Ponca City-— 

5,075 

5,080 

5,085 

5,780 

5.787.5 
5,795 

5.502.5 
5,810 

150 

Borger and others- 




3-L-C—175ft_ _ __ 

i 

Apr. 11,1929 

—do. 

L_ 

Marland Camp_... 

5,810 

5, S40 
5,870 
5,735 
5,980 

5, S10 
5,840 
5,870 
5,735 

5,9S0 

Tulsa and other sta¬ 
tions of same com¬ 
pany. 

■ 

150 

3-L-C-524.. 

5-P-C-9S3 .. 

Marland Camp. 

Jal— __ 

5,075 

5,080 

5,085 

5,780 

5.787.5 
5,795 

5.802.5 
5,810 
5,075 
5,080 
5,085 
5,780 

5.787.5 
5,795 

5.802.5 
5,810 

500 

500 

Ponca City and 
others. 

.—..do_ 

5-P-C-710a 

C. P... . 

-Tftl 


j 







3-L-C-194a 

Apr. 11,1929 

L. 

Bartlesville, Okla_ 


Tulsa and others—. , 

4.000 

3—L—C—526 

Bartlesville_ 

182 

186 

188 

193 

4,000 

Tulsa and others.. 






3-T—C-IMa 

Apr. 11,1929 

L 

Borger . _ 

157 

169 

182 

187.5 

Tulsa and others._ 

4,000 

4-L-C-525 .. 

Borger. 

182 

168 

188 

193 

4,000 

Tulsa and others. _ 






3-L-C-196a 

April 11,1929 

L . . 

Breckenridge_ 

157 

169 

182 

187.5 

Tulsa and others ... — 

750 

3-L-C-527-. 

Breckenridge... 

182 

186 

18S 

193 

750 

Tulsa and others.. 

>7nt amAndad 





3-P—C— 738ft .... 

April 11,1929 

C. P 


5,810 

5,840 

5,870 

Tulsa jw'd «th«rs_ 

500 

3-P-C-982. . 

Crane..._ 

5,075 

5,080 

5,085 

500 

Ponca City and 
others. 







Commis¬ 
sion’ 
actio 


D. 

G. 


a » 










































































4 _L_C_ 2 i 5 _I May 12.1927 Renewal_! Eldorado----— 187.5 Tulsa and others- 2,000 4-L-C-215a. 


Skelly 


Oil Co. Apr. 22,1927 !.do- Skelly Camp, Tex.— 


Superseded by: ! , „ „ _ 

3_L_C-214. June 4,1928 .do- Skellytown. 


187.5 Eldorado and others-. 2,000 

190 


187.5 Tulsa and others. 1,000 3-L-C-214a. 


3-L-C-216. Apr. 22,1927 I__do_ Tulsa, Okla. 187.5 Eldorado. 5,000 3-L-C-216a. 


3-P-C-762. Dec. 15,1928 C. P- Wink, Tex. 5,840 Tulsa... 


500 I 3-P-C-762a. 


Texas Pipe Line Co. ------ May 3,1927 Renewal- 

Superseded by 3~L-C—222.. June 28,1928 -do— 


Kings Mill. 6,240 Wichita Falls, Tex.— 

_do. 6,240 -do. 


500 3-L-C-222a. 


Texas Pipe Line Co-.—— May 19,1927 ——do.. 
Superceded by 3-L-C-223-. June 28,1928 -do... 


McCarney, Tex_ 6,240 Wichita Falls and 500 .. 

Kings Mill. 

_do. 6,240 _do- 500 3-L-C-223a. 


Texas Pipe Line Co. May 3,1927 6,660 Kings Mill and Me- 50 

Carney. 



Superseded by 3-L-C-224..I June 28,1928 I.do. do . 6,660 -do— . 500 3-L-C-224a. 



63493—29. (Bfcce p. 162.) No. 2 






































































Appendix J 

* * 

Text of North American Agreement 


AN ARRANGEMENT BETWEEN UNITED STATES, CANADA, CUBA) 
AND OTHER NORTH AMERICAN NATIONS RELATIVE TO THE 


ASSIGNMENT OF FREQUENCIES ON THE NORTH 
CONTINENT 


AMERICAN 


, i ; i 

(1) The sovereign right of all nations to the use of every 

radio channel is recognized. j 

Nevertheless, until technical development progresses to 
the stage where radio interference can be eliminated, it is 
agreed that special administrative arrangements ate essential 
in order to promote standardization and to minimize radio 
interference. 

(2) The governments agree that each country shall be free 
to assign any frequency to any radio station within its juris¬ 
diction upon the sole condition that no interference with any 
service of another country will result therefrom. 

(3) It is agreed that each government shall use Appendix 
1, attached hereto, as a general guide in allocating channels 
to the various services specified therein. 

(4) Channels are divided into two classes, (1) common 
channels which are primarily assigned to particular services 
in all countries; and (2) general communication channels 
which are assigned for use in specific areas. 

(5) With regard to the general communicatioh channels, 
it is considered that at the present stage of the art, the use 
of radio channels below 3,500 kilocycles will not normally 
cause interference at distances greater than 1,000 miles and 
such channels may, therefore, be used with freedom from 
interference by stations separated by such distances. It is 
further recognized that stations operating on frequencies 
above 3,500 kilocycles may become sources of interference 
at distances in excess of i,000 miles, particularly at night. 

(163) j 






(6) The governments agree to take advantage of the 
physical facts just explained, and by suitable geographical 
distribution of these two classes of channels throughout 
North America and the West Indies, to make available for 
general communication services, the total number of chan¬ 
nels set forth in Appendix 2 attached hereto. 

(7) Each government shall have the right to assign to 
stations under its jurisdiction, in the manner it deems best, 
such general communication channels as are allocated to 
that government under this agreement, as set forth in 
Appendix No. 2. The governments agree not to assign to 
stations within their respective jurisdiction any of the 
general communication channels allocated to other govern¬ 
ments, unless it can be accomplished without causing 
interference. 

(8) The marine calling frequency of 5,525 kilocycles shall 
be used until superseded by an international assignment. 

(9) In addition to the frequencies assigned specially for 
experiments (1,604, 2,398, and 4,596 kilocycles) the govern¬ 
ments agree that experimentation by particularly qualified 
experimenters, may be authorized on any other channel 
provided no interference is caused with established services, 
as provided in Regulation No. 11 of the International Radio 
Convention of Washington, 1927. 

(10) The governments agree to adopt [a radio-frequency 
standard based on the unit of time, and to compare at least 
once every six months, the actual radio-frequency measuring 
standards. 

(11) The governments agree to require all stations, other 
than mobile and amateur stations, under their jurisdiction, 
to time their transmitters with an accuracy of 0.025 per cent, 
or better, of their national frequency standard. 

(12) The governments agree to require all stations, likely 
to cause international interference, other than mobile and 
amateur stations, to maintain their frequency with an 
accuracy of 0.05 per cent, or better, at all times. 

(13) For the purpose of this agreement a channel shall be 
regarded as a band of frequencies the width of which varies 
with its position in the range of frequencies under consider- 


ation, but which progresses numerically from the lower to 
the higher frequencies, as shown in the following table: 


Frequency 

Channel 

width 

Kilocycles 

Kilocycles 

1 , 500 - 2,198 

4 

2 , 200 - 3 , 313 

6 

3 , 316 - 4 , 400 

8 

4 , 405 - 5 , 490 

10 

5 , 495 - 6 , 000 

15 


(14) The governments agree to adopt for the present in 
their national plan of allocation a separation of 012 per cent 
between radio-frequency channels; and to permit stations 
under their respective jurisdiction to occupy the assigned fre¬ 
quency and the adjacent frequencies to the limit| permitted 
by the frequency maintenance tolerances and necessitated 
by the type of emission the station may be authorized to use. 
For commercial telephony a band width of 6 kilocycles shall 
be permitted. For the present, a 100-kilocycle band width 
shall be considered standard for television. 

(15) The governments agree to require stations under 
their jurisdiction to use transmitters which are as free as 
practicable from all emissions (such as those due to harmonics, 
decrement, spacing waves, frequency modulation, key clicks, 
type of keying, mush, etc.) not essential to the type of com¬ 
munication carried on, and which would be detrimental to 
communication being carried on by stations in other countries. 

(16) Appendices Nos. 1 and 2, together with the chart 
showing graphically the distribution of the frequencies, 
which are attached hereto, shall constitute a part of this 
agreement. 

(17) This agreement shall go into effect on March 1, 1929, 
and shall remain in force until January 1, 1932, and there¬ 
after for an indeterminate period and until one year from 
the day on which a denunciation thereof shall have been 
made by any one of the contracting parties. 










/ 


166 


NORTH AMERICAN RADIO CONFERENCE, 1929 

Appendix No. 1 .—Allocation of channels to services {arranged in order 

of kilocycles) 


Channels * 

Service 

Number 

of 

channels 

1,504 to 1,600_ 

Maritime Mobile Services * _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _____ _ 

25 

1,600 to 1,648. 

Air Mobile Services * _ _ __. _ _ __ . _ 

12 

1,648 to 1,712. 

Mobile Services_ 

16 

1,712 to 2,000 . _ 

Amateurs _____ 

72 

2,000 to 2*200 

Experimental VisnAl Broadcasting_ _ __ __ 

50 

2,200 to 2,296_ 

General Communication Services 4 _ _ _ _ _ ... 

16 (32) 

2,296 to 2,398 

Maritime and Air Mobile Services *__ - --- -- -- -- - 

17 

2,398 to 2,470 

Mobile Services. _ _ _ ____ ___ _ ______ 

12 

2,470 to 2,506 

Air Mobile Services_ 

6 

2,506 to 2,602. 

Maritime Mobile Services_____ 

16 

2,602 to 2,650. 

Air Mobile Services_____ 

8 

2,650 to 2,746_ 

Maritime and Air Mobile Services_ 

16 

2,746 to 2,950. 

Experimental Visual Broadcasting _ _ _ _ _ _ _ 

34 

2,950 to 3,004. 

Maritime and Air Mobile Services _______ 

9 

3,004 to 3,058. 

General Communication Services« __ _ __ . __ . 

9 (18) 

3,058 to 3,106. 

Air Mobile Services_ 

8 

3,106 to 3,148. 

Maritime Mobile Services __ __ _ _ _ __ __ __ 

7 

3,148 to 3,412 

General Communication Services« _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ 

40 (80) 

3,412 to 3.500. 

Maritime and Air Mobile Services_ 

11 

3,500 to 3,996_ 

Amateurs_ 

62 

3,996 to 4,100. 

General Communication Services 4 _________ _ 

13 

4,100 to 4,196. 

Maritime and Air Mobile Services___ 

12 

4,196 to 4,745. 

General C«Tnmonication Services < _ _ _ _ 

60 

4,745 to 4 r 7Q.«i ■ 

Martime and Air Mobile Services *_____...... 

5 

4,795 to 5,495. 

General Communication Services 4 _ 

70 

5,495 to 5,690. 

Maritime and Air Mobile Services_ 

13 

5,690 to 6,000. 

General Communication Services 4 ..... 

20 



* 639(704) 


J The last channel in each group is assigned to the service indicated immediately abreast the 
group except as specially noted to the contrary. 

J The channel 1,600 kilocycles is assigned to Mobile Services. 

'The channels 1,604, 2,398, and 4,795 kilocycles are assigned to experimental Services. 

4 For details regarding General Communication Services, see Appendix II. 

'Taking into account articles 5 and 6 of the agreement, this total is increased by 65. 


SUMMARY 


Maritime Mobile Services exclusively 

Air Mobile Services exclusively_ 

Amateurs_ 

Experimental Visual Broadcasting... 
Air and Maritime Mobile Services... 

Experimental_ 

Mobile Services_ 

General Communication Services.... 


Number of 
channels 

.. 47* 

_ 33 

_ 134 

_ 84 

_ 81 

_ 3 

_ 29 

_ 228 


Total 


639 


Grand total__ 704 

Note.—T he grand total is obtained by adding on 65 channels made available through the 
application of articles 5 and 6 of the agreement. 



































































General Communication 



_ Maritijne-Mobile 


K/c 


—At r _Mp]?j_(_e_ 


CANAD 




o» v ©* 

i|»o (O +*1 


t\l g O 


oO w vf O V 





oOn o o 


iilil!i!Sili!99BHBBBnSi 


iiiiiii!ili!i!!!18IIHB8H9j 





Mobil 


liiiiiiiS 

Iii 1|ffim m ffi i 


_ AjTjofewrs._ 


Exper. Visual 


- Lxper, visual 

— Broadcasting 


_ uxpjs r i I 


C^anjacicL_ 


MtvyfQUDd.Landl 


C Itb a. I OTHER NATIONS 



1III8SI1III 

>1 a ' mmmmm 
■■■■■■SBBKnsiS 
HiaSilSBKM 
■■■■■■■■■ 


- . 




BBBBBBBBflBBBBflflflllflBBBBBBI 




ytKer.Alcitj^ns 


§, 


COPY A VAI LAB 


• a 


from the original bound volume 



































































































1500 K/c 



MSSMI 

mumi 

SBUMI 

1I121II 



o J3M $ Otf ® Wtf 
vP iDiPSNtOdoo 





*5 


Ntf 0<* 
M^Ctf 


ftltfO 

0)0)0 

<j) 


M O OtfflOCV 
— oici (\Jio 




lev) <o| 



COM 


00-^00 

0)0 

N 



OTTOOMtfOtfOOtUvOcW (fllttf cOO^fl 
VOOON N «0 000 O'® O --NNN 

« 





«O(V)^Ottt(O\0OtO9 

Mroro^^kV)<r)tf®<0 


ok 

03 



ii 




£&£• 


**£$» 



■■■■■■■■■■■■■■I 

■■■■■■■■■■■■■■I 


■ Err ;'y.*ttsS< 


II11I11II1II 

liilliiiliil 

IliilBKBSSS 


M M ■■ ■*« M H » H Ml 

■■■■■■■■■■■■■■I 

■■■■■■(■■■■■■■■I 

■■■■■■■■■■■■■■I 


oj o sol o two oato^f* m o 
^^^tnvoNQOcOOo-cv] 



■ • 1 


SH 3 


Y AVAILABLE 


from the original bound volume 





























































































































































































































































































































































































































(UOO’t o|<J <V) <0 rfr O <0 <v4«0 ^ O U w 
-CUNWfO'tWmtftP N ©<a<Wff>0-0J 


o|v# M*K O 


t *i 




wmm 




\ "fcSSSSSS 


llliilll 




lUoOoMol^^^M'aoU o ©|fj|g^*o O oJ «RF o m cj oo ’*■ o 
— (ucv/roro^<n<ou)O n ooooi 0*o— cJWfO^-^tno^N 


to OV70^)OV>OV>0 «f> 
r-P0*t9N$>ocurotfltf 


o ft? o ^ okfl oj<n 
N03O- iJMtfS 


o <ooto© 

VO N J>0 CM 


mi ©I to ow oimio 


tftOWOlfl 
— rO^-vON 


268 


f 


2/-X//-2& 










167 


i 


i 



i 
j 

Appendix No. 2 .—Distribution of general communication Channels 

United States (146): 3154, 3160, 3166, 3172, 3178, 3184, 3190, 3232, 
3238, 3244, 3250, 3256, 3262, 3268, 3274, 3280, 3286, 3292, 3298, 3304, 

3310, 3316, 3324, 3332, 3340, 3348, 3356, 3364, 3372, 3380, 3388, 3396, 

3404, 3412, 4012, 4020, 4028, 4036, 4044, 4052, 4060, 4068, 4076, 4084, 

4092, 4100, 4204, 4236, 4244, 4252, 4260, 4268, 4276, 4284, 4292, 4300, 

4308, 4316, 4364, 4372, 4380, 4388, 4396, 4405, 4415, 4425, 4435, 4445, 

4525, 4535, 4545, 4555, 4565, 4575, 4585, 4595, 4605, 4615, 4625, 4635, 

4645, 4655, 4665, 4675, 4685, 4695, 4705, 4715, 4725, 4735, 4745, 4925, 

4935, 4945, 4955, 4965, 4975, 4985, 4995, 5005, 5015, 5025, 5035, 5045, 

5055, 5065, 5075, 5085, 5095, 5105, 5115, 5125, 5135, 5145, 5155, 5165, 

5175, 5185, 5195, 5205, 5215, 5225, 5235, 5245, 5255, 5265, 5275, 5285, 

5295, 5305, 5315, 5325, 5335, 5345, 5355, 5365, 5855, 5870, 5885, 5900, 

5915, 5930, 5945, 5960, 5975, 5990. 

Canada and Newfoundland (103): 2206, 2212, 2218, ?224, 2230, 
2236, 2242, 2248, 2254, 2260, 2266, 2272, 2278, 2284, 2290, 2296, 3010, 
3016, 3022, 3028, 3034, 3040, 3046, 3052, 3058, 3154,* 3160,* 3166,* 
3172,* 3178,* 3184,* 3190,* 3196, 3202, 3208, 3214, 3220, 3226, 3232, 
3238, 3244, 3250, 3256, 3262, 3268, 3274, 3280, 3286, 3292, 3298, 3304, 
3310, 3316, 3324, 3332, 3340,* 3348,* 3356,*8364,* 3372,* 3380,* 3388,* 
3396,* 3404,* 3412,* 4324, 4332, 4340, 4348, 4465, 4475, 4485, 4495, 
4815, 4825, 4835, 4845, 4855, 4865, 4875, 4885, 4895, 4905, 5385, 5395, 

5405, 5415, 5425, 5435, 5445, 5455, 5465, 5475, 5485, 5495, 5705, 5720, 

5735, 5750, 5765, 5780, 5795, 5810.—* Used by Newfoundland. 

Cuba (20): 2206, 2212, 2218, 2224, 2230, 2236, 2242, 2248, 3010, 
3016, 3022, 3028, 3196, 3202, 3208, 4004, 4212, 4505, 5375^ 5825. 

Other Nations (24): 2254, 2260, 2266, 2272, 2278, 2284, 2290, 2296, 
3034, 3040, 3046, 3052, 3058, 3214, 3220, 3226, 4220, 4228, 4356, 4455, 
4515, 4805, 4915, 5840. 


i 


j 

i 






Appendix K 


f> ^ A 

4- * ') 


List of frequencies designated by Executive order of 
March 30, 1928 (10 to 6,000 kilocycles): 17.6, 19.8, 26.1, 
28.5, 30.6, 32.8, 33.8, 38, 42.8, 46, 48, 51, 54, 54, 56, 58, 
64, 66, 66, 68, 72, 75, 78, 81, 83, 86, 93, 100, 102, 104, 105, 
106, 108, 113, 115, 120, 122, 125, 128, 132, 133, 153, 155, 

159, 166, 172, 173, 175, 175, 180, 185, 185, 185, 187, 190, 

192, 195, 196, 197, 198, 199, 200, 200, 201, 202, 203, 204, 205, 
206, 206, 207, 208, 209, 210, 211, 212, 213, 214, 215, 216, 

217, 218, 219, 220, 221, 222, 223, 224, 225, 226, 227, 228, 

229, 230, 231, 232, 233, 234, 235, 236, 237, 238, 239, 240, 

241, 242, 243, 244, 245, 250, 258, 260, 266, 272, 273, 275, 

280, 284, 285 to 315, 315 to 350, 355, 375, 396, 405, 410, 
425, 428, 435, 440, 445, 447, 450, 454, 465, 471, 476, 480, 

500, 525, 536, 540, 545, 550, 558, 566, 600, 618, 625, 631, 

638, 645, 652, 659, 666, 681, 685, 689, 690, 738, 750, 1,110, 
2,010 to 2,020, 2,240 to 2,250, 2,305, 2,315, 2,335, 2,355, 
2,385, 2,405, 2,435, 2,465, 2,485, 2,515, 2,545, 2,575, 2,605, 

2,655, 2,675, 2,685, 2,705, 2,715, 2,745, 2,885, 2,915, 2,955, 

2,960, 2,965, 2,970, 2,975, 2,980, 2,995, 3,005, 3,035, 3,065, 

3,095, 3,155, 3,195, 3,235, 3,265, 3,295, 3,340, 3,345, 3,350, 

3,355, 3,360, 3,365, 3,370, 3,375, 3,380, 3,385, 3,390, 3,395, 

3,400, 3,405, 3,410, 3,415, 3,445, 3,475, 3,500 to 4,000, 4,015, 
4,017, 4,020, 4,025, 4,030, 4,045, 4,050, 4,055, 4,060, 4,065, 

4,070, 4,075, 4,080, 4,085, 4,090, 4,105, 4,135, 4,155, 4,205, 

4,235, 4,255, 4,265, 4,295, 4,300, 4,305, 4,310, 4,365, 4,370, 

4,375, 4,380, 4,385, 4,430, 4,435, 4,436, 4,440, 4,445, 4,525, 

5,920, 5,925, 5,930, 5,935, 5,940, 5,945, 5,950, 5,955, 5,960. 

( 168 ) 



Appendix L 

i 

General Order No. 62 

At a session of the Federal Radio Commission held ai its 
office in Washington, D. C., on April 5,1929: 

It is ordered — 

That in the frequencies exceeding 1,500 kilocycles per 
second, a channel of radio communication shall be Regarded 
as a band of frequencies, the width of which varies according 
to its position in the spectrum. The width of these channels 
increases with the frequency according to the following table: 


Frequency (kilocycles per 
second) 

Channel 
width (kilo¬ 
cycles per 
second) 

1, 500-2, 198 

4 

2, 200-3, 313 

6 

3, 316-4, 400 

8 

4, 405-5, 490 

10 

5, 495-8, 202. 5 

15 

8, 210-10, 980 

20 

10, 990-16, 405 

30 

16, 420-21, 960 

40 

21, 980-32, 780 

60 


Note. —A visual broadcasting channel shall not be more than 100 
kilocycles in width. 

A commercial telephone channel below 3,313 kilocycles shall be 
regarded as 6 kilocycles in width. 

A relay broadcasting channel between 6,000 and 9,600 kilocycles 
shall be regarded as 20 kilocycles in width. 

j 

In granting licenses, the Federal Radio Commission will 
specify the frequency in the center of the particular channel 
licensed to be used, but the licensee may occupy the center 
frequency and in addition such adjacent frequencies (within 
the limit indicated on the above table) as may be pehnitted 
by the frequency maintenance tolerance and required by the 
type of emission the station may be authorized to use, all 

( 169 ) 







272 


170 


of whicn will be specified in the instrument of authorization. 
Furthermore, the licensee, upon application to the commis¬ 
sion, may have the privilege of occupying the whole channel 
on condition that the emission from the station does not 
exceed the limits of the channel at any time, and provided 
that fixed stations shall maintain the constancy of any single 
emission of a carrier frequency to within 0.05 per cent or 
better at all times. 

Fixed stations shall make full use of the channels that may 
be assigned them to the end that channels are occupied in 
the most effective and economical manner, and yet their 
limits pot exceeded. The following uses are recognized and 
will receive encouragement: High-speed telegraphy, facsimile 
transmission, telephony, multiplex modulation, polyphase 
transmission, multiple emission on separate frequencies 
closely spaced. 

In order that channels may be utilized to the fullest extent, 
licensees who have been granted two different channels for 
use at two or more stations will be granted the use of these 
same channels at any of the stations in their own system, if 
such use will not create interference with stations of other 
systems. 

Licensees of fixed stations who, at the expiration of the 
licenses, can not demonstrate that they are using a channel 
to the fullest capacity consistent with the average state of 
the radio art, may be required to either occupy a channel of 
lesser width or to share the channel on a part-time basis with 
others. 

Licensees of fixed stations who have been granted the use 
of a channel for communications with specified points, upon 
application to the commission for license, may be granted 
the use of the same channel for communications with other 
points on the condition that the public interest, convenience, 
and necessity will be served by such a grant. 

[seal.] Federal Radio Commission, 

By Ira E. Robinson, Chairman. 

Attest: 

Carl H. Butman, 

Secretary. 


I 


i 


Appendix M 

Frequency versus distance table 

[Frequencies in the continental hand, 1,500 to 6,000 kc.] 


Distances in statute miles 

I 


Frequency (kilocycles per 
second) 

Ground 

wave 

Sky wave 

Skip dis¬ 
tance- 
midday, 
midsum¬ 
mer— 
midnight, 
mid¬ 
winter 

Summer 

Winter 


Day 

Night 

Day 

Nigl 

t 

1,500. 

200 







1,750. 

160 




i 

>90 


2,000. 

130 




580 


2,250. 

110 




1,000 


2,500. 

100 


220 


1,480 


2,750. 

100 


450 


2,160 


3,000. 

100 


660 

120 

2,800 


3,250. 

100 


930 

140 

3,350 


3,500. 

90 


1,200 

160 

3,840 


3,750. 

90 


1,500 

190 

4,400 


4,000. 

90 


1,760 

220 

5, p00 


4,250. 

90 

100 

2,060 

260 

5,800 

(M0 

4,500. 

90 

100 

2,300 

300 

6,600 

0-60 

£ 

80 

130 

2,600 

330 

0 ) 


0-110 

5,000. 

80 

140 

2,960 

380 

o ) 


0-140 

5,250. 

80 

160 

3,280 

430 

0 >! 


0-170 

5,500. 

80 

180 

3,640 

4S0 

0)1 


20-200 

5,750. 

80 

200 

4,100 

530 

0)1 


20-230 

6,000. 

80 

220 

4,900 

590 

0 ) 


20-280 


i Over 6,600. 

63493—29-12 (171) 


I 

I 

i 

i 


I 


i 


i 

| 
















































\ 


Appendix N 


Frequency versus distance table 


[Distances in statute miles] 


Frequency 
(kilocycles per 
second) 

Sky wave 

Skip distance 

Ground 

wave 

Summer 

Winter 

Summer 

Winter 

Day 

Night 

Day 

Night 

Day 

Night 

Day 

Night 


220 


590 

<9 

100 

180 

260 

360 

80 

6,500. 

260 

(9 

720 

0) 

110 

210 

320 

400 

75 


300 

<9 

850 

0) 

120 


380 

440 

70 


360 

(9 

1,010 

(i) 

130 

275 

460 

555 

70 


420 

(9 

1,180 

(?) 

140 

310 

540 

670 

65 

8,500. 

480 

0) 

1,375 

(?) 

155 

345 

635 

855 

65 


540 

<9 

1,570 

<9 

170 


730 

1.040 

60 

9,500. 

610 

<9 

1,780 

(l) 

185 

415 

840 

1,195 

60 


690 

0) 

1,990 

0) 

200 


950 

1,350 

60 

10.500. 

780 

<9 

2,215 

0) 

215 

485 

1,070 

1,525 

55 


870 

<9 

2,440 

(9 

230 

520 

1,190 

1,700 

55 

11,500. 

970 

0) 

2,680 

0) 

245 

565 

1,325 

1,880 

50 


1,080 

(9 

2,920 

(1) 

260 

610 

1,460 

2,060 

50 

12,500. 

1,190 

0) 

3,160 

0) 

285 


1,610 

(9 

45 


1,310 

() 

3,400 

(9 

300 


1,760 

(?) 

45 

13,500. 

1,440 

(9 

3,660 

0) 

320 

750 

1,940 

(9 

40 

14,000.. 

1,570 

(9 

3,930 

0) 

340 


2,110 

(9 

40 

14,500. 

1,710 

(9 

4,200 

0) 

365 

850 

2,315 

(?) 

35 

15,000. 

1,860 

(9 

4,480 

(9 

390 


2,520 

(9 

35 

15,500. 

2,020 

(9 

4,790 

(?) 

415 

955 

2,760 

(9 

30 

16,000... 

2, ISO 

<9 

5,100 

0) 

440 

1,010 

3,000 

(9 

30 

16,500. 

2,360 

(9 

5,450 

0) 

465 


( J ) 

<9 

25 

17,000. 

2,550 

(9 

5,800 

<9 

490 

1,130 

( l ) 

(9 

25 

17,500. 

2,750 

(9 

6,230 

0) 

515 

1,190 

(9 

(9 

25 

18,000. 

2,960 

0) 

6,660 

< l > 

540 

1,250 

(9 

(9 

20 

18,500. 

3.200 

<9 

(9 

0) 

570 

1,315 

(9 

(9 

20 

19,000. 

3,440 

0) 

<9 

0) 

600 

1,380 

(9 

(9 

20 

19,500. 

3,720 

0) 

(9 

0) 

630 

1,450 

(9 

(9 

15 

20,000. 

4,000 

0) 

(?) 

(9 

660 

1,520 

(9 

(9 

15 


x Over 7,000. 

3 No longer useful at midday, midwinter. 

3 No longer useful at midnight, midwinter. 


( 172 ) 



































Appendix 0: Skip-distance 


■■■»■■■■■■■#■■■» BaunKMi _ 

W MB— pW MMM fW—(■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■I 

■gwi—aMMM a " a* ■■■ >i«inmnHuiuammn»nui 

■hniU(i;uii ■ ituMiranqMin * • 'iniiuiiiuiutMUMnmuni 

~ — — - — ~ -^ — iaanMnaaMnuBaamiBiaiaai 


■■■■,'« iv iiiHinimniMi.'' - iliMiVliBBliiuBiiua aaaaaaBaaa 
k~r.wiiw«—gimi» ii>—w—■■ 

miMIIMHUMMWinmWMIllmlMHMMUMlMmiHI 


»eBBBBineaESE>ui(ceE 
laiBnaiiacaBBiMiiism 
JBMOBbsBoaootBDeBicaaaoBeac 
jooaanocsiisDcaBcecDottisccBD 

_ _ ■■■*■■■■■■■■■»■■■■■■■■■■■■»■ 

t»Mii»iiuii»HiuaiMiiina«OH 
aicoecisaaHBBEaBBiiBciBEaEBEaEaaacBa 
joa»BBaB=; isaoaaBoosBoosaBB«js»e=.Ba»a5Ea«a 
■ BBBEI IBEBBBGSStBBBBSEBIIOIsgiBRaSHBB 
3 0 01 OnBODSEBECSSMBBlIBCBEBBeSaBEISBa 
laEHSaBBBBBiailBBBiaBaBeiBIBB 
lEOBEBDaoEBBBBEBOS3eoCBBOEBaB 
SnBBBEBOCSBBaanaaBdSCDBBSCBBB 
SBBBaDsioBBBSHncaoansanaaBBoa 

-so = »Ba==Ba*a.3nBitE»aiaaia>a»* *<=»«« 

BBBBIsaBDBaOaoBB IBBBaaBllBSBIlBBl!B«aB3BBBBB»BB 

«■■■■■■■■—■■■■■»»■■■■ BBBaBBBPBB I 
VV !■■■■■■■■■■ MMIHMMIMIMiilll 
aaaaanaaaa iM mMm Miiii!!iji« »wi mMmwmwmnM 
iia«iumiww ni i iaBtnni ii.i iiM imiiiwM»iwmm»MU 
iiUMVwiiM WMM i inB ii^iiwiMwiMimMMUMiMMiM 




■uuiHauaauaiiui 


■iiUHiiiuminiia apaaaaaaa auauaaavL-* ■naniaiiniuiumiiiiHim 
■unimilmwBii ’’iiiiiaaaaiaiaaaHn ■■■■ ■■■■■■■■■■■!«■■■■■■■■■■■■■» 

■—I luaMIIMIIiniUHIBinHIIIB 


■■■aaa aaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaiaaaaai 


■uuaummaiHinnmu 
waiHiiiiiiuiiuniiuiiiHi 
1 «■■■■■■■■■■■■»«■»•■■■■■■■•■■■ 



BEjaBBaataBBBBaBB 
Ein> iiiBiiBUBiiBMaBniaaiaaaaaa 
= =»== - SIBBBBBBB BflIBB BBBHB BIBBBBBaBB■ 

-EBBSaBBBSEBaiaWBIBSBHIBBiaiB 

- laailBasBesnaawe bb a•«■■■■ aaaBi 
r rBBBlBaaaaaaaiaaKaafBBataaaa 
BeaEBBItSSaBBaSZCB»IBC 
BBBBtnaiBBIIBaBBBBBMBI 
'BCBBBBBB!!B*BBBBUBBBEBBIB 
aDBBaaiaiBaaaaflaaaaBuaa 

BaawhMiMaaiii mw i 
■aaaaaawarr aa aa iaaaaaaiaaaaa iimihim 
■ aiaaaaafiiaai. aniaiSi aavaaraaaaa laainiaaa 


(SE- ■ tBBBnBBaaaEBBSaneBBBBBBBBBBO 

■■is uuimuiBunniBniiBMBi 
a aaay ia aaaa rtBaaaaaallaaaai nraBainBaBaBiaaiBaaiaBBaBaia 

aaaiiiwi««;iHaMMiawam?;iamwi»«BiiimM»iM m »iB 
aaaaaaiaaahtiaaaanuuiiiar.iiaaaaaiHaMnMinMimii 
aaaaaa aaaaBi~-< aiaaanaaaaaaa^ iBBaaaaa aaaaat aaaaa BaaaauraaBa 
■■■lilllHBfHaaaaHiiiiiia mu: 

so she tan bob 



iBSBiaagBiHaanE 
■■■■■■ BBBaunanl 
inavpBHmBMavaMBaaMBB 

. .. 

waaBaiaana^^^^^^^H 







nan 


BBaaaBBBBV BassaaBBaBBiaiaaBBaiB 

_Hauuini' aSaiaanaaanaaaaas'i: 

aaaaa aaaaaaaaaai Jaaaaaaaa aianaarji 
aaaaaaaaaaaaaaB. >'aaaaaaai■aaaaaia l i 
.Waaaaaaaaina u'tlfiaaaaaa aaaaaa aau 


iaav vaw wawaaawawa«aMWWp wv va 
■aaaaaiaaaaBaaaaaaaaiagiaaaaagiaiaaaaaaa 
VCTaaPaaaMSaaaaaaaPaaSiaitvMMgaPBBPPBa 


aaaaaaaaaaaaaaaa.i—aMaagaaaaaaaaaa aaa a aaaa iaaaaaaaaaaaaiaaaaaaaaai 
Ma aaSBa aaawam'aaataaiiaaa a a aaa a a aBaaaaaaaaaaaa aaa aaaaiwiiaaaaai 
aaaagaaaaaaaaa a aa.waiaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaa aaaaaiM aaa aiaaa aiaaai 

rSBUisaaj 





aaraaaaaa aaaaaaaa 
■aaaaaaiiBBaaaaa 
laaaaaBaaaaaaaaa 

■VBBIUI^H 


aaaaaaaaaauaaaaaii 
BaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaLai 
laiaaaa aaaaaiiaaaai 
avpvHli ■■■■■■■■■■* 





BBBBBWl BimBIIBBinBIIHB 

■aaaa bl-. naaaniiaaaaaaaa ai 
■aaaaaatiaa a a aa aaaaaaaaaaaa 
aaaaaa af.- laaaaaaaaaanaaaaal 
lir.'i laaaaaaBBaanawaa 
U..EBBBUBBBUBEUH 



EBBBBBB BIUnBI 

I ta aaaaa aaaanaMlHi 
. inaaaaainiiaBaii jaaaa 

.kSsssskEE 


imiiiimmiiii mmmmum 

BUS UUMBBBBB ■■■■ — 













i&siass 












































































































































































































distance-effect of frequencies 






h--* f— • • 












*«»• 


jlllUHIIUll 













nnii 

iwni 







K£fc£ 


iWZB* 




iW 

















miauui 




ts: 




I^UI 




■aa 





















X 



















^x: 

mvai 









(SS'S 






xsxxxxx^: 

sxxxBxaxxx:: 




imii 



>■■■■ 


MiiiMifiuuiBUtMaaaiiMaam] 
i— mmnmrnmmmmmmww 

SSUwMiiiBuimi 11 usb mmmmmm I 

_.Jm«bwbmbbiwi mmummumm \ 

Tr===i===u:= =:r.:.n:::=l 

___ xmmm^mms.xmmmt 

...IBEaBDBBBaBEaBBBBIll 
1= is a. jncLsrao «nBaSBi«« I 

:aaBBB mob■*■■■■■«■■■•■■■■■ I 































i-frH-f 






m mmmmmn m 

bxsx: 


■■■■■■■■la ■•««*»■■*••■■■*•■■ 

ummwrnmwmmmH 

Eunnu»mn«»M»H>»ii' , 9 

EHMMMMnHnHUIIIIU»*IW 
R«nnMHiinniiiiiiaH*u*Hi' I 
—OTW«—■»■■■!«■■■■ ■■■ ■**»** 

K Maaaaiaaaaa BBaaaaraaBB BBaaBaaaaa 

BBE9CMBBBBBB BBBBElfBBBB lltBilBiBB 
SXiinaaBBBaannMBBHMNiii 

MMUMHUUIEUiailUBniU 

nJBBaBBBBBBBBBBBBUBBBBKBBBBBBBBB 

laBaBBBBBBBBBBBBBMBBBBBBBBBBBBBBl 

EBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBEIBBBBBBBBBBBBBB J 

gBBaHIBMIlBWIiaBBBBBMBaaBBal 

'Bao = sca»i!iiti !3 = Bi: = i:» = !*o»*B!. 

;«oEom»»paSDa»«oiisssoeasBaaanBa i 

iBaaaaaaaaaaaaBaiiaaaa ■•••uaaia I 
:>BBeaua>i»oniii»i>»a>aaH< 
UMiMganaaBBBHBaMiaaaaBBBBafl 
•■axiiaaaiaaa BBaaaaa * 

aaBaniaiiaiiaiMiai^ 
aBnwiuBMB»»*aaaoo = i*r 
..aaiinaamaaa>aiaU| 

^■■■aaiiaaiiHaaiaaaaij 
;iiinaiiaanauaiKaaa<^ 

■ W>«..>*JiaaaKpiBflB«aaaaaaaaag 
laaBBBBBBBaEBBatnaaaaaMBBiaaBi S 
iBaaaaaaBBBiauaaaaaaaaaiataiu; 

■ BaiBaaaaaaaMiainaaB<Baaaaaa>a 1 
iHHaauaaanaaauaaManaaaaVj 

-linumaMiBBHiiatitj 

aaaaaaa«asnaaiaaaataa [ J 
aaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaBaJi 
caBEaaaaiEaaaucaaaaa' 
CBBEBBOEESBBBaaeEaUB , 
Haaaaaaaaaaj 

SaSSaaMaaaaaaBaaBBBaBaaaaaaaaaj 

■ aaaiaaaaaBaaiBaaaBBMBaiaiaafa 
aoBBOnaocBaaaDB»aaBai*aaaa.a»*« 
iHaaaiaaiaaaaiaaaiaaiaaiaaaau 
MaaBaaaaaaaaanMaaoaiisaaiaaa 
■ aaaaHaaonaaaDaaaaaaaaaaaiiaa 
saaaaaaBtaaaaBaeaaaaDaaaaaaaau 
EiniaaaaMaaaaiaaaaiiaaaaaiaaa 

gjiaianaaari-- 

■BaaaaaUBaBBBBaaamaaHaaaa 
iaaiBaBBBaaani«ag«aaaEsiBai 
EMaalaBBiBBBBBaiEBBaaaaaBa 




:u> 






■ BaaanaaBBian 
BHaaaaaaaalaas 

■ liaaaMBaaaaaa 
BiBaaaaiaaBBaaa 



s 



G3493—20. (Facts p. 172.) 











































































































































































































































Appendix P 
General Order No. 55 



At a session of the Federal Radio Commission held at its 
offices in Washington , D. C., on December 22,1928. 

The commission, in order to carry out the provisions of 
the radio act of 1927, having determined that public interest, 
convenience, or necessity requires the allocation of certain 
frequencies, within the band of frequencies between 1,500 
and 6,000 kilocycles, to those services and classes of stations 
hereinafter enumerated, hereby enters the following order. 

It is ordered: 

paragraph i 

i 

j 

That of those frequencies between 1,500 and 6'000 kilo¬ 
cycles, the following are hereby allocated to those services 
and classes of stations enumerated herein, for assignment 
to individual stations in conformity with this order; 

(a) Mobile services 


1. Ship stations and coastal stations. —The frequencies 


1,504, 

1,508, 

1,512, 

1,516, 

1,520, 

1,524, 

1,528, 

1,532, 

1,536, 

1,540, 

1,544, 

1,548, 

1,552, 

1,556, 

1,560, 

1,564, 

1,568, 

1,572, 

1,576, 

1,580, 

1,584, 

1,588, 

1,592, 

1,596, 

1,660, 

1,672, 

1,684, 

1,708, 

2,320, 

2,332, 

2,350, 

2,368, 

2,380, 

2,416, 

2,428, 

2,446, 

2,452, 

2,476, 

2,482, 

2,554, 

2,566, 

2,584, 

2,596, 

2,614, 

2,626, 

2,632, 

2,638, 

2,644, 

2,668, 

2,692, 

2,728, 

2,740, 

3,076, 

3,106, 

3,118, 

3,130, 

3,142, 

3,420, 

3,428, 

3,436, 

4,116, 

4,148, 

4,172, 

4,188, 

4,196, 

4,755, 

4,775, 

5,525, 

0,000, 

5,585, 

5,615, 

5,645, 

5,675. 









2. Aircraft 

and 

aeronautical 

stations. —The frequencies 

1,608, 

1,612, 

1,616, 

1,620, 

1,624, 

1,628, 

1,632, 

1,636, 

1,640, 

1,644, 

1,648, 

1,656, 

1,668, 

1,676, 

1,688, 

2,302, 

2,326, 

2,344, 

2,362, 

2,374, 

2,392, 

2,506, 

2,518, 

2,524, 

2,530, 

2,536, 

2,542, 

2,560, 

2,578, 

2,590, 

2,608, 

2,620, 

2,650, 

2,662, 

2,680, 

2,698, 

2,722, 

2,734, 

3,070, 

3,082, 

3,100, 

3,112, 

3,124, 

3,136, 

3,148, 

3,452, 

3,460, 

3,468, 

3,484, 

3,492, 

4,108, 

4,124, 

4,140, 

4,164, 


( 173 ) 


| 

i 


i 



278 


174 


4,180, 4,765, 4,785, 5,510, 5,540, 5,570, 5,600, 5,630, 5,660, 
5,690. 

3. Portable stations. —The frequencies 1,600, 1,652, 1,664, 
1,680, 1,704, 1,712. 

4. Railroad rolling-stock stations and railroad harbor and 
tug stations. —The frequencies 2,410, 2,422, 2,440, 2,458, 
2,470. 


(b) Fixed services 

1 . Point-to-point. —The frequencies 3,202, 3,208, 3,214, 

3,220, 3,226, 3,238, 3,244, 3,250, 4,212, 4,220, 4,228, 4,244, 

4,268, 4,276, 4,284, 4,396, 4,405, 4,415, 4,455, 4,465, 4,475, 

4,485, 4,495, 4,505, 4,515, 4,535, 4,545, 4,865, 4,875, 4,885, 

4,895, 4,905, 5,115, 5,125, 5,135, 5,145, 5,155, 5,165, 5,175, 

5,185, 5,195, 5,205, 5,215, 5,225, 5,235, 5,245, 5,255, 5,265, 

5,275, 5,285, 5,295, 5,305, 5,405, 5,415, 5,425, 5,435, 5,445, 

5,455, 5,465, 5,475, 5,485, 5,720, 5,735, 5,750, 5,765, 5,780, 

5.795, 5,900, 5,975, 5,990. 

2. Amateur. —The band of frequencies between 1,715 and 
2,000 kilocycles, inclusive, and that band of frequencies be¬ 
tween 3,500 and 4,000 kilocycles, inclusive. 

3. Experimental visual broadcasting. —The frequencies 2,002 
to 2,300, inclusive, and 2,750 to 2,950, inclusive. 

4- Experimental. —The frequencies 1,604, 2,398, 3,088, 

4.795. 

The following frequencies allocated to fixed services, point- 
to-point stations, are to be assigned exclusively to stations 
devoted to promoting the interests of agriculture in addition 
to such assignments as may hereafter be made above 6,000 
kilocycles. 

Frequencies 3,202, 4,244, 5,485. 

The following frequencies are reserved for assignment to 
stations rendering emergency services: 

Frequencies 3,208, 3,214, 3,220, 3,226, 3,238, 3,244, 3,250. 

PARAGRAPH II 

No license shall be granted to any applicant for a fixed 
station, coastal station, or aeronautical station who is unable 
to satisfy the commission that he can maintain the assigned 
station frequency with an accuracy of 0.05 per cent or better 
at all times. 


175 




PARAGRAPH III 

Licensees of fixed, coastal, or aeronautical stations shall 
obtain and use for tuning and checking the tuning of their 
transmitters suitable frequency-measuring equipment which 
shall be accurate within 0.025 per cent on the frequencies 
on which the transmitter is licensed to operate, j Further¬ 
more, such licensees shall, at frequent intervals, take steps 
to have the frequency-measuring instruments calibrated or 
compared with the standards made available by the Depart¬ 
ment of Commerce. ! 

PARAGRAPH IV 

i 

Licensees must use radio transmitters, the emissions of 
which, by reason of actual decrement high-speed signaling 
modulation, spacing waves, harmonics, frequency modu¬ 
lation, key clicks, and mush, do not cause interference 
detrimental to traffic and programs being carried out on 
other authorized channels of communications. 

[seal.] Federal Radio Commission, 

By Ira E. Robinson, Chairman. 

Attest: 

Carl H. Butman, Secretary . 


I 

i 

i 

| 

! 

i 

| 

i 

! 

i 

i 

i 

i 

I 


i 


i 





Appendix Q 

Conditions attached to the decision of the Commission, 
December 22, 1928, granting certain applications of the 
Universal Wireless Communication Company and attached 
to construction permits issued to that company. 

“1. The applicant shall construct transmitting stations in 
or near the towns or cities described in the applications and 
further described in the construction permits after the exact 
locations have been approved by the Commission or the 
Government department administering radio. 

“2. At least 10 transmitting stations situated in 10 of the 
cities to be served shall be constructed and ready for use by 
the public not later than December 31, 1929, and at least 
three additional stations shall be similarly placed in operation 
on or before the last day of each and every month thereafter: 
Provided , That all stations constructed under construction 
permits herein authorized to be issued shall be completed on 
or before December 31, 1931. 

“3. The applicant shall install equipment of character 
and speed satisfactory to the Commission. 

“4. The applicant, when licensed, shall accept, transmit, and 
deliver, at reasonable rates, all messages filed with it by the 
general public destined to points with wrhich the applicant 
is authorized to communicate. 

“5. All of said stations shall connect and cooperate when¬ 
ever necessity demands with wireless stations operating on 
frequencies allocated to special uses, including fire, police, 
power (emergency), agriculture, etc., and shall cooperate to 
the fullest extent with stations operating in connection with 
aviation.” 


( 176 ) 


Appendix R 



List of United States general communication standard station bands in the 
medium-frequency range , showing designations to services and commu* 
nications companies 


Kilocycles: 

* 

Kilocycles: 

i 

3,154- 

Government. 

4,036_ 

Government. 

3,160— 

Emergency, police. 

4,044_ 

Dp. 

3,166_ 

Do. 

4,052_ 

Dp. 

3,172_ 

Do. 

4,060_ 

Do. 

3,178_ 

Do. 

4,068_ 

Dp. 

3,184_ 

Do. 

4,076_ 

Do. 

3,190_ 

Government. 

4,084_ 

D<J. 

3,232_ 

Do. 

4,092_ 

Dp. 

3,238_ 

Emergency, police. 

4,100_ 

DP. 

3,244_ 

Do. 

4,204_ 

Dei. 

3,250_ 

Agriculture. 

4,236_ 

Do). 

3,256_ 

Experimental. 

4,244_ 

Agriculture. 

3,262— 

Government. 

4,252_ 

Government. 

3,268_ 

R. C. A. 

4,260_ 

Dp. 

3,274_ 

Do. 

4,268_ 

R. C. A. 

3,280_ 

3,286_ 

Do. 

Do. 

4,276_ 

4,284_ 

Undesignated. 
R. C. A. 

3,292-... 

Government. 

4,292_ 

Government. 

3,298_ 

Universal. 

4,300_ 

DP. 

3,304_ 

Do. 

4,308_ 

Doi. 

3,310_ 

Do. 

4,316_ 

Dp. 

3,316_ 

Do. 

4,364_ 

Do. 

3,324_ 

Do. 

4,372_ 

Dp. 

3,332_ 

R. C. A. 

4,380— 

DP. 

3,340_ 

Government. 

4,388_ 

DP. 

3,348_ 

Do. 

4,396_ 

Mackay. 

3,356_ 

Do. 

4,405_ 

Dp. 

3,364_ 

Do. 

4,415_ 

DP. 

3,372.... 

Do. 

4,425_ 

Government. 

3,380_ 

Do. 

4,435_ 

Dp. 

3,388_ 

Do. 

4,445— 

Dp. 

3,396_ 

Do. 

4,525— 

Dp. 

3,404_ 

Do. 

4,535_ 

R. c. 4. 

3,412 i... 

Do. 

4,545_ 

Do. 

4,012 i... 

Do. 

4,555_ 

Dp. 

4,020_ 

Do. 

4,565_ 

Universal. 

4,028.... 

Do. 

4,575_ 

Dp. 


1 Station bands below 3,500 kilocycles are shared with Canada; those above 3,500 kilocycles 
are exclusive United States. i 

(177) i 


i 

* i 


178 


Kilocycles: 


4,585_Universal. 

4,595— 

Do. 

4,605- 

Do. 

4,615- 

Do. 

4,625_ 

Do. 

4,635_ 

Do. 

4,645_ 

Do. 

4,655_ 

Do. 

4,665- 

Do. 

4,675- 

Do. 

4,685_ 

Do. 

4,695_ 

Do. 

4,705_ 

Do. 

4,715- 

Press. 

4,725_ 

Do. 

4,735_ 

Do. 

4,745- 

Do. 

4,925- 

Do. 

4,935_ 

Do. 

4,945_ 

Do. 

4,955_ 

Do. 

4,965- 

Do. 

4,975- 

Do. 

4,985- 

Do. 

4,995_ 

Do. 

5,005_ 

R. C. A. 

5,015_ 

Do. 

5,025_ 

Do. 

5,035_ 

Do. 

5,045_ 

Do. 

5,055- 

Do. 

5,065_ 

Do. 

5,075- 

Western. 

5,085_ 

Do. 


5,095_Universal. 

5,105_ Do. 


Kilocycles: 
5,115— 

5,125- 

5,135— 

5,145— 

5,155_ 

5,165— 

5,175— 

5,185— 

5,195— 

5,205— 

5,215— 

5,225—. 

5,235— 

5,245— 

5,255— 

5,265— 

5,275— 

5,285— 

5,295— 

5,305— 

5,315— 

5,325— 

5,335— 

5,345— 

5,355... 

5,365— 

5,855— 

5,870— 

5,885-- 

5,900— 

5,915— 

5,930— 

5,945— 

5,960- 

5,975- 

5,990- 


. Universal. 

Do. 

Do. 

Do. 

Do. 

Do. 

Do. 

Do. 

Do. 

Do. 

Do. 

Do. 

Do. 

Do. 

R. C. A. 

Do. 

Do. 

Press. 

Do. 

Do. 

Do. 

Do. 

Do. 

Do. 

Do. 

__ Agriculture. 
— Universal. 
Do. 

Do. 

Do. 

Government. 

Do. 

Do. 

Do. 

... Mackay. 

Do. 


o 


INTERCITY RADIO TEL. CO. ET AL. VS. FED. RADIO COM. 283 

i 


300 Minutes Federal Radio Commission, Washington, 

D. C. 

Juiie 16, 1927. 


The meeting of the Federal Radio Commission called at 
ten o’clock this date, was attended by Admiral Bullard, 
Judge Svkes, Mr. Caldwell, and Mr. Bellows, j 
It was decided informally to make no changes in alloca¬ 
tion during the sixty day trial period except as a result of 
hearings, or in certain exceptional cases of extraordinary 
merit. ! 


* * # # 




# 


SAM PICKARD. 

i 


301 Minutes Federal Radio Commission, Washington, 

ID. C. 

October 6, 1927. 

At a meeting held this date which was attended by Com¬ 
missioners Bullard, Bellows and Caldwell, the following 
Special Order, construction permits and changes in the 
status of broadcasting stations effected since the last meet¬ 
ing of the Commissioners were formally approved and are 
entered into the minutes of this meeting as follows: 


# * m * # # # 

Applications for short wave construction permits, one 
for the Los Angeles Examiner and the otheh for the Ex¬ 
aminer Printing Company, submitted by Mr. George Hearst 
of the San Francisco Examiner, were duly considered and 
they were not found to be in the public convenience, inter¬ 
est or necessity at this time, due to the definite; policy which 
this Commission has been adhering to. Such permits have 
only been granted up to this time where it was found that 
reliable communication could not be had by existing wire 
communications, either telegraph or telephone! 

SAM PICKARD. 

! 

302 Minutes Federal Radio Commission, \Washington, 

D. C. ! 

November 29,1927. 

Minutes of a meeting of the Federal Radio: Commission 
held Tuesdav November 29, at which the following Commis- 
7—4987a ' I 







284 


INTERCITY RADIO TELEGRAPH CO. ET AL. VS. 


sioners were present: Judge Sykes, Mr. Caldwell, Mr. 
Pickard, and Mr. Lafount. 

******* 

At the request of interested parties, the Federal Radio 
Commission has postponed the hearing on the applications 
of short waves in point to point communications until 10 
a. m., January 17. 

CARL H. BUTMAN. 

303 December 1,1927. 

Minutes of a meeting of the Federal Radio Commission 
held Thursday December 1, at which the following Com¬ 
missioners were present: Judge Sykes, Mr. Pickard and 
Mr. Lafount. 

After discussing the question of extending the licenses 
of active broadcasting stations, the following General 
Order No. 21 was authorized. The secretary was instructed 
to mail this order to all broadcasting stations and to supply 
new forms for the reissuance of licenses. A draft of this 
form was to be based on the printed application blank pre¬ 
viously used, but to be revised to include data as to when 
stations were operating. 

It was decided by the Commissioners present that no new 
licenses be issued for operation on short wave lengths prior 
to the general public hearing scheduled for January 17. 

******* 

Concerning the general public hearing to be held January 
17 on short waves, the secretary was authorized to invite 
the Wire Communication Companies and all wireless com¬ 
panies likely to be interested that they were invited to the 
hearing if they desired to participate. 

******* 

CARL H. BUTMAN. 

304 Minutes Federal Radio Commission , Washington, 

D. C. 

January 21, 1928. 

Minutes of a Meeting of the Federal Radio Commission 
held Saturday January 21, 1928, at which the following 
Commissioners were present: Judge Sykes, Mr. Caldwell, 
Mr. Pickard and Mr. Lafount. 


FEDERAL RADIO COMMISSION. 


285 


The following memorandum was read to tile Commission 
by the Secretary: 

‘‘Information is requested as to what disposition is to be 
made of the many applications for the renewal of existing 
licenses that this office has before it. 

There are approximately one hundred applications for 
the renewal of existing experimental stations!, and approxi¬ 
mately twenty-five applications for new experimental sta¬ 
tions now pending action by the Commission. Experi¬ 
mental licenses are in all cases issued for a period of three 
months, and if this policy is continued, there! will be a con¬ 
tinual flow of such work. 

305 Approximately 150 applications foi* the renewal 
of existing licenses for Limited Commercial Stations 
are awaiting the approval of the Commission. The major¬ 
ity of these are in the long wave spectrum, there being but 
a few short wave stations operating at the present time. 

The majority of applications for public stations are for 
new stations in the short wave bands, but there are about 
one hundred renewal cases both in the long afid short wave 
bands. 

Applications for ship licenses are received by the Com¬ 
mission almost daily, and at the present tiine, there are 
about three hundred such applications awaiting action by 
the Commission. 

Under General Orders one and three, tjic life of all 
licensed stations (excepting broadcasting) was continued 
indefinitely pending the issuance of licenses, but, of course, 
there is a possibility that in view of the recommendations 
of the International Conference, the assignments of some 
of the stations may be necessarilv changed to! conform with 
those recommendations. 

It is requested that I be informed as to the desires of 
the Commission in this connection. 

Verv respectfullv, 

CARL H. BUTMAN, 

Secretary 


306 Concerning the extension or renewal of limited 
commercial long wave applications and limited pub¬ 
lic stations, as well as ship licenses, the secretary and Mr. 


Blackwell were requested to confer with Mr. 


Terrell, Chief 




2S6 


INTERCITY RADIO TELEGRAPH CO. ET AL. VS. 


of tlie Radio Division, to ascertain his views on the method 
of handling these applications. In this connection, the sec¬ 
retary was directed to invite Mr. Terrell to be present at 
the next meeting of the Commission. 

It was decided that relay broadcasting applications and 
all pending applications for the use of short wave channels 
be held up temporarily until March 1. 

In the case of applications for licenses based on construc¬ 
tion permits for relay short wave stations now in effect, Mr. 
Blackwell was instructed to prepare the applications for 
the consideration of the commissioners of the respective 
zones. 

CARL H. BUTMAN. 


307 Federal Radio Commission, Washington, D. C. 

January 25, 1928. 

Minutes of a meeting of the Federal Radio Commission 
held Wednesday, January 25, 1928, at which the following 
Commissioners were present: Judge Sykes, Mr. Caldwell, 
Mr. Pickard, and Mr. Lafount. 

At the request of the Chairman, Mr. W. D. Terrell, Chief 
of the Radio Division of the Department of Commerce, was 
invited to sit with the Commission and discuss the policy of 
extending existing licenses and issuing new licenses. 

It was decided to withhold action on the approximately 
150 applications for limited commercial stations, chiefly on 
long waves, until the short wave policy was determined. It 
was suggested, however, that when this work was under¬ 
taken the licenses might be extended for one year. Judge 
Sykes pointed out that renewal licenses according to the law 
should not be issued prior to thirty days before the expira¬ 
tion of the existing licenses. 

A similar recommendation was made regarding limited 
public stations and general public stations. 

The Commission decided that all existing ship licenses 
on long waves should be relicensed for a period of two years. 
The Secretary was requested to look up all cases where 
ships were licensed to operate on short waves. Such new 
ship licenses as were approved, it was decided, should in¬ 
clude the name, number, and signal letters of the ship. The 
Commission authorized the issuance of new ship licenses, 
and it was directed that prior to their issuance the officials 


FEDERAL RADIO COMMISSION. j 287 

| 

of the Radio Division of the Department of! Commerce be 
consulted, and it was determined that the j period of the 
license should be for two years. 

Applications for new technical and training licenses and 
renewals thereof are to be prepared by tlie Secretary’s 
office for presentation to the Commissioner in whose terri¬ 
tory the station lies, for his approval and the action of the 
board. 

The Secretary was instructed to have all experimental 
and other station construction permits contemplating the 
use of short waves held up temporarily, but it was stated 
that applications for licensing all these stations should be 
presented with the other data to the individual Commis¬ 
sioners for their consideration when the station was ready 
for operation. 

308 The question of reallocating station^ of the United 
States on channels designated by the recent Inter¬ 
national Radiotelegraph Conference which becomes effec¬ 
tive January 1, 1929, was discussed. As practically all 
station licenses were being held up, it was Stated that the 
Commission desired that in renewing and relicensing ships, 
assignments of channels should be fitted in tb the new allo¬ 
cations and the secretary was instructed to take up each 
specific case with the individual Commissioner concerned 
prior to its presentation to the Commission. | 

The Commission adjourned to meet at the call of the 


Chairman. 

-vy. .v. 

.y. .U. J/. 


* w w ** 

CAEL Hf BUTMAN. 

309 

Minutes. 


February 10, 1928. 


The following radio commissioners were! present at a 
meeting held Friday afternoon, February 19, 1928: Judge 
Sykes, Mr. Caldwell, Mr. Pickard, and Mr. Uafount. 

Following the presentation of an application from the 
Humble Oil and Refining Company for the! licensing of a 
radio beacon and station to guide and comjmunicate with 
ships at a gulf port located on the sand dunes at Mustang 
Islands near Port Aransas, it was decided to defer action 
on this case until other limited public and commercial sta~ 
tion licenses were considered. 



2SS 


INTERCITY RADIO TELEGRAPH CO. ET AL. VS. 


A questionnaire seeking additional data from limited 
commercial, limited public, and general public stations was 
submitted for the approval of the Commission. It was de¬ 
cided that if this ques-naire requested data not found on 
the present applications or licenses, it be issued to supple¬ 
ment the information on these classes of stations. The ad¬ 
vice of Mr. Downey was to be sought on the subject with 
the understanding that his suggestions would be incorpo¬ 
rated and that the Commission would approve the issuance 
of the questionnaire if he believed it desirable. 

The approval of the Radio Commission in connection with 
the reserve band for the use of the reserved ship radio 
channels, of certain CW long waves, used for ship commu¬ 
nication and adopted by a committee composed of delegates 
from different foreign government and commercial radio 
interests, as agreed to on November 17, 1927, was secured. 
The Commission voted that it would follow the allocations 
designated on the tables attached to the informal inter¬ 
national agreement, understood to have been signed by 
representatives of Government or private companies, as 
designated at the end of the written agreement attached. 

With regard to the issuance of experimental licenses, the 
Commission decided that no new licenses would be issued 
and no extensions of existing licenses made without the 
designation of specific channels. It was directed, however, 
that the Department of Commerce procedure be followed, 
although it was pointed out that it seemed undesirable to 
designate channels as variable except where such a wide 
latitude was deemed necessary. 


* 


# 


* 


* 


* 


CARL II. BUTMAN. 


310 Minutes . 

February 17, 1928. 

At a meeting of the Federal Radio Commission held 
Thursday morning, February 16, the following Commission¬ 
ers were present: Judge Sykes, Mr. Caldwell, Mr. Pickard, 
and Mr. Lafount. 

****** * 

It is understood that no stations will be licensed for a 
longer period than thirty days terminating April 1. 


FEDERAL RADIO COMMISSION. 


289 


The Commissioners discussed the status of jthe New York 
Times and the San Francisco Examiner radio stations, 
which are operating under amateur licenses, and it was 
decided that these stations be communicated with to find 

out definitely what type of matter was being transmitted. 

! 

******* 

CARL HJ BUTMAN. 

311 Minutes. I 

February 18, 1928. 

i 

The Following Commissioners were present at a meet¬ 
ing of the Federal Radio Commission held Saturday morn¬ 
ing February 18, 1928: Judge Sykes, Mr. ICaldwell, Mr. 
Pickard and Mr. Lafount, Mr. Terrell. 

i 

! 

It was decided that a conference be held wijh Mr. Guthrie 
and perhaps another representative of the Sadio Corpora¬ 
tion of America, or the Radio-Marine Corporation of 
America, on Monday or Tuesday, relative to the issuance 
of licenses to ships. 

j 

**###*# 

The meeting was adjourned at 11:30 a. m. 

CARL Hj BUTMAN. 

312 Minutes. 

! 

February 20, 1928. 

At a meeting of the Federal Radio Commission Monday 
morning February 20, the following were present: Judge 
Sykes, Mr. Caldwell, Mr. Pickard, and Mr. Lafount. Mr. 
Terrell was also present, as was Captain S. C. Hooper, 
USN, temporarily detailed by the Navy Department to aid 
the Commission in its short wave work. Chptain Hooper 
reported this date for duty. 

After a report from Captain Hooper it was decided that 
he was to proceed with the work of preparing a report for 
the Commissioners on the short wave situation with the 



290 


INTERCITY RADIO TELEGRAPH CO. ET AL. VS. 


cooperation of the Bureau of Standards when their advice 

and assistance was deemed necessary. 

*/ 

CARL H. BUTMAN, 

Secretary. 


313 Minutes. 

March 16, 192S. 

The Federal Radio Commission met at ten o’clock this 
date, and the following commissioners were present: Judge 
Sykes, Air. Caldwell, Mr. Pickard, and Mr. Lafount. 

A general discussion was held on broadcasting and other 
matters. A report was filed by Commissioner Lafount rela¬ 
tive to the policy for licensing high frequency circuits 
between Alaska and the United States. The Secretary was 
directed to forward a copy of this memorandum to Mr. 
Terrell, Head of the Radio Division of the Department of 
Commerce. The meeting then adjourned. 

CARL H. BUTMAN. 


314 Minutes. 

March 19, 1928. 

The following Commissioners were present at a regular 
meeting on March 19: Judge Sykes, Mr. Caldwell, Mr. 
Pickard, and Mr. Lafount. Mr. Terrell and Captain 
Hooper were also present during the latter part of the 
meeting. Mr. Butman was present and recorded the pro¬ 
ceedings. 

■»*#**** 

Commissioner Lafount reported on the Alaskan radio 
situation and the following definition of policy was adopted: 

March 16, 1928. 

Subject: Policy for licensing high frequency circuits 
between Alaska and the United States. 

1. The Commission has received several applications for 
high frequency licenses for Alaskan radio stations and for 
radio stations in Seattle and Portland, for intereommuniea- 


FEDERAL RADIO COMMISSION. 


291 


i 

! 


lion by cannery services. A conference wai held in the 
Federal Radio Commission on March 15th, 1928, between 
the representatives of the Commission, War and Navy 
Departments, and the representatives of the Alaskan Terri¬ 
tory, to discuss the subject of granting thesd licenses and 
the following policy will govern as a result of the dis¬ 
cussion. 

2. The Commmission will grant licenses as hecessarv for 
cannery stations to communicate between themselves 
locally and with the nearest suitable Government radio 

* i 

station in any of the available bands allocated! by the Inter¬ 
national Radio Conference, 1927, for point to point radio 
communication service, as follows: 


160—194 kilocycles. 
1,715—2,000 “ 
2,000—2,250 “ 
2,850—3,500 “ 


Licenses will only be granted for C. W. or A. (jl W. appara¬ 
tus for new stations in these bands unless! it is clearly 
shown that no interference from other types of equipment 
will be caused to broadcast listeners or other services. 
Licenses will not be issued for spark transmitters. 

3. Assurance has been given by the representatives of the 
Government radio services in Alaska that adequate facili¬ 
ties exist and that there are no serious delays except during* 
cable breaks, which arc very infrequent.; Therefore, 
licenses will not be granted to parallel existing Government 
service between the United States and Alaska on high fre¬ 
quency, unless the cannery interests will make a joint 

315 recommendation, recommended for approval by the 
Territorial Government in Alaska, for one or pos¬ 
sibly two high frequency channels for the joint use of all 
cannery interests, and will guarantee service equal or 
better than the Government service now existing. 

4. It is requested that the Radio Supervisor at Seattle be 
informed of the above and directed to bring same to the 
attention of all applicants or parties interested in obtain¬ 
ing high ferquency licenses for the cannery interests. 

i 

# # * * * * i * 


CARL H. 


BUTMAN. 





292 


INTERCITY RADIO TELEGRAPH CO. ET AL. VS. 


316 Minutes. 

March 21, 1928. 

The following Commissioners were present at a meeting 
of the Federal Radio Commission: Judge Sykes, Mr. Cald¬ 
well, Mr. Pickard, and Mr. Lafount. 


* 


* 


* 


* 


* 


* 


After some discussion as to the issuance of a new General 
Order terminating the existing coastal, point to point, 
technical and training, experimental, ship and amateur 
radio station licenses, the Secretary was directed to confer 
with the Radio Division of the Department of Commerce 
and draft a new General Order terminating these classes 
of licenses as of August 31 and submit it to the Commis¬ 
sioners for approval. 

CARL II. BUTMAN. 


317 Minutes. 

April 2, 1928. 

The Federal Radio Commission met on April 2 and 
Judge Sykes presided. Mr. Pickard, Mr. Caldwell, Mr. La- 
fount and Judge Robinson and Mr. Terrell were also pres¬ 
ent. Secretarv Butman recorded the minutes. 


* 


* 


* 


* 


* 


After discussing the proposed publication by the Depart¬ 
ment of Commerce of a list of foreign short wave stations, 
Judge Sykes, on motion of Mr. Caldwell which was passed, 
was directed to write the Department of Commerce urging 
a delav in the issuance of this short wave list of from 30 to 
60 days. In the meantime, Mr. Terrell was requested to 
ask informally that this publication be not issued at this 
time. 


******* 

1 CARL H. BUTMAN. 


318 


Minutes. 


April 3, 1928. 

The following Commissioners were present at a meeting 
of the Federal Radio Commission of April 3rd: Judge 
Sykes, Mr. Caldwell, Mr. Pickard, Mr. Lafount, and Judge 


FEDERAL RADIO COMMISSION. 


293 


Robinson. Secretary Butman recorded the nfinutes. 

Captain Hooper discussed the proposed allocation of 
short waves above 10,000 kilocycles, with respect to pend¬ 
ing’ applications from the general public communication 
companies and others with respect to the long distance 
trans-oceanic channels. It was pointed out that the Radio 
Corporation had asked for 66 channels and! that only 43 
were available. He pointed out that it looked as if only 33 
channels could be assigned the Radio Corporation of 
America, and probably 10 to the Mackay interests, but 
added that two or three other organizations bad also filed 
applications for these particular channels for trans-con¬ 
tinental service. Following a discussion on| this subject, 
it was decided that the Commission would have to first pass 
upon the short wave priority list proposed by Captain 
Hooper. 

The Captain recommended that in view of the necessity of 
allocating the short waves, particularly those iused in inter¬ 
national communication, as soon as possibld, it might be 
well to mention this problem before the experts and others 
who meet with the Commission Friday on the broadcast 
reallocation problem. 

i 

# * # # * * 1 * 

CARL H.| BUTMAN. 

| 

i 

319 Minutes. 

i 

i 

April 5, 192|S—10 a. m. 

i 

At a meeting of the Federal Radio Commission on April 
f), the following Commissioners were present :j Judge Sykes, 
Mr. Caldwell, Mr. Pickard, Mr. Lafount, and!Judge Robin¬ 
son. Mr. Terrell was also present. Secretary Butman 
recorded the minutes. 

i 

i 

# * # # * # ! * 

j 

i 

j 

Based on the recommendation of Captain! Hooper that 
there appeared to be no reason why tlie avaliable short 
wave channels in the mobile band should not be assigned, 

it was moved by Commissioner Lafount and seconded bv 

_ • i/ • 

Commissioner Caldwell that it was the sense! of this meet¬ 
ing of the Federal Radio Commission that the recommen- 


294 


INTERCITY IIAD10 TELEGRAPH CO. ET AL. VS. 


dations for the specific allocation of short wave channels to 
mobile stations made by Captain Hooper be acted on by 
the Commission, and that these recommendations be con¬ 
sidered individually when received. 

CARL H. BUTMAN. 


320 Minutes. 

April 11, 1928. 

At a meeting of the Federal Radio Commission on April 
11, the following* Commissioners were present: Judge Rob¬ 
inson, Judge Sykes, Mr. Pickard, and Mr. Caldwell. Secre¬ 
tary Butman recorded the minutes of the meeting. 

#*##**# 

The secretary reported receipt of a telegram from Joseph 
Pierson, representing the American Publishers Commit¬ 
tee on Radio, Chicago, seeking a special conference with the 
Commission in regard to short wave assignments to the 
press. The Commissioners and Captain Hooper agreed 
that they could meet Mr. Pierson on Tuesday April 17, and 
the secretary was directed to so advise Mr. Pierson. 

#*##*#* 

CARL H. BUTMAN. 


321 Minutes. 

April 16,1928. 

At a meeting of the Federal Radio Commission on April 
16, the following Commissioners vrere present: Judge 
Robinson, Judge Sykes, Mr. Caldwell, and Mr. Pickard. 
Mr. Terrell and Captain Hooper vrere also present. Secre¬ 
tary Butman recorded the minutes. 

#####*# 

The allocation of short waves for international communi¬ 
cation was discussed by the Commission and Captain 
Hooper, and the advisability of informing the Berne Bureau 
as to allocations in the United States was commented upon. 


FEDERAL RADIO COMMISSION. 


295 


i 
i 

i 
I 

It was the opinion of the Commission that a letter he ad¬ 
dressed to the Berne Bureau, stating that the United States 
would claim and enumerate 50 channels for later specific 
allocation in the United States. Captain Hpoper was re¬ 
quested to draft such a letter listing the channels to be so 
reserved. 

Captain Hooper read communications from the Radio 
Corporation of America with regard to its requirements 
in short waves for international and national communica¬ 
tion, and for international broadcast relay service and 
national television service, the latter pertaining to applica¬ 
tions for experimental stations. 

i 

i 

i 

• * • # * # # 


CARL H. BUTMAN. 


322 Minutes. 

i 

! 

April 18, 1928. 

At a meeting of the Federal Radio Commisjsion on April 
18, the following Commissioners were present.: Judge 
Robinson, Judge Sykes, Mr. Caldwell, and |Mr. Pickard. 
Secretary Butman recorded the minutes. Assistant Secre¬ 
tary Clearman was also present. 

i 

j 

# # # # # # # 

i 

i 

The Commissioners discussed the applications of the 
Radio Corporation of America for three public service 
stations at Cleveland, Chicago, and Duluth. 

The secretary was requested to have a memorandum on 
the lake radio communication system prepared and sub¬ 
mitted to Judge Robinson. 

The secretary was requested to make a summary of the 
licenses issued to different classes of commercial interests 
and the applications pending showing the ratio of those 
issued to the Radio Corporation in proportion to its com¬ 
petitors. 

i 

j 

• ##### * 

i 

CARL H. BUTMAN. 


I 


296 


INTERCITY RADIO TELEGRAPH CO. ET AL. VS. 


323 


Minutes. 


April 25, 1928. 

At a meeting of the Federal Radio Commission on April 
25, the following Commissioners were present: Judge 
Robinson, Mr. Pickard, and Mr. Lafount. Judge Robinson 
presided and Secretary Butman recorded the minutes. 

******* 

Captain Hooper expressed the hope that he could receive 
cooperation from commercial radio operating companies in 
preparing a complete and accurate list of short wave radio 
stations now operating in different parts of the world, 
designating the channels used. The Chairman advised 
Captain Hooper that he would confer with him at an early 
date regarding this request. 

******* 

CARL H. BUTMAN. 


324 Minutes. 

May 7, 1928 (Morning). 

The Federal Radio Commission met on the above date 
and the following Commissioners were present: Judge 
Robinson, Judge Sykes, Mr. Caldwell, Mr. Pickard, and Mr. 
Lafount. Secretary Butman recorded the minutes. 

The different Commissioners discussed the short wave 
problems and the securing of short wave data. Judge Sykes 
moved as follows: 

Captain Hooper is requested to confer with applicants 
for international short waves as to those already in use 
by other nations, and also to obtain the information from 
all other sources available, and that to this end a hearing 
be had on a certain day to which all applicants and other 
parties having! such information be invited to attend. 

This memorandum was seconded and passed. 

The Commission adjourned to meet at 2:15. 


CARL H. BUTMAN. 


FEDERAL RADIO COMMISSION. 


297 


i 

i 


i 


325 Minutes. 

May 7, 1928 (Afternoon). 

| 

At a meeting of the Federal Radio Commission on the 
above date, the following Commissioners were present: 
Judge Robinson, Judge Sykes, Mr. Caldwell, Mr. Pickard, 
and Mr. La fount. Secretary Butman recorded the minu¬ 
tes. 

Following a discussion as to the Alaskan situation, Mr. 
Lafount recommended that the Commission issue Alaskan 
applicants temporary licenses, all of which were to carry 
the following condition: 

This license is issued and accepted with thb full under¬ 
standing that the licensee is to accept and transmit at rea- 

• • i 

sonable rates all messages offered him (or it) by the pub¬ 
lic or any individual member thereof. This license is ef¬ 
fective only until December 31,1928. j 

The Secretary was instructed to see that j the pending 
applications for licenses in Alaska be prepared for the 
signature of the Chairman, and that they include the above 
condition. I 

After conferring with Mr. Terrell as to thb date which 
terminates the fishing season in Alaska, the Secretary was 
instructed to have such date inserted in the jabove condi¬ 
tion so as to enable the radio stations to function during 
the present fishing and canning season. It was agreed that 
this date be fixed as Dec. 31, 1928. j 

The Commission discussed the general public licenses and 
private licenses. 

Mr. Lafount moved to hold a number of! applications 
which appeared to be strictly private until a legal investi¬ 
gation was completed. This was seconded and passed. 

The issuance of ship licenses was also discussed at some 
length. 

The Commission adjourned to meet at 9;:30 Tuesday 
morning. 

CARL H. BUTMAN. 

i 

326 Minutes. 

i 

Mgy 8, 1928. 

At a meeting of the Federal Radio Commission on the 
above date, the following Commissioners were present: 


298 


INTERCITY RADIO TELEGRAPH CO. ET AL. VS. 


Judge Robinson, Judge Sykes, Mr. Caldwell, Mr. Pickard, 
and Mr. Lafount. Mr. Webster of the Department of Jus¬ 
tice was also present. Secretary Butman recorded the min¬ 
utes. 

A discussion as to the policy of the Commission with re¬ 
gard to the issuance of short wave licenses and the several 
legal points involved was held, during which Mr. Webster 
expressed his views. 

It is ordered that a public hearing be held on Monday, 
May 14, 1928, at 10 a. m., at the quarters of the Commis¬ 
sion, on all applications for public service licenses in the 
transoceanic fields, and that public announcements be made 
of this hearing and all applicants of the classification re¬ 
ferred to above, be requested to attend. 

This motion, made by Mr. Lafount, was seconded and 
duly passed. 

The above motion was recorded as General Order No. 29, 
which reads as follows: 

May 9, 1928. 

4 ‘General Order No. 29. 

It is ordered that a public hearing be held on May 14, 
1928, at 10 a. m., at the quarters of the Commission, on all 
applications for public service licenses in the transoceanic 
field, and that public announcements be made of this hear¬ 
ing, and that all applicants of the classification referred to 
be notified to attend and present testimony. 

FEDERAL RADIO COMMISSION, 
(Signed) By IRA E. ROBINSON, 

Chairman.” 

The Commission adjourned to meet at 2:00 P. M. 

CARL H. BUTMAN, 

Secretary. 

327 Minutes. 

May 14, 1928. 

The Federal Radio Commission met in special session 
to hear the applicants for transoceanic short wave chan¬ 
nels. The following Commissioners were present: Judge 
Robinson, Judge Sykes, Mr. Caldwell, Mr. Pickard, and 
Mr. Lafount. 


FEDERAL RADIO COMMISSION 


299 


The proceedings of this meeting were takbn down steno- 
graphically and are found in the files of the Commission as 
of this date. 

CARL H. BUTMAN, 

Secretary. 

328 Minutes. i 

May 16, 192$ (Morning). 

At a meeting of the Federal Radio Commission on 
the above date, the following Commissioners! were present: 
Judge Robinson, Judge Sykes, Mr. Caldwell, Mr. Pickard, 
and Mr. Lafount. Secretary Butman recorded the minutes. 

The Chairman requested Mr. Webster’s views with re¬ 
gard to the application of Section 17 of the Rfidio Act to the 
issuance of licenses for transmission, and whether or not 
this Act concerned the Commisison in its possible connection 
with patents owned by the radio operating companies. Mr. 
Webster promised to make a written report on this subject 
for the benefit of the Commission. 

Judge Sykes urged the issuance of licences to the gen¬ 
eral public radio stations on short waves, ajs soon as was 
found practicable. 

Mr. Lafount presented the application <j)f the Alaska 
Packers Association for the operation of their stations in 
Alaska and Alameda, which had been constructed on pre¬ 
viously issued construction permits. After; a discussion, 
the Commission directed that telegraphic authority to op¬ 
erate until December 31, 1928, be issued to Ithis company, 
temporarily, without assurance for license in! future. 

The secretary was instructed to secure copies of the 1921 
Act relating to the landing and operation |of sub-marine 
cables in the United States, and to distribute them, one to 
each Commissioner. He was also requested to ascertain 
what branch of the Government fixed cable r$tes. 

The commission adjourned to meet in the afternoon. 

CARL H.i BUTMAN. 

i 

329 Minutes. 

May 16, 1928 (Afternoon). 

j 

At a meeting of the Federal Radio Comipission on the 
above date, the following commissioners were present: 

8—498/a 




300 


INTERCITY RADIO TELEGRAPH CO. ET AL. VS. 


Judge Robinson, Judge Sykes, Mr. Caldwell, Mr. Pickard, 
and Mr. Lafount. Secretary Butman recorded the minutes. 

The Commission decided to take up the short wave prob¬ 
lem at an early date, and it was understood that Captain 
Hooper would confer with Judge Sykes and Mr. Caldwell 
in order that they might report to the full Commission on 
Monday with recommendations. 

####### 

CARL H. BUTMAN. 


330 Minutes. 

May 18, 1928. 

At a meeting of the Federal Radio Commission on the 
above date, the following Commissioners were present: 
Judge Robinson, Judge Sykes, Mr. Caldwell, Mr. Pickard, 
and Mr. Lafount. Mr. Terrell was also present. Secretary 
Butman recorded the minutes. 

Judge Sykes stated that the short wave committee had re- 
eeived an informal report from Capt. Hooper, and stated 
that this Committee would be ready to report to the full 
Commission on Monday. 

Judge Robinson asked the secretary to read a letter from 
Mr. Webster of the Department of Justice, setting forth his 
interpretation of Section 17 of the Radio Act of 1927 in 
its application to the Commission in the issuance of trans¬ 
oceanic short wave licenses to the applicants who have filed. 
###*##* 

The Commission approved the issuance of a construction 
permit to Jos. C. Branch of Chicago, for the erection of a 
five watt short wave experimental transmitter to operate 
as station 9 X A D. 

The Commission adjourned to meet Monday morning. 

. < * CARL TI. BUTMAN. 

331 Minutes. 

May 21, 1928'. 

At a meeting of the Federal Radio Commission on the 
above date, the following Commissioners were present: 
Judge Robinson, Judge Sykes, Mr. Pickard and Mr. La- 
fount. Secretary Butman recorded the minutes. 


FEDERAL RADIO COMMISSION 


301 


Short wave applications and the recommendations of the 
Commission expert, Capt. Hooper, were discussed. 

Judge Sykes moved that consideration of the specific ap¬ 
plications for short wave channels in transoceanic service 
be postponed until Tuesday, pending the securing of further 
information. This motion was seconded and carried. 




* 


* 


* 




* 


The meeting adjourned. 


CARL Hi BUTMAN. 


332 


Minutes. 


May 23, 1928. 

I 

At a meeting of the Federal Radio Commission on Mav 
23,1928, the following Commissioners were present : Judge 
Robinson, Judge Sykes, Mr. Pickard, Mr. | Caldwell, and 
Mr. Lafount; Dr. Dellinger of the Bureau; of Standards 
was also present. Secretary Butman recorded the min¬ 
utes. 

Judge Svkes suggested the desirabilitv of!holding a con- 
ference with the engineers of the applicants for trans- 
Atlantic communication service after the number of chan¬ 
nels to be assigned to each applicant had been determined, 
so that specific channels might be agreed upon. This was 
agreed to and the meeting was tentativelv set for Fridav. 
May 25. 

Judge Robinson suggested that Mr. Caldwell and the office 
staff confer on the short wave communication applicants 
and prepare a list or map showing the competing and non- 
competing applicants and the point to point services they 
desired to establish, going into the technique of the prob¬ 
lem for the Commission, which suggestion was adopted. 

Mr. Pickard moved that the Commission vote on the 
short wave applicants for transoceanic service designating 
those believed qualified and eligible so that I assignment of 
channels might be considered. 


The Commission agreed that the following organizations 


were qualified and eligible for transoceanic licenses on 
short wave: 

The Mackay Company, Tropical Radio Teljcg. Co., Robert 
Dollar Company, Radio Corporation of America, American 
Tel. & Tel. (to., American Publishers, The Pacific Commu¬ 
nication Co. 


302 


INTERCITY RADIO TELEGRAPH CO. ET AL. VS. 


Mr. Lafount moved and the Commission ordered that 
telegraphic authority be sent to the Mackay Radio and 
Telegraph Company authorizing the operation of station 
KNN and KNW on frequencies described in their construc¬ 
tion permit. 

Authority was also granted the Boulevard Express, San 
Diego, California, authorizing the operation of station 
KVU and KVT pending final action on the application, 
without commitment for the future. 

333 On motion duly carried the Mutual Telephone 
Company of Honolulu was authorized to operate its 
radio telegraph circuit in the Hawaiian Islands. If the 
channel assignment in the construction permit was found 
“OK” the license was to be issued, but it was ordered that 
the limitation clause requiring reasonable rates be in¬ 
cluded. 

Telegraphic authority was granted Wilbur Jerman of 
Portland, Oregon, to operate an airplane experimental sta¬ 
tion for ten davs. This station was designated as station 
7XAO. 

Telegraphic authority was also granted Paul Franklin 
Johnson of Altadena, California, to operate ship radio sta¬ 
tion aboard yacht Seyelyn on frequencies of Forty-three 
hundred ten and eighty-six hundred twenty (S,G20) kilo¬ 
cycles. Call letters WQBD. 

Telegraphic authority was granted Mr. Ewing Scott of 
the Fox Film Corporation of Fairbanks, Alaska, to operate 
portable radio transmitter for ten days on frequency of 
ninetv-seven kilocycles. Call letters KGGT. 

CARL H. BUTMAN, 

Secretary . 


334 


Minutes . 


May 24, 1928—Morning. 

At a meeting of the Federal Radio Commission on the 
above date, the following Commissioners were present: 
Judge Robinson, Judge Sykes, Mr. Caldwell, Mr. Pickard, 
and Mr. Lafount. Secretary Butman recorded the minutes. 

The Commissioners voted to change the date of the con¬ 
ference with the engineers of the trans-oceanic applicants 
to Thursday May 31st., when specific allocation of fre¬ 
quencies will be discussed. 

Judge Robinson offered the following resolution: 


FEDERAL RADIO COMMISSION. 


303 


“In the grant of con.'ruction permits ana licenses for 
public service transoceanic communication services, under 
consideration today, the following principle! shall be ob¬ 
served : 

That competitive service be established where there are 
competing applications, or an application or applications 
to compete with already established service, and that in the 
grant of competing licenses, fairness of competition be es¬ 
tablished, except that as to an isolated country which in 
the judgment of the Commission will not afford sufficient 
business for competing wireless lines, only one grant of li¬ 
cense shall be made, preferably the first applicant in pri¬ 
or itv.” 


The Commission adopted this reason unanimously. 

Mr. Lafount moved that operating license^ be issued to 
the Mackay Company on the construction permits hereto¬ 
fore issued it for transoceanic public service communica¬ 
tion, when frequencies therefor shall have beejn ascertained, 
and that operating licenses be issued to the Rhdio Corpora¬ 
tion of America, for similar service on the construction 
permits already issued it when the frequencies issued there¬ 
for shall have been ascertained; the aforesaid licenses, 
however, to be issued only upon satisfactory evidence that 
construction lias been completed and the applications for 
licenses filed. This motion was seconded by Commissioner 
Pickard and adopted unanimously. 

Mr. Lafount moved that the radio transmitting stations 
now operating in point to point service in thejUnited States 
and using transoceanic channels be either deleted or as¬ 
signed transcontinental frequencies. Seconded by Mr. 
Caldwell, this motion was unanimously adopted. 

Upon examination by the Commission of tjhe application 
of the Pacific Communication Company for & transoceanic 
station construction permit, the applicant having 
335 been given full hearing on a former day, the Commis¬ 
sion is of tiie opinion that public interest, conveni¬ 
ence or necessity would not be served by tlie granting of 
the application and accordingly doth deny the same. 

Upon examination by the Commission of the application 
of the S. P. Radio Company for a transoceanic station con¬ 
struction permit, the applicant having been given full hear¬ 
ing on a former day, the Commission is of tlije opinion that 


304 


INTERCITY RADIO TELEGRAPH CO. ET AL. VS. 


public interest; convenience or necessity would not be served 
by the granting of the application and accordingly doth 
deny the same. 

Judge Selves moved that the Commission proceed to the 
consideration of the applications for construction permits 
for transoceanic service. This motion was seconded by 
Mr. Lafount and adopted. 

The Commission had before it a map prepared by Com¬ 
missioner Lafount and Mr. Blackwell on which was deline¬ 
ated by lines and figures, the existing grants and present 
applications of the following applicants: 

The Pacific Communication Company, 

The Robert Dollar Company, 

The Tropical Radio Telegraph Company, 

The American Tel. & Tel. Company, 

The American Publishers, and 
The Mackay Company, 

and also a map prepared by the engineers of the Radio Cor¬ 
poration of America, on which was delineated by lines and 
figures, the ekisting grants and present applications of that 
applicant. 

The Commission, following the principle of competition 
adopted by it, authorized the issuance of construction per¬ 
mits to the Robert Dollar Company, which permits shall 
authorize the construction of stations that shall use eight 
frequencies. These stations to be built in the United States 
or its possessions, to communicate with cities in foreign 
countries, or as between the United States and its posses¬ 
sions, the complete details of which shall be contained in 
the construction permits. 

Likewise the Commission also authorized the granting of 
construction permits to Tropical Radio Telegraph Com¬ 
pany, permitting the construction of stations for the use 
of seven frequencies, also the issuance of construction per¬ 
mits to the American Telephone and Telegraph Company 
for the construction of stations to use nine frequencies; the 
Mackay Company for fifteen frequencies; and the Radio 
Corp. of America for fifteen frequencies, was approved. 
The construction permits to contain the following provi¬ 
sions : 

336 All construction permits issued for transoceanic 
short wave service are to he for general service sta¬ 
tions. They will also provide that within ninety days of the 


FEDERAL RADIO COMMISSION. 


305 


date of issuance, the applicant shall file with the Commission 
a report showing Hie progress made in connection with the 
making* of satisfactory arrangements for tlife establishing 
of receiving* or transmitting stations with the countries de¬ 
scribed in the permits. In the event the Commission is 
not entirelv satisfied with the showing made, then the Com- 
mission will so advise the applicant and tlife construction 
permit will immediately be cancelled and become null and 
void. 

The construction permits will provide tluit six months 
from the date of issuance be allowed the applicant in which 
to construct the station and be ready to commence opera¬ 
tion, but the Commission may extend from tiijne to time, as 
it deems advisable and in the public interest, convenience 
and necessity, the date to which the permit-fee is required 
to show progress or complete construction. 

The construction permits will provide tluit the specific 
frequencies assigned or to be assigned will bejsubject to the 
right of the United States to employ the same, that is, that 
these channels are available for assignment to United 
States public service stations at the time, ahd that at the 
end of any license period for the particular frequencies, 
they may be assigned to other public service stations in 
the judgment of the licensing authority. 

The Commission also authorized the issuance to the 

i 

American Publishers Committee, its trustee or nominee, 
construction permits authorizing the construction of sta¬ 
tions in cities of the United States to communicate with 
cities in foreign countries for general public |press service, 
and the use of twenty frequencies, the derails of which 
shall be contained in the construction permits. These par¬ 
ticular construction permits to be issued to the American 
Publishers Committee, shall in addition to the provisions 
set forth above provide also that the applicant shall within 
thirty days of issuance furnish the Commission satisfactory 
evidence that it will represent the entire press of the United 
States insofar as radio communication service is concerned, 
and that a plan has been agreed upon by said press inter¬ 
ests whereby all press communications will he handled in 
a fair and equitable manner and as a general!public service 
in that particular, with assurance also that the business 
contemplated by any applicant that may hereafter be filed 
with the Commission for the use of the press pr newspapers 









306 


INTERCITY RADIO TELEGRAPH CO. ET AL. VS. 


in the United States or its territories, shall and can be 
handled through and by this present applicant. 

337 All construction permits shall require that at any 
time demanded the applicant shall satisfy the Com¬ 
mission that finances sufficient to construct a system such 
as is described therein and to do the work contemplated are 
available, and that the applicant will submit to the Com¬ 
mission within sixty days of date of the issuance of the con¬ 
struction permit satisfactory evidence that arrangements 
have been made for the purchase of transmitting equip¬ 
ment that will in the opinion of the Commission be capable 
of transmitting on an assigned frequency to the points 
designated in the x>ermit. 

The Commission adjourned to meet in the afternoon. 

CARL II. BUTMAN. 


338 Minutes. 

May 25, 1928 (Morning). 

The Federal Radio Commission met the morning of May 

25th, 1928. The following Commissioners were present: 

Judge Robinson, Judge Sykes, Mr. Caldwell, Mr. Pickard, 

and Mr. Lafount. Secretarv Butman recorded the minutes. 

* 

There appeared before the Commission Mr. R. D. Siddall, 
Attorney, and Mr. Lewis Windmuller, Radio Engineer, of 
A. H. Bull Co., Inc. These representatives of the Bull 
Insular Line, stated to the Commission their desires and 
needs for two radio communicating channels; one for trans¬ 
oceanic service to Africa and another for continental serv¬ 
ice between the United States, Porto Rico and other West 
Indian ports. The Commission announced no decision as 
to the issuance of licenses to this company. 

Major Blair of the Signal Corps, appeared before the 
Commission and announced that an appeal for additional 
short wave channels for the Army would be made by the 
Secretary of War to the Interdepartmental Radio Advisory 
Committee and the Secretary of Commerce, with the hope 
that an amendment to the recent executive order setting 
forth the short wave channels assigned to Government serv¬ 
ices, might be secured. Major Blair stated that he would 
file a copy of the proposed amendment together with a list 


FEDERAL RADIO COMMISSION. 


307 


of the channels desired for the military use of the Army, 
prior to Thursday, May 31st. 

# # # * * # | * 

GAEL H. BUTMAN. 

i 

339 Minutes. 

I 

i 

May 25,1928 (Afternoon). 

I 

At a meeting of the Federal Radio Commission on the 
above date, the following Commissioners were present: 
Judge Robinson, Judge Sykes, Mr. Caldwell, | Mr. Pickard, 
and Mr. Lafount. Secretary Butman recorded the minutes. 

During the meeting Mr. Campbell, attorney for the Stand¬ 
ard Oil Company, discussed the applications of his com¬ 
pany for radio service between Bay way, Ne\i r Jersey, and 
Bolivia, which service he said would be open to the general 
public if desired. 

The Commission then adjourned. 

CARL H. BUTMAN. 

340 Minutes . 

June 1, 1928 (Afternoon). 

At a meeting of the Federal Radio Commission on June 
1, the following Commissioners were present!: Judge Rob¬ 
inson, Judge Sykes, Mr. Caldwell, and Mr. Picjkard. 

* * * # * # j • 

There was submitted to the Commission a proposed allo¬ 
cation of high frequency channels for the grants made at 
the meeting of the Commission on May 24, 1928, signed by 
the engineering representatives of each of t|ie companies 
to whom grants were made on that day, as follows: 

1. Tropical Radio Teleg. Company—7 frequencies: 


6,770 

12,940 

6,785 

12,970 

10,450 

17,580 

10,470 

! 


308 


INTERCITY RADIO TELEGRAPH CO. ET AL. VS. 


2. American Publishers Committee—20 frequencies: 


7,340 

7,850 

15,700 

7,355 

7,925 

15,730 

7,370 

7,955 

15,760 

7,625 

15,580 

15,850 

7,640 

15,610 

15,880 

7,820 

15,640 

15,910 

7,835 

15,670 



3. Robert Dollar Steamship Company—8 frequencies: 

7,430 14,860 

7,445 14,890 

9,410 18,820 

10,930 22,660 

4. American Telephone & Teleg. Company—14 frequen¬ 
cies: 


341 


6,755 14,590 

9,170 16,270 

9,750 19,220 

9,870 19,820 

10,550 18,340 

13,390 21,060 

14,470 21,420 

5. Radio Corporation of America—65 frequencies: 


i 


6,710 

10,610 

16,000 

6,725 

10,630 

16,030 

6,740 

11,680 

17,860 

6,845 

13,420 

17,900 

6,860 

13,450 

17,940 

6,890 

13,480 

17,980 

6,920 

13,690 

18,020 

6,935 

13,720 

18,060 

6,950 

13,780 

18,860 

6,965 

13,840 

18,900 

7,400 

11,950 

18,940 

7,415 

13,870 

18,980 

7,520 

13,900 

19,020 

7,715 

13,930 

20,100 

8,950 

14,800 

20,180 


FEDERAL RADIO COMMISSION 


309 


8,990 

14,S30 

20,26p 

9,010 

14,920 

20,78f) 

9,450 

15,040 

20,820 

9,470 

15,430 

21,220 

9,490 

15,460 

21,260 

10,390 

15,490 

21,300 

10,410 

15,970 

| 


6. Mackay Radio & Teleg. Company—37 frequencies: 


6,815 

9,070 

17,420 

6,875 

9,280 

17,660 

7,670 

10,490 

17,700 

7,655 

10,810 

18,260 

7,730 

10,830 

18,780 

7,745 

13,000 

19,540 

7,760 

13,030 

19,580 

8,075 

13,750 

19,620 

8,720 

13,960 

19,740 

8,850 

14,680 

20,300 

8,930 

14,710 

20,980 

8,970 

14,740 

21,380 


14,770 

1 


i 

342 We, tlie undersigned representatives! of commercial 
companies, recommend approval of; the foregoing 
assignment: 

(Signed) F. E. METNHOLTjZ, 

American Publishers Committee. 

(Signed) LLOYD ESPEXSCHIED, 

American Tel. £ Teleg. Co. 
(Signed) FRANK A. HART, 

Mackay Radiol A: Teleg. Co. 
(Signed) C. W. LATIMER, | 

L. A. BRIGGS, | 

Radio Corp\. of America. 
(Signed) EDWARD IT. LOPfTIN, 

Robert Dollar Steamship Co. 
(Signed) W.E. BEAKES, j 

Tropical Radio £ Teleg. Co. 


(Signed) 

(Signed) 


Whereupon by unanimous vote of the Commission, the 
proposed allocation aforesaid was approved and adopted. 


310 


INTERCITY RADIO TELEGRAPH CO. ET AL. VS. 


Upon consideration of the applications of the Firestone 
Plantations Cbmjjany and the Standard Oil Company of 
New Jersey, the former for point to point general public 
service communication between Akron, Ohio, and Liberia, 
and the latter for point to point general public service com¬ 
munication from (Bayway) Elizabeth, N. J., to Bolivia, the 
Commission finds each of the aforesaid proposed services 
to be in the general public interest, convenience and neces¬ 
sity, and doth grant construction permit to the latter, and 
license on the construction permit heretofore granted the 
former, subject, however, to all the conditions and require¬ 
ments made applicable to the grants to other general public 
service companies at the meeting of the Commission on 
May 24, 1928. The foregoing grant, however, is made with 
the understanding that two transoceanic frequencies or 
wavelengths will be assigned to these two companies for 
their joint use upon such division of time as they may make. 

The Commission adjourned. 

CARL II. BUTMAN. 


343 Minutes. 

June 21,1928. 

At a meeting of the Federal Radio Commission on the 
above date, the following Commissioners were present: 
Judge Robinson, Judge Sykes, Mr. Caldwell, Mr. Pickard, 
and Mr. Lafount. Secretary Butman recorded the minutes. 

*##**## 


Judge Sykes moved that the ship licenses be issued as 
previously ordered by the Commission on March 9, that is, 
in the name of the owner of the radio apparatus. This 
motion, seconded by Mr. Caldwell, was passed. 

Judge Sykes moved as follows: 

“ It is moved that licenses and construction permits be 
issued to the applicants allocated frequencies by the Com¬ 
mission on May 24th, and that these licenses and permits 
show the exact circuits to be operated, provided that these 
circuits have no new destination other than those pre¬ 
viously operated, or covered by construction permits pre¬ 
viously issued, or covered in the applications which were 
under consideration at the time the Commission acted on 
May 24tli; these permits and applications to be in exact 


FEDERAL RADIO COMMISSION. ! 311 

| 

accordance with the number of frequencies heretofore allo¬ 
cated to each applicant.’’ 

This motion was passed and adopted. (Junp 21, 1928.) 
The Secretary was cautioned that specific! points to be 
communicated with must be noted on the license if author¬ 
ity for such communication existed, and that in no instance 
was the phrase 4 ‘and to other points with which stations of 
this company are authorized to communicate”j to be used. 

* * * # # *■ i * 


Mr. Caldwell was asked to revise the copy of his letter to 
applicants for short wave broadcasting, relay broadcasting, 
and television channels, and the secretary was! instructed to 
mimeograph this letter for distribution to applicants. 


# 


Mr. Lafount stated that an armv officer had asked if the 

•/ i 

National Guard station at Seattle would be j permitted to 
transmit code in the braodcasting band. Thd Commission 
decided in the negative, since it would interfere with broad¬ 
cast reception. 

The Commisison adjourned to meet at 10 a. m., Friday 
morning, June 22nd. 

CARL H. BUTMAN. 


344 Minutes . 

Jujie 22, 1928. 

i 

At a meeting of the Federal Radio Commission on June 
22, the following Commissioners were present: Judge 
Robinson, Judge Sykes, Mr. Caldwell, Mr. Pickard, and 
Mr. Lafount. Secretary Butman recorded the minutes. 

The Commission discussed the applications! of the Radio 
Corporation of America for licenses and decided that the 
licenses are to hear the names of the points I to which the 
stations are licensed to communicate, supplenjiented by the 
statement “and other stations with which the Radio Cor¬ 
poration of America (applicant) are licensed! to communi¬ 
cate by the Federal Radio Commission.” The Secretary 
was instructed to have all licenses of this type rewritten to 
include communication with stations with which the com- 


312 


INTETtCTTY EAPTO TELECKAPTT CO. ET AL. VS. 


panv is licensed to communicate by Hie Federal Radio 
Commission. 

Judge Robinson moved that the Radio Corporation ap¬ 
plication for license to communicate with Liberia be denied. 
This motion was seconded by Mr. Caldwell and passed. 
The Secretary was authorized to advise the Radio Corpora¬ 
tion with regard to its desire to communicate with Liberia, 
that, based on the information available, the Commission 
did not believe there was sufficient competition to license 
two radio operating companies to communicate with points 
in Liberia. The Radio Corporation was to be advised that 
in the event a hearing on this question was desired, one 
would be scheduled. 

The Commission moved to issue the other licenses of the 
Radio Corporation as applied for and the Chairman sig¬ 
nified his willingness to sign them as soon as they were 
ready. The new points to be communicated with are as 
follows: Lisbon, Portugal; Madrid, Spain; Hong Kong, 
China, via Manila; Mukden, China, via Manila; and Shang¬ 
hai, China, via Manila. 

A list of the licenses granted to the RCA June 7 is at¬ 
tached. 

The two applications of the Mackay Company for 
licenses, using 15 frequencies, were approved. The points 
to be communicated with are as follows: French Indo- 
China and Japan. 

A list of the licenses granted the Mackav Co. is attached. 

The Chairman read the proposed conditions to be im¬ 
posed in the issuance of construction permits to the new 
short wave transoceanic stations approved by the Radio 
Commission recently. The Secretary was instructed to 
mimeograph these supplementary conditions and make 
them a part of the construction permits when issued. 
The construction permits, it was decided, would include 
the points to be communicated with as shown in the 
licenses. 

345 The application of the Pacific Communication 
Syndicate for a rehearing with regard to its short 
wave transoceanic applications was denied, and the Secre¬ 
tary was instructed to write a letter for the signature of 
the Chairman to this effect. 

As agreed in the meeting of May 21, Mr. Caldwell an¬ 
nounced that he had arranged for Mr. Ormsby McIIarg, 



FEDERAL RADIO COMMISSION. 


313 


representating the SP Radio Company to appear before the 
Commission to present a supplementary statement on Mon¬ 
day June 25, at 2 p. m. 

* * # * # # # 


(Sgd.) CARL H. BUTMAN. 

34G RCA Transoceanic Shortwave Applications 

G,000/23,000 KC. j 

Freq., 

Kc. Location. 

21.260 Rocky Point, N. Y. 

21,220 

20,820 Bolinas, Calif. I 

20,780 “ “ | 

20.260 Rocky Point, N. Y. j 

20,180 “ “ “ 

20,100 “ “ “ 

18,980 “ “ “ 

18.940 “ “ “ 

18.900 “ “ “ 

18,060 Bolinas, Calif. 

18,020 “ “ 

17.940 Rocky Point, N. Y. 

17.900 “ “ “ 

17,860 “ “ “ 

15,970 “ “ i 

15,490 Bolinas, Calif. ! 

15,430 “ “ 

14,800 Rocky Point, N. Y. 

13,930 “ “ 

13.900 “ “ “ | 

13,870 “ “ “ 

13,840 “ “ “ 

13,780 San Juan, P. R. 

13,720 Bolinas, Calif. 

13,690 “ “ 

13,480 Rocky Point, N. Y. j 

13,450 “ “ “ 

13,420 “ “ “ 

11,680 Kahuku, T. H. 





314 


INTERCITY RADIO TELEGRAPH CO. ET AL. VS. 


RCA Transoceanic Shortwave Applications 6,000/23,000 

KC.—Continued 

Freq., 

Kc. Location. 

10,610 Rocky Point, N. Y. 

10,410 Bolinas, Calif. 

9,490 Rocky Point, N. Y. 

9,450 “ “ “ 

9,010 Bolinas, Calif. 

8,990 Rocky Point, N. Y. 

8.950 

7,715 Bolinas, Calif. 

7,415 Kahuku, T. H. 

7,400 Rocky Point, N. Y. 

6,965 New Brunswick, N. J. 

6.950 Rocky Point, N. Y. 

6,935 

6,920 

6,860 Bolinas, Calif. 

6,845 

6,740 Rocky Point, N. Y. 

6,725 Rocky Point, N. Y. 

6,710 

347 Mackay Transoceanic Applications 

Frequency, 

K. C. Location. 

7,760 
8,075 
8,720 
9,070 
10,490 
10,810 
13,030 
17,420 
6,815 
7,745 
8,850 
8,970 
13,000 
17,660 
18,260 


Honolulu, T. H. 


c c 

i t 
i i 

a 
i c 
11 
i c 


i l 

u 

i i 
i t 

u 
i c 
i c 


Palo Alto, Calif. 

u Ci 


C l 
11 
(l 
i i 

a 


u 
11 
a 

i < 

u 


FEDERAL RADIO COMMISSION. 


315 


i 

i 

i 

348 Copy. 

i 

i 

Amended United States High Frequency List, Federal 

Radio Commission, 6/25/28’. 

Freq., 

Kc. Location. 

6,710—Rocky Point, N. Y. j 

6,720—Dearborn, Michigan. 

6,725—Rocky Point, N. Y. 

6,740— “ “ | 

6,755—Deal Beach, N. J. 

6,770—Boston, Mass. I 

6,785—Boston, Mass. 

6,815—San Francisco, Calif. 

6,845— “ | 

6,860— “ | 

6,875—Guam. j 

6,890—New York City. 

6,900—Cleveland, O.—Bypro, Ky. j 

6,920—Rocky Point, N. Y. | 

6,935— “ “ I 

6,950— “ “ | 

6,965— “ 

7,340—New York City. j 

7,355— 

7,370— 

7,400—Rocky Point, N. Y. j 

7,415—Honolulu. 

7,430—San Francisco, Calif. j 

7,445—Seattle, Washington. 

7,520—Rocky Point, N. Y. 

7,600—Naknek, Alaska—Alameda, Cal. 

7,625—New York City. 

7,640— “ | 

7,655—San Francisco, Calif. j 

7,670— “ 


9—4987a 


316 


INTKKCITV RADIO TELEGRAPH CO. ET AL. V 


Amended United States High Frequency List, Federal 
Radio Commission, 6/25/28—Continued. 

Freq., 

Ke. Location. 

7,715—San Francisco, Calif. 

7,730— 

7,745— 4 4 

7,760— 

7,775—Akron, 0.—Baytown, N. J. 

7,820—New York City. 

7,835— 

7.850— 

7,925—San Francisco, Calif. 

7,955— 

8,010—Rogers, Michigan. 

8,075—San Francisco, Calif. 

*8.650— 

8,720—Honolulu. 

8.850— San Francisco, Calif. 

8,930—Midway Island. 

8,950—Rocky Point, N. Y. 

8,970—San Francisco, Calif. 

8,990—San Francisco, Calif. 

9,010— 

9,070—Honolulu. 

9,170—Deal Beach, N. J. 

9,280—Guam. 

9,410—San Francisco, Calif. 

9,450—New York City. 

9,470— 

9,490— “ 

9,750—Deal Beach, N. J. 

9,870— “ 

10,390—San Francisco, Calif. 

10,410— 

10,450—Miami, Florida. 

10,470— “ 


♦Specially assigned for experimental work. 


FEDERAL RADIO COMMISSION. 


317 


A mended United States High Frequency List, Federal 
Radio Commission, 6/25/28-—Continued. 

Freq., 

Kc. Location. 

10,490—Honolulu. 

10,550—Deal Beach, N. J. 

10,610—New York City. j 

10,630— 

10.750— Newark, N. J. 

10,810—Honolulu. | 

10,830—Guam. j 

10.900— San Francisco, Calif. 

10.930— 

11.680— Honolulu. j 

11,950—San Francisco, Calif. 

*12,850— ! 

12,940—New Orleans, La. ! 

12,970— 44 j 

13,000—San Francisco, Calif. j 

13,030—Honolulu. 

13,390—New York City. i 

13,420— 44 ! 

13,450— 44 i 

13,480— 44 ! 

13,690—San Francisco, Calif. | 

13,720— 

13.750— Guam. 

13,780—New York City. 

13,840— 

13,870— 44 j 

13.900— “ | 

13.930— 

14,470—Deal Beach, N. J. | 

14,590— 44 4 4 

13,960—Guam. j 

14.680— New York City. 

14,710— 44 


* Specially fissioned for experimental work. 














318 


INTERCITY RADIO TELEGRAPH CO. ET AL. VS. 


Amended United States High Frequency List, Federal 
Radio Commission, 6/25/28—Continued. 

Freq., 

Ke. Location. 


349 


14,740—New York City. 
14,770— 

14,800— 

14,830— 

14.860— Seattle, Washington. 

14,890— “ 

14,920—New York City. 

15,040- 

la,430—San Francisco, Calif. 
15,460— “ 

15,490— 

15.580— New York City. 

15,610— “ 

15,640— 

15,670— 

15.700— “ 

15,730— “ 

15,760— 

15,850—San Francisco, Calif. 
15,880— “ 

15,910— “ 

15,970—New York City. 
16,000— “ 

16,030— “ 

16,270—Deal Beach, N. J. 
*17,300— 

17,420—Honolulu. 

17.580— New Orleans, La. 
17,660—San Francisco, Calif. 

17.700— Guam. 

17.860— New York City. 
17,900— 

17,940— 


*Spe<21allj assigned for experimental work. 


.FEDERAL RADIO COMMISSION. 


319 


i 

i 

i 

i 

Amended United States High Frequency List , Federal 
Radio Commission , 6/25/28—Contiiiued. 

Freq., 

Kc. Location. 

17.980— San Francisco, Calif. j 

18,020— 4 4 | 

18,060— 

18,260— * i 

18,340—Deal Beach, N. J. \ 

18.780— San Francisco, Calif. j 

18.820— San Francisco, Calif. 

18,860—New York City. j 

18,900— 

18,940— “ 

18.980— 

19,020— 

19.220— Deal Beach, N. J. 

19,540—New York City. | 

19,580— “ I 

19,620— “ | 

19,740—Guam. j 

19.780— Akron O.—Baytown, N. J. j 

19.820— Deal Beach, N. J. j 

20,100—New York City. ‘ i 

21,080— 

20.260— Kocky Point, N. Y. 

20.300— New York City. 

20.780— San Francisco, Calif. ! 

20.820— 

20.980— “ | 

21,060—Deal Beach, N. J. 

21.220— New York City. I 

21.260— “ | 

21.300— San Francisco, Calif. 

21,380— “ 

21,420—Deal Beach, N. J. | 

22,670—Seattle, Washington. I 


320 


INTERCITY RADIO TELEGRAPH CO. ET AL. VS. 


Reserved for Special Assignment. 

10,050 

10,090 

10,160 

10,230 

17,140 

18,180 

18,720 

350 Minutes. 

July 27, 1928. 

At a meeting’ of the Federal Radio Commission on the 
above date, the following Commissioners were present: 
Judge Robinson, Judge Sykes, Mr. Caldwell, Mr. Pickard 
and Mr. Lafount. 

On motions duly made, seconded and unanimously car- 
ried, the following orders were entered: 

6 ‘The Commission having examined the application of 
the International Quotations Company, Inc. (formerly S. 
P. Radio Company, Inc.) dated November 16, 1927, for a 
radio station construction permit, and having further ex¬ 
amined the supplemental application of that company dated 
May 31, 1928, and the Commission not being satisfied that 
public interest, convenience or necessity would be served by 
the granting of said application, or of said supplemental 
application, 

It is ordered that a hearing be, and the same is hereby, 
set for Tuesday, August 21st, at the office of the Commis¬ 
sion in Washington, D. C., and the secretary is hereby in¬ 
structed to notify the applicant of the time and place of 
said hearing.” 


“The Commission having examined the applications of 
the Bull Insular Line, Inc. dated June 7, 1928, for renewal 
of experimental licenses for station now operating at 40 
West Street, New York City, Pier 8, Baltimore, Md., and 
San Juan, P. R., and the Commission not being satisfied 


that public interest, convenience or necessity would be 
served by the granting of said applications, and 

The Commission having examined the applications of the 
Bull Insular Line, Inc. dated June 8, 1928, for public serv- 


FEDERAL RADIO COMMISSION'. 


321 


ice radio station construction permits for stations to be 
located at New York City, Baltimore, Md., San Jnan, P. R., 
and Tampa, Fla., and having further examined the pre¬ 
vious applications of that company which were superseded 
by the applications of June 8, 1928, and the Commission not 
being satisfied that public interest, convenience or necessity 
would be served by the granting of all or anjr of the afore¬ 
said applications, 

It is ordered that a hearing be, and the same is hereby, 
set for Tuesday, August 24, at the office of the Commission 
in Washington, D. C., and the Secretary is hereby instructed 
to notify the applicant of the time and place of said hear¬ 
ing.’ ’ 

W. J. CLEAfeMAN, 

Acting Secretary. 


351 


Minutes. 


August 13, 1928. 

At a meeting of the Federal Radio Commission on the 
above date, the following Commissioners jvere present: 
Judge Robinson, Judge Sykes, Mr. Caldwell!, Mr. Lafount 
and Mr. Pickard. Dr. Dellinger was also present. Secre¬ 
tary Butman recorded the minutes. 

The question of policy relative to continental short waves 
was discussed in view of the conference with representatives 
of Canada, Cuba, and Mexico on August 2pth. Dr. Del¬ 
linger stated that the complete report as tojUnited States 
stations on channels between 1500 and 6000 kilocvcles, and 
applications for such stations, would be ready on Friday, 
at which time the Commissioners were to discuss the poli¬ 
cies of the United States further. It was decided that this 
conference will probably be held in the Chairman’s office, 
and it was stated that the court reporters would not be re¬ 
quired. It was also stated that the conference would be 
private. 

With regard to the other hearings, that is, the RCA 
hearing scheduled for August 17, the international Quota¬ 
tions Co., formerly of SP Radio Company, qn the 21st, the 
Bull Insular Line on August 24, and the portable hearing 
on September 10, the Secretary was advisedj that court re¬ 
porters would be required at these session^ in order that 
complete reports would be available, and that the hearings 
would probably be held in Judge Robinson’s ioffice. 


i 




322 


INTERCITY RADIO TELEGRAPH CO. ET AL. VS. 


Commissioner Caldwell presented the application of 
Strawbridge and Clothier of Philadelphia, seeking a tem¬ 
porary experimental license for television from an airplane 
to the ground. On motion duly seconded, special authority 
was granted George Humpfer, engineer of station WF1 to 
operate a radio transmitter aboard airplane No. 1521 for 
one week, using call letters 3X1), and a frequency of 5630 
kilocycles. The channel was recommended by Dr. Dellinger. 

The Commission adjourned at one o’clock, to meet again 
at 2:30. 

Afternoon Session 

During the afternoon session the application of Dr. John 
Nathansohn of Buffalo, N. Y., for three experimental li¬ 
censes desired in connection with work intended to elimi¬ 
nate or reduce static interference, was discussed. The Com¬ 
mission decided by vote of 3 to 2 that two experimental 
licenses would be issued Dr. Nathansohn when the proper 
applications were filed, Commissioners Robinson, Lafount 
and Caldwell voting in the affirmative, and Commissioners 
Sykes and Pickard voting in the negative. Commissioner 
Pickard stated that he declined to support this application 
on the grounds that he believes the applicant was resorting 
to a subterfuge in requesting an experimental license and 
that nothing 1 of experimental value could result from such 
a grant inasmuch as such service was already well estab¬ 
lished, and furthermore, that such application should be 
considered in its order when other pending applications of 
similar nature were acted upon. 

■f? *#'### 

CARL H. BUTMAN, 

Secretary. 


352 


Minutes. 


August 14, 1928. 

At a meeting of the Federal Radio Commission on the 
above datej the following Commissioners were present: 
Judge Robinson, Judge Sykes, Mr. Caldwell, Mr. Pickard, 
and Mr. Lafount. 



FEDERAL RADIO COMMISSION. 


323 


The high frequency channel plan, using the jone-tenth per 
cent separation, adopted by a technical committee assembled 
by Captain Hooper, was approved by the Commission and 
the transmission of copies to the State Department for dis¬ 
tribution to the foreign Governments concerned, was au¬ 
thorized. Dr. Dellinger was requested to prepare a letter 
of transmittal. 

CARL H. BUTMAN, 

i Secretary. 

353 137 

i 

i 

Minutes of Federal Radio Commission 

| 

August 17, 1928—10 of clock a. m. 

Present: Commissioners Robinson, Chairman, Svkes, 
Caldwell, Pickard and Lafount, the General; Counsel and 
Assistant Counsel Pratt. 

• i 

i 

Hearing Docket 

i 

A hearing was held before the Commission jin the follow¬ 
ing case: 

I 

Docket 

No. Applicant. Nature of application. 

1(59 Radio Corporation of America. Modification of Existing 

Licenses so as to per- 
m i t i coummunication 
with | Monrovia, Libe¬ 
ria. I 
j 

The Commission, having considered the evidence and the 
arguments presented to it in said case, foufid that public 
interest, convenience or necessity would be served by grant¬ 
ing said application and directed that a license modified in 
accordance with said application be issued forthwith. 

CARL H. BUTMAN, 

| Secretary. 

354 139. | 

Minutes of Federal Radio Commission 

I 

August 21,1928—10 d’clock a. m. 

I 

Present: Commissioners Robinson, Chairman, Sykes, 
Caldwell, Pickard and Lafount, the Generali Counsel and 
Assistant Counsel Pratt. I 



324 


INTERCITY RADIO TELEGRAPH CO. ET AL. VS. 


Hearing Docket 

The hearing was held before the Commission in the fol¬ 


lowing case: 

Docket 

No. Applicant. Nature of application. 

ITT International Quotations Company, Inc. Construction Permit. 


At 1 o’clock p. m., an adjournment was taken until 2:30 
o ’clock p. m. 

CARL H. BUTMAN, 

Secretary. 

355 140. 

Minutes of Federal Radio Commission 

August 21,1928—2:30 o ’clock p. m. 

Present: Commissioners Robinson, Chairman, Sykes, 
Caldwell, Pickard and Lafount, the General Counsel and 
Assistant Counsel Pratt. 

Hearing Docket 


The hearing was resumed before the Commission in the 


following case: 


Docket 

No. Applicant. Nature of application. 

ITT International Quotations Company, Inc. Construction Permit. 

At the conclusion of the hearing, the Commission took 
the case under advisement. 




# 


* 


* 


356 


CARL H. BUTMAN, 

Secretary . 

#166. 


Minutes of the Federal Radio Commission. 


August 22, 1928—10 oclock a. m. 

Present: Commissioners Robinson, Chairman, Sykes, 
Caldwell, Pickard and Lafount, the Secretary, and the Gen¬ 
eral Counsel. 




FEDERAL RADIO COMMISSION. 


325 


Construction Permits. 

I 

A motion was made in the following matter;: 

i 

File No. Name of applicant. ! Permit granted. 

1-P-C-Z17 Standard Oil Co., of New Jersey . June 11,1928. 

i 

that an extension of thirty days be granted for making* the 
final report under subdivisions (b) and (c); respectively, 
and for completion of construction of station under sub¬ 
division (d) of the order governing transoceanic station 
construction permits adopted on May 24, 1928. The Com¬ 
mission granted the motion and directed that the terms of 
the applicant’s construction permit be modified in accord¬ 
ance therewith. 

357 Applications for Construction Pernlits. 

The Commission having examined the following applica¬ 
tions for construction permits: 

File No. Name of applicant. 

3-P-G-l 
3-P-G-2 
3-P-G-3 
3-P-G-4 
3-P-G-5 
3-P-G-6 
3-P-G-7 
3-P-G-8 
3-P-G-9 
3-P-G-10 
3-P-G-ll 
3-P-G-12 
3-P-G-13 
3-P-G-14 
3-P-G-15 
3-P-G-16 
3-P-G-17 
3-P-G-18 
3-P-G-19 
3-P-G-20 


Geophysical Research Corporation; 


i i 

l c 

a 

i i 

11 

t i 

i i 

i t 

t i 

i i 

c t 

c i 

u 

i i 

i c 

a 

i i 

i c 

i i 

i i 

u 

11 

i c 

i t 

i i 

c i 

l i 

a 

C i 

i i 

i t 

l c 

i i 

a 

i t 

u 

a 

l i 

i l 

a 

t i 

i l 

i i 

l i 

l i 

a 

l i 

u 

i i 

i i 

a 

t c 

t i 

c t 

i i 

i i 

u 


i 





326 


INTERCITY RADIO TELEGRAPH CO. ET AL. VS. 


Applications for Construction Permits—Continued. 


File No. 


Name of applicant 

5-P-G-21 

Geophysical 

Resea rc 

5-P-G-60 


i i 

i t 

5-P-G-61 


i i 

i t 

5-P-G-62 


i t 

i t 

5-P-G-63 


i t 

11 

358 & 359 




3-P-G-22 

Humble Oil and Hefini 

3-P-G-23 

i i 


11 

3-P-G-24 

t i 


i i 

S-P-G-25 

i c 


11 

3-P-G-26 

t i 


11 

3-P-G-27 

11 


a 

3-P-G-28 

i t 


a 

3-P-G-29 

i i 


a 

3-P-G-30 

t c 


a 

3-P-G-31 

i t 


i i 

3-P-G-32 

u 


tc 

3-P-G-33 

i c 


a 

3-P-G-34 

i i 


a 

3-P-G-35 

l i 


a 

3-P-G-36 

it 


a 

3-P-G-37 

i i 


a 

3-P-G-38 

11 


a 

3-P-G-39 

11 


a 

3-P-G-48 

The 

Texas Company. 

3-P-G-49 


i c 

a 

3-P-G-50 


a 

11 

3-P-G-51 


11 

(t 

3-P-G-52 


i t 

a 

3-P-G-53 


11 

a 

3-P-G-54 


it 

11 

3-P-G-55 


11 

11 

3-P-G-56 


11 

i c 

3-P-G-57 


a 

a 

3-P-G-58 


a 

a 

3-P-G-59 


tc 

cc 


11 
11 
a 
a 




FEDERAL RADIO COMMISSION. 


327 


I 


I 

i 
J 

| 

Applications for Construction Permits—Continued. 

File No. Name of appUcant. 

3-P-G-41 Phillips Petroleum Company. ! 

3-P-G-42 “ “ “ ! 

3-P-G-43 “ “ “ | 

i 

l-P-G-40 McCollum Geological Explorations^ Inc. 

' i 

found that it was not satisfied that public interest, conveni¬ 
ence or necessity would be served by granting any of said 
applications. The Commission therefore directed that the 
said applicants be respectively notified thereof, that a time 
and place be fixed for hearings on said applications, and 
that the applicants be respectively notified of the time and 
place of such hearings. 

! 

360 & 361 #168. j 

i 

Minutes of the Federal Radio Comniission. 

August 23, 1928—10 o ’clock A. M. 

i 

i 

Present: Commissioners Robinson, Chairman, Sykes, 
Caldwell, Pickard and Lafount, the General Counsel and 
the Secretary. 

Construction Permits. j 

I 

Motions were made in the following matters: 

Call 

File No. Name of applicant. Permit gralnted. letters. 

1-P-C-Z38 Mackay Radio & Tele¬ 
graph Company. July 25,1928 WSF 

1-P-C-Z39 Mackay Radio & Tele¬ 
graph Company. July 25,1928 WSL 

I 

that the name of the company holding the permits in each 
case be changed from “Commercial Wireless, Incorpo¬ 
rated^ to “Mackay Radio & Telegraph Company,” that in 
the case of Station WSL, the date of the required comple¬ 
tion of construction be extended from July lj, 1928, to Jan¬ 
uary 1,1929, and in the case of Station WSFj from Septem¬ 
ber 1, 1928, to January 1, 1929, and that in the case of Sta- 



328 


INTERCITY RADIO TELEGRAPH CO. ET AL. VS. 


tion WSF the power be increased from 250 to 1,000 watts. 
The Commission granted the motions and directed that the 
terms of the said construction permits be modified in ac¬ 
cordance therewith. 

362 #172. 


Minutes of the Federal Radio Commission . 

August 24, 1928—2 o’clock P. M. 

Present: Commissioners Robinson, Chairman, Sykes, 
Caldwell, Pickard and Lafount, the General Counsel and 
the Secretary. 

##*•••• 


363 Applications for Construction Permits. 


The Commission having examined the following applica¬ 
tions for construction permits: 


File No. 

1- P-C-l 

2- P-C-3 

l-P-C-4 

3- P-C-5 
l-P-C-6 

3-P-C-7 
3-P-C-8 

3- P-C-9 

4- P-C-10 

4- P-C-ll 
l-P-C-12 

1- P-C-13 

2- P-C-14 

3- P-C-15 
3-P-C-16 
3-P-C-17 
l-P-C-2 

5- P-C-19 

5-P-C-20 
3-P-C-21 
3-P-C-22 


Name of applicant. 


The Intercity Radio Telegraph Co. 


tt 

11 

11 

11 

11 

tt 

11 

11 

11 

11 

a 

11 

11 

11 

tt 

a 

11 

11 

tt 

tt 

l t 

11 

11 

tt 

tt 

tt 

tt 

tt 

a 

tt 

i t 

11 

11 

11 

a 

tt 

a 

tt 

11 

11 

tt 

tt 

a 

tt 

a 

11 

11 

tt 

11 

tt 

a 

a 

11 

a 

11 

tt 

11 

tt 

a 

tt 

tt 

tt 

tt 

tt 

11 

tt 

tt 

a 

tt 

a 

tt 

11 

11 

a 

it 


Industrial Radio Telegraph Co. 
Mackay Radio & Telegraph Co. 


a 

tt 

tt 

tt 

tt 

tt 

tt 

tt 

tt 

a 

tt 

tt 



FEDERAL RADIO COMMISSION”. 


329 



Application for Construction Permits—Continued. 


File No. 


Name of applicant. 


4-P-C-23 

Mackay Radio & Telegraph Co. 

5-P-C-24 

a 

L L 

i i 

L L 

4-P-C-25 

l l 

L l 

i i 

a 

5-P-C-26 

a 

l L 

Li 

il 

3-P-C-27 

li 

L L 

i i 

i l 

3-P-C-28 

L l 

11 

i l 

11 

3-P-C-29 

L L 

l i 

i i 

L L 

5-P-C-30 

L L 

L l 

l i 

i l 

5-P-C-31 

Li 

L l 

i l 

l L 

l-P-C-32 

L L 

L L 

i L 

i l 

5-P-C-33 

L L 

Li 

i l 

i L 

5-P-C-34 

l L 

Li 

Li 

L i 

5-P-C-35 

11 

L L 

i L 

l i 

3-P-C-38 

L i 

LI 

Li 

i l 

5-P-C-39 

Li 

11 

a 

i l 

3-P-C-47 

L L 

Li 

L i 

L l 

3-P-C-84 

Li 

i i 

i l 

L i 


364 


l-P-C-36 

l-P-C-40 

l-P-C-41 

5-P-C-42 

5-P-C-43 

5-P-C-44 

l-P-C-45 

l-P-C-46 

l-P-C-48 

3-P-C-49 

5-P-C-50 

3-P-C-51 

3-P-C-52 

3-P-C-53 

3-P-C-54 

3- P-C-55 

4- P-C-56 
4-P-C-57 
4-P-C-58 


Radio Corp. of America. 


l L 

It 

11 

L L 

ll 

11 

a 

ll 

a 

LL 

a 

a 

ll 

a 

it 

LL 

a 

n 

LL 

it 

it 

L l 

it 

it 

LL 

ii 

it 

ll 

n 

it 

ll 

a 

n 

ll 

n 

n 

ll 

ii 

it 

IL 

n 

it 

ll 

a 

it 

ll 

it 

it 

It 

it 

it 

It 

it 

it 




330 


INTERCITY RADIO TELEGRAPH CO. ET AL. VS. 


Aplications for Construction Permits—Continued. 

File No. Name of applicant. 


5-P-C-59 Radio Corp. of America. 


4-P-C-60 

C C 

c c 

cc 

4-P-C-61 

i C 

cc 

cc 

4-P-C-62 

C l 

c c 

c c 

4-P-C-63 

C C 

c c 

c c 

4-P-C-64 

C i 

c c 

cc 

4-P-C-65 

i C 

i c 

c c 

4-P-C-66 

l C 

c c 

c c 

4-P-C-67 

t C 

c c 

c c 

4-P-C-6S 

C C 

c c 

cc 

4-P-C-69 

C C 

c c 

c c 

4-P-C-70 

i i 

cc 

cc 

4-P-C-71 

i i 

cc 

c c 

2-P-C-72 

l i 

c c 

c c 

2-P-C-73 

6 i 

c c 

c c 

2-P-C-74 

a 

c c 

cc 

2-P-C-75 

cc 

cc 

cc 

l-P-C-76 

i t 

c c 

cc 

l-P-C-77 

i ( 

c c 

c c 

5-P-C-78 

( i 

cc 

c c 

5-P-C-79 

6 l 

cc 

cc 

5-P-C-80 

CC 

cc 

cc 

5-P-C-81 

c c 

cc 

cc 

5-P-C-82 

c c 


c c 

5-P-C-83 

c c 

cc 

c c 

5-P-C-85 

c c 

c c 

c c 

5-P-C-86 

cc 

cc 

cc 

5-P-C-87 

cc 

c c 

cc 

l-P-C-88 

cc 

cc 

cc 

365 

l-P-C-89 

Radio Corp. of America 

2-P-C-90 

c c 

cc 

cc 

l-P-C-91 

c c 

cc 

c c 

2-P-C-92 

c c 

cc 

cc 

l-P-C-93 

cc 

cc 

cc 

l-P-C-94 

cc 

cc 

cc 

l-P-C-95 

cc 

cc 

cc 


iO 10 iO 


FEDERAL RADIO COMMISSION. 


! 

Applications for Construction Permits—Continued. 


File No. 


Name of applicant. 


l-P-C-96 

Kadio Corp. 

of America. 

i 

l-P-C-97 

t i 

i t 

a 

i 

l-P-C-98 

i i 

( t 

<< 

i 

l-P-C-99 

L i 

11 

i t 

i 

! 

j 

l-P-C-100 

i i 

i i 

i i 

i 

l-P-C-101 

i t 

i i 

u 

i 

i 

l-P-C-102 

i i 

i i 

4 < 


l-P-C-103 

it 

n 

4 4 


l-P-C-104 

a 

i ( 

4 i 


l-P-C-105 

11 

< c 

t 4 


l-P-C-106 

i i 

i t 

4 4 


l-P-C-107 

i 6 

L l 



l-P-C-108 

l t 

4 t 

j 


l-P-C-109 

l i 

i l 

4 4 


l-P-C-110 

l i 

l l 

4 4 


1-P-C-lll 

l l 

t 6 

a 

l-P-C-112 

i i 

i i 

i i 

i 

4-P-C-116 

The Wireless Teleg. & Communication Co. 


l-P-C-117 

i t 

i t 

i t 


u I 

l-P-C-118 

i i 

i i 

i { 


i t 

4-P-C-119 

i i 

it 

it 


u 

l-P-C-525 

t i 

i i 

i l 


t i 

4-P-C-526 

t l 

i i 

i i 


11 

2-P-C-560 

i i 

i l 

l i 


t i 

l-P-C-561 

i i 

i l 

i i 


i l j 

4-P-C-562 

i i 

i i 

i i 


i t | 

4-P-C-120 

Universal 

Wireless Commun. Co. Inc: 

4-P-C-121 

c < 


a 

i t 

“ ! 

4-P-C-122 

< t 


a 

a 

a 

i 

4-P-C-123 

i i 


t i 

i i 

a 

j 

4-P-C-124 

11 


11 

i i 

i i 

i 

i 

3-P-C-125 

i t 


11 

t i 

t i 

3-P-C-126 

11 


t i 

11 

11 

j 

5-P-C-127 

11 


11 

t i 

a 

i 

5-P-C-128 

i c 


a 

a 

a 

i 

5-P-C-129 

t l 


a 

a 

a 

z v> n i Qn 

a 


a 

a 

u 


10—4987a 







LTD CO ID rH 


332 


INTERCITY RADIO TELEGRAPH CO. ET AL. VS. 


Application for Construction Permits—Continued. 


366 

File No. 

5-P-C-131 
5-P-C-132 
5-P-C-133 
5-P-C-134 
3-P-C-135 
3-P-C-136 
3-P-C-137 
3-P-C-138 
3-P-C-139 
3-P-C-140 
3-P-C-141 
3-P-C-142 
3-P-C-143 
5-P-C-144 
5-P-C-145 
-P-C-146 
-P-C-147 
-P-C-148 
-P-C-149 
2-P-C-150 
2-P-C-151 

2- P-C-152 
l-P-C-153 
l-P-C-154 
l-P-C-155 
l-P-C-156 
l-P-C-157 
l-P-C-158 
l-P-C-159 
5-P-C-160 
5-P-C-161 
5-P-C-162 

3- P-C-163 
3-P-C-164 
3-P-C-165 
3-P-C-166 
l-P-C-167 


Name of applicant. 

Universal Wireless Communication Co. Inc. 


tt 

11 

11 

tt 

i t 

11 

t i 

11 

t i 

11 

11 

11 

tt 

11 

11 

t i 

a 

11 

11 

11 

l i 

11 

i i 

11 

tt 

tt 

t i 

i t 

i i 

11 

t i 

11 

t i 

11 

11 

11 

a 

11 

a 

t i 

tt 

11 

11 

11 

i i 

11 

11 

i t 

i i 

11 

11 

11 

t i 

11 

11 

11 

t i 

11 

11 

11 

a 

11 

11 

11 

a 

11 

11 

t i 

i i 

11 

11 

11 

i i 

11 

11 

11 

a 

11 

11 

11 

i i 

11 

11 

i t 

t i 

11 

i t 

t i 

tt 

11 

11 

11 

11 

11 

11 

i t 

i t 

tt 

t i 

tt 

a 

11 

11 

11 

tt 

11 

t i 

11 

11 

11 

11 

11 

11 

11 

11 

11 

11 

11 

i t 

11 

11 

11 

11 

11 

11 

11 

11 

i t 

t i 

11 

i i 

tt 

11 

11 

i t 

11 

a 

11 

11 

11 

11 

tt 

tt 

tt 


FEDERAL RADIO COMMISSION. 


333 


Application for Construction Permits—Continued. 


File No. 

l-P-C-168 


Name of applicant. 

J 

Universal Wireless Communication Co. Inc. 


l-P-C-169 

i t 

£ £ 

i £ 

£ £ 

l-P-C-170 

t i 

£ £ 

£ £ 

£ £ 

l-P-C-171 

i i 

£ £ 

£ £ 

£ £ 

l-P-C-172 

i i 

£ £ 

£ £ 

£ £ 

l-P-C-173 

£ c 

£ £ 


£ £ 

l-P-C-174 

£ £ 

£ £ 

<< 

£ £ 

l-P-C-175 

£ c 

£ £ 

££ 

££ 

l-P-C-176 

£ £ 

£ £ 

£ £ 

£ £ 

l-P-C-177 

£ £ 

£ £ 

£ £ 

££ 

l-P-C-178 

a 

£ £ 

£ £ 

££ 

5-P-C-179 

£ £ 

£ £ 

<< 

£ £ 

367 





l-P-C-180 

i 

Universal Wireless Communication Cc 

5-P-C-181 

£ L 

£ £ 

£ £ 

£ £ 

5-P-C-182 

t i 

£ £ 


£ £ 

5-P-C-183 

i i 

£ £ 


£ £ 

3-P-C-184 

i 6 

£ £ 

£ £ 

£ £ 

l-P-C-185 

i i 

£ £ 

£ £ 

£ £ 

l-P-C-186 

i l 

£ £ 

£ £ 

£ £ 

l-P-C-187 

l i 

£ £ 

£ £ 

£ £ 

2-P-C-188 

i i 

£ £ 

£ £ 

£ £ 

l-P-C-189 

l i 

£ £ 

£ £ 

£ £ 

2-P-C-190 

i l 

£ £ 

£ £ 

£ £ 

2-P-C-191 

< i 

£ £ 

£ £ 

£ £ 

2-P-C-192 

i i 

£ £ 

£ £ 

££ 

l-P-C-193 

c c 

££ 

£ £ 

££ 

l-P-C-194 

t £ 

£ £ 

£ £ 

£ £ 

l-P-C-195 

£ £ 

£ £ 

£ £ 

£ £ 

l-P-C-196 

£ £ 

£ £ 

£ £ 

£ £ 

2-P-C-197 

£ £ 

£ £ 

£ £ 


l-P-C-198 

£ £ 

£ £ 

£ £ 

£ £ 

l-P-C-199 

£ £ 

£ £ 

£ £ 

£ £ 

2-P-C-200 

£ £ 

£ £ 

£ £ 

£ £ 

2-P-C-201 

££ 

£ £ 

£ £ 

££ 

2-P-C-202 

£ £ 

££ 

££ 

£ £ 

0 t> n 

(6 

££ 

a 




334 


INTERCITY RADIO TELEGRAPH CO. ET AL. YS. 


Applications for Construction Permits—Continued. 


File No. 

2-P-C-204 

4-P-C-205 

4-P-C-20G 

4-P-C-207 

4-P-C-208 

4-P-C-209 

4-P-C-210 

4-P-C-211 

4-P-C-212 

4-P-C-213 

4- P-C-214 

5- P-C-215 

4- P-C-216 

5- P-C-217 
5-P-C-218 
5-P-C-219 
4-P-C-220 
4-P-C-221 
4-P-C-222 
4-P-C-223 
4-P-C-224 

4- P-C-225 
368 

5- P-C-555 
5-P-C-556 
5-P-C-557 
l-P-C-524 
5-P-C-564 
5-P-C-565 
5-P-C-566 


Name of applicant. 

Universal Wireless Communication Co. Inc. 


44 

4 i 

4 4 

4 4 

4 4 

i i 

4 4 

4 4 

a 

6i 

4 4 

4 4 

t c 

i i 

4 4 

4 4 

i i 

i 4 

44 

4 4 

c i 

4 4 

4 4 

4 4 

t i 

4 4 

4 4 

4 4 

L 4 

4 4 

4 4 

4 4 

4 4 

4 4 

4 4 

4 4 

4 4 

4 4 

4 4 

4 4 

4 4 

4 4 

4 4 

4 4 

4 4 

4 4 

4 4 

4 4 

4 4 

4 4 

4 4 

4 4 

4 4 

4 4 

4 4 

4 4 

4 4 

4 4 

4 4 

44 

4 4 

4 4 

4 4 

4 4 

4 4 

4 4 

4 4 

4 4 

4 l 

4 4 

4 4 

4 4 

i L 

4 4 

4 4 

4 4 

i l 

4 4 

4 4 

4 4 

it 

4 4 

4 4 

4 4 

Pacific Communications Svndicate. 

* 

t i n a 


i i 

4 4 

4 4 


The Robert Dollar Company. 

t i a a 


i i 

4 4 

4 4 


i i 

4 4 

4 4 



found that it was not satisfied that public interest, con¬ 
venience or necessity would be served by granting any of 
said applications. The Commission therefore directed that 
the said applicants be respectively notified thereof, that a 
time and place be fixed for hearings on said applications, 
and that the applicants be respectively notified of the time 
and place of such hearings. 

CARL II. BUTMAN, 

CARL H. BUTMAN, 

Secretary . 


FEDERAL RADIO COMMISSION. 


335 


369 #194. ! 

Minutes of the Federal Radio Commission. 

| 

August 25, 1928—11 o’dlock a. m. 

Present: Commissioners Robinson, Chairman, Sykes, 
Caldwell, Pickard and Lafount; the Secretary,; the General 
Counsel, Captain Hooper and Captain Hill. 

The commission met with representatives of the Dominion 
of Canada and the Republic of Cuba named injthe minutes 
for the session of the Commission held at 2:30 O’clock p. m., 
on August 20, 1928. The Commission’s representatives 
designated at that session to serve on a sub-cjommittee of 
the Conference, communicated to the Conference a pre¬ 
liminary report prepared by the sub-committee;. The Com¬ 
mission agreed with the representatives of Canada and 
Cuba as follows: 

1. Parties to the Conference will, for the period of 90 
days from this date, accept and abide by the provisions con¬ 
tained in Paragraph 2 of said preliminary Ireport with 
respect to mobile stations. 

2. Parties to the Conference will not, for the jperiod of 90 
days from this date, issue any licenses to fixed Rations that 
will in any way prejudice the future adoption! of the plan 
contained in the preliminary report. 

The Commission agreed with the representatives of 
Canada and Cuba that there should be a further conference 
to consider the matters covered in the preliminary report 
at some date approximated 90 davs from this date. 

CARL H. BUTMAN, 

Secretary. 

i 

i 

370 (148.) 

! 

Minutes of the Federal Radio Commission. 

August 29, 1928—3 o’clock p. m. 

Present: Commissioners Robinson, Chairifian, Sykes, 
Caldwell, Pickard and Lafount, the General Counsel and 
the Secretary. 

i 

! 



336 


INTERCITY RADIO TELEGRAPH CO. ET AL. VS. 


Hearing Docket. 


The Commission having considered the evidence and the 
arguments presented to it in the following case, heretofore 
heard and taken under advisement: 


Docket No. Applicant. 

179 Bull Insular Line Inc. 


Nature of application. 

Construction Permit. 


found that public interest, convenience or necessity would 
not be served by granting said application, and directed 
that an order be entered forthwith, denying said applica¬ 
tion. 

Applications for Modification of License. 

The Commission having examined the following applica¬ 
tions for modification of license. 

File number. Name of applicant. 

1- M-C-l Intercity Radio Telegraph Company. 

2- M-C-2 “ “ 

2-M-C-3 

4- M-C-4 

found that public interest, convenience or necessity would 
be served by the granting of each of said applications. The 
Commission therefore diercted that modified licenses be 
issued in accordance with each of said application. 

i 

Application for Construction Permits. 

The Commission having examined the following applica¬ 
tions for construction permits. 

371 

File number. Name of applicant. 

2-P-C-114 Tidewater Wireless Telegraph Company. 

2- P-C-115 

l-P-C-226 1 Albany Evening Union Company. 
l-P-C-227 1 Anderson, Clayton & Company. 

5- P-C-22S 
l-P-C-229 
5-P-C-230 

3- P-C-231 

5-P-C-232 “ “ " 



I 


FEDERAL RADIO COMMISSION. 

! 

I 

Application for Construction Permits—Continued. 

File number. Name of applicant. 


5-P-C-233 

Armour & Company 


3-P-C-234 

n 

u 


4-P-C-235 

a 

a 


4-P-C-236 

a 

a 


4-P-C-237 

tt 

a 


4-P-C-238 

a 

a 


4-P-C-239 

a 

a 


4-P-C-240 

a 

11 


4-P-C-241 

t i 

a 


4-P-C-242 

tt 

a 


2-P-C-243 

tt 

i i 


l-P-C-244 

t t 

a 


l-P-C-245 

1t 

a 


l-P-C-246 

tt 

it 


2-P-C-247 

a 

a 


l-P-C-249 

i t 

tt 


5-P-C-248 Caw Packing 

Company. 


l-P-C-251 

Baltimore Publishing Company 

372 

l-P-C-252 

Consolidated Press Association. 

2-P-C-253 

11 

11 

it 

2-P-C-254 

i i 

a 

tt 

2-P-C-255 

a 

a 

tt 

2-P-C-256 

a 

tt 

tt 

2-P-C-257 

a 

a 

tt 

l-P-C-258 

i t 

a 

tt 

l-P-C-259 

i i 

tt 

tt 

l-P-C-260 

u 

a 

tt 

2-P-C-261 

a 

tt 

tt 

2-P-C-262 

i t 

tt 

a 

2-P-C-263 

a 

11 

tt 

2-P-C-264 

u 

11 

a 

l-P-C-265 

a 

11 

tt 

2-P-C-266 

a 

11 

tt 

2-P-C-267 

a 

tt 

it 

2-P-C-268 

a 

11 

tt 

4-P-C-269 

a 

a 

a 

l-P-C-270 

a 

tt 

tt 


337 






338 INTERCITY RADIO TELEGRAPH CO. ET AL. VS. 

Application for Construction Permits—Continued. 


File number. 


Name of applicant. 


4-P-C-271 

Consolidated Press Association. 

2-P-C-272 

66 

6 6 

66 

3-P-C-273 

66 

6 6 

66 

4-P-C-274 

66 

6 6 

66 

4-P-C-275 

66 

66 

6 6 

5-P-C-276 

66 

6 6 

66 

4-P-C-277 

66 

66 

6 6 

4-P-C-278 

66 

6 6 

66 

373 




4-P-C-279 

Consolidated Press Association 

4-P-C-280 

66 

66 

6 6 

4-P-C-281 

6 6 

6 6 

66 

4-P-C-282 

66 

66 

6 6 

5-P-C-283 

6 6 

6 6 

66 

5-P-C-284 

66 

6 6 

6 6 

5-P-C-285 

66 

6 6 

66 

5-P-C-286 

66 

66 

6 6 

5-P-C-287 

66 

6 6 

66 

5-P-C-288 

66 

66 

66 

l-P-C-289 

6 6 

6 6 

66 

l-P-C-290 

66 

66 

6 6 

l-P-C-291 

6 6 

6 6 

66 

l-P-C-292 

66 

66 

66 

l-P-C-293 

6 6 

66 

66 

2-P-C-294 

6 6 

66 

66 

2-P-C-295 

66 

66 

66 

2-P-C-296 

66 

66 

66 

l-P-C-297 

66 

66 

6 6 

l-P-C-298 

66 

6 6 

66 

l-P-C-299 

66 

66 

6 t 

l-P-C-300 

6 6 

6 6 

66 

4-P-C-301 

Corn Products Refining 

Company. 

4-P-C-302 

6 6 

6 6 6 6 

6 6 

4-P-C-303 

66 

6 6 6 6 

6 6 

l-P-C-304 

66 

6 6 6 6 

66 

374 




4-P-C-305 

Cudahy Packing Company. 

4-P-C-306 

66 

6 6 6 6 


l-P-C-307 

66 

6 6 6 6 


4-P-C-308 

66 

6 6 66 




FEDERAL RADIO COMMISSION. 


339 


Application for Construction Permits—Continued. 


File number. 

1- P-C-309 
3-P-C-310 
3-P-C-311 

2- P-C-312 

2- P-C-313 

3- P-C-314 

4- P-C-315 

5- P-C-316 
5-P-C-317 
l-P-C-318 

1- P-C-319 
5-P-C-320 
5-P-C-321 

2- P-C-322 
4-P-C-323 
l-P-C-324 
l-P-C-325 

4- P-C-327 

5- P-C-328 

3- P-C-329 
l-P-C-330 
5-P-C-331 

375 

l-P-C-332 

4- P-C-333 
3-P-C-334 

5- P-C-335 

1- P-C-337 

2- P-C-338 
5-P-C-339 

3- P-C-340 

2- P-C-341 

3- P-C-342 
5-P-C-343 
5-P-C-344 
5-P-C-345 
l-P-C-346 
l-P-C-347 


Name of applicant. 

DeForest Radio Company. 

J. E. Dadswell. 

J. E. Dadswell. 

The Detroit Edison Company. 


i i 


i 6 


U 


t C 


i 6 
C i 


i i 


(( 


Evening* Wisconsin Company, Inc, 
Examiner Printing Company. 


(( 


i i 


i < 


Firestone Cotton Mills. 

Firestone Footwear Company. 

Firestone Tire & Rubber Co. of California. 
Goodyear Tire & Rubber Co. of California. 


11 


i c 


i i 


t i 


a 


Illinois Publishing & Printing Coinpany. 
Industrial Radio Telegraph Comphny. 


6 i 


i i 


i < 


6 i 


International News Service, Inc. 


<. i 
11 
t i 
C i 


i l 
i l 
i i 
l i 


i i 
i C 

i c 
a 


i t 


t c 


i i 


i t 


Frazier Jelke & Company. 

u a a 

I. R. Jones. 

The Light Publishing Company. 
Geo. H. McFadden & Bro. 

a a a 


i i 
1t 
11 
a 

i t 


t ( 
a 
(i 
tt 
i i 


t c 
i i 

u 

t i 
i 6 


Geo. H. McFadden & Bro’s. Agency. 

u u a j 


L t 
l i 

a 


l i 


a 


l 6 
i i 


i i > 

i 

i i i 





340 


INTERCITY RADIO TELEGRAPH CO. ET AL. VS. 


Application for Construction Permits—Continued. 


File number. 

l-P-C-348 

l-P-C-349 

4-P-C-350 

l-P-C-351 

l-P-C-352 

4-P-C-353 

4- P-C-354 
l-P-C-356 
l-P-C-357 
l-P-C-358 
l-P-C-359 
l-P-C-360 

376 

3-P-C-361 

3-P-C-362 

5- P-C-363 
5-P-C-364 
l-P-C-365 

3- P-C-366 
5-P-C-367 
l-P-C-368 
l-P-C-369 
l-P-C-370 
l-P-C-371 

5-P-C-373 

l-P-C-374 

1- P-C-375 
5-P-C-376 
5-P-C-378 

2- P-C-379 

4- P-C-380 

5- P-C-381 
4-P-C-382 
4-P-C-383 
4-P-C-384 
4-P-C-385 


Name of applicant. 

The Monson Maine Slate Company. 

a a a a a 


Montgomery Ward & Company, Inc. 

a a a a 


i t 
i t 
i t 


i i 
t i 

c c 


it 
i i 
11 


i < 

a 

a 


New York American, Inc. 
New York Herald Tribune. 
New York Times. 

a a a 


Northeastern Publishing Company, Inc. 


Oklahoma Gas 

a a 

& Electric Company. 

i i a 

E. A. Pierce & Company. 

a a a a 

a a 

i t 

i i 

a a 

11 

t i 

a a 

a 

a 

a a 

i i 

11 

a a 

a 

11 

a a 

i i 

i i 


Joseph Pierson, Chairman American 
Publishers Committee. 

Post Intelligencer Company. 

Public Service Electric & Gas Company. 

a a a a a 

Kobinson, Mach. & Forge Works. 

Sears, Roebuck & Company. 

n it a 

a a a 

Swift & Company. 

a a 

ti a 

a a 

a a 


r 


i-Q i-O tH lO H 10 lO iQ 


FEDERAL RADIO COMMISSION. 


i c 
i i 
t i 
t i 


i i 
i i 
i i 

t c 


i i 
L C 
l i 
i i 


I 


L i 

“j 

“j 

“! 


Application for Construction Permits—Continued. 

File No. Name of applicant. 

3-P-C-387 The Texas Company. 

3- P-C-388 “ “ “ 

5-P-C-389 The Times-Mirror Company. 

(Publishers of Los Angeles Times) 

377 

2- P-C-390 Times Publishing Company. 

4- P-C-391 The Tribune Company. 

-P-C-392 Union Lumber Company. 

-P-C-393 United Artists Corporation. ! 

-P-C-394 “ “ “ I 

-P-C-395 Universal Pictures Company, Inc*. 

-P-C-396 
-P-C-397 
-P-C-567 
-P-C-568 

-P-C-398 United Press Associations. 

-P-C-399 “ “ “ | 

-P-C-400 Victor Talking Machine Company. 

-P-C-401 "Washington Times Co. ! 

-P-C-402 West Indies Radio Telegraph Association. 
-P-C-403 

-P-C-404 West Penn Power Company. 

-P-C-405 “ “ “ “ 

-P-C-406 Wilson & Company. 

-P-C-407 “ “ 

-P-C-408 United Press Association. 

-P-C-409 Examiner Printing Company. 

-P-C-522 L. Elden Smith. 

5- P-C-523 “ 

3- P-C-527 Anderson-Prichard Oil Corp. 

4- P-C-528 Iowa-Nebraska Light & Power Compan}^ 
4-P-C-529 

3-P-C-530 Anderson-Prichard Oil Corp. 

378 


i t 


11 


5-P-C-531 Raymond Concrete Pile Compahv. 
5-P-C-532 “ “ “ “ | 

5-P-C-534 Wilmington Transportation Company. 







342 


INTERCITY RADIO TELEGRAPH CO. ET AL. VS. 


Application for Construction Permits—Continued. 

File No. 

5-P-C-535 
3-P-C-537 
3-P-C-538 

3- P-C-539 

4- P-C-540 

2- P-C-541 

1- P-C-544 

3- P-C-545 

4- P-C-546 
4-P-C-559 

4-P-C-563 
3-P-C-577 
3-P-C-578 

2- P-C-579 

found that it was not satisfied that public interest, con¬ 
venience or necessity would be served by granting anv of 
said applications. The Commission therefore directed that 
the said applicants be respectively notified thereof, that a 
time and place be fixed for hearings on said applications, 
and that the applicants be respectively notified of the time 
and place of such hearings. 

The Commission having examined the following appli¬ 
cations for construction permits, 

File number. Name of applicant. 

3- P-G-64 Geophysical Exploration Company. 

3-P-G-65 “ “ “ 

3-P-G-66 

3-P-G-67 

3-P-G-68 

379 

3-P-G-69 Geophysical Research Corporation. 

3-P-G-70 “ 

3-P-G-71 

found that it was not satisfied that public interest, con¬ 
venience or necessity would be served by granting any of 


Name of applicant. 

Hawaiian Pineapple Company, Ltd. 
Florida Public Service Company. 

a a a a 

a a a a 

Delco-Remy Corp. 

a a 

John L. Fav. 

Phillips Petroleum Company. 

The C. Reiss Coal Company. 

Great Lakes Dredge & Dock Company. 
Chicago Federation of Labor. 

Burford Oil Company. 

Ct a a 

Ford Motor Company. 



FEDERAL RADIO COMMISSION. 


343 


said applications. The Commission therefore directed that 
the said applicants be respectively notified I thereof, that a 
time and place be fixed for hearings on said applications, 
and that the applicants be respectively notified of the time 
and place of such hearings. 

The Commission having examined the following applica¬ 
tion for construction permit, 

File number. Name of applicant. 

5-P-C-510 Pewabic Mining and Milling Coinpany. 

found that it was not satisfied that public interest, con¬ 
venience or necessity would be served by the granting of 
said application. The Commission therefoije directed that 
the said applicant be notified thereof, that aj time and place 
be fixed for hearing on said application and that the appli¬ 
cant be notified of the time and place of such hearing. 

The Commission having examined the following applica¬ 
tions for construction permits, 

File number. Name of applicant. 

5-P-E-29 Southern Pacific Company. 

5-P-E-55 Nightingale Radios, Inc. 

5-P-E-56 Charles L. Watson & Ralph C. Cray. 
l-P-E-57 The Baltimore Radio Show, Inc.j 
l-P-E-58 Walter Charles Van Brandt. I 

found that public interest, convenience or necessity would 
be served by the granting of each of said applications. The 
Commission therefore directed that construction permits be 
issued to each of said applicants in accordance with said 
applications. * * * 

CARL H. BUTMAN, 

Secretary. 

380 #173. 

Minutes of the Federal Radio Comikission. 

| 

August 30,1928—10 o’clock a. m. 

Present: Commissioners Robinson, Chairman, Sykes, 
Caldwell, Pickard, and LaFount, the General Counsel and 
the Secretary. 





344 


INTERCITY RADIO TELEGRAPH CO. ET AL. VS. 


Application for Licenses. 

The Commission having- examined the following applica¬ 
tions for radio station licenses 
File number. 

l-L-C-71 
l-L-C-293 
l-L-C-294 
5-L-C-297 
5-L-C-298 
l-L-C-299 

found that public interest, convenience or necessity would 
be served by the granting of said applications. The Com¬ 
mission therefore directed that radio station licenses be 
issued to said applicant in accordance with said applica¬ 
tions. 

381 Application for Modification of License. 

The Commission having examined the following applica¬ 
tion for modification of radio station license 

File number. Name of applicant. 

5-L-C-149 Hawaiian Pineapple Company. 

found that public interest, convenience or necessity would 
be served by the granting of said application. The Com¬ 
mission therefore directed that a modified license be issued 
in accordance with said application, subject to the assign¬ 
ment of such frequencies as the Commission deems to be in 
the interest, convenience or necessity of the public. 

CARL H. BUTMAN, 

CARL H. BUTMAN, 

W. C. Secretary. 

382 #198. 

Minutes of Federal Radio Commission. 

September G, 1928—2:30 o’clock p. m. 

Present: Commissioners Sykes, Acting Chairman, Cald- 
wel-, Pickard and LaFount, the Secretary, the Chief Engi¬ 
neer, Captain Hill and the General Counsel. 


Name of applicant. 

Radio Corporation of America. 


i i 

i i 

t t 

i i 

i i 

6 i 

l i 

a 

it 

i 6 

i t 

l i 

it 

i i 

a 


federal radio commission. 


345 


I 


Miscellaneous 

The Commission authorized Commander Cjraven to pro¬ 
ceed to Cincinnati and to East Pittsburgh to j study and re¬ 
port developments in high-frequency receiving sets. 

i 

i 

i 

Applications for Renewal of Licenses. 

The Commission having examined the following applica¬ 
tions for renewal of radio station licenses, 

File number. 

3- L-C-216 

4- L-C-215 
3-L-C-214 

3-L-C-194 
3-L-C-195 

3- L-C-196 

4- L-C-161 

5- L-C-156 
5-L-C-157 
2-L-C-159 
2-L-C-158 

2- L-C-160 

3- L-C-174 
3-L-C-175 

3-L-C-154 
3-L-C-153 

3-L-C-222 
3-L-C-224 
3-L-C-223 

found that it was not satisfied that public interest, conveni¬ 
ence or necessity would be served by the granting of said 
applications. The Commission therefore directed that the 
said applicants be notified thereof, that a timfe and place be 
fixed for hearing on said applications, and that the appli¬ 
cants be notified of the time and place of such hearing. 


Name of applicant. 

Skelly Oil Company. 


t i 


11 


t t 


i t 


l i 


a 


Phillips Petroleum Co. 


l i 


i < 


11 


i t 


Illinois Pipe Line Co. 

a a a 


(( 
(( 
(t 

a 


i i 
i i 
1t 
i i 


t t 

a 
t c 
11 


Marland Pipe Line Co. 

a a 


11 


Humble Pipe Line Co. 

a 


a a 


Texas Pipe Line Co. 


11 


a a 


i t 


a it 




346 


INTERCITY RADIO TELEGRAPH CO. ET AL. VS. 


383 Application for Construction Permit 

The Commission having examined the following applica¬ 
tion for construction permit, 

File number. Name of applicant. 

X-P-C-581 Mackay Radio and Telegraph Co. 

found that public interest, convenience or necessity would 
be served by the granting of said application. The Com¬ 
mission therefore directed that construction permit be is¬ 
sued to said applicant in accordance with said application. 
******* 

CARL H. BUTMAN, 

CARL H. BUTMAN, 

W. C. Secretary. 

384 #254. 

Minutes of the Federal Radio Commission. 

(Confidential—Subject to Corrections.) 

September 12, 1928—at 10 o’clock. 

Present: Commissioners Robinson, Chairman, Sykes, 
Caldwell, Pickard and Lafount and the General Counsel. 

Miscellaneous. 

A motion was made that each of the Commissioners, the 
General Counsel and the Chief Engineer be authorized to 
visit New York during the week commencing September 
16, 1928, to meet with various broadcasters in regard to 
the new allocation. The Commisison granted the motion. 
******* 

Application for Modification of Licenses. 

The Commission having examined the following appli¬ 
cations for modification of radio station licenses, 

File No. Name of applicant. 

l-M-C-7 Radio Corporation of America. 
l-M-C-8 44 44 44 44 

l-M-C-9 

found that public interest, convenience or necessity would 
be served by the granting of said applications. The Com- 



FEDERAL RADIO COMMISSION. 


347 


mission therefore directed that modified licenses he issued 
to said applicant in accordance with said applications. 

I 

#*«•##* 

CARL H. BUTMAN, 

Secretary. 

385 #255. ! 

i 

Minutes of the Federal Radio Commission. 

September 24, 1928—10.00 o^clock a. m. 

Present: Commissioners Robinson, Chairman, Sykes, 
Caldwell, Pickard and Lafount. 

Construction Permits. 

A motion was made in the following matters: 

. i 

File 

number Name of applicant. 1 Permit granted. 

1-P-C-Z- 1 Joseph Pierson, Trustee.|. August 1, 1928. 

American Publishers Committee.!. “ 

1-P-C-Z- 2 “ “ “ i. 

1-P-C-Z- 3 “ “ “ j. 

1-P-C-Z- 4 “ “ “ i. 

1-P-C-Z- 5 “ “ “ !. 

1-P-C-Z- 6 “ “ “ I. 

1-P-C-Z- 7 “ “ “ .. 

1-P-C-Z- 8 “ “ “ !. 

1- P-C-Z- 9 “ “ “ L 

5-P-C-Z-lO “ “ “ .. 

5-P-C-Z-ll “ “ “ !. 

5-P-C-Z-12 “ “ “ j. 

4-P-C-Z-13 “ “ “ i. 

4-P-C-Z-14 “ “ “ |. 

4-P-C-Z-15 “ “ “ i. 

2- P-C-Z-16 “ “ “ j. 

that the plan of organization originally directed by the 
Commission be modified so as to permit the organization 
of several individual corporations rather than one. The 
Commission took the motion under advisement and di¬ 
rected the applicants to make a detailed presentation of 
their modified plan in writing, said presentation to be 
made prior to November 1, 1928, and further extended the 
time within which applicants are to comply with the con- 

i 

11—4987a 

i 



























348 


INTERCITY RADIO TELEGRAPH CO. ET AL. VS. 


ditions attached to said construction permits for a period 
of 31 days to November 1, 1928. 

CARL H. BUTMAN, 

Secretary. 

386 #241. 


Minutes of the Federal Radio Commission. 

i 

September 25, 1928—10 o’clock a. m. 

Present: Commissioners Robinson, Chairman, Sykes, 
Caldwell, Pickard and Lafount; the General Counsel, As¬ 
sistant Counsel Hughes and Pratt; the Chief Engineer, 
Lieut. Comdr. Craven and the Secretary. 


Hearing Docket. 


Hearings were held before the Commission in the fol¬ 
lowing cases: 


Docket 

No. 


Applicant. 


Nature 

of application. 


202 Hawaiian Pineapple Co. 

191 Montgomery Ward & Co. 

195 J. Pierson, Chairman. 

Amer. Publishers Committee. 

190 Consolidated Press Assn. 

194 New York Herald-Tribune. 

197 International News Service. 

211 Ill. Printing & Publishing Co. 

215 New York Times. 

185 Universal Wireless Commun. Co., Inc 

199 Tidewater Wireless Teleg. Co. 

188 Cudahy Packing Company. 

218 Mackay Radio & Teleg. Co. 

201 Anderson, Clayton & Co. 

222 The Times Mirror Co. 

223 Examiner Printing Co. 

224 Albany Evening Union Co. 

225 Baltimore Publishing Co.. 

226 Evening Wisconsin Co. 

227 The Light Publishing Co.. 

228 New York American.. 

229 Northwestern Publishing Co., Inc._ 

230 Post Intelligencer Co. 

231 Times Publishing Co. 

232 The Tribune Co. 

233 Washington Times Co. 

234 Atlanta Georgian American. 

235 Los Angeles Examiner. 

236 Pitt Publishing Co. 

237 Rochester News Corporation. 

238 Syracuse Newspaper, Inc. 

239 United Press Associations. 


Construction Permit. 


44 

44 

u 

44 

44 

44 

44 

44 

44 

44 

44 

44 

44 

44 

44 

44 

44 

44 

44 

44 

44 

44 

44 

44 

44 

44 

44 

44 

44 

44 

44 

44 

44 

44 

44 

44 

44 

44 

44 

44 

44 

44 

44 

44 

44 

44 

44 

44 

44 

44 

44 

44 

44 

44 

44 

44 

44 

44 

44 

44 

44 

44 


































FEDERAL RADIO COMMISSION 


349 


387 In Docket Numbers 195, 190, 194, 197,! 211, 215, 222, 
223, 224, 225, 226, 227, 228, 229, 230, 1231, 232, 233, 
234, 235, 236, 237, 238, 239, the applicants, after present¬ 
ing their cases in part, moved for leave to niake a further 
presentation on September 27, 1928, if the occasion should 
arise therefor, and further moved for leave t6 file affidavits 
in support of their applications at a later date. The Com¬ 
mission granted both motions, and directed -that such affi¬ 
davits be filed prior to November 1, 1928. Subject to said 
motions thus granted, all of the above-mentioned cases 
were continued to a later date to be set by thp Commission, 
for the purpose mainly of hearing evidence of engineering 
experts on matters pertinent to these and all similar ap¬ 
plications and to allow time for further progress in nego¬ 
tiations now pending for allocation oT the short-wave band 
of 1500-6000 kc/s. between the nations of Nprth America. 
The General Counsel withdrew during the hearing and con¬ 
sideration of applications and motions made in Docket Nos. 
195, 190, 194, 197, 211, 215, 222, 223, 224, 225j 226, 227, 228, 
229, 230, 231, 232, 233, 234, 235, 236, 237, 23S\ 239. 


* 


* 


# 


CARL H.i BUTMAN. 


388 


#239. 


Minutes of the Federal Radio Commission. 

September 26,1928—10 o’clock A. M. 

Present: Commissioners Robinson, Chairman; Sykes, 
Caldwell, Pickard and Lafount; the General Counsel, Com¬ 
mander Craven and the Secretary. 

i 

Hearing Docket. 

Hearings were held before the Commission in the follow¬ 
ing cases: 

Docket Nature 

No. Applicant. of application. 

212 Radio Corp. of America. Construction Permit. 

186 Intercity Radio Teleg. Co. “ “ 

Both of said cases were continued to a later; date to be set 
by the Commission, for the purpose mainly of hearing evi¬ 
dence of engineering experts on matters pertinent to these 
and all similar applications, etc. 





350 


INTERCITY RADIO TELEGRAPH CO. ET AL. VS. 


Applications for License. 

The Commission having- examined the following applica¬ 
tion: 

File No. Applicant. Nature of application. 

l-L-C-327 New York Times Co. License for mobile service. 

found that public interest, convenience and necessity would 
be served by the granting of said application for use of 
frequencies recommended by the Engineering Division and 
directed that a license be issued in accordance with said 
recommendation. 

******* 

389 September 26, 1928—10 o’clock A. M. 


Applications for Licenses. 

The Commission having examined the following applica¬ 
tion for license for ship station: 

File Can Date 

number, letter. Name of company. Name of vessel. of license. 

K-K-485 KIMZ 1 U. S. S. B. E. F. Corp. Pipestone County Sept. 26, 192S 

found that public interest, convenience or necessity would 
be served by the granting of said application and directed 
that a license be issued to said applicant in accordance with 
said application. 

CARL H. BUTMAN, 

Secretary. 

390 #242. 

Minutes of the Federal Radio Commission. 

September 27, 1928—10 o’clock A. M. 

Present: Commissioners Robinson, Chairman; Sykes, 
Caldwell, Pickard and Laf ount and Assistant Counsel Pratt. 


Hearing Docket. 


Hearings were held before the Commission in the fol¬ 
lowing cases: 

Docket Nature 

number. Applicant. of application. 


184 The Detroit Edison Co.Construction Permit. 

200 Public Service, Electric & Gas Company. “ “ 

217 West Penn Power Co. “ “ 






FEDERAL RADIO COMMISSION. 


351 


At the conclusion of the hearings all of said c4ses were con¬ 
tinued to a later date to be set by the Commission, for the 
purpose mainly of hearing evidence of engineering experts 
on matters pertinent to these and all similar applications 
and to allow time for further progress in negotiations now 
pending for allocation of the short-wave band of 1,500-6,000 
kilocycles, between the nations of North America. 

j 

####*#* 


CARL H. BUTMAN, 

Secretary. 

391 #243. 

i 

Minutes of the Federal Radio Commission. 

i 

i 

September 27, 1928—2:30 P. M. 

I 

Present: Commissioners Robinson, Chairman; Sykes, 
Caldwell, and Pickard. 


i 

i 

* 


Applications for License. 


The Commission having examined the following applica¬ 
tion for license, 

7 

File number. Name of applicant. 

4-L-C-328 Chicago Federation of Labor. 


found that it was not satisfied that public interest, conveni¬ 
ence or necessity would be served by the granting of said 
application. The Commission therefore directed that a 
time and place be set for a hearing on said application and 
that said applicant be notified of said time and place of 
hearing. 

CARL H. BTJlTMAN, 

Secretary. 


392 


#266. 


Minutes of the Federal Radio Commission. 


October 6,1928—at 10:00 o’clock a. m. 


Present: Commissioners Sykes, Vice-Chairman; Caldwell, 
Pickard and Lafount, and the General Counsel. 

i 

j 

i 

i 


O *0 Cl rH 


352 INTERCITY RADIO TELEGRAPH CO. ET AL. VS. 


Application for Construction Permits. 

The Commission having heretofore examined the follow¬ 
ing applications for construction permits: 


File number. 


Name of applicant. 


4- P-C-37 

5- P-C-233 

3- P-C-234 

4- P-C-235 
4-P-C-236 
4-P-C-237 
4-P-C-238 
4-P-C-239 
4-P-C-240 
4-P-C-241 
4-P-C-242 
2-P-C-243 
l-P-C-244 
l-P-C-245 

1- P-C-246 

2- P-C-247 
l-P-C-249 
4-P-C-301 
4-P-C-302 
4-P-C-303 
l-P-C-304 

3- P-C-310 

3- P-C-311 
l-P-C-318 
l-P-C-319 

-P-C-320 
-P-C-321 
-P-C-322 
-P-C-324 
l-P-C-325 
l-P-C-2 
l-P-C-332 

4- P-C-333 
3-P-C-334 


E. M. Tellefson. 

Armour and Company. 

a a a 

a a 66 

a a a 

6 6 66 66 

6 6 6 6 6 6 

66 66 66 

66 66 66 

66 66 66 

66 66 66 

66 66 66 

66 66 66 

66 66 66 

66 66 66 

66 66 66 

66 66 66 

Corn Products Refining Company. 

6 6 6 6 6 6 6 6 

6 6 6 6 6 6 6 6 

66 66 66 66 

J. E. Dadswell. 

J. E. Dadswell. 

Firestone Cotton Mills. 

Firestone Footwear Company. 

Firestone Tire & Rubber Co. 

Goodyear Tire & Rubber Co. 

66 66 66 66 

Industrial Radio Telegraph Co. 

66 66 66 66 

66 66 66 66 

Frazier Jelke & Company. 

66 66 66 

I. R. Jones. 


FEDERAL RADIO COMMISSION. 


353 




Application for Construction Permits—Continued. 


File No. 

l-P-C-337 

1- P-C-18 

2- P-C-338 
5-P-C-339 

3- P-C-340 

393 

2- P-C-341 

3- P-C-342 
5-P-C-343 
5-P-C-344 
5-P-C-345 

1- P-C-346 
5-P-C-347 
5-P-C-376 
5-P-C-378 

2- P-C-379 

4- P-C-380 

5- P-C-392 

4- P-C-395 

5- P-C-396 
l-P-C-397 
l-P-C-400 
l-P-C-402 

1- P-C-403 
4-P-C-406 

4- P-C-407 

5- P-C-510 
5-P-C-522 
5-P-C-523 
5-P-C-534 
4-P-C-540 

2- P-C-541 
l-P-C-544 
4-P-C-546 

4- P-C-559 

5- P-C-567 
5-P-C-568 


Name of applicant. 


Geo. H. McFadden & Bro. 


i i 

a 

ti 

t i 

6 i 

a 

i i 

11 

t i 

l i 

a 

a 


Geo. H. McFadden & Bro. 

a a a 

a a a 

a a a 

a a a 

i 

a a a 

a a a 

Robinson Machine & Forge Works. 
Sears, Roebuck and Company. 

a a a 

a a a 

Union Lumber Company. 

Universal Pictures Company, Inq. 

a a a a 

a a a it 

Victor Talking Machine Company. 
West Indies Radio Telegraph Asgn. 

a a a a a 

Wilson and Company. 

a a a 

Pewabic Mining and Milling Co.' 

L. Elden Smith. 

L. Elden Smith. j 

Wilmington Transportation Co. 
Delco-Remy Corporation. 
Delco-Remy Corporation. 

John L. Fay. 

The C. Reiss Coal Co. 

Great Lakes Dredge & Dock Co. I 
Universal Pictures Corporation. ! 

d tC 


i 




354 


INTERCITY RADIO TELEGRAPH CO. ET AL. VS. 


Application for Construction Permits—Continued. 

File No. Name of applicant. 

3-P-C-577 Burford Oil Co. 

3-P-C-578 44 44 44 

2-P-C-579 Ford Motor Company. 
l-P-E-45 Faske Engineering- Co. 


and not having- reached a decision that public interest, con¬ 
venience or necessity would be served by the granting of 
any of said applications, and having so notified the respec¬ 
tive applicants and having fixed, and given notice to the re¬ 
spective applicants of, a time and place for hearing on said 
applications and having thus afforded the respective appli¬ 
cants an opportunity to be heard, and each and all of the 
respective applicants having failed to take advantage of 
said opportunity to be heard, the Commission, therefore, 
denied each of said applications. 

*#**### 

CARL H. BUTMAN, 

Secretary. 


394 


#289. 


Miniites of the Federal Radio Commission. 

1 October 12, 1928—2:30 o’clock p. m. 

Present: Commissioners Robinson, Chairman; Sykes, 
Caldwell, Pickard, and Lafount; the Secretary, Chief En¬ 
gineer, Captain Hill, Commander Craven, and the General 
Counsel. 

Rules and Regulations. 

The Engineering Division presented to the Commission 
a series of receommendations covering an assignment of 
the frequencies for communication by the press with mobile 
stations, a copy of which recommendations is attached to 
these minutes.* A motion by Commissioner Robinson that 
the recommendations together with the pending applica¬ 
tions of the New York Times and the San Francisco Ex- 


*See Commander Craven's recommendation page 7. 


FEDERAL RADIO COMMISSION. 


355 


aminer for licenses for sucli services be referred to the 
Legal Division. The motion failed to carry, Commissioner 
Robinson voting for and Commissioners Caldwell and La- 
fount against said motion, and Commissioners Sykes and 
Pickard not voting. 

A motion by Commissioner Caldwell that tlije said recom¬ 
mendation of the Engineering Division be 'adopted was. 
carried, all Commissioners in favor thereof j except Com¬ 
missioner Robinson, who reserved the right tb incorporate 
in the minutes a written explanation of his position that 
the matter should be referred to the Legal Division for 
an opinion as to whether the application of the test 4 4 public 
interest, convenience, or necessity’ ’ would not require the 
refusal of the license to any private enterprise such as a 
particular newspaper. 


395 October 12, JL928—p. m. 

i 

The Commission thereupon examined the following ap¬ 
plications : 

i 

File 

number. Applicant. Nature jof application. 


l-L-C-327 

5-L-C-338 


New York Times.For license^ to communicate 

San Francisco Examiner. with mobile stations. 


and (Commissioner Robinson dissenting) fouhd that public 
interest, convenience or necessity would be Served by the 
granting of said applications and directed tile issuance of 
licenses in accordance with the recommendations of the 
Engineering Division. 

On motion by Commissioner Sykes, which motion was 
duly carried, the matter of assigning frequencies in the 
high frequency band for the use of aircraft stations was 
referred to the Engineering Division for recommendation. 

On motion by Commissioner Robinson, which motion was 
duly carried, the Commission directed that! hereafter in 
all records, forms, and practices of the Cohunission, the 
use of the terms “wavelength” and 44 meters and the de¬ 
scription of channels thereby be abandoned and that the 
term 44 frequency” expressed in kilocycles be employed ex¬ 
clusively. 

* # # # # # # 


396 


CARL H. BUTMAN, 

| Secretary . 


! 

i 




356 


INTERCITY RADIO TELEGRAPH CO. ET AL. VS. 


397 


October 12, 1928—p. m. 
Memorandum to Short Wave Committee. 


Subject: Frequency assignments, Mobile Press Service. 

1. It is recommended that the following frequencies be 
assigned to United States land stations engaged in the 
press service of all mobile stations and scientific expe¬ 
ditions away from this country: 


Stations located east 
of Mississippi River. 

5570 

6365 

8250 

11140 

16500 


Stations located west 
of Mississippi River. 

5585 

6335 

8350 

11170 

16700 


2. All newspaper companies that desire to establish radio 
stations for the press service of mobile stations and scien¬ 
tific expeditions away from this country must use the fre¬ 
quencies as allocated above. All stations using the same 
frequencies must share time. All stations which may be 
licensed must be open on an equal basis to all who desire 
to file messages on press service of mobile stations and of 
scientific expeditions away from this country. 

3. The licensees must maintain the station frequency with 
an accuracy of .05 per cent or better at all times. 

4. The licensees must obtain and use in checking the tun¬ 
ing of their transmitters suitable frequency-measuring 
equipment which shall be accurate within .025 per cent on 
the frequencies on which the station is licensed to operate. 

5. The licensees must use their transmitters so that thev 
do not cause interference which, by reason of actual decre¬ 
ment, high-speed signaling modulation, harmonics, fre¬ 
quency modulation, key clicks, and mush is detrimental to 
traffic being carried out on other authorized frequencies. 

T. A. M. CRAVEN, 

Engineer. 


FEDERAL RADIO COMMISSION 


357 


i 


j 

i 

i 

398 #296. 

Minutes of the Federal Radio Comniission. 

October 19, 1928—2:30 6’clock p. m. 

i 

l 

Present: Judge Robinson, Chairman; Caldwell, Pickard, 
and Lafount, and Assistant Counsel Pratt, the Chief En¬ 
gineer, and Captain Hill. 

i 

Applications Granted. 

The Commission having examined the following applica¬ 
tions for renewal of license: 


File 

number. Name of applicant. ! Call letters. 


5-R-C- 5 

The Mackay 

Radio & 

e Telegraph 

Co 

5-R-C- 6 

ii 

it 

U 

a 

ii 

5-R-O 7 

a 

it 

ii 

a 

ii 

5-R-C- S 

a 

« 

ii 

a 

ii 

5-R-C-10 

ii 

it 

a 

a 

ii 

5-R-C-ll 

a 

it 

a 

a 

ii 


found that public interest, convenience or necessity would 
be served by the granting of said applications. The Com¬ 
mission, therefore, directed that licenses be issued to said 
applicant. 

The Commission having examined the following appli¬ 
cations for licenses for airplane stations: 


File 

number. 


Name of applicant. 


Official No. 
of airplane. 


5-L-C-249 Western Air Express, Inc. 

5-L-C-250 “ “ “ “ . 

• • « • 

5-L-0-251 “ “ “ “ . 


5-L-C-252 “ “ “ “ .. 


5-L-C-253 “ “ “ “ . 


5-L-C-254 “ “ “ “ . 


5-L-C-255 “ “ “ « . 


5-L-C-256 “ “ “ “ . 


5-L-C-257 “ “ “ “ . 


5-L-C-25S “ “ “ “ . 


5-L-0274 “ “ “ “ . 

• * * * 

5-L-C-335 “ “ “ “ . 

* * • • 

5-L-C-336 “ “ ** “ . 


5-L-C-337 “ “ “ “ . 

• * * * 

5-L-C-303 Boeing Air Transport, Inc. 

5-L-C-304 “ “ “ “ . 

• • . . 

.... 

5-L-C-305 “ “ “ “. 


5-L-C-306 “ “ *« “ . 

.... 


i 


i 


F-14 
F- 7 
F- 6 
F- 5 
F- 4 
F- i) 
F-10 
F-ll 
F-12 
F- 8 


C-535S 

0-5170 

C-445S 

C-26S 

C-269 

0270 

0272 







































358 


INTERCITY RADIO TELEGRAPH CO. ET AL. VS. 


Docket Nature 

No. Applicant. of application. 


5-L-C-307 

44 

44 

‘4 

44 

. C-273 

3-L-C-30S 

• 4 

*'• 

*4 

44 

. C-274 

3-L-C-309 

44 

44 


44 

. C-273 

5-L-C-310 

44 

44 

<4 

44 

. C-276 

5-L-C-311 

44 

44 

‘4 

44 

. C-277 

5-L-C-312 

44 

44 


44 

. C-27S 

399 

3-L-C-313 

44 

44 

44 

44 

. C-279 

5-L-C-314 

44 

44 

44 

44 

. C-2S1 

5-L-C-315 


44 

44 

44 

. C-2S2 

5-L-C-316 

4 4 

44 

44 

44 

. C-2S3 

5-L-C-317 


44 

44 

44 

. C-2S4 

5-L-C-31S 

, 

44 

44 

44 

. C-2S5 

f,-L-C-319 

44 

44 

44 

44 

. C-2S6 

5-L-C-320 


44 

44 

u 

. C-2S7 

5-L-C-321 


44 

44 


. C-2SS 

5-L-C-322 


44 

44 


. C-2S9 

5-L-C-323 


44 

44 


. C-290 

5-L-C-324 

44 

44 

44 

44 

. C-291 

5-L-C-325 

44 

44 

44 

44 

. C-292 


found that public interest, convenience or necessity would 
be served by the granting of said applications. The Com¬ 
mission, therefore, directed that licenses be issued to said 
applicants. 

The Commission having examined the following appli¬ 
cations for license, 


File 

number. Name of applicant. Call letters. 

5-P-L-7 Boeing Air Transport. Inc. KWV 


found that public interest, convenience or necessity would 
be served by the granting of said applications. The Com¬ 
mission, therefore, directed that license be issued to said 
applicant. 

The Commission having examined the following appli¬ 
cations for renewal of license 


File 

number. Name of applicant. Call letters. 

5-R-C-12 Pacific Air Transport. KEU 

3-R-C-13 “ “ “ . KGE 

3-R-C-14 “ “ “ . KCT 


found that public interest, convenience or necessity would 
be served by the granting of said applications. The Com- 





























FEDERAL RADIO COMMISSION. 


359 


i 


mission, therefore, directed that licenses be issued to said 
applicant. 

400 The Commission having examined the following 
applications for construction permit, 

| 

File 

number. Name of applicant. Call letters. 


5-P-C-611 

Booing 

Air 

Transport, 

Inc 

;j-P-C-612 

»4 

ii 


44 

5-P-C-613 

<4 

ii 


44 

G-P-C-614 


ii 

ii 

44 

o-P-C-615 

44 

<4 

ii 

44 

5-P-C-616 

44 

ii 

ii 

44 

0-P-C-G17 

<4 

ii 


44 

5-P-C-61S 

it 

<4 

ii 

44 

4-P-C-619 

ii 


a 

44 

o-P-C-620 

<4 

ii 

H 

44 

5-P-C-621 

ii 

ii 

ii 

44 

5-P-C-622 

a 

<4 

ii 

44 

5-P-C-623 

a 

ii 

ii 

44 

5-P-C-624 

<4 

ii 

ii 

44 

5-P-C-625 

ii 



44 

4-P-C-G26 


ii 

ii 

44 

4-P-C-G27 

ii 

ii 

ii 

44 

4-P-C-62S 

ii 

<4 

a 

44 

4-P-C-629 

ii 

a 

a 

44 

• 

4-P-C-630 

*4 

a 

4» 

44 

• 

4-P-C-631 

a 

a 

a 

44 

• 


KEG 

KGE 

KEU 

KGT 

KZJ 

KTU 

KVO 

KFO 

WBQ 

KOE 

KQC 

KQD 

KKO 

KJE 

KFM 

KQQ 

KQM 

KMP 

KMR 

New 

New 


found that public interest, convenience or necessity would 
be served by the granting of said applications, j The Com¬ 
mission, therefore, directed that construction permits be 
issued to said applicants. 


Applications Designated for Hearings. 

The Commission having examined the following applica¬ 
tions for licenses, 


File 

number. Name of applicant. 


Call letters. 


5-L-C-246 
r>-L-C-247 
5-L-C-24S 
5-L-C-269 
5-L-C-270 
5-L-C-271 
5-L-L- 3 
5-L-C-302 


Western Air Express, Inc 


44 


a a 


u 


44 

44 

44 

44 


a 

a 


44 

44 

44 

44 


Boeing Air Transport, Inc 
Pacific Air Transport, Inc. 


j 

!» 


4 


I 


KMV 

KRP 

KVR 

KMV 

KVR 

KRP 

KTC 

KWV 


401 found that it was not satisfied that public interest, 
convenience or necessity would be serVed by the 
granting of said applications. The Commission therefore 


i 



































360 


INTERCITY RADIO TELEGRAPH CO. ET AL. YS. 


directed that said applicants be notified thereof, that a time 
and place be set for hearing on said applications, and that 
said applicant be notified of the time and place of such 
hearings. 

The Commission having examined the following applica¬ 
tions for construction permit, 


File number. Name of applicant. 


4-P-C-547 

Western 

Air 

Express, 

Inc 

4-P-C-548 

i i 

11 

( t 

i t 

4-P-C-549 

l t 

t i 

t L 

11 

5-P-C-550 

i i 

L t 

i t 

i t 

5-P-C-551 

i t 

t i 

it 

a 

5-P-C-552 

11 

t t 

11 

11 

5-P-C-553 

a . 

a 

i i 

i ( 

5-P-C-554 

a 

11 

i t 

11 

5-P-C-558 

t i 

11 

t i 

i t 

3-P-C-584 

i i 

11 

i t 

11 

5-P-C-586 

i i 

11 

i t 

t i 

3-P-C-587 

i i 

11 

11 

11 

5-P-C-588 

i i 

11 

L t 

11 

3-P-C-634 

l i 

t i 

a 

i t 

3-P-C-635 

a 

a 

i i 

i i 

3-P-C-636 

a 

11 

i t 

11 

3-P-C-637 

11 

11 

a 

11 

3-P-C-638 

t i 

a 

i i 

a 

3-P-C-639 

a 

tt 

t i 

i t 

5-P-C-640 

t i 

i i 

11 

t i 

3-P-C-641 

a 

11 

11 

11 

3-P-C-642 

t i 

a 

a 

a 

5-P-C-643 

a 

a 

a 

a 

3-P-C-644 

t i 

t i 

a 

t i 

4-P-C-645 

a 

a 

a 

a 

3-P-C-646 

a 

a 

a 

a 

3-P-C-647 

a 

a 

a 

a 

5-P-C-605 

t i 

a 

a 

a 

5-P-C-606 

11 

a 

t i 

a 

5-P-C-607 

a 

a 

a 

a 

5-P-C-608 

a 

a 

a 

a 

5-P-C-609 

11 

a 

a 

a 

5-P-C-610 

a 

a 

a 

a 

5-P-C-709 

11 

a 

a 

a 


2-P-L-6 Pacific Air Transport, Inc. 


FEDERAL RADIO COMMISSION'. 


361 


402 found that it was not satisfied that publicj interest,con¬ 
venience or necessity would be served by the granting 

of said applications. The Commission, therefore, directed 
that said applicant be notified thereof, that a time and place 
be set for hearings on said applications, and [that said ap¬ 
plicant be notified of the time and place of such hearings. 

CARL H. BUTMAN, 

! Secretary. 

i 

403 #331. 

Minutes of the Federal Radio Commission. 

(Subject to corrections up to 4 P. M. Nov. 3^1, 1928. See 

Minutes Oct. 24, 1928.) 

October 22, 1928—10 o’clock a. m. 

Present: Commissioners Robinson, Chairman; Caldwell, 
Pickard, and Lafount, General Counsel, Secretary, Dr. Del¬ 
linger and Captain Hill. 

* # # * # # j * 

Construction Permits. 

I 

A motion was made in the following matters: 

File 
number. 

1-P-C-Z- 1 

1-P-C-Z- 2 
1-P-C-Z- 3 
1-P-C-Z- 4 
1-P-C-Z- 5 
1-P-C-Z- 6 
1-P-C-Z- 7 

404 

1-P-C-Z- S 

1-P-C-Z- 9 
l-P-C-Z-10 
1-P-C-Z-ll 
l-P-C-Z-12 
l-P-C-Z-13 
l-P-C-Z-14 
l-P-C-Z-15 
l-P-C-Z-16 

that the Commission accept the modified organization and 
operation plan presented by the said applicant as a tenta- 


i 


Name of applicant 


Permit granted. 


Joseph Pierson, Trustee. i August 1, 1928. 

American Publishers Committee: 

ii 




ii 

a 

a 

a 

a 


I 


Joseph Pierson, Trustee. 

American Publishers Committee: 


August 1, 1928. 


ii 

ii 

ii 

ii 

ii 

ii 

ii 

a 


a 

a 

a 

a 

u 

a 

a 

a 





























362 


INTERCITY RADIO TELEGRAPH CO. ET AL. VS. 


live fulfillment of the second paragraph of Section (d) of 
the conditions attached to said construction permits. The 
Commission granted the motion, Commissioners Robinson, 
Caldwell, and Lafount voting for and Commissioner Pick¬ 
ard against the motion. Commissioner Lafount asked, and 
was granted, permission to submit a statement of his views 
on this subject. The approval of the Commission was, how¬ 
ever, made subject to the understanding that the licenses 
when issued to the grantees of the construction permits 
should contain express language showing that the issuance 
of each license shall not be understood as vesting any right 
in the licensee to the use of anv channel or anv other nature 
beyond the term of the license or as depriving the Commis¬ 
sion of its right to assign to other applicants any of the 
channels covered by such licenses after their expiration; 
and further subject to the understanding that the corpora¬ 
tions to be organized must each be under a full press pub¬ 
lic service obligation and must be of such character as to be 
able to respond and liable in damages for failure to deliver 
press messages entrusted to them. 

* * # * # # # 


405 


CARL H. BUTMAN, 

Secretary. 


# 331-A. 


Acts of Commissioners. 


(In addition to those shown by minutes.) 

September 26, 1928. 

Extension of Experimental License. 

File No. 5-L-E-8, Earle C. Anthony, Inc., Station K F I, 
Los Angeles, Calif., was authorized by telegram dated Sep¬ 
tember 26, 1928 to operate experimental station 6 X Y for 
three months from Sept. 26, 1928 using 500 watts and fre¬ 
quency 640 kilocycles. The telegram was signed by Com¬ 
missioner Lafount and approved by Engineers Dr. Del¬ 
linger and Captain Hill. 


I 

I 


363 


FEDERAL RADIO COMMISSION". 


September 28, 1928. 

| 

Extension of Experimental Television License. 

File No. l-L-F-10, Radio Corporation of j America, Sta¬ 
tion W 2 X B S, New York, N. Y. was authorized by tele¬ 
gram dated Sept. 28, 1928 to conduct experimental tele¬ 
vision communication on frequencies of 2100land 2300 kilo¬ 
cycles for a period of sixty days unless revoked by the Com¬ 
mission in the meantime. This telegram was approved by 
Commissioners Lafount, Caldwell and Pickard. 

i 

* *####!* 

i 

September 28, 1928. 

j 

Change of Location. 

File No. 5-P-C-611, Station KEG, Pacific Air Transport, 
Inc., Seattle, Washington, was authorized; by telegram, 
dated September 28, 1928 to modify station license to 
change the location of station from Vancouver to Swan Is¬ 
land Airport, Portland, Oregon. This authorization shall 
be considered of temporary nature pending final decisions 
relative to point to point limited commercial stations. This 
telegram was approved by Chief Engineer Dellinger and 
Commissioners Sykes, Lafount and Pickard. I 

i 

i 

* #•#**#: 

September 28, 1928. 

i 

Construction Emergency Radio Stations. 

| 

Porto Rico Telephone Company, New York, N. Y. was au¬ 
thorized (pending receipt and final action oh application) 
to construct emergency radio stations at San | Juan, call let¬ 
ters W D Y, and at Ponce, Porto Rico, call letters W J F, 
on a frequency of 5735 kilocycles, this authority being 
granted for sixty days. The telegram was signed by Chief 
Engineer Dr. Dellinger, and approved by Commissioners 
Caldwell, Lafount and Pickard. 

* * * * * •j * 

12—4987a 



364 


INTERCITY RADIO TELEGRAPH CO. ET AL. VS. 


September 29,1928. 

Television Demonstration. 

The Lexington Air -Station, Boston, Mass., was author¬ 
ized by telegram dated September 29,1928 to operate a fifty- 
watt transmitter on stage Boston Radio Show for televi¬ 
sion demonstration for a period ending Oct. 6, 1928, using 
call letters 1 X A Y within band 4800 to 4900 kilo- 
406 cycles. The telegram was signed by Commissioner 
Caldwell. 

#*#*#** 

October 2,1928. 

Experiment with Television. 

File No. 5-P-F-21, Ben S. McGlashan, Los Angeles, Calif., 
was authorized by telegram dated Oct. 2,1928 to experiment 
with television on frequencies between 2000 and 2100 kilo¬ 
cycles, for a period of thirty days, using call letters 6 
X A M. This telegram was signed “Federal Radio Com¬ 
mission.” 


*###### 

October 4, 1928. 

Extension of Construction Permit. 

File No. 2-P-B-296, Worlds Star Knitting Co. Bay City, 
Mich. The time for completion of construction to Nov. 15, 
1928 was approved by Commissioners Robinson, Caldwell 
and Pickard. The letter advising of the extension was sent 
by Carl H. Butman, Secretary. 

##**#*# 


October 4, 1928. 


Permission for Tests. 


File Nos. 5-L-C-133 and 5-L-C-134, Wm. Mulholland, 
Chief Engineer and General Manager, Department of Water 


FEDERAL RADIO COMMISSION. 


365 


and Power, Los Angeles, Calif, was authorized by telegram 
dated Oct. 4,1928 to make tests on 2794 kilocycles only. The 
telegram was signed by Commissioner Lafountj 

i 

# # # * # # ! # 

| 

407 October 8,1928. 


Permission to Experiment with Television. 

File No. 4-P-A-12, Chicago Federation of Labor Station 
WCFL, Chicago, Ill. was authorized by letter, dated Oct. 
9, 1928 to experiment with television for 30 <jlays for one 
hour each day between the hours of 9 A. M. and 3 P. M., pro¬ 
vided agreeable to other stations with which time is divided 
and further provided such experiments do not Require more 
than 5000 cycles each side of assigned frequency, 620 kilo¬ 
cycles. Effective this date also authorized toj conduct ex¬ 
perimental television or 90 days on band 4460,to 4660 kilo¬ 
cycles provided no emissions whatsoever will take place out¬ 
side the limits of specified band. To use call letters W 9 X 
A. A. This authority subject to all the conditions in pres¬ 
ent license as well as the conditions set forth jin the Radio 
Act of 1927. The letter was signed by Commissioner Pick¬ 
ard and approved by Commissioners Caldwell and Lafount. 

CARL H. BUTMAN, 

! Secretary. 

408 #336. ! 

i 

Minutes of the Federal Radio Commission. 

I 

October 23 1928—10 oi’clock a. m. 

i 

(Subject to corrections with 24 hours after mimeographed.) 

Present: Commissioner Robinson, Chairman; Caldwell, 
Lafount, the Secretary, General Counsel, Ur. Dellinger, 
Captain Hill, and Assistant Counsel Pratt. 

Applications for Licenses. 

The Commission having examined the following applica¬ 
tions for ship licenses: 

File Number. Owner. Name of Vessel. j Call Letters. 

R-K-233 W. K. Vanderbilt.Ara .j. KFBO 

L-K- 7 Inland Waterways Corp.John W. Weeks...j. WRBN 





366 


INTERCITY RADIO TELEGRAPH CO. ET AL. YS. 


found that public interest, convenience or necessity would 
be served by granting each of said applications. The Com¬ 
mission therefore directed that licenses be issued to each 
of said applicants. 

The Commission having examined the following appli¬ 
cations for licenses: 


File Call 

Number. Name of Applicant Letters. 

4-L-C-11S Chicago Federation of Labor. WCFL 

4-L-C-276 “ “ “ “ . WCFL 

2-L-C-277 “ “ “ “ . WCFL 

2-L-F- i) Westingliouse Elec. & Mfg. Co. SXAV 

l-L-C-331 News Syndicate Company, Inc. 

l-L-C-332 “ ** “ “ . 

4-L-C-301 Elgin National Watch Company. WNBT 


found that it was not satisfied that public interest, con¬ 
venience or necessity would be served by the granting of 
said applications. The Commission therefore directed that 
said applicants be notified thereof, that a time and place 
be set for hearings on said applications, and that said ap¬ 
plicants be notified of the time and place of such hearings. 

***•••• 

409 and it appearing that said application is inconsistent 
with General Order No. 40, the Commission denied 
said application. 

The Commission having examined the following applica¬ 
tions for modification of licenses: 


File 

Number. Name of Applicant. Call Letters. 

l-M-B-67 U. S. Broadcasting Corp. WCGU 

3-M-B-62 W. G. Patterson. KSBA 

3- M-B-5S Oklahoma College for Women. KOCW 

4- M-B-S2 Radiophone Broadcasting Corp. WHT 

4-M-B-S1 Nelson Bros. Bond & Mtg. Co. WIBO 

4-M-B-86 Great Lakes Radio Brdcstg. Corp. WENR-WBCN 


found that it was not satisfied that public interest, con¬ 
venience or necessity would be served by the granting of 
any of said applications. The Commission therefore di¬ 
rected that said applicants be notified thereof, that a time 
and place be set for hearing on said applications, and that 
said applicants be notified of the time and place of such 
hearings. 














.FEDERAL RADIO COMMISSION. 


367 


Applications for Construction Perntits. 

I 

i 

The Commission having* examined the following applica¬ 
tions for construction permits: 


! 

File i Call 

Number. Name of Applicant Letters. 

5-P-B-343 KXL Broadcasters, Inc.j. KXL 

5-P-B-344 Wilbur Jerman.. KWJJ 


found that public interest, convenience or necessity would 
be served by granting each of said applications. The 
Commission therefore directed that construction permits 
be issued to said applicants. 

The Commission having examined the following applica¬ 
tions for construction permits: 


File 

Number. Name of Applicant 

l-P-B-134 K & B Electric Co. 

o-P-B-340 Louis Wasmer. Inc. 

5-P-B-341T “ “ “ . 


Call 

Letters. 

WKBE 

KHQ 

KHQ 


and it appearing that each of said applications are incon¬ 
sistent with General Order No. 40, the Commission denied 
said applications. 

410 The Commission having examined the following 

applications for construction permits; 

I 

i 

File Number. Name of Applicant. 

l-P-E-73 Radio Corporation of America. 

3-P-G-78 Sun Oil Companv. I 

3-P-G-79 “ 44 44 I 

3-P-G-80 44 44 | 

3-P-G-81 44 44 

3-P-G-82 44 44 44 ! 

5-P-C-710 Maryland Pipe Line Company. 


found that it was not satisfied that public linteresf, con¬ 
venience or necessity would be served by thfe granting of 
said applications. The Commission therefore! directed that 
said applicant be notified thereof, that a time and place be 
set for hearing on said applications, and that said appli¬ 
cant be notified of the time and place of such hearing. 









368 


INTERCITY RADIO TELEGRAPH CO. ET AL. VS. 


General Orders. 

The Secretary reported that the licenses extended by 
General Order No. 39, expired on the first of November, and 
recommended that, in view of the great amount of work be¬ 
fore the License Division, a new General Order be issued 
extending these licenses for sixtv davs. The General Coun- 
sel was instructed to draft such an order. 

Rules and Regulations. 

The Commission authorized the Secretary, with the ad¬ 
vice and approval of the General Counsel and the Chief En¬ 
gineer, to prepare a new regulation governing the handling 
of technical and training radio applications. 

**••••• 

CARL H. BUTMAN, 

Sec ret art/. 

Mimeographed Nov. 5, 1928—9:45 A. M. 

411 #333. 

Minutes of the Federal Radio Commission . 

October 30, 1928—10 o’clock, a. m. 

(Subject to corrections within twenty-four hours.) 

Present: Commissioners Robinson, Chairman; Caldwell, 
Pickard and Lafount. 


Hearing Docket. 

Hearings were held before the Commission in the follow¬ 
ing cases: 

Docket * Call 

No. Applicant Nature of Application. Letter. 

220 Robert Dollar Company.Construction Permit. 

# # # * * * * 

CARL H. BUTMAN. 

Secretary. 

Mimeographed Nov. 5,1928,10:45 A. M. 




FEDERAL RADIO COMMISSION. 


369 


412 


#340. 


Minutes of the Federal Radio Commission. 

i 

I 

(Subject to corrections within 24 hours after:mimeograph- 

ing.) 

October 31, 1928#-2:30 p. m. 

Present: Commissioners Robinson, Chairman; Sykes, 
Caldwell, Pickard, and Lafount, the Secretary, General 
Counsel, and the Chief Engineer. 


* 


413 


10-31-28—p. m. 


Applications for Construction Pernjits. 


The Commission having examined the following applica¬ 
tions for construction permits: 


File number. 


Name of applicant. 


Call letters. 


2-P-E-69 Continental Broadcasting Corp. 
2-P-E-70 “ “ “ , 

2-P-E-71 “ “ “ 

2-P-E-72 “ “ “ 


found that it was not satisfied that public ! interest, con¬ 
venience or necessitv would be served bv the granting of 
said applications. The Commission, therefore, directed 
that said applicant be notified thereof, that a time and place 
be fixed for hearings on said applications and that the ap¬ 
plicant be notified of the time and place of suth hearings. 

i 

• | 

Construction Permits. 


A motion was made in the following matteprs: 


File 

number. 


Name of applicant. 


Permit granted. 


1-P-C-Z- 1 Joseph Pierson, Trustee. i. August 1, 1928. 

American Publishers Committee: 

1-P-C-Z- 2 
1-P-C-Z- 3 
1-P-C-Z- 4 
1-P-C-Z- 5 
1-P-C-Z- 6 
1-P-C-Z- 7 


44 

a 

a 


u 

u 

a 

a 

a 

44 


44 

44 

44 

44 

44 

44 




















370 


INTERCITY RADIO TELEGRAPH CO. ET AL. VS. 


Application for Construction Permits—Continued. 


File 

number. 


Name 

of applicant. 

Permit granted. 

1-P-C-Z- S 

44 

44 

44 

44 

1-P-C-Z- 9 

44 

44 

44 

44 

l-P-C-Z-10 

44 

44 

44 

44 

1-P-C-Z-ll 

44 

44 

44 

44 

l-P-C-Z-12 

44 

44 

44 

44 

I-P-C-Z-13 

44 

44 

44 

44 

l-P-C-Z-14 

4k 

44 

44 

44 

l-P-C-Z-15 

44 

44 

44 

44 

1-P-C-Z-1C 

44 

44 

44 

44 


that the time within which applicants are to comply with 
the conditions attached to the construction permits he 
further extended for a period of 30 days to December 1, 
1928. The Cbmmission granted the motion. 

414 Applications for Incense. 

The Commission having examined the following applica¬ 
tion for license: 


File number. Name of applicant. Call letters. 

5-L-C-32G Merchants Exchange of Portland. KPK 


found that it was not satisfied that public interest, conven¬ 
ience or necessity would he served bv the granting of said 
application. The Commission, therefore, directed that said 
applicant be notified thereof, that a time and place be set 
for hearing on said application, and that said applicant be 
notified of the time and place of such hearing. 

General Orders. 

On motion duly made and carried, the Commission 
adopted General Order No. 50, relative to picture and tele¬ 
photo broadcasting, and directed that it be entered and 
promulgated. Chairman Robinson voted against the mo¬ 
tion. His statement follows: 

Views of Commissioner Robinson for the Record on Sign¬ 
ing General Order No. 50. 

“I regret that the Commission has admitted television 
to the broadcasting band. The best engineers say that the 
















FEDERAL RADIO COMMISSION. 


371 


time has not yet arrived for this, notably Dr. Goldsmith of 
the Radio Corporation of America. Our own Chief En¬ 
gineer, Dr. Dellinger, of the Bureau of Standards, lias cau¬ 
tioned us against too forward an action in thjis particular. 
Besides, our own knowledge of affairs should dictate a 
delay. The American public have for several years been 
entertained by broadcast programs of speech and music. 
Why give them a whistle or blur as to a part bf the time in 
which they have received so long something iiitelligible and 
entertaining? The merest minority of the pbblic have re¬ 
ceivers for pictures. When one gets the picture, as far as 
developed today, what utility is it? It is of ho value com¬ 
pared with the spoken word. A dark silhouette means little 
in entertainment and interest to the Anderican public. 
415 “All the necessary experimentation to forward 
and perfect television could take plaeb between the 
hours of midnight and six in the morning. ! Whv disturb 

« » v_7 j » 

that which the public has become used to, byi freak whistle 
or confusion? The forwardness of the manufacturers 
could well be curbed for the present. One induced by the 
order of the Commission to buy a television receiving set is 
likely to be so disappointed that he will not only damn the 
Commission, but at the same time junk his new fangled con¬ 
trivance for which lie has paid the advertised price.’’ 

The commission adopted General Order No! 51 relative to 
discontinuing the use of apparatus employing damped 
wave emissions on and after Jan. 1,1929. 


* 


* 


* 


# 


* 


* 


* 


CARL II. BUTMAN, 

| Secretary. 

Mimeographed Nov. 7, 3928, 2:30 P. M. 


416 Acts of the Commission. 

* * * * * * I * 

I 

November 23, 1928. 
Approval of Ship License. I 

File No. R-K-1160, Richard F. Howe, New York City, 
Vessel named “Seaborn”. License issued! for one year 
effective Nov. 23, 1928. Approved by Commissioners 
Caldwell, Sykes and Lafount. 

******* 



INTERCITY RADIO TELEGRAPH CO. ET AL. VS. 


Q79 

O l -u 


Authority to Conduct Test. 

November 24, 1928. 

File No. l-P-C-408 Carl A. Bickel, United Press Associa¬ 
tion, New York City, authorized as follows: “You are au¬ 
thorized conduct two weeks test on seven three four naught 
kilocycles night and fifteen seven six naught kilocycles day 

to consist of transmission from vour station New York to 

•/ 

San Francisco amateur station period Commission desires 
remind you these frequencies are being reserved for trans¬ 
oceanic communications and when placed in service should 
not be used regularly for transcontinental work.” Ap¬ 
proved by Commissioners Caldwell, Lafount and Sykes. 


* 


# 


CARL H. BUTMAN, 

Secretary. 

Mimeographed December 4,1928—3:00 p .m. 


417 #435. No. 20. 

Minutes of the Federal Radio Commission. 

November 27, 1928—3 p. m. 

Present: Commissioners Robinson, Chairman; Sykes, 
Caldwell and Lafount, the General Counsel, Captain Hill, 
and Mr. Gates. 


Ap plication Granted. 


The Commission granted the following applications: 


File No. Applicant. 

1-P-E- 70 Universal Wireless Communication 
Co. 


l-L-E-162 Universal 'Wireless Communication 
Co. 


Call 

letters. Nature of appl. 

- C. P. for portable ex¬ 
perimental station 
to operate with 500 
watts power. 

.... Portable station li¬ 
cense to operate on 
2,140, 4,280, S,560 
kycs. with 500 
watts power. 

WSXL Renewal of Televis¬ 
ion license. 

- Experimental air¬ 
plane license on 
2,505 kycs. 


1-L-F- 5 Radio Corporation of America.... 
1-L-L- S Sky-Lines, Inc. 




FEDERAL RADIO COMMISSION 


373 


The following applications were denied, the applicants 
having failed to indicate a desire to be heard at hearings 
set as indicated: 

418 j 


File No. Name of Applicant. 


">-P-F-l 

2-P-F-4 

2-P-L-6 

1- P-F-6 

2- P-F-9 


5-P-F-10 

2-P-F-12 

2-P-F-13 

4-P-F-14 

4- P-F-15 

5- P-F-16 

4- P-F-17 

5- P-F-1S 
r>-I>-F-19 
5-P-F-20 
5-P-F-22 
5-P-F-23 
5-P-C-542 


5-P-C-543 


4-P-C-547 

4-P-C-54S 

4- P-C-549 

5- P-C-550 
5-P-C-551 
5-P-C-552 
5-P-C-553 
5-P-C-554 

419 

r»-p-c-r>r»s 

3-P-C-584 

5-P-C-585 

5-P-C-5SG 

3-P-C-5S7 

5-P-C-5SS 

5-P-C-605 

5-P-C-60G 

5-P-C-G07 

5-P-C-608 

o-P-C-609 

5-P-C-610 

3-P-C-634 

3-P-C-635 

3-P-C-636 

3-P-C-637 

3-P-C-638 

3-P-C-639 


P. S. Lucas. 

It. Louis House, U. Research Lab... 

Winfred S. Martin. 

Oliver W. Greene, Jr. 

The Courier Journal The Louisville 

Times .•.. 

L. Kessler . 

John C. Slade. 

C. A. Petry. 

The Voice of St. Louis, Inc. 

Fred L. Schoemvolf. 

Halowat Radio Corporation. 

Gillette Rubber Company. 

Galvin J. Smith. 

Donald Claire Wallace. 

W. E. Riker. 

James W. Summers. 

James W. Summers. 

Division of Fish and Game, Dept, of 
Natural Resources, State of Cali¬ 
fornia . 

Division of Fish and Game, Dept, of 
Natural Resources, State of Cali¬ 
fornia . 

Western Air Express, Inc. 

*4 44 44 44 

44 44 44 44 

44 44 44 44 

44 44 44 44 

44 44 44 44 

44 44 44 44 

44 44 44 44 


44 

44 

»4 

44 

44 

44 

44 

44 


44 

*4 

44 

44 

44 

44 

44 

44 

44 

»4 

44 

4* 

44 

44 

44 

44 

44 

44 

44 

44 

44 

44 

44 

44 

44 

44 

44 


44 

44 

44 

44 

44 

44 

44 

44 

44 

44 

44 

44 

44 

44 

44 

44 

44 

44 

44 

44 

44 

44 

44 

44 

44 

44 

44 

44 

44 

44 

44 

44 

44 

44 

44 

44 


Date Set; for 

Nature 

Hearhij; 

of Appl. 

lO-1G-j>8 

C. P. 

10-16-18 

4» 4* 

11-20-28 

44 44 

10-10-^8 

44 •« 

10-16-2S 

44 44 

10-16-28 

44 44 

10-16-28 

4* *4 

10-16-28 

44 44 

10-16-28 

44 44 

10-16-28 

44 44 

10-16-28 

44 44 

10-16-28 

44 44 

10-16-2S 

44 44 

10-16-2S 

44 44 

11-13-2S 

44 44 

11-13-28 

44 44 

11-13-2S 

44 44 

10-16-28 

i 

44 44 

I 

10-16-28 

44 44 

11-20-28 

44 44 

11-20-28 

44 44 

11-20-28 

44 44 

11-20-28 

44 44 

ll-20i2S 

44 44 

11-20-28 

44 44 

11-20-2S 

44 44 

11-20-28 

44 44 

11-20428 

44 44 

11-20428 

44 44 

11-20428 

44 44 

11-20428 

44 44 

11-20128 

44 44 

11-20428 

44 44 

11-2042S 

44 44 

11-20+2S 

44 44 

11-20I2S 

44 44 

11-20428 

44 44 

11-20428 

44 44 

11-20-28 

44 44 

11-20428 

44 44 

11-20428 

44 44 

11-20-28 

44 44 

ll-20i2S 

44 44 

11-2042S 

44 44 

11-2042S 

44 44 






















374 


INTERCITY RADIO TELEGRAPH CO. ET AL. VS. 


Application Granted—Continued. 






Date Set for 

Nature 

File No. 

Name of Applicant. 


Hearing 

of Appl. 

5-P-C-640 

44 ' 

44 44 44 


11-20-28 

44 44 

3-P-C-641 

44 

44 44 44 


11-20-2S 

44 44 

3-P-C-642 

44 

n a tt 


11-20-2S 

44 44 

5-P-C-G43 

44 

44 fc4 44 


11-20-28 

44 44 

3-P-C-644 

44 

44 44 44 


11-20-28 

44 44 

4-P-C-645 

44 

44 44 44 


11-20-28 

44 44 

3-P-C-646 

44 

44 *4 44 


11-20-2S 

44 44 

3-P-C-647 

44 

44 44 44 


11-20-28 

44 44 




Call 



5-P-C-709 

44 

44 44 44 


11-20-2S 

44 44 




KVA 



5-L-L-3 

Boeing 

Air Transport Inc.. 


11-20-2S 

License 

420 










Date 





Call 

Set for 

Nature of 

File No. 

Name of Applicant. 

Letter. 

Hearing. 

Appl. 

5-L-C-133 

Dep’t. 

of Water & Power, 





City 

of Los Angeles.... 

KQS 

10-16-28 

License 

5-L-C-134 

Dept. 

of Water & Power, 





City 

of Los Angeles.... 

KQT 

10-16-28 

44 

5-L-C-246 

Western Air Express, Inc. 

KMV 

11-20-28 Renewal of I 

2-L-C-247 

44 

44 44 4* 

KRP 

11-20-28 

44 44 

o-L-C-248 

44 

44 44 44 

KVR 

11-20-2S 

44 44 

5-L-C-269 

44 

44 44 44 

KMV 

11-20-28 

44 44 

5-L-C-270 

44 

4 * 44 4 * 

KVR 

11-20-28 

44 44 

5-L-C-271 

44 

44 44 44 

KRP 

11-20-28 

44 44 

5-L-C-302 

Pacific 

Air Transport, Inc. 

KWV 

11-20-28 

44 44 


Applications Designated for Hearings. 

The Commission designated the following applications for hearings: 

Call 

File No. Applicant. Letters Nature of Appl. 

3-P-A-26 Electrical Equip. Co. Short Wave Bdcst. C. 1\ 

• > T 4 O 44 44 44 44 44 44 T i f* 

«>* I • • • • 

* * * * * * * 

3-P-C-632 E. V. Kideout Co. Construction Permit 

3-P-C-633 Harl)or Tug Barge Co. “ “ 

5-L-C-233 Twin Harbor Stevedoring & 

Tug Co. KJQ License 

******* 

CARL H. BUTMAN, 

Secretary. 

Mimeographed December 4, 1928—11:30 A. M. 


421 #439. No. 22. 

Minutes of the Federal Radio Commission. 

Dec. 3, 1928—10 a. m. 

Present: Commissioners Robinson, Chairman; Sykes and 
Lafount, the Secretary, Dr. Dellinger, and Commander 
Craven. 












FEDERAL RADIO COMMISSION. 


375 


Applications Granted. 

I 

The Commission granted the following applications: 

Call 

File No. Applicant. letters. Nature of appl. 

* * # * # * * 

o-P-C-513 Mackay Radio & Telegraph Co. Construction permit. 

5-P-C-533 Mutual Telephone Co. of Hawaii.. KHK C. P.: new appara¬ 
tus same power and 
freq. 

5-P-C-521 Radiomarine Corp. of America- KSE Construction permit. 

in accordance with the recommendations of the Engineering 
Division. 

* # # * # * | * 

CARL H. BUTMAN, 

| Secretary. 

422 #462. No. 28. j 

i 

Minutes of the Federal Radio Commission. 

December 15, 1928—11 a. m. 

Present: Commissioners Robinson, Chairman: Sykes, 
Caldwell, Pickard, and Lafount, the General Counsel and 
the Secretary. 

Rules and Regulations. 

j 

The Commission considered the question as to whether in 
view of Opinion #28 of the General Counsel and the fact 
that eventually Section 13 of the Radio Act!of 1927 might 
require the Commission to refuse licenses to the Radio Cor¬ 
poration of America and its subsidiaries, the Commission 
should grant ship licenses to the Radiomariiie Corporation 
for as long a period as one year. The question was referred 
to the General Counsel who recommended tl^at the licenses 
in question be issued for the full period of one year, first, 
because it is extremely improbable that any final judgment 
(including the action of any court of review) will be entered 
in the pending litigation involving the Radio porporation of 
America within that period, and secondly, because of the 


376 


INTERCITY RADIO TELEGRAPH CO. ET AL. YS. 


peculiar importance of ship licenses to the safety of life and 
property and the fact that .Section 12 of the Act forbids 
the Commission to issue licenses to many of the ship-owners 
because of alien stock ownership. On motion duly made and 
carried, the recommendation of the General Counsel was 
adopted and the Chairman was authorized to execute the 
licenses in question. 


Miscellaneous. 

A motion was made in the following manner: 

Call Nature of 

File No. Applicant. Location. letter, application. 

1-P-C-Z 47 Robert Dollar Co... New York, N. Y.WGA Extension of 


C. P. 

a a it 


5-P-C-Z 43 

it 

a 

a 

... Honolulu. 

... KGS 

it 

it 

it 

5-P-C-Z 52 

it 

a 

a 

... Seattle . 

... KGR 

it 

it 

it 

5-P-C-Z 50 

a 

a 

a 

... San Francisco_ 

... KGQ 

it 

it 

it 

5-P-C-Z 44 

it 

a 

a 

... Los Angeles. 

... KGX 

it 

it 

it 


that the Commission authorize the extension of said con¬ 
struction permits issued June 25, 1928 for ninety days to 
March 31, 1929. The motion carried. 

i CAEL H. BUTMAN, 

Secretary. 

Mimeographed December 15,1928—2:50 p. m. 

423 #502. 

Minutes of the Federal Radio Commission. 

Minute #32. 

December 22,1928—11:00 a. m. 

Present: Commissioners Eobinson, Chairman; Sykes, 
Caldwell, Pickard and Lafount, Assistant Counsels Pratt 
and Hyde, Commander Craven, Mr. Gross and the Secre¬ 
tary. 


Eules and Eegulations. 

On motioii duly made and carried, the Commission 
adopted General Order No. 54, amending General Order 
No. 47, and authorizing the extension of existing licenses to 
costal, point-to point, experimental and ship radio trans- 








FEDERAL RADIO COMMISSION. 377 

mitting stations to 3 o’clock A. M., Eastern Standard Time, 
January 31, 1929, in all cases wherein such licenses expire 
previous to the above date and are not extended by General 
Order 54 (copy attached hereto). 

The Secretarv was directed to have the necessary changes 
in frequencies made in accordance with the international 
agreement effective on January 1, 1929. 

On motion duly made and carried, the Commission 
adopted General Order No. 55, copy of which is attached 
hereto. 

Hearing Docket. 

In the following case heretofore heard by the Commission 
and taken under advisement : 

Docket Call 

No. File No. Applicant. letters. Mature of appl. 

185 P-C-120-225 Universal Wireless Com- _ Construction Permits. 

munication Co., Inc. 

P-C-650-657 

P-C-661-670 

P-C-6S1-70S 

i 

the Commission found that public interest, convenience, or 
necessity would be served by the granting of each of said 
applications in accordance with the recomifiendations of 
the Engineering Division as contained in the files. The 
Commission therefore directed that an order be entered re¬ 
citing said finding and ordering that each of the permits be 
issued accordingly, subject, however, to the following 
terms, provisions and conditions which are directed to be 
made a part of the order and of the construction permits 
when issued: 

424 1. The applicant shall construct transmitting sta¬ 

tions in or near the towns or cities described in the 
applications and further described in the construction per¬ 
mits after the exact locations have been approved by the 
Commission or the Government Department (administering 
Radio. 

2. At least ten transmitting stations situated in ten of the 
cities to be served shall be constructed and ready for use 
by the public not later than December 31,1929, and at least 
three additional stations shall be similarly placed in opera¬ 
tion on or before the last day of each and every month 
thereafter; Provided all stations constructed under con- 


i 



378 


INTERCITY RADIO TELEGRAPH CO. ET AL. VS. 


struction permits herein authorized to he issued shall be 
completed on or before December 31, 1931. 

3. The Applicant shall install equipment of character 
and speed satisfactory to the Commission. 

4. The Applicant, when licensed, shall accept, transmit 
and deliver, at reasonable rates, all messages filed with it 
by the general public destined to points with which the ap¬ 
plicant is authorized to communicate. 

5. All of said stations shall connect and cooperate when¬ 
ever necessity demands with wireless stations operating on 
frequencies allocated to special uses, including fire, police, 
power (emergency), agriculture, etc., and shall cooperate 
to the fullest extent with stations operating in connection 
with aviation. 

Commissioners Robinson, Sykes and Lafount voted for 
this action; Commissioner Caldwell not voting. Commis¬ 
sioner Pickard voted against such action, being of opinion 
that applicant should be granted 5 (.002) channels out of 
40 high frequency channels to be allocated experimentally 
until it should demonstrate the practicability or imprac- 
ticafo'&ity of its proposed service to the satisfaction of the 
Commission and in accordance with engineering develop¬ 
ments. 

425 Applications Granted. 

The Commission granted the following applications: 


Can Nature of 

File No. Applicant. letters. Appl. 

5-P-C-7S1 Los Angeles Times Wireless, Inc. C. P. 


5-P-C-7S0 San Francisco Chronicle Wireless Corp., Ltd. 

l-P-C-777 American News Traffic Corp., Inc. 

4-P-C-77S “ “ “ “ “. 

1-P-C-7S0 “ “ “ “ “. 

1-P-C-7S7 United Press Wireless, Inc. 

1-P-C-7S2 New York Herald Tribune Wireless, Inc. 

l-P-C-767* Consolidated Wireless Corp.. 

1-P-C-7S4 Scripps Howard Wireless, Inc. 

l-P-C-776 New York Times Wireless, Inc. 

l-P-C-77!) Press Publishing Wireless, Inc. 

4-P-C-7S3 Chicago Tribune Wireless, Inc. 

l.p_C-7Sr> Universal Service Wireless, Inc. 


♦Application requests transoceanic as well as transcontinental frequen¬ 
cies. 





















FEDERAL RADIO COMMISSION. 


379 


Miscellaneous. 

! 

On motion duly made and carried the issuance of ship 
licenses for the period of one year was authorised. 

CARL H. BUTMAN, 

Secretary. 

Mimeographed January 12,1929—11:00 A. Ml. 

426 #513. 

Minutes of the Federal Radio Commission. 

Minute # 33. j 

December 22, 192$—3 P. M. 

Present: Commissioners Robinson, Chairman; Sykes, 
Caldwell, Pickard and Lafount, Assistant Counsel Pratt, 
Commander Craven, Mr. Gross and the Secretary. 


Hearing Docket. 

In each of the following cases heretofore heard by the 
Commission and taken under advisement: ! 


Docket 






( 

>11 

Nature 

No. 

File No. 


Applicant. 



letters. 

of appl. 

ISO 

3-r-G- 1 

Geophysical Research Corp. 

• 

} • # + • 

Geo. C. P. 

a 

3-P-G- 2 

44 

44 

44 



i “ 

44 

a 

3-P-G- 3 

44 

44 

44 



i « 

44 

a 

3-P-G- 4 

44 

44 

44 



i 44 

44 

a 

3-P-G- 5 

a 

44 

44 



44 

44 

a 

3-P-G- 6 

a 

44 

44 



44 

44 

a 

3-P-G- 7 

u 

44 

44 



u 

44 

a 

3-P-G- S 

a 

44 

44 



“ 

44 

a 

3-P-G- 9 

a 

44 

44 



44 

44 

44 

3-P-G- 10 

4 i 

44 

44 



44 

44 

44 

3-P-G- 11 

44 

44 

44 



44 

44 

u 

3-P-G- 12 

44 

44 

44 



44 

44 

a 

3-P-G- 13 

44 

44 

44 



44 

44 

a 

3-P-G- 14 

44 

44 

44 



44 

44 

u 

3-P-G- 15 

44 

44 

44 



44 

44 

u 

3-P-G- 16 

44 

44 

44 



44 

44 

a 

3-P-G- 17 

44 

44 

44 



44 

44 

a 

3-P-G- IS 

44 

44 

44 



44 

44 

a 

3-P-G- 19 

44 

44 

44 



44 

44 

a 

3-P-G- 20 

44 

44 

44 



44 

44 

u 

3-P-G- 21 

44 

44 

44 



44 

44 

a 

5-P-G- 60 

44 

44 

44 



44 

u 


13—4987a 





























380 


INTERCITY RADIO TELEGRAPH CO. ET AL. VS 


Hearing Docket—Continued. 


Docket 







Call 

Nature 

No. 

File No. 



Applicant. 




letters. 

of appl. 


5-P-G- 61 

Geophysical Research Corp. 


• • 


Geo. C. P. 

64 

5-P-G- 62 



46 

44 


• * * 

66 

66 

6 * 

5-P-G- 63 


46 

4* 

44 


• • * 

46 

44 

64 

3-P-G- 69 


»6 

64 

64 


•’ • • 

44 

46 

64 

3-P-G- 70 


46 

46 

44 


• • • 

46 

44 

64 

3-P-G- 71 


64 

44 

44 


• • • 

46 

44 

1S1 

3-P-G- 22 

Humble Oil & Refining 

Company 

• • • 

46 

Geo. C. P. 

44 

3-P-G- 23 


46 

6 * 


46 

• 00 

44 

46 

44 

3-P-G- 24 


4» 

44 


64 

00 m 

44 

46 

66 

3-P-G- 25 


46 

64 


44 

0 0 0 

46 

66 

46 

3-P-G- 26 


44 

44 


46 

0 0 0 

44 

46 

46 

3-P-G- 27 


46 

44 


44 

0 0 0 

46 

44 

44 

3-P-G- 2S 


44 

46 


44 

0 0 0 

44 

46 

66 

3-P-G- 29 


46 

44 


44 

0 0 0 

66 

46 

44 

3-P-G- 30 


44 

44 


64 

0 0 0 

44 

66 

66 

3-P-G- 31 


*4 

44 


64 

0. 0 0 

44 

46 

*4 

3-P-G- 32 


44 

44 


44 

0 0 0 

64 

64 

44 

3-P-G- 33 


64 

46 


46 

0 0 0 

44 

46 

427 










66 

3-P-G- 34 


44 

66 


44 

0 0 0 

44 

44 

64 

3-P-G- 35 


44 

46 


66 

0 0 0 

46 

44 

44 

3-P-G- 36 


64 

4» 


46 

0 0 0 

46 

44 

*4 

3-P-G- 37 


44 

64 


44 

0 0 0 

64 

44 

*6 

3-P-G- 3S 


64 

46 


44 

0 0 0 

44 

66 

46 

3-P-G- 39 


44 

44 


46 

0 0 0 

46 

64 

1S3 

3-P-G- 48 

The 

Texas Company.... 


• a • • • 

• mm 

46 

Geo. C. P. 

6 * 

3-P-G- 49 


46 

46 

• • • 



• •0 

64 

46 

66 

3-P-G- 50 


44 

46 

• • • 



• 00 

46 

44 

44 

3-P-G- 51 


44 

46 

• • • 



0 0 • 

44 

46 

46 

3-P-G- 52 


44 

46 

• • • 



0 0m 

44 

46 

44 

3-P-G- 53 


46 

44 

• • • 


0 0 0 

44 

66 

46 

3-P-G- 54 


44 

44 



• 00 

66 

46 

64 

3-P-G- 55 



44 

• • • 


• 00 

64 

44 

66 

3-P-G- 56 



44 

• • • 


• 00 

64 

66 

44 

3-P-G- 57 


*4 

44 

• • • 



0 0 0 

46 

44 

64 

3-P-G- 5S 



46 

• • • 

• * • 


• 00 

44 

46 

64 

3-P-G- 59 


44 

66 

• • • 



0 0 0 

66 

46 

1ST 

3-P-G- 64 

Geophysical Exploration 

Co 


0 0 

46 

Geo. C. P. 

44 

3-P-G- 65 


66 

44 

46 


0 0 0 

46 

46 

46 

3-P-G- 66 


46 

46 

46 

a a » a a 

0 0 0 

44 

46 

46 

3-P-G- 67 


46 

46 

44 


0 0 0 

66 

46 

44 

3-P-G- 6S 


44 

66 

46 


0 0 0 

46 

46 

209 

3-P-C-387 

The 

Texas 

Company.... 

• • • • 


0 0 

44 

Geo. C. P. 

46 

3-P-C-388 


64 

44 

• • • • 

* • • a 



44 

46 

245 

3-P-C-5S3 

Marland Production Company .... 


46 

46 

46 

3-P-G- 73 


46 

46 

46 

a a < 


46 

66 

33S 

3-P-C- 78 

Sun Oil Company . 

• • * 



44 

Geo. C. P. 

46 

3-P-G- 79 

66 

66 

44 

• • • 

a a a a < 


46 

64 

66 

3-P-G- SO 

46 

44 

44 

• • • 



64 

44 

44 

3-P-G- 81 

46 

46 

46 

• • • 


0 0 

44 

66 

44 

3-P-G- S2 

44 

64 

46 

• a a • 


0 0 

46 

44 

31S 

3-P-G- S3 

Interstate 

Geo. Expl. Co 

• * • • 


0 0 

46 

Geo. C. P. 

44 

3-P-G- S4 


64 

46 64 66 

♦ • • 


0 0 

66 

44 







































FEDERAL RADIO COMMISSION. 


381 


i 


I 


I 


Hearing Docket—Continued. 


Docket 
No. File No. 

44 3-P-G- 85 

44 3-P-G- S6 

44 3-P-G- 87 

44 3-P-G- 88 

44 3-P-G- 89 

44 3-P-G- 90 

44 3-P-G- 91 

44 3-P-G- 92 

44 3-P-G- 

44 3-P-G- 94 


1S4 2-P-C-312 
44 2-P-C-313 

44 2-P-C-314 

202 5-P-C-535 
217 2-P-C-404 
44 2-P-C-405 

254 5-P-C-569 
44 5-P-C-570 

44 5-P-C-571 

“ 5-P-C-572 

44 5-P-C-573 

44 5-P-C-574 

44 5-P-C-575 

44 5-P-C-576 

268 4-P-C-326 

269 1-P-C-5S0 



Applicant. 


Call 

lettjers. 

Nature 
of appl. 

Interstate Geo. Expl. Co. 

44 44 44 44 

4 

Geo. C. P 

44 

44 

44 44 

44 

4 

44 

44 

44 44 

44 

4 

44 

44 

44 44 

44 

4 

44 

44 

44 4 4 

44 

4 

44 

44 

44 *4 

44 

4 

44 

44 

44 44 

44 

4 

44 

44 

44 44 

44 

4 

44 

44 

44 44 

44 

4 

44 


I 

I 


Detroit Edison Company 

44 44 44 

44 44 44 


Hawaiian Pineapple Co 
West Penn Power Co... 

44 *4 44 44 


State Fed. Joint 

44 44 44 

44 44 44 

44 44 44 

44 44 44 

44 44 44 

44 44 44 

44 44 4T 


Mkt. Service 


44 

44 

44 

44 

44 

44 

44 

44 

44 

44 

44 

44 

44 

44 


Inland Waterways Corporation 
Boston Fire Department. 


KDPH 

iWPV 

WRH 

KYB 

| . 

i. 

KRB 

KRN 

KRM 


KRJ 

RRH 

KRG 

KRD 

KQP 

WEY 


C. P. 


the Commission found that public interest, coinvenience or 
necessity would be served by granting said applications in 
accordance with the recommendation of the I Engineering 
Division as contained in the files. The Commission, there¬ 
fore, directed that an order be entered, effective this date, 
reciting said findings and ordering that the! construction 
permits be issued accordingly. 

Commissioner Robinson opposed the actioi taken with 
regard to Dockets 181, 183, 184, 209, 217, 245 and 338. 

In each of the following cases heretofore heard by the 
Commission and taken under advisement: 


Docket Call Nature 

No. File No. Applicant. letters, ofappli. 

186 4-P-C-305 Cudahy Packing Company. !. C. P. 

188 4-P-C-306 44 44 44 . I 44 

44 l-P-C-307 44 44 44 . i 44 

44 4-P-C-308 44 44 44 . I 44 * 


i 
















































382 


INTERCITY RADIO TELEGRAPH CO. ET AL. YS. 


Docket 

No. 

i 

File No. 

Hearing Docket- 

Applicant. 

-Continued. 

Call 

letters. 

Nature 
of appli. 

101 

4-P-C-350 

Montgomery Ward & 

Co. 

44 

44 

44 

l-P-C-351 

44 

44 

44 

*4 

44 

44 

l-P-C-352 

44 

44 

44 

44 

44 

4 4 

4-P-C-353 

44 

44 

44 

44 

44 

44 

4-P-C-354 

44 

44 

44 

4'» 

44 

199 

2-P-C-114 

Tidewater 

Wireless Tele. Co. 


44 

44 

2-P-C-115 

44 

44 

44 44 

44 

44 

201 

l-P-C-227 

Anderson, 

Clayton & 

Co. 

44 

44 

44 

5-P-C-22S 

44 

44 

44 

44 

44 

44 

l-P-C-229 

44 

44 

44 

44 

44 

»4 

5-P-C-230 

44 

44 

44 

44 

44 

44 

3-P-C-231 

44 

44 

44 

44 

44 

44 

5-P-C-232 

44 

44 

44 

44 

44 

429 

337 

5-L-C-320 

Merchants Exchange, Portland, Oregon 

KPK 

License 


the Commission found that public interest, convenience or 
necessity would not be served by granting- any of said ap¬ 
plications. The Commission, therefore, directed that or¬ 
ders be entered, reciting said findings and denying said 
permits. 

In the following case heretofore set for hearing: 


Docket Call Nature 

No. File No. Applicant. letters, of appl. 

343 4-L-C-11S Chicago Federation of Labor. WCFL Renewal 

of lie. 


upon reconsideration the Commission found that public in¬ 
terest, convenience or necessity would be served by grant¬ 
ing said application in accordance with the recommenda¬ 
tion of the Engineering Division as contained in the files. 
The Commission, therefore, directed that an order be en¬ 
tered, effective this date, reciting said findings and order¬ 
ing that the license be issued accordingly. 

In the following case heretofore designated for hearing: 


Docket Call Nature 

No. File No. Applicant. letters, of appl. 

219 5-L-C-156 Illinois Pipe Line Co. KVX License 

5-L-C-157 “ “ “ “ . KVD “ 

2-L-C-158 “ “ “ “ WJAV 

2-L-C-159 “ “ “ “ . WJC 

2-L-C-160 “ “ “ “ . WBY “ 

5-L-C-161 “ “ “ “ . WHY 





























FEDERAL RADIO COMMISSION 


383 


the applicant having failed to appear at the tinke and place 
fixed for hearing- and having failed to present any evidence 
in support of said applications, the Commission found that 
public interest, convenience or necessity would riot be served 
by granting any of said applications. The Commission, 
therefore, directed that an order be entered, reciting said 
findings and denying said licenses. 

| 

430 Applications Granted. 

The Commission granted the following applications: 


File No. 

r>-L-c- 59 
5-L-C- 65 
5-L-O 60 
5-L-C- 61 
5-L-C- 62 
5-L-C- 63 
5-L-C- 64 
5-L-C- 66 
5-L-C- 67 
5-L-C- OS 
5-L-C- 69 
5-P-L- 3 
5-P-L- 4 
3-P-L- 5 
1-L-C- 25 
1-L-C- 26 
1-L-C- 27 
1-L-C- 2S 
1-L-C- 29 
1-L-C- 30 
1-L-C- 31 
1-L-C- 32 
3-L-C- 33 
3-M-C- 15 
3-P-C-75S 
3-A-C- 1 

3-L-C- 39 
3-L-C- 40 
3-L-C- 41 
3-L-C- 42 
3-L-C- 43 
3-L-C- 44 
1-L-C- 45 
3-L-C- 46 
1-L-C- 96 
3-L-C-226 
3-L-C-227 
3-L-C-22S 
3-L-C-229 
3-L-C-230 
l-L-C-231 
3-L-C-333 
3-L-C-334 


Applicant. 
Mutual Telephone ( 


44 

44 


44 

44 


Maddux Air Lines, Inc. 

44 44 44 44 


Radiomarine Corp. of America- 


44 

44 

44 

44 

44 

44 


44 

44 

44 

44 

44 

44 

44 


44 

44 


Tropical Radio Tel. Co. 

*4 44 44 4* 

44 4* 44 44 


44 

44 


George Collins Wa rner, .7r. WPD 

Radio Corp. of America. WQM 

Tropical Radio Tel. Co. 


44 

44 


44 

44 


44 

44 

44 


44 

44 

44 

44 

44 

44 


44 

44 


Call 



letters. 

Nature of appl. 

KHO 

Renewal License 

KHO 

New Channel Lie. 

KOG 

4* 

44 44 

KI1M 

i* 

i 

44 44 

KHL 


44 44 

KLN 

j‘ 

44 44 

KHX 


44 44 

KOG 

U 

44 44 

KHM 

License 


KHL 

! 44 


KLX 

i “ 



Aqronautical C. P. 


j 44 

44 


44 

44 

wsc 

Renewal License 

WSC 

I *4 

1 

44 

WMH 

License 


WNY 

Renewal License 

WSH 

44 

i 

44 

wee 

! “ 

44 

WIM 

j « 

44 

WSA 

! 

44 

WGV 

44 

44 

WOE 

License 


WOE 

C.jP. 


WPA 

Assignment from 


Gulf Ref. Co. 

WNN 

Renewal License 

WNN 

44 

44 

wxu 


44 

WAX 


44 

WIO 


44 

WBW 


44 

WBF 


44 

WPD 



WQM 


44 

WBW 


44 

WIO 

| »» 

44 

WNN 

! “ 

44 

WNU 

1 44 

44 

WNU 

44 

44 

WBF 

License 


WNU 

Rjenewal License 

WAX 

i 

«< 
































Ct Cl Cl 


384 


INTERCITY RADIO TELEGRAPH CO. ET AL. VS 


4:il 

File No. 

o-L-C-347 

2-L-C-348 

2- L-C-34S 

3- L-C- 12 
3-L-C- IS 

2- L-C- 38 

3- L-C-152 

3- L-C-173 
."-L-C-loO 
5-L-G- 1 

2 

-L-G- 3 
-L-G- 4 
-P-C-7G3 

l-P-C-7(»4 

l-P-C-763 

4- P-C-766 
l-P-C-767 
3-P-C-70S 
l-P-C-769 
l-I > -C-770 
l-P-C-771 
l-P-C-772 
l-P-C-773 

1- P-C-774 
:>-P-(’-77r> 

2- L-C-1S7 

2-L-C-1SS 

2-L-C-189 

2-L-C-190 

2- L-< M91 

l-P-C-739 

432 

3- R-C-l 

1- L-C-1T3 

2- P-C-761 

2- L-C-349 

3- L-C-342 
3-P-C-51S 
.--p-c-mo 

5- P-C-520 
l-L-C-329 
l-L-C-10 

1-L-C-ll 


Application Granted—Continued. 


Applicant. 

Hoeing Air Transport, Inc. 

Ford Motor . 

Ford Motor Company. 

Gulf Refining Company.... 

Palm Beach Radio Co. 

Tidewater Wireless Tel. Co 
l-Iuinble Oil & Refining Co. 
Magnolia Petroleum Co.... 
Hawaiian Pineapple Co... 
Geophysical Research Corp 


San Francisco Chronicle Wireless 

Corp. Ltd. 

United Press Wireless, Inc. 

Seripps Howard Wireless. Inc.. 
Chicago Tribune Wireless, Inc.. 

Consolidated Wireless Corp. 

Universal Service Wireless, Inc. 
Press Publishing Wireless, Inc.. 
American News Traffic Corp., Inc, 

4» •» 44 44 

Universal Service Wireless, Inc. 
New York Herald Tribune Wire 

less. 1 11 c. 

New York Times Wireless, Inc.. 
Los Angeles Times Wireless, Inc 
Penna. State Police, Common 

wealth of Pa. 

Penna. State Police, Common 

wealth of Pa. 

Penna. State Police. Common 

wealth of Pa. 

Penna. State Police. Common 

wealth of Pa. 

Penna. State Police. Common 

wealth of Pa. 

Commonwealth of Mass. 


Call 

letters. 

KQX 

WCQ 

WPA 

WOE 

WNW 

KDPS 

WT>D 

KRQ 


WBR 


WBAK 


WMB 


Nature of appli. 
License 


Renewal License 


License 

License 


C. P. 


WL>X Renewal License 


WJL 


C. P. 


Fire Signal Dept. KYP 

Board of Fire Commissioners, 

City of Balto., Md., . WEQ 

The Pennsylvania Railroad. 


Miickay Radio & Tel. Co. KFS 


KOK 


Bethlehem Shipbuilding Corp. ... WPC 
Dept, of Interior, Bur. of Insular 

Teleg. (Porto Rico). WKK 

“ “ « « WGW 


Renewal License 


Construction 
permit 
License 
License 
C. P. 

C. P. 

C. P. 

License 

Renewal License 









































FEDERAL RADIO COMMISSION 


385 


File No. 

2-L-C-16 

2-L-C-5S 

2-L-C-176 

2-L-C-57 

4-L-C-36 

4-L-C-103 

4-L-C-2S1 

2-L-C-2S2 

2-L-C-2S4 

1- L-C-28T) 

2- L-C-2SS 
2-L-C-290 
2-L-C-47 
4-L-C-2 


Applicant. 

Michigan Limestone & Chemical Co. 


44 

a 


44 

a 

a 


u 


The Reiss Coal Company. 

• * ki 44 *•« 

The Intercity Radio Teleg. Co- 


44 

44 

44 


44 

44 

44 

44 


4* 
44 
44 


44 44 

44 44 

44 44 

44 44 

44 44 


Alpena Marine Radio Service.... 
Ann Arbor Railway Company... 


Call 

letters. 

WLC 

WLC 

WLC 

WLC 

WSK 

WSK 

WME 

WTL 

WDI 

WAM 

WCL 

WTK 

WGI 

WMW 


Nature of appl. 
Renewal License 


! 44 


44 

44 


License 

Renewal License 

j 44 44 

Renewal License 


i 

I 44 


i 44 
i 4» 
44 
1 44 


44 


44 

44 


License 

Renewal License 


2-L-C-3 

44 

44 44 


44 

• • • 

WDM 

44 44 

i 

2-L-C-4 

44 

44 44 


44 

• • • 

WFK 

| 44 44 

2-L-C-5 

44 

44 44 


44 

• • • 

won 

<< u 

2-L-C-109 

44 

44 44 


44 

« • • 

WDM 

44 44 

2-L-C-110 

4% 

44 44 


44 

• • • 

WFK 

• * 44 

2-L-C-lll 

44 

44 44 


44 

• • • 

won 

4k 44 

4-L-C-112 

44 

44 44 


44 

• • • 

WMW 

44 44 

4-L-C-14.J 

Illinois 

Radio Corporation of Am. 

WGO 

Renewal License 

2-L-C-145 

Ford Motor Company 

• • • 


WMD 

Liicense 

4-L-C-13 

Illinois 

Radio Corporation of Am. 

WGO 

Renewal License 

4-L-C-14 

44 

44 

44 


44 44 

WGO 

I 4k 44 

4-L-C-1G2 

44 

44 

44 


44 44 

WGO 

License 

2-L-C-19 

l’ere Marquette Railway . 


WLD 

Renewal License 

2-L-C-192 

44 

44 

44 

• 


WLD 

License 

i‘»o 

!.>♦> 







1 

4-L-C-20 

Radio Corporation of 

Am. 

(Ohio) 

WRL 

1 

License 

4-L-C-21 

44 

44 

44 

44 

44 

WRL 

44 

l-L-C-22 

44 


4k 

44 

44 

WBL 

1 M 

1 

2-M-C-19 

44 

44 

44 

44 

44 

WCY 

Mod. of Lie. 

2-M-C-20 

44 

44 

44 

44 

44 

WCY 

:4k 44 44 

4-L-C-100 

44 

44 

4% 

44 

44 

WRL 

License 

l-L-C-102 

44 

44 

44 

44 

44 

WBL 

i •• 

2-L-C-206 

44 

44 

4k 

44 

44 

WCY 

Renewal Lie. 

2-P-C-755 

44 

44 

44 

u 

u 

WCY 

ci r. 

2-L-C-101 

44 

44 

44 

44 

44 

WCY 

Renewal License 

2-L-C-37 

E. M. 

Tellefson.. 

# • • • 

• • • • 


WIIQ 

Renewal License 


2-L-C-105 

2-L-C-169 

2-L-C-170 

2- L-C-155 

3- L-C-164 

3- L-C-165 

4- L-C-166 
3-I.-C-167 
3-L-C-23i> 

5- L-C-52 
5-L-C-7 
5-L-C-S 
5-P-C-7f>7 
5-M-C-14 




W. W. Kathan. 

Kreetan Company . 

Huron Transportation Company 
Inland Waterways Corporation 


44 

44 


U. S. Shipping Board. 

City of Seattle Harbor Dept. 

a a a a « 

Coos Bay Wireless Teleg. Co. 


44 


44 


American Tug Boat Company 


WHQ 

KUXM 

KUVQ 

WNO 

WPP 

WPI 

KQP 

WPM 

KIDM 

KPE 

KPE 

KGN 

KGN 

KFT 


44 44 

Renewal “ 

44 44 

I 44 44 

44 44 

44 44 


Renewal License 
License 

Renewal License 

! 44 44 

| 44 44 

q. p. 

Mod. of Lie, 


I 


















386 


INTERCITY RADIO TELEGRAPH CO. ET AL. VS 


Applcation Granted—Continued. 


File No. 


Applicant. 


Call 

letters. Nature of appli. 


5-L-C-17 Mutual Telephone Company_ KHK 

5-L-C-34 Radiomarine Corp. of America.. KSE 
5-L-C-35 “ “ “ “ .. KPH 

5-LrC-265 “ “ “ “ KPH 


Renewal License 

44 44 

44 44 

44 44 


The Commission granted the following applications: 


Call 

File No. Applicant. letters. 


2-L-C-240 West Penn Power Company. WJBF 

2-L-C-241 *• “ “ “ . WOB 

2-L-C-242 “ “ “ “ . WOY 

5-L-C-120 City of Seattle Light Dept. KVW 

5-L-C-121 “ •*' “ “ “ _ WJK 

5-L-C-122 “ “ “ “ • “ _ KFR 

2-R-C-26 The Philadelphia Electric Com¬ 
pany . WJV 

l-R-C-24 The Susquehannah Power Com¬ 
pany . WSY 

4-L-C-12”) Commonwealth Edison Company. 


424 

3-P-C-717 Florida Power and Light Co. 


3-P-C-71S 

44 

»4 

44 44 44 

3-P-C-719 

44 

44 

44 44 44 

3-P-C-720 


44 

44 44 44 

3-P-C-721 

44 

44 

44 44 44 

3-P-C-722 


44 

44 44 4» 

3-P-C-723 

44 

44 

44 44 44 

3-P-C-724 

44 

44 

44 44 44 

3-P-C-725 

44 

44 

44 44 44 

3-P-C-72G 

44 

44 

44 44 44 

3-P-C-727 

• • 

44 

*4 44 44 

3-P-C-72S 

44 

44 

44 44 44 

l-L-C-204 

Ihiblic Service 

Electric & Gas Co. 

l-r,-C-205 

44 

44 

4t 44 44 

1-L-C-lOS 

The Potomac 

Edison Company — 

1-L-(M90 

44 44 

44 44 

• • • 

l-L-C-200 

Potomac 

Electric Power Co. 

l-L-C-201 


44 

44 44 

2-L-C-1S2 

Pa. Power & Light Company. 

2-L-C-1S.3 

44 44 


•4 44 

2-L-C-1S4 

44 44 


44 44 

2-L-C-1S5 

44 *4 


m 44 

2-L-C-1S6 

44 44 


44 44 

5-L-C-1S0 

Northwestern 

Electric Company.. 

5-L-C-1S1 

44 


44 44 

• • 

4-L-C-17S 

Northern 

States Power Company. 

4-L-C-179 

44 

44 

u u 

• 


WIIF 

WKZ 

WJH 

WJX 

WPH 

WLF 

WBI 

WHC 

WCJ 

KFL 

KLB 

WLP 

WPL 


Nature of appli. 
Renewal License 

44 44 

44 44 

Renewal License 

44 4» 


44 44 

License 


Construction 

permit 

44 


License 

44 


Renewal License 


44 

44 

44 

44 

44 

44 

44 

44 

44 

44 

44 

44 

44 

44 

44 

44 

44 

44 

44 

44 



















FEDERAL RADIO COMMISSION 


387 


2-L-C-135 The Detroit Edison Company_ WBM Ren. Lie. 

2-L-C-136 “ “ “ “ .... WRH Rehewal License 

2-L-C-137 “ “ “ “ _ WPV j “ 

for emergency service only, viz: breakdown of other means 
of communication except during certain specified test 
periods. Commissioner Robinson opposed the granting 
of the applications of the said power companiejs. 

i 

i 

Applications Reconsidered and Granted! 

i 

i 

The following applications, previously denied by the 
Commission, were reconsidered and granted: 

Call 

File No. Applicant. letters. Nature of appli. 


5-L-C-246 

Western 

Air Express. 

. KMV 

License 

5-L-C-247 

44 

44 

44 

. KRP 

! ** 

5-L-C-270 

44 

44 

44 

. KVR 

it* 

4-P-C-547 

*4 

44 

44 

• •••« •*•••• 

C. P. 

4-P-C-54S 

• 4 

44 

44 

• •••• •••••• 

44; 

4-P-C-549 

• 4 

44 

44 

• • • • # •••••• 

*4; 

435 

i 

►—< 
y* 

1 

/■*, 

1 

o 

Western 

Air Express. 


C. V. 

5-P-C-551 

»4 

44 

44 

44 

“! 

5-P-C-552 

44 

44 

44 

44 

44l 

1 

5-P-C-553 

*4 

44 

44 

44 

“! 

5-P-C-554 

*4 

44 

44 

44 

44 

5-P-C-558 

44 

44 

44 

44 

44i 

1 

5-P-C-5S4 

44 

44 

44 

44 

“1 

5-P-C-585 

44 

44 

44 

44 

44! 

5-P-C-586 

44 

44 

44 

44 

44 

5-P-C-587 

44 

44 

44 

44 

44) 

I 

5-P-C-5S8 

44 

44 

44 

44 

*< 

5-P-C-605 

»4 

44 

44 

44 

H 

5-P-C-606 

44 

44 

44 

44 

1 

5-P-C-607 

44 

44 

44 

44 

44> 

5-P-C-608 

44 

44 

44 

44 

44j 

5-P-C-609 

44 

44 

44 

44 

‘1 

5-P-C-610 

44 

44 

44 

44 

H 

3-P-C-634 

44 

44 

44 

44 

44 

i 

3-P-C-635 

44 

44 

44 

44 

• • • • • 

4«ij 

1 

3-P-C-636 

44 

44 

44 

44 

44j 

3-P-C-637 

44 

44 

44 

44 

4i| 

3-P-C-G38 

44 

44 

44 

44 

H 

3-P-C-639 

44 

44 

44 

44 

4 

j 

5-P-C-640 

44 

44 


44 

4 1 

ii 

i 

3-P-C-641 

44 

44 

44 

44 

3-P-C-642 

44 

44 

44 

44 

«< 

5-P-C-643 

44 

44 

44 

44 

3-P-C-644 

44 

44 

44 

44 

‘i 

4-P-C-645 

44 

44 

44 

44 

4«j 

4 

3-P-C-646 

44 

44 

44 

44 

3-P-C-647 

44 

44 

44 

44 

44j 

5-P-C-709 

44 

44 

44 

*4 

H 











































388 


INTERCITY RADIO TELEGRAPH CO. ET AL. VS. 


Tlie following applications 
hearing, were reconsidered and 


previously designated 
granted: 


for 


File No. 


Applicant. 


Call 

letters. Nature of appli. 


3-P-G-75 

3-P-G-76 

3-P-G-77 

3-P-L-l 

o-P-L-2 

2-R-C-1G 


F. S. Chapman. 

44 •• 44 

44 44 44 

44 44 44 »» 

Maddux Air Lines. 

44 *4 44 

Ford Motor Company. WAV 


Geo. C. P. 

44 

44 

44 

Aero. C. P. 

44 

Renewal License 


436 


Applications Denied. 


The Commission denied the following applications: 


Cali 

File No. Applicant. letters. 

3- P-C-355 Morris and Company . 

4- P-C-676 Davis Industries. Inc.. 

4- P-C-677 “ “ “ .'. 

5- L-C-13S I>iv. of Fish & Game, California. KMY 


Nature of appli. 
C. P. 

44 

44 

License 


Applications Designated for Hearing. 


The Commission designated the following appplications 


for hearing: 




File No. 

Applicant. 


Call 

letters. 

Nature of appli. 

l-L-C-217 

South Porto Rico Sugar 

Co. 

WPR 

Renewal License 

3-P-C-712 

Southern Radio Corp. 
Oil) . 

(Standard 


C. P. 

3-P-C-713 

Standard Radio Corp. 
Oil) . 

(Standard 


44 


3-P-C-714 Southern Radio Corp. (Standard 

Oil) . 

1-P-C-H82 Southern Radio Corp. (Standard 

Oil) . 

3-L-C-70 Palm Beach Radio Telcg. Co. WOE 

3-P-C-736 Florida Radio Teleg. Co. 

• » 0 *)»> ' 44 44 44 44 


2-L-C-27S Ford Motor Company. WBO 

2-L-C-144 “ “ “ . WBO 


44 

44 

License 
C. P. 

Renewal License 
Renewal License 

44 44 


2-P-C-752 

2-L-C-140 

2-L-C-141 

2-L-C-142 


4-L-C-107 

Wireless 

Tele?. 

& Comm. 

Co. 

l-P-C-590 

44 

44 

44 

44 

2-P-C-591 

44 

44 

44 

44 

2-P-C-592 

44 

44 

44 

44 

2-P-C-593 

44 

44 

44 

44 

4-P-C-594 

44 

44 

44 

44 

• 


. C. P. 

WCT Renewal License 

wot 

WCT 

WHW 

. C. P. 


44 
































M lO W W rl H Cl lO O 


FEDERAL RADIO COMMISSION 


389 


File No. 

5-P-C-595 
4-P-C-596 
4-P-C-597 
4-P-C-59S 
4-P-C-599 
3-P-C-600 
P-C-601 
P-C-602 
P-C-603 
P-C-604 
-P-C-658 
P-C-659 
-P-C-660 
-P-C-671 
-P-C-672 

437 


3-P-C-678 
3-P-C-679 
3-P-C-6S9 
2-P-C-l 13 
f>-L-C-16S 
2-L-C-131 
r,-L-C-146 
5-L-C-147 

2- L-C-139 
f)-L-C-202 
H-L-C-203 
5-L-C-132 
5-L-C-193 
5-L-C-263 
5-L-C-219 
5-L-C-220 
5-L-C-221 
5-M-C-13 
5-L-C-10S 
r>-L-C-114 

3- L-C-115 
2-L-C-116 
2-L-C-117 

2- L-C-119 

3- P-C-673 
3-P-C-674 
5-P-C-741 
5-P-C-742 
3-L-C-151 
5-L-C-211 
5-L-C-212 


438 


5-L-C-171 

1- L-C-172 
5-L-C-225 

2- L-C-236 

1- L-C-237 

3- L-C-23S 
3-L-C-239 

2- L-C-245 
5-L-C-124 


Call 

Applicant. letters. 


ireless 

Teleg. 

& 

Comm. 

Co 

44 

44 


it 

*4 

44 

44 


44 

44 

44 

44 



44 

44 

44 


44 

44 

44 

44 



44 

44 

44 


44 

44 

44 

44 


44 

44 

44 

44 


44 

44 

44 

44 


44 

44 

44 

44 


44 

44 

44 

44 


44 

44 

44 

44 



44 

44 

44 


44 

44 

44 

44 


44 

44 


• • • • 



Wireless Teleg. & Comm. Co. 

a a a a 

m 0 • • 

it U ii «< 

• • • • 

Radio Teleg. Company. 

Lincoln L. Jackson. 

Crosley Radio Corporation. 

General Electric Company. 

a « u 

Frank D. Fallain. 

C. S. Pratt and L. C. Dutro. 

a u a n a *< a 

Cecil B. DeMille. 

Jay Peters . 

ii ii 

Southern California Edison Co... 

ii ii ii ii 

• • 

44 44 44 44 

• • 

American Tug Boat Company.... 

44 44 44 44 

• « * • 

Boulevard Express Company, Inc. 

44 44 44 44 

The J. P. Burton Coal Company.. 

By Products Coal Company. 

City of Akron. 

Straus-Frank Company . 

44 44 44 



KPA 

WDJ 

KEB 

KFD 

WGF 

KYX 

KZI 

KJU 

KZB 

KZA 

KDPU 

KRY 

KFT 

KXU 

KFT 

KVU 

KVT 

WLI 

WLG 


American National Company. 

44 44 44 


Houston Printing Company. KPRC 

Russell Reed . KFZ 

“ “ . KGV 


Mackay Radio & Teleg. Co. KKC 

“ “ “ “. WKI 

George Cooper Tichenor. KHX 

John Wanamaker Company. WHE 

“ “ “ . WHI 

E. G. Watts, Jr. WRP 

“ “ “ “ . WRP 

Wyandotte Transportation Co.... WCV 
City of Seattle Harbor Dept. KPE 


Nature of appli. 


C. P. 


44 

l 


<44 

i 

,44 

j44 

r 

ii 





■44 
i 44 

License 

Renewal License 

44 44 


i 44 ti 

' a a 

i 

Renewal License 

u a 

Renewal License 

i «4 44 

i 

! it << 

Renewal License 

<( M 

Modification of Lie 

a a 

Renewal License 
Renewal Lie. 

| 44 44 

Renewal License 

44 44 


License 
C. P. 
c. P- 
C. P. 


License 

Renewal License 


License 


Renewal License 
Renewal License 


I « 


44 

44 


44 

44 

44 

M 































390 


INTERCITY RADIO TELEGRAPH CO. ET AL. VS. 


Applications Designated for Hearing—Continued. 


File No. 

3-M-C-16 

l-L-C-207 

l-L-C-208 

l-L-C-209 

1- L-C-210 
fi-L-C-148 

2- L-C-234 
l-L-C-6 

3- P-C-514 
l-P-C-759 

4- L-C-104 
l-L-C-177 


l-L-C-197 

l-L-C-261 

1- L-C-262 
4-L-C-340 

2- P-C-512 
2-P-C-536 
2-P-C-736 


Applicant. 

Radiomarine Corp. of America 


44 

44 


44 44 44 

44 44 44 

44 44 44 


44 


44 


44 


Grays Harbor Stevedore Co... 
U. S. Shipping Board. M. F. C. 
Bethlehem Shipbuilding Corp. 

Stewart Hall Buchanan. 

City of N. Y. Dept, of Plant 

Structures. 

The C. Reiss Coal Company.. 
The N. Y. Police Dept. City 

New York. 

The N. Y. Police Dept. City 

New York. 

New York Central Railroad Co 

44 44 44 44 44 

Chicago Federation of Labor. 
Tidewater Wireless Teleg. Co. 


and 


of 
• • 
of 


Call 

letters. 

Nature of appli. 

WOE 

Mod. of Lie. 

WCC 

Renewal License 

wsc 

License 

WNY 

44 

WSH 

Renewal license 

KZE 

4* 44 

WPF 

44 44 

KDGU 

Renewal license 


44 44 

C. P. 


License 

KUVS 

Renewal License 

KUVS 

44 44 


License 

44 


44 


C. P. 


44 


44 


Mimeographed Jan. 19, 1929, 3:30 P. M. 


439 #504. 

Minutes of the Federal Radio Commission . 

Minute #35. 

January 7, 1929—10:30 a. m. 

Present: Commissioners Robinson, Chairman; Sykes, 
Caldwell, Pickard, and Lafount, the General Counsel, Dr. 
Dellinger, Commander Craven and the Secretary. 


Rules and Regulations. 

♦ ###### 


CARL H. BUTMAN, 

Secretary. 


Mimeographed January 14,1929—11:45 a. m 

















FEDERAL RADIO COMMISSION. 


391 


440 


Acts of Commissioners. 


December 20, 1928. 


Approval of Construction Permit. 


File No. 2-P-C-754, Radio Station WCY, Radio Corpora¬ 
tion of America Ohio Company, West Doveh, Ohio. Con¬ 
struction permit for public point to point station. Ap¬ 
proved by Commissioners Robinson, Sykes, Caldwell, and 
Lafount. 

441 #495. | 

i 

! 

Minutes of the Federal Radio Commission. 

\ 

Minute #34. 

January 7, 1929-—2:30 p. m. 

Present: Commissioners Robinson, Chairman; Sykes, 
Lafount, Caldwell, Pickard, the General Counsel, Com¬ 
mander Craven and the Secretary. 


* 


* 


* 


On motion duly made and carried, the short wave com¬ 
mittee, comprising Commissioners Sykes and'Caldwell, was 
authorized to proceed to Canada on or about January 21st, 
taking with them such legal and engineering experts as were 
deemed necessarv to attend the International Conference. 

CARL H. BUtTMAN, 

Secretary. 


Mimeographed January 11, 1929—11:00 A. 


442 


#543. 


M. 


Minutes of the Federal Radio Conwiission. 


Minute #41. 

February 4, 1929-j—2:30 p. m. 

i 

Present: Commissioners Robinson, Chairman; Sykes, 


Caldwell, and Lafount, Captain Hill, and 
tary Blackwell. 


Acting Secre- 


* 









392 


INTERCITY RADIO TELEGRAPH CO. ET AL. VS. 


Upon motion duly made and carried, the following ap¬ 
plications : 


Call Nature 

File No. Application. letters, of appli. 

5-L-C-171 Mackay Radio & Teleg. Co. KKC License 

I-L-C-172 “ “ “ “ “ . WKI 


heretofore designated for hearing were reconsidered and 
granted. 


*#**### 

G. COLBY BLACKWELL, 

Acting Secretary. 

Mimeographed February 9,1929—2:45 P. M. 


443 #536. 

Minutes of the Federal Radio Commission. 

Minute #42. 


February 5, 1929—2:30 p. m. 

Present: Commissioners Robinson, Chairman; Sykes, 
Caldwell, and Lafount, and Commander Craven. 

Extension of Construction Permits. 


A motion was made in the following matters: 


Call 


File No. 

1 Applicant. 



letters. 

Nature 

of application. 

l-P-C-Z-92 

Radio Corporation of America 

WQW 

Ext. Construction Permit 

5-P-C-Z-80 

44 44 

44 

44 

KQH 

44 

• 4 

44 

5-P-C-Z-75 

44 44 

44 

44 

KQZ 

44 

44 

44 

l-P-C-Z-90 

44 44 

44 

44 

WKW 

44 

*4 

44 

o-P-C-Z-89 

44 44 

44 

44 

WKQ 


*4 

44 

l-P-C-Z-74 

44 44 

44 

44 

KKR 

44 

44 

44 

1 -P-C-Z-92 

44 44 

44 


WQG 

44 

44 

44 

1-P-C-Z-S1 

44 44 

44 

44 

WAZ 

44 

44 

44 

1-P-C-Z-SS 

44 44 

44 

44 

WKU 

44 

44 

44 

l-P-C-Z-93 

44 44 

44 

44 

WQV 

44 

44 

44 

5-P-C-Z-72 

44 44 

44 

44 

KKQ 

44 

44 

44 

r»-P-C-Z-S7 

44 44 



KER 

44 

44 

44 

l-P-C-Z-86 

44 44 

44 

44 

WET 

44 

44 

44 

l-P-C-Z-94 

44 44 

44 

44 

WEG 

44 

44 

44 

5-P-C-Z-73 

44 44 

44 

44 

WGX 

44 

44 

44 











FEDERAL RADIO COMMISSION. 


393 


that said construction permits be extended for six months 
to August 1, 1929. The Commission granted the inotion. 

# # # # * * ! • 

I 

CARL H. BUTMAN, 

Secretary. 

i 

Mimeographed February 7, 1929—11:45 A. M. 

444 #545. j 

Minutes of the Federal Radio Commission. 

• i 

Minute #44. 

February 7, 1929^—4 p. m. 

Present: Commissioners Robinson, Chairman; Sykes, 
Caldwell, and Lafount, the Secretary, Assistant Counsel 
Hughes, and Commander Craven. 


Hearing Docket. 


The following cases: 


Applicant. 

Los Angeles Times Wireless, Inc.. 
San Francisco Chronicle Wireless 

Corp., Ltd. 

American News Traffic Corp., Inc. 


« 


ii 


File No. 

5-P-C-781 
5-P-C-7S0 

l-P-C-777 
4-P-C-77S 
l-P-C-786 

1-P-C-7S7 United Press Wireless, Inc. 
1-P-C-7S2 New York Herald Tribune Wire 

less, Inc. 

1-P-C-7G7 Consolidated Wireless Corp... 
1-P-C-7S4 Scripps Howard Wireless, Inc 
l-P-C-776 New York Times Wireless, Inc 
l-P-C-779 Press Publishing Wireless, Inc 
4-P-C-7S3 Chicago Tribune Wireless, Inc 
1-P-C-7S5 Universal Service Wireless, Inc 


Call 

letters. 


Natiire of appli. 
Construction Permit. 


u 

i 

4 

4 

4 


u 

4 

4 

U 

i 

4* 


heretofore set by the Commission for hearing oh February 
18, 1929, were continued to March 7, 1929. Tile Commis¬ 
sion directed that notices of said continuance be &ent to said 
applicants and all other interested parties including the 
Associated Press. 


CARL H. BUTMAN, 

Secretary. 

I 

Mimeographed February 11, 1929—2:00 P. M. 












394 


INTERCITY RADIO TELEGRAPH CO. ET AL. VS. 


445 #556. 

Minutes of the Federal Radio Commission. 

Minute #46. 

February 13, 1929—2:30 p. m. 

Present: Commissioners Robinson, Chairman; Sykes, 
Caldwell, and Lafount, Commander Craven, Captain Hill, 
and the Secretary. 


Applications Granted. 

The Commission granted the following applications: 

Call 

File number. Applicant. letters. Nature of application 

l-P-C-711 Mackay Radio & Teleg. Co. Substitution of freq. 8,900 

for 8,930 kc 

CARL H. BUTMAN, 

Secretary. 

Mimeographed February 19, 1929—10:00 A. M. 

446 #559. 

Minutes of the Federal Radio Commission. 

Minute #47. 

February 16, 1929—10:40 a. m. 

Present: Commissioners Robinson, Chairman; Sykes, 
Caldwell, and Lafount, the General Counsel, Commander 
Craven, Captain Hill, and the Secretary. 

Applications Granted. 

The Commission granted the following applications: 

Call Nature 

File No. Applicant. letters, ofappl. 

l-L-C-403 Mackay Radio & Teleg. Co. (of Delaware)... WSL License 



FEDERAL RADIO COMMISSION. j 395 

Applications Denied. 

j 

The Commission denied the following applications: 

Caill Nature 

File No. Applicant. letters. of appl. 

l-P-C-Z-103 The Western Union Teleg. Company... 2XBM CP. 

1-L-E- 157 “ “ “ “ “ ... 2XBM Appl. for lie. 

it appearing from the applications that this corporation is 
within the prohibition of Section 12 of the Radio Act of 
1927, in that one of its directors is an alien. 

# * # # * # i # 

I 

i 

i 

i 

Miscellaneous. 

i 

i 

Commander Craven presented a report covering his 
Recommendations concerning Visual Broadcasting dated 
February 4, 1929. 

CARL H. BUSMAN, 

Secretary. 

j 

Mimeographed February 20, 1929—9:15 A. M. 

Revised February 21, 1929—4:00 P. M. 

447 (#566.) 

Minutes of the Federal Radio Commission. 

Minute #48. i 

February 18, 1929—11:40 a. m. 

I 

Present: Commissioners Robinson, Chairman; Sykes, 
and Caldwell, Commander Craven, the General Counsel, 
Captain Hill, Mr. Gross and the Secretary. 

I 

448 Applications Granted. 

j 

The Commission granted the following application: 

Call 

File No. Applicant. letters. Nature of appl. 

l-L-E-160 Mackay Radio & Telegraph Co. Experimental license; 

use of additional ex¬ 
perimental frequen¬ 
cies. 


14—4987a 



39 G 


INTERCITY RADIO TELEGRAPH CO. ET AL. VS. 


The Commission granted the following applications, in 
accordance with the recommendations of the Engineering 
and Local Divisions, the licenses so granted to be for the 
period ending September 1, 1929, at 12:01 A. M., standard 
time, at location of transmitting station: 




Call 

File No. 

Applicant. 

letters. Nature of appl. 

1-L-F-ll 

Radio Corp. of America... 

W2XBW Visual license; 2,000-2,100 
keys. 

l-L-F-12 

1 a a 

• • • 

W2XBV Visual license; 2,000-2,100 
keys. 

1-P-F-2S 

it 1 it it .< 

. Visual C. P.; 2,100-2,200 

keys. 

449 

Applications Denied. 


The Commission denied the following applications: 

Call 

File No. Applicant. letters. Nature of appl. 

3- L-C- TO Palm Beach Radio Co. WOE Commercial License. 

4- L-C-107 Wireless Tel. & Com. Co. WHW 

******* 


450 Rules and Regulations. 

The Commission reviewed Commander Craven’s report 
on Visual Broadcasting and adopted the following regula¬ 
tions : 

That visual broadcasting be designated to include both 
television broadcasting and picture broadcasting, or mov¬ 
ing picture broadcasting and still picture broadcasting, 
and that all licenses issued be of an experimental nature 
for a period of six months only, the licensees to report to 
the Commission the results of their experiments; the trans¬ 
mitters to be located outside the city limits and sufficiently 
distant from important receiving centers to avoid inter¬ 
ference. 

For joint use to visual broadcasting licensees, the Com¬ 
mission authorizes the following bands of frequencies for 
experimental use only: 2000 to 2200 and 2750 to 2950 kilo- 
cvcles. In addition, the Commission will authorize the 
operation of visual radio broadcasting transmitters in the 
band between 2200 and 2300 kilocycles, on the condition 
that they do not interfere in any way whatever with the 




FEDERAL RADIO COMMISSION - . 


397 


services of any other nation on the North American 

451 Continent and in the West Indies, and Ithat licenses 
be subject to revocation in case there are any com¬ 
plaints from any other nation of any such Interference. 
The Commission may continue to issue experimental tele¬ 
vision or visual licenses in the broadcast band for opera¬ 
tion between 1 and 6 A. M. only, in accordance with General 
Order 50. 

The Commission adopted the following rules of priority 
in the granting of applications: 

1. Those engaged in experimentation to improve the 
technique of visual broadcasting. 

2. Those who employ methods which give the maximum 
definition with the minimum radio frequency band widths. 

CARL H. BUTMAN, 

Secretary. 

i 

Mimeographed March 25, 1929, 10:15 A. M.| 

452 (#602.) 

Acts of Commissioners. 

(Other than those shown in Minutes.) 

February 21, 1929. 

Approval of Radio Station Licenses. 

Commissioners Caldwell, Lafount, and Svkes approved 
the following applications: 


File No. 


Applicant. 


Nature 
of application. 


l-P-E-99 Universal Wireless Communications Co., Inc. C. P.—Portable Exp. 
l-P-E-100 “ “ “ “ “ “ “ “ 

l-P-E-101 “ u “ “ 44 44 ■ 44 44 

l-P-E-10 0 44 44 44 44 44 44 4 ^ 44 44 

l-P-E-103 “ 44 “ 44 44 “ 4 f 44 44 

Commissioners Robinson, Sykes, and Lafoqnt approved 
the following applications: 


File No. 
l-L-E-177 


Applicant. 


Nature of application. 


Universal Wireless Communications Licensed—Portable Exp. 
Co., Inc. 

l-L-E-178 Ditto. 
l-L-E-179 
l-L-E-180 

l-L-E-181 44 “ I 


H 


u 

u 

i* 

*4 


I 

I 












398 


INTERCITY RADIO TELEGRAPH CO. ET AL. VS. 


453 February 23, 1929. 

*###### 

CARL H. BUTMAN, 

Secretary. 

Mimeographed March 13, 1929—2:00 P. M. 

454 (#585.) 

Minutes of the Federal Radio Commission. 

Minute #51. 

February 28, 1929—2:40 p. m. 

Present: Commissioners Robinson, Chairman; Sykes, 
and Lafount, Commander Craven, Captain Hill, Mr. Mar¬ 
riott and the secretary. 

#*##### 

Applications Granted. 

The Commission granted the following applications: 

Call 

File No. Applicant. letters. Nature of appl. 

2-P-C-760 Highland Park Police. C. P. to operate on 1,712 

kcs. £>0 watts. 

l-P-C-Z-10.7 American Tel. & Teleg. Co_ WLO Extension of C. P. to 

Dec. 1,1929. 

1-P-C-Z-10C “ “ “ “ .... WNC Extension C. P. to Dec. 

l-P-C-Z-107 “ “ “ “_ WMI Extension C. P. to 

1,1929. 

June 1,1929. 

##**#*# 


(Signed) CARL H. BUTMAN, 

Secretary. 

CARL H. BUTMAN, 

Secretary. 

Mimeographed March 6, 1929—10:45 A. M. 


FEDERAL RADIO COMMISSION. 


399 


455 (#599.) 

Minutes of the Federal Radio Commission. 

Minute #55. ! 

March 7, 1929—i:30 p. m. 

Present: Commissioners Robinson, Chairman; Sykes, 
and Lafount, and the Secretary. 

i 

i 

Special Authorization. 

A motion was made in the following matter: j 

i 

File Call 

number. Licensee. letters. Natiire of appl. 

. Radio Corporation of America. Emergency Communica¬ 
tion to Mexico. 

j 

that the Radio Corporation of America be authorized tem¬ 
porarily, for the period of the emergency described in the 
letter of the Radio Corporation of America to the Commis¬ 
sion of March 7, to establish communication frbm the sta¬ 
tions in New York City and Port Arthur, (using some fre¬ 
quency already assigned these stations) with I stations of 
the Mexican Government, the end of the period during 
which this operation to be determined by the Commission. 
The Commission gxanted the motion. 

CARL H. BUTMAN, 

Secretary. 

| 

Mimeographed March 12,1929—11:45 A. M. j 

456 (#620.) j 

| 

Minutes of the Federal Radio Commission. 

Minute #57. j 

March 11,1929—12:30 p. m. 

Present; Commissioners Robinson, Chairman; Sykes 
and Lafount, and Mr. Blackwell, the Acting Secretary. 




400 


INTERCITY RADIO TELEGRAPH CO. ET AL. VS. 


Applications Granted. 

The Commission granted the following applications: 

File No. Applicant. letters. Nature of appl. 

l-A-C-3 (Radio Corp. of America). Verified petition for con- 

(RCA Communciations, Inc.) sent to transfer of con¬ 

struction permits and 
and licenses affecting 
point-to-point stations 
from Radio Corpora¬ 
tion of America to RCA 
Communications, Inc. 

in accordance with the recommendations of the Legal Divi¬ 
sion contained in the files. 

G. COLBY BLACKWELL, 

G. COLBY BLACKWELL, 

Acting Secretary. 

Mimeographed March 22, 1929—1:00 P. M. 

457 617. 

Minutes of the Federal Radio Commission. 

Minute #60. 

March 18, 1929—10:30 a. m. 

Present: Commissioners Robinson, Chairman; Sykes, 
and Lafount, the Secretary, Dr. Dellinger, Mr. Sutton and 
Mr. Pratt. 

File No. Applicant. Call letters. Nature of appl. 


5-R-C-57 Mackay Radio & Telegraph Co., KFS Renewal License 
Clearwater, Calif. 

5-R-C-5S Mackay Radio & Telegraph Co., . Renewal License 

near Palo Alto, Calif. 

5-L-E-73 Mackay Radio & Telegraph Co., W6XBK Renewal License 
Portable. 

#♦#*#** 

CARL H. BUTMAN, 

Secretary. 

458 & 459 March 22, 1929. 


Modification of Construction Permit. 

Commissioners Robinson, Sykes, and Lafount approved 
the extension of time of the following construction permits 
from March 31 to Sept. 30,1929, 



FEDERAL RADIO COMMISSION. 


401 


Applicant. Location. 

• I 

Robt. Dollar Co. New York. 

“ “ “ .Honolulu, T. H. 

“ “ “ .Los Angeles, Calif. 

“ “ “ .San Francisco, Calif. 

“ “ “ .Seattle* Wash. 

i 

Marcji 23, 1929. 

Approval of Radio Station License. 

File No. 5-L-C-443, Mackay Radio & Telegraph Co. Gen¬ 
eral Public Coastal Station KEK, Hillsboro, [Ore. Appli¬ 
cation for license to operate station KEK ip accordance 
with construction permit issued Dec. 6,1928. Approved by 
Commissioners Robinson, Sykes, and Lafounti 

| 

# • # * # * * 

CARL H. BUSMAN, 

Secretary. 

Mimeographed March 26, 1929—11:55 A. ]\^. 

460 Ajjmil 2,1929. 

Approval of License Application!. 

File No. 5-L-C-397, Mackay Radio & Teleg. Co., point-to- 
point station KNK, Palo Alto, Calif. Licence application 
to operate in accordance with construction permit issued 
August 1, 1928. Approved by Commissioners Robinson, 
Sykes and Lafount. 

i 

i 

461 #651. i 

I 

i 

Minutes of the Federal Radio Commission. 

I 

i 

Minute #64 -a. 

\ 

i 

April 3, 1929—KL2:30 p. m. 

Present: Commissioners Robinson, Chairman; Sykes, 
and Lafount, and the Secretary. 


File No. 

l-P-C-Z-47 

l-P-C-Z-42 

5-P-C-Z-44 

5-P-C-Z-50 

5P-C-Z-52 


i 








402 


INTERCITY RADIO TELEGRAPH CO. ET AL. VS. 


Applications Granted. 

The Commission granted the following* application: 

Call 

File No. Applicant. letters. Nature of application. 

3-A-E-l (Radio Corp. of America). Verified petition for con- 

(RCA Communications, Inc.) sent to transfer for ex- 

perimental point-to- 
point station licenses 
from Radio Corporation 
o f America to RCA 
Communications, Inc. 

in accordance with the recommendations of the Legal Divi¬ 
sion contained in the files. 

CARL H. BUTMAN, 

Secretary. 

Mimeographed Apr. 11, 1929—4:20 P. M. 


462 


(643.) 


Minutes of the Federal Radio Commission. 


Minute #64. 

April 3, 1929—2:30 p. m. 

Present: Commissioners Robinson, Chairman; Sykes, and 
Lafount, Captain Hill, Lieut. Jett, and the Secretary. 

# * * # * * * 


Applications Granted. 


The Commission granted the following applications: 


Call Nature of 

File No. Applicant. letters. application. 


3-L-G-17 Geophysical Research Corp. 


3-L-G-1S 

44 

44 

44 

3-L-G-19 

44 

44 

44 

3-L-G-20 

44 

44 

44 

3-L-G-21 

44 

44 

44 

3-L-G-22 

44 

44 

4 * 

3-L-G-23 

44 

44 

44 

3-L-G-24 

44 

44 

44 

3-L-G-25 

44 

44 

44 

3-L-G-26 

44 

44 

44 

3-L-G-27 

44 

44 

44 

3-L-G-28 

44 

44 

44 

3-L-G-30 

44 

44 

44 


Geophysical license to 
operate point-to-point 
stations. 






















FEDERAL RADIO COMMISSION 


403 


Applications Granted (Continued)!. 


File No. 
3-L-G-31 


3-L-G-32 

3-L-G-33 

3-L-G-34 

3-L-G-35 

3-L-G-36 

3-L-G-37 


Applicant. 

Geophysical Research Corp, 


('all 

letters. 


| Nature of 
application. 

Geophysical license to 
operate point-to-point 
stations. 


463 


4-3-20 4-3-29. 


3-L-G- 38 “ “ “ .... 

3-L-G- 39 “ “ “ ... 

3-L-G- 40 “ “ “ ... 

3-L-G- 41 “ “ “ ... 

3-P-G- 96 “ “ “ ... 

3-P-G- 97 “ “ “ ... 

3-P-G- 98 “ “ “ ... 

3-P-G- 99 “ “ “ ... 

3-P-G-100 “ “ “ ... 

3-P-G-101 “ “ “ ... 

3-P-G-102 “ “ “ ... 

3-P-G-103 “ “ “ ... 

3-P-G-104 “ “ “ ... 

3-P-G-105 “ “ “ ... 

3-P-G-106 “ “ “ ... 

3-P-G-107 “ “ “ ... 

3-P-G-108 “ “ “ ... 

5-L-C-461 Radio Corp. of America, Bolinas 

Calif. 

1-P-E- 9S General Industries Co., Somer 
ville, Mass.. 


Geophysical Const. 
Permit. 


KKQ Coipmercial license 


ville, Mass. Experimental con¬ 

struction permit. 

5-P-E-113 Fox Film Corporation, Beverly 

Hills, Calif. Experimental con¬ 

struction permit. 

| 

Application Designated for Hearing. 

The Commission designated the following application for 
hearing: 

Call ! Nature of 

File No. Applicant. letters. | application. 

4-L-C-413 The Wireless Telegraph and 
Communication Co., near 

Northbrook, Ill. WHW Comjmercial license 

CARL H. BUSMAN, 

Secretary. 

Mimeographed April 8, 1929—10:15 a. m. 































404 


INTERCITY RADIO TELEGRAPH CO. ET AL. VS. 


464 (656.) 

Minutes of the Federal Radio Commission. 

Minute #65. 

April 5, 1929—2:30 p. m. 

Present: Commissioners Robinson, Chairman; Sykes, and 
Lafount, Capt. Hill, Comdr. Craven, Lieut. Jett, Mr. Sut¬ 
ton, Mr. Smith, and the Secretary. 

Rules and Regulations. 

The Commission, Commissioner Robinson dissenting, 
adopted General Order No. 62, a copy of which is attached 
hereto. 


Frequency Assignments. 

On motion duly made and carried the Commission, Com¬ 
missioner Robinson dissenting, revised the list of fre¬ 
quencies granted to the Mackay Radio and Telegraph Com¬ 
pany June 1, 1928, to read as follows: 


6815 

8970 

13030 

17680 M 

6875 

8980 M 

13750 

17700 

7655 

8990 

13960 

18260 

7662.5 M 

9070 

14680 

18780 

7670 

9290 

14695 M 

19540 

7730 

10170 

14710 

19560 M 

7737.5 M 

10490 

14725 M 

19580 

7745 

10810 

14740 

19600 M 

7752.5 M 

10820 M 

14755 M 

19620 

7760 

10830 

14770 

19740 

8075 

10890 

17140 

20300 

8710 

13000 

17420 

20980 

8850 

13015 M 

17660 

21380 


M=Mid channel. 

Applications Granted. 

The Commission, Commissioner Robinson dissenting, 
granted the following applications in accordance with the 
recommendations of the Engineering Division: 



FEDERAL RADIO COMMISSION 


405 


File No. 
1-P-C- 36 

1-P-C- 40 
1-P-C- 41 

465 

5-P-C- 42 


5-P-C- 44 


1-P-C- 45 


1-P-C- 48 


l-P-C-734 


l-P-C-735 
1-L-C- 72 
1-L-C- 73 
1-L-C- 74 
1-L-C- 75 
1-L-C- 76 
1-L-C- 78 
1-L-C- 83 

1-L-C- S4 
1-L-C- 87 


5-L-C- 79 

5-L-C- SI 
5-L-C- S2 


466 

l-L-C-436 
l-L-C-437 
l-L-C-438 
l-L-C-439 
5-L-C-296 
5-L-C- 99 
1-L-C- 90 
1-L-C- 91 
1-L-C- 93 
1-L-C- 94 
1-M-C-10 
1-R-A- 1 


Applicant. 

Radio Corp. of America. 

44 44 44 4» 

a %i a 44 

44 *4 4* 44 

* 

44 44 44 44 

44 *4 44 44 

%4 *4 44 44 

44 44 44 44 

44 *4 44 44 

44 44 44 44 

44 44 44 44 

44 44 44 44 

44 44 44 44 

44 44 44 44 

44 »4 44 44 

44 44 44 44 

44 *4 i 9 44 

44 44 44 44 

44 44 44 44 

44 44 44 44 

44 44 44 44 


44 

44 

44 

44 

44 

44 

44 

44 

44 

44 

44 

44 

44 

44 

44 

44 

44 

44 

44 

44 


44 44 

44 44 

44 44 

44 44 

44 44 

44 44 

44 44 

44 44 

44 44 

44 44 


44 


44 44 44 


Baruchrome Corporation 


Call 

letters. 

WQV 

WKO 

WQA 


(KWE 

(KKH 

(KEM 

(KIO 

(KEN 

(WBU 

(WER 

(WEG 

(WGX 

(WJT 

(WGT 


(WPE 

(WET 


WIY 

WES 

WIK 

WEA 

WAJ 

WHR 

WED 

WKW 


WQP 


I 

Nature of 
application. 

Modification of con¬ 
struction permit 
Modification of license 

44 44 

i 

I 

i 

! 

; 

i 

44 44 

j 

i 

j 

| 44 44 


j “ “and 

construction permit 

j 

Modification of license 
and construction 
permit 

Modification of license 
aijid construction 
permit 


Modification of license 


“ 

44 

44 

j 44 

44 


44 

44 

44 

44 


Modification of con¬ 
struction permit 
Modification of license 


(WEL 

(WEX 


i 

KKQ Modification of con¬ 
struction permit 
KEE Modification of license 

KER Modification of con¬ 

struction permit 


WEG 

WQW 

WKW 

WKU 

KRO 

KET 

WRT 

WII 

WSO 

WQK 

WEC 


License 


Renewal license 

44 


44 

44 

44 


44 

44 

44 

44 


Modification of license 


W2XBR Renewal license 


i 










































406 


INTERCITY RADIO TELEGRAPH CO. ET AL. VS. 


Applications Granted—Continued. 

Call Nature of 

File No. Applicant. letters. application. 


l-P-C-730 Mackay 
l-P-C-731 
l-P-C-732 
5-R-C- 60 
5-R-C- 56 
1-L-C-172 
5-R-C- 50 
5-L-C-171 


Radio & Teleg. Co 


44 44 

44 44 

4b 44 

44 44 

I 44 

44 44 

44 U 



Construction permit 

44 44 

44 44 

KNR 

Renewal license 

KG II 

44 44 

WKI 

License 

KWT 

Renewal license 

KKC 

License 


Miscellaneous. 


On motion duly made and carried, the Commission re¬ 
ferred the application of the Mackay Radio and Telegraph 
Company for construction permit to erect a station at the 
Island of Guam to the Legal Division for recommendation. 

I CARL H. BUTMAN, 

Secretary. 

Mimeographed April 13, 1929—12:30 p. m. 

467 (658.) 

Acts of Commissioners (Other than those shown in 

Minutes). 

# •# * * # * * 


April 11, 1929. 

Approval of Station License. 

File No. l-LnC-351, Mackay Radio & Teleg. Co., Station 
WSL, Sayville, New York. Application for license to oper¬ 
ate general public coastal station at Sayville, New York, in 
accordance with construction permit issued on March 10, 
1928. Approved according to Engineering recommenda¬ 
tions by Commissioners Robinson, Sykes and Lafount. 

April 11, 1929. 

Approval of Station License. 

File No. l-L-C-404, Mackay Radio & Teleg. Co., Station 
WSF, 20 Broad Street, New York City. Application for 
license to operate general public coastal station at 20 Broad 
Street, New York City in accordance with construction per¬ 
mit issued on July 25, 1928. Approved according to En¬ 
gineering recommendations bv Commissioners Robinson, 
Sykes, and Lafount. 

Mimeographed April 15, 1929—2:00 p. m. 









407 


FEDERAL RADIO COMMISSION. 


I 


468 (659.) 

I 

i 

Minutes of the Federal Radio Commission. 

Minute #68. ■ 

April 12, 1929—2:40 p. m. 

Present: Commissioners Robinson, Chairnjian; Sykes, and 
Lafount, Acting Chief Engineer Hill, General Counsel Web¬ 
ster, and the Secretary. 

I 

***** ;* * 


Applications Granted (Continued). 


Call 

File No. Applicant. letters. Nature of application. 

5-M-C-24 RCA Communications, Inc. KQH Modification of licenses and 

KIO construction permit for 

KKH additional point of com¬ 

munication. 

Applications Designated for Hearing. 

The Commission designated the following applications 
for hearings: 

Call Nature of 

File No. Applicant. letters. appl. 


1-P-C-S64 Nat’l Radio Press Assn.,Los Angeles, Calif.. INew Constr.permit 


l-P-C-867 

44 


44 

<4 

Chicag, Illinois_ 

44 

44 

44 

l-P-C-S6o 

44 

44 

44 

44 

San Francisco, 




a 





Calif. 

i “ 

44 

44 

1-P-C-S68 

a 

44 

44 

44 

St. Louis, Mo. 

44 

44 

44 

1-P-C-S49 

44 

44 

44 

44 

Philadelphia, Pa.. 

; 44 

44 

tt 

l-P-C-850 

n 

44 

44 

44 

Minneapolis, Minn. 

it 

1 

44 

44 

l-r-C-S51 

a 

44 

44 

44 

Atlanta, Ga. 

1 « 

44 

44 

1-P-C-S52 

a 

44 

44 

44 

Salt Lake City, 









Utah . 

44 

44 

44 

l-P-C-853 

a 

44 

44 

44 

New Orleans, La.. 

44 

44 

44 

l-P-C-854 

a 

44 

44 

44 

Kansas City, Mo.. 

44 

44 

44 

1-P-C-S55 

a 

44 

44 

44 

Cincinnati, Ohio... 


44 

44 

l-P-C-856 

a 

44 

44 

44 

New York, N. Y.. 

44 

44 

44 

l-P-C-857 

44 

44 

44 

44 

Cleveland, Ohio. 

44 

44 

44 

1-P-C-S5S 

a 

44 

44 

44 

Dertoit, Mich. 

“ 

44 

44 

1-P-C-S59 

a 

44 

44 

44 

Dalas, Tex. 

44 

44 

44 

1-P-C-SOO 

a 

44 

44 

44 

Columbus, Ohio.... 

44 

44 

44 

1-P-C-8GI 

a 

44 

44 

44 

New York, N. Y. 

44 

44 

44 

l-P-C-862 

a 

44 

44 

44 

Seattle, Wash. 

44 

44 

44 

l-P-C-863 

44 

44 

44 

44 

Washington, D. C.. 

44 

44 

44 

1-P-C-S66 

a 

44 

44 

44 

Boston, Mass. 

44 

44 

44 

iff. 


* 

* 


* * 

* 

* 







CARL H. BtJTMAN, 



Secretary . 

Mimeographed April 16, 1929—11:00 a. m. 


i 

i 


i 















408 


INTERCITY RADIO TELEGRAPH CO. ET AL. VS. 


469 (#661.) 

Minutes of the Federal Radio Commission. 

Minute #69. 

April 15, 1929—10:30 a. m. 

Present: Commissioners Robinson, Chairman; Sykes and 
Lafount; Capt. Hill, Mr. Sutton, and the Secretary. 

• •••••• 


Applications Granted. 

The Commission granted the following applications: 

Call 

File No. Applicant. letters. Nature of application. 

1-A-E- 3 Irving Trust Co., Trustee for Ex- W2XAL Assignment of license 
I>erimenter Publishing Co., Inc., to Aviation Radio 

Coytesville, N. J. Station, Inc. 

l-A-B-79 Irving Trust Co., Trustee for Ex- WNRY Assignmentof license 
perimenter Publishing Co., Inc., to Aviation Radio 

Coytesville, N. J. Station, Inc. 


470 


4-15-29. 


Designation of Frequencies for Mobile Service. 


On motion duly made and carried, the Commission 
adopted the following designation of low and medium fre¬ 
quencies for use by coastal stations on the Great Lakes: 


Low frequencies. 


Medium frequencies. 


143 kc. Calling channel. 

161 44 

Working 44 

163 44 

a u 

165 44 

a a 

167 “ 

tc a 

169 4 4 

il u 

171 44 

a a 

174 44 

a a 


410 kc. Calling channel. 
425 44 Working 44 
454 “ 44 “ 


On motion duly made and carried, the Commission 
adopted the following designation of low and medium fre¬ 
quencies for use by ship stations on the Great Lakes: 



FEDERAL RADIO COMMISSION. 


409 


Low frequencies. Medium frequencies. 

143 kc. Calling channel. 394 kc. Working channel 

(CW-ICW). 

151 44 Working 44 410 44 Calling channel. 

153 44 44 44 425 44 Working 44 j 

155 44 44 44 375 44 Radio Compass channel. 

157 44 44 44 

j 

CARL H. BUTMAN, 

j Secretary. 

Mimeographed April 17, 1929—11:15 a. m. j 
471 709. 

i 

* # * * * * | # 

Apifil 16, 1929.- 

Approval of Radio Station Construction! Permit. 

I 

File No. 4-P-C-889, Intercity Radio Telegraph Company, 
commercial station WME, Duluth, Minnesota, j Application 
for construction permit to install tube transmitter to re¬ 
place spark apparatus in accordance with General Order 
51. Approved in accordance with engineering recommenda- 
tions by Commissioners Robinson, Sykes, and Lafount. 
The Commission also permitted the operation; of the spark 
apparatus for the term of two weeks effective April 16 pend¬ 
ing installation of the tube apparatus. 


Appl 23,1929. 

Modification of Construction Perniit. 

i 

File No. l-M-P-C-3, Universal Wireless Coijnmunications 
Co. Inc. Application for modification of construction per¬ 
mit to change location of experimental transmitter from 
New York, N. Y. to Scobeyville, N. J. to operate as public 
point to point station communicating with Chicago, Illinois. 
Approved by Commissioners Robinson, Sykes, and La- 
fount. 


410 


INTERCITY RADIO TELEGRAPH CO. ET AL. VS. 


April 23,1929. 

Approval of Radio Station License. 

File No. l-L-C-747, Universal Wireless Communications 
Co. Inc., Station WKDA, Scobeyville, N. J. Approval of 
license to operate public point to point station communicat¬ 
ing with Chicago, Illinois. Approved by Commissioners 
Robinson, Sykes, and Lafount. 

#*•##*# 

April 23,1929. 

Approval of Radio Station License. 

File No. 4-L-C-473, Universal Wireless Communications 
Co., Inc., Station WKDE, Plainfield, Illinois. Approval of 
license to operate public point to point station communi¬ 
cating with Scobeyville, N. J. Approved by Commissioners 
Robinson, Sykes, and Lafount. 

*#**•## 


472 787. 

Minutes of the Federal Radio Commission. 

Minute #79. 

May 8, 1929—2:30 P. M. 

Present: Commissioners Robinson, Chairman; Sykes, La¬ 
fount, Saltzman, and Starbuck, the General Counsel, Chief 
Engineer, and the Secretary. 

Applications Granted. 

The Commission granted the following applications in 
accordance with the recommendation of the Engineering 
Division : 

Call 

File No. Applicant. letters. Nature of appl. 

l-P-F-36 Jenkins Laboratories, Nr. Silver 

Springs, Md. W3XK Visual C. P. 



FEDERAL RADIO COMMISSION. 411 

i 

The Commission, Commissioner Robinson! dissenting, 
granted the following application in accordance with the 
recommendations of the Engineering Division :j 

Call j 

File No. Applicant. letters. future of appl. 

l-L-E-189 General Electric Co., Schenec¬ 
tady, N. Y. W2XAG Exp. license to op¬ 

erate with 200 KW. 
from midnight to 
morning on 550, 
660, 790, 1150 & 
1500 kcs. 

i 

# * # # # # ! * 

i 

; 

473 Applications Designated for Hearing j( Continued). 

i 

Call | 

File No. Applicant. letters. Nature of Appl. 

j 

License £2048 Jos. Lessard, Ishpeming, Mich. W9AXR Renewal of Ama¬ 
teur License. 

4 4 Upon motion duly made, seconded, and j unanimously 
carried, the following order was adopted: 

It appearing that certain applications forj construction 
permits and/or licenses involving the use of high frequency 
channels for point to point communication within the United 
States have heretofore been filed with the Commission, and 

It further appearing that, pursuant to Section 11 of the 
Radio Act of 1927, as amended, hearings on I said applica¬ 
tions have been granted to Radio Corporation of America, 
Mackay Radio & Telegraph Co., Wireless Telegraph and 
Communication Company, Intercity Radio Telegraph Com¬ 
pany, and others, and 

It further appearing that the Commission will require 
additional evidence before deciding whether it will serve 
public interest, convenience or necessity to grhnt the appli¬ 
cations of Radio Corporation of America, Mackay Radio & 
Telegraph Company, Wireless Telegraph ancj Communica¬ 
tion Company, and Intercity Radio Telegraph)' Company, or 
any of them, 

Now, therefore, 

It is ordered that May 22, 1929, at 10:00 A.j M. be, and it 
is hereby set as the time for further hearings upon the 
applications of said Radio Corporation of America, Mackay 

15—4987a 





412 


INTERCITY RADIO TELEGRAPH CO. ET AL. VS. 


Radio & Telegraph Co., Wireless Telegraph and Communi¬ 
cation Co., and Intercity Radio Telegraph Co., and 

It is further ordered that the Secretary shall notify said 

v * 

applicants that they will be heard at Room 2333 Interior 
Building, Washington, I). C., at said time, and 

It is also ordered that said Secretary shall issue a press 
release to the effect that said further hearings will be held, 
in order that any person favoring or opposing the grant¬ 
ing of the construction permits and/or licenses may have 
an opportunity to be heard.” 

CARL H. BUTMAN, 

Secretary. 


Mimeographed May 10, 1929—11:30 A. M. 


474 


892. 


Minutes of the Federal Radio Commission. 

Minutes it 81. 

i i 

May 10, 1929—10:30 a. m. 

Present: Commissioners Robinson, Chairman; Sykes, 
Lafount, Saltzman, and Starbuck, the General Counsel, 
Acting Chicff Eingineer Hill, Commander Craven, Lieut. 
Jett, Mr. Gross, and the Secretary. 

Rules and Regulations. 

There was presented to the Commission for its approval 
the following allocation plan covering maritime mobile, 
coastal and mobile press low and high calling and working 
frequencies. 

Maritime Mobile Frequency Allocation Plan. 

Ocean-Going Vessels. 


143 kc. Calling CW only 

151 “ Working CW, ICW, only 


153 

i i 

11 

i t 

a 

11 

155 

i i 

11 

11 

a 

11 

157 

a 

u 

i i 

11 

a 

159 

it 

11 

a 

a 

a 


a 

a 

a 

a 

a 



FEDERAL RADIO COMMISSION. 


413 


410 “ 
425 “ 
454 “ 
468 “ 


c c 
i c 


a 

tt 

a 


500 


a 


375 kc. Radio Compass 
400 “ CW, ICW only—Working 
CW, ICW—Damped “ 

CW, ICW— 

CW, ICW— 

CW, ICW—only 

Distress} CW > ICW—Damped 

5525 kc. Calling 
5555 “ Working 
5615 “ Working 
6590 kc. Working 
6605 “ 

6620 4 4 “ 

6635 “ 

8290 kc. Working 


8330 “ 

a 

8450 “ 

a 

11050 “ 

Calling 

11110 “ 

Working 

11230 “ 

a 

13240 “ 

11 

13270 “ 

a 

16580 “ 

Calling 

16660 “ 

Working 

16860 “ 

a 

22100 “ 

Calling 

22220 “ 

Working 

22460 “ 

a 


Also working frequency of individual Coastal station 
when directed to do so by Coastal station controlling the 
frequency. 


475 


Great Lakes Vessels. 


143 kc. Calling CW only 
151 “ Working CW, ICW only 

153 ‘ 4 4 4 CW, ICW 

155 “ “ CW, ICW 

157 “ “ CW, ICW 

375 kc. Badio Compass 
394 “ Working CW, ICW only 


a 

it 

a 


414 


INTERCITY RADIO TELEGRAPH CO. ET AL. VS. 


410 kc. Calling CW, ICW Damped 


425 44 

Working CW, ICW Damped 

5525 44 

Calling 

5555 44 

Working 

5615 “ 

a 

8330 44 

u 


General Public Coastal Stations. 
Coastal Station Calling Frequencies. 


High freq. 

5525 kc. 

11050 44 

16575 (channel 16580) 
22100 


Low freq. 

143 kc. 

410 44 (Great Lakes only) 
500 (Except Great Lakes) 


Coastal Working Low Frequencies. 


111 kc. 

East Moriches 

406 kc. Chatham 

117 “ 

Marion 

408 

a 

Torrance 

119 44 

Palm Beach 

418 

a 

Baltimore 

126 “ 

Bolinas 



Galveston 

129 44 

Marion 



Port Arthur 

131 44 

Port Arthur 

425 

a 

Cleveland 

133 44 

Tuckerton 



Buffalo 


Torrance 



Chicago 

135 44 

New York 



Duluth 


Baltimore 

436 

11 

Bolinas 

136 44 

Bolinas 

442 

6 C 

New York 

137 44 

East Moriches 

454 

U 

Cleveland 

141 44 

Marion 



Chicago 

161 44 

Cleveland 



Buffalo 


Buffalo 



Duluth 

167 44 

Chicago 

462 

tc 

Tuckerton 


Duluth 

476 

a 

New London 

394 44 

Palm Beach 





Note.—E. M. C. A. = 
America. 


Eadiomarine Corporation of 



FEDERAL RADIO COMMISSION. 


415 


476 Coastal Working Low Frequencies (Continued). 


High freq. 

M. R. T. 

107 kc. Sayville 
109 4 4 Palo Alto 
121 “ Palm Beach 
123 ‘ 4 Palo Alto 
131 “ New York 
392 “ Sayville 
392 “ West Palm Beach 
418 “ New York 
Hillsboro 
Clearwater 
Palo Alto 


Low freq. 

I 

T. R. T. 

145 kc. Miami 
147 “ Boston ! 
Mobile | 

149 “ New Orleans 
436 “ Boston j 
442 ‘ 4 Ft. Morgan 
Mobile | 

448’ “ New Orleans 
482 u Miami 


Other 

Companies. 

163 kc. 

West Coast 


Great Lakes 

165 “ 

Great Lakes 

169 “ 

Great Lakes 

171 “ 

Great Lakes 

174 “ 

Great Lakes 

425 “ 

Great Lakes 

438 “ 

East Coast 

454 “ 

Great Lakes 

460 “ 

West Coast 


Note.— M. R. T. = Mackay Radio Telegraph Co. 
T. R. T. = Tropical Radio Telegraph Co. 

i 


477 Coastal Working High Frequencies. 




F 

br assignment 

R. M. C. A. 

M. R. T. 

T. R. T. 

to other 

Coastal Stations. 

Coastal Stations. 

Coastal Stations. 

companies. 

4188 kc. 

4196 kc. 

4148 kc. 

4116 kc. 

4775 “ 

4755 “ 

4172 “ 

i 

1 

6515 “ 

6440 “ 

5675 “ 

6650 “ 


6455 “ 


6665 “ 

i 

8630 44 

6470 “ 

6560 “ 

1 





416 


INTERCITY RADIO TELEGRAPH CO. ET AL. VS. 


R. M. C. A. 
Coastal Stations. 

M. R. T. 

Coastal Stations. 

T. R. T. 

Coastal Stations. 

For assignment 
to other 
companies. 

6485 ke. 

6575 kc. 

8490 kc. 

11020 kc. 

6500 44 

8670 44 

8550 44 

11080 44 
11140 44 

8’350 44 

8690 44 

11290 44 

11200 44 

8370 44 


12340 44 


8390 44 

11320 44 

12370 44 

16900 44 

8430 44 

11350 44 

13180 44 


8570 44 

11380 44 

17100 44 

22160 44 

12430 44 
12490 44 

13060 44 

22280 44 


12520 44 

16900 44 

22340 44 


12550 44 

16980 44 

22400 44 


12580 44 
12640 44 

21580 44 

22580 44 


12670 44 

21620 44 



12730 44 

21660 44 



12820 44 
13210 44 

22700 44 




16700 44 
16740 44 
16780 44 
21700 44 
21740 44 
21780 44 
21820 44 
21860 44 
21900 44 
21940 44 
21980 44 
22040 44 
22520 44 

Note.— R. M. C. A. = Radiomarine Corporation of Amer¬ 
ica. 

M. R. T. = Mackay Radio Telegraph Co. 

T. R. T. = Tropical Radio Telegraph Co. 



I 


FEDERAL RADIO COMMISSION. 


417 


478 


I 

Mobile Press Frequencies. 

j 

East of Mississippi. West of Mississippi. 


5645 kc. 

5585 kc 

6545 44 

6530 44 

8250 44 

8230 i 44 

11260 44 

111701 44 

16500 44 

16460 44 


of the Badio 


Having* examined said plan, the Commission made the 
following* findings: 

1. The adoption of said plan will serve public interest, 
convenience or necessity. 

2. The adoption of said plan is necessary t|o more fully 
carry out, and to comply with, the provisions 
Act of 1927 as amended. 

Upon motion duly made, seconded and carried, the Com¬ 
mission adopted said plan and ordered 

(1) That such existing licenses for maritime mobile, 
coastal and mobile press stations as do not conform to said 
plan be so modified as to conform to said plap. 

(2) That all future frequency assignments) to said sta¬ 
tions and classes of stations be made in conformitv with 

i * 

said plan. 

Pursuant to the above plan, there was presented to the 
Commission for its approval a new allocation bf all general 
public coastal and combined general public* coastal and 
public point-to-point stations now in operation, specifying 
the frequency for each such station. This allocation is as 
follows: 


i 

! 





418 


INTERCITY RADIO TELEGRAPH CO. ET AL. VS 


J S 2 

o § g 
10 so 

•s 

_ •** 
o c. « 

SO IQ g 

co © 
so o o 
r-i to o 

*s #s 

CO X X 
rfi CC CC 

T—I 'rK 


O CO 
O CO 


X X 
CO ^ 
H< iH 


o o 

O CO 
CM T-i 
1-1 CM 
1 —I CM 

•s 

O 

0~® 

to 

o 23 


‘ • o 

o 

_r © 
O CO 
CO rH 
• ® ^ 
O 00 o 

® O0 
to ^ to 
«s to CO 
O CM rH 
CO IQ 
to 


o © 

O CO 
CM rH 
rH CM 
i—l CM 

*s 

_® 

° 2 
to rt 
© OM 

^ CM 


^ O 
X 
~ to 
to CO 
CM i-i 
to 
to 


O 

o 

. CM 

O iH 
O rH 
CM 

i—l 

^ cT 

~ to 

o o 

to i—I 

© t—I 


~C 

o co 

CO CO 
CO X 
X 

#s 

to to 
CM Cl 
to to 
to to 


o o 

o o 

CM CM 


r O' 

o 

_r cc ~ 

o co ^ 

CO 2 CC 

co co 
o 00 o"' 00 

*X X 

>s LC ^ 

CO to CO to 
rH CM rH Cl 
to to 
to to 


to . 

00 o 

to 

to Hh 

CO 

O r*i ^ 

O eo O 

1—1 ^ rH 

r C r! • 

© o -g 

x ico c g 
iQ co L ~ 
co - ci 

rr O X O 

co co 

HI H 1 


3 fcc 

a .s 

— -H> 

bC g 

*3 © 

:o a 

<1 O 

O £ 

.a o 

> 52J 


jz . . . 0 O h_M 

£ $ ‘ « « „ . 

^ SH . ,5 no rH 

^ ^ K ^ ^ g - 

~ © r- 

+T cc ~PQ © 

13 ~ ^ O © ^ 2 

S s o cr-^H ■£ - 

— •— 1 rH ^ *H 


H • —1 o Ci 
— © •—* o 

“5h r ^ rr> 


o*o 


JK O O 

02 & a 


HH © a 

Cw P-H ^ N# 

O O ~ 

PQ O o 

bD pc r “H 

^ <72 13 - 

S ^ 

S 2 

© 1—1 2 "• 

•£ ,© hP 
0^0 

O —■> Hi 
C © 3 ~ 

< PQ PQ ^ 


b o . 
3 o o 
M .0 

err 1 ^ 


53 o 
M &« 

c*-i CQ .*• 
O M 01 

cc ^2 

h% o Ch 
. 15 o o 
O O G 


. • © 
$3 £ 

~o 


o o 

>h c; 


o o 

/H H 


CO 

O 


cC 

tfl 



O 



<*W 

O 

O 

P=H 

O 

"c5 


O 

O 

72 

«W 

72 




• 

O 



O 


• 

© 


0 

U 


O 

O 

P C 


bJO 

r—* 

0 

K. 







































FEDERAL RADIO COMMISSION 


419 


o o 
o o 

IQ IQ 
^ ** 
00 CO 
CO CO 


- ~ 
O O 

CO G5 

oo 2 

T“> 

iC> © 
CM CO 
*Q uo 

Q> CO 


o ~ 

o o 

lQ »Q 

o 


o o 

co so 

iQ CO 
CO r*H 
CM 

*Q o' 

(M § 

^ vQ 
iQ CO 

« _• o' •■« 

O^o 
o P CM 
rH CO 
<M ^ t-h 
CM ^tH 

«. «S C ~ J »K 

o o o 

CM iTC lQ 

CO o 


r*. 

gs 

s ^ 

ao J2 

1H 3 
Tfl tH 

O 00 00 


lQ O 
t- CO 
CO iQ 
IQ CO 


O' g 

gs 

O § 
© 2 


1 - 1 

o 1-1 
“o' 

CM X* 
05 2 
CO ^ 


. VQ 
O CM 
O ^ 
t^. IQ 
CM - 
CM O 

#K 

o 

o - 

rH M 
CM Cl 
CM 00 


<t>8 

g S 

2 CM 
Ti CM 


O0000 ~oco .o CO 1^0 

O^^OQO^OO^OlM 
HHHQQHt>CHC5CO 
CM - ., CO CO ~CO CO ~CO irH 


HNCOHtMHOCOHNCOnH 

1—I CO O O <M 


•s CO 'T"( 
H CO CM 
<M 


Q o O 00 

o o o ^ 

^ *s #v *s 

00 o O CO 
CO’ CO CO CO 
^ ^ n 


Cw © 

•s 

-S g 

c3 £ 
A O 

g 

Q r i 

03 cS 

H CQ 


© 1 1 

02=3 

o 

*rg O 
c 3 q 

«3 

2s £ 

s s 

OK 


O cj 

CO w—i 

^ f=H 


>H !g 
. "cs 
52; O 

»S 

^sS O 

U 

O ^ 


© cs 

5s (X 


x a * k 

^ ‘ill-* 

E-< K Ei 

•s 

•4^ rs • ^ 

£ ff f-i c3 

g 9 ^ £ 

5 'o ° 

£ 2 £ ^3 

CS 3 ? r— 5 - 

O O ~ £ 

KSh? 


So 

<D © 
OC rn 

2 ° 

*—i i—< 

•+* r KC 
© O- 

PL. ® 
© 

.S&H 


<3 <5 



































420 


INTERCITY RADIO TELEGRAPH CO. ET AL. VS. 


£ 

o 


co 

a 

O 

*43 

a 

~M 

Ul 

r a 

-M 

CO 

a 

© 

O 


CO 

© 


O 

CO 

03 


o 

uO 

03 

GO 

cd 

© 

© - 
a vo 
© 

2,0 

geo 

s 

o 

co 

o 


O 

03 

O 

o 

o 

o 

o 

r* 

8 w 


o o 

O CO 
O C5 
03 r-t 
rH 03 

o'® 

•§s 

^ 03 


O 


TjH 


GO 


CO 


©8 

si 

CO ^ 

• ^ -y-T • 

O CQ^ 
0^^003 
IQ H ^ ^ lO 
CO * ^ Tti (M 03 

H O CO CO 
CO 03 


O 

O 


03 


o o c 

NXC 
O Cl 
CO 03 r"f 

tH l 03 

£ o' o' 

^ CO 

O o =2 
W 03 ^ 
. rH ^ 


O 

03 


- O 

o§° 

O CO 


O 


co 


CO 




o o 
o o 

O O 
03 

rh C5 

Tt< co 


o o 
g co o 

° H O H 


cc 

03 


o _- 

o ~ o 

LJO o CO 
O O ,_, 

^ CO CO #•. ^ #x 

CO X H cq i—i CO t— 

O H H H 

Ttl H ^ H 


O O 
O CO 
^ o 
CO CO 
tH 
CO 

03 «~T 

£ g 

CO ^ 
-03 

8- . 
^ -ro 

oog 2 

5 rl ?3 


O CO co co ^ o' 

O "T ^ C Ol 

ic H H n N QQ 

^ ^ ^ CO 

CO O O H X Cl 

t'- CO i—i co 

Ttl H H H 


ZD 

U 

© 


© 


© 

a 

cr 1 
© 
u 

o — 
. "5 
*3 03 © 
© © 
cu 2 

02 .3 

«w ■§ 

° o 

*9 

© 

a 

a 

CJO 

• ^4 

co 

CO 

© 

© 


© 

© 

o 

§ 


© 

a 


a 

w-H 

© 

3 

a 

PH 


© 

a 

© 

O 


*5 °° 
§ © 

s a 

J-4 

C 

K* 

£ 

© 


• ^ 

^ . * 


2 » 

J 8 

© « ~ 


a 

o*' 

° IS 

^4 

o 

- 4-1 

CO ^ 

a 

fe 

- 4 - 4 > 

© 

"a 


PP 


a 


© 

« M 


U 


© 


s 


<1 


«M 

O 

o 

o 

• 




«H 

r—H 

a 

Q 

•s 

OQ 


o 

O 

© 


a ~ 

a '• 

o 

*•-4 

'zi 

a 

rri 


co 

co 

a 


a 

-m 

a 

O 


a 

© 

f-4 

© 

a 

O 


O 

o 

© 


a 

a 

o 

tH % 

S8 2 


CO X 

© © a 

m r- ■ CO 

OT? “ er! 


X 

o tn a © 

o .£& 
_?* ^ * 
£ w ' w c a 

o o o S ° 3 
^ a % »® pp ^ 

^ 2 c ^ ^ 7 
-m > *a > ^ 5 -m 
co x ^ ^ ? a h 
a a ® © © a o 
H O S ^ ^ Cl, pu 



























133,143, 408, 500, 5525, 6485, 
8430, 11050, 12490, 12430, 
16580, 22040, 22100, 22520. 
133,143, 462, 500, 5525, 6485, 
6500, 8370, 11050, 12730, 






Twin Harbor Stev. & Tug'. Co. . Iloquiam, \\ ash. 


























Specific Assignment of Frequencies to Combined Coastal (P. G.) and Public Point-to-point Stations 

Now Operating. 


422 


INTERCITY RADIO TELEGRAPH CO. ET AL. VS. 


v ? 

o 

o 

5 

a 

c 

<y 


O O w 10 o o 

CM CM ©1 CM CM CM 
Pji -*^1 


O 

2 ooOooor^ioio 

rv * #s *•> #s 

t>. f- t— t>* t>* t>» 7“ICO 

7—I rH 1 “H rH i-H rH ^ ^ CC 


LfO 

©l 


ITS 

t- 

r- 

l© 

•V 

1© 

CM 

hJH 


O O o © 
CO CO CO CO 
COOOC5 
*00 00 OO 00 

cd* o' cd" ©" 

r-1 rH rH r-l 
t—H rH t-H . 
rf ^ ^ -Ji 


i© *© 

CM ©1 

__^ ^ - * ** 

o o o o 

5 N r- n 

^ l© ^ Th 
- > »- 00 *>,_ •* 

5 <2 i© 

'H* 7— 1 <M 1—1 r ” 

• ^ ^. a 

»o 0O CC o ‘O l - 

CO SO h*i ^© ^ 


*© i© 
©2 ©1 


7— ? 

i© i© 


i-_ t>- ^ 




CC 

o 


cs 

O 


W X 
o 3 


>oo 

fa £5 
> > > 


t—( KS 

S 5 


©H 7-1 


ci 

-4-1 

CC 


© ^ 


o 

a 

cc 

a 

« 

o 


O W-H 
_; - r-1 .-5 

id H M 
© <5 w 

i~_i - © 

- ©.S’ 

© :fl *r 

&:g S 

<H 3 


© 

© 


© : 

^6 

o 

;g ©3 
cS g 

2 C5 

l« 

c3 !«* 

w-j o 
^ & 
. t-> 

Ct 

s ^ 
cu 5 


cc © r-J 

•—< ••—i "T! 

w—I © 

^ hh 
—* 

o O 

§2q 

•s.S s 

o g o 

© • 
r 

r CS 
CS © O 

!rH W 

^ P 


<J ^jH - - ^ - 


O 

o 

u 

o 

-+^> 

o 

w—i 

u 

o 

fe 


CO 

00 


© 

• 

u—i 


© 

• f ' 

§ s 


—» LJ 

S L c 2 


C3 


•s 

, -7 


o 

CJO 

Cw 

© 


o © 

o o 


© 

o ^ 
O < 


„ r. «« 

o 

fO • 

cs a 

P -S ^ 

O 

O o 

C5 & o 

*|g| 

| o eK 
^ |p a .2 
73 § 2 2 


O -© © 122 

9 feows 


C.2 
sc _:S 


© cs 

I I , • 

C3 © O 


© 


© 




o 

O 


© 

Eh 


C3 




© 

r 

© 











































FEDERAL RADIO COMMISSION 


423 


•s 

#S 

•* 


O 

uO 

lO 


CM 

CM 

CM 


lO 


ITS 


UO 

©> 

ITS 


r» 

©i 

r» 

CO 

#K 

©> 


t- 

t— 

C— 


t— 

t- 

t— 






• • rs 


r> 


O ^ ^ 




CM lO o 

lO 



-Ji 




^ ^ #v 

rv 


• 

© o UO 

O 

lO 


rH CM CM 

CM 

CM 

03 

^ ^ 


■HH 



rH O O . O . © . O 

nhhoho^o^ 

•!—( t-— t-— 

v • e» •*» >2 #•> lO ^ ** 

HWlQ^HXHQONOOrl 

^ t2> o c— © © © t>* 


O* 

hH 

H-l 

£ 


CZ 

be 


O ^ M 


S 

o 


© O 

o 

“H =2 


O 

o 

>% 

Cw 


o 

02 


© 

rH 

rn 

o 


O OQ 
>—i ..—( o 
Cw ^ 

^ c3 C 

■s«a 

W « s 

^ C3 


CS 

© 

•4^ 

© 

f3 

© 

# 

rH 

cS 


CS 

& 

a 

o 

O 


<! 


2 CJO^ 

j go 

,5 ^ © . 


© 


W O 


rH 

♦ • 

• • • 

• • 

• • • 


• 

• 

• 

"3 

. 


• 

■ ’ 


• 

• 


© • 



r* 

rH rd 

a.s : 

O 

• rH 


C3 

"o3 

>H 

I—* 

o 

rH 
f H 

fl 

hH 

© 

CS 

•- ^52? 

O 5 ^ 

•4-i ~ 

•N 

rH 

rr 

• rH 

*s 

rH 

rH 

CJO r5 

r£S 


• rH 

© 

£-1 C r 

© .S «■£ 

C/0H3 <— 

o 

►> 

pi'i 

H-h 

J3 


DO 

• rH 

fe¬ 


ci 

CJO 

>% 

o 

© 

rH 

S3 


o 

o 

t * H 

CS 

o 

O 

CO 

CO 

• rH 

o 

W 

• 

o 





















424 


INTERCITY RADIO TELEGRAPH CO. ET AL. VS. 


484 Having examined said new allocation, the Commis¬ 
sion made the following findings: 

1. With respect to each station listed therein, the new 
assignments of frequency will serve public interest, con¬ 
venience, or necessity. 

2. All changes in frequency which said new allocation 
will impose on existing coastal stations will promote public 
convenience and interest and will serve public necessity, and 
will prevent interference between stations. 

3. With respect to all assignments of frequency specified 
in said new allocation and with respect to all changes 
thereof imposed by said new allocation, said assignments 
and said changes are necessary to more fully carry out, 
and to comply with, the provisions of the Eadio Act of 
1927, as amended. 

Upon motion duly made and carried, the Commission 
adopted said new allocation and ordered that to each station 
listed in said allocation, the frequency assignment of which 
is different from that of the license of said station, a modi¬ 
fication of license be issued specifying the use only of the 
frequencies indicated in said allocation. 

Applications Granted. 


The Commission granted the following apj)lications: 


File No. 

l-L-C-352 

Applicant. 

Mackay Radio & Telegraph 

Co., 

Call 

letters. 

Nature of appl. 

4-L-C-452 

Sayville, L. I., N. Y. 

Intercity Radio Telegraph 

• • • • 

Co., 

WLF 

Commercial License 

2-L-C-45T) 

Duluth, Minn. 

Intercity Radio Telegraph 

> • • • • 

Co., 

WME 

ii 

a 

2-L-C-460 

Cleveland, Ohio. 

Intercity Radio Telegraph 

• • • • 

Co., 

WTK 

ii 

ii 

l-L-C-459 

Cleveland, Ohio. 

Intercity Radio Telegraph 

• * • • 

Co., 

WTK 

ii 

ii 

l-L-C-457 

Buffalo, N. Y. 

Intercity Radio Telegraph 

• • • • 

Co., 

WAM 

a 

ii 

2-L-C-45S 

Buffalo, N. Y. 

Intercity Radio Telegraph 

■ • • • • 

Co., 

WAM 

ii 

it 

485 

5-L-C-541 

Detroit, Mich. 

Radiomarine Corp. of America, 

WDI 

ii 

it 

3-MP-C-2 

Torrence, Calif. 

Mackay Radio & Telegraph 

• • • • 

Co., 

KSE 

Commercial license 


West Palm Beach. Fla. WMR Mod. of construc- 

5-P-C-900 Mutual Telegraph Co., Honolulu, tion permit 

T. H. KOG Construction permit 












FEDERAL RADIO COMMISSION. 


425 


Call 

File No. Applicant. letters. 

5-P-C-S47 The Robert Dollar Co., King 

County, Wash. 

5-P-C-S4G The Robert Dollar Co., San Mateo, 

Calif. 

5-P-C-845 The Robert Dollar Co., Territory 

of Hawaii. 

3-ML-C-2 Inland Waterways Corp., Miss- WPP 

Warrior Service, Mobile, Ala... 

1-L-C- 51 Bureau of Insular Telegraph, Vie- 


quez, P. R. WOW 

1-L-C- 50 Bureau of Insular Telegraph, 

Ceiba, P. R. WKK 


i 

i 

i 

! Nature of appl. 

j 

i 

j 

Construction permit 

44 44 

I 

I 

4 4 44 

M|o dificatio nof 
jlicense 

Renewal of license 

i 

' U it H 


Applications Designated for Hearing. 

The Commission designated the foil wing applications for 


hearing 

• 

• 




File No. 

Applicant. 

Call 

letters. 


Nature of appl. 

1-L-C- 29 

l-L-C-351 

Radiomarine Corp. of America, 

East Moriches, N. Y. 

Mackay Radio & Telegraph Co., 
Sayville, L. I., N. Y. 

WSH 

WSL 

Commercial license 

it it 

1 


CARL H. BUTMAN, 

Secretary. 


Mimeographed May 24, 1929—11:45 A. M. j 

i 

i 

486 799. | 

Minutes of the Federal Radio Commission. 

Minute #82. 

May 10, 1929^—2:30 p. m. 

| . 

Present: Commissioners Robinson, Chairman; Sykes, 
Lafount, Saltzman, and Starbuck, Captain j Hill, and the 
Secretary. 

# # # * # * # 

Applications Granted. 

j 

The Commission granted the following applications: 

i 

Call 

File No. Applicant. Letters. Nature of Appl. 

1-R-L-S4 Sky Lines, Inc., New York Experimental airplane 

City, N. Y. W2XAQ license. 











426 


INTERCITY RADIO TELEGRAPH CO. ET AL. VS. 


Applications Denied. 

The Commission denied the following applications, the 
applicants having failed to indicate a desire to be heard: 

Call 

File No. Applicant. Letters. Nature of Appl. 

******* 

2- L-F-G Chas. A. Johnson, Wynnefield, 

Philadelphia, Pa. W3XX 

3- L-F-13 T. L. Kidd, San Antonio, 

Texas . . New station 

5-L-F-16 Ben S. McGlashan, Los An¬ 
geles, Calif. W6XAM Renewal of license 

4- R-F-1S Stewart-Warner Speedometer 

Corp., Chicago, Ill. W9XT “ “ “ 

******* 

487 

2- P-E-Go Durham & Co., Inc., Philadel¬ 

phia, Pa. 

3- P-E-91 George Robert Conklin, Clin¬ 

ton, Okla. 

5- P-F-2G Alfred M. Hubbard, Belling¬ 

ham, Wash. “ “ “ 

5-P-F-29 Crocker Research Laboratory, 

San Francisco, Calif. “ “ “ 

5-P-F-32 Western Broadcast Co., Holly¬ 
wood, Calif. 

******* 

CARL H. BUTMAN, 

Secretary. 

Mimeographed May 14,1929—2:00 P. M. 

488 #866. 

Minutes of the Federal Radio Commission. 

Minute #84. 

May 15, 1929—2:30 p. m. 

Present: Commissioners Robinson, Chairman; Sykes, 
Lafount, Saltzman and Starbnck, and the Secretary. 

Upon motion duly made, seconded and carried, the fol¬ 
lowing order was adopted: 

It appearing that Western Radio and Telegraph Com¬ 
pany is an applicant for high frequency channels for point- 
to-point communication within the United States, and 












FEDERAL RADIO COMMISSION 


427 


It further appearing that said applicant desires an op¬ 
portunity to adduce further evidence at the hearing involv¬ 
ing applications for such frequencies heretofore set for 
May 22, 1929, on such application, now, therefore, 

It is ordered that said applicant be allowed to submit 
such additional proof at said hearing, and that the General 
Counsel notify attorney for said applicant o^ this action of 
the Commission. 


* 


489 


CARL H. BUTMAN, 

Secretary. 


Mimeographed May 21, 1929—4:00 P. M. 

490 873. 

Federal Radio Commission, Washington, D. C. 


^lay 15, 1929. 

i 

General Order No. 63. 

i 

At a session of the Federal Radio Commission held at its 
office in Washington , D. C., on May 15 , 1929 \ 

The Commission hereby further postpones the effective 
date of General Order No. 43, limiting duplicated operation 
on cleared channels to stations more than 3l00 miles apart, 
122 davs to October 1, 1929. 

FEDERAL RADIO COMMISSION, 
By JNO. E. ROBINSON, j 

Chairman. 

Attest: 

CARL H. BUTMAN, 

[seal.] Secretary. 

i 

i 

491 916. j 

i 

Minutes of the Federal Radio Commission. 


Minutes #88. 

i 

May 27, 1929—10:30 a. m. 

Present: Commissioners Robinson, Chairman; Sykes, 
Lafount, Saltzman Starbuck, General Counsel, Captain 
Hill and the Secretary. 

16—4987a 






428 


INTERCITY RADIO TELEGRAPH CO. ET AL. YS. 


Applications Granted in Part and Denied in Part. 

The Commission granted the following applications: 

Call 

File No. Applicant. Letters. Nature of Appl. 

l-L-C-243 Westinghouse Elec. & Mfg. 

Co.. East Pittsburgh, Pa... WAQ Renewal of license 

l-L-C-244 Westinghouse Elec. & Mfg. 

Co. .. WBZ “ “ “ 

for experimental purposes and ordered that the following 
condition be inserted in each of the licenses: “Experi¬ 
mental stations may be used only for experimental pur¬ 
poses. They are not licensed to transmit any messages ex¬ 
cept messages relating specifically to the experimental work 
being conducted under the station license.’’ 

###*### 

CARL H. BUTMAN, 

Secretary. 

Mimeographed May 29, 1929—4:00 P. M. 

492 927. 


Minutes of the Federal Radio Commission. 

Minutes #89. 

May 27, 1929—2:30 p. m. 

Present: Commissioners Robinson, Chairman; Sykes, 
Lafount, Saltzman and Starbuck, the General Counsel, Cap¬ 
tain Hill and the Secretary. 


Applications Granted. 

The Commission granted the following applications: 


File No. 

Applicant. 

Call 

Letters. 

Nature of Appl. 

* 

* * * 

* 

* * 

4-A-C-4 

Intercity Radio Telegraph Co., 
Cleveland, Ohio. 

WFL * 

Assignment from the 
Chicago Federation of 
Labor to Intercity Ra¬ 
dio Telegraph Co. 




federal radio commission 


429 


493 


Applications Granted. 


The Commission granted the following applications: 


File No. 


Applicant. 


1-P-C-75G Radio Corporation of Amer¬ 
ica, Rocky Point, X. Y. 


1-M-C-1S 

l-L-C-295 


44 

ii 


Li 

Li 


ii 

<4 


5-L-C-29G Radio Corporation of Amer¬ 
ica, Kaliuku, T. H. 


Call 

Letters. 


Nature of Appl. 


WQN Reassignment of frequen¬ 
cies 5820, 5501 and 52G0 
kilocycles. 

WQN | “ 

WIR Reassignment of fre¬ 

quency 4050 kilcycles. 
KRO Reassignment of fre¬ 

quency 5845 kilocycles. 


by extending licenses of said stations operating in the Con¬ 
tinental band for transoceanic communication on the above- 
mentioned frequencies for 30 days, terminating July 1,1929. 

I 

i 

i 

494 Applications Granted in Part and Defied in Part. 

i 

The Commission granted the following applications: 


File No. 
5-L-E-124 

4- L-E-125 

l-L-E-129 

1-L-E-GO 

5- L-E-75 

1- L-E-1S6 

2- L-C-45JJ 


Applicant. 

University of California, 

Berkeley, California. 

Dept, of Electrical Engineer¬ 
ing, University of Minne¬ 
sota, Minneapolis, Minn... 
Wesleyan University, Dept, 
of Physics, Middletown, 

Conn. 

John Hays Ilammond, Jr., 

Gloucester, Mass. 

Montana State College. Boze¬ 
man, Montana. 

DeForest Radio Co., Jersey 

City, N. J. 

Westinghouse Elec. & Mfg. 
Co., E. Pittsburgh, Pa- 


Call 

Letters. Njature of Appl. 
W6XM Exp. License 


W9XI 

*4 

i 

W1XN 

44 

W1XI 

44 

W7XB 

i 

44 

i 

W2XCD “ 

ii 

i 

1 

1 . . 


WKA Exp. license; point - to ■ 
p oj i u t communica- 
tioiji; change of fre 
quCncy. 


subject to General Order No. 64. 


# * # # «■ # # 

Applications Designated for Hearing (Continued). 

* * * * * j* * 


i 

i 











430 


INTERCITY RADIO TELEGRAPH CO. ET AL. VS. 


1-L-E-12S John M. Wells, Southbridge, 

Mass. IX AX License 

******* 

CARL H. BUTMAN, 

Secretary. 

Mimeographed June 3, 1929—1:00 P. M. 

495 942. 

Minutes of the Federal Radio Commission. 

Minutes #90. 

! May 29, 1929—2:30 p. m. 

Present: Commissioners Robinson, Chairman; Sykes, 
Lafount, Saltzman and Starbuck, the General Counsel, Cap¬ 
tain Hill, Lieutenant Jett and the Secretary. 

Hearing Docket. 

In the following case heretofore heard by the Commis¬ 
sion and taken under advisement: 

Docket Call 

No. File No. Applicant. letters. Nature of appl. 

464 l-L-C-234 U. S. Shipping Board, Merchant 

Fleet Corporation, on Board 
the Summerleaf, James River, 

Ya.WPF Renewal license 

the Commission found that public interest, convenience or 
necessity would be served by granting said application in 
accordance with the recommendations of the Engineering 
Division. The Commission, therefore, directed that an 
order be entered, reciting said finding and ordering that 
the license be issued accordingly. 

In the following case heretofore heard bv the Commis- 
sion and taken under advisement: 

Docket Call 

No. File No. Applicant. letters. Nature of appl. 

428 l-L-C-217 South Porto Rico Sugar Co., 

Ensenada, P. R. WPR Renewal license 

the Commission found, Commissioner Robinson dissenting, 
that public interest, convenience or necessity would be 





FEDERAL RADIO COMMISSION. 


431 


served by granting* said application in accordance with the 
recommendation of the Engineering Division j authorizing 
operation of the arc set only on one calling arid one work- 
ing low frequency to be designated. The Comknission also 
granted one calling and one working medium frequency 
provided the applicant file construction permit application 
for tube transmitter to operate on intermediate frequency 
to replace spark set. 


496 


5-29-29. 


Hearing Docket (Continued). 

In the following case heretofore heard by the Commis¬ 
sion and taken under advisement: 


Docket 
No. File No. 


Applicant. 


Call 

letters. 


Nature of appl. 


429 5-P-C-741 Gray's Harbor Stevedore Co., 

Aberdeen, Wash. 

o-L-C-148 Gray's Harbor Stevedore Co., 

Aberdeen, Wash... 


| Construction 
permit 

! Renewal license 

i 


the Commission found, Commissioner Robinson dissenting, 
that public interest, convenience or necessity would be 
served by granting said application in accordance with the 
recommendations of the Engineering Division authorizing 
the use of one coastal frequency only to be selected in the 
1500 to 2500 kilocvcle band for harbor communication, with 
the understanding that new construction permit application 
be filed, authorizing continued operation of present equip¬ 
ment for 90 days, but denied the application! for the con¬ 
tinued use of a low frequency after September;!, 1929. 


# # * # # 


# 


* 


In the following cases heretofore heard by j the Commis¬ 
sion but undecided: i 


Docket 

No. File No. Applicant. 


Call 

letters. 


186 2-L-C-283 
“ 2-L-C-2S6 

“ J -L-C-.279 


Intercity Radio Teleg. Co- 

Detroit, Mich. WDI 

Intercity Radio Teleg. Co., 

Cleveland, Ohio . WTK 

Intercity Radio Teles. Co., 

Buffalo. N, Y. WAM 


Nature of appl. 


License 

H 














432 INTERCITY RADIO TELEGRAPH CO. ET AL. VS. 


407 


Docket 




Call 


No. 

File No. 

Applicant. 


letters. 

Nature of appl 

205 

3-L-C-174 

Marland Pipe Line 

Co., 





Ponca City, Ok la.. 


KFE 

%4 

44 

3-L-C-175 

Marland Pipe Line 

Co., 





near Borger, Tex.. 


KEII 

44 

• 

5 

M 

3-L-C-196 

Phillips Petroleum 

Co.. 





Brecken ridge, Tex. 

• • • • • 

KSU 

44 

44 

.3-L-C-194 

Phillips Petroleum 

Co., 





Bartlesville, Okla .. 


KJM 

44 

44 

.3-L-C-195 

Phillips Petroleum 

Co., 





near Borger Tex.. 


KJS 

44 

207 

4-L-C-215 

Skelly Oil Co.. Eldorado, 





Kans. 


WAIT 

44 

44 

.3-L-C 210 

Skelly Oil Co.. Tulsa. 

Okla. 

WEI I 

44 

*4 

3-L-C-214 

Skelly Oil Co., near Borger, 





Tex. 


Kill 

44 

20.3 

.3-L-C 222 

Texas Pipe Line Co.. Kings- 





mill. Tex. 


KYI 

44 

♦ 4 

.3-L-C-22.3 

Texas Pipe Line Co., 

Me- 





Carney, Tex. 


KSZ 

44 

44 

.3-L-C 224 

Texas Pipe Line 

Co,. 





Wichita Falls, Tex 


KYU 

44 

453 

4-L-C-413 

Wireless Teleg. & Commu- 




mentions Co., North¬ 
brook, Ill. WIIW 


the Commission directed that the authority of General 

m/ 

Order 60 be extended 30 days to expire July 1, 1929, as to 
the above applications. 

498 In the following cases heretofore heard by the 
Commission and taken under advisement: 


Docket 
No. File NO. 

* 

4.30 2-L-C-245 

446 5-L-C-124 

| 

.392 1-L-E- .34 

4.35 4-L-C-104 
490 

4.37 2-L-C-117 
43:3 2-L-C-116 


Applicant. 

* * * * 

Wyandotte Transportation Co., 

Wyandotte, Mich. 

City of Seattle Harbor Dept., 

Seattle. Wash. 

Edison Electric Illuminating 
Co. of Boston (Portable), 

Mass. 

C. Reiss Coal Co., Sheboygan, 
Wis. 


Byproducts Coal Co., Bypro, 

Ky. 

The .T. P. Burton Coal Co., 
Cleveland, O. 


Call 

letters. Nature of appl. 

* * 

WCV Renewal license 
KPE 

W1XAG 
New License 

WLG Renewal license 
WLI 


the Commission found that public interest, convenience or 
necessity would not be served by granting any of above 

















I 


FEDERAL RADIO COMMISSION. 


433 


applications. The Commission, therefore, directed that 
orders be entered reciting- said findings andj denying said 
applications. 

In the following cases heretofore designate^ for hearing, 
but continued indefinitely: 


Docket 
No. File No. 


Applicant. 


Call 

letters. 


Nature of appl. 


440 2-L-C-131 The Crossley Radio Corpora¬ 
tion, near Harrison, Ohio.. WDJ 


Renewal license 


the Commission found that public interest, convenience or 
necessity would not be served by the granting thereof, 
designated this docket for hearing and directed that there 
be no extension of the existing license which! expires June 
1st and in addition that the applicant be advised to cease 
operating the transmitter. 

In the following case heretofore designated for hearing, 
and submitted on affidavits: 


Docket 

No. File No. Applicant. 


Call | 
letters.! 


Nature of appl. 


334 4-L-C-301 


Elgin National Watch Co., 
Elgin, Ill. 


| 

WNBT 


Renewal license 


the Commission not being satisfied that public interest, con¬ 
venience or necessity would be served, and desiring addi¬ 
tional evidence, designated this application for further 
hearing, but directed that the existing license be not ex¬ 
tended after June 1st. 

j 

500 Hearing Docket (Continued), j 

Application Reconsidered and Granted 

Upon reconsideration of the following application, here¬ 
tofore designated for hearing: 


Docket Call 

No. File No. Applicant. letters!. Nature of appl. 

344 4-L-C-276 Chicago Federation of Labor, 

Chicago, Ill. WFLj License for 

coastal service 

I 

the Commission found that public interest, Convenience or 
necessity would be served by granting said application by 


! 

| 












434 


INTERCITY RADIO TELEGRAPH CO. ET AL. VS. 


assignment of calling frequency of 410 kilocycles and work¬ 
ing frequencies of 425 and 454 kilocycles. The Commission, 
therefore, directed that an order be entered, reciting said 
finding, and ordering that the license be issued accordingly. 

Applications Granted. 

The Commission granted the following applications: 



FEDERAL RADIO COMMISSION 


435 


o o 

02 02 

r* H 

© © 
© o 


*3 Cw Cw 

> 

© (o' k" 

© CD O 

** ri 

S © CD 


a 

^ -» 

H H 


• ^ m ^ pp ^ 

| i^'fc W^OQcc 

ii COWN(M(M!M(M^)(M(M(M(M(MHCi(M 
- >►>>>>>>>>>>>>>£>> 


25 >-2 


^ k~* • r bh r ±4 

_JV• ^2 © .2 

o 25 <» tri 2 : 

O e —1 . jJ_i k" 

O ^if 5 ^ 

^ ^ 

£2 ^ 

5 £ ip o 

° © © K? 

W Jz; 02 p£ 


>H >H 


£ 3 

>% © 
K> » 

© © 
O S3 

« CH 


c 3 k_; 

O ^ 

#v 02 

02 J-i 

C3 © 

s ^ 

• rH 

f—< ^ 

o o 
PP >H 


52525 


2"* © 


; r 5 & 


^5 M _r = 


: !: 525 

CC Hpl 

02 HH *> 

C3 I . *S 


o o 

>H 

£ £ 

© © 

25 52 ; 


2ffl 

§ * 

!- o 

M 55 


s^-s 

~ g~* 

<“* kjJ . 

o 15 >-. 

C2 -is2 
Jh « y 

« 5 o 

Sikes 


,_ 10 10 th o 

“$t'-OOrH<MC'OOOOCOi-t<M 

6 ^hhqciq^hxhooow 

fHaSagaBBSHSEH 

* t * I I I I I I | | I | 


|m 

10 o co 
co Ph co 

' : 1 1 

ass 

«ua 

1 ! I I 

H tO H 


l-R-E-64 “ “ “ “ Rocky Point, N. Y. W2XBI 

































436 


INTERCITY RADIO TELEGRAPH CO. ET AL. VS. 


in accordance with the recommendations of the Engineer¬ 
ing Division for the use of the following frequencies: 1604, 
2398, 3256, 4795, 6425, 8650,12850 and 17300 kilocycles. 

501 5-29-29. 

Applications Granted (Continued). 

The Commission granted the following application: 

Call 

File No. Applicant. letters. Nature of appl. 

l-L-E-99 Radio Corp. of America. Rocky 

Point, N. Y. W2XT Exp. renewal license 

in accordance with the recommendation of the Engineering 
Division for the use of 17300 kilocvcles. 

The Commission granted the following applications: 




FEDERAL RADIO COMMISSION 


437 























438 


INTERCITY RADIO TELEGRAPH CO. ET AL. VS. 


in accordance with the recommendations of the Engineer¬ 
ing Division for the use of the following frequencies: 1604, 
2398, 3256, 4795, 6425, 8650, 12850 and 17300 kilocycles. 

502 Applications Granted (Continued). 

The Commission granted the following application: 

Call 

File No. Applicant. letters. Nature of appl. 

l-L-E-165 Westinghouse Elec. & Mfg. Co., 

Newark. N. J. W2XAI Exp. renewal license 

in accordance with the recommendation of the Engineering 
Division for the use of 6425 kilocycles. 

The Commission granted the following application: 

Call 

File No. Applicant. letters. Nature of appl. 

l-MP-E-77 David Grimes, Grasmere, N. Y... W2XCB Exp. renewal license 

in accordance with the recommendations of the Engineer¬ 
ing Division for the use of the following frequencies: 6425 
and 4795 kilocycles. 

The Commission granted the following applications: 

Call 

File No. Applicant. letters. Nature of appl. 

1-L-C- 4S American Telephone & Telegraph 

Co., Rocky Point, N. Y. WNL Transoceanic phone 

of mean fre¬ 
quency of 60 kil¬ 
ocycles ; renewal 
license. 

l-L-E-170 Pilot Electric Mfg. Co. Inc., 

Brooklyn, N. Y. W2XCL Visual exp. li¬ 
cense : 2000 to 

2100 kc. 

in accordance with the recommendations of the Engineer¬ 
ing Division. 

503 Applications Granted in Part and Denied in Part. 

The Commission granted the following application, Com¬ 
missioner Robinson dissenting: 


Call 

File No. Applicant. letters. 

1-L-C-21S South Porto Rico Sugar Co., Ensen¬ 
ada, P. R. WPR 


Nature of appl. 
License 






FEDERAL RADIO COMMISSION - 


439 


in accordance with Engineering recommendations for opera¬ 
tion of arc set for general public coastal communication 
only, designating the following frequency for calling, 143, 
and the following for working, 163 kilocycles, and requir¬ 
ing filing of construction permit application covering in¬ 
termediate frequencies to replace spark set by the installa¬ 
tion of tube apparatus. 


# 


* 


4 * 


Applications Designated for Hearing. 

The Commission designated the following cases for hear- 

ir»cr • 

Call ! 

File No. Applicant. letters. 

5-L-E-U54 Fred L. Dewey, Los Angeles, Calif. W6XL 

4- R-F- SO University of Iowa, Iowa City, 

Iowa .W9XAZ 

5- R-E- 15 Simpson Radio Corp., Seattle, 

Wash. W7XF 

5-L-C-195 Robert B. Parish, Los Angeles, 


| Nature of appl. 
Experimental 
| license 

I 

1 

Exp. renewal 
| license 

( 

Exp. renewal 
license 



Calif. 

• • • 

* • • • 



W6XC 

Exp. renewal 








i license 

3-L-C-130 

The Dallas News & Dallas Journal 




Dallas, Tex. 

• • 




KFB 

License 

5-R-C- 7S 

Wilmington 

Transportation 

Co., 


i 

Renewal license 


Wilmington. 

Calif. . 



KNI 

3-P-G-l 10 

Marland Refining 

Co. 

(Portable).. 

KJZ Construction 








! permit 

3-P-G- 95 

Marland Refining 

Co., 

Ponca 

City, 


! 


Okla. 

• • • 

• • • • 



KSF Construction 








permit 

3-L-G- 29 

Marland Refining 

Co. 

(Portable).. 

KJZ 

License 

3-L-G- 87 

Marland Refining 

Co. 

(Portable).. 

WCU 

*4 

3-L-G- 42 

Tlu* Texas Company 

(Portable).. 

WCD 

License 

3-L-G- 43 


44 


44 

• • 

WCB 

4* 

3-L-G- 44 

a a 

44 


44 

• • 

KJG 

44 

3-L-G- 45 

a a 

44 


44 

* • 

WCH 

“ 

3-L-G- 40 

a a 

44 


44 

• • 

WCA 

44 

3-L-G- 47 

44 44 

44 


44 

• • 

WBX 

« 

3-L-G- 48 

44 44 

44 



• • 

WBS 

44 

3-L-G- 49 


44 


44 

• • 

WBN 

44 

3-L-G- 50 

44 44 

44 


44 

• • 

WBG 

44 

3-L-G- 51 

44 44 

44 


44 

• • 

WBK 

44 

3-L-G- 52 

44 44 

44 


44 

• • 

WBG 

44 

3-L-G- 53 

44 44 

44 


44 

• • 

WBE 

44 

3-L-G- 54 

44 44 

44 



• • 

WBD 

44 

3-L-G- 55 

44 44 

44 


44 

• • 

WBB 

44 

3-P-G-l 11 

Marland Refining 

Co. 

(Portable).. 

WCU ( 

Construction 


# 


* 


permit 

| 

=* * 


CARL H. BUTMAN, 

| Secretary. 


Mimeographed June 4,1929—4:00 P. M. 










440 


INTERCITY RADIO TELEGRAPH CO. ET AL. YS 


Minutes of the Federal Radio Commission . 

Minute #91. 

June 3, 1929—10:30 a. m. 

Present: Commissioners Robinson, Chairman; Sykes, 
Lafount, Saltzman, and Starbuek, the General Counsel, Mr. 
Sutton, Lieut. Jett, and the Secretary. 

Applications Granted. 

The Commission granted the following applications: 

Call 


File No. 

Applicant. 


letters. 

Nature of appl. 

r>-R-C-SO 

RCA Communications, Inc. 


KQ.T 

Renewal of I. 

license 

fi-R-C-81 

44 ii »4 


KUN 

*4 

44 

44 

1-R-C-S2 

RAC Communications, Inc., 
Point, N. Y. 

Rocky 

WBU 

44 

44 

44 

3-R-C-S3 

RCA Communications, Inc., 
Point, New York. 

Rocky 

WQA 

44 

44 

44 

. r >-R-C-S4 

RCA Communications, In< 
linas, Calif. 

•., Bo- 

KMM 

44 

44 

44 

l-R-C-85 

RCA Communications, Inc., 
Point, N. Y. 

Rocky 

WQQ 

44 

44 

44 

3-R-C-86 

RCA Communications, Inc., 

I unit, ^^ 

Rocky 

\VQX 

44 

44 

44 

l-R-C-87 

RCA Communications, Inc., 
Point, N. Y. 

Rocky 

WQY 

44 

4 

44 

1-R-C-SS 

RCA Communications, Inc., 
Point, N. Y. 

Rocky 

WFX 

44 

44 

44 

1-R-C-89 

RCA Communications, Inc., 
Point. N. Y. 

Rocky 

WTT 

44 

44 

44 

l-R-C-90 

RCA Communications, Inc., 

I oint, ^ 

Rocky 

WDS 

44 

44 

44 

l-R-C-91 

RCA Communications, Inc., 
Point. N. Y. 

Rocky 

WKM 

44 

44 

44 

I-R-C-92 

RCA Communications, Inc., 
I unit, ^ 

Rocky 

WQB 

44 

44 

44 

l-R-C-93 

RCA Communications, Inc., 
Point, N. Y. 

Rocky 

WQC 

44 

44 

44 

l-R-C-94 

RCA Communications, Inc., 
I oint, ^. \. 

Rocky 

WIL 

44 

44 

44 

3-R-C-95 

RCA Communications, Inc., 
Point, N. Y. 

Rocky 

WKO 

44 

44 

44 

1-R-C-96 

RCA Communications, Inc., 
Point, N. Y. 

Rocky 

WIK 

44 

44 

44 

l-R-C-97 

RCA Communications, Inc., 
Point. N. Y. 

Rocky 

WQP 

44 

44 

44 

1-R-C-9S 

RCA Communications. Inc.. 
Point, N. Y. 

Rocky 

WIY 

44 

44 

44 

l-R-C-99 

RCA Communications, Inc., 
Point, N. Y. 

Rocky 

WPE 

44 

44 

44 

l-R-C-100 

RCA Communications, Inc., San 
Juan, Porto Rico .. 

WGT 


44 

a 





















505 

File No. 
l-R-C-101 

l-R-C-102 

l-R-C-103 

l-R-C-104 

l-R-C-105 

l-R-C-106 

l-R-C-107 

1-R-C-10S 

l-R-C-109 

l-R-C-110 

1-R-C-lll 

l-R-C-112 

l-R-C-113 

l-R-C-114 

l-R-C-115 

l-R-C-110 

l-R-C-117 

5-R-C-11S 

5-R-CV119 

5-R-C-120 

5-R-C-121 

5-R-C-122 

5-R-C-123 

5-R-C-124 

5-R-C-125 

5-R-C-12G 

5-R-C-127 

5-R-C-12S 

5-R-C-129 


I 

i 

I 


FEDERAL RADIO COMMISSION. | 


441 


Call 

Applicant. letters. 

RCA Communications, Inc., Rocky 
I omt, ^. I. .................. W .V ij 

RCA Communications, Inc., Rocky 

Point, N. Y. WEX 

RCA Communications, Inc., Rocky 

Point, N. Y. WHR 

RCA Communications, Inc., Rocky 

Point, N. Y. WED 

RCA Communications, Inc., Rocky 

Point, N. Y. WEA 

RCA Communications, Inc., Rocky 

Point, N. Y. WEF 

RCA Communications, Inc., Rocky 

Point, N. Y. WES 

RCA Communications, Inc., Rocky 

Point, N. Y. WEL 

RCA Communications, Inc., Rocky 

Point, N. Y. WEC 

RCA Communications, Inc., Rocky 

Point, N. Y. WEM 

RCA Communications, Inc., Rocky 

Point, N. Y. WKP 

RCA Communications, Inc., Rocky 

Point, N. Y. WEB 

RCA Communications, Inc., Rocky 

Point, N. Y. WEE 

RCA Communications, Inc., Rocky 

Point, N. Y. WEJ 

RCA Communications, Inc., Rocky 

Point, N. Y. WQO 

RCA Communications, Inc., Rocky 

Point, N. Y. WER 

RCA Communications, Inc., New 

Brunswick, N. .T. WIZ 

RCA Communications, Inc., Bo- 

linas, Calif. KSS 

RCA Communications, Inc., Bau¬ 
linas, Calif. KEN 

RCA Communications, Inc*., Bo- 

linas, Calif. KEL 

RCA Communications, Inc., Bo- 

linas, Calif,. KEE 

RCA Communications, Inc., Ka- 

liuku, Hawaii . KKII 

RCA Communications, Inc., Bo- 

linas, Calif. KES 

RCA Communications, Inc., Bo- 

linas, Calif. KEJ 

RCA Communications, Inc., Ka- 

huka, Hawaii . KIO 

RCA Communications, Inc., Bo- 

linas. Calif. KKZ 

RCA Communications, Inc., Bo- 

linas. Calif. KLL 

RCA Communications, Inc., Bo- 

linas. Calif. KWE 

RCA Communications, Inc., Bo- 
linas, Calif. KEM 


i 


Nature of appl. 
Renewal of License 

j 

a a a 

| 

i 

j it it ii 

I 

i 

tt n u 

i 

i 

i 

ii ii ii 

j 

i 

i 

ii ii ii 

j 

a a a 

i 

i 

a a a 

i 

i 

a a a 

i 

i 

i 

it « u 

I 

I 

it u tt 

ii tt ii 

I 

i 

! 

ii U ii 

i 

i 

! a a a 

i 

j 

ii ii ii 

i 

j 

ii ii ii 

| 

i 

i 

ii ii ii 

i 

i 

i 

i 

ii ii ii 

I 

a a a 

l 

j 

i 

ii ii ii 

i 

a a u 

j 

i 

ii ii ii 

a a u 

i 

j 

ii ii ii 

U ii ii 

\ 

ii ii ii 

ii ii ii 


ii ii ii 

ii ii ii 


I 

I 



































442 


INTERCITY RADIO TELEGRAPH CO. ET AL. VS. 


Applications Granted (Continued). 

Call 

File No. Applicant. letters. Nature of appl. 


l-R-C-130 RCA Communications. Inc., Rocky 


Point, New York . WQJ 

I-R-C-131 RCA Communications, Inc., Rocky 

Point, New York . WQD 

l-R-C-132 RCA Communications, Inc., Rocky 

Point, New York . WQF 

506 


l-R-C-133 RCA Communications, Inc., Rocky WQE 

Point, New Y’ork. 

l-R-C-134 RCA Communications, Inc., Rocky WEN 

Point, New York . 

l-R-C-135 RCA Communications. Inc., Rocky WQI 

Point, New York . 

1-R-C-13G RCA Communications, Inc., Rocky 


Point, New York . WKJ 

l-R-C-137 RCA Communications, Inc., San 

Juan, Porto Rico . WGU 

5-R-C-13S RCA Communications, Inc., Ka- 

liuku, Hawaii . KEQ 

5-R-C-139 RCA Communications, Inc., Bo- 

linas, Calif. KEB 

5-R-C-140 RCA Communications, Inc., Bo- 

linas. Calif. KEI 

n-R-C-141 RCA Communications, Inc., Ka- 

kuku, Hawaii. KKP 

5-R-C-142 RCA Communications, Inc., Bo- 

linas, Calif. KQG 

5-R-C-143 RCA Communications, Inc., Bo- 

linas, Calif. KKW 

l-R-C-144 RCA Communications, Inc., Rocky 

Point, New York . WEZ 

1-R-C-T45 RCA Communications, Inc., Rocky 

Point, New York . WEY 

l-R-C-146 RCA Communications, Inc., Rocky 

Point, New York . WKL 

l-R-C-147 RCA Communications, Inc., Rocky 

Point, New York . WKC 

1-R-C-14S RCA Communications, Inc., Rocky 

Point, New York . WQU 

l-R-C-149 RCA Communications, Inc., Rocky 

Point, New York . WQT 

l-R-C-150 RCA Communications, Inc., Rocky 

Point, New York . WQL 


Renewal of License 

44 44 44 


44 44 44 


44 44 44 

44 44 44 

44 44 44 

44 44 44 

44 44 44 

44 44 44 

44 44 44 

44 44 44 

44 44 44 

44 44 44 

44 44 44 

44 44 44 

44 44 44 

44 44 44 

44 44 44 


l-R-C-151 RAC Communications, Inc*., Rocky 



Point, New York . 

• • • • 

WQR 

44 

44 

44 

5-M-L-C-S 

Mackay Radio & Telegraph 
Palo Alto, Calif. 

Co., 

• • • • 

KNW 

44 

44 

44 

5-M-L-C-9 

Mackay Radio & Telegraph 
Oahu. T. II. 

Co., 

• • • • 

KNN 

44 

44 

44 

3-R-C-152 

Tropical Radio Telegraph 
New Orleans, La . 

Co., 

• • • • 

WNU 

44 

44 

44 

l-R-C-153 

Tropical Radio Telegraph 
Boston, Mass . 

r • 
o • 

« : 

WP.F 

44 

44 

44 

3-R-C-154 

Tropical Radio Telegraph 
Hialeah, Fla . 

Co., 

• • • • 

WAX 

44 

44 

44 

3-R-C-155 

Tropical Radio Telegraph 
Mobile, Ala . 

Co., 

0 0 0 0 

WNX 

a 

/V 

u 

H 






























I 


FEDERAL RADIO COMMISSION. j 443 

I 

507 May 28,1929. 

i 

Telegraphic Authority to Operate Experimental Radio 

Station. 

Freeman Land, Experimental radio station W6XAN, Los 
Angeles, Calif. Telegram sent B. L. Hunter, Adjutant, 
Naval Post, Los Angeles, Calif.—“Retel tiventyseventh 
this will authorize Freeman Lang to use equipment W6XAN 
on May thirtieth as unit of hookup which will enable broad¬ 
casting station KPLA to broadcast ceremonies aboard 
U. S. S. Maryland on frequency 2320 kilocycles!.” Approved 
by Commissioners Starbuck, Robinson, Sykes, jand Lafount. 

I 

Applications Designated for Hearing. 

| 

The Commission designated the following! applications 
for hearing: 


Call j Nature 

File No. Applicant. letters. of application. 

i 

5-L-C-366 Alaska Packers Assn., Alameda, KFU Commercial 

Calif. License 

5-L-C-385 Alaska Packers Assn., Naknek, KTZ Commercial 

Alaska . j License 

# # * # # # | # 


CARL H. BUTMAN, 

Secretary. 

\ 

508 971. i 

| 

Minutes of the Federal Radio Commission. 

j 

Minute #96. 

June 7, 19294-2:30 P. M. 

Present: Commissioners Robinson, Chairman; Sykes, 
Lafount, Saltzman, and Starbuck; Captain j Hill, Acting 
Chief Engineer, Lieut. Jett, Mr. Gross, B. M. Webster, Jr., 
General Counsel, and Frank H. Lovette, Acting Secretary. 

17—4987a I 






444 


INTERCITY RADIO TELEGRAPH CO. ET AL. VS. 


Hearing Docket. 

In the following case heretofore heard by the Commis¬ 
sion and taken under advisement: 

Docket No. Applicant. 

185 Universal Wireless Communication Co., Inc. 

in which the Commission, on December 22, 1928, found that 
public interest, convenience or necessity would be served by 
granting said applications in accordance with recommenda¬ 
tions of the Engineering Division then contained in the 
files of the Commission (subject to certain enumerated pro¬ 
visions and conditions which were to be made a part of the 
order and of the construction permits when issued) the 
Commission directed the Secretary to list and publish the 
continental high frequency channels recommended by the 
Engineering Division, as aforesaid, for assignment in con¬ 
nection with said grant, as follows: 


Exclusive U. S. Channels. 


4565 Kc. 

5095 


4575 

5105 


4585. 

5115 


4595 

5125 


4605 

5135 

(Licensed 5885) 

4615 

5145 

(Licensed 5900) 

4625 

5155 


4635 

5165 

. 

4645 

5175 


4655 

5185 


4665 

5195 


4675 

5205 


4685 

5215 


4695 

5225 


4705 

5235 



5245 



5855 



5870 




FEDERAL RADIO COMMISSION. 


I 


445 


Shared U. S. & Canada. 

3298 Kc. j 

3304 

3310 

3316 

3324 

509 In the following- case heretofore heard by the Com¬ 
mission and taken under advisement: ! 

Docket 

No. Applicant. j 

212 R. C. A. Communications, Inc. 

| 

the Commission, Commissioners Robinson dissenting, found 
that public interest, convenience and necessity would be 
served by granting the applications, as follows: 

i 

Exclusive U. S. Channels. 


4268 Kc. 

5055 Kc. 

4284 

5065 

4535 

5255 

4545 

5265 

4555 

5275 

5035 

5005 

5045 

5015 


5025 

Shared U. S. & Canada. 

3268 Kc. 

3274 


3280 


3286 


3332 



In the following case heretofore heard by the Commission 
and taken under advisement: 


Docket No. Applicant. 

i 

505 Western Radio & Telegraph Company. 

• i 

the Commission, Commissioner Robinson dissenting, found 
that public interest, convenience and necessity would be 
served by granting said applications, as follows: 







446 


INTERCITY RADIO TELEGRAPH CO. ET AL. VS. 


Exclusive U. S. 

Exclusive Canadian 

channels. 

channels. 

Low frequencies. 

5075 

5780* 

182 

5085 

5795* 

186 


5810* 

188 



193 


The Commission therefore directed, (1) that applicant 
furnish the Commission with an amended list of applica¬ 
tions specifying points of communication and frequencies 
and type of service in accordance with the terms of this 
grant, and (2) that an order be entered, effective June 10, 
1929, reciting the findings herein, and providing that con¬ 
struction permits and/or licenses covering and limited to 
the frequencies and service effected by these minutes be 
issued in accordance with said amended list of applica¬ 
tions. 

510 In the following cases heretofore heard bv the 
Commission and taken under advisement: 

Docket 

No. Applicant. 

345 Chicago Federation of Labor. 

447 

the Commission found that public interest, convenience and 
necessity would not be served by granting the applications, 
and therefore directed that an order be entered, effective 
June 10, 1929, reciting said findings, and denying said ap¬ 
plications. 

In the following case heretofore heard bv the Commission 

Q v 

and taken under advisement: 

Docket 

No. Applicant. 

218 Mackay Radio & Telegraph Company. 

the Commission found that public interest, convenience 
and necessity would not be served by granting the applica¬ 
tions, and therefore directed that an order be entered, 
effective June 10, 1929, reciting said findings, and denying 
said applications. 


♦Subject to limitation of power and hours of operation preventing inter¬ 
ference with Canada. 


FEDERAL RADIO COMMISSION. ! 447 

| 

In the following case heretofore heard by the Commis¬ 
sion and taken under advisement: j 

j 

Docket | 

No. Applicant. 

453 Wireless Telegraph & Communications jCo. 

the Commission found that public interest, convenience and 
necessity would not be served by granting the j application, 
and therefore directed that an order be entered, effective 
June 10, 1929, reciting said findings, and denying said ap¬ 
plications. j 

In the following case heretofore heard by the Commis¬ 
sion and taken under advisement: ! 

j 

Docket J 

No. Applicant. 

186 Intercity Radio Telegraph Company, j 

! 

the Commission found that public interest, convenience and 
necessity would not be served by granting the applications, 
and therefore directed that an order be entered, effective 
June 10, 1929, reciting said findings, and denying said ap¬ 
plications. 


i 


j 





448 


INTERCITY RADIO TELEGRAPH CO. ET AL. VS. 


cj 

- 4 —> 

rH 

CS 

u 

o 

CO 

r 1 * 

O 

£ 

a 


<1 


CO 

r•* 
a 

o 


o 


& 

CS 

CiO 


o 

Ca 


cc 


CO 

CO 

a 

a 

O 

O 

© 




• 

CJ 

• 

CJ 

. —' 

CO 

-a 

4 — 

• 

CJ 

• VS 

CO 


vs 

CO 

o 

5 to 



333 , 

3 

rH 

CS 


V 

CO 

t— 

o 



K> 

JS> 

CS 

ICO 

E 


CO 




3 



co 






>o 

S' 


vs 




Vs 

s 

CO 





o 

o 

? 

H 



Ol 

CJ 


• 

O 

a 

o 


Ol 



o 



CO 



o 

£ 


U 2 

O 

<3 

T—i 


o 



CO 

CO 

O 


■O 


co 

o 


-4— > 

v£ 

lO 



CO 



CO 

CO 

UO 

cO 

o 



(•S 


Cw 


L— 



Cl 



Vs 


OJ 


CO 


vs 



< 

• Vs 

• Vs 

• Vs 





co" 


cS 



CO 

CJ 



v ivH 

CJ 

-4-> 




1 

4-> 

-a 

4-4 

w 

• vs 

GJ 

O 

• Vs 

CJ 


CO 

3 



a 


a 


rH 


| 

•w 

►s. 

K 

CO 

i— i 

CO 


rH 

CS 


t— 


vO 

%4 





?: 


lO 

a 

(-4 



v 



CJ 

CS 

O 


Vs 


I 

o 

o 

o 

CJ 

ICO 

vs 

CJ 

CJ 


CC 

CO 

CS 


CJ 

k 4 

CL 

CO 

£j 


O 

O 



»o 

iO 

• ^ 

GO 

• 


co 

s* 



t ~4 

Vs 

r^ 


lO 

a 

a 

1 

©1 

• Vs 

Ol 

• *4 

o 

O 

T—i 

CJ 


• VS 

CJ 

• vs 

CJ 


lO 

lO 

O 

v 

00 

o 

rn 

o 

v 

CO 

Vs 

CO 

a 

• 

-^a 

+4 

r* 




*o 

*.> 


rH 


rH 

• 4 -^ 

-a 

CO 

M 

<w 

o 

© 

CO 

| 

• f-H 

a 

** 

JZ 

Vs 

CO 

vw 

CJ 

o 



CO 

o 

TjH 

Vs 

CJ 

r 

-a 

£ 

co 

• Vs 

O 

H 

3 

a 

ci 

2 

rH 

CJ 

CJ 

• vH 

hP 

o 

Q 

#—« 

r-1 

O 

a 

o 

o. 

1 —H 

r-> 

l-H 

o 

'E 

fH 

cs 

^-, 

t>- 

o 

co 

Vs 

Ol 

. o 

p t 

£ 

S'. 

co 

i— 

o 

CO 

.a 

Is 

r-i 

O 

tH 

CO 

vs 

O 

r-i 

CO 

-a 

CJ 

CO 

a 

a 

CJ 

CJ 

fH 

X 

o 

O 

CO 

o 

CO 

VS 

<M 

rH 

CC 

rH 

rn 

o 

O 

£ 

O 

o 

co 

• Vs 

CJ 

cc 

rn 

S 

a 

• vH 


o 

• — * 


a 

CO 

a 

'w' 

5 

lO 

3 

l “ -< 


O 


CJ 

CJ 

3 


« < 

cs 

►» 

CJ 

r—; 

rH 

CJ 

O 

a 

cs 

a 

o 

0\1 

V* 

co 

cS 

a 

o 

CS 

Ol 

a 

LO 

vs 

CO 

£ 

o 

CJ 

a 

CS 

CJ 

£ 

CO 

CM 

Vs 

CJ 

r- 

£ 

S> 

lO 


& 

© 

lo 

CO 

o 

a 

• o 

CO 

a 

£ 

o 

CO 

o 

r> 

c 

rH 

o 

o 

3 h 

E 

1 T—l 

E 

cs 

■an 

E 


© 

O 

o 

£ 

GJ 

rH 

£ 

CJ 

V 

Ol 

i— 

X 

r- 

- 3 1 

tH 




rH 

-vH 

CO 

r 

v ^H 


^ O o H H 
G* H 

PP O 

ft . .X X 

« ©H . CM CM 


72 

i. 

o 

■*-> 

a 

O 


CC 

O 


cc 

o 




'7* Cj 

a r- 

< ^ 
VS 

vT 9 
2 co 

• hH —* 
H Cw 

§ ^ 

S H 

©< ^ 

a ss. 


o> 

hH 

hH 

M 


o - 

■— CO 

03 © 


— ^ 


C * 
a ^ 


» hh 


© P a 

. —i • a 


^ r 


O r w 

• vH hH 

3 s 


CJ >. 

3 t: 
« § 


CJ a 

© CS 

.—i -4-* 
^ © 

| __ N a 

CS © 


CO 
CU CO 

a cs 

° ^ 
O ^ 

v 

O ~z 

LO i-* 

w X 
cs © 

'V* © 

—i £ 

CO © 

I 

ww 

- fi 


. 

a 

a 

a 


rH 

rn 

^H 

CJ 

Ha 

hH 

hH 

►> 



Vs 


vT 

co" 

CO 



S'. 

K". 

rH • 

rH 

£ 

£ 

£ 

rH hh 

rn 

« o 

H 

*g g 


> E-i 

■4 

v —a 

C Eh 



o r* £ • a © — 

•r -1 CJO cc cs cs ^ cs 

£ o a p a :£ © 

© © *r* fsn t 1 > 

£ © £ ^ o 2 

©3 £ ’£ £ > £ '£ 

r-\ 4-4 ~ £03 

M C3< C3< OS CS 


<—i fC- | 

a ^ 

o 


o 

£ 

o 


lO 


02 

rH 

C 3 

sV 

W 

rH 

o ^ 

, — i nr 

rH 

n 

a 

02 

£ © 

a o 

a a 

£ 

«v 

£ 2 C 
£ ^ 

r-1 

rn 

£ 

V 

D 

E 


• «H 

Ph 

w 

O 


rH 

hH 


Ch 

PH 

PL 

co 

o 

cs 

CO 

cs 

CO 

Cl 


CS 

CO 

CO 


CO 


tH 

l— 

1 > 

i-H 

lO 


rH 

i 

| 

xzc 

l 

o 

1 

1 

6 

1 

O 

1 

o 

i 

h ^5 

1 

3 


3 

■ 

h 3 

| 

h 3 

i 

l-p 

1 

hP 

1 

i 

1 

P-« 


I 

>3 

1 

rJ 


■ 

h 3 

i 

l 3 

| 

Pl 

i 

Ph 

l 

hP 

1 

i 

Cl 

t 

IQ 

co 

1 

rH 

i-H 


rH 

CO 

oo 

CO 

co 













3-L-L-45 Pail, American Airways, Inc. KHAR Airplane license; 333, 500, 414, 2302, 3076, 

Miami, Fla. 4108 kc; 100 watts. 


FEDERAL RADIO COMMISSION 


449 


j 


vs 

CO 


© 


VS 

© 


Vs 

© 


Vs 

© 


V 

© 


V 

© 


r 

© 

P- 


C- 




t— 


tH 


t— 


C- 


tn 

o 


O 


© 


© 


© 


© 


© 


© 

CO 


CO 


CO 


CO 


CO 


00 


CO 



#s 


Vs 


Vs 


Vs 


V. 


Vs 




H 

Ol 


c\l 


Ol 


03 


Ol 


Ol 


Ol 


OJ 

o 


o 


© 


© 


© 


© 


© 


© 

CO 


CO 


CO 


CO 


CO 


CO 


CO 


CO 

03 


03 


03 


03 


03 


03 


03 


03 

Vs 


Vs 


Vs 




vs 


Vs 


vs 


hT 















1—1 


i-H 


i—l 


rH 


rH 


i—l 


rH 


i—I 



'Tt* 






hH 







vs 

o 


VS 

© 


vs 

© 


Vs 

© 


Vs 

© 


Vs 

© 


Vs 

© 


rs 

o 


O 


© 


© 


© 


© 


© 



IQ 


lO 


1.0 


lO 


lO 


LO 


LO 


iq 

Vs 

CO 

• 

Vs 

CO 

• 

VS 

CO 

• 

vs 

CO 

• 

Vs 

CO 

• 

CQ 

• 

CQ 

• 

Vs 

cq 

CO 

CO 

CO 

CO 

CO 

CO 

CO 

to 

CO 

CO 

CO 

CO 

CO 

CO 

oO 

CO' 


CO 

-H» 

-t-J 

CO 

•H* 

CO 


CO 


CO 

*H> 

CO 

a 

oq 

• vs 

ai 

• Vs 

ci 

• Vs 


* vs 

C5 

• Vs 


• Vs 

"cC 

• Vs 

S 

• VS 

© 

& 

© 


© 

£ 

© 

£ 

© 

£ 

© 

£ 

© 

£ 

d 

CO 


CO 


CO 


CO 


CO 


CO 


CO 


CO 

rH 

rr 

© 

rH 

rH 

o 

rH 

rH 

© 

rH 

rH 

© 

rn 

rn 

© 


© 

rr 

rn 

© 

Si 1 

© 

© 

© 

© 

© 

© 

© 

© 

© 

© 

© 

© 

© 

© 

© 

© 

i—l 

© 

m — i 

rH 

© 

rH 

© 

rH 

© 

• pH 

rH 

© 

v 

i—l 

© 

i—l 

.21 ■ 

• 

• vs 


• Vs 


• vs 

pH 

• Vs 


• vs 


• vs 

r— 

• V. 


© 

© 

>v 

© 

Cp) 

© 

© 

© 

© 

tv 

© 

© 

^ »v 

o 

© 

tv 

© 

© 

IV 

d 

<—j 


rH 

r—H 

rH 

r—H 

r-H 


rn 


rH 


(— > 


si 1 

c 3 

00 

JS 

00 

Js 

00 

JS 

00 


00 

c 3 

00 

cS 

00 

cS: 1 


o 


© 


© 


© 


© 


© 

r—1 

© 

r-Mi ( 

p. 

rH 


iH 

r ft 

rH 

Cm 

rH 


rH 

& 

rH 

ft 

iH 

ft - 

rM 


rH 


H 


rH 


rH 

• iH 


rH 
• H 


rH 


,y ■ 

< 


< 


<1 


'-5 




<5 





u—1 


c 


PL 











< 

fcr 


< 

a 


<1 

hH 


£ 


£ 


£ 


£ 


i 

H 

HH 


HH 


hH 


© 


© 


© 


© 


©! 

HH 


hH 


k> 

HH 










<z:i 


o 

© 


© 


o 


© 


© 


© 


©i 

s 

£ 


H 


rH 


rH 


rH 


rH 


rH ; 

hH 

l-H 


» . 

l-H 


rH 

hH 


HH 


HH 


rH 

HH 


HH 

Vs 

Vs 


Vs 


Vs 


Vs 


VS 


Vs 


•l 

CO 

CO 


CO 


CO 


CO 


CO 


CO 


CO 

>* 





V". 


► 


V. 


►- 

V. 


t. 1 

a 

cS 


d 


cS 


>H 

*v 


C 3 


CZ 


Uui 

5 ? 

?: 


> 




1 

? 




& 


«?! 


H 

• pH 


rH 


r^ 


VH 


H 


rH 


m 

3 

< 


’-5 










< 


rH 
* rH 


— 


rH 



* 

rH 



• 

<-! 

CC 

as cz 

CZ 

C 5 

G2 

rn 

Cu 


S3 

CZ 

cs 

c 5 

C 5 


a 

© 

• l— H 

u 

S 

f-i 

s 

© 

• vH 

S 

© 

• H 

rH 


© 

V 

s 

© 

• H 

rH 

s 

*a 


©! 

•r 1 * 

t-H| 

© 

- © 

Vs 

© 

Vs 

o 

vs 

© 

vs 

© 

Vs 

© 

vs 

©1 

a 

s S 

• H 

C 

S 

• H 

P 

£ 

s 

s 

• vH 

S3 

S 

• M 

S 

£ 

• rH 

s 

s 

-d 

§ <1 

s 

.5 

Jh 

S 

.a 


s 

a 


S 

.a 

< 

s 

.a 


s 

a 


^-r 

r-f 

HH 


HH 

^H 

uv 

rH 

W —1 

« 

s_1 

rH- 



♦V 

^ P 

l-^ 

rn 

Cv 


rH 

Cv 


rn 

Cu 

rn 

rH 

*w 

rs 

rn 

CS 

r <3 

rHi 

cz\ 

—4 

PL, 




PL 


Ph 


Ph 


HH 



© 

t— 


00 


© 


© 


tH 


© 


H 

1 

1 




a 


is 


iro 


lO 


IQ 

■ i 

J 

1 

1 


j 

• 


1 

J 

■ 


hi 


hP 


hP 


■ 1 

hP! 

hP 

i 

J 


1 




a 


hP 


hP 

I 


»-P: 

• 

CO 

CO 


CO 


CO 


CO 


CO 


CO 


cd 


i 

I 


Miami, Fla. 4108 kc; 100 watts. 

3-L-L-63 Pan American Airways, Inc.Now Airplane license; 333, 500, 414, 2302, 3076, 

Miami, Fla. 4108 kc; 100 watts. 















Applications Granted—Continued. 


450 INTERCITY RADIO TELEGRAPH CO. ET AL. VS. 



O 

O 

*■4 

3 


c3 

Z 


co 

o 

co 

0s 

Cl 

o 

co 

Cl 

1"H 

•N 

o 

xO 

•*>» 

CO 

CO' 

CO 


o 

C/2 

1 i 

o 

o 


CO 

CO 

ms 

CO 

#s 

co 

0S 

CO 

00 § 

r^- 

N 

t— 



° o 

o 

o 

o 

o 

o 

© rH 

CO 

CO 

co 

CO 

CO 

i-H 




•s 


• 0 

Cl 

Cl 

Cl 

Cl 

Cl 

*" o 

o 

o 

o 

o 

© 

■*- C5 

• pMl 

CO 

CO 

co 

co 

co 

c 

Cl 

Cl 

Cl 

Cl 

Cl 





e* 


o XCO 

f 4 

r—i 

i—1 

r—1 

rH 

rH 

*- M CD 



TjH 




•s 



•s 



o 

o 

o 

o 

o 

o o 

o 

o 

o 

O 

o 

• r; rH 

xO 

xQ 

ICO 

xCO 

xro 

ZJ xco 






r- xro 

CO 

. CO 

. ©o' 

* CO* 

- co • 

Sr 

CO 

C/2 co 
-*-' er\ 

C/2 CO 
•+■* rn 

j£ co 

TT 

^ co 02 

7H rr\ "+~* 

to 00" 


• fs 



•V 


cz 

m 0^ 

CZ 

O 

£ 

0 

?: 

0 


O 

* 

C /2 

r* 

O 

C 0 

r-* 

0 

CC 

0 

r* 

O 

O 

0 

O 

0 

O 

0 

0 

O 

0 

rH 

O 

i-H 

O 

rH 

a 

i-H 

• r-H 

• ^ 


• 


• VK 


• #S 

O 

kc 

O 

/“< 

kc 

O 

r* 

a 

0 

r-* 

0 

>■> 


cs 


o 

C/2 


s o 
o 


cj ^ 


s 8 


o 


o 


00 c 5 00 cSCO c; co 

CitS 

• ^-4 • >—» 


• ^-4 r « 


O 


o 

1—I 




<1 


< 


CZ £ 

■*- t>- 

c o 
o co 

£ . 
■r <m 

O o 

co 

X « 


o 

o 

t— 

XO 

XCO 

#»» 

(Cl 

ICO 

CO 

• ^ 

cc 


cz 


© 

o 

xTO 

• 

CC o 

£ cc 

t: s 

> © 

? o 



o 


CO 

C2 

CO 


c 

o 

xco 


»s 

co 

CO 

co 




I 










FEDERAL RADIO COMMISSION 


451 


02 

CO 

-4-> 

rH 

-4—< 

CO 

c3 

►> 

rH 



o 

co' 

o 

CO 

rH 

CO 


% £ 

o 

00 

o ^ 

C 5 ^ 
--H rH 

<—i CO 
5-i CM 


£ =2 


'P iH « 
p •-'-I 

n © 

go.-s 

•s ° a 

g CO s 
c ^ cs 
£ 

P p . 

P-i C 
tiU-4 K* 

CO_, O 

•i?b- 

£ C "c3 
C2 ? 
O ~ O 
02 1 O ^ 

O IO lO O 
02 j02 O «2 

C |5 t-: £ 

^ !o T "“ l o 


o 

g c5 

r-t 

tH O 
CO 
.rT<© 


p lO 

j-i 

e4H oO 

*®p .3 


"S ® 

o & 


3 H^ C5 

S .'3 ° 

H 6 <.$ 

*5 *©* ^ 'cT.S S 

^3 op £ ^ 

. O 't ^ CS 

•—J Cw O 23 t—i 

c 3 -f - >—i ir* c 3 

—• 5-1 ^ 5-1 '*-• 

o ° _, o c; S 

• -h Hj “ Q, ■*- c 3 

•£ 3 £ ^ 3 02 

Cw O C 3 

fe 02 


•-J o 

2 3? 

2 * 

F-H 

® 'S 


sa 

r, 


fH 

o 

4 -> 

CQ 

H-» 

0> 

fH 

M 


l-H 

6 

. 


o !••—<•. 

! . 02 
Cw _, I w 

s I 

j2 3|Sfcj ■'l 

• H 

C3 i ?H * r- •* 

^ Icq EL^ _2 

02 JSi P 3 rh b: 
^ ^ bo « 

^ O 5-| r-l O 

*■« N ° O -r 02 

cli io a 


'OO C3 
02 O 

■ -^ • •—< 
02 cc 

E-! 20 









452 INTERCITY RADIO TELEGRAPH CO. ET AL. VS. 








to 


>"0 


TO 

k. 

CS 


o 

OQ 






cs 

> 




CZ 

£ 

o 


^ o 

r; «+-i 
° £ 

02 


to 

o 


CS p 

cS O 
o 

m 


o 


to to 

CS ^ CS 

I£ o p 

CS 


o 

a 

H 

r* 

(-H 

v—3 



TO 

TO 

p CS 

g Ph 

P. 

CS 


TO 

P. 


£<0 g 

^ -g ^ S 3 i< 


'd O ? •-< 

Sh TO *“• C 
CS ^ CS © 

O O *2 55 
^ CS ^ £ 

CS5 J—5 CS 
o o - 
02 GQ a 


o 

cS 

o 


* 

o 

CO 

CO 

• 

CO 

to 

CO 


a 

V 

hP 

1 

1 

hP 

hP 


•^4 

i-H 

i 

p^ 

1 

P^ 

• 

LO 

i-H 


rH 

<NJ 

CO 



CO 

t>- 

CO 

Ci 

o 

CO 

co 

CO 

1 

CO 

1 


1 


■ 

l-p 

1 

►■p 

1 

1 

p^ 


PH 

pH 

1 

pH 

1 

1 

CO 

CO 

<NI 

CN 




Indianapolis, Tnd. 
4-P-L-41 Seaboard Airways, Inc 
St. Louis, Mo. 





















federal radio commission 


453 


£ 

© 


£ 

o 


r* 

© 


£ 

© 


52? 


£ 

© 


£ 

© 


f" 

© 


© 


£ 

© 


52? £ 


f" 

© 


r' 

© 


CO 


© 


CO U_| f-- rr< ■— 1 
>%r^i £ &H 

* -‘S . 

!? >% J-t © 

^ -*-s c- ^ 

•-< o ^ > 


© 


C5 r-, 

o ~ 


§cq 


o 

CO 


S o 

• r* 

CO £ 

• ^ Cu 


_ * cJ § 

PS K/ ,0 lT 

<72 Ph 


CM 

Th 

I 

hP 


i 


CO 

I 


I 

CO 


© o 
o M 

-*vH 


Ci 

hi 

I 

Ph 

I 

\o 


.- * - 

^3 M c/3 
• • 

r 1 of r- « 

M M © 

c3 p c5 ©-| 

Ph §Ph"„ 

• ^ • o 

mc« g 

k. D-i 

U P= 'r-( M 
© © © ^ 
^2 ^ ^ G£1 

« « 


C3 

-4-i 

P 

h-i ^ ^ 

03 X CO 


03 


02 


i 


o 


ww 

■ r\ , 


O 

t —j 


,j£ h- o 

ww C 5 © C 3 „ 

Cl, o Ph >5 Ph 

Bjffl S"B|fi o 

. -M * Cw • k- » 

Si o S S" 3 
'§72-g0'§0'g 
23 Ph Ph Ph 


of! 

i 


^: ! 

cci 


P 

I 

CO 


P 

i 

p 

i 

CO 


CM 
T—i 

I 

I 

PH 

IfC 


CO 

T—I 

I 

l-p 

p 

I 


P 

I 

CM 


tO 

tH 

i 

hP 

i 

P 

a 

tH 


CM 

* rH 

S ^ o 

"cop^o) - 
• h rc O 

r-l ^ © 

J- r/C 5 i o: 

re .P es •- 

Po^s 

• Oh • c3 

ro cs CC ' H 

w 2 £ p 

O • O W 

'o r^? o C£ 

W PH 


CO 
1—t 
lO 


CO 

i-H 

I 

hP 

I 

Ph 

I 


P 

l 

pH 

I 

xG) 














Applications Designated for Hearing.—Continued. 

File No. Applicant. Call letters. Nature of appl. 

3-P-L-18 Robert B. Parrish. New Construction permit. 

Port Worth. Tex. 


454 


INTERCITY RADIO TELEGRAPH CO. ET AL. VS 




Los Angeles, Calif. 

(Mimeographed June 12, 1929—9:00 a. m.) P. H. LOVETTE, 

Acting Secretary . 












Minutes of the Federal Radio Commission, 

Minutes #97. 


FEDERAL RADIO COMMISSION. 


455 


a 2 

d 

o 

co a? 


05 « 

ft 

05 

rH 

~ cs 

S 33 


05 ..—I 

GO 

£2 02 

3 £ 

•2g 

- £ F3 
C C 

O o s 

. i—i . CO 

* s ^ 


05 •<—' - 

^ > o 

p lio 

^ 05 00 

LL CQ 

fl «c 

05 ft Jo 

a ® s 

•5 5*<n 
s 05 

CL O pft 


• F-J Q 

CO s 

2* £D 

ft5 w 

ft^H 

8 Is 

CD 

Q5 

*T CO 
-4-> ft 

• pH J3 

g o 

05 «M 

ft 


I o o oo 

^ -*-3 o 05 

® j -* c<5 

o go o 

05 SSJ .2 cc CO 

o -r; d 5 ft 

.i-i rH rj 

■g 2 « ° 9 

§ £ ft ^ ^ 

ft p 9* c? 05 

-ft ft 05 co CO 

CO 53 *,4 ft £ 

r—l O—i ^ CC 

R tC ! O 05 
05 -+J CL*- - "C 

S® X ^ > > 

^ 9 1o CS 
ft O °ti> .05 crq .o <N 
05 O 0 ^ r— ~ft i—* 

a th % p ft 5 * 
.2 !C cl C 1:5 H 

IT 1 • ^ h CS ^ 

PH -1 -A -IX PH PH 

•a-s|2»|i 

< x s 9 2 2 

H <5 ^ 


sc 

8 pq 
i xi 

~ CM 
ft 


i ^ 


ft o 
o C5 

•a m 

2 


ft rft 

2 p 
a 55 

ft( ~ 

.1-1 CO 
Cw co 
ft5 o 

o a 


i M 

"I 1 * 

co *5b 

M ft 
C? r ft 

05 H 

.2 «g 
CO 05 

52 *ft 

I o * 

a cD 


o ^ 

«+-t ?H 

a s § 

5 S 5 

'S 

9ft- 

c <3 6 


•fH _; 

H gH 


cS ► O ^ 

■ft co -ft O 

ft ,-c 
05 05 05 ** 

d $ H CC 

.5 ft.S ft 

CS ^ pft 
ft ft i—' d 
o ft o ft 

§ .a § ft 

CCrr; CCrJ 

05 ft ft o 

S>q So 

?H pH 

H H 


05 r—I 
CO 05 
0 CO 

ft ft 
Pn ft 

M O 


£ 

5 ' 







456 


INTERCITY RADIO TELEGRAPH CO. ET AL. VS. 


518 On motion duly made and carried, the following 
acts of the Commisisoners were approved: 

June 7, 1929. 

Approval of Experimental Station License 

File No. 4-R-E-87, Lannie W. Steward, Experimental 
Station W9XV, Carterville, Mo. The said application, 
heretofore designated for hearing, was reconsidered and 
granted by the Commission in accordance with the recom¬ 
mendations of the Engineering Division. 

June 7, 1929. 

Temporary Authority to Operate 

File No. 5-L-L-106, Lockheed Aircraft Company, Bur¬ 
bank, Calif., telegram dated June 7 to applicant as follows: 
“Retel May twentyeight Commission granted temporary 
authority pending receipt license application for trans¬ 
pacific flight employing maritime frequencies as follows 
five five two five comma one one naught five naught comma 
one six five seven five comma working frequencies five five 
five five comma one one one naught comma and one six six 
six naught kilocycles with call letters KIK Repeat KIK.” 
Approved by Commissioners Lafount, Sykes, and Starbuck. 


Applications Designated for Hearing. 

The Commission designated the following applications for hearing: 

Pile No. Applicant. Call letters. Nature of appl. 

2-L-E-147 Westing-house Elec. & Mfg. Co., Portable. Experimental License. 


FEDERAL RADIO COMMISSION. 


457 


© . 
x *3 

H I 

P4 


o 

© .2 


a> 

© S 

o g 

<z> 

S s 

u o 

O •<— 1 
Ph a 


v ci © 

q .P r- O 

H-i rH h_S 

co © «2 • 

S S s & 

o M © x 

O OH 


o ,£ 

*42 £ 
© C 
ps O 

£o 

H-n 

q Cu 
o X 
O H 


p 

o r • 

.pH O 

qo : 

o & : 

ft g . 

s *42 • 

O co 
O cS 

© H-^ 
i —■* *pH 


i—< o ^ o 
C3 PS _g H 

s &cP3 pq 

O <-• 

■rt -3 S=! 


rP 'q 
CO © 


Jh CC 

2 s fe 

33 .2 © 

p ^ ^ 
o 03 


c— 

rH tH 
t—I rH 

HH 


50 k! 

CC >• 
© '+- 5 v * 
Pi »>h 

g # 
m o 

a 1 * 
q > 

.2 © - 

*3 £ 

c3 ^ 

55 


. p _ 
•O q 

• ~ o 

• co co 

• © qs | 

• i 

• ^<3 

r ! 

; . § L 

■ ^ M -1 

CO Q 

-T *> .pH 

. ft ? 

. O 03 CS 

• P3 55 *3 

si 20 til 

.& o ” 

-r-l .pH -rH ”j 

$ 

H ^ O g 

O rS &D h 

^ § gftn 


' ?h 

: ps 
© 

i* 6 : 

: cs'O ; 

,q 

CC r© 

■ a J ; 

!°« : 
r o 

O 

H 0.2 • 
• ^ 
z; 530,2 

o co 

xSe 2 


H s 

=8 s 


6 © m 
?: q ^ 
42 © 

tS 2 5=1 

^ rH 
O ^ ^ 
rH CO co 

HH6 

PhPhJi 

iO 


-H CO ^ 

*2 © 
q £ > 
© pL| c3 
T3 _ te 

rH ^ 42 


o p2 
^ 00 

CO 05 
CO lH 

*7 *1 
O H 

• i 

H Ph 

^ rH 










458 


INTERCITY RADIO TELEGRAPH CO. ET AL. YS. 


520 991. 

Minutes of the Federal Radio Commission. 

Minutes #98’. 

June 10, 1929—2:30 p. m. 

Present: Commissioners Sykes, Acting Chairman; La- 
fount, Saltzman and Starbuck, the General Counsel, Acting 
Chief Engineer, Hill, Lt. Jett, and the Secretary. 

On motion duly made and carried, the Commission ap¬ 
proved the afternoon minutes of June 7, 1929. 

Hearing Docket. 

In the following case heretofore heard by the Commission 
and taken under advisement: 

Docket File 

No. No. Applicant. 

212 _ RCA Communications, Inc 

the Commission found that public interest, convenience, and 
necessity would be served by granting said applications, in 
so far as they request the use for point to point service 
within the United States of high frequency channels hereto¬ 
fore granted for transoceanic service of applicant, and 

The Commission further found that public interest, con¬ 
venience, and necessity would not be served by granting 
said applications, except in so far as the same have been 
expressly granted by the terms of these minutes and the 
minutes of June 7,1929. 

The Commission therefore directed, (1) that applicant 
furnish the Commission with amended applications speci¬ 
fying points of communication, frequencies, and type of 
service in accordance with the terms of this grant and the 
grant of June 7, 1929, and (2) that an order be entered, 
effective June 10, 1929, reciting the findings herein as well 
as those contained in the minutes of June 7, 1929, and pro¬ 
viding that construction permits and/or licenses covering 
and limited to the frequencies and service affected by said 


Call Nature 
letter, of appl. 




FEDERAL RADIO COMMISSION 


459 


minutes be issued in accordance with said ainended appli¬ 
cations. 

• * # # * # \ * 

CARL H. BUTMAN, 

! Secretary . 

Mimeographed June 18, 1929—2:30 P. M. j 

i 

521 1035. | 

i 

Minutes of the Federal Radio Coinmission. 

| 

Minutes #101. I 

i 

j 

June 18,1929——10:30 a. m. 

i 

Present: Commissioners Robinson, Chairman; Sykes, 
Lafount, Saltzman, and Starbuck, Acting Chief Engineer 
Hill, Mr. Jett, Mr. Sutton, Mr. Gross, and the Secretary. 

| 

Hearing Docket. 

In the following case heretofore heard by the Commission 
and taken under advisement: 

i 

i 

Docket Cnjll Nature 

No. File No. Applicant. lettejrs. of appl. 

350 l-L-E-158 Baltimore Radio Show, Inc., 3X|E Exp. license 

Baltimore, Md. 

i 

the Commission found that public interest, convenience or 
necessity would be served by granting said! application in 
accordance with the recommendations of the Engineering 
Division. The Commission, therefore, directed that an or¬ 
der be entered, effective June 18, 1929, reciting said finding 
and ordering that the license be issued accordingly. 

In the following cases heretofore heard by the Commis¬ 
sion and taken under advisement: 

i 

Docket i Call Nature 

No. File No. Applicant. letters. of appl. 

434 3-L-C-2G1 The N. Y. Central R. R. Co. on |_ License 

board train. 

1-L-C-2C2 “ “ i .... 

I 

#*•*** «j * 

the Commission found that public interest, jconvenience or 
necessity would not be served by granting any of said ap- 
18—4987a 


i 



460 


INTERCITY RADIO TELEGRAPH CO. ET AL. VS. 


plications. The Commission, therefore, directed that or¬ 
ders be entered effective June 18,1929, reciting said findings 
and denying* said applications. Commissioner Lafount dis¬ 
sented with reference to the action taken in Docket No. 396. 

####.*## 

CARL H. BUTMAN, 

Secretary. 

Mimeographed June 27, 1929—10:00 A. M. 

522 1037. 

Minutes of the Federal Radio Commission. 

Minutes #102. 


June 18, 1929—2:30 p. m. 

Present: Commissioners Robinson, Chairman; Sykes, 
Lafount, Saltzman, and Starbuck; Acting Chief Engineer 
Hill, Lieut. Jett, Mr. Gross and the Secretary. 

Correction of Minutes. 

Upon motion duly made, seconded and carried, the fol¬ 
lowing order was adopted : 

It appearing that action heretofore taken by this Com¬ 
mission with reference to File Nos. 2-L-C-453, l-L-C-243, 
l-L-C-244, applications of Westing-house Electric & Manu¬ 
facturing Company, was improperly recorded in the steno¬ 
graphic transcript of the minutes for May 27, 1929, for the 
reason that the Commission was advised that said applica¬ 
tions requested issuance of experimental licenses, whereas, 
in fact, said applications request- licenses for point-to-point 
traffic of applicant, and 

It further appearing that said applications are inconsist¬ 
ent with General Order No. 64, 

It is ordered that said stenographic transcript of the 
minutes for May 27, 1929, be amended (in so far as they 
apply to said applicant) in part, to read as follows: 



FEDERAL RADIO COMMISSION. 


461 


i 
I 

“ Applications Designated for Hearing. 

i 

The Commission designated the following applications 
for hearing: 

File No. Applicant. 

2-L-C-453 Westingliouse Electric & Manufacturing Company. 

l-L-C-243 

l-L-C-244 


# * # # * # 


523 In the following cases heretofore 1 heard bv the 

o J %f 

Commission and taken under advisement: 

Docket 

No. File No. Applicant. Nature of appl. & grant. 


355 3-P-E- 23 F. J. Reynolds, Tampa, Fla.. Construction permit (Ex- 

periinental). 

341 l-L-C-331 News Syndicate Co., Inc., New License (Portable Press 

York, N. Y. Relay). 

l-L-C-332 News Syndicate Co., Inc., New f* “ “ “ 

York, N. Y. i 

l-P-C-715 News Syndicate Co., Inc., New C. P. (Mobile Press Serv- 
York, N. Y. ice)!. 


* 


* 


* 


the Commission found that public interest, Convenience, or 
necessity would not be served by granting any of said appli¬ 
cations. The Commission therefore directed that orders 
be entered, reciting said findings and denying said appli¬ 
cations. 

524 With regard to Docket No. 212, upjon motion duly 
made, seconded and carried, Commissioner Robinson 
dissenting, the following order was adopted: 

j 

It appearing that the minutes of June 7 ahd 10, 1929, call 
upon RCA Communications, Inc. to furnish iamended appli¬ 
cations consistent with the grant made to shid applicant on 
June 7 and 10, 1929, and j 

It further appearing that said applicant has, by letter 
dated June 14, 1929, addressed to the Secretary, Federal 
Radio Commission, furnished, said amended applications, 
covering the use of certain high frequency channels for 
domestic point-to-point communication between certain 
points, now, therefore, 


462 


INTERCITY RADIO TELEGRAPH CO. ET AL. VS. 


It is ordered that the applications of RCA Communica¬ 
tions, Inc., as amended and recited in said letter of June 14, 
1929, be, and the same are hereby, approved, and 

It is further ordered that construction permits and/or 
licenses covering said amended applications be issued 
forthwith, and 

It is further ordered that all applications other than 
those recited and amended in letter of June 14, 1929, which 
were pending in Docket No. 212 at the time of the Commis¬ 
sion’s decision of June 7 and 10, 1929, be, and the same are 
hereby, denied. 

* 7 



Applications Granted. 

The Commission granted the following applications: 


federal eadio commission. 


463 


2 5 


.A O 
^ c5 

S w 

• ^ 

* {§ 
vo 


P eg 

C‘o 

S 

h o 

O (72 

r-< 


P P 


O 
C3 CM 

CO 

u & 

^ <M 
p. ^ 

P CO 


s ° 

g O 
H 


o > 
w ^ 


o ° • 

|S£ 

I §w 


o k: 
•■8 P- 

-2 W 

P o 
<4 X 

P-O 
i- <N 

s ^ 

o ° 

9 co 


-2 M 


• r-4 O 

<j >V< 

^ hH 

P.o 

p 2 

cC 

o ° 

2 co 

Q-i £ 

g O 

g O 

EH 


• »-* CJ 

* M 

3-i i"H 

o ° 
& 2 
g s 
g « 
6 


°. • 

*p > 

5 C 

CO w 
03 


••- cj 

<£ KJ 

^ HH 

P.co 

3-< Cb 

C3 CO 

O O 
2 5/2 

g cj 

g » 

Eh 


• rH <y 

3-1 O 
cd -H 

O ® 

ft 2 

g S 
§ ° 
EH 


4—1 

<D 

O 

X 

O 

Eh 

> 

1—1 

5h 

X 

s 


CO 


CO 

CO 

CO 

CO 

CO 

e3 

u 



k> 

HH 

K> 

KH ! 

M 

Ph 

M 

X 


83 ^ 

o CJ 

% P 

Cm #s 


c3 . 

-4—* U i 4 

3 P< 

2 • 
.3 55 

g «r 

V > 
co o 


csO CS 
u u 

EH EH 


■—i c>3 'r£ & ; p . 

*rj j_g .5 . ,£ . 

o ^ i o ^ o_2 cj 

—4 —.! r+ ^ k> C2 • -* 

-4 w i '■* ^ fi gg «. 

•p ?ip o'^o?> 

£ Oj £ ss S 

o I o a* © - o ^ 

o IS; o 'H O C o g 

CO CO CJ CO ^ CO s 

Gj P>i Cg ^ H E H 


P '1 c5 cr 1 C3 

I 3-i 3-i 

!Eh H 


6 

»y 

CO 

T—1 

CO 

o 

t-H 

o 

o 


(M 

o 

T—1 
| 

CIO 

Cb 

1 

O 

s 

1 

rH 

O 

i 

b- 

Cb 

t 

z 

a; 

1 

o 

1 

p 

1 

p 


P 

1 

p 

1 

p 

P 

i 

P 

1 

••—t 

fa 

1 

p 

1 

p 

1 

p 

UO> 

CNI 

P 

| 

p 

1 

p 

1 

P 

• 

P 

1 


1 

1 

rH 

xb 

\a 

xf5 

VT5 


CO 

VT5 









Applications Granted (Continued). 


464 


INTERCITY RADIO TELEGRAPH CO. ET AL. VS. 


rji 

© 

.—4 

© 

)-+ 

© 

S ^ 

£ 2 

<3 ^ 


03 


© 

A 

es 


o 

hi 

3 

c5 

2 


C3 


O 


*5 


o 


hi O O 

© M K> 

r^l—i t—i 

X O CO 
© lO C3 
CO CO 
GO 00 OQ 


m 

-<-> 

c3 

£ 

O 

lO 

d 

K> 

HH 

CO 

C3 

CO 


03 fe 03 

<i £ 

Q ' 

o 

*S*° X 

a 

^ »—• • | 
s £ 

<=> 

sog 

oh2 

1-e* 

r 1 o +* 


S3 .SP. 
o “ 
O 


cC 


f t 

a o- 

fl 

O c3 
C3 . 

X “ 

°«§ 

*rt 

£ © 

S ° 
c3 o, 

__ 03 

g © 

s ° 

° a 

75 .2 


CO 


"To 

© «4-l 
-h> '-" 

C3 

^ d 

© ^ 
© S 

•J-S O 
CS O 


03 

© 

» ^«4 

© 

© 

CT 1 

© 

hi 

C4-4 


C±_| 

S3 O 


<w< P— 

© C5 

K* 

o 


r-" 

© 


P< S 

« 


c3 

§£ 

JM 

O ° 

X £ 
© cs 


CO ^ 
o ° 

«4-l © 

N_✓ t-J 

© 

• £3 

© s* 
2 © 

• ’ _J 

-S 

Q_i 53 

° a 

”c3 


© 

A 


2 * 
(-4 


00 

o 


o 


- ^ 


£ 
© © 

#5 


£ £ 
© © 


£ 

£ 

£ 

© 

© 

© 

525 

& 

£ 



6 

o 

S 


Cl 

C3> 

co 

CO 

CO 

xtt 

co 



co 

CO 

<© 

CO 

t— 

1 

CO 

1 

CO 

1 


H 

H 


w 

W 

1 

w 

w 

1 


i 

l-P 

i 

1 

hP 

■ 

hi 

• 

pu, 

1 

pi 

1 

p^ 

1 



Cl 


Cl 

co 

rH 

rH 

uo 


2-P-E-96 Cleveland Vacuum Tube Works, Cleveland, Construction permit, (for 8 

Ohio . New experimental frequencies 

& 500 w.) 









5-P-E-106 Radio Corp. of America, Oahu, Honolulu. 


federal radio commission. 


465 


OO CO cfdg 

u .2 ^ u .2 

o o o o o 

«H d % =4-1 d ^sj 

w § ^ § 

."S © o .h og 

d ^ © d 

H !H o d ^ r-> 

S-i •* *-i ^r: 

O O O © 

5^dg ^ 

d ^ d - o 

o © o © © S 

o .2 _ o .5 ^ 

u S g ^ s s g 

-p o. © -t-> rv © 

2x gC SS9 

g GCO^ 3 O CO 

o o 


o o 

«*-• id 


O © 

53 g 


g o 

o © 


• Id 

■4^ 

If 

J_| C? 

s -* 

P->00 

Ci 
, CO 

£ cm 

o 

•-H HO 

-4J <-* 

t © d 

> O rt 

" ?H -fl 


ft°~© to 
X o o £ 

© CO id q 

O 


t3 o 

a-* 

og 

JC-GO 

<M 


2 ^ 

© d 

9 

o 

-£ »d 

d © 

© 00 


00 g 

3 - 

^ 3 

9 

© © 
co 9 


9 

_g 9 
>3 o 

S g 

a-e 

•9 © 

© P- 
k: £< x 
£ * « 
H 


00 g 

i-i 

o 2 

CM M 

' —' © 

9 

© o' 

CG 9 


_. d 

M '4-' 

S3 M 

-M ** 
^ M © 

> | a 

O *£ ^ 

S S, ^ 

pr d 


9 O 
o o 
9- 1 co 


!© eg 

:cg 0,5 

9 

© O 
!© Id 
•i^ GO 
*j 00 

»l #s 

d id 

^-v?d CQ 

• IS 

£ jg «s 

O ;5 - 

|S g 

eg £c0 


o o 

CM ^si 


O LZ 

CG ^ 

fl eg 
O ^ 
O GO 
^3 ud 
(M 

.—i 00 

d cd 
o co 

d CN 

E - 

. O o 

O CL<0 

H 


<o o 

Jz; 525 


CG OS 
O W 


rH 

i-i 

o 

d 

7— 1 

CO 

(M 

1—1 

O 

co 

rH 

| 

CO 

lO 

tH 

1 

CO 

T— 1 

1 

i 

w 


H 

H 

i 

1 

P9 



i 

1 

1 


1 

rH 

r—i 

id 


id 







Applications Granted (Continued). 


466 


INTERCITY RADIO TELEGRAPH CO. ET AL. VS. 


I 

© 

© 


£ 


CO co 
. © 

o © 

«*-• S3 
'—" © 
S3 

So © 


tc *“* 

v © 

^ o 


© 

© s 


>3 


Cw 1 

o ^ 

<—» : *£ 

• 

S* o 
® o 

A O 
X 


co « 

° £ 
<4-. S3 

'—' 2 

© 

CO 5 

© <4-1 
© 


*CS 

© § 


cs 

r h 
© 


■- © 
1—1 

s x 
x ° 


H 


00 

;-! 

o 

<4-1 


o 

CO 

© 

© 


c3 


o I' 

s s 

=3 g- 

r©i 


CO 

© 

» 

© 

© 

S3 

O* 

© 


Cw 


'V o 

c <M 

<4-1 

© X 

CO ^ 

© o 

© § 

• f-H W? 

■ 

O 

_ o 
co 


Cw 


© 

s >, 

.is k> 

i_, ^H 

© o 

r+ 

© o<3 


Bg^ 

Sh O k 1 - 
© Lrr~ 


x 


s- o 

£ ° 
<4-1 CO 


© JO 
CO ^ 

S ° 

g ICO 

.Si go 

*s 

CM 

_, ^ ''“T 

S3 ^ O 

© 35 o 

S3 CO uo 

*5 o <8 

O CM 
C. ”T 


H 


x 

H 


W O 

c© M 




© 



© 

Cw 


K. 

K* - 


cs 6 
'© 'S3 

© O 

O 




• ^ 

co . 

©n 
** • 
•s 525 

S3 ^ 

P CO* 
^3 

r 5 h 

CJO o 

s fe 

• *-< 
© C3 
© H 

s° 

< 4 - 1 ,2 

o o 

>W< 

■jJ c3 

slq 

Q 


© 




© 


O K. 
■H 




© 

125 




o 






co 


lrt 

0 

• 

A. 

t>- 


00 

CO 

CO 

0 

O 

55 

1 


rH 

1 

rH 

tH 

1 

i-H 

1 

CJ 

H 

1 


w 

1 

H 

H 

H 

r 

^4 

1 

t^- 

<M 

1 

P 

1 

1 

1 -^ 

1 

1 

>-3 

l 


<M 

lO 


tH 


rH 


l-L-E-192 David Grimes, Staten Island, N. Y. ... New Experimental license, (for 

6425, 4795 kc. & 50 w.) 

l-L-E-193 Allen D. Cardwell Mfg*. Corp., New York, Experimental license, (for 8 

N. Y. New experimental frequencies 

& 20 KW.) 









FEDERAL RADIO COMMISSION', 


467 


—* r 

© o 
© 5 


5- S O 

.2 ^ 

.2 o 

—- > kO 

C3 o CO 
— c^i 

S3 • © ' 

© >■ Z_| © 

5 f> n 

5 Kyi _, t— 

© © fe s* 

6 T—( £) O 

I ^ k 3 £ tM 

© O ^ 

« 


^ o 

O T—I 

=w -tH 


S g 

<V) CTi • 

.2 co 

— »o 

1 § 
fa -tl 
-CO 

2 of 

S CO 

2 ^ 

■ s <*> 

<3 


o 2 


o W 

^ g O 

• • —^ T 1 

< — k-O 

^ to 

o — - 

O C3 CSJ 

kO o o 

^'■5 S 

' cs g co 

• s ° 

©go 


S3 2 

g co 

2 > 

3,2 

© © 

€M =g 

O v> 

CJ O 
^ © — 
£-3 - 

Cv • rH 

O © ff 

o cd r 

C1 *r= © 

d£ o A 


%* CO 

o © 

<*1 J • pH 

rZ> © 


© fa 
© 


a 

V 2 

Cv • -H 

o CO 

’2 £? 

r-1 i—I 

° 

— © 

8 *> 


\nz 

!V3 =3 

© ^ 

I © 

r ►> 


g o 

© t*- 

© I 


go fa 

£ s 
^ ^ 

§ & 


=4-1 

© fa. 

u S5 

© -4-> 

o -+j 
— CS 

5= 

Sg 

CO 2 

S3 ^ 

g<# 

fa co 
fa ©.2 
£ S3 2 
— fa © 

g fa O 

?S 2 cr 4 




O c3 

o ^ 
Q 

o S 

p^ ^ 

o ^3 
p£ 


a 


Cu 

P 5 

cS 

o ~fa 
fcC J“4 

ca fa 
© <3 

• pH ~ * 


ca o 

2 ° 

CO g 

pH 

fa 8 

§ w 


c- x ! © 

x o © 

H H I > 


© 

cc g 

HH 

«g ~ 

CO 

© C3 
© fa 

.2 O 


iO CS 


<M 


VM 

l 

W 

1 

fa 

fan? 

1. - 

fa 

1 

fa 


fa ° 

O C3 

< • pH 

1 

o 

1 

fa 

i 

1 

J 

fa 

fa»? 

1 

fa 

W —1 

| 

GO 

C<J 

fa ^ 

1 

fa 

• 

fa 

l 

iQ 

i 

O 

LQ ^ 


rH 

o 

co 

CO 

CO 














Applications Granted (Continued). 

File No. Applicant. Call letters. Nature of appl. & grant. 

l-R-E-95 Universal Wireless Comm. Co., Inc., (Port- Renewal experimental li¬ 
able) . W3XU cense (for 8 experimental 

frequencies & 50 KW). 


468 


INTERCITY RADIO TELEGRAPH CO. ET AL. VS. 


£ 

O ^ 

■ r- <M 

g* 

o 

co ^ 

o p 

° © 

CO 


CZ 

o 


Cm 


Ci 


C3 

c 

CO 


co 


2 s 
? s 

O 


CO P* 


o' 

. C vCl 

§ « <3 
M •- M 
O O 
_ cm 
_ ^ C 

« S3 

02 O 

© o 

xfi ty 


-M © _ 

rr* — *** O 

£ S C *m 

fS © C CM 


<55 

<r, c 
w-J * 

Eh 

PQ 

HH 

HH 

c 


o 

£ 


b ^ 

^—i p-. 

' pQ^ 

c> W =3 

M 


c 


c 

p-. 

U1 


o 

* 

C? 

r-H 

o 

o 

CO 

(—* 

cp 




Cm ^ 

I. ' 

a 


co^ 


o 

o 

cp 

M 

o 

b. 

cp 


O 

CJ 

co 

CP 

X 

o 

Eh 

o 


3 

H 

o 

o 


Ci 

CM 

Ci 


CO 

CM 

© 


TP 

© 


ICO 

I 

I 

Cl-i 

I 


lO © 

o > 
O 

~M CO 

^ * 

9 § 

P3 — 

co 


bo 

o 

© 

a 

• r—* 

u-i 

r=5 





529 1031. 

Minutes of the Federal Radio Commission. 

Minutes #104. 


FEDERAL RADIO COMMISSION. 


469 



r—H 






c3 



3 

a 

• 

PH 

<5 

O 

^■4 



r-H 

O 

a . 

• 

PH 

O 



a 

o 

Op 

o 



*pC 

o 

o . 

o 

00 
• • 

© 

pH 



o 

au 

oo"0 

CM . 

<M 

H 



x 

o 

M ^ 

o 

•v 

o 



p< 

o 

3 o 

c,) -M 

<M 

a 



4m 


C5 


# 

4-p 

o 

P o 

r—H 

ph 



c> 

o o 

Ps 

a 

• 

«v 


m *r-s 

©> 

-M 


to 

r-i 


rH 

m 

pH 

a 

a 

» 

(—< a 

HN CO 

© 

a 

^2 

P-S 

© 

i* . 

S3 

CD 

a 

40 'm 


c5 o 

~ c 

a a? 

IjS 

S3 

a g 

CQ 5 

•N 

co 

a co 

5 O 
O ^ 

“3^ 

pO 

co 

O ~ 

a 

o 

x/i p 

- S 

a go 

c3 • 

SP 

U 

• pH 

c3 ^_T 
43 C5 

Q &0 

© 

,-rGQ 

PH 

o < 

co © 

m CO 

4 S 

O o 

W O 

2 73 

2 o 


CO 

CO w 

• ^H . •> 

3 a 

3 £ 

O co 

O ‘55 

CO 

^ <1 

*~4 

PH 

o 

w £ 

co 


a co 

0j a _ 

w og 

—• o 

-m <D 

2 co o 

5 a co 


a £ 
0 £ 


CO 

J w 43 
5 cS 
S O K 

~ pH I_J 

♦ I-H 

< ? >■ 
_ • ^H 

a o 

co „ 

*m ^ 

<D 44 
> c3 

*3 p0 


O 

CM 

O tH 

y 1 

■$ H 

UO 


o © 

.£ [a 

M «4-l 


£ >H £ 

j? P 
L 

CS jCC 
CO . 4 s I CO 

‘ pH F—l |Ph 

o ph !o 

iK* 

•a pH # 

P P 


Si 

<3 

5zT £ 

3 8 

£ gq 
EH 
p 
P0 


• CO . 

• GO 

• ^3 

• "o cs 

^ O 

• • m w 

• ^ 

. P* O 

,-H O 

C3 *S 
► CO 2 
O pH 3 

CO p ? 

g-5fa 











Minutes of the Federal Radio Commissi 

Minutes #105. 


470 


o 

CO 


Cl 

Cl 

o 


o 

Cl 

o 


C5 

5-4 

ci 


^ 3 

ci 

< O 


ci 


'o ^ 

C3 

^ I * 

-£ ? 

^ M 

cs o 
-o ci 
CO CO 

r3 © 

<-4 

S3 ~ i -' 

•4 '"C 

.-4 (-4 

44 l—I 

Co Co 


TELEGRAPH 

CO. 

ET AL. 



71 

• 

• • 



•4—* 

o-< 

—4 


*3 

* 

• *4# 

3 " 

o 

3 

Cl 

71 

• 

C5 

<44 

o 

Cl 

p 

• 

P- 

P* 

Cl 

p 

• 

Pm 

K 

Cl 



r d 

«4 

71 

CO 

Co 

40 

— 

(—4 

o 

O 

5-i 

Cl 

'A 

O 

O 

'“C 

M 


Cl 


^4 




M 




44 




s 
^ >> 

— 

— — 



Co 

cs o 

O tJ 

£ • 

Cl 


'u 





71 


o 


o 

O 


CO 


© 

P 


£/;• 

O 


o 

CO 

lO 


N © 

15 

CO © 

-P 




o 

<= 4—1 

« 71 

1—3 ^ 

^ o 


© O 

*> 

T. u 

U1 


© 
>■> 

o 

o 

P 

bO 
^ C3 


Co © 

is 


c3 

5 


Xfl 

• 

50 

I—I 

<5 


a 

© 

w 


o 

71 


o o 

W § 

2 g> 

£ P 

° cm 

71 Cl 
71 

’§ 5 

3 CO 

o s 

O *P 
© 


© 

71 

© 


O 

71 


O 

O 


CC 

r* 

o 

• ^ 

71 

71 


o 

O 

o 




CS 

© 


o 

Cm 

o 

O—i 

© 

5-i 

O 


75 

O 

71 

Co 

o 


'CO 


p: 

jo 

o 

cm 


cm 

O 


© 

Co 

Cl 


* 


c5 

iS * 


o 

o 

04 


40 

c . 

O 


O 

d 

p 

O 

To 


71 

Co 


o 

71 

71 

<1 

71 

71 

© 


o . 

71 - 


71 

© 


o 

O 


Cl 

»o 

9? o 

O ^ 




CO 


71 

c3 




j® S £ 
K'’ 1 - ^ 

£ §>£* 
© cs zrt 
^ ci CJ 

2*0 3 
2 6 ^ 

_ H © 

^ * c ^ 

■ 44 

r 3 •*-> *■■ 

rC: M 71 

cs s ci 
j- *r © 
O r- 1 2 

H P-( 'r, 


P* 

o 

Sf 

Cl 


Co 

P^ 

o 

P^ 

o 

O 

o 

Cl 


© ^ 

oq.2 

71 T 
£ ° 
© 5o 

^ 2 


<> gjs! ^ 

oP 


O s ® 

5 =a 


- >4 - g tx 


Ph 


Cl «—< Cl 


^ 9 ^ 


N CO 00 Cl 
- lO ^ lO ► rH 

o CO CO CO CO CO 

CO 

I 

o 


p 


o 

C5 


coqOOO^o- 
o#p^p^o ? 
p ■ -* 1 '• '■ 




I 

p 


p 


ci 




d d 


Cl 








FEDERAL RADIO COMMISSION. 


471 


tlie Commission found that public interest, convenience or 
necessity would not be served by granting any of said ap¬ 
plications. The Commission, therefore, directed that or¬ 
ders be entered reciting said findings and denying said ap¬ 
plications. j 

i 

* # * # # # 

531 Press Applications Granted, j 

The matter of applications of the American press for con¬ 
struction permits came on for consideration, and the follow¬ 
ing order (Commissioner Saltzman not voting) was adopted 
without objection: 

Upon the action taken by the Commission May 24, 1928, 
and December 22, 1928, granting certain applications for 
permits to construct stations to be used by agencies of the 
American press, and upon the conditions and limitations 
attached to and affecting said permits, and upon all the evi¬ 
dence and argument presented to the Commission in con¬ 
nection with said applications and permits, and upon all 
the protests and proposals filed by applicants! for said per¬ 
mits and other agencies of the American pr^ss, and upon 
all papers and proceedings herein, and upon due considera¬ 
tion of the foregoing, and 

It appearing that the action of the Commission taken De¬ 
cember 22, 1928, with reference to said applications is not 
effective, 

Now, therefore, it is ordered that the construction per¬ 
mits issued August 1, 1928, (pursuant to minutes of May 
24 and June 22, 1928), to one Joseph Piefson, Trustee, 
American Publisher’s Committee, acting for and on behalf 
of a single public utility corporation which! should be or¬ 
ganized to engage in a public service communication busi¬ 
ness for the American press, be reissued, subject to all the 
conditions and limitations attached to said permits at the 
time of their original issue, and 

It is further ordered that said Pierson shall, before July 
15, 1929, submit the articles of incorporation, the by-laws, 
and the minutes of said public utility corporation for the 
written advice and approval of the Commission, at which 
time, if the Commission is satisfied that said corporation 
will provide a bona fide public service open to all agencies 
of the American press on a fair and equitable basis, the 
Commission shall grant its written consent;to the assign- 


i 




472 


INTERCITY RADIO TELEGRAPH CO. ET AL. VS. 


ment of said permits by said Pierson to said corporation, 
and 

It is further ordered that in the event said Pierson shall, 
by August 1, 1929, fail to satisfy the Commission that said 
corporation has been organized on the basis herein defined, 
said permits shall lapse, and 

It is further ordered that said Pierson, or, if said permits 
have been assigned, said corporation, shall, within a period 
of sixty days, file applications for modification of said per¬ 
mits to conform with the terms of this order and to provide 
for the location of proposed stations at points other than 
premises under the control of any newspaper or press asso¬ 
ciation, and 

It is further ordered, that the time within which con¬ 
struction under said permits shall be completed and within 
which the conditions and limitations attached to said per¬ 
mits (other tlia£ those herein specifically stated) shall be 
complied with shall be extended to October 1,1929, and 

It is further ordered that the following frequencies, to 
wit: 


5325, 5335, 5345, 5355 
4965, 4975, 4985, 4995 
5315, 5305, 4725, 5285 


4715, 4745, 4945 
5295, 4925, 4955 
4735, 4935 


be, and the same are hereby, reserved for the use of the 
American press for point-to-point communication within the 
United States, and that construction permits covering the 
same shall be issued to said corporation (the organization 
of the same having been approved by the Commission as 
aforesaid) if and when applications have been filed which 
satisfy the Commission that said applicant has a project 
for the utilization of said frequencies which will serve pub¬ 
lic interest, convenience and necessity. 




532 Rules and Regulations. 

The Commission adopted General Order 69, extending 
broadcasting, and other licenses, copy of which is attached. 

CARL II. BUTMAN, 

Secretary. 


Mimeographed July 1, 1929—10:30 A. M. 


FEDERAL RADIO COMMISSION 


473 


533 1012. i 

I 

Federal Radio Commission, Washington, D. C. 

I 

S 

General Order No. 69. 

At a session of the Federal Radio Commission held at its 
office in Washington, D. C., on June 20, 1929. j 

It is ordered (1) That all existing licenses to broadcast, 
which by their terms expire at 3 a. m., Eastern Standard 
Time, July 33, 1929, are extended from sucji time until 3 
a. m., Eastern Standard Time, on October 31, 1929, Pro¬ 
vided: 

(a) that this order shall apply only to $tations which 
shall have filed applications for such renewal Iwith the Com¬ 
mission, in full and proper form, on or before! July 31,1929, 
and 

(h) that where any change of status or coiidition of any 
station has taken place during the present license period 
which might be considered by the Commission in determin¬ 
ing whether the further operation thereof is in the public 
interest, convenience, and necessity, which; change shall 
come to the attention of the Commission after the extension 
of license herein provided for, the right to set the same aside 
is specifically reserved, and 

(c) that by special order or minute entry the Commis¬ 
sion may make this order inapplicable to apv specifically 
named station. 

i 

i 

(2) that all existing licenses for stations other than broad¬ 
casting stations, as well as construction permits of all 
classes, which expire at any time from Jupe 15, 1929, to 
September 10, 1929, both inclusive, are hereby extended 
until 3 a. m., Eastern Standard Time, October 1, 1929. 

FEDERAL RADIO COMMISSION, 
By IRA E. ROBINSON, j 

Chairman. 

Affpof • 

[seal.] FRANK H. LOVETT, j 

Acting Secretary J 



474 


INTERCITY RADIO TELEGRAPH CO. ET AL. YS. 


534 Copy for the Commission. 

Tuesday, January 17, 1928. 

Hearing Before the Federal Radio Commission in the New 
National Museum, Washington, I). C. 

Docket No. 86a. 

Public Hearings on Short Waves. 

Hart, Dice & Carlson, Shorthand Reporters, 416 Fifth 
St. N. W. (Suite 301-307 Columbian Bldg.), Washington, 
D. C. Geo. L. Hart, Edwin Dice, Fred A. Carlson. Tele¬ 
phones: Main 343, Main 5649. 

535 A list of those who registered as attending the 
hearing appears at the end of the transcript of to¬ 
day’s hearing. 

536 Contents . 

; Tuesday, January 17, 1928 

Statement of: Page 

Dr. J. H. Dellinger, Bureau of Standards (The High 

Frequency Spectrum) . 3,100 

Mr. Joseph Pierson, Representing The American 

Publishers Committee, Chicago, Illinois . 12 

Mr. John D. Costello, Examiner Printing Company, 

San Francisco, California, and other allied Hearst 

interests .. 19 

Mr. L. M. Loeb, Representing the New York Times. . 29 
Mr. Robert Anderson Pope, Representing The Alas¬ 
ka Communication Service, Seattle, Washington. . 40 
Mr. J. Donald Haig, Representing The Tidewater 


Wireless Telegraph Co., Phila., Pa. 42 

Mr. Charles E. Hughes, Jr., Representing The Mac- 

kav Radio and Telegraph Co.. 49 

Mr. Manton Davis, Representing The Radio Corpo¬ 
ration of America. 58,102 

Dr. Frank B. Jewett, Vice-President of the Ameri¬ 
can Telephone and Telegraph Company, 195 









FEDERAL RADIO COMMISSION. 


475 


Broadway, New York City . !..... 82,99 

Mr. Frederick C. Scofield, Representing the inter¬ 
city Radiotelegraph Co. of Cleveland and the 
Michigan Lime Stone and Chemical Co. of Roger 

City, Michigan .1. 94 

Mr. Frederick G. Simpson, Representing the Robert 

Dollar Co., San Francisco, California.j.103 

Mr. Lewis Windmuller, Representing the Bull Insu¬ 
lar Line, 40 West St., New York City |.104 

537 Mr. Paul K. Trautwein, West Indies Radio 
Telegraph Co., 15 Albany St., New! York 

City.[.109 

Mr. R. N. Conwell, National Electric Light; 1 Asso¬ 
ciation, New York City.. j .110 

Mr. W. C. Smith, Representing the Boston Elevated 

Railway, Boston, Mass. j .117 

Mr. J. W. Parker, Representing the Detroit-JEdison 

Co., 2000 Second Avenue, Detroit, Mich. . .11S 

Major W. R. Blair, United States Army . . . j.120 

Captain S. C. Hooper, Head of Radio Division, Bu¬ 
reau of Engineering, United States Navy j.122 

Lieutenant E. M. Webster, United States! Coast 

Guard, Washington, D. C. j .131 

Mr. H. J. Walls, Representing the Bureau of Light 

Houses .i..135 

Mr. Dave P. Carlton, Representing the various oil 

Companies .j.140 

Professor C. M. Jansky, Jr., Consulting Engineer, 
Associate Professor, Radio Engineering, Univer¬ 
sity of Minnesota, Minneapolis, Minn. . . .j .146 

List of those present at hearing. j .155 


538‘ Federal Radio Commission, Washington, D. C. 

Public Hearings on Short Waves , New National Museum , 
Tenth & B Streets N. W., Washington, I}. C., Tuesday, 
January 17, 1928. 

Public Hearings on Short Waves held by the Federal Radio 
Commission in the Auditorium of the New National Mu¬ 
seum, Tenth and B Streets N. W., Washington, D. C., 
beginning at 10 o’clock a. m. Tuesday, January 17, 1928. 

The following Commissioners were present: Eugene O. 
Sykes, Acting Chairman; Orestes H. Caldwell, Sam Pickard, 

19—4987a I 


i 

























476 


INTERCITY RADIO TELEGRAPH CO. ET AL. VS. 


H. A. Lafount 1 ; Secretary of the Federal Radio Commis¬ 
sion, Carl H. Butman. 


Acting Chairman Sykes: Gentlemen, the hearing will 
X>lease come to order. First I desire to announce that smok¬ 
ing is prohibited. Also we want to insist on you gentlemen 
registering with the Secretary up by the door, so that we 
may know whom we have the honor of entertaining today. 
Also as you address the meeting we will ask you to come 
up here on the rostrum and speak from that place, 
539 as they say the acoustics are very much better there. 

As you know, gentlemen, we have invited you to 
attend this public hearing to discuss generally the short 
wave bands between 10 and 200 meters, how many there 
are, the uses to which they must lie applied, and the uses 
to which they may be applied in the public interest, the effect 
of the last International Radio Conference on the allocation 
of these channels by this Commission, those channels 
especially needed by the various branches of this Govern¬ 


ment. 

The representatives of each class or group of service ap¬ 
plied for are invited to discuss also more particularly, 
first, the dependence of such service upon short wave radio 
rather than wire or other means. 

Second, the humane, social and economic importance of 
their proposal. 

Third, the number and position of channels believed avail¬ 
able for such service. 

Fourth, power required and interference likely to be 
caused to other services other countries. 

Fifth, the probable total number of applications which 
will be made for such service within the next five years 
by all applicants in their class. There we are asking you 
to be more or less prophets. 

The discussions are to be of a general character and not 
of the particular applications of any one. And from the 
information we glean at this hearing and our individual 
study we hope to evolve a general policy by which we 
540 may be guided in passing upon the individual appli¬ 
cations. 


FEDERAL RADIO COMMISSION. 


477 


"We very much appreciate your attendance,, and feel sure 
that your discussion will be of great aid to us. 

Before calling on the representatives oi the various 
groups here I shall ask Dr. Dellinger to open tjhis discussion 
by telling us generally about the short wave j band. I take 
great pleasure in presenting to you Dr. Dellinger. (Ap¬ 
plause.) 

The High Frequency Spectrum, by Dr. ,J. H. Dellinger, Bu¬ 
reau of Sandards. 

Dr. Dellinger: Mr. Chairman and members of the Com¬ 
mission, gentlemen: The problem faced by the Federal 
Radio Commission in high frequencies is sirdilar to that in 
broadcasting. In any part of the radio spectrum the num¬ 
ber of channels is definitelv limited at anv given stage of 
radio development. The difficulty of the problem, and in 
fact the verv reason whv there is need for a federal Radio 
Commission, is the simple fact that the number of channels 
is limited. j 

The Waves Available—The spectrum undey consideration 
extends from 2,000 to 23,000 kilocycles, that is, from 150 
meters to 1300 meters. This spectrum of wav^s was divided 
up into 36 small bands by the recent International Radio 
Conference to various services, as set forth ijn the attached 
Appendix. This allocation will come into fojrce January 1, 
1929, and it is assumed that allocations will be made 
541 in accordance with it henceforth. Several bands of 
frequencies are available to mobile sdrvices, several 
to fixed services, several to broadcasting, and several to 
amateurs, “Mobile services” refers to comndunication with 
ships, aircraft, or vehicles. “Fixed services” refers to 
communication between stations permanently fixed in posi¬ 
tion. The bands allocated to “broadcasting” are largely, 
as far as this country is concerned, for the use of broadcast 
relay stations. 

General Characteristics.—Considerable experience has 
been accumulated in the past four years in experimental 
use of the high frequencies, and certain conclusions can 
now be drawn as to the number and character of the avail¬ 
able communication channels: There is by no means unani¬ 
mous agreement on precise details among those who have 


i 



478 


INTERCITY RADIO TELEGRAPH CO. ET AL. VS. 


had most experience; and I must therefore sound a note of 
warning. Any statements either by myself or others giv¬ 
ing actual figures for width of channel, available number 
of channels, distance ranges, etc., are only approximations. 
The primary phsical fact characterizing high frequencies 
is that they are subject to greater vagaries than radio waves 
of lower frequency. It is never certain that the perform¬ 
ance observed at one time can be exactly duplicated at any 
other time. The conclusions which can be tabulated are 
averages of a great deal of experience. 

A factor of safety must be allowed in order to insure 
genuine communication service when high frequen- 

542 cies are used. Much of the information in the hands 
of the public is based on sensational reports of great 

distances worked by amateurs with small power. It is true 
that a boy in the United States will occasionally communi¬ 
cate with a boy in Australia, using 50 watts or even 5. I 
had a case reported to me where an amateur in Washing¬ 
ton received a most flattering report of reception in Michi¬ 
gan, when he was transmitting on 5 watts without the tubes 
being lit. (Laughter.) But such communication is of no 
use commercially. Sufficient power must be provided to 
carry the messages through under severe conditions of 
fading, atmospherics, low wave intensity, and interference. 
As an illustration, the British Government paid over $200,- 
000, exclusive of the land occupied, for the high-frequency 
station to communicate with Canada, and the company 
which furnished it lost money on it. 

It is by no means possible to say that an operating chan¬ 
nel in the high-frequency spectrum is N kilocycles wide 
where N can be immediately specified and the number of 
channels easily computed by dividing the total width of 
this part of the spectrum by N. The conditions are very 
different in different parts of the frequency spectrum. 
These conditions, aside from the existence of vagaries and 
irregularities which I mentioned, are such things as the se¬ 
lectivity of receiving sets, accuracy of maintenance of fre¬ 
quency, skip distance, and the different carrying power of 
the waves at different hours of the day and night. 

543 I regret having to mention such a collection of 
technical factors, but I know no other way of mak¬ 
ing it clear to you how far we are from a situation in which 



FEDERAL RADIO COMMISSION 


479 


we can merely list the frequency channels and parcel them 
out according to demand. The task of the iFederal Radio 
Commission in this field is far more complicated than 
that. 

Width of Channels.—Every radio transmission poten¬ 
tially is capable of interfering with every other. This is 
avoided by virtue of the fact that receiving sets have a 
certain amount of selectivity, or, discriminating power for 
signals of differing frequency. If receiving sets had un¬ 
limited selectivity it would be possible to receive without 
interference continuous-wave transmissions Separated only 
a few hundred cycles from one another and telephone trans¬ 
missions separated only 5 kilocycles, and ! this would be 
true regardless of the propinquity of transmitting stations 
to the reception point. As we actually utilize real receiv¬ 
ing sets rather than ideal ones, channels of greater width 
are necessary. Taking into account the iactual average 
power (usually 1 to 10 kilowatts) and distaiice of transmis¬ 
sion, and the selectivity of existing receiving sets, it turns 
out that reception can be carried on without Excessive inter¬ 
ference with an average frequency separation of about 5 
kilocycles at a frequency of 5000 kilocycles; and this same 
proportionate separation of 1 in 1000 holds pretty well 
throughout the whole high frequency spectrum. Contin¬ 
uous waves (called type A-l in the International 
544 Convention) and radio telephony (type A-3) are in 
view. It is assumed that no damped waves (type B) 
will be allowed. 

On the basis of this rough rule it can be: calculated that 
there are something like 2000 channels available in the 
frequency spectrum under consideration. These are not 
all available for use in the United States, j As I shall ex¬ 
plain later, the higher frequency channels I are essentially 
adapted to very long distances and hence international 
working. j 

There is a possibility of increasing somewhat the num¬ 
ber of channels if advantage is taken of a certain principle. 
This principle, well recognized in the allocation of the very 
low frequencies for transoceanic telegraphy, is that adja¬ 
cent frequencies should be assigned to transmitting stations 
close to one another geographically. Then ja receiving sta¬ 
tion at a given point is subject, on the average, to less 




480 


INTERCITY RADIO TELEGRAPH CO. ET AL. VS. 


interference from nearby stations. The use of this prin¬ 
ciple permits the use of a smaller frequency separation 
between stations. It is uncertain how extensive use can 
be made of it in the high frequency field. Some experiments 

have been made on this basis bv the Armv and a definite 

« •- 

improvement obtained. It is also possible that more sta¬ 
tions can bc ! accommodated by duplicating the use of a 
channel at widely separated points. On account of the 
great carrying power of high frequencies, however, any 
duplication, even with low power, must be considered expe¬ 
rimental until it has been proved that negligible in- 

545 terference results. 

Here again you see the problem is more difficult 
than in the broadcast range. 

Accuracy of frequency.—Another limitation on the num¬ 
ber of communication channels available is the lack of per¬ 
fect constancy of station frequencies. Departure of a sta¬ 
tion’s frequency from its licensed value is a most impor¬ 
tant source of interference. A very small percentage vari¬ 
ation indeed will cause a transmitting station to invade 
the frequency limits of some other station. If the fre¬ 
quency separation between stations is the amount T men¬ 
tioned, 0.1it follows that a variation of 0.1% in the fre¬ 
quency of onb station will put it exactly on the channel occu¬ 
pied by another station. Frequencies must therefore be 
maintained much more accurately than 0.1%. This is a 
rigorous requirement, more so than the present ruling of 
tiie Federal Radio Commission on the maintenance of fre¬ 
quencies of broadcasting stations. As it is difficult for some 
of the broadcasting stations to comply with this require¬ 
ment, it follows that accuracy of frequency is at the present 
time a limitation forbidding the use of a number of fre¬ 
quency channels much in excess of what I have indicated. 

The practicable limit in present practice is just about 
0.03 per cent, the limit of the Commission’s present re¬ 
quirement for broadcasting stations. Even this requires 
great care on the part of the station operator. As 

546 temperature-controlled piezo oscillators come into 
use the accuracy can be expected to advance and fre¬ 
quencies maintained perhaps ten times as close. In any 
event, proper operation of high-frequency stations is bound 
to take on something of laboratory character, for the main- 



Jb'EDEKAL 11ADI0 COMMISSION. 


I 


481 


tenance of accurate frequency is far more important than 
in the lower parts of the spectrum. This fact in itself gives 
notice that all those who secure the privilege! of using high- 
frequency channels must expect to provide themselves with 
precision apparatus for maintaining frequency with great 


accuracy. 

Day and Night Distances.—The frequency required for 
any given kind of service depends upon the distance of 
transmission and the time of day in which the station must 
operate. In the first place, it is a remarkably characteristic 
of the very high frequencies that they carry better to great 
distances than to certain short distances. IThis is known 
as the ski]) distance effect. Because of tins, the recent 
International Radio Conference stipulated that as a gen¬ 
eral rule frequencies above 600 kilocycles should be re¬ 
served for long distance communications (hs far as fixed 
services are concerned). The following statements may be 
taken as a rough guide to the uses of various parts of the 
high-frequency spectrum. j 

Between 2000 and 3000 kilocycles the waves are suitable 
for short distances, of the order of a hundred miles in the 
daytime and several hundred miles at nighti Bear in mind 
my warning that figures are to be! taken as only 
547 rough approximations. Obviously j these channels 
can all (or nearly all) be used in the United States 
with little regard to their use by other countries. Exam¬ 
ples of services suitable for allocation to this band are air¬ 
craft telephony and emergency communication between 
substations of power companies. 

Between 3000 and 6000 kilocvcles the waives carrv a few 
hundred miles by day and a thousand oil more miles at 
night. While these waves can be allocated freely for 
national use as far as daytime is concerned, their use in 
other parts of the world must be considered when night 
transmission is desired. 

Above 6000 kilocycles we have very great distances of 
transmission both by day and night, withj a skipped zone 
of a few hundred miles around the transmitting station. 
The uses of such waves in all parts of the wrorld must be 
considered in allocating these frequencies.! They are suit¬ 
able for transoceanic services such as commercial tele¬ 
graphy and relaying of broadcast programs. 


i 

i 

i 

i 

i 






482 


INTERCITY RADIO TELEGRAPH CO. ET AL. VS. 


Above about 15,000 kilocycles Hie waves are useful only 
for daytime communication, and 23,000 kilocycles is about 
the limit at which the waves have any use at all for long¬ 
distance communication on this- planet. 

On account of the differing transmitting conditions for 
day and night it follows that stations which must carry 
on service throughout the whole 24 hours may need to have 
two different frequencies for operation at different times 
of dav. 

V 

548 Conclusion.—Summarizing, it appears that there 
are some 2000 channels available between 2000 and 

23,000 kilocycles. This number might conceivably be in¬ 
creased as the selectivity of receiving sets and the accu¬ 
racy of frequency control are improved by future design, 
but on the other hand the probable increase of power used 
in the future may compensate for this, so that this num¬ 
ber can be taken as a guide for discussion. In order that 
this number of channels may be used, all stations must pro¬ 
vide special means for maintaining their frequencies with 
great accuracy. The assignment of frequencies for any 
given service must take account of the physical facts in re¬ 
gard to distance wdiich is best covered by any particular 
frequency. Among the most interesting of these facts are 
that the higher frequencies are better adapted for long dis¬ 
tance than for short distance communication and that for a 
given distance a different frequency is required in the day¬ 
time than at night. 

If I have accomplished nothing else, I shall be glad if I 
have made it clear that radio transmission at high fre¬ 
quencies is subject to greater vagaries than low frequency 
transmission. All principles must be applied with cau¬ 
tion. My brief summaries of existing knowledge will be 
supplemented by the statements of others, and I am en¬ 
tirely prepared to have some of my statements contro¬ 
verted. 

It is impossible to give a neat set of miles that can be 
immediately applied to setting up a system of high 

549 frequency stations that will work together with 
maximum efficiency and harmony. The problem is 

very much more difficult than that of the broadcast fre- 
quencies because of greater variability of the high-frequency 
waves, the greater difficulty of maintaining accurate fre- 


FEDERAL RADIO COMMISSION 


483 


quencies, the differences between day and night transmis¬ 
sion, and the relative lack of extensive experience in the 
practical use of high-frequency waves. 

Acting Chairman Sykes: We have attempted to rough¬ 
ly classify the various groups that desire to be heard and 
that we desire to hear. The first classification on the list, 
which I dare say you gentlemen have, is Newspapers and 
news services. We w’ould be glad now to!hear from the 
gentlemen here present who come under that classification. 
Do any of you gentlemen representing any; newspapers or 
news services who are applying to the Comntiission for allo¬ 
cations in the short wave band desire to be hbard this morn¬ 
ing? | 

Mr. Joseph Pierson: Yes, I do. 

Acting Chairman Sykes: All right, sir. | Will you give 
your name to the Reporters, if you please.; 

Statement by Mr. Joseph Pierson, Representing the Ameri¬ 
can Publishers Committee , Chicago j Illinois. 

Mr. Pierson: Mr. Chairman, and gentlemen of the Com¬ 
mission: The American Publishers Committee on cable and 
radio communications, whose interests I here represent, 
begs leave on this, its first opportunity, to present 
550 to the Federal Radio Commission j of the United 
States assurance of its high consideration. We have 
watched with attention your Commission’s struggles to 
give order to traffic in the ether so that th^ public at least 
may fully enjoy it. We early have realized the immense 
value to the press of a regulatory Radio Commission. For 
radio communication seems specially designed to provide 
to the press a means of public information for which it has 
been searching for more than a half century. On your 
invitation, therefore, we have the honor ;to present our 
claims to the use of certain radio channels fjor the swift col¬ 
lection and dissemination of public intelligence among the 
people of this and neighboring nations. 

First, that we mav make clear our needs, we wish to 
acknowledge our appreciation of the great amateurs and 
engineers and powerful companies and governments who 
have given to modern society this science of radio commu- 




484 


INTERCITY RADIO TELEGRAPH CO. ET AL. VS. 


nication. In this rapid development the press, too, has 
played an important part by spreading the information on 
which genius has based new steps onward. For many years 
also the press on its own accord and initiative has been 
experimenting in radio science in the hope of producing 
by its own effort a result for the public good. We now are 
ready and anxious to realize this hope. 

The two great problems of modern public journalism are 
the collecting and dissemination of news. Faked rumors 
and propaganda flourish in proportion to the restric- 
551 tions on free and rapid communications, whether 
those restrictions are imposed by man or by an un¬ 
developed science. When channels of communication are 
free, open, and convenient, enabling the collection and dis¬ 
semination of news in perfect harmony, error and fraud 
vanish. 

Members of the American press began about ten years 
ago collecting some of their most important news by their 
own radios. Todav thev are collecting about 10,000.000 

m/ w C? 7 7 

words a year by this means. We refer you to MacMillan at 
the Greenland ice cap: Byrd and Chamberlain over the At¬ 
lantic, Dyott in the Amazon jungles, to the first news of the 
tornado-stricken Miami, to Lindbergh, and so forth. 

By radio the newspapers alone opened, and kept open, 
communication with Mexico Citv during the height of the 
de la Huerta revolution. All other means of communica¬ 
tion had collapsed. Our committee established the first 
regular direct communication between Italv and North 
America. This was done from our Halifax stations. These 
are only a few points in a long and active record of achieve¬ 
ment. These incidents demonstrate what the press with¬ 
out radio could have done when all communications were 
cut off at the time of the Taft Inauguration in this very city 
of Washington. At that time, due to a big snow storm, 
all wires were down, and Chicago, for example, was igno¬ 
rant of the details of the inauguration for 24 hours 
552 afterwards. Couriers had to be sent to Philadelphia 
to get the news out. 

We are asking you here only to make permanent the serv¬ 
ices which we have proven a public necessity by extensive 
experiment. 


FEDERAL RADIO COMMISSION 


485 


For our own exploits in the collection of hews, although 
it lias been done without ostentation, as befits careful ex¬ 
periment, we nevertheless have won the corhmendation of 
the American public. We beg to acknowledge our appre¬ 
ciation and to assure the public through yoijir Commission 
that we are confident we can make our recojrd even better 
in this important service. , 

It is in the dissemination of public information among 
the people that we seek here most today thej careful atten¬ 
tion and direction of this honorable Commission. This is 
one of the most perplexing problems of American journal¬ 
ism. ! 


One of the great news agencies associated jin our commit¬ 
tee calculates that fully 60 per cent of the! adult popula¬ 
tion of the United States never receives a cbmplete report 
of important national and international events. Although 
several newspapers and news associations gjathcr at a cost 
of millions every twentv-four hours from hundreds of ex- 
pert reporters and correspondents in all payts of the world 
a thorough and comprehensive news report^ they are able 
to deliver this full report only into some 25 or 30 cities, the 
great bulk of these east of Mississippi and north of Ohio. 


This delav is due to the necessary mechanics of news dis¬ 


tribution when it must deal with wire communica- 
553 lion. The complete news reports arrive in each of 

the 25 cities aforementioned in full!bloom. There 
the various editors are compelled to trim and re-write down 
this report to fit the economic limits of each wire subscriber 
to the service. The complete report is cut down to 10,000, 


to 7500, to 5000, to 2500, to 500, and even compressed into 
200 words with almost miraculous speed and skill. In the 


lower wordage, the wires are open a part 1 of the time at 
regular arbitrary periods. When great events occur in Con- 
gress or similar big news is abroad, such as a catastrophe, 
it frequently takes two, three or even fom* of these short 


periods running perhaps over four hours tq send the com¬ 


plete report. 

When the great news associations are allowed to pour 
their whole reports into the air, editors in the most remote 
places will receive the news without delay or expensive 
wire costs, and news associations will be able to reduce the 
rural papers' costs still further because of the reduction 

I 

i 

i 


! 




486 INTERCITY RADIO TELEGRAPH CO. ET AL. VS. 

of their distribution expense. There are in the United 
States about 170 cities whose editors should receive daily 
or nightly a complete national and international news re¬ 
port to distribute among their regional population. 

We wish further to call your attention to the fact that 
time is the essence of news. This is a psychological truth 
no doubt too well known to your Honorable Commission 
to require analysis here. It is the pride of American 
journalism that news is delivered quicker to the 

554 American population than to any other population 
in the world. This is the result of a relentless energy 

by men full of enthusiasm for public service, men of great 
thoughts, however hidden they may be, in anonymity. They 
work in obscurity; their fine accomplishments seldom known 
beyond their editors. We beg for them in this moment the 
appreciation of your Commission and that of our Govern¬ 
ment. 

In order to complete their public service, it is necessary 
and proper for us to ask your Commission for the facili¬ 
ties which will eliminate the present delays. We propose 
a careful system which will eliminate this trouble and will 
deliver a complete national and international news report 
into every city of the United States, thereby contributing 
to the convenience, interest and necessity of all the people 
in the United States. We ask this Commission for adequate 
radio channels for this mass dissemination of news reports. 

Owing to the close coordination necessary between the 
press and its means of collection and distribution of news 
en masse as proposed, it must directly control the means 
of communication exclusively reserved for it and free from 
the caprice of weather and the hazards of another business. 

In view of the field of development we have dis- 

555 covered we respectfully request your Commission to 
reserve for us channels adequate for our needs. 

At the rate of radio progress today it is fair to assume 
a large advance will be made in the next few years. A serv¬ 
ice of so great an importance to the public, should be given 
an opportunity to participate in this development and to 
give the public the resulting advantages. 

The freedom of the press is based on the freedom of 
news communication. An} 7 governmental, or other arti- 


I 


FEDERAL RADIO COMMISSION. j 487 

I 

j 

ficial restraint on news communication is restriction of 
press freedom. 

The press must have free access to and use of the means 
of news communication. Only considerations! of national 
defense and public safety outrank the press in public in¬ 
terest. 

I wish to emphasize that I purposely have refrained here 
from going into detail and have contented myself with giv¬ 
ing you a bird’s eye view of our position, jl have asso¬ 
ciates present who are in a position to treat the details and 
other phases of this subject more exhaustively. 

I thank you, gentlemen. (Applause.) 

Acting Chairman Sykes: Gentlemen, we will be glad to 
hear further from any of the representatives of the papers 
or news services. 

! 

556 Statement of Mr. John D. Costello, Examiner Print¬ 

ing Company, San Francisco, California, and Other 
Allied Hearst Interests. 

Mr. Costello: Gentlemen of the Commissipn: I am rep¬ 
resenting the San Francisco Examiner, the! Los Angeles 
Examiner and other allied Hearst interests, who either have 
applications pending or whose applications are in the proc¬ 
ess of being filed before the Commission. Particularly do 
I speak in behalf of the two Examiners because they have 
filed applications with the Commission, and those applica¬ 
tions were denied under date, I believe, of October 26th, 
the Commission citing the reasons in denying the applica¬ 
tions that the denial was due to an adherence to a definite 
policy to which they had been adhering in the past, that 
reason being that they had been granting applications for 
short wave point to point communications onlfy where it was 
shown that the existing means of reliable wire communica¬ 
tion were not adequate. 

557 Thereupon, the Commission graciously granted a 
rehearing; and I believe it was one of the specific 

cases mentioned in the Commission’s bulletin of November 
17 in calling this hearing which has, I think, very largely ex¬ 
panded since that time. 

We have prepared a brief and some exhibits in which 
we undertake to point out where, in our opinion, the Com- 




488 


INTERCITY RADIO TELEGRAPH CO. ET AL. VS. 


mission erred both in questions of fact and of law. We 
have stated in one set of exhibits a number of instances in 
which we feel that we clearly show the total prostration to 
which the existing wire communications have been and can 
be reduced, and in our humble opinion we believe that any 
service that 6an be so completely reduced to impotence, as 
we believe we show the existing wire communications can 
be, can under no circumstances be deemed to be either 
reliable or adequate. Being unreliable, as we feel we show 
them to be, we feel that they are therefore inadequate. 

I have, as I say, a number of such instances which I 
will not take time to go into; but following that up and 
endeavoring to anticipate the position which the Commis¬ 
sion might take, I wanted specifically to say that, speaking 
on behalf of the people I represent, certainly they would 
not be satisfied with auxiliary permits or emergency per¬ 
mits. Thev would feel that the business of gathering news 
is so important and time is so thoroughly of the essence 
that they cannot be put in the position of having no avail¬ 
able means of communication, possibly, if the wire com¬ 
munications are prostrated as they so frequently are. 
Those prostrations come without any warning, and we feel 
we should have another service. 

558 We have also set forth in our brief and exhibits 
a number of instances wherein radio has actually 
been used with great effect and very helpful effect when 
such wire prostration has occurred. 

I recall an instance just the other day in San Francisco 
of a complete and total prostration of wires in the Pacific 
Northwest due to a very severe storm and the Associated 
Press was faced with the necessity of furnishing to one 
of its member papers in Astoria a news report on that day. 
They were absolutely unable by looping up other wires or 
other circuits to get the news reports to the Morning Asto- 
rian, and as a last resort they used radio by broadcasting by 
word of mouth a news report from the Portland Argonian 
station in the hope that it would be received by the Asto- 
rian, and it was so received. 

Then, again, we have instances which we believe set 
forth the uses of radio when there are actually no other 
means available; and while it is true that the instances we 
cite relate to mobile uses of radio, still we feel that there 


FEDERAL RADIO COMMISSION. 


489 


are a number of other instances in which radio can be used 
where there is no available possible means of wire com¬ 
munication. 

T have in mind particularly the case of a Report on the 
details of the Dole air trip from San Francisco to Hawaii 
last year, when it was possible for one of the q>an Francisco 
newspapers to equip and airplane with a portable radio set 
and transmit news of that event of great interest which 
otherwise they would not have been able to convey to 

559 their paper. j 

Again, a regatta of universities was held on the 
Pacific Coast where it was possible to equip a motor launch 
with a portable set and transmit to the papers the details 
of that event; events which we believe are of public inter¬ 
est and which otherwise could not be given to |the press. 

We think that section 30 in itself is an indication of the 
intent of the Congress to provide additional means of 
communication rather than to hamper additional means of 
communication as it would be indicated the Commission 
intended in its ruling. 

Section 30 specifically gives to the Secretary of the Navy 
the right to transmit press messages for a^l newspapers 
from the United States to points outside the United States, 
and from papers owned by Americans in foreign countries 
and the press reports of the various national press asso¬ 
ciations; and indeed today we find that the! greater press 
associations of the United States, the Associated Press, 
International News Service, and other services, are trans¬ 
mitting their reports to the Orient, Manilq and the Ha¬ 
waiian Islands by means of radio, using eifher the naval 
radio or the Radio Corporation of America’s equipment. 

As further evidence of the fact that existing means of 
communication are not adequate today, is th'e fact that the 
Mackey Company and other companies, perhaps, are actu¬ 
ally paralleling their wire communications with radio, which 
in itself, we believe, is an indication of the fact that these 
communeation companies which are said bV the Commis¬ 
sion to be adequate, do not so deetn their wires, 

560 because they are actually paralleling :their lines, ac¬ 
cording to my information. 

Furthermore, it might be said that there is wire com¬ 
munication between the United States and the Orient, and 






490 


INTERCITY RADIO TELEGRAPH CO. ET AL. YS. 


yet \ve find by specific mandate of the Congress that the 
newspapers are permitted to transmit their daily news re¬ 
port to the Islands, and we feel that it is probably a w’ell 
know r n fact that the cable is not as subject to complete pros¬ 
tration from many causes as are wire communications. We 
deal with that in our brief. 

We also find that the Department of Justice and other 
government departments are ordered and have been or¬ 
dered to use radio transmission throughout the United 
States in communicating government messages to and from 
various departments. That is specifically true of the De¬ 
partment of Justice. I have on file an affidavit from a for¬ 
mer United States attorney in which he goes on record as 
having said the Department of Justice ordered him to use 
radio transmission in the transmitting of government mes- 
asges. 

We feel, also, that the radio has infringed, in a sense the 
field of the press, and yet when we seek to use radio w r e 
are told that w r e are going to infringe on the field of exist¬ 
ing wrire communications. That certainly, in effect, is the 
intent of the Commission’s ruling. 

I have specifically in mind the use of the radio by the 
Dodge Brothers to advertise a new car that they were put¬ 
ting out. I think they spent $60,000 for one hour to adver¬ 
tise their car, and we feel that probably that was money 
that might have gone to the press. 

561 I know’, however, that there are some three mil¬ 
lions of dollars spent in the last ten months by 
advertisers in the use of one national broadcasting chain, 
solely for advertising purposes; and we think that that is 
also money that might have gone to the press. 

We think that the press, as a matter of fact, provides 
ample opportunity for advertising and news distribution. 
It is estimated by N. W. Ayre & Company that there are 
some sixty or seventy million people that read the daily 
papers. 

We think that this provides ample, even abundant, means 
of advertising in news distribution, and yet we have no 
quarrel with the use of radio in the way it is being used 
with respect to newspapers, but we think that we are 
entitled to use radio means of collecting and disseminating 
our news. 


FEDERAL RADIO COMMISSION. 


491 


j 


Clarence Limner, in a recent issue, said that radio means 
an additional appropriation for advertising j and a cutting 
down of the allotment for newspapers. 

We also think that the effect of the Commission’s ruling 
is in a sense to absolutely destroy competition. We think 
that if the spirit of the Commission’s ruling were carried 
to ts ultimate conclusion there would have begn no air mail. 
It might well have been said that the railroads were carry¬ 
ing the mail to the satisfaction of every one. jAnd yet today 
we know that we can get an air letter to I Chicago in a 
much shorter time than the trains could carry it. 

We can attribute to the same far-sighted policy the use 
of the parcel post, today. But it might well have been said 
that the existing rail transportation facilities were 
562 adequate, and therefore it was not! necessary to 
undertake the use of stage lines. Yet we find that 

i 

that has been done. 

I think probably a similar situation was presented when 
the Postal Telegraph Company sought admission to the 
field of wire communication. It might well have been said 
that the Western Union was well supplying the needs of 
the Country. But we feel that we must enter] into the prog¬ 
ress of the country and submit to as many u^es as possible 
the art of radio. 

We feel, also, that sections 9 and 21 of the Act embrace 
a specific mandate to the Commission to graiit permits and 
licenses where it is clearly shown that they meet the test 
of public convenience, interest and necessity. We believe 
that we are fully and thoroughly qualified under that test. 

Section 21 deals with the licensing authority of the Com¬ 
mission, that the Commission may grant such permit if the 
public convenience, interest or necessity will be served by 
the construction of a station. We find at no place in the 
Act any language to the effect that the Commission is 
clothed with authority to deny any applicant a permit be¬ 
cause in their opinion the existing wire facilities are ade¬ 
quate. 

First of all, we do not believe that they are adequate. 
Secondly, we do not believe that the Commission had any 
right to render such a ruling. That is ouf humble judg¬ 
ment. 

i 

20—4987a 


i 



492 


INTERCITY RADIO TELEGRAPH CO. ET AL. VS. 


Public convenience, we believe, is a term used to pre¬ 
scribe the power, whether of police, legislative or 

563 governmental, which exists in a state to regulate, by 
appropriate enactment not forbidden by the Consti¬ 
tution of the United States, the relative rights and duties 
of all persons or corporations within its jurisdiction and 
therefore to provide for the public convenience and public 
good. 

The Supreme Court of the United States, in defining 
public convenience, said that it is a relative expression and 
is to be considered as calling for such facilities as are to 
be fairly demanded. We believe that when Congress em¬ 
ployed the term “interest” it merely wished to state that 
radio had become a business affecting the public interest. 

When we speak of necessity we merely mean urgent pub¬ 
lic convenience. 

We think that Congress intended to clothe the Commis¬ 
sion only with regulatory power, and not with arbitrary 
power to deny applicants in the absence of a proper show¬ 
ing. We feel that the Federal Radio Commission is purely 
regulatory and has no arbitrary power. 

I think we must leave with the Commission the question 
of the assignment of desirable wave lengths which will 
provide a minimum of interference. Those, of course, are 
technical questions about which I am frank to say I know 
nothing—and 1 probably have a lot of my friends in this 
room. I know nothing about the technical side of the ques¬ 
tion. We have technical experts who, if the Commission 
sees fit to grant further consideration with regard to our 
permit, will be very glad to sit down with any experts of 
the Commission and endeavor to work out such ques- 

564 tions as that. 

We think that the public press renders a great 
service of public interest, convenience and necessity, as in¬ 
deed its names implies, and we feel that the public press 
comes perhaps as fully within the scope of the definition 
used by Congress as almost any classification that we can 
conceive of. That is given some weight by the fact that 
the Commission in the promulgation of its regulations spe¬ 
cifically recognized the press as one of the classes entitled 
to consideration in a specified band which perhaps since 
that time has been changed or altered. 



FEDERAL RADIO COMMISSION. 


493 


There were 65 channels set aside, as I understand it, in 
a higher band, 1 think perhaps around 85.7 tb 105, for fixed 
services, and in that classification were included the press, 
electric power utilities, public toll stations aijid government 
mobile stations. 

We think, also, that the public press lia.^ fulfilled very 
fully its mission of public convenience, interest or neces¬ 
sity. We believe that the press provides a wonderful means 
of communication between the Executive and the people of 
the country. Twice weekly the President nteets the press 
representatives and conveys to the people bf the country 
a report on the state of the Union; and it is;because of in¬ 
stances of this kind and manv more that T could cite that 

•' i 

we feel are outstanding evidences of the public convenience, 
interest and necessity provided by the press[ 

We further feel that the ruling of the Cojmmission is in 
effect a granting of a subsidy or bounty tojprivate corpo¬ 
rations operating telephone and telegraph companies; 

565 and certainlv it is well understood jthat Congress 
did not and, as a matter of fact, cpuld not grant 

such power. 

I think it is a well established question pf law that the 
power of Congress, indeed, to grant a subsidy or a bounty 
to private corporations is questionable, and Certainly under 
no circumstances can that power be delegated to and exer¬ 
cised by executive officers. 

We feel that the purpose of the Commission departed 
from the true intent of the Congress in having made such 
a ruling, because we believe that the effect is the granting 
of a bountv or a subsidy. 

566 I can only close by saying that wejare anxious to 
have further consideration given to the applications 

now pending before the Federal Radio Commission on be¬ 
half of the San Francisco Examiner, the Lqs Angeles Ex¬ 
aminer, the Seattle Post-Intelligencer and other allied 
Hearst papers whose applications, as previously stated, are 
now pending or will be pending shortly before the Commis¬ 
sion, and I assume-that those applications^ although they 
have been denied, are still before the Commission, in view 
of this rehearing. 

The Chairman: That is one of the reasons for this hear- 




494 


INTERCITY RADIO TELEGRAPH CO. ET AL. VS. 


Statement of Mr. L. M. Loeb, Representing the New York 

Times. 

Mr. Loeb: Mr. Chairman and members of the Federal 
Radio Commission, and gentlemen, the New York Times, on 
behalf of whom I appear here, wishes to make it clear, first, 
that it opposes in making its applications no other inter¬ 
ests or groups that appear before the Commission in seek¬ 
ing to get an allocation of the short wave radio spectrum. 
It does believe, however, that the public service, the im¬ 
provement of the service which it will be enabled to ren¬ 
der, entitles it to a definite assignment of wave lengths and 
to the serious consideration of the Radio Commission. 

I propose, first, to cite examples of the public service 
which the Times has already rendered, both direct and in¬ 
direct, to the great reading public through the use 
567 by it of an amateur license which was granted by 
the Department of Commerce in May, 1926. The 
Times has been enabled by that station to render four dis¬ 
tinct improvements of public service, all of which we think 
are important, and I just want to cite examples of them, 
because I believe that the examples of the use made by the 
Times apply 1 to all the other newspapers and all the great 
news services which are applying here for consideration. 

The New York Times, through its station in New York, 
lias maintained communication with a number of great ex¬ 
ploration expeditions, such as the Geological expedition in 
South Greenland. It has maintained communication with 
Commander Byrd at Spitzbergen, both before and imme¬ 
diately after his epoch-making flight to the North Pole. It 
has maintained communication with Commander Dvott in 
his expedition to the River of Doubt in Brazil, and also 
communicated with George Palmer Putnam in his 1926 ex¬ 
pedition to the Coast of Greenland, his 1927 expedition to 
Baffin Land, North Labrador. 

It may not be amiss to digress a minute to cite one spe¬ 
cific example which T think may be of interest, that in the 
1926 expedition of Commander Putnam his ship, the Mor¬ 
rissey, happened to run on a rock off the coast of Green¬ 
land. The New York Times happened to be in touch with 
the expedition at that time and we were able to publish news 



FEDERAL RADIO COMMISSION. 


495 


of the event within thirty minutes after the actual happen¬ 
ing, up in Greenland. 

The Times was also able to communicate {with ships of 
the McMillan expedition which were jnot in direct 

568 communication with the Morrissey, andflhey were en- 
abled in that way to get in communication with the 

Morrissey to prepare to go to its rescue and aid in floating 
it, and the Morrissey was able, finally, after twjo days to free 
itself. 

Perhaps the most recent and, from the standpoint of the 
public, one of the most far-reaching examples of the im¬ 
portance of this service was the communication established 
by the Times Station with the Mexican War Department 
Station at the Val Bueno flying field in Mexico City during 
Colonel Lindbergh’s visit. 

Through its contact the Times was able ! to get direct 
Colonel Lindbergh’s signed story and the publication by it 
and associated newspapers and the graphic j stories of its 
correspondents which totaled between three and four thou¬ 
sand words a night; and if the Times had bben compelled 
to depend upon the wire communications it would have been 
greatly delayed in receiving this. In fact, the corre¬ 
spondents of the Times in sending the story w^rote the story 
right at the transmitter and it was immediately transmitted 
right from their elbows to the Times. 

Another type of service which the Times ha^ rendered has 
been the daily news service which it broadcasts the ships 
at sea and distant land stations. 

If the Commission desires to examine them, we would 

be very glad to submit letters from over a hundred and 

twenty-five different ships and a number of land stations 

acknowledging the great benefit of this service. No one 

knows how manv others receive it without written 

* 

569 acknowledgment. This service is distributed to 
points as far distant as Melbourne, Australia, Dur¬ 
ban, South Africa, the United Fruit Company’s isolated 
stations in Central and South America, various isolated 
points in Alaska, not to mention the Army base in Panama 

and the headquarters of the marinesj in Nicaragua. 

570 No one can know how many other points have re¬ 

ceived and enjoyed this service without written ac¬ 
knowledgment. i 



496 


INTERCITY RADIO TELEGRAPH CO. ET AL. VS. 


It may be said that other agencies also broadcast a news 
service which is received by ships at sea. The distinct fea¬ 
ture of The Times' service has been that, whereas in most 
of the other services the leading news events of the dav 

•w* •/ 

may be covered, The New York Times endeavors to give 
short, terse accounts of all the news published by it in its 
paper. There are other news services which do broadcast 
a news service to ships at sea, but they are mostly de¬ 
pendent on the news that they glean from the newspapers, 
whereas The Times is able to broadcast tlie news which it 


is about to publish in the paper which will appear the fol¬ 
lowing morning, so that its service is, to use the vernacu¬ 
lar, hot off the griddle. 


Then also this service of The Times is unique in that it 


is a short wave service. 


Most of the other services broad¬ 


casting are long wave services, and any one who has been 
in the wireless room on board any ship, particularly in 
tropic waters, must have a graphic picture in his mind of 


the great interference of static which, as you know, is neg¬ 


ligible in case of short wave lengths. 


The third use made by The Times of its station, and 


very important one, is communication which it maintains 
with The News Traffic Board, Ltd., Radio Station at Hali¬ 
fax, Nova Scotia. No doubt the Commission is familiar 
with the fact that The News Traffic Board, Ltd., main- 
571 tains a radio circuit between Halifax, Nova Scotia, 
the British Post Office Station at Leafield, England, 
and The Italo Radio Communication Company, at Rome, 
Italy, for the transmission and reception of press dispatches 
for American and Canadian newspapers. It is also a fact 
that the Western Union Telegraph Company has increased 
its rate on foreign press dispatches refiled at Halifax for 
New York, from sixty-seven cents a hundred words to two 
dollars a hundred words, which makes the receipt of mes¬ 
sages from this source more expensive than would be the 
receipt of direct cables from London and Rome to New 
York. It is the position of The New York Times, that it 
should be free to select the source from which it receives 
its news. There are other wires maintained by the Postal 
Telegraph and the Canadian Pacific Telegraph lines which 
link Halifax and New York, but there are many times when 
these wires are insufficient to carry the burden of the mes- 


FEDERAL RADIO COMMISSION. 


497 


i 


sages, which is especially true in times of particularly im¬ 
portant news. There are other times, when dbe to the ex¬ 
tremely turbulent weather conditions which pijevail a large 
part of the year in the vicinity of Halifax, tWse wire com¬ 
munications are frequently interrupted and broken. At 
such times, radio communication is indispensable. Often 
through its station in New York, The Times is able to re¬ 
ceive communications from the English Post Office Station 
direct without waiting for their retransmittal. At this 
time, when relations between the United States and the 
European nations are more intimate and involved 

572 than possibly at any previous era in bur history, it 
is desirable, almost requisite for a greht newspaper, 

that any medium that enables the reading public to receive 
accurate news from abroad more quickly and inore reliably, 
should be maintained and assisted. 

Any one of the above three services rendered by The New 
York Times’ station should be reason enough for its con¬ 
tinuance on a commercial wave length. There is yet an¬ 
other, however, which has been extremely important dur¬ 
ing the past year, and will, it is believed increase in im¬ 
portance to an extent which it is difficult to predict. When 
Colonel Lindbergh, Chamberlain and Commander Byrd 
were planning to take-off in their non-stop transoceanic 
flights, their chief interest was to obtain the most accurate 
and up-to-the-minute weather reports possible. Of course, 
the United States Weather Bureau rendered a service of 
prime importance and of unexcelled efficiency. Neverthe¬ 
less, The New York Times received radio; advices from 
ships strung across the entire span of the Atlantic, which 
detailed the exact, up-to-the-minute weathet conditions in 
all parts of the ocean that were likely to be traversed by 
the daring adventurers. These reports supplemented the 
regular weather reports which could not be! as recent and 
did not emanate from the places themselves. All of the 
above mentioned aviators have advised The Times of the 
value of this service. In fact, Colonel Lindbergh has stated 
that it was the reception bv him of such reports from 

573 The Times, repeating radio advicesj received by it 
from steamers in mid-ocean, that finally decided him 

to take-off. ! 



498 


INTERCITY RADIO TELEGRAPH CO. ET AL. VS. 


Now just very briefly I want to direct myself to the five 
propositions, the discussion of which was invited by the 
Commission in its letter of December 19th. I think I have 
covered the first one by saying that as a matter of fact 
the uses to which The Times has put its radio station are 
largely cases which do not involve paralleling any existing 
wire facility. I do not in saving that desire that it should 
be misunderstood that I subscribe to the thought that a line 
should be drawn where existing wire facilities are adequate. 
I do not think that is a progressive attitude, and I think 
it should depend on the public service to be rendered by the 
group or interest which intends to use the radio, as well as 
the existence of adequate wire facilities. 

With reference to the number and position of channels 
that are available in the radio spectrum, 1 take it that a 
newspaper is not qualified nearly as well to answer that 
question as the Federal Radio Commission itself will be, 
guided as it is by the technical experts of all of the govern¬ 
mental departments, and having the benefit, as I know it 
has quite properly of the experts of the various great pio¬ 
neers in American commercial radio, and The Times for 
one is confident that those experts will only furnish the 
Commission with accurate, scientific data on the subject, 
uncolored by any possible desire of the commercial 
574 radio companies themselves to retain the exclusive 
use of the radio spectrum. We are informed, how¬ 
ever, that there are at least 5,000 wave lengths available, 
and we are confident that the newspapers merit their proper 
share of those 5,000. 

The Radio Act of 1927, furthermore, we believe, furnishes 
the Commission with an adequate check, and should the ex- 
tremelv remote situation arise that all of these 5,000 wave 
lengths were allocated or that all of the existing wave 
lengths were allocated and a greater need was deemed for 
some wave lengths than the uses to which they were em¬ 
ployed, and it was believed that they could be put to more 
important us'es, licenses would be continually expiring and 
available. Licenses are limited in time, and no licensee ob¬ 
tains any prescriptive right or any title to any of the wave 
lengths. They will be constantly expiring and the Commis¬ 
sion will constantly be able to put them to the greatest use 


FEDERAL RADIO COMMISSION. 


499 


that the Commission and the Government thinks that they 
can serve. 

The New York Times is asking for one kilowatt of power. 
We understand that a number of applications heretofore 
granted have been for larger amounts of power than that, 
and no one can claim that that amount will interfere with 
any foreign services or governments. 

Now as to the probable number of applications, I am un¬ 
able to speak for others, in the newspaper j field, but for 
The Times I can say this, that it has applied for two sta¬ 
tions now: The change of its present New York sta- 
575 tion to a commercial one, and anothejr, a commer¬ 
cial station in Washington. The reason for that one 
being that it has been found that for communicating with 
points south of the United States reception isj much clearer 
in Washington. 

It has quite recently concluded an agreement with Com¬ 
mander Bvrd, whereby it will receive the exclusive news- 
paper rights fo the story of his contemplated! expedition to 
the South Pole, and it will be extremely important that it 
be in a position to maintain constant radio communication 
with the expedition. It is believed that this can be most 
effectively accomplished through a station to| be located at 
some point on the west coast. As soon as Tljie Times is in 
a position to determine upon the most advantageous loca¬ 
tion for such a station, an application will be filed with this 
Commission for a license. The great public service and in¬ 
terest which will be served through such a station and the 
maintenance of such communication need hardily be stressed. 
It is also contemplated that The Times will, within the next 
five years, apply for a station at Chicago, which will sup¬ 
plement the other stations hereinabove discussed. It may 
possibly develop that unforeseen conditions may arise with¬ 
in the next five years wiiich will make it necdssary for The 
Times to apply for additional stations at other points, but 
at this time we can state to the Commission!that w^e know 
of no others than those above specified. 

576-585 In other words newspapers and The Times, to 
summarize, believe that they do rbnder a great 
public service to the people of this country; we believe that 
it is a service that is of equal importance tjo that of any 
other group which appears before this Comrfiission, and wre 


i 






500 


INTERCITY RADIO TELEGRAPH CO. ET AL. VS. 


merely ask that the Commission allow The New York Times 
and other papers to use radio to increase its power and 
influence and usefulness to the great American people. 

Acting Chairman Sykes: Arc there any further represen¬ 
tatives of the newspapers or news services who wish to 
speak? There seem to be no further representatives under 
this general classification so we will proceed to the next, 
which is Communication Companies—domestic and trans¬ 
oceanic. We will be glad to hear from you gentlemen. 

586 Statement of Mr. Charles E. Hughes , Jr., Represent¬ 
ing the Mack eg Radio and Telegraph, Com pang. 

Mr. Hughes: Mr. Chairman, members of the Commission, 

and gentlemen, of course it is elemental that the problem 

that arises before this honorable bodv is the verv limited 

* * 

number of short wave lengths or, putting it in another 
way, frequencies, which this Commission has the power to 
deal with. 

There may be differences of opinion as to the total num¬ 
ber of frequencies available in the world, but certainly in 
any view it is a very limited number, and it is not possible 
at this time to ascertain how many of that total world 
number will be available for allotment to United States 
concerns for domestic or trans-oceanic use. 

Moreover, it must be borne in mind that for any com¬ 
munication circuit over which a large continuous volume 
of traffic is to be expected, you must figure not in terms 
of one channel or a simplex channel, but of a duplex chan¬ 
nel with different lengths for sending and receiving. 

This honorable body has proceeded with great circum¬ 
spection in the assignment of these very scarce, relatively 
speaking and, because scarce, very valuable, short wave 
lengths. Any other policy would mean chaos and a con¬ 
gestion of the air that would make their use by any one 
impracticable; and this hearing has been brought on, as 
we understand it, in order that the relative public impor¬ 
tance of the 1 different applicants may be intelligently con¬ 
sidered and air congestion and chaos may be avoided. 



FEDERAL RADIO COMMISSION. 


I 


501 


I speak from the point of view of t\ie established 

587 communication companies generally aiid from that 
of the newly formed Mackay Radio ahd Telegraph 

Company particularly. 

The Commission, in its communication of ^December 31, 
as has just been pointed out, listed the relative order in 
which, in view of the consensus of opinion^ the relative 
importance of these various services classified themselves, 
and you will recall that next after emergency! services, like 
marine distress, services absolutely dependent upon short 
wave communication, like communication ! between the 
ground and airplanes, and the paramount—and we recog¬ 
nize it as paramount—considerations of national defense, 
was placed the general public; and it is ouit view that in 
the next classification of the general public the existing 
communication svstems should be recognized in order to 
develop communication, the general art of communication, 
to its fullest logical extent, because of the communication 
companies are the only agencies which serve the public 
exclusively in matters of communication. T^iey are public 
utilities subject to government control, and the public has 
a vital interest that the svstems of these existing communi- 
cation companies should be made as up to j date, efficient 
and economical as possible. 

So it is without the slighest disparagement or criticism 
of the claims of other bodies or other organizations that 
have been and will be made that I plead for the right of a 
great communication system to take the next step in elec¬ 
trical communication and so to furnish the public 

588 with an all round system of electrical communica¬ 
tion, in order for the communication! companies to 

attain their maximum of efficiencv when they coordinate 

i 

wire and cable communication with radio cjommunication. 

Experience has certainly demonstrated, if it has demon¬ 
strated nothing else, that either system aloi^e is inherently 
subject to interruptions. 

You have heard this morning, and perfectly justly so, of 
the interruptions that occur in the case of wire lines. But 
wire lines are not the onlv means of communication that 

i 

are subject to interruption. I gathered from the remarks 
of Dr. Dellinger that there are conditions oker which man 
has no control that cause a different sort but an equally 






502 


INTERCITY RADIO TELEGRAPH CO. ET AL. VS. 


serious breakdown of a radio system. The break downs of 
pole and wire lines arc paralleled by interruptions due to 
static, in the case of radio, and that inconstant phenomenon 
which we call fading. 

So, on the other hand, just as radio is interrupted by 
fading and by static, so we of the wire companies, at least 
our wire company, are the last to controvert that pole and 
wire lines taken by themselves are inherently subject to 
interruption. You cannot guard against destruction of 
poles and wires by tornado, flood, fire or sleet storm. You 
cannot with the exercise of the utmost prudence and busi¬ 
ness caution guard against unexplained breaks in cables. 

Moreover, the radio adapts itself peculiarly to facsimile 
or photo-electrical transmission, which is the next step in 
the arti of radio communication; and it is our view 
589 that these existing communication systems which 
have been serving the public for years with facilities 
at the then stage of the art and which were the only ways 
of communication, should now be in position to take the 
next step in the art, and we feel that it is only by the in¬ 
telligent coordination of radio with cable and wire that 
the public will be assured the most valuable use of these 
scarce and, hence, valuable, short waves. 

To take up the question that is on the Commission’s 
agenda of why short waves rather than any other method 
of communication, with particular reference to the com¬ 
munication company, I have already dealt with why these 
existing wire companies and why in our view preeminently 
the existing wire companies should go forward with radio 
as well as wire and cable communication. But between 
short and long waves as a practical matter the communica¬ 
tion companies are dependent upon the short wave. It is 
the economical means of radio communication, the power 
required being smaller, the mechanical and electrical units 
required being smaller and less expensive and, moreover, 
for one very important consideration, the ratio of power 
required to the distance to be covered is much smaller in 
the case of short waves than in the case of long waves. 
This is particularly important to communication companies 
with respect to long distances, such as trans-oceanic com¬ 
munication. 


FEDERAL RADIO COMMISSION. 


503 


I 

i 


I 

Besides the cost of operation due to the larger mechani¬ 
cal and electrical units and the amount of pofwer required, 
we have the long wave requiring towers for its 
590 antenna systems of great height, a lhrge tract of 
land, perhaps 80 to 100 acres in extent, for their 
erection, whereas adequate and efficient short wave trans¬ 
mission, even over long distances, can he j accomplished 
through the use of wooden poles and wires with a very much 


less extensive antenna svstem than in the 


case of 


long 


waves. 

It is also, I believe—although I cannot talk as a techni¬ 
cian—demonstrated, I believe, that for long distance work, 
particularly, short waves are very much better subject to 
control than long waves, and hence that a short wave sys¬ 
tem for radio communication, commercial radio communi¬ 
cation, is more efficient as well as more economical. 

The result is that any communication company which 
was relegated to the use of long waves would be at a very 
serious disadvantage in competition with a Isystem which 
had the advantage of the short wave method of transmis¬ 
sion in the field of radio communication. 

Coming down from the general to the particular, from 
the claims of communication companies generally to the 
claims of the system which I particularly Represent, the 
Mackey Radio and Telegraph Company, we believe that 
there is no institution that is better able tb give to the 
public the important coordination of wire add cable with 
radio communication than that svstem. 

You are all, of course, too familiar to require any descrip¬ 
tion with the present land lines of the Postal Telegraph 
Company and its affiliated companies. During the last 
summer arrangements were made through contract 
591 with the Federal Telegraph Company, iof California, 
for the furnishing by that company to oine of the com¬ 
panies of the Mackey system of equipment! necessary to 
carry on radio communication commercially by short waves, 
and I believe that that includes facilities for communication 
by facsimile and photo-electric transmission. 

You have, then, in the Mackey system the present ability 
to go forward in the field of radio communication, plus 
the ready made pick-up and delivery system. That is a 
system for the picking up and delivering of messages. 


i 



504 


INTERCITY RADIO TELEGRAPH CO. ET AL. VS. 


And thus we have the prime requisites for going ahead 
in the field of commercial radio, two-way communication; 
wherever we may be given the right to go by radio and 
wherever it may be practicable for us to go by radio, we 
have readv made the officers, clerks and messenger bovs 
for the picking up and delivering of messages which can 
be used with a very small increase of personnel for the 
radio together with the land wire messages. 

We believe that such a combination holds out hope to 
the public of a better rounded, better coordinated, more 
progressive system of general electrical communication than 
has thus far been provided. 

Now to answer the Commission’s questions as to the 
number of applications made and in prospect and reason¬ 
ably to be expected within the next five years. 

I of course cannot speak for any company except the 
one for which I am speaking. I take it that representa¬ 
tive- of the other communication companies will set forth 
their immediate and reasonably foreseeable future 
592 needs, and with your permission, therefore, I will 
simply sketch the needs of the Mackey system at the 
present time and what is foresees during the next five 


years. 

The Mackey system has already acquired the necessary 
permits for the new trans-Paeific radio communication 
system of the Mackey Radio and Telegraph Company. It 
has also been granted permits for additional point-to-point 
communication on the Pacific coast by short waves between 
Hillsboro, Oregon, Palo Alto and Clearwater, California. 

As to the future needs, the system now has on file, I 
believe, applications for 46 short wave lengths for point-to- 
point communication within the United States. 

Do not misunderstand that. That does not mean 46 
centers; that means 46 wave lengths. And through them 
the Mackey system hopes, as soon as they are granted, to 
establish radio communication on trunk lines between the 
following points: 

New York to San Francisco via Chicago, Kansas City 
and Denver. 


Chicago to New Orleans via St. Louis, Memphis and 
Birmingham. 

Kansas City to Galveston, Texas, via Dallas. 



FEDERAL RADIO COMMISSION. 


505 


New York to Miami, via Norfolk, Savannah and Jack¬ 
sonville. 

These lines have been a matter of study, and their selec¬ 
tion has been made with great care and with due regard 
to the interruptions that previous speakers j have pointed 
out that interrupt the overland pole ahd wire lines. 

593 You will note that those lines or routes which I 
have just given run, in major part, through the tor¬ 
nado and flood sections of the central and Western states, 
and that the eastern line, the New York to Miami line, is 
one peculiarly subject to destruction by sleet sitorms. 

The Mackey system proposes at once, besides these trans¬ 
continental lines that I have just mentioned, as soon as ap¬ 
plications may be made, if granted, to extend its sliip-to- 
sliore communication. It has already engaged in ship-to- 
shore communication upon the Pacific Coast!. 

It will desire in the immediate future tweljve short wave 
lengths for the extension of its Pacific Coast business and 
the inauguration of an Atlantic ship-to-shorej business. 

It further has in mind the establishment] of communi¬ 
cations with other smaller centers in the "United States 
which it does not now reach and cannot practicably reach 
with its wire lines. It will probably apply ip the next few 
years for perhaps as many as fifty wave lengths for the 
proposed low power stations, most of them j ranging from 
ten to 100 watts, and we think they will be operated with¬ 
out serious inconvenience to the high power stations, either 
our own or those of other applicants. 

With respect to the needs of the Mackey bystem within 
the next five years, however, the most important ones of 
our probable future applications will be fori trans-oceanic 
communication. It is there that the use of! the high fre¬ 
quencies finds its greatest adaptation, and th!e Mackey sys¬ 
tem regards it as a vital matter to the public that the 

594 wire and cable facilities should be supplemented by 
radio communication across the Atlantic as well as 

across the Pacific. 

It is of course manifestly impracticable to assemble a 
comprehensive system of radio communication with foreign 
countries all at once. Your body knows the] practical dif¬ 
ficulties that initially must be met; but the Mackey system 
intends in good faith, in the earliest practicable time, to 


i 





506 


INTERCITY RADIO TELEGRAPH CO. ET AL. VS. 


develop such a coordinated system and relieve the present 
disadvantage 1 which it is under of communicating with the 
hinterland of Europe. 

At the present time this trails-Atlantic cable stops at cer¬ 
tain points, and for communication with such countries as 
Poland, Czecho-Slovakia, Austria, Greece, and so forth, it 
is dependent upon the lines of other companies. 

That situation it wishes to relieve by establishing, as it 
believes it to be, in the public interest, a system of direct 
eommunicatibn by radio between the United States and for¬ 
eign countries. 

We believe that the number of wave lengths necessarv, 
perhaps within the next five years, to work out such a com¬ 
prehensive system of communication with foreign countries 
would be about 75. We have no idea that these will be ap¬ 
plied for all at once, but we do feel that the public im¬ 
portance of a coordinated communication system using both 
radio and cable for communication with foreign countries 
is so great that we are justified in asking this body to see 
to it that our ability to develop such a coordinating system 
is not made impossible through the preemption of the 
595 necessary wave lengths by less important applicants. 

So, in conclusion, we feel that under the consensus 
of opinion as this Commission has stated, the rights of the 
general public rank next after the absolutely emergency 
and distress services and the paramount demands of the 
Army and Navy; that no body more effectively promotes the 
public interest in the field of communication than do the 
present communication companies; that those companies can 
only render uninterrupted, efficient and all-around com¬ 
munication service by combining radio with wire and cable, 
and that the position of the Mackey system in the commu¬ 
nication field is such that we are justified in asking for at 
least as good treatment in the matter of the assignment 
of these short wave lengths as any other communication 
companies. (Applause.) 


Statement of Mr. Manion Davis, Representing the Radio 

Corporation of America. 

Mr. Davis: Gentlemen of the Commission, I am Manton 
Davis and I represent the Radio Corporation of America. 



FEDERAL RADIO COMMISSION. 


507 


I do not believe it would be necessary to this Commis¬ 
sion, nor do I believe it would be necessary to Ithis audience 
to point out the importance of the company! that I have 
the honor to represent in the radio communication field. 
The dramatic circumstances of the organization of that 
company I feel sure are known to most of you!. You doubt¬ 
less know that at the conclusion of the great war and 
59G when the United States had developed radio until 
America was one and the other nations of the world 
were practically nowhere at all in the radio communication 
field, responsible officials of the government pf the United 
States urgently requested and demanded that certain or¬ 
ganizations important in the electrical field ajnd which had 
contributed to the development of radio as a communica¬ 
tion service during the war should organize a| great Ameri¬ 
can radio communication company capable of! competing in 
the fields of the world with the organizations in like serv¬ 
ice throughout the world. ! 

It was pointed out by those officials of thje government 
of the United States how great and how strong was the 
hold of one country and one nation and the citizens of that 
nation upon the cables, and how important; in peace and 
how important in war it was for America tb have an un¬ 
controlled and uncensored communication system capable 
of competing with the cables, to be substantially under the 
control and in the hands of one country. Alnd it was this 
insistence, it was this demand, it was this urge that brought 
about the formation of the Radio Corporation of America. 

I need not attempt to point out to you gentlemen, I am 
sure, the importance of that company in that field as the 
company is actually carrying on its business!; today. With 
23 nations of the world we are in actual dally and hourly 
communication and contact, and with practically all the 
ships on the sea we are carrying on that communication 
service. So that what we are actually doing in this 
597 field we are doing today. They axle not entirely 
plans for the future; they are actual matters of per¬ 
formance daily and hourly today. Particularly in the short 
wave field the company is now carrying pn communica¬ 
tion over twenty different short wave channels, daily and 
hourly, and is receiving communications over 25 short wave 

i 


i 


21—4987a 


508 


INTERCITY RADIO TELEGRAPH CO. ET AL. VS. 


channels engaged in international service with the nations 
of the world. 

But it really was not that subject that I came to discuss. 
I came to discuss the particular problems that to our 
mind are confronting this Commission in tlie allocation 
of short wave frequencies. 

I am not an engineer and I desire now to disclaim anv 
technical ability in this art and science, but I am here to 
present to you an argument that is based on the most pains¬ 
taking study of a number of world-famous engineers who 
have for weeks studied the question that this Commission 
lias asked be studied, and it is the facts and data that these 
gentlemen bring to the Commission that will form the 
basis of the argument that we are to make to you today. 

I shall give to the Commission at the conclusion of mv 
remarks a copy of the engineering data that I shall use, 
and that copy will be signed by Dr. Goldsmith, now the 
president of the Institute of Radio Engineers, an interna¬ 
tional and world wide body of radio engineers engaged in 
the study of these practical problems, and by Mr. C. H. 
Taylor who for manv vears has been known doubtless to 
all of you gentlemen, certainly most of vcu, as the chief 
communications engineer of the Radio Corporation 
598 of America. Those gentlemen and the staffs that 
assist them have carefully studied these questions 
and they vouch for the engineering data that will be con¬ 
tained and discussed in my argument. 

The short wave band under consideration extends from 
1500 to 30,000 KC/s. 

The fundamental question is, how many channels are 
there? We will use the word ‘ 4 channel 7 ’ to include not 
only the frequency assigned but as well the protective 
bands necessarv to avoid interference. 

Solution of this question cannot even be begun until it 
is decided how wide is a channel—how great a separation 
must be made when adjacent frequencies are assigned. 


On this subject the Commission will hear, it has heard, 
tongues as diverse as those at 1 lie Tower of Babel—and 
honest tongues, too. Their advice is diverse because radio 
is new, its growth has been almost explosive in character 
and many applications of radio in practical use still re- 


FEDERAL RADIO COMMISSION. 


509 


main subjects of debate and dispute in the radio science 
and art. 

The Radio Commission desiring* to find a helpful rule to 
apply in dividing up the short wave spectrum, will keep 
in mind many practical considerations, important among 
them the following: 

1) It cannot demand, in licensing stations for commer¬ 
cial service, the exactitude possible in the laboratory but 
must take the standards as they exist in the rhdio commu¬ 
nication field today, discouraging sloppy work but 

599 not expecting almost infinitesimal precision. The 
laboratory expert should be heard, bfit insisting 
upon his standards being applied on the communications 
circuits would invite disaster, for stations too: close would 
interfere and the result would be chaos. 

2) Short wave signals, even those with very low power, 

are capable of interfering over vast areas, excepting, how¬ 
ever, the area moderatelv near the transmitter!. The range 
of the ultra short waves is large. A peculiar characteristic 
of them is their so-called “skip distance effect.” That is, 
such a short wave signal will be heard in the immediate 
vicinity of the transmitter, then skipping it vk’il 1 be heard 
feeblv or not at all over a wide zone and thereafter in- 
tenselv over the remainder of its range. Short wave sig- 
nals, therefore, may cause little interference ip. the country 
in which they originate but may nevertheless skip to nu¬ 
merous distant countries and lav down in them a signal 
that will utterly disrupt the communications ojf those coun¬ 
tries unless there is a separation in frequencies sufficient 
to give protection. j 

3) The jurisdiction of this Commission does not extend 
over the stations with which American short wave sta¬ 
tions will most likely interfere nor does it; extend over 
the foreign stations which will most likely interfere with 
American stations. The United States, therefore, cannot 
act in this matter as if it were a purely self-contained unit. 
Radio stations recognize no national boundaries. They 
speed to remote points under other and equally sovereign 

governments. In allocating frequencies, therefore, 
GOO and in fixing a separation divisor, thi<j> Commission 
must consider the practices and the j precision re¬ 
quirements of other countries: and must fix |stations here 



510 


INTERCITY RADIO TELEGRAPH CO. ET AL. VS. 


to avoid interference there. The United States is just as 
vulnerable in this respect as any other nation and if we 
adopt a policy resulting in interference abroad, we must 
expect retaliation which will render the effective use of 
short waves impossible in this country. 

4) Measurements of frequency in kilocycles are not suf¬ 
ficiently precise to locate a particular radio transmission 
exactly. In addition to this a radio transmitter is a high 
frequency generator, the absolute constancy of which, with 
its load variations, has not been attained. It wobbles and 
the channel must be made wide enough to take care of the 
wobble and as well to take care of the inevitable inexact¬ 
ness in measurements. Channel width must be made not 
only for the wobbles of transmitters operated by the most 
painstaking and the most carefully supervised personnel, 

but also for the wobbles of transmitters as thev are and 

%> 

as they are operated in the world. Interference is not a 
theory, it is a fact, and when permitted to exist it prevents 
communication. 

5) Width of channel must also allow for variation in selec¬ 
tivity in receiving equipment. The interference of trans¬ 
mitters is not felt at the transmitting stations. It occurs 
at the reception end of the circuits. Even if transmitters 
could be placed accurately on a given frequency and there 
maintained indefinitely with absolute exactness, transmit¬ 
ters on adjacent channels would not be commercially 

601 useful if frequencies were allocated so close together 
that receiving equipment in use could not select the 
desired signals and reject the adjacent ones. 

6) Channel width must also vary with the type of service 
being carried on. The narrowest channel needed is for tele¬ 
graphy at ordinary speeds. As speed increases the channel 
must be wider. Services other than telegraph at ordinary 
speed in the order of their increasing requirements for 
channel width are as follows: 

High Speed Telegraphy. 

Fac-simile transmission. 

Speech telephony. 

Music and similar entertainment. 

Television. 

Since channel widths must vary for each type of service, 
manifestly a unit of channel width serviceable for all pur- 



I 


FEDEBAL EADIO COMMISSION. | 511 

j 

poses cannot be used in dividing up the short wave portion 
of the radio spectrum. In order, however, for a division 
to he made a unit must be fixed and we, therefore, suggest 
that tlie narrowest required, that is, the one for telegraphy 
at ordinary speeds be taken and when wideh channels are 
required for other services that multiples of this unit be 
allocated. 

As the result of a long, practical and world-wide experi¬ 
ence with communications operations, their own and others, 
coupled with a laboratory experience equally long, the engi¬ 
neers of this corporation recommend to the Commission as 
the unit applicable in the short wave; field and for 
602 telegraphy at ordinary speeds a chapnel width of 
approximately 2/10 of 1% of the assigned frequency. 

This recommendation is for the state of tljie art as it is. 
Improvements in technique will narrow the channel, but we 
must not force the art and make channels sb narrow that 
confusion will result and communications faijl. 

More accurately stated, the channel widths! recommended 
are 

In the band 5500-7500 KO/s, a channel width 15 KC/s. 

In the band 7500-11000 I\C/s, a channel width 20 KC/s. 

In the band 11000-15000 KC/s, a channel vi 7 idth 30 KC/s. 

In the band 15000-22000 KC/s, a channel width 15 KC/s. 

In the band 22000-30000 KC/s, a channel vfidth 60 KC/s. 

The precision required by this recommendation is one 
that the 4 ‘cut and try” operator cannot hope to attain 
and yet it is one which the mere laboratory expert will 
likely scorn. 

Such precision is not maintained even on| the great cir¬ 
cuits in operation today. 

The British Marconi Company in fixing the channels 
for its new 4 ‘Beam” stations made those channels 4/10 of 
1%, except for two of their circuits on which the channels 
were made 2/10 of 1%. j 

Recent complaints concerning international interference 
are illuminating. 

On October 7, 1927, Balboa complained pf interference 
between HJG, Bogota, on 13,660 KC/s and 2XAD, Schenec¬ 
tady, on 13,615 KC/s. Their normal separation was 45 
KC/s and 2/10 of 1% of their assigned frequencies equals 
27.2 KC/s. j 



512 


INTERCITY RADIO TELEGRAPH CO. ET AL. VS. 


603 On September 9, 1927, Berlin complained of inter¬ 
ference between WLL, Rocky Point, on 18,180 KC/s 

and GBK, Bodmin Beam, on 18,100 KC/s. Their normal 
separation was 80 KC/s and 2/10 of V/ of their assigned 
frequencies equals 36 KC/s. 

On October 22, 1927, Berlin complained of interference 
between 2XT, Rocky Point, on 18,540 KC/s and GBI, 
Grimsby, England, on 18,500 KC/s. Their normal separa¬ 
tion was 40 KC/s and 2/18 of V/c of their assigned fre¬ 
quencies equals 37 KC/s. 

On November 3, 1927, New York. complained of inter¬ 
ference between HJG, Bogota, on 13,660 KC/s, and GLH, 
Dorchester, England, on 13,580 KC/s. Their normal sepa¬ 
ration was 80 KC/s and 2/10 of 1% of their assigned fre¬ 
quencies equals 27 KC/s. 

On November 9, 1927, New York complained of inter¬ 
ference between 2NAD, Schenectady, on 13,615 KC/s and 
IIJG, Bogota, on 13,660 KC/s. Their normal separation 
was 45 KC/s and 2/10 of V/c of their assigned frequencies 
equals 27 KC/s. 

On December 2, 1927, London complained of interference 
between 2XT, Rocky Point, on 18,540 KC/s and YWX, In¬ 
dia, on 18420 KC/s. Their normal separation is 120 KC/s 
and 2/10 of V/c of their assigned frequencies equals 37 
KC/s. 

On December 2, 1927, London complained of interfer¬ 
ence between 2XT, Rocky Point, on 18,540 KC/s and GBI, 
Grimsby, England, on 18,500 KC/s. Their normal 

604 separation was 40 KC/s and 2/10 of \/c of their as¬ 
signed frequencies equals 37 KC/s. 

On December 8 to 15, 1927, New York complained of 
interference for a whole week between GLK, Dorchester, 
England, oil 8020 KC/s and NAA of the United States 
Navv, Washington, on 8030 KC/s. Their normal separa- 
tion is 10 KC/s, and also it complained of interference dur¬ 
ing the same period between GLK, Dorchester, England, 
on 8020 KC/s and MPG, San Francisco, on 8070 KC/s. 
Their normal separation is 50 KC/s and 2/10 of V/ of 
their assigned frequencies equals 16 KC/s. 

On December 17, 1927, Berlin complained of interference 
between WAJ, Rocky Point, on 13480 KC/s and RKU, 
Turkestan, whose assigned wave is unknown but which 



FEDERAL RADIO COMMISSION. 


513 


usually operates on 13,560 KC/s. Their normal separa¬ 
tion is supposed to be 80 KC/s and 2/10 of 1% of their 
assigned frequencies equals 27 KC/s. 

The cases cited are illustrative, not exhaustive. They 
show that much effort will be required for tljie world’s sta¬ 
tions to measure up to the constancy suggested in these 
recommendations. In order that these recommendations 
may be met, cooperation will be required hot between a 
few nations only but between practically all nations and 
not between a few short wave stations but between all of 
them. 

Applying the unit herein recommended tliere are in the 
short wave spectrum between 1500 and 30,obo KC/s, 1316 
channels of the unit width necessary for telegraphy at ordi¬ 
nary speeds. 

605 We have not considered the frequencies above 
30,000 KC/s for the reason that no juseful service 
has yet been found for those frequencies. 

Our inquiry is directed at how many of those channels 
this Commission can justly allot to the exclusive uses of 
citizens of the United Slates, giving due jregard to the 
needs of the whole world and the necessity of world co¬ 
operation in order that world’s services may be carried 
on. Wise statesmanship is required in malting the neces- 
sarv decisions and however wisolv anv particular nation 
may decide these questions, conflicts that will tax the in¬ 
genuity of the foreign offices of the world aye inevitable. 

We must assume, and doubtless the Commission will as¬ 
sume, that the United States and the other 7j6 governments 
represented will accept the arrangements made last fall 
by the International Radio Telegraph Conference at Wash- 
ington. These arrangements will doubtless jbe ratified and 
will soon be universally applied. 

That Conference assigned the short wave frequencies 
between services, most of the sections being assigned ex¬ 
clusively to a particular service, but some were given over 
undivided to two or more services. 

The engineers of this corporation have taken the divi¬ 
sions and assignments made by the International Radio 
Telegraph Conference and applying the unit; herein recom¬ 
mended have calculated the minimum unit j width channel 
available in each division up to 30,000 KC/fs. The results 


i 








514 


INTERCITY RADIO TELEGRAPH CO. ET AL. VS. 


of their calculations are stated in a memorandum 
606 which has been filed with the Commission. A copy 
of that memorandum is attached. 

Since the Commission is considering the exclusive allot¬ 
ment of channels it must leave out of consideration those 
fields wherein no exclusive allocations will be made and 


wherein all comers must be accommodated, however crowd¬ 
ed the field. Those fields include the mobile, the amateur and 
the experimental fields. Exclusive assignments are as im¬ 
practicable in the mobile field as exclusive rights of way 
would be in the public streets. 

The band 1500—2700 KC/s is practically exclusively mo¬ 
bile. It is true that the band 1715—2000 KC/s is shared 
with fixed services and amateur services, and the band 
2000—2250 KC/s is shared with fixed services, but since 
any nation may put mobile stations on those frequencies 
it is certain many will and, therefore, those frequencies 
would be of little use for services other than mobile. In 


addition those frequencies are of short range and many of 
them cannot be used at all during a large portion of each 
day. They are, therefore, practically useless for point to 
point communications service over any appreciable dis¬ 
tance. 


We also know as a matter of fact that the United States 


Government intends to include all those frequencies 2750- 
2850 KC/s as part of those devoted to its governmental 
services and not open to public correspondence. 

For all the reasons stated, therefore, we leave out of 
consideration those channels 257 in number, covering 
607 frequencies from 1500 to 2850 KC/s. 

There then remain: 


Channels for fixed services cxclusivelv. 378 

44 shared between mobile and fixed services. . 302 

44 f4 44 44 4 4 4 4 & amateur 59 

44 for mobile exclusively. 134 

4 4 4 4 broadcasting. 34 

4 4 4 4 amateurs cxclusivelv . 34 

* 

44 shared between amateurs and experimental 

services . 34 

Channels unreserved . 84 


Total 


1059 










FEDERAL RADIO COMMISSION 


515 


From these we must deduct: 

I 

Channels mobile exclusively . \ . 134 

44 for amateurs.j. 34 

44 44 44 & experimental services. 34 

And we should deduct: 

i/> of 302 channels shared between fixed aiid mobile 

seiwices .. j . 151 

2/3 of 59 channels shared between mobile, fixed and 

amateurs. j . 40 

i 

Total .|. 393 

These deductions are plainly not sufficient because the 
sum of the actions of all nations of the world in placing 
mobile, amateur and experimental stations in shared bands 
where existing international arrangements permit such sta¬ 
tions rightfully to be placed will certainly jpreclude effec¬ 
tive use of anv of the channels in those shared bands for 

%! 

commercial point to point or broadcasting service. 
60S With the factors of error shaded in favor of in¬ 
creasing the number of available stations, we now 
have 666 minimum width channels by means of which there 

. i. 

must be carried the fixed services, including the Army, 
Navy and other governmental services, of;all the nations 
of the world and as well the commercial j point to point 
services of all the nations of the world, aiid likewise the 
short wave broadcasting services of all thcjse nations. 

How many of those channels may the United States ap¬ 
propriate to itself in justice or safely withjout stirring up 
controversies, retaliations or never-ending international 
diplomatic discussions? 

In terms of percentage it would certainly not err in 
liberality to the rest of the world as against the United 
States if the United States should appropriate 25% of the 
available channels, leaving 75% for the oilier 76 nations 
concerned. 

This division would give to the United States in the short 
wave field approximately 170 minimum wi$th channels. 

By means of these 170 channels must be| carried not on 
all the great volume of traffic, national arid international 


! 







516 


INTERCITY RADIO TELEGRAPH CO. ET AL. VS. 


for the service of the people of I he United States, but as 
well the Army and the Navy fixed service traffic and all 
that traffic for the service of the other departments of the 


Unitod States Government and all short 


wave broadcast- 


in 0 ’. 

Under Section 6 of the Radio Act of 1927 the Govern¬ 
ment of the United States for its services not open to the 
public for communication purposes does not require 
609 license from this Commission and does not have such 
licenses and, therefore, its stations are not publicly 
recorded and the number of channels used bv it in the short 

9 

wave field are not known except as knowledge of the exist¬ 
ence of such stations comes through contact in actual opera¬ 
tions. The Government of the United States for its serv¬ 
ices not open to the public for communication purposes 
will utilize manv of the channels in the short wave field 

9 

and under Section 6 of the Radio Act of 1927 and under 


Articles 21 and 1 of the International Radio Telegraph Con¬ 
ference of 1927 its actions in so doing may not be subjected 
to the jurisdiction of this Commission nor be questioned by 
anv foreign government. 

We know that licenses have alreadv been issued in this 

9 

field for 229 channels for stations already in operation in 
the United States or about ready to go into operation; 
that included in this number are none of the armv, navv or 
other stations operated by the government of the United 
States for governmental purposes, and of course there are 
included no mobile or amateur stations. 


1 am informed that this Commission has before it now 
applications for licenses for more than 100 new stations 
in the short wave field. 

It must further be borne in mind that a channel is not a 


circuit. The range and the efficiency of frequency chan¬ 


nels varv laPgelv whether the channels are used in dav- 
light or darkness throughout and there is a proportional 
variation when the range covers areas partly in daylight 
and partly in darkness. Some frequencies are most 
610 effective in daylight; others most effective in dark¬ 
ness and there is further variation with the changing 
position of the sun relative to the circuit and the changes 
of the seasons. As many as four channels may be neces- 


FEDERAL RADIO COMMISSION. 


517 


sary to keep a given long distance circuit !in commercial 
operation for 24 hours a day. 

It now becomes perfectly apparent that in the short 
wave field, as in the broadcast field, there ire not enough 
channels to go around. But the short wave field is different 
from the broadcast field in two vital particulars: 

1) Reduction of power and the staggering of stations 
geographically cannot be availed of to permit the same fre¬ 
quency to be shared by many users for, as jalready shown, 
range and interference are frequently not dependent upon 
power or location. 

2) All the parties concerned in interference could not 
be brought before this Commission or before any similar 
tribunal having jurisdiction of them all for, as already 
shown, short wave signals cross many international fron¬ 
tiers and may interfere with stations located in manv dif- 
ferent countries. 

It is also apparent that the Government) of the United 
States must rely upon this Commission to assure perform¬ 
ance of the obligations to be undertaken 1 by the United 
States in Article 8 of the International Radio Convention 
of 1927, which reads: 

‘ 4 Article 8. 


(ill 


* 


All stations whatever their purpose must 
so far as practicable be established gnd operated so 
as not to interfere with the radio communications or serv¬ 
ices other contracting governments and of individuals or 
private enterprises authorized by these contracting govern¬ 
ments to carry on public radio communication service.” 

j 

In like manner this Commission must bcf relied upon by 
the Government of the United States to assure perform¬ 
ance of its obligations under Sections 16 and 17 of the 
General Regulations of 1927, which read: j 

“16. The new frequencies assigned by Administrations 
to all new fixed land or radio broadcasting stations which 
they may have authorized or of which they may have under¬ 
taken the installation must be chosen in such a manner as 
to prevent so far as practicable interference with interna¬ 
tional services carried on by existing stations the frequen- 


518 


INTERCITY RADIO TELEGRAPH CO. ET AL. VS. 


cies of which have already been notified to the International 
Bureau. In the case of a change of the frequency of an 
existing land or broadcasting station, the new frequency 
assigned to this station must comply with the above condi¬ 
tions. The interested Governments shall agree, in case of 
need, upon the determination of the waves to be assigned 
to the stations in question as well as upon the conditions 
for the use of waves so assigned. If no arrangement in¬ 
tended to eliminate interference can be arrived at, the pro¬ 
visions of Article 18 of the Convention may be applied. 

11 yj * * * 

In the case of a fixed short wave station intended 

612 to carrv on regular service and the radiation of 
which would lie likelv to cause international inter- 

ference, the Administration concerned must, as a general 
rule, before the completion of the station in any case before 
it is open for service, notify to the International Bureau 
the frequency assigned to that station.” 

“Such notification, however, shall be sent only when the 
administrations concerned shall have ascertained that the 
service in question can be established within a reasonable 
time. ’’ 

Under the circumstances it is submitted: 

That this Commission would be well advised to grant 
the use of no frequency for communication between fixed 
points to any organization unless that organization has ade¬ 
quate facilities and has the obligation under the law to 
accept messages from the public and to serve any and 
every one of the public equally and fairly without discrim¬ 
ination. 

In no other way can the frequencies, all too few, be made 
to serve equally all the public. In no other way can the 
United States avoid being itself the instrument through 
which discrimination is brought about. 

If a channel were appropriated to carry the private com¬ 
munications of one organization between one point in the 
United States and another point on a distant continent, it 
is little likely that such a channel would be used to its 
capacity. 

If, however, the situation were such that all the 

613 messages from all the people in the United States, 
all the people in Central and South America, all the 



people in the Hawaiian and the Philippine Islands and all 
the people in Japan and China destined forj any point on 
that same distant continent were in position j to be brought 
together, transmitted through that channel to the same dis¬ 
tant continent and there distributed to the many addressees 
concerned at many different points on that Continent, such 
a channel would likely be well filled. Such a channel would 
be dedicated to the service of millions of pebple and thou¬ 
sands of organizations, not to the service of! one organiza¬ 
tion alone. 

The principle of collection and diffusion is the very es¬ 
sence of public service and the scarcity of utilities is the 
very basis of public utility law. 

If a channel be given to the exclusive use of one news¬ 
paper, by what principle may any other newspaper in the 
world be denied a like privilege? 

If a channel be given to the exclusive use | of one broker, 
by what principle may any other broker iii the world be 
denied a like privilege? 

The question can be repeated as to bankers, exporters, 
traders, manufacturers and throughout thg whole gamut 
of human relations wherein communications to distant 
points are desirable. 

Doubtless in America alone will it be ur^ed that radio 
channels should be licensed for carrying fixed service com¬ 
munications of a particular organization only. Communi¬ 
cation is a governmental function in most countries 
614 and the members of the International Radio Tele¬ 
graph Conference were zealous to protect their com¬ 
munications departments against encroachments by private 
operators. This distinguished in their minds between sta¬ 
tions engaged in public service and private experimental 
stations and they provided in Article Article 5 Ter. that 
when the latter were permitted to carry international mes¬ 
sages at all they should be “in plain language and be limi¬ 
ted to messages bearing upon experiments and to remarks 
of a private nature for which, by reason of the unimpor¬ 
tance, recourse to the telegraph service mi^ht not be war¬ 
ranted. ’ ’ 


We repeat: The Federal Radio Commission would well 
serve the United States and its people and! the world and 
the people thereof if it should 




520 


INTERCITY RADIO TELEGRAPH CO. ET AL. YS. 


Grant the use of no frequency for communication between 
fixed points to any organization unless that organization 
lias adequate facilities and has the obligation under the 
law to accept messages from the public and to serve any 
and every one of the public equally and fairly and without 
discrimination. 

Gentlemen of the Commission, and you gentlemen (ad¬ 
dressing the audience), I ask you to believe that the state¬ 
ment that I have just presented before you is a painstak¬ 
ing effort and is an honest effort to aid this Commission in 
the service of the people of the United States and in the 
service of the people of the world. 

I thank you. (Applause.) 

(The statement referred to and submitted by Mr. Davis 
is as follows: 

G15 Banda 1500-30000 K. C. Allocated by 1027 International Radio Con¬ 
ference , icith Existing Wave Frequency Assignments in Each 
Band. 

Present 

Possible known assignments. 


present , - 

telegraph For- 


Band meters. 

KC. 

Service. 

channels. 

eign. 

U.S.A. 

Total 

200. 00-174. 03 

1500- 1715 

M .... 

. 58 

No record kept. 

174. 93-150. 00 

1715- 2000 

MFA . 

. 68 

44 

44 

44 

150. 00-133. 33 

2000- 2250 

MF ... 

. 50 

44 

44 

44 

133. 33-109. 00 

2250- 2750 

M .... 

. G7 

a 

44 

44 

100. 09-105. 2G 

2750- 2850 

F . 

. 14 

44 

44 

44 

105. 2G- S5-714 

2850- 3500 

MF .. 

. 87 

• • 

7 

7 

S5.714- 75.000 

3500- 4000 

MFA . 

. 50 

2 

•> 

•> 

5 

75.000- 54.545 

4000- 5500 

MF ... 

. 150 

i 

33 

40 

54.545- 52.632 

5500- 5700 

M .... 

. 14 

•> 

•> 

6 

9 

52.032- 50.000 

5700- 0000 

F .... 

. 20 

4 

13 

17 

50.000- 4S.7S0 

6000- 6150 

BC ... 

. 10 

• • 

•> 

• > 

3 

4S.7S0- 44.044 

6150- 6675 

M .... 

. 35 

1 

10 

20 

44.044- 42.S57 

6675- 7000 

F .... 

. 22 

o 

•J 

25 

2S 

42.S57- 41.090 

7000- 7300 

A .... 

. 20 

1 

0 

1 

41.006- 36.6S5 

7300- 8200 

F .... 

. 40 

20 

10 

30 

30.685- 35.0SS 

8200- S550 

M .... 

. 18 

3 

•> 

o 

6 

35.088- 33.708 

8550- S900 

MF ... 

. 18 

14 

G 

20 

33.708- 31.579 

8000- 9500 

F .... 

. 30 

16 

13 

20 

31.579- 31.250 

9500- 9600 

BO ... 


1 

0 

1 

31.250- 27.273 

9600-11000 

F .... 

. 70 

29 

17 

4G 

27.273- 26.311 

11000-11400 

M .... 

. 14 

4 

•> 

O 

7 

2G.31G- 25.641 

11400-11700 

F .... 

. 10 

s 

2 

10 

25.641- 25.210 

11700-11900 

BC ... 

. 7 

4 

0 

4 

25.210- 24.390 

11900-12300 

F .... 

. 14 

12 

1 

13 

24.390- 23.302 

12300-12S25 

M .... 

. IS 

1 

4 

5 

23.392- 22.472 

12825-13350 

MF .. 

. IS 

6 

2 

S 

22.472- 21.420 

13350-14000 

F .... 


13 

20 

33 

21.429- 20.833 

14000-14400 

A .... 

. 14 

•> 

•> 

2 

5 

20.S33- 19.S67 

14400-15100 

F .... 

. 23 

8 

0 

8 





























FEDERAL RADIO COMMISSION - . 


521 


I 


1 

i Present 

Possible known assignments. 


present , - 1 — 

telegraph Fojr- 


Band meters. 

KC. 

Service. 

channels. 

eign. 

TT.S.A. 

Total 

10.SG7- 10.544 

15100-15350 

BC . 

_ 7 

i 

0 

1 

10.544- 18.293 

15:550-16400 

F . 

_ 26 

6 

2 

S 

18.293- 17.544 

16400-17100 

M . 

.... 18 

0 

3 

12 

17.544- 16.001 

17100-17750 

MF . 

.... 17 

12 

6 

IS 

16.901- 16.854 

17750-17S00 

BC . 

2 


0 

0 

16.854- 13.086 

17S00-21450 

F . 

_ 92 

5$ 

25 

83 

13.086- 13.021 

21450-21550 

BC . 

.... 3 

1 

0 

1 

113.921- 13.453 

21550-22300 

M . 

_ 17 

3 

1 

4 

13.453- 13.043 

22300-23000 

MF-ed - 

.... 12 

t) 

0 

0 

13.043- 10.714 

23000-28000 

Unreserv- . 

.... 84 

0 

0 

0 

10.714- 10.000 

28000-30000 

A Ex. 

.... 34 

6 

0 

0 


253 221) 482 


Note A.—There are included in this list only fixed short wave stations. 


616 (1) Which appear in U. S. A. list of | 4i Commercial 

and government radio stations of the United States” 
and supplements to date; 

(2) Which appear in Berne list and supplements to date; 

(3) Which have been actually observed in regular opera¬ 
tion; 



Which are known 


of from various otjher authentic 


sources. 

Note B.—The list of present assignments i$ not complete 
for many reasons including: 

(1) The U. S. Government stations are nqt required by 
law to be published; therefore none of them aire included in 
this list and we know of such stations only asi we come into 
contact with them in the course of our operations. 

(2) Foreign governments do not report their stations 
used in military, naval or other such government services. 
Therefore we know of and have listed only a verv few such 

j i J 

stations. 

(3) Many foreign commercial stations are iiot yet regis¬ 
tered and may not be registered until the Washington con¬ 
vention of 1927 becomes effective. 

(4) Many short wave stations are operating regularly 
but on an experimental basis and neither call letters nor 
regular frequencies have been published. 

(5) Mobile and amateur stations are not included in this 
list because of the variable and uncertain frequencies 
largely used b u such stations. 














522 


INTERCITY RADIO TELEGRAPH CO. ET AL. VS. 


617 The Chairman: We are very glad indeed to have 
heard these discussions, and in future discussions we 

would like you gentlemen to bear in mind the number of 
available short wave channels as discussed bv Mr. Davis. 
There does not seem to be quite as many as we once con¬ 
sidered available. 

We will take a recess, now, until 2 o’clock this afternoon. 

(Wliereupon, at 12:45 o’clock p. m., a recess was taken 
until 2 o’clock p. m.) 

618 After Recess 

The public hearing on Short Waves was resumed at 2 
o’clock p. m. Tuesday, January 17, 1928, at the expiration 
of the noon recess. 

(Commissioner Orestes H. Caldwell presided over the 
afternoon session.) 

Commissioner Caldwell (Presiding): In connection with 
calling this Short Wave conference for Januarv 17th I 
would like to bring to your attention the fact that this is 
the birthday of Benjamin Franklin. Benjamin Franklin 
was born 222 years ago and I believe has the distinction of 
being one of the first investigators both of oscillator dis¬ 
charges and also of the higher atmosphere from an electri¬ 
cal standpoint. I think, after observing the discussion of 
this morning, that we are going to need the sage wisdom 
of the many-sided Franklin both in delving into different 
technical problems and in bringing all sorts of thinking 
together. And moreover, I hope, Judge Sykes, that there 
is in Philadelphia or in the Second Section a successor to 
Benjamin Franklin who can be appointed as the fifth Com¬ 
missioner for the Radio Commission who can help us with 
this problem. (Applause.) 

We will now continue the discussion by the communica¬ 
tion companies. Dr. Jewett. 

619 Communication Companies, Domestic and Trans¬ 

oceanic (Continued). 

Statement of Dr. Frank B. Jewett, Vice-President of the 
American Telephone and Telegraph Company, 195 
Broadway, New York City . 

Dr. Jewett: Mr. Chairman and Commissioners: As the 
Chairman has indicated, I am here in response to the invi- 


FEDERAL RADIO COMMISSION". 


523 


i 

tation which came to the American Telephone and Tele¬ 
graph Company in common with others, to i represent the 
American Telephone and Telegraph Company and the asso¬ 
ciated companies of the Bell System. After listening to the 
discussion and presentation of views this mprning I think 
that what I will have to sav vou will find is largely in sub- 
stantiation of much that Dr. Dellinger said and much that 
others have said. 

The American Telephone and Telegraph Company and 
the Bell System, as you all know, is a public service com¬ 
munication company primarily interested in| the giving of 
telephone service to the people of the United States, both 
internal and external, and secondarily interested in the 
giving of a telegraph business of a non-message character 
but a very large magnitude. The users both of the tele¬ 
phone service (the public in general) and the users of the 
telegraph service, both that furnished by tlfe Bell System 
and by the other telegraph and radio companies, in increas¬ 
ing measure is a service which demands the maximum of 
reliability at a cost which is justified by the worth of the 
service. 

620 So far as the American Telephone ^nd Telegraph 
Company and the Bell System are concerned we do 
not have and never have had any interest in!any particular 
means of communication. We have always viewed our 
function as the function of providing an adequate and reli¬ 
able service. 

As a result of that attitude, while the communication busi¬ 
ness of the past has been largely a business Of wires, almost 
from the very inception of the idea of radio as a means 
of distant communication we of the Bell System have been 
interested to find out all there was to know about radio and 
to apply it wherever we could, whether for telephone or 
telegraph in our business. 

So for twenty years now we have investigated in the 
field of radio, and with particular activity for the last thir¬ 
teen or fourteen years, in an endeavor to! find the exact 
place which radio could take in a service [which we were 
attempting to render to the people of the!United States. 
Out of that thing and bearing in mind the question of relia¬ 
bility it is interesting to note that we have never yet found 

22—4987a- ! 


i 


524 


INTERCITY RADTO TELEGRAPH CO. ET AL. VS. 


a use for radio except a sporadic use in an overland serv¬ 
ice. That we have never had but two commercial radio 
telephone services, and we have but one at the present 
time. The first one which we had, the telephone service 
connecting the Island of Santa Catalina with the main 
land, was forced out of existence in part by other and more 
urgent demands for radio with which it conflicted. The one 

service which is in existence at the present time, and 

021 so far as I know it is the onlv commercial radio-tele- 

•» 

phone service in the world, is of course the well 
known trans-oceanic. Dr. Dellinger and some of those who 
spoke this morning pointed out two things, first, that in 
the region that the Commission is discussing here, the so- 
called short wave region, there were theoretically but a rela¬ 
tively limited number of channels, and second, that what 
we are dealing with in this field, unlike some other parts 
of the radio field, is a world problem so far as interfer¬ 
ence is concerned. 


We may differ somewhat as to what the theoretical possi¬ 
bilities of radio, either telephone or telegraph, are. We 
may varv bv a factor of two, if vou like. But it is of little 
matter at the present time whether the figures which Dr. 
Dellinger gave are reasonably accurate as the theoretical 
ideal, whether they are twice as great as to number of 
channels, or whether they are onlv half as great—the facts 
remains that whether it be telephone or telegraph we are 
still far from that ideal, whatever it may be. 

The other factor is that in the part of this region, as was 
pointed out this morning, with which we are interested 
particularly for longer distance services we are dealing 
with something where the very fact that makes possible the 


occasional service of an amateur from this countrv to Aus¬ 


tralia is the verv fact which indicates how much of what 


takes place in one part of the world may interfere 


622 with what takes place in some other part of the 


world. 


From the very beginning of our work in radio, and at 
all stages, and even now when the short wave range with 
its increased number of theoretical channels has come to 


the front, it has been clear to us, at any rate, that after 
you had taken out of the possible channels all of those 
which were required for services which could be given in 


FEDERAL RADIO COMMISSION’. 


525 


no oilier way, such as services to mobile objects and serv¬ 
ices required by the national defense, the Army and the 
Navv, there was left a relatively verv small number of chan- 

* 7 w • j 

nels for use in point to point work. So small ih fact that in 
comparison with the channels required, the communication 
lines required, they bulk very small. Even (if we should 
double the figures given by Dr. Dellinger and some others 
this morning as to the theoretical possible number of chan¬ 
nels in this region and assuming that we coiild get all of 
those channels tomorrow, we would still have; a total num¬ 
ber of wire channels, telephone and telegraph, which are 
in simultaneous use in the United States at hny given in¬ 
stant, excluding the purely local. So that when you take 
the total that you have got and subtract, from if. those things 
which can only be given by this means, and eliminating, if 
you want, the idea of adequacy and reliablity, you have 
got a mere fraction of the total number of channels which 
are required for the giving of what you might call 
023 the long distance telephone and telegraph service of 
the world. i 

To go back a moment. When our work had gone far 
enough along so that it seemed feasible to contemplate the 
establishment of a trans-oceanic telephone service, which 
obviously could only be given by radio in the! present state 
of the art, we had to choose from our experience and all 
the experience that we could glean from whjat others had 
done, the channel to employ, the wave length to employ. 
We had been experimenting for a long time not only with 
long waves but with very short waves, and We came to the 
conclusion that in the then state of the art there was onlv 
one channel to use which would approximate! to the degree 
of reliability which modern telephone and telegraph users 
required. We were not interested in a sporadic, some time 
use of this service, but we were interested to Supply a thing 
which approximated as nearly as we could ! to the degree 
of service which people using the telephone and the tele¬ 
graph were accustomed to get. 

We came to the conclusion that there was onlv one thinsr 
to do at that time and that was to use the very lon<>- waves 

j * o 

earing a chan¬ 
nel in that region of small number of channel^ was so great, 
required so much work all over the world, tlijat it was quite 






526 INTERCITY RADIO TELEGRAPH CO. ET AL. VS. 

clear that if there was a demand for long distance tele¬ 
phone service by radio the answer had to be found some¬ 
where else, and from the then state of the art, the present 
state of the art, it obviously would have to be down 

624 in the very short wave lengths. 

During this past year that that service has been in 
operation it, as the Commission knows, has been supple¬ 
mented in an east-bound direction bv a short wave channel. 
There is no short wave channel west-bound at the present 
time, but there are a set of short wave channels east-bound. 
We are operating at the present time five channels, or 
rather, we count five wave lengths assignments which are be¬ 
ing operated. So far as I know we have no application in for 
other channels at the present time, although we have given 
indication that in the extension of this kind of service there 
is likely to be a demand for a limited number of channels for 
further transoceanic work and for work from ship to shore 
and to airplanes. 

It may be of interest to the Commission to know what 
our experience has been with this short wave operation 
which we have had. Roughly I should say that it has indi¬ 
cated that to get the degree of reliability of transmission 
which we get out of a single long wave channel, at least 
over this route, an east and west route—and I am told that 
the transmission north and south on short waves issome- 
w’hat better—we would need to have at least three wave 
length assignments among which you could pick and choose, 
in order to get a reliability equivalent to the reliability of 
the very long wave which is being employed as the regular 
means of communication, and even that reliability 

625 is far from the degree of reliability which is the 
standard with ordinary telephone and telegraph 

service. 

Our experience indicates on the short wave that the so- 
called washout, fade-out effect which, so far as we know 
at the present time, is something for the moment at least 
beyond man’s control, indicates a degree of unreliability of 
short wave transmission over the distances of the Atlantic 
of somewhere approximating ten per cent of the time. Our 
records for a period of time last summer, a number of 
months, indicated that on that short wave route we had 
one case where the service was completely out for eight 


I 


FEDERAL RADIO COMMISSION. 527 

i 

j 

hours, no transmission at all; one for six hours; one for 
five hours; six for four hours; sixteen for three hours; 
twenty for two hours, and twenty-eight for bne hour, or 
something approximating somewhere between!five and ten 
per cent of the total time on the eight hour dayi 
In passing it might be of interest to note that that expe¬ 
rience showed that our observations are not widely dissim¬ 
ilar from the experience reported to us by the British Post 
Office in their experience with the beam stations. They 
are about the same order of magnitude. 

I cite this thing because it seems to me to lend emphasis 
to the remarks that were made this morningj that in this 
problem before your Commission you are dealing not with 
a great pot of things into which you can make an almost 
unlimited dip, but you are at present and even in the theo¬ 
retically ideal condition dealing with a relatively lim- 
626 ited number of channels. We are far frjom the ideal. 

We are dealing with a thing which has la world-wide 
use; you have to eliminate certain things ior which no 
other means is yet available to give a service, and then if 
you take into account the factor of reliability such as re¬ 
quired by modern business and social requirements, which 
may require the apportionment of two or three or four wave 
lengths to insure the reliability of continuous! operation or 
anything approaching continuous operation, j you get the 
total number of things down to a very small amount. 

Further than that, and merely as illustrative of the tre¬ 
mendous penetrating power of these things at!times, and so 
the effect on operations in one part of the world of opera¬ 
tions in another part of the world, for a couple; of years past 
we have at the request of the British Post Office and others 
been making observations on the operation of short wave 
equipment all over the world. Among other things the so- 
called beam stations. Of course that beam; station in a 
sense is a misnomer. A misnomer certainly from the stand¬ 
point of any interference. But the beam j stations that 
have been constructed, the structures I presume are as effi¬ 
cient structures for the general direction of energy for one 
direction as against the reverse direction as there are. But 
a few percentages of energy get out from the back door of 

those beam stations, and it is interesting to note that a 

| 

i 

i 

i 

i 

i 


i 




528 


INTERCITY RADIO TELEGRAPH CO. ET AL. VS. 


large part of the time that small per cent, possibly 

627 less than five per cent, of energy, going out the back 
door, comes around the world to America a tenth of 

a second later than the direct energv and records itself 

sometimes as strong as the direct energy. So that we are 

dealing with something which is extremely penetrating, 

where we can not assume that what we do in this country 

is of no concern to anvbodv else. 

* «- 

I think that that practically completes what I have to say 
except with regard to one thing. Mention has been made 
here of the possible use of radio as a guard against dis¬ 
turbance, interruption of wire line service. It is true and 
will continue to be true that in spots and at places times 
will arise where a certain amount of radio service, if it 
were available, might prevent an interruption. But as I 
indicated before, it is now and has been, so far as I know, 
at all times since radio appeared on (he horizon, a physical 
impossibility to conceive of enough radio channels to make 
good the deficiencies in a complete disruption of wire facil¬ 
ities, whether telegraph or telephone. And as I indicated 
before, we have never yet in all these years of searching 
for a better and more reliable and cheaper means of sup¬ 
plying the kind of services which our customers want, the 
telephone-using public, and the users of the leased telegraph 
service, which are largely the press associations, the brok¬ 
ers and bankers and business people of this country—we 
have never yet found, other than in sporadic cases, a single 
case where radio could be used to better advantage 

628 in giving the kind of service which we were called 
upon to give. 

Our picture at the present time of the situation in this 
short wave channel, so far as we have a picture based on 
our past experience, is that the needs for this service, where 
this is the only method of giving the service, are likely 
to prove so numerous, when coupled with a degree of re¬ 
liability, particularly if things like civil aviation come in, 
that there is relatively little left which can justly be appor¬ 
tioned to any other service. 

Now we may differ a little bit as to the relation of what 
the telephone use of the ether demands in comparison with 
the telegraph. I may say that you can put ten telegraph 
messages where you can put one telephone. Somebody 


FEDERAL RADIO COMMISSION. 


529 


else may say you can put twenty or somebody jelse may say 
you can only put five. At any rate, within thq order of ten 
to twenty is a ratio of telephone to telegraph use which I 
do not think we will quarrel much about. But this is true. 
Either now or at any time in the future if you assign a 
channel for telephone you have barred a lar^e number of 
telegraph channels. By the same token, if you assign one 
telegraph channel in a region which might be used for tele¬ 
phone you have barred a telephone channel. | That is, if it 
takes ten thousand frequency wide for a telephone channel 
and only 1,000 frequency wide for a telegrapli channel and 
one telegraph channel is assigned in a region 10,000 
629 frequencies wide you have barred a telephone use. 

We have heard a good deal of television and the 
use of radio. If television should ever be a! real thing it 
is obvious from its very nature that instead of being a 10 
to 1 ratio of telephone to telegraph it is 100 tojl ratio, some¬ 
thing like that. A single television channel Would require 
the abandonment of untold numbers of possible telegrapli 
channels. j 


So that it has seemed to us that these wave [length assign¬ 
ments, particularly in the longer distant range, namely, the 
shorter wave length, if you will, were extremely valuable 
things and not lightly to be used unless there was a real 
reason for their use. 

Just as an illustration of how man’s idiosyncrasies affect 

•/ : 

his use of physical facilities, the extension'of this trans- 
Atlantic telephone service is an illustration of how these 
wave lengths are likely to be used up if thei|e is a real de¬ 
mand for telephone service or telegraph sendee over great 
oceanic distances. I 

In this country, where we have a continent served by a 


national telephone service, we are in the ideal position to 
utilize what nature has given us in the ether! most economi¬ 
cally. We can concentrate our radio transmission and re¬ 


ception at a point and distribute it by our internal network 
of wires and whatnot all over the continent.I We all know, 

j 7 

whether it is telephone or telegraph, you c^n operate over 
three circuits worked as a group ojr four circuits 
630 worked as a group much more traffijj than you can 


over separated circuits. Now the logical way to ex¬ 
tend the telephone service to the European! continent is to 


530 


INTERCITY RADIO TELEGRAFH CO. ET AL. VS. 


cencentrate the radio links at one point somewhere on the 
continent and distribute it over the wire net works. But 
national interests at the moment are antagonistic to that. 
Very few of the countries on the continent of Europe care 
to have their communications with the United States pass 
through other countries. The result is that there is a pres¬ 
sure on, not only to establish telephone service to these 
countries, but to establish it in a direct manner that is an 
uneconomical manner when vou consider it from the stand- 
point of the use of the ether. 

Then in other parts of the world, notably in South 
America, we have the condition where there are no physical 
connections between the countries which may have to be 
served, and there again we are confronted with the possi¬ 
bility, and I presume this is true of the telegraph as well 
as the telephone, of having for the moment at any rate to 
use our facilities in what is in effect from the physicist’s 
standpoint and the engineer’s standpoint an uneconomical 
situation. 

I have tried to give you, sirs, out of our experience of 
twenty years and more in this field a picture of how this 
situation looks to us at the present time. We have no quar¬ 
rel with the figures that were stated this morning. 
631 They are of the order of magnitude which we our¬ 
selves 1 assign. We all agree that we are far from 
the ideal at the present time. But even even if you take 
from it the things that must be subtracted from it, which 
are matters of national defense, of service which cannot 
be given by any known means at the present time, and 
coupled with that the world use of those other facilities, and 
the fact that you are dealing with a thing which is of world¬ 
wide physical effect, you are dealing with very small num¬ 
bers of things measured in terms of man’s use of those 
things, and any use of that limited number of things which 
is not a proper use to some extent and sooner or later will 
affect adversely a proper use somewhere of those facilities. 
(Applause.) 

Commissioner Caldwell (presiding): Any other commu¬ 
nication companies to be heard from? 


FEDERAL RADIO COMMISSION 


531 


Statement of Mr. Frederick C. Scofield , Representing the 
Inter-City Radiotelegraph Company of Cleveland and the 
Michigan Lime Stone and Chemical Company of Roger 
City , Michigan. 


Mr. Scofield: Mr. Chairman, members of tlje Commission 
and members of the Conference: Our views ihave been so 
ably stated by Mr. Hughes in behalf of theiMackay Com¬ 
pany, and our conclusion is heartily in accohd with that of 
Colonel Davis that companies furnishing a ! public service 
should have a priority of the use of the short waves second 
only to the governmental use in the interest of national de¬ 
fense. The value of the short wave,! its reliability 
632 and its economies, especially during £he static sea¬ 
son, seem to be well recognized in thejvery large at¬ 
tendance at this conference. 

I shall address myself practically to our! own personal 
interests. 

In 1922 a situation arose on the Great Lakes where the 


Government had closed down all of its ship to shore sta¬ 
tions. The ship operators had been unable | to come to an 
agreement with the Radio Corporation to j maintain that 
service. The Michigan Limestone and Chemical Company, 
situated up at the Soo, and previously operating a station 
for its private purposes, opened that station to public serv¬ 
ice, it being at the most dangerous point of 'transportation 
on the Great Lakes and in position from that locality to 
serve all ship operators engaged in transportation. In 
1923 the Inter-City Company was invited by the ship op¬ 
erators to open a station at Cleveland, which service has 
been expanded so as to serve Buffalo, Detroit, Duluth, 
Cleveland, Columbus, and an interchange of j traffic with the 
Michigan Limestone and Chemical Company and also with 
one or two of the lake ports where there are private com¬ 
panies operated. This service, as well as that of the Michi¬ 
gan Limestone and Chemical Company, has always been 
open to the public at the same rates. 

At Roger City there are no land wire facilities, and it is 


just as important that there shall be stations along the 
Great Lakes that are able to operate with Roger City as 




532 


INTERCITY RADIO TELEGRAPH CO. ET AL. VS. 


that Roger City should he able to communicate with 

633 Hie ports on the Great Lakes. 

Now there is one peculiarity about the Great Lakes 
situation. In order to furnish that ship to shore service 
there must lie a permanent organization, there must be 
stations capitalized, equipped, ready to operate during the 
navigation season, but from an economic point of view 
unless they can be supported during the balance of the 
season by point to point traffic that service would very 
promptly disintegrate and be lost to the shipping operators. 
So in addition to our ship to shore work the company has 
maintained a point to point traffic, and and I have here 
nearly 200 letters from customers who have compared our 
work with the land wires for reliabilitv, and sav thev are 
only too anxious to have us extend the service to include 
New York, Pittsburgh, Boston, Philadelphia and other 
points with which they are in communication. 

For instance, along governmental lines we are furnish¬ 
ing service to two companies engaged in the transporting 
of the air mail, giving them the same service that the De¬ 
partment of Commerce is giving to other companies en¬ 
gaged in transportation of air mail. One of those com¬ 
panies writes that it is absolutely necessary to maintain 
their service that they have what they call a five minute 
service, but that our service has measured more nearly up 
to a four minute standard than five. Giving them weather 
reports and different messages that they need in the dis¬ 
patch of their planes. 

634 Much has been said about emergency use, but un¬ 
less a company is equipped, unless a company has 

the facilities to be called upon in the emergency there will 
not be anvbodv there to serve in the emergencv. There 
is no one that you could get to invest capital to leave that 
station idle until emergency had need for it. 

An illustration of that was in 1921. We had no station 

in Boston. There was a sleet storm that paralyzed New 

England. One of the national banks in New York said, 

“If vou have anv wav of communicating bv radio with 

Boston we can furnish vou as much service todav as you 

probably could get under ordinary circumstances in the 

whole Year.” 

* 


FEDERAL RADIO COMMISSION 


533 


i 

i 

When there was a tornado at Lorain, Ohio, one of the 
ships having* our service on board was the only means of 
communication with the outside world, and they wirelessed, 
radioed to our station at Cleveland, from where we got into 
communication with the Governor and the authorities at 
Columbus. 

Mr. Hughes and others have told you of other such situa¬ 
tions throughout the country. • ; 

We, therefore, think that point to point Service in con¬ 
junction with our ship to shore service is both desirable 
from the Government’s point of view, from' every feature 
of public interest, convenience and necessity, as well as 
from our own personal needs. 

The value of point to point facilities is demonstrated by 
the government itself. In expanding their own 
635 program for national defense they c\o it by radio. 

The very message from this Commission notifying 
us of the adjournment of the session until jtoday came by 
the Government’s point to point traffic to Clolumbusj Ohio, 
over the War Department’s radio facilities, and from there 
by land lines to our office at Cleveland. 

There are many other advantages to be gained through¬ 
out this entire territory that we serve by a|n expansion of 
the service, and I think that an investigation into the sub¬ 
ject will fully demonstrate to the Commission that it should 
be granted to public service corporations, j and should be 
granted particularly to our clients. (Applause.) 

i 

Commissioner Caldwell (presiding): Are there any other 
communication companies to be heard from?! If not, we will 
go to Aviation. Are there any representatives of airplane 
operating companies here? It has been predicted that a 
very large use might come by airplanes, atid with the de¬ 
velopment of airports there would be need for reserving 
a number of short waves for that important, use. Is there 
any one here to present the case for the airplanes? 


636 


Airplane Operating Companies. 


Statement by Dr. Frank B. Jeivett , Vice-President Ameri¬ 
can Telephone and Telegraph Company. 

Dr. Jewett: I did not expect to speak tv|ice, but as long 
as you have raised that question, we have given a consider- 


534 


INTERCITY RADIO TELEGRAPH CO. ET AL. YS. 


able amount of consideration to that at the request of the 
various departments of the Government and various people 
interested in civil aviation. 

Of course the whole question as to how much use of this 
range of radib frequency is required is tied up with how 
fast civil aviation as well as military aviation is likely to 
come forward. You can get all kinds of opinions from 
very pessimistic to very optimistic. But it seems clear to 
those of us who have given some thought to it that if civil 
aviation is to have anything like the future which its ad¬ 
vocates make for it it can onlv be established bv and in 

mt & 

conjunction with a proper co-ordinated scheme of communi¬ 
cation, just as in a similar way a railroad system can oper¬ 
ate only by and with a good communication system. And 
that the use of short waves, waves in this band, is a neces¬ 
sary adjunct to the communication system which now pic¬ 
tures itself aS a necessary adjunct to this business. 

How big it will be I take it that none of us are in a posi¬ 
tion to say, because none of us know how big civil 
637 aviation is going to be when combined with military 
aviation. But certain it is that if it is going to have 
any size at all it is going to require a considerable amount 
of assignment if it is to be done safely and economically. 
(Applause.) 

Commissioner Caldwell (presiding): Are there any more 
aviators? 

Statement of Dr. J. H. Dellinger, Bureau of Standards. 

Dr. Dellinger: There is something to be said for the Gov¬ 
ernment viewpoint on this thing. 1 do not know whether 
this is the time to say it, as the present heading is “ Avia¬ 
tion companies”, whether you reserve it from the Govern¬ 
ment standpoint? 

Commissioner Caldwell (presiding): Well, does that refer 
to beacons? 

Dr. Dellinger: I was referring to communications. 

Commissioner Caldwell (presiding): We would be glad 
to hear from you Doctor right now, if you will. 

Dr. Dellinger: For the information of the gentlemen 
I would like to say just a few words to get the case on 
record and to say that the Government viewpoint is quite 


federal radio commission. 


535 


in harmony with what Dr. Jewett has just shid. It is con¬ 
fidently expected that the users of radio in aviation will 
become very large. Within just exactly how many months 
or years I can not say. But it must be provided for. 

Initially the Government will establish on the air- 

638 ways stations for providing directive beacon sig¬ 
nals to guide airplanes along their course, and radio 

telephone transmitting stations for communicating from 
ground to aircraft. The Government in addition will oper¬ 
ate, as it is now, certain stations for interfield communica¬ 
tion, using both low and high frequencies. The latter, high 
frequency stations for interfield communication are from 
somewhere between 3,000 and 5,000 kilocycles. 

The particular thing which it remains for the future to 
determine and which we can not speak on positively yet is 
what frequencies shall be used for the very essential com¬ 
munication from ground, Government stations on the 
ground, to privately owned receiving stations on the air¬ 
planes in flight to give them weather information, the pri¬ 
mary best use of radio as an aid to aviation. The initial 
installations of the Government to render tliat service will 
probably be on a frequency lower than we are considering 
today, but we must expect within perhaps a year or a cou¬ 
ple of years certainly, we must definitely expect in the 
future the operation of such telephony frond ground to air¬ 
planes within the 2,000 to 3,000 kilocycle band. That is the 
band which is physically best adapted for Communications 
within a distance of 100 miles approximately, both day and 
night. (Applause.) 

Commissioner Caldwell (presiding): Adiy more repre¬ 
sentatives of aviation? 

639 Mr. Manton Davis: May I just sky a word, Mr. 
Commissioner? 

Commissioner Caldwell (presiding): Colonel Davis. 

I 

Statement of Mr. Manton Davis , of the Radio Corporation 

of America . 

Mr. Davis: We are not an aviation company, but the 
Radio Corporation of America in its capacity of serving 
all people is preparing combination telegraph and telephone 
sets for the use of air services, and naturally as those sets 
are developed channels for their use will be required. I 




536 


INTERCITY RADIO TELECRAPH CO. ET AL. VS. 


think it would be speculation run entirely wild if we at¬ 
tempted to say before the Commission how many channels 
we would like to utilize or reserve for such services, but 
those sets are actually being- constructed and are practically 

readv for use. 

* 


Commissioner Caldwell (presiding): Thank you. 

It is a matter of considerable regret that the representa¬ 
tives of the airplane people themselves are not here, be¬ 
cause certainly here is a great development we must look 
forward to in the future and one for which due reserva¬ 
tion must be made. 

The next subject on the list is that of Railroads. The 
railroads have asked to be considered both for communca- 
tion between moving trains and from moving trains to 
cities, for dispatches, and for communication between parts 
of moving trains, as from the locomotives to the 
640-656 caboose. Are there any representatives of rail¬ 
roads present? 

Mr. G. T. Stanton (American Railway Association): Mr. 
Aishton, President of The American Railway Association 
wishes to speak, but it was his understanding that he could 
do that tomorrow, and consequently he is not here at this 
time. I wonder if that could be passed over until tomorrow 
morning? 

Commissioner Caldwell (presiding): Yes. Will you see 
that his attention is called to that tomorrow. 

The Electric Railways have also made application for 
short waves for signalling purposes. Are there any repre¬ 
sentatives of the Electric Railways here? 


(There was no response at this time by representatives 
of the Electric Railways.) 

Commissioner Caldwell (presiding): I skipped the Navi¬ 
gation Companies, the use of short waves in shipping. That 
division should have come ahead of Railroads. Are there 
any representatives of the shipping interests here who 
would like to be heard ? 


657 Army. 

Statement of Major TF. R. Blair, United States Anny. 

Major Bair: Mr. Chairman and gentlemen, the purpose 
of the Armv is national defense, it carries out its mission 



FEDERAL RADIO COMMISSION. 


537 


i 

I 


in accordance with well-defined, carefully-coiisidered and 
authorized plans. In accord with these plans jits personnel 
and equipment are very widely distributed. I Among this 
equipment, of course, are communication equipment and 
personnel. 

The need for communication is based purejy on our de¬ 
fense plan; but in addition to serving that purpose, which 
we are sure is sufficient justification for any assignment of 
frequencies to the Army, some of the Armjv equipment, 
notably engineering equipment and communication equip¬ 
ment, may be used for public service. 

The communication equipment and personnel of the Army 

are available to the other departments of thu government 

in so far as thev can use them for communication. 

* 

In asking for channels or in outlining our n^eds for chan¬ 
nels for the Army it must be kept in mind that we have 
shipping and aircraft in addition to connecting up our units 
wherever thev are located, so that we will want some com- 
munication facilities and channels in all of | these bands. 
Our request will contain all of them. 

We have one communication system which ife not entirely 
but only partially in accord with the defense plans, and 


that is our Alaskan system of communication. We have 
a radio network covering Alaska and a cabje connecting 
Alaska with Seattle. .j 

G58 So far as high frequency radio is concerned and 
our need for it, it should be kept in jnind that all 
army equipment in these days is made as mobile as pos¬ 
sible. We have very few fixed defenses. They are practi¬ 
cally out of date. 

With a view to mobility in our radio equipment we began 
during the World War to develop high frequency equip¬ 
ment, and it may be of interest to you to know] that the first 
radio apparatus operating on frequencies above the 4,000 
kilocycle boundary was tested in the Army ajid that radio 
equipment has been a regular issue to troops since that 
time. Two years ago they were authorized; to use high 
frequency in the Army net in this country. 

I think that answers the second question that you have 
in your circular letter with regard to the number of chan¬ 
nels available. 

I would say that our operation of radio in! nets has led 
us to what we might speak of as the band principle in the 



538 


INTERCITY RADIO TELEGRAPH CO. ET AL. VS. 


assignment of frequencies rather than the channel system; 
and I believe that the number of channels available for 
communication will depend to quite an extent on the method 
of assignment of channels. 

We are quite sure that we can operate transmitters in 
the same localities close together with rather small separa¬ 
tion compared with what some of the speakers have indi¬ 
cated here this morning. (Applause.) And we are led to 
think that if a careful studv of the whole situation could be 
made—that is, if it is not too late—if certain assignments do 
not stand in the way of it, and if frequencies were allocated 
to nations and also in our own country geographi- 
659 cally so that we would have a certain band allocated 
to this location and another one to that, in such a 
way that transmitters might be placed close together but 
receivers getting the return of the circuit would be far 
away, you might find the maximum number of channels in 
the spectrum. 

I thank you. (Applause.) 

Commissioner Caldwell: Major Blair, will the Army be 
represented by another speaker today? 

Major Blair: I think not. 

Navv. 

* 

Commissioner Caldwell: We also have some represen¬ 
tatives here from the Navy. I would like to call on Captain 
Craven. 

Captain Craven: I will ask Captain Hooper to speak, 
Mr. Chairman. 

Statement of Captain S. C. Hooper, Head of Radio Division, 
Bureau of Engineering, U. S. Navy. 

Captain Hooper: Mr. Chairman and gentlemen, I will 
first read a quotation from Captain Craven’s statement 
which has been submitted to the Commission, and I will 
just take up the study that I have made from the technical 
side: 

“The Navy has made an exhaustive study of the fre¬ 
quency spectrum and of its possibilities and has materially 
reduced its previous demands. It is now requesting fewer 
high frequency channels than were previously assigned to 



FEDERAL RADIO COMMISSION 


539 


it. For example, of the frequencies above 2;000 kilocycles, 
the Navy has at present 168, while thejallocation now 

660 requested is for 116. Of this number all except 4 
are at present assigned to the Navy,! and therefore 

the Navy is relinquishing* 48 frequencies and requesting* an 
assignment of 4. 

__ • i 

‘‘Continued use by the Navy of the frequencies which it 
has requested from the President is vital to jit. Its present 
equipment and the equipment projected and ijinder construc¬ 
tion, amounting to millions of dollars, if valuable is based 
on the uses of the frequencies mentioned. 

“In the allocation of frequencies particular attention 
must be given to the character of the service to be accom¬ 
plished and to the communication distances! to be covered. 
Attention must be accorded the vital matter bf interference; 
and needless to say, as a plain, practical matter of common 
sense, radio should not be called upon to do ivork which can 
better be accomplished through other meanjs, nor can pre¬ 
cious channels be allocated to duties which are not urgent. 

“It may be noted that of tlie frequencies jabove 4,000 as¬ 
signed for the Navy, those in the point to point band are 
assigned to stations which do trans-oceanic work and 
weather broadcasting, national and international, and those 
in the middle band are assigned to interfi^et and fleet to 
shore work, while those in the mobile point tci point band are 
assigned in shore to fleet and point to point yrork. Four or 
five channels are required for each station iii order to cover 
the distance required which is available in the case of ships 
by day and by night in the different seasons of the year. 
None of these communications can be carried on by 

661 other means than radio. 

“The Navy will use power in these! channels oper¬ 
ating from about 100 watts to 10 kilowatts, the high powers 
being used on the frequencies above 4,000 kilocycles. The 
interference likely to be caused is impossible of determina¬ 
tion, but transmissions bv the Navy on manv of the fre- 
quencies above 4,000 kilocycles have already been heard in 
many foreign countries and doubtless their presence in 
the frequency spectrum has already been noted and allowed 
for. Minor readjustments of higher frequencies conse¬ 
quently may become necessary in the future.” 

23—4987a ! 


540 


INTERCITY RADIO TELEGRAPH CO. ET AL. VS. 


As to my own statement, a study has been made by the 
division to determine the number of high frequency chan¬ 
nels when vaTious phases of the radio art are considered. 
The table which has been submitted here shows the alloca¬ 
tion of bands to the various services in accordance with the 
1927 International Radio Conference. 

It is expected, of course, that the United States will al¬ 
locate high frequency channels and license radio stations 
in accordance with the provisions of the radio conference. 

My first table shows channels available for various classes 
of services as allocated by the 1927 International Radio 
Telegraph Conference between 1,500 kilocycles and 60,000 
kilocycles. 

I have made out these tables to submit to the Commission 
for their possible use, based on our experience, and 1 have 
made them up using five different columns, each calculated 
on using a different figure of accuracy. I used .1 per cent 
accuracy, .05 per cent and .025, .02 and .01 per cent. 
662 I will leave a copy of my tables with the secretary 
in case you should wish to refer to any of them. 

I will just give a few samples of the number of channels 
with the different percentages; and I might say that in 
working up my table I used, for instance, where I give .1 
per cent, the amount of the mean frequency of the band to 
which it is applied, and I multiplied it by 2 to allow for the 
variation on either side of the fundamental, and then we 
add 2,000 cycles as a point which must be absolutely clear 
between channels. That is a little different method than 
was used in the calculations this morning by the other 
speakers. I have based on my recommendations on the .05 
per cent figure of accuracy, and therefore I will only read 
from that column. 

Mobile services. We would have 425 channels. 

Mobile, fixed, and amateur shared, 161. 

Mobile and fixed, shared, 537. 

Fixed services, 715. 

Broadcasting, 32. 

Amateurs, 58. 

Not reserved, 759. 

Amateurs, and experimental, 131. This is as between 
1500 and 60,000 kilocycles. The total would be 2,818. 

The next table shows the channels available for classes 
of services and for the percentages of accuracy indicated 


i 

i 

i 

| 


FEDERAL RADIO COMMISSION. ! 541 

i 

between 4,000 and 23,000 kilocycles. Thosej are really the 
channels that ate under discussion. 

These frequencies, by virtue of their extreme range for 
limited power, can cover great distances and must be 

663 considered international in character.! 

In the column of .05 per cent, allowing a 2,000 cycle 
separation band between channels, I have, fbr mobile serv¬ 
ice 255 channels; mobile and fixed combined, shared, 351 ; 
fixed services, 694; broadcasting, 32; amateurs 58, making a 
total of 1,390 between 4,000 and 23,000 kilocycles. 

If we cut that to a wider separation, .1 per cent with a 
2,000 cycle separation between channels, we ivould have 765. 
If we get it up to .01 per cent, which is a moije or less liberal 
standard at the present time, we would get j4,139. 

The standard of accuracy which may reasonably be re¬ 
quired from all high frequency stations, ship and shore, 
may be subject to considerable argument. Considering the 
monetarv value of the channel which carries for thousands 

%• i 

of miles, it seems reasonable to require transmitting sta¬ 
tions to comply with such accuracy as necessary in order to 
accommodate the many applicants for station licenses as 
much as possible. 

The following methods of controlling frequencies are in 
actual use: 

(a) Piezo electric crystals. 

' ^ ' 

(b) Harmonics from a tuning fork. 

(c) Harmonics from a constant speed! generator em¬ 
ployed in Germany in broadcasting band. I 

The following methods of controlling frequencies are pos¬ 
sibilities for the future: 

(a) Harmonics of longitudinal oscillations in magnetic 
metal bars. 

664 (b) Frequency multipliers by stopping up time 
intervals from standard clocks. 

Theoretically, and based on results with pur most modern 
Naval circuits, a percentage of accuracy jof .02 of 1% is 
possible. However, it is realized that many stations are 
not prepared to adopt this standard at the present time. 

Therefore, the following accuracy is recommended, with a 
guard band of 2000 cycles between channels (Combined con¬ 
stancy and absolute accuracy): 

.05, I January, 1928, to 1 January, 1930; 




542 


INTERCITY RADIO TELEGRAPH CO. ET AL. VS. 


.025%, 1 January, 1930, to 1 January, 1933. 

.01% after 1 January, 1933. 

I am not fully informed whether a large percentage of 
foreign stations can maintain an accuracy of 05%. Prob¬ 
ably they can maintain an accuracy of only .1% at the pres¬ 
ent time. 


However, it will be to the advantage of the United States, 
in securing as large a percentage of high frequency chan¬ 
nels as possible, to allocate frequencies on the basis of .05% 
if we feel that foreign stations will not interfere. 

In the use 6f high frequencies for long distances, most 
stations will require two frequencies, that is, one for day 
and one for night communication. A few stations will re¬ 
quire three and four frequencies, such including those used 
in broadcasting weather, press, ships and aircraft. So, for 
this reason, the number of stations which can be licensed 
would probably be half those indicated above in the band 
4000=23,000 kcs., i. e.: 

.05% accuracy M> x 1390—G95. 

.025% “ % x 2361—1281. 

.02% “ y 2 x 2745—1373. 


665 It is desired to point out that the longer the United 
States delays in putting its high frequency circuits 
on the map internationally, the larger will be the propor¬ 
tion of channels occupied by foreign stations; (Applause.) 

If we take on say 10% for the United States of the theo¬ 
retical (.01% accuracy) high frequency channels we will 
have at a guess 10% x 4137—114 channels. Cutting this in 
half to give day and night channels to a station, would give 
the United States y> x 414—212 stations. 

Reducing this to a present day basis of .05%' accuracy 
would give 1/10 x VL> x 139—70 stations between 4000 and 
23,000 kcs. 

If we could obtain 20%> of the available channels for the 
United States; there could be accommodated 139 stations. 

Number of existing high frequency stations: T have no 
accurate list of existing high frequency stations. An in¬ 
complete list, probably very incomplete, is appended. It 
will be desirable that licenses be issued bearing in mind 
existing stations throughout the world. The accurate list 


FEDERAL RADIO COMMISSION. 


543 


! 


would, of course, have to be obtained from the International 
Bureau. 

Priority of Stations: The stations which must be accom¬ 
modated in the high frequency spectrum would take a pri¬ 
ority somewhat as follows: 

(1) Those for maritime purposes. Separate bands are 
provided for these in the International Radio Conference 
agreement, therefore they need not be discussed, as they 
will not interfere with the bands allotted to Ishore stations. 

(2) Those required for National Defense. 

666 (3) Those required for long distance rebroad¬ 

casting, or broadcasting, as assigned by the Inter¬ 
national Radio Conference, Special bands at*e allocated for 
these. 

(4) Those required for long distance poinlt to point com¬ 
munication, paid traffic, public service. 

(5) Those required for long distance communication, 
non-paid traffic, public service, which are necessary due to 
impracticability of obtaining wire services.j 

(6) Same as (5) except that they parallel wire services. 

(7) Other services, in order of their importance to the 
public. 

Amateurs are provided their own high frequency bands 
by the International Radio Conference, therefore need not 
be considered at this conference. 


In this connection, attention is invited to tl;ie recommenda¬ 
tion of the International Radio Conference that high fre¬ 
quencies be reserved for long distance j communication 
(rather than short distance communication} in services be¬ 
tween fixed points. The Navy Department has for two 
years realized the importance of conserving high fre¬ 
quencies for long distance communication ajnd, with that in 
mind, has installed intermediate and lowj frequency ap¬ 
paratus (even at much greater cost) for communicating at 
distances of 500 miles and less, rather thaln use high fre¬ 
quency equipment at less cost but which would interfere at 
great distances. It is believed that this policy is necessary 
if a maximum advantage to radio is to be siecured through¬ 
out the world. 


667 

► 


I have a very large set of figures 
take time to read. It is a table of 
1500 up to 60,000 and they range in 


which I will not 
j the bands from 
accordance with 


i 










544 


INTERCITY RADIO TELEGRAPH CO. ET AL. VS. 


the services. The separation is calculated on the basis of 
1/10 per cent accuracy, .05 per cent accuracy, .25, .02 and 
.1, and the separation is shown in each band for the figure 
of accuracy named and also the number of channels which 
under that figure could be accommodated in each band, 
leaving a 2,000 cycle separation between channels. 

Also on the right of the page (exhibiting) is shown the 
day and night distances at the high frequencies that the 
different bands may be expected to carry, based on our 
experience. 

Our work has been compiled as a result of our study and 
from operating experience with a great number of high 
frequency channels and development work and study, a 
great deal of it bv Dr. A. Hovt Tavlor of the Naval Re- 
search Library, and Commander Rubel in the Bureau with 
me; and we feel that the figures are the best that we can 
present, but subject to a great deal of challenge and pos¬ 
sibly change as we get further experience, and particularly 
the figures about tlie accuracv we recommend. We know 
that we can comply with a certain accuracy, and we feel 
that it will not be long before the other services in the 
country and foreign services can reach the same accuracy 
we can, and we feel that it is an advantage to keep the 
standard as high as possible so that more service can be 
accommodated at the earliest practicable date. 

I thank you. (Applause.) 

Commissioner Caldwell: Will there be anv other 
668 speaker from the Navy? 

Captain Craven; No, Mr. Chairman. I think Cap¬ 
tain Hooper has covered it. 

Commissidner Caldwell: Is the Coast Guard represented 
here todav? 

mt 

Lieutenant Webster: Yes, sir. 

Coast Guard. 

Statement of Lieutenant E. M. Webster , United States 

Coast Guard, Washington , D. C. 

Lieutenant Webster: Mr. Chairman, members of the 
Commission,' and gentlemen, the original of the statement 
which I am hbout to make was inadvertently mailed to the 



FEDERAL RADIO COMMISSION 


545 


Commission before this meeting and I think it is before 
you; but if there is no objection I will repeat that statement 
for the benefit of the others who have not seejn it. 

Also, the agenda was not seen by the Coajst Guard, and 
the statement being made specifically applied to the Coast 
Guard and is in necessarily general terms [regarding the 
general subject of short waves. 

Section 6 of the Radio Act of 1927 provides that all gov¬ 
ernment radio transmitting stations shall use such frequen¬ 
cies or wave lengths as shall be assigned tc* each class by 
the President. 

In accordance with that provision the Secretary of the 
Treasury, on behalf of the Coast Guard, has! made applica¬ 
tion to the President for the following short wave fre- 

v -- 7 i 


quency assignments for the use of the Coast Guard: 

Only one in the band below 4,000 kilocycles, in the 
669 vicinity of 4,280, for a special circuit in connection 
with the operation of the Internatiojnal Ice Patrol 
Service conducted between the months of March and July 
on the Grand Banks of Newfoundland. Thbt is primarily 
for communication with Washington direct. | 

Five other frequencies between 2,705 and 2,315 kilocycles 
for inter-communication among different vessels and shore 
stations. 

The frequency of 4,280 kilocycles for handling traffic 

between Coast Guard vessels on international ice patrol 

service on the Grand Banks of Newfoundland, and the Navy 

Station at Arlington during the time between March and 

Julv of each vear is absolutelv essential for the efficient 
•/ • + 

conduct of that service. 


The selection of these frequencies has been made after 
exhaustive tests during the past few seasons and appear 
the best adapted for this particular service.; 

These five frequencies in the band betiveen 2,705 and 


2,315 are used approximately by the following: 

A frequency of 2,705 by about 22 stations;. 

A frequency of 2,675 by about 90. j 
A frequency of 2,465 by 354 vessels also; employing tele¬ 
phone on that frequency. | 

A frequency of 2,365, about 90, and 2,315 about 22. 

In the early part of 1924 the Coast Guard was faced with 
a problem of providing radio communication between a 
large number of small vessels and between those vessels and 

i 


546 


INTERCITY RADIO TELEGRAPH CO. ET AL. VS. 


larger vessels of the service. After careful study and after 
mature consideration on the part of the Inter- 

670 Departmental Radio Advisory Committee, which 
body had been requested to give advice as to the fre¬ 
quencies to be employed, the band between 2,000 and 2,850 
kilocycles was selected as the most practicable for this use. 

Equipment employing this band of frequency was pur¬ 
chased and the Coast Guard now has a large investment in 
apparatus. A change to another band would necessitate the 
purchase of new equipment and the scrapping of the old. 

The fourth radio conference held at the Department of 
Commerce on November 9 to 11, 1925, set aside a band 2300 
to 2750 kilocycles for mobile and government mobile onlv, 
which is within the band originallv selected bv the Coast 
Guard for its work, and that band is agreeable to this 
service. 

The conference held in Washington, concluded in Novem¬ 
ber, 1927, has provided a band of 2,250 to 2,750 for mobile 
services, which band includes the frequencies that the Coast 
Guard is now using for its mobile service. 

These five frequencies now being used by the Coast 
Guard and which the President has been requested to 
authorize in conform'dv with the Radio Act of 1927 have 
also been selected after consultation with the Armv and 
Navy, and do not interfere with the frequencies to be used 
bv those services. 

Your attention is invited to the fact that the Coast Guard 
is by the Act of January 23, 1915, a part of the military 
forces of the United States and shall operate under the 
Treasury Department in time of peace and operate as a 
part of the Navy, subject to the orders of the Secre- 

671 tary of the Navy, in time of war or when the Presi¬ 
dent shall so direct. 

It is therefore necessary that the assignment of frequen¬ 
cies to the Coast Guard be coordinated with those assigned 
to the other military services, and with the Navy in par¬ 
ticular. 

The saving of lives and property at sea and the law en¬ 
forcement work of the Coast Guard is of such an extent and 
of such acknowledged importance that these two features 
alone, of all the diversified activities of that service, would 
suffer materially if any interference were experienced on 
the radio frequencies now employed. 



FEDERAL RADIO COMMISSION 


547 


In the assignment of frequencies within the band 2,250 to 
2,750 kilocycles the Commission is respectfully requested to 
give consideration to the extensive use by the Coast Guard 
of the five frequencies mentioned, all of which are abso¬ 
lutely necessary in the conduct of the radio communication 
service of the Coast Guard. We cannot stress too strongly 
the importance to the Coast Guard of keepihg these chan¬ 
nels in question free from interference. 

I thank you. (Applause.) 

Commissioner Caldwell: Is the Light House Service 
represented this afternoon? 

Mr. Walls: Yes, sir. 

' \ 


672 


Light-House Service. 


Statement of Mr. H. J. Walls, Representing 1 the Bureau of 

Light Houses. 

Mr. Walls: Mr. Chairman, if these hearings had been 
called a year or so ago the Bureau of Light! Houses would 
practically have asked for only about tvjo frequencies. 
They would be at Alaska and one or two isolated radio tele¬ 
phone stations in the Great Lakes. But with j the passage of 
the Act of 1926 the needs of the Light House Service have 
much increased. The Air Commerce Act authorizes, among 
other things, the establishment and maintenance of air ways 
by the Department of Commerce. This was mentioned by 
Dr. Dellinger, and he outlined the work which we are plan¬ 
ning and expect to carry on. 

The principal need for high frequency channels will be 
for communications between air ports for handling weather 
reports and ship movements and messages relating to 
safety aids to navigation. 

At the present time we are using low frequency channels, 
frequencies in the neighborhood of 200 kilocycles, but these 
channels are quite congested and we believe that any expan¬ 
sion that is made in these services will be toward the high 
frequency channels. 

However, we believe our needs will not be jvery great and 
that two comparatively narrow bands will be all that will 
be required. 

As has been pointed out, the aircraft industry, particu¬ 
larly its use of radio, is quite prominent at this time and 



54S 


INTERCITY RADIO TELEGRAPH CO. ET AL. VS. 


our use of these frequencies is likewise prominent, 
673-67C) but we feel that some provision should be made to 
carry on our work should the aircraft industry 
grow as some people predict. 

We also believe, as Dr. Dellinger mentioned, that some 
consideration should be given to allocating frequencies for 
aircraft as mobile aircraft similar to the so-called distress 
waves and other waves in use. 

The fourth national conference provided such bands, and 
it is believed that those frequencies may be used. There 
has been little experience in operation on those frequencies, 
and in view of that the frequencies so designated may not 
be the most desirable. However, they would be very satis¬ 
factory as a basis. (Applause.) 

677 Statement of Mr. Dave P. Carlton, Representing 

Various Oil Companies. 

Mr. Carlton: My name is Dave P. Carlton. I am asso¬ 
ciated with the Humble Oil & Refining Company in the 
capacity of geologist in charge of geophysics. I am a geolo¬ 
gist by training, a graduate of Leland Stanford University 
and have been associated with the Humble Oil & Refining 
Company in 1 geologic work during the past nine years. 
Three years prior to my association with the Humble Oil 
& Refining Company I was engaged in petroleum geology 
and mining. 

In this proceeding I am appearing in behalf of the Ameri¬ 
can Petroleum Institute, the Western Petroleum Refiners 
Association, the National Petroleum Association, The Mid- 
Continent Oil & Gas Association and the following com- 
panies: Illinois Pipe Line Company (Indian Pipe Line 
Company); The Texas Oil Corporation; The Texas Pipe 
Line Company; Skelly Oil Company; Gulf Oil Corpora¬ 
tion (Gulf Production Company, Gulf Pipe Line Company, 
Gypsy Oil Company, Eastern Gulf Oil Company); Roxana 
Petroleum Corporation; Sun Oil Company; Humble Oil & 
Refining Company; Humble Pipe Line Company; Phillips 
Petroleum Company; Marland Refining Company; Mar- 
land Pipe Line Company; Magnolia Petroleum Company; 
Simms Oil Company; Pure Oil Company; Atlantic Oil Pro¬ 
ducing Company; Vacuum Oil Company; Geophysical Re¬ 
search Corporation and American Seismos Company. 



FEDERAL RADIO COMMISSION 


i 

I 

i 


549 

I. Introduction. 

i 

Radio is now filling an increasingly important role 

678 in geophysical exploration, that type jof exploration 
which makes it possible to discover and study sub¬ 
surface geologic structures and ore bodies jby use of the 
physical properties of the various geologic members of the 
structures. Radio as now applied to this wjork is used in 
seismology and gravimetric surveying to transmit timing 
signals, and in direct radio prospecting, involving the trans¬ 
mission of radio energv and observations of the field of 
force thus created. In other words, radio i|s used in geo¬ 
physical exploration for two separate and disjtinct purposes, 
(1) the transmission of signals from one ppint to another 
several miles away for the purposes of timing the occur¬ 
rence of some phenomenon (such as the instant of an ex¬ 
plosion) occurring at the first location, (2)j the transmis¬ 
sion of radio frequency energy from one point to other 
points in order to determine the geological character of the 
territory in the radio frequency field from the behavior of 
that field. Radio is here applied to scientific methods which 
are being used for the development of the natural mineral 
resources of the United States. 

It is requested that two types of licenses bq kept available 
for geophysical purposes. The first type j should permit 
the use of mobile radio sets for sending timing signals and 
brief operating instructions by continuous wave, interrupted 
continuous wave or phone. Three years’ experience has 
shown that the frequency band front 2,250 to 2,750 

679 kc/s (133 to 109 meters) is well suited for this work. 
The second type should be an experimental license, 

of such nature that the use of radio science,jin the develop¬ 
ment of hidden mineral resources, may be further advanced. 

I 

II. The Dependence of Such Service upbn Short-wave 

(High Frequency) Radio Rather Than Wire or Other 
Means. 

i 

i 

j 

Radio has made the use of the seismograph practical as 
a method of geophysical exploration. No| other kind of 
communication is practical or available. 'Small portable 
sets, light in weight, rugged enough to be transported over 
the roughest of roads and of sufficient po\yer to transmit 



550 


INTERCITY RADIO TELEGRAPH CO. ET AL. VS. 


signals through 10 to 12 miles of dense woods, have been 
developed for this work. A power of 50 watts or less on 
some channel between 1,670 to 3,300 kc/s (180 to 90 meters) 
is all that is ordinarily necessary. This frequency band 
has been used because of the great difficulty of securing 
reliable performance with higher frequencies and because 
of the difficulty of constructing portable sets using lower 
frequencies. 

In gravitational work, where distances of transmission 
are greater, a maximum of input of 250 watts is sometimes 
desirable. 

The use of wire for communication would involve the 
installation and dismantling of from 50 to 120 miles of wire 


line per day for each seismograph party in operation. 
Wire installations would be expensive under the most ideal 
conditions, furthermore in view of the fact that the 
680 work must be carried on in swamps, woods, brush, 
across river, lakes, and to boats operating 5 or 6 miles 
off the seacoast, such installations are entirely out of the 
question. There is no known means, other than radio, for 
satisfactory service in this type of geophysical work. 


III. Economic Importance. 


It is very important from an economic standpoint that 
radio frequency channels be available for use in geophysics, 
for this science is aiding in the location of our hidden min¬ 
eral mineral resources. In the past three years seismology 
in Texas, Louisiana, and Mississippi has been the means 
of discovering at least thirty salt domes, one type of struc¬ 
ture with which petroleum and sulphur are associated in 
that territory. These newly discovered domes have a value 
of at least $50,000,000.00. The discovery of oil or sulphur 
deposits on any one dome enhances the value of that par¬ 
ticular dome by many millions of dollars. Large savings 
are made through the knowledge gained by seismology since 
such knowledge reduces the number of wells to be drilled 
in searching, for domes and in developing those already 
found. From the standpoint of the public and the petro¬ 
leum industry it is important that all scientific means be 
made available for the finding and development of petro¬ 
leum resources. 



FEDERAL RADIO COMMISSION. 


551 


The cost of producing oil must always include the cost 
of wildcat wells, that is, wells drilled in unprbvcn territory 
with the hope of finding petroleum deposits. Ex- 

681 perienee shows that an exceedingly small percentage 
of wildcat wells are succes-ful. It is evident that the 

adoption and use of any scientific means for reducing these 
economic losses will be of great benefit not cjnly to the oil 
companies themselves but to the public, wlpcli must ulti¬ 
mately bear all costs incident to the finding and produc¬ 
tion of oil. | 

The use of seismology in geophysics, although its success 
lias been fully demonstrated, has just begun, lit has proven 
to be mush more economical for locating salt domes than 
the drilling of wells. However its use is rapidly being ex¬ 
tended in other fields of exploration. 

Geophysics four years ago was a little us^d science but 
through its recent successes, advancements, jand apparent 
future possibilities, it has become an outstanding contribu¬ 
tion in the history of economic geology. 

IV. The Number and Portion of Channels Believed Avail¬ 
able for This Service. 

i 

i 

The frequency band 2250 to 2750 kc/s (133 to 109) meters 
will be available for mobile service if the banjds designated 
bv the International Radio Convention are adopted by the 
United Stat es. Assignments in this band I have already 
been made to some geophysical operators biy the Depart¬ 
ment of Commerce or the Federal Radio Commission. Ac¬ 
cordingly apparatus now in use in this work has been de¬ 
signed to operate on channels in this band. j In case it is 
not found feasible to continue the above assignment the 
band 2850 to 400 kc/s (105 to 75 meters) cquld be substi¬ 
tuted though this change would work some hard-hip on the 
exploration companies. In geophysics the exclusive 

682 right to a band is not necessary. The |right to oper¬ 
ate on some channels in the above bands is requested 

and with proper discretion on the part of the Commission, 
with respect to territorial assignments, other; interests may 
be served bv the same channels. 

V. Power Required and Interference Likely; to be Caused 
bv Services and Other Countries. 



552 


INTERCITY RADIO TELEGRAPH CO. ET AL. YS. 


As referred to under the discussion above, seismology 
and other types of geophysical exploration needing a simi¬ 
lar service, require powers up to 250 watts. 

On account of the small amount of power usually em¬ 
ployed in this work, very little interference lias been ex¬ 
perienced or is expected. Furthermore, most of the work is 
carried out in daylight, and very little actual operating time 
is required. The distances worked are very short—3 to 12 
miles—and the country prospected is usually sparsely set¬ 
tled. 

Experimental licenses for direct radio wave prospecting 
should fit the needs of these services as they develop. 


VT. Probable Number of Applications 'Which Will be Made 


for Such Service Within the Next 


Five Years. 


Three years ago there were four radio sets being used in 
the seismograph branch of geophysics. Today there are 
75 sets operating and it is anticipated that 300 sets will be 
operating within the next five years in various methods ot' 
geophysical exploration. 

I thank you. (Applause.) 

683 Mr. Dow: Mr. Chairman, I will ask Dr. Jansky to 
discuss point-to-point communication from the stand¬ 
point of the oil industry. 

Statement of Prof. C. M. Jansky, Jr., Consult'my Radio En¬ 
gineer, Associate Professor, Radio Engineering, Uni¬ 
versity of Minnesota, Minneapolis, Minn. 

Prof. Jansky: My name is C. M. Jansky, Jr., Consulting 
Radio Engineer. I am