« ÎnapoiContinuați »
REPORT No. 624
BRIDGE ACROSS THE ST. FRANCIS RIVER, ARK.
APRIL 30 (calendar day, May 7), 1930.-Ordered to be printed
Mr. Dale, from the Committee on Commerce, submitted the following
(To accompany S. 4196)
The Committee on Commerce, to whom was referred the bill (S. 4196) to authorize the construction, maintenance, and operation of a bridge across the St. Francis River in Craighéad County, Ark., having considered the same, report favorably thereon, and recommend that the bill do pass without amendment.
The bill has the approval of the Departments of War and Agriculture as will appear by the annexed communications, which are made a part of this report.
WAR DEPARTMENT, April 22, 1930. Respectfully returned to the chairman Committee on Commerce, United States Senate.
So far as the interests committed to this department are concerned, I know of DO objection to the favorable consideration of the accompanying bill (S. 4196, 71st Cong., 2d sess.) to authorize the construction of a bridge across the St. Francis River in Craighead County, Ark.
F. TRUBEE DAVISON,
Acting Secretary of War.
DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE,
Washington, D. C., April 29, 1930. Hon. Hiram W. JOHNSON, Chairman Committee on Commerce,
United States Senate. DEAR SENATOR: Receipt is acknowledged of your letter of April 18, transmitting a copy of a bill (8. 4196) with request that the committee be furnished with such suggestions touching its merits and the propriety of its passage as the department might deem appropriate.
This bill would authorize the St. Louis-Southwestern Railway Co. to construct, maintain, and operate a railroad bridge and approaches thereto across the St. Francis River in section 13, township 13 north, range 6 east, of the fifth principal meridian, in Craighead County, Ark., on a line of railway between Caraway, and Trumann, said State. The bill relates to a railroad bridge and is without objection so far as this department is concerned. Sincerely,
R. W. DUNLAP, Acting Secretary. O
APRIL 30 (calendar day, May 7), 1930.-Ordered to be printed
Mr. FRAZIER, from the Committee on Post Offices and Post Roads,
submitted the following
[To accompany H. R.-1234)
The Committee on Post Offices and Post Roads, to whom was referred the bill (H. R. 1234) to authorize the Postmaster General to impose demurrage charges on undelivered collect-on-delivery parcels, having considered the same, report favorably thereon with one amendment and recommend that, as amended, the bill do pass.
The proposed change is as follows:
On page 1, line 10, strike out“10” and insert “5”, which would be the maximum daily demurrage charge imposed upon parcels after 15 days' free storage.
This measure gives the Postmaster General authority to fix a reasonable period for free storage and to make a reasonable demurrage charge when delivery has not been made to either the addressee or the sender until after the expiration of the prescribed period. It is needed because of the growing practice of using the post office for storage of collect-on-delivery parcels. Considerable expense is entailed and it is believed that reasonable payment should be made therefor after a period of 15 days.
The proposed action is in line with that taken by express companies several years ago, who now only allow three days or at most five days free time. On this point the Third Assistant Postmaster General states:
The express companies allow only three days free time on straight shipments and the same period on C. 0. D. shipments which are not accepted by consignees and allow only five days free time on C. 0. D. shipments which are accepted by the consignees. The express storage charges on shipments weighing 100 pounds or less, which are analogous to the limits of weight of shipments by mail are 10 cents for the first day after expiration of free time and 5 cents for each of the next 8 days, a total storage charge of 50 cents for the first 9 days. When the total storage charge reaches 50 cents for a shipment weighing 100 pounds or less no further charge is made until the expiration of one month from date storage charge commenced. After the first month the storage rate on shipments weighing 100 pounds or less is 50 cents per month, any fraction of a month to be computed as one month. These express storage charges apply only during the period the shipments remain in the custody of the express company. When shipments are placed in public warehouses they are subject to the charges assessed by such public warehouses.
It is not the intention of the department, if this bill is enacted, to impose a hardship upon shippers or upon those who receive collecton-delivery parcels, but simply to prevent abuse of the privilege at the expense of the general public. In the letter above quoted, the department makes the following statement:
If bill H. R. 1234 is enacted into law it is expected to require postmasters to issue notices to the senders of all undelivered C. 0. D. parcels which may involve demurrage after attempt to deliver has been made, informing the senders of the provisions of the law and the time when demurrage charges will begin, and at the same time requesting them to give information as to the disposition desired to be made of the parcels. With this understanding the department believes that there should be little objection to the passage of this proposed legislation.
The experience of the postmaster in Washington, D. C., shows the need for such legislation. On February 24 he reported that parcels on hand since January totaled 150, while those which had been in the office during February for more than 10 days were 227 in number. The storing of these parcels requires an appreciable amount of clerical labor and the use of space, for which no extra charge is demanded at present. A precedent exists in the case of incoming foreign packages, on which demurrage is charged at the rate of 5 cents a day beginning 10 days from the date of notice to the addressee.
On several occasions the Postmaster General has urged the enactment of the proposed legislation, and recommendation for same was renewed in the department's latest annual report.
PREVENTION OF IMPROPER PRACTICE BEFORE THE
UNITED STATES PATENT OFFICE
MAY 8, 1930.-Ordered to be printed
Mr. WATERMAN, from the Committee on Patents, submitted the
(To accompany H. R. 699)
The Senate Committee on Patents, to which was referred the bill (H. R. 699) to prevent fraud, deception, or improper practice in connection with business before the United States Patent Office, and for other purposes, has had the same under consideration, and reports the bill to the Senate with the following amendments, and recommends that the bill as amended by the Senate committee be passed.
The amendments proposed by the Senate Committee on Patents are as follows:
1. Beginning on page 1, line 9, with the words “It shall further", down to and including the words "United States Patent Office" page 2, line 8, strike out, and in lieu thereof there shall be substituted the following:
It shall further be unlawful for any person or association of persons not so recognized, or, who, having been so recognized, has been subsequently disbarred, to describe himself or itself, or hold himself or itself out or permit himself or itself to be described or held out that he or it either alone or together with any other person or persons, has, owns, conducts, or maintains an office of any kind for the purpose of preparing or prosecuting applications for patents, or for compensation to act or practice as a patent agent or patent attorney, with respect to matters relating to patents before the United States Patent Office:
2. Insert, on page 2, line 12, after the word "advising", the words "or assisting":
3. On page 2, beginning with the words "to clerks”, in line 18, strike out down to and including the word “apply”, being the first word of line 21.
SR-71-2-VOL 2- -24