« ÎnapoiContinuă »
Mr. COUZENS, from the Committee on Interstate Commerce, sub
mitted the following
[To accompany H. R. 12599]
The Committee on Interstate Commerce, having considered H. R. 12599, do recommend its passage, and file herewith copy of House of Representatives Report No. 1665 as its own views.
(House Report No. 1665, Seventy-first Congress, second session) The Committee on the Merchant Marine and Fisheries, to whom was referred the bill (H. R. 12599) to amend section 16 of the radio act of 1927, having considered the same, do report the bill back to the House with the recommendation that the bill do pass.
In compliance with the rules of the House there follow the present law and the proposed amendment. The matter inclosed in brackets represents that to be stricken out and the matter printed in italics represents the new matter to be inserted:
“[Sec. 16. Any applicant for a construction permit, for a station license, or for the renewal or modification of an existing station license whose application is refused by the licensing authority shall have the right to appeal from said decision to the Court of Appeals of the District of Columbia; and any licensee whose license is revoked by the commission shall have the right to appeal from such decision of revocation to said Court of Appeals of the District of Columbia or to the district court of the United States in which the apparatus licensed is operated, by filing with said court, within twenty days after the decision complained of is effective, notice in writing of said appeal and of the reasons therefor.
“The licensing authority from whose decision an appeal is taken shall be notified of said appeal by service upon it, prior to the filing thereof, of a certified copy of said appeal and of the reasons therefor. Within twenty days after the filing of said appeal the licensing authority shall file with the court the originals or certified copies of all papers and evidence presented to it upon the original application for a permit or license or in the hearing upon said order of revocation, and also a like copy of its decision thereon and a full statement in writing of the facts and the grounds for its decision as found and given by it. Within twenty days after the filing of said statement by the licensing authority either party may give notice to the court of his desire to adduce additional evidence. Said notice shall be in the form of a verified petition stating the nature and character of said additional evidence, and the court may thereupon order such evidence to be taken in such manner and upon such terms and conditions as it may deem proper.
“At the earliest convenient time the court shall hear, review, and determine the appeal upon said record and evidence, and may alter or revise the decision
appealed from and enter such judgment as to it may seem just. The revision by the court shall be confined to the points set forth in the reasons of appeal.]
“Sec. 16. (a) An appeal may be taken, in the manner hereinafter provided, from decisions of the commission to the Court of Appeals of the District of Columbia in any of the following cases:
“(i) By any applicant for a station license, or for renewal of an existing station license, or for modification of an existing station license, whose application is refused by the commission.
“(?) By any licensee whose license is revoked, modified, or suspended by the commission.
“(3) By any other person, firm, or corporation aggrieved or whose interests are adversely affected by any decision of the commission granting or refusing any such application or by any decision of the commission revoking, modifying, or suspending an existing station license.
"Such appeal shall be taken by filing with said court within twenty days after the decision complained of is effective, notice in writing of said appeal and a statement of the reasons therefor, together with proof of service of a true copy of said notice and statement upon the commission. Unless a later date is specified by the commission as part of its decision, the decision complained of shall be considered to be effective as of the date on which public announcement of the decision is made at the office of the commission in the city of Washington.
“(b) The commission shall thereupon immediately, and in any event not later than five days from the date of such service upon it, mail or otherwise deliver a copy of said notice of appeal to each person, firm, or corporation shown by the records of the com mission to be interested in such appeal and to have a right to intervene therein under the provisions of this section, and shall at all times thereafter permit any such person, firm, or corporation to inspect and make copies of the appellant's statement of reasons for said appeal at the office of the commission in the city of Washington. Within thirty days after the filing of said appeal the commission shall file with the court the originals or certified copies of all papers and evidence presented to it upon the appli cation involved or upon its order revoking, modifying, or suspending a license, and also a like copy of its decision thereon, and shall within thirty days thereafter file a full statement in writing of the facts and grounds for its decision as found and given by it, and a list of all interested persons, firms, or corporations to whom it has mailed or otherwise delivered a copy of said notice of appeal.
"(c) Within thirty days after the filing of said appeal any interested person, firm, or corporation may intervene and participate in the proceedings had upon said appeal by filing with the court a notice of intention to intervene and a verified statement showing the nature of the interest of such party, together with proof of service of true copies of said notice and statement, both upon appellant and upon ihe commission. Any person, firm, or corporation who would be aggrieved or whose interests would be adversely affected by a reversal or modification of the decision of the commission complained of shall be considered an interested party.
“(d) At the earliest convenient time the court shall hear and determine the appeal upon the record before it, and shall have power, upon such record, to enter a judgment affirming or reversing the decision of the commission, and, in event the court shall render a decision and enter an order reversing the decision of the commission, it shall remand the case to the commission to carry out the judgment of the court: Provided, however, That the review by the court shall be limited to questions of law and that findings of fact by the commission, if supported by substantial evidence, shall be conclusive unless it shall clearly appear that the findings of the commission are arbitrary or capricious. The court's judgment shall be final, subject, however, to review by the Supreme Court of the United States upon writ of certiorari on petition therefor under section 347 of tille 28 of the Judicial Code by appellant, by the commission, or by any interested party intervening in the appeal.
“(e) The court may, in its discretion, enter judgment for costs in favor of or against an appellant, and/or other interested parties intervening in said appeal, but not against the commission, depending upon the nature of the issues involved upon said appeal and the outcome thereof."
The purpose of the amendment is to clarify the procedure on appeal to the court from decisions of the Federal Radio Commission, to more clearly define the scope of the subject matter of such appeals, and to insure a review of the decision of the Court of Appeals of the District of Columbia by the Supreme Court.
This amendment was part of H. R. 11635, which unanimously passed in the House on April 30, 1930. Because of the urgent need of this legislation and the probability that consideration of H. R. 11635 will not be reached in the Senate, the amendment is offered as a separate bill.
REPORT No. 1116
CHANGING THE NAME OF THE ISLAND OF PORTO RICO
TO PUERTO RICO
JUNE 27, 1930.-Ordered to be printed
Mr. Bingham, from the Committee on Territories and Insular Affairs,
submitted the following
[To accompany S. J. Res 193]
The Committee on Territories and Insular Affairs, to whom was referred the joint resolution, S. J. Res. 193, to change the name of the island of Porto Rico to “Puerto Rico," having considered the same, reports favorably thereon and recommends that the joint resolution do pass.
This legislation is proposed in accordance with the will of the people of Porto Rico, as expressed in a concurrent resolution adopted by the Porto Rican Legislature in April last, a copy of which is embodied in this report.
The legislative resolution stresses the desirability of thus doing justice to the history, language, and traditions of the island, and points out that the word “porto," although of Latin derivation has not been adopted into the language of the island.
The resolution of the Porto Rican Legislature referred to is as follows:
I, Jose Munoz Rivera, secretary of the Senate of Porto Rico, do hereby certify:
That the following concurrent resolution was unanimously approved by the Senate of Porto Rico on April 3, 1930, and by the House of Representatives on April 12:
CONCURRENT RESOLUTION REQUESTING THE CONGRESS OF THE UNITED STATES
OF AMERICA OFFICIALLY TO RESTORE THE TRUE NAME OF THIS ISLAND
Whereas in accordance with all historical data relative to the discovery and colonization of our island, the original name given thereto by its discoverer and consecrated in the royal orders of the colonizing nation was Isla de San Juan;
Whereas the first city founded on Porto Rican soil, and denominated Villa de Caparra, was given the name of Ciudad de Puertorrico;
Whereas subsequently, and by virtue of the transfer of the old Ciudad de Puertorrico to the site now occupied by our capital city, the aforesaid names of San Juan and Puertorrico became the exclusive patrimony of our city and of our island, respectively;
Whereas the history and traditions of our people have since then sustained and consecrated the name of Puerto Rico, given to our island, as its sole name;
Whereas immediately following the change of sovereignty which took place in the island, the Congress of the United States of America, without justifying reasons, officially gave this island the name of Porto Rico;
Whereas the aforesaid name of Porto Rico is an impure idiomatic compound partly formed of the foreign word porto, which, although of Latin origin, has not yet been adopted into our language, but is here used illegitimately to substitute the word puerto, genuinely Spanish, though no license, reasons of diction, or advantages of euphony exist to warrant such substitution;
Whereas there are no reasons either in the history, the language, or the traditions of our people, supporting the legitimacy of the foreign term porto which officially forms part of the name of our island; now therefore be it
Resolved by the Senate of Porto Rico, the House of Representatives concurring: 1. To request the Congress of the United States of America, and the same is hereby requested, officially to restore to our island its true name of Puerto Rico in place of Porto Rico as it is now called, because it is considered that full justice will thus be done to our history, our language, and our traditions.
2. That for the proper purposes, a copy of this resolution be forwarded to the Congress of the United States of America; to the Hon. Herbert Hoover, President, and to our Resident Commissioner, Hon. Felix Cordova Davila.
For transmittal to His Excellency Herbert Hoover, President of the United States of America, as provided in the second paragraph of said resolution, I have hereunto set my hand and caused to be affixed the seal of the Senate of Porto Rico at San Juan, P. R., on this the 6th day of May, 1930, A. D. (SEAL.)
JOSE MUÑOZ RIVERA,
Secretary of the Senate. O