Lapas attēli

Amendment no. 89: Appropriates $250,000 for printing and binding, as proposed by the Senate, instead of $260,000, as provided by the House.

Amendment no. 90: Appropriates $9,586,600 for salaries and expenses, Immigration and Naturalization Service, as proposed by the House, instead of $9,089,900, as provided by the Senate. It is the sense of both the Senate and House conferees that not less that $340,000 of this appropriation shall be allocated to the work involving the deportation of aliens under existing law, which sum shall be used exclusively for such purpose.

Amendment no. 91: Correct a limitation to correspond with action taken on amendment no. 90.

Amendment no. 92: Retains language in the bill as inserted by the House and deleted by the Senate requiring certain expenditures made by the Immigration and Naturalization Service to be made in strict compliance with certain other provisions of law.

Amendment no. 93: Inserts language, as proposed by the Senate, prohibiting the use of money appropriated in the act for the payment of salaries of persons nominated to fill any position after the Senate has voted not to approve of said nomination.


Managers on the part of the House.



Mar 18, 1937.-Committed to the Committee of the Whole House on the state

of the Union and ordered to be printed

Mrs. NORTON, from the Committee on the District of Columbia,

submitted the following


(To accompany H. R. 7085)

The Committee on the District of Columbia, to whom was referred the bill (H. R. 7085) to regulate barbers in the District of Columbia, and for other purposes, having considered the same, report favorably thereon and recommend that the bill do pass.


Section 2 of this bill relates to definitions.

Section 3 creates a Board of Barber Examiners, prescribes their qualifications and duties and provides for their appointment or removal. It also authorizes the Board to adopt rules and sanitary regulations as prescribed by the Health Department of the District of Columbia.

Section 4 outlines the conditions under which the Board may issue a certificate of registration as a registered barber and prescribes among other qualifications that the applicant must furnish a health certificate.

Section 5 prescribes the conditions under which a certificate of registration as a registered barber apprentice may be issued by the Board and also provides that the applicant must furnish a health certificate.

Section 6 authorizes the Board to conduct examinations.

Section 7 provides for the granting of certificates of registration to barbers and barber apprentices without examination to those engaged in the practice of barbering at the time this proposed law becomes effective.

Section 8 requires that such certificates must be publicly displayed near the work chair of the holder.

Section 9 provides for renewal of certificates.

Section 10 relates to conditions under which the board is authorized to revoke and/or refuse to restore certificates. Also provides for appeal from and review of any action of the board.

Section 11 fixes fees and provides for refunds.

Section 12 provides for the supplying of office space, equipment, clerk, compensation for board and salaries for assistants; also for the appointment of three inspectors. It further provides that payments under this sectionshall not exceed the amount received from fees provides for in this Act: and if at the end of each fiscal year any funds unexpended in excess of the sum of $1,000 shall be paid into the Treasury of the United States to the credit of the District of Columbiaand that no expense incurred under this Act shall be a charge against the funds of the United States or the District of Columbia.

Section 13 relates to barber schools and colleges.

Section 14 provides that it shall be unlawful (1) to engage in barbering without a certificate, (2) while knowingly afflicted with an infectious or communicable disease, (3) to employ any person except registered barbers and apprentices, (4) to operate a shop without the personal supervision of a registered barber, (5) to obtain or attempt to obtain a certificate from the board for money other than the required fee. Subdivision 6 of this section provides for the closing of shops 1 day in 7. Subdivision 7 requires that operators of barber schools or colleges must display signs indicating that the work therein is done by students exclusively. Subdivision (b) provides a penalty of $25 for violation of any of the provisions of the act.

Section 15 fixes the effective date at 90 days after enactment.

Section 16 lists persons exempt from the provisions of the proposed act.

Section 17 is the usual constitutionality clause.

Section 18 provides for the repeal of all laws or portions of laws inconsistent with this proposed act. Section 19 states the purpose of the act as follows:

to prevent the spreading of diseases and promote the general health of the public by promoting sanitary conditions in barber shops and barber schools or colleges in the practice of barbering.

This committee held a hearing and the provisions of the bill were discussed with representatives of the trade, the health department, and the public. Evidence was submitted tending to establish the fact that there was a need for regulatory legislation.

Laws similar to the one here sought to be enacted are now in effect in 41 States. It is the opinion of the committee that if this bill becomes law in the District of Columbia it will prove to be conducive to the best interests of the barber trade, the patrons of barber shops, and the public generally.

[ocr errors]




May 18, 1937.-Referred to the House Calendar and ordered to be printed

Mr. BULWINKLE, from the Committee on Interstate and Foreign

Commerce, submitted the following


[To accompany H. R. 6049)

The Committee on Interstate and Foreign Commerce, to whom was referred the bill (H. R. 6049) to amend the Interstate Commerce Act, having considered the same, report thereon with a recommendation

that it pass.

The bill has the approval of the Interstate Commerce Commission as will appear by the letters attached:


Washington, February 26, 1937. Hon. CLARENCE F. LEA, Chairman, Committee on Interstate and Foreign Commerce,

House of Representatives. MY DEAR MR. CHAIRMAN: The chairman of the Commission has referred to our legislative committee your communication of February 17, 1937, requesting comment on H. R. 222, introduced by Congressman Smith, to render traveling by sightless persons safer and more convenient by entitling them to be accompanied by "seeing-eye” dogs on interstate transportation facilities without additional cost. This bill has been carefully considered by the legislative committee, and I am authorized to submit the following comments in its behalf.

H. R. 222 provides as follows:

"That any sightless person who is a passenger for hire on any interstate common carrier, motor vehicle, railroad train, motorbus, streetcar, boat, or other public conveyance or mode of transportation, traveling from and between one State and another State, shall be entitled to have with him while such passenger thereon as his "seeing eye” his dog specially trained for that purpose, without such passenger being required to pay any additional charge or fare and the transportation for said "seeing-eye” dog shall be included in the regular standard charge or fare paid by said owner-passenger.

There can be no doubt that the bill has a humane and worthy purpose. However, we question the power of Congress by statute to compel any common carrier to transport persons or property free of charge. In the case of carriers which have been made subject to regulation by this Commission, free transportation is prohibited, either specifically or in effect, except so far as it is specifically authorized. Free transportation of certain classes of persons is authorized by section 1 (7) of the Interstate Commerce Act, and free transportation of certain classes of persons and property or for certain purposes is authorized by section 22 (1);

« iepriekšējāTurpināt »