LEGAL ANALYSIS 97 



to be compared with the very similar problem faced by a legislative 

 body when it decides how to manage other similar functions or 

 resources which yield best to restrictions upon the number of par- 

 ticipants. For example, the radio broadcasting business started with 

 a rush for all available channels of broadcast, with such a welter 

 of overlapping and jamming stations that federal legislation became 

 absolutely essential. Finally, under the 1927 act and the later 1934 

 act, the government has come to allocate the various wave lengths 

 as among the various applicants upon the basis of who will give the 

 best service to the public. ^^^ It will be noted that this process is not 

 simply one of weeding out the incompetent, but of choosing from 

 among admittedly competent broadcasters. The state does the same 

 for many similar functions, such as the granting of franchises for 

 ferry crossings, intrastate bus lines, and the like. Similarly, where 

 determinations have been made upon some ground other than purely 

 physical limitations, the legislatures have also imposed limitations 

 upon the number of participants. The most recent of these to undergo 

 judicial scrutiny is Seattle's jukebox licensing scheme. Under that 

 scheme, Seattle limits the number of jukebox licensees to one for 

 every 10,000 residents. This scheme, incidentally, seems a rather 

 approximate one; certainly a more logical one would have been to 

 limit the number of jukeboxes directly, not as here by allowing any 

 one licensee to have as many jukeboxes as he pleased up to an upper 

 limit of 150. Nevertheless, the court upheld it in Ragan v. Seattle ^^^ 

 decided in 1961. 



Illustrations of the same sort of limitation upon number are seen 

 in the liquor control statutes, where the Class "H" licenses are limited 

 to not more than one for every 1,500 in population, ^^^ and in the 

 various cities' taxicab licensing ordinances. Seattle, for example, 

 limits the number of taxicabs to not more than one for every 2,500 

 inhabitants. ^^"^ 



It should be noted, incidentally, that such a licensing scheme 

 tends to put a value on the license, even though the licensing author- 

 ity usually retains full power to determine who shall be a successor 



121. For an excellent discussion see the opinion of Mr. Justice Frankfurter writing for 

 the majority in National Broadcasting Co., Inc. v. United States, 319 U. S. 190 

 ( 1943), especially at 210-220. 



122. 58 Wn. 2d 779, 364 P. 2d 916 (1961), discussed supra, nn. 54-55, 57. 



123. Revised Code of Washington §66.24.420. 



124. Seattle Ordinances §10.69.130 (Ord. #59866 §3, as amended by Ord. #79136, 

 July 10, 1950). 



