Southern standard. (McMinnville, Tenn.) 1879-current, 1884-11-01
Law for Farmers.
American Agriculturist.
THE EMPLOYERS DUTIES.

fully performed, render the master liza
BILE for the injury resulting to the men
from such failure; 1. To exercise due
care in the hiring and retention of ems
ployees, 2. To exercise due care in
purchasing and retention of machinery.
3. To exercise due care in keeping his
buildings and premises in safe and
proper condition. 4. To exercise due
care not to expose his men to other
than the ordinary risks OF the business
for whick they hired. These general
duties of the last group fall naturally
under the following heads;
INJURIES BY CARELESS FELLOW
woRKIEN.
One of the risks which workman
assumes when he engages in any en-
ployment, is that which arises from
carelessness on the part of his fellow
workmen. If two farm hands, both
presumably competent, are set to work
together, and one carelessly Injuries the
other, the injured workman has no
claim therefor upon the master. But
if the master failed in the first duty
above set forth, i. e., if he hired a man
whom he knew to be incompetent, or
if he did not exercise due care to as.
certain that the man was competent,
then he, the master, would be liable
for injury suffered through such in>
competence by another workman,
without fault on the part of the latter.
To illustrate: Suppose farmer hires
careless boy, and sets him to driving
spirited team; if the boy by his care
lessness allows the team to run away
and injure another workman, the farm
er will be liable. He has here failed
in his duty to exercise proper care in
the selection of his employees. But
if he had used the caution Of an ordi>
narily prudent man in selecting per-
son competent to drive the team, and
the man so selected had still proved
careless and allowed the team to run
away and injure workman, the mas
ter would be relieved from liability for
the damage done.
INJURIES BY DEFECTIVE MACHINERY,
NGs, ETC.
The second and third duties of the
master require him to exercise care in
the purchase and retention of machine.
ry, and in keeping his buildings and
premises in a safe condition. If he
fails in these duties, and such failure
results in injury to workman without
negligence on the workman's part, the
master is liable for the damage done.
But here it must be observed that il
the defects in the machinery or build.
ings are open and apparent to the
workman, so that by the exercise Of
care on his part he can avoid the dam
gers arising from them, he cannot re-
cover damages if he is injured in con-
sequence. By engaging in the en-
ployment he voluntarily encounters
the dangers which he can see, and, by
prudence, avoid. Many of the de-
J fects, however, in machinery and
buildings, are of an unseen and latent
character, and not apparent to the
ordinary observer. The servant doe;
not, and connot be expected to inves'
{ tigate at every step to know that he il
treading on safe ground. If he is in.
iured by reason of such a defect, and
the defect is known, or ought to b.
known to the employer that is, if or
, binary care and prudence on his par
, would have discovered the defect, thu
master is liable. This is we'll illustra
ted by case in New York, where {
portion of a mill fell because the tim
| bers and supports under it we're allow
3 ed to become defective. The Cour
7 held that ordinary care on the part o
3 the owner required him to find on
! such defects and remedy them, anC
s that failure of this duty rendered hin
t liable to the injured operatives GA N
. Y, 410). Where latent defects ar
' known to the servant, and he calls thu
s masters attention to them, and tn
e master promises to repair them, that j
: sufficient for the servant. He may
n | Al - &ko ,uo,lx opI - he :