Santa Fe daily New Mexican. [volume] (Santa Fe, N.M.) 1885-1897, 1893-02-02

listen to the reading of the act it pro-
vides that the employe may obtain dam
ages only when such mismanagement
carelessness. neglect, default or wrongful
act of such employe or agent could have
been avoided by such corporation The
leaving in of the words stricken out by
my amendment takes away even the au-
vantages of the present statute. The
question to prove if you strike out these
words is whether by due care and dill
gence you could have avoided an acct
dent; but with them in it leaves an open
door for questions of exception and
technicalities to which lawyers always
resort to win case. The intention is to
deprive the emplove of the benefits of a
jury verdict by legal technicalities. If
the amendment were radical l would OPP
pose it because the territory can not af-
ford to be radical with companies or en-
ployes. We are suffering now from the
radical acts OF the corporations and we
can not afford to suffer by reason of radi-
cal acts of the employees also.
"The question is one of risk, money on
one side and life on the other. Shall life
be considered on equality with money
Here the companies and the employees
have reasonable opportunity to cffer
their proof. The employees are divided
into two classes; the officers who belong
to the element of capital, and the switch
men, engineers, ETC., who belong to labor
When these high officials employ mar
they satisfy themselves of his competency
and if he afterwards turns out knave
this bill would prevent fellow-employe
recovering damages because the company
had exercised reasonable care and dill
gence in his selection.
"The measure now pending is very diff
ferent from the one introduced, which wa'
radical; but these men have made fai
concessions, and we are now given an op
portunity to legislate SO as to define thu
relative rights of the companies and thu
employees, being fair to each, without de
triment to New Mexico. Of course ma,
not be correct, but am firmly of the be
lief that if this bill goes through withou
! the adoption of my amendment you will
see that these little words will be tn,
foundation of thousands of legal argu
ments and the defeat of numerous JUS
claims against the companies. The frs
objection of the company lawyer will b'
that his clients have exercised due car,
and diligence. The best legal counse
have been consulted on this point by thos
men, and they have been told just as
have stated here. The more figure OF
this question the more I am convinced
that if you pass this bill with these words
in you do not give the men the benefit o
the law as it now stands"
Mr.. Fall made the closing speech il
which he became somewhat sarcastic, al
luding to the relative amount of lega
knowledge possessed by Las Vegas rea
estate dealer and Dona Ana count,
lawyer, and some colloquy ensued be
tween him and Mr.. Martinez about tn
authorship of the bill. The debate from
this on was almost entirely irrelevant tt
the amendment or to the merits of tn
bill, except that Mr.. Fall said that TIN
whole thing was simply question o
risk of property on one side and lif
on the other. The employe knew wha
he was about and when he made his term
of wages with the company he did 81
knowing the full risk and charged &C
cordingly. 1t was simply a matter o
dollars and cents and sentiment did no
enter the case.
Mr.. Martinez finally called the question
on his amendment, which was lost on tn
following vote
Aye: Messrs. Hubbell, Martinez ant
Patterson.
No: Messrs. Burns, Fall, Hall, Pine
Saint, Sanchez Veeder and the presi
dent.
The substitute as published above thel
passed by viva voce vote.