Iron County register. [volume] (Ironton, Iron County, Mo.) 1867-1965, 1897-02-18

der this law, was that the meaning OF
the expression, ''any person." was
broad enough to include every citizen
Of the country.
The attorneys of railroad com pauies
have concluded that there are two
classes, and which they distinguish as
persons and servants, and the word
persons does not include fellow SER
wants, they are servants and not per-
sons. The courts ruled to the con-
trary repeatedly. while the attorneys
with their characteristic pertinacity
maintained their opinion, and finally
succeeded by a divided court in
| getting what they had contended for.
The decision was rendered that co-em-
| plOyees are fellow servants and are not
| persons in the statutes. and conse-
| quently cannot recover damages from
| their employers. An employee, say a
| section hand is ordered to go by train to
another place to work, the train is
wrecked in consequence of carelessness
or incompetency of a fellow servant.
The courts have held that any passeng-
ers who may have been injured or
killed at the same time, may recover
damages, while the employees have
| no recourse. An individual standing
near the track who may have been in
jured at the same time may also re-
ceive pay for all damages.
The popular opinion has declared
this to be unjust Discrimination, and a
| wrong that ought not to be permitted.
| This same distinction has been dis
carded long ago in countries that do
not guarantee the liberties of the peO-
pie nor protect them as this State
should guarantee and protect the lib
critics of its people.
Germany not a republic at all but
| ruled over by a monarch, saw the in
justice of this, and twenty years ago
passed a fellow servants law. Eng
land where the common law originated,
passed similar law in 1880 for a term
of seven years, that they might try it
and watch its workings. When that
law expired by limitation, it was ex-
tended for twelve years more, and
they and nearly all of the provinces
have fellow servants law.
Even in our own country we are be-
hind a great many states, who have
legislated on this subject and are sue
cessfully operating under such laws.
The new constitutions as they have
been ratified, expressly provide that
every employe of any railroad or COR
poration shall have the same rights
and remedies for an injury suffered
him from the acts or omissions of said
corporations or its employees, as are al
lowed by law to other persons not en-
ployes, when the injury results from
the negligence of fellow servant, who
is engaged in another department of
labor from that of the party injured or
about a different piece of work. 1t
does not extend to members of gangs,
but applies to injuries resulting to en-
ployes of one gang or division, from
carelessness or other avOidable cause
from employees of another gang, and
they have the same remedies at law as
other persons. In nine different states
these provisions have been incorpor-
ated into their constitution while five
others have modified the common law
rule, which gives almost the same BEN
eft to this class of citizens.
There was much desire manifested
from the beginning of this session, to
hasten the fellow servant bills, and ev-
cry department of business where many
are employed was well represented. |
All kinds of arguments were made |
against official legislation on this sub |
ject, with evident intent to get as
many opposing factors as possible, |
with the hope of defeating it as has |
been done on all previous occasions.
The bill which was passed had been
formed particularly for railroad en-
plOyees, and was cOntended for as the |
most important.
The arguments were heard in an
open session of the committee, to
which it had been referred, and those
opposed either from principle or other
reason, used the responsiveness of
their eloquence to convince a majority
of the justice of their claim. Each
kind of labor was demanding some
that would include their
class of work. The desire of the orig
inators of this bill, was that it be kept
free from any incumberance, which
might lose influence, and votes for its
final passage. All of the proposed
were promptly voted
down, both in the committee and in the
House when the bill came up for final
passage there was only one dissenting
vote, and a resolution was Immediate
ly introduced, asking the member to
explain his vote. The explanation
was not made, and the conclusion was
inferred that the individual did not
know of any other way to make him
self distinguished on this question.
The bill met with about the same OPP
position in the Senate, but finally
passed and was promptly signed by
he President of the Senate, the speak
sr of the House and lastly by the Gov
ernor, and has become law. The
principle involved in the case is one of =
Justice and has demanded definite leg
Station. Every hazardous occupation
should undoubtedly be protected by
he law. The same desire to stop one
wrong will hold good in all other de-
lartments of employment. The bill to
protect railroad employees was the
irst one introduced and consequently
las had consideration first; afterwards
'ther bills which have for their object,
he protection of othar kinds of labor,
will receive similar attention. 1t is
much easier to pass a bill which is OPP
POSED by a few than the bill which has
'eeu amended until many opposing in
erests are arrayed against it, like the
actics of Napoleon, which was to meet