The Houston daily post. [volume] (Houston, Tex.) 1886-1903, 1900-09-30

Visions OF the common law unchanged. as APP
piled 70 the employees OF al other Industries
less. and often very much more, hazardousf
Why should the foreman OF gang at an
oil mill. compress, saw mill, brewery.
a packing house. corpenters', timers or
hreklayers foreman, or any other OF the
numerous large industries that thrive in all
parts OF this great state, which foreman ok.
ercises supervision and control over, but Is
not BY the master clothed with authority to
employ or discharge others working with or
under him, be held In law the fellow-seryant
Of sueh Others while ea mousse sssuSn ,Ore
railroad likewise without power to employ
or discharge his co-laborers, over whom he
10 a limited extent, exercises supervision
and control Is held vice-principal OF the
railroad company
non hazardous service on railroads, be wise
and lust, then why not no extend IL ms to
embrace all those engaged in every vocation
where the employment Is no less hazardous?
The common law rule applied TO the every
day affairs Of lie. which requires the master
to use ordinary care to- employ reasonably
competent servants, furnishes the servant
adequate protection, and he assumes tha
risk OF isolated acts Of negligence or care
lessness on the part OF his co-laborers when
he enters the masters service Just as he
takes the risk incident TO the breaking OF
machine, in the selection and maintenance
OF which the master has used ordinary care.
We're an attempt made to change the whole
some rule Of the common law. as applied TO
local industries to make 1t conform to the
statutory rule as II now exists, MS applied
to railroad companies. q howl would 70 forth
from every quarter OF this great State that
the legislator, with his ear to the ground.
would not be slow to heed.
But the legislature, not content with the
creation OF new liabilities against railroad
companies, and the consequent multiplication
of possible suits against them, have, in an
osteusible effort to protect lawyers against
their own clients, made the voluntary settle
rlent by such companies OF claims against
them much more difficult
Article 4647 of our Revised Statutes, au-
thorizing the sale and transfer OF causes
OF action of every character. aud providing
that the filing OF such transfer among the
papers OF the case. and the notation Of same
upon the docket. shall be sufficient notice
OF same we'll as Article 3S5sa OF our
Statutes. providing for the survival OF causes
of action for personal injuries, ae construed
Santa Fe Railway Company VS.. Mlllor, 81
S. W. Reporter, ZOO, we're ostonsibly intend
ed TO serve a good purpose. That the pro-
visions OF these statutes are frequently and
VIGOROUSLY abused, there can be no question.
They have served to encourage 1.-THE traffic
of merchandising In quarrels OF mixing In
| litigious dscord." They have done much
toward making champerty the rule rather
than the exception in personal injury litiga-
yion. and reducing our criminal statutes
against barratry to a dead letter. They have
tended to foster "the commercial spirit which
has entered the profession and threatens TO
reduce it from guild to mere trade for
getting money
! II is notorious fact that as soon as an
accident on n railroad occurs the injured
parties are bcsieged by STRIKERS" or run
ners" for some personal injury damage law
yer with the view OF securing contract
with the injured person, by which an inter-
est, nsually one-half. In the cause OF action
/ is transferred to such lawyer. with the eN-
elusive power TO collect the damages by
suit or otherwise. No matter how great may
be the diligence exercised by the representa-
tives OF railroad companies, II is difficult Tor
them in many cases to reach the injured
person for the purpose Of Erecting settlement
of his claim outside OF the courts before his
mind is poisoned by the insidous represen Ia
tons OF some emissary of a trafncker In per-
sonal Injuries. II in fact the injured man has
not already so bound himself that he is not
free to act. 5.i+
Many cases have como 10 nay personal mo-
tice where claim agents have delayed ap-
preaching person injured or those bereaved
on account of death, only so long as common
decency might dictate, ana then found that
they had been forestalled; and II settlement
were reached at all, It must be reached
tract to receive one-half of whatever amount
should be paid /, of course, do not wish
TO be understood as charging that all law
yers of this Slate who have successfully con.
ductea large number OF personal injury
cases against railroad, companies, pursue th'
course here outlined Personally, | know
many honorable gentlerneniIlnd able lawyer
with high professional standards who have
quite largely engaged in this branch OF Tn,
practice; but / also know. and | venture tbs
assertion that every member OF this nsso
ciation knows that the methods here re
ferred to are openly and unblushingy fol
lowed by very large per cent ut the AT
turneys at law" who make especially of anti
corporation personal injury litigation. cas-
, is now pending on the docket of one of TIL
district courts of this State, growing out o
the killing OF negro swtehman, where tn
petition was actually filed within i've hour
after the fatal accident occurred. Stimuli
Nit n I'll "a no
was filed a contract puUporting to hay
been signed by the bereaved widow, transfer
ring to her attorney one-half interest Il
her cause of action. The day following tn
filing OF the petition the widow in question
called upon officer of the railroad com
pany, seeking assistance 10 bury her dea
husband representing that her attorney de
clined TO advance her any money or rende
her any assistance She expressed Burpris
, when acquainted with the fact that she ha
filed suit and contended and still contend
that she never authorized the bringing G
such suit. and that the paper which purport
to be contract was fraudulently obtained
She instructed her attorneys to aismiss tn
action, which they declined to do, The
propourded to her interrosatories, seeking {
+ make out their case. which she declined I
! answer. and they went so far Ia this high
: handed procedure to instruct the notar
I to commit her to Jail for declining to ties
tify in her own case. Yet these attorney
are still. officers OF the court before whic
this case is pending. Their names hav
"A
apparently blissfully unconscious of til
E fact that they have outraged the ethics {
4 the profession which they and their kin
are rapidly bringing into disrepute and di:
/ grace
Another case. which occurred within th
e past two months, has been called to my al
D tention, where railroad company effecte
G settlement with mother by paying her $55(
n Tor the loss OF her son, killed while in th
L railroad company's employ as fireman. IN
t railroad company recognized a liability an
4 was anxious from the first TO reach amiC
. able settlement of the mothers claim, an
: she and her family were equally anxious
, settle, but such settlement was with diff
o Guilty accomplished even where the compan
= was willing 10 make so reasonable a pay
IS nent as that mentioned because OF propI
j. sition made to her by a lawyer to guarantG
IS her within one years time an amount equ
@ to what the railroad company was willing
O voluntarily pay urging that she would at Il
same time have a chance OF recovering SOM
q thing in excess OF such amount, and he to
/ would have an opportunity TO speculate
/, the railroad companys expense. 1t not II
IS frequently happens that a plaintiff is willr
q and anxious to make fair settlement OF n
II case on a reasonable basis, but his attorne
Ie will not permit him to do so. Gases has
d come under my individual observation whe
the plaintiff, after knowing all the facts al
d being fully advised was willing to settle for
n fixed sum and willing TO give his attorn'
lr one-half Of that sum, and sui his attorn'
W would not agree 20 the settlement. In OIL
n such case, recently decided finally in fay
y OF thu defendant. railway company volul