New-York tribune., 1901-03-18
Old westbury Long Island March 5. ig5l
AGAINsT ME nRAcKErT-cosTELL BILL


To the Editor Of The Tribune
Sir: The Brackett-Cost bill now UP for con-
sideration I'm the legislature ought not to pass IT
seeEs 10 ne. because II would work injustice to the
wiling NAV. In fact, It is a btu not to extend
Ha'"ltT of empoverG 10 employees and others for
iL,arios suffered by them" but rather a bill to
relieve the employer through the well plea
OF "contr'hutory negligence from any liability
whatever.
We need legislation that will defend the wage
Garner. not Oppress him. and that will restrict not
increase. the power o. corporations The doctrine
OF fellow servant has been used in our courts
all too often 10 absolve master corporation from
compensating workman for personal injuries re-
Ceived when in their service In this sense the
courts have ruled ont eli claim for damages in ad-
judicated cases where 1t held. and unjustly,
too. that: % The laborer for railroad company
and enginee- are fellow servants: (2y the local
surveyor for corporation who injured, and
the conductor Of train which he a pas
senger belonging 20 his corporation) fellow
servants; CD telegra ph operator. conductor and
n fireman who was injured fellow servants; 90
a boiler maker who constructed a boiler Of loco
motive years previously. and all machinists en-
pioyed in repairing the same at any time after
ward are fellow servants Uhe injured was
one OF those machinists): (s) a switchman and a
locomotive engineer. who injured. are fellow
servants: 90 a mechanic In a company's shop, who
injured. and n conductor Of a train tan employ
ment utterly distinct from the hrst are fellow ser
wants
Such are the New-York State Court OF Appeals
DECISIONS and have the references and page for
each one. But in the United States Supreme Court
Justice Field. in 1884, held that n conductor is
n fellow servant with a locomotive engineer. and
this decision has greatly impaired this defence of
''ftuCw servant" TO do away with the usefulness OF
that doctrine to excuse a master where a servant
has been injured through the neglect of a
en.aioye-
Il Is evident that the Court OF Appeals OF this
State Is in conflict with the Supreme Court OF the
United States IN the application OF the doctrine OF
"felIOw servant where there (a) dis tinct
Payments OF the general service (b) superior
ity OF one servant over another in the branch
of service; and l see good reason why the Court
OF Appeals should not in behalf Of justice and hu-
manity. be Obliged TO reconsider It's views 5 ex-
pressed in many cases by legislative enact
ment embOdying the views of Chief Justice Waite
and Justices Miller. Field. Harlan and Woods. OF
the Supreme Court of the United States.
Let the Civic Council, backed up by twenty thou
sand wOrkingmen. urge the passage of such a bill
vast Improvement on this Costello imposition
and they Will accomplish something toward assist
ing any poor work nan who shall enter our courts
and ask damages from his master for injuries
ceiVed In his service, although resulting from the
negligence Of a cO-serVant in distinct branch of
the same general employment as the negligence OF
n superior vested with control over the injured
workman in the same branch of general employ
ment JOSIAH G. PUMPELLY.
NeW-York March l3 1901.