The Chickasha daily express. (Chickasha, Indian Territory [Okla.]) 1899-current, 1901-04-02
AN IMpoRTANr RuLINo.
Employer Liable for Damages to Employe
Injured BY Another's Careiessness.

Employer Liable for Damages to Employ,
Injured BY Another's Careiessness
Two trains on the Eric Railroad
approaching each other from Oppo
site directions. were both greatly be-
hind time, and were running on
special orders, from station 10 sta
ti0ns sent by the train dispatcher al
Hornellsyille About as the day dis.
/ patcher was leaving aud the night
dispatcher was coming on, both
trains were waiting at different sta
tl0ns for orders The night dis
patcher asked the retiring day dis
hatcher 70 give the orders, which was
done.
At later hour the night dis
patcher, having forgotten the order
sent by the day dispatcher at his re-
quest, d rected one OF the trains 10
proceed beyond station where it
was waiting TO meet the other The
order was uheyed, a collision resulted.
and the hreman was terribly hurt.
losing both legs and suffering other
inlarles.
The old doctrine Of law is that a
master is net responsible FOR Injuries
caused TO a servant through the neg
ligence Of fellow servant This il
still held TO be the la'V where the
servants are OF equal rank and neither
IS working under the orders OF the
other IL six men are handl NJ a
bar cf "a Oad iron, aud hy the care.
lessness Of one il fails and smashes
the toos oi another the employer is
not Liable.
But IN several States il has been
held that-where the employees are
not equal 10 rank. but one Is work.
ing under the orde Of anothcr-if
the inferior employe is 10 ured
through the negligence OF the su-
perlor. the employer is liable The
superior employe represents the en-
plOYer, and MS act is the employers
act The boss 81 gang Of hands is
the 'yice principal" OF their common
employer % use a technical term In
law
Ia the Er'e Railroad case the train
dispatcher sent the order. signing
the division superintendenus name
over MS own initials, according 70
the usage OF the company lie repre-
sented the company and was the SUI
perlOr ~ the q eman who was IN
lured His act was the c9mpanys
act.
This decis on derives additional in.
terest from the fact that the opinion
was written by Judge hufus w. Peck.
ham who Is regarned Justly as one OF
the ablest and most enliehtened iur-
lists Ia the United States. He de-
rlared that the doctrine was not free
from diAculty especially Ia many
cases ia determining whether one
employe is superior ia authority To
the other Hut this be regarded as
mainly matter Of fact 70 be settled
by the jury. The principle was cor
rect
In some ten States OF the Union
the highest courts have held t. this
rule Of law, and ia ono case 10 has
been affirmed by the Supreme Court
" the United sta.es In the ease n I
b claim for damages against Wis I
,Onsin railroad company a locomotive
engineer having been injured by fol-
lowing the orders of the conductor or /
.he train-a superior empl0ye-the I
federal sup eme Court gave final
Judgment against the railroad CON-
Dlny.
In Illinois and other tates there /
have been repeated efforts 10 procure I
legislation making employers liable
IN all cases Tor damages ia case or in /
ury 10 employees caused by the negli. ]
renee nf co-employes even II OF equal (
authority But it has been thought I
hat this was carrying the principle 4
.oO far or course, II il should he
IN a law it would apply to
III employers alike individuals and /
ifms. as well as corporations