The mirror. (Stillwater, Minn.) 1894-1925, 1904-06-30
The Responsibility Of
Inspectors.

The recent disaster which occurred
on the General Slocum brings before
the public the question: Upon whose
shoulders rests the responsibility for
this astounding accident which has !
brought grief and mourning to thou
sands of homes? Should the people or
the inspectors be held liable? Realiz-
ing the danger to which human life
was subjected by boiler explosions, fires,
ETC., the people had laws passed which
provided for inspectors whose duty it
would be to protect the public from
these possible dangers, at least insofar
as it lay within their power to do SO.
| 1t has been reiterated time and again
that the people were Indifferent as to
whether these laws were or were not
enforced. This is not true. 1t cannot
be proven. The people don't care! In
deed they do. That is why almost
every state in the union has inspectors
to protect the people from just such
carelessness as was brought TO light in
connection with the General SlOcum
accident. Because the inspectors were
culpable in the performance of their
duties, is no fault of the people.
That many of these inspectors do not
inspect, is becoming notorious. When
it is proven that they have been negli-
gent in the performance of their duties
they should be held responsible when
it results in misfortune. But if, like
the outlawed bandit, they have no
sense of responsibility connected with
their position, then the Office should
be abolished or else the laws modified
to meet the exigencies of the case.
, Because an inspectors predecessors
have failed to enforce the laws does
not justify him in doing likewise, nor
does it exonerate him from all blame
whenever an accident occurs. To ad-
NIT that it does is poor logic. Such a
hypothesis will establish dangerous
precedent which will be wide-sweeping
tits evil effects. No government, how
ever autocratic, could long endure un-
, der the general operation Of such a
, precedent. We might just as we'll say
that it is ridiculous to bring Mr.. Cash
before the bar of justice on proven
case of accepting brides, just because
, it was alleged that several of his pred.
l ecessors were guilty of the same Of
( Tense.
2 In connection with the Iroquois the
atre disaster it has been said that
everyone knew the fire inspectors were
not enforcing the law. Some people
1 even stated that the inspector should
d have been held accountable when il
e was known that he was not doing his
>. duty. Now, the reason why the aver
age inspector does not enforce the
y laws pertaining to his department i!
because he has not the courage to de-
Il so. Instead of dong his duty cour
e ageously and fearlessly he waits unit
n someone makes complaint. Then 1t
6 uses the man who raised the objection
, as a weapon to strike those who ar
evading the law. In justification h
u says: Don't blame me. When a com
q plant is lodged I must act" Bravo
r Scratch such a man and you will flint
!. hemisphere streak of yellow run
ming through him.
However, this shifting the response
bility from the inspectors to the PEG
Il pie is very unbusinessike. What ap
ls pears to be the duty of everybody, j
IA nobody's duty. When a man commit
It a forgery it is absurd to beat about tn
Ia bush by asking where he bought tn
ink, what brand of paper he used an,
10 whether the penholder was made GU
r. of cedar or oak. These are irrelevan
1t propositions. It is also irrelevant a
u to whether the people knew or did no
Is know that certain inspector was neg
lecting his duties. That is the inspect
~ or's business. He should be held an
IL swerable for his acts, and not the pee
l. pie. But, whatever responsibility
due to the inspector, it should not b
70 forgotten that the greater responsible
. ity rests with the captain, who abov
= all men should have been familiar wit
the workings of the fire apparatus an
q. the condition of the life preservers o.
n his vessel, especially when his vessel j
=. chartered for excursion purposes.
r. - S.
Or An Indignant Poet.