The San Francisco call., 1904-04-27
THE GARMENTS VOTE.

- He street carmen have nearly UNANIMOUSLY re-
| ected the offers made by the company and the pub
lie await the act in the drama 1t is to be
GREETED propositions punched that
propositions essentially dissmilar in their had
stand fall together. AS the OF compensation per
hour impinged upon the issue of responsibility of
the corporation for the of its employees and both
had be decided together, it impossible to do
than guess which the instrumental in the
suit.
In such business rairoadng corporation is held
such strict responsibility for any damage that
others the prosecution of its business and such
damage depends entirely upon its control and disc-
pine of its employees that is difficult to how it
utterly abdicae the right employ and discharge
em nasmueh its possession OF that right is its sole
of protecting itself and the public If abdicate
this right favor of the unon then in law and logic
responsibility should follow control, and the union
should respond in damages for such injuries the
courts now compel the corporation repair.
1t unthinkable that the law will separate response
bilty from control No will attempt to do In
the event of suit for damages against the United Rail
roads for the of employe the corporation will not
be permitted plead that it had control of its
ploye having entered into agreement that should
neither employ discharge him. The court would
hold that such agreement is ultra wires and can
not be pleaded in avoidance of damages
The doctrine that the corporation the principal and
the empoye agent and that the principal is respon
ble for the OF the agent deeply embedded in
the any doctrine known that science. Corpora
tions will be permitted to evade by giving up
of the employment and discharge of their agents
This the point that is important to the public which is
quick to penetrate the logic and justice OF
ston which affects its welfare
The law provides remedy for every wrong. 10 be
a remedy it be efficient. If sustain an in
jury person property the law right him. For
injury inflicted by the United Railroads. by the act of
an employee the law will not entertain action against
he he
corporation control of the employees because the
mems union is corporation, it has no legal exist
ence in the in which the corporation has whose
property it will control if it control the employees.
verdict against would be no remedy to the person IN
ured. To pursue redress in that direction would be
vain thing and the law compes to do vain
thing pursuit of redress.
1t will be seen then that this issue goes farther and
deeper than any question of hours and wages 1t is
fundamental If the United Railroads abdicate
troll the law be rewritten before it also abdi-
cate responsibility On the other hand if the union take
control it takes without responsibility until the law
rewritten.
AS proposition of law and it clear that
control and responsibility ndssoubly united To
carry further and into other activities where labor
largely employed the same principle of responsibility
goes wherever there risk and hazard If empoye
be injured by the of fellow workman, by his omis
the ordinary of their vocation the
injured does not seek redress of his fellow agent HI
goes their common principal, their employer. That
principal is allowed plead that he has abdicated
the right employ and discharge and therefore
troll his agents. He is held to rigid responsibility.
These principles upon such sound foundation of
and necessary for the security of rights
that strange that anywhere the United States
they should require The proposition d
responsibility from control has basis in reason,
and is distinctly revolutionary that it would only
to require statement be Immediately rejected by men
reared and the orderly operation of
our system of law