The Topeka state journal. [volume] (Topeka, Kansas) 1892-1980, 1907-06-10

to secure pecuniarys compensation to
! workmen suffering from accidents.
and when they are Killed, to their
families. At present both in the sphere
covered by national legislation, and in
the sphere covered by state legislation,
the law in too many cases leaves the
financial burden of industrial accidents
to be borne by the injured workmen
and their families; and a workman
has no case at all for redress or else
must undertake a suit for DANA ges
against his employer. The present
practice is based on the view an
nounced nearly seventy years ago that
"principles OF justice and good sense
demand that a workman shall take
upon himself all the. ordinary risks of
his occupation" In my view, prin-
ciples of Justice and good sense de-
nand the very reverse of this view
which experience has proved to be un-
sound and productive of widespread
suffering. 1t is neither just, expedient,
nor humane, it is revolving to judg-
ment and sentiment alike, that the
because of the necessary exigencies of
their daily occupation should be
thrust upon those sufferers who are
least able to bear it, and that such
tanned by litigation which now bur-
dens our courts
AS a matter of fact there is no
sound economic reason for distinction
between accidents caused by negIi-
gence and those which are unavoid-
able, and the law should be such that
the payment of those accidents will
become automatic instead of being
matter for a lawsuit. Workmen
should receive a certain definite and
limited compensation for all accidents
in industry irrespective of negligence.
Employer Should Take the Risk
When the employer, the agent of
the public, on his own responsibility
and for his own profit, in the business
OF serving the public starts in motion
agencies which create risks for others,
he should take all the ordinary and
extraordinary risks involved. and
though the burden will at the mo-
ment be his, it will ultimately be as
sumed, as it ought to be- by the gem
eral public. Only in this way can the
shock of the accident be diffused, for
it will be transferred from employer
to consumer. for whose benefit all in
dustries are carried on. From every
standpoint the change would be a
benefit. The community at large
should share the burden as well as the
benefits of industry. Employers would
thereby gain a desirable certainty of
obligation and get rid of litigation to
determine it. The workman and the
workmans family would be relieved
from a crushing load.
The national government should be
model employer. 1t should demand
the highest quality of service from it's
employees and should care for them
properly in return. Congress should
adopt legislation providing limited but
definite compensation for accidents to
all workmen within the scope of the
federal power, including employees in
navy yards and arsenaIs. Similar
legislation should follow throughout
the states. The old and inadequate
remedy of suit for negligence would
then gradually disappear.
Such policy would mean that with
increased responsibility of the employ
er would come increased care, and ac-
cidents would be reduced in number.
The temporary burden involved will
not hamper our industries. Long ex-
perience of compensation laws in
other countries has demonstrated
their benefit. What we advocate is
only a simple measure of justice, only
one step toward the goal of securing,
so far as human wisdom can secure.
fair and equitable treatment for each
and everyone of our people.
AS a corollary to the above let me
point out the extreme ,unwisdom of
the railway companies in fighting the
of the national en-
ployers' liability law. No law is more
needed, and it must be
kept on the statute books in drastic
and thoroughgoing form. The rail-
roads are prompt to demand the inter
ference and to claim the protection
Of the federal courts in times of riot
and disorder; and in turn the federal
government should see to 1t that they
are not permitted successfully to
plead that they are under the federal
law when thereby their own rights can |
be protected, but outside of it when |
it is invoked against themjn behalf of |
the rights of others. If it is proper for |
the federal courts to issue injunctions
In behalf of railroads, it is proper that |
railroads should be held to a strict LA |
bility for accidents occurring to their |
employees. There should be the plain |
est and most unequivoca BILE additional |
by enactment of congress-
to the effect that railroad employees |
are entitled to receive damages for |
any accident that comes to them as an I
incident of the performance of their |
duties, and the law should be such
that it will be impossible for the rail-
roads successfully to fight it without
thereby FORGETTING all right to the pro-
lection of the federal government un-
Ter any circumstances In the same
way there should be rigid federal leg
Station to minimize all railway acct
tents.
Navy a Guarantee of Peace.
In closing, friends and fellow cIti-
.ens of Georgia, let me say one word
by the recent ceremonies in
which you have just taken part, in
,onn ection with your gift to the noble
oattleship named after your state. Our
and great armored cruis-
G~rI,k srl-~