Daily Kennebec journal. [microfilm reel] (Augusta, Me.) 1870-1975, 1907-06-11


lions means a corresponding increase
in the number OF accidents to the
! Nage-WorkerS employed therein, these
including both preventablc and inevita-
| BILE accidents. To the ordinary wage
| workers family such a calamity
means grim hardship. AS the work is
done for the employer, and therefore
ultimately for the public, it is bitter
injustice that it should be the wage
worker himself ANA his wife and
| children who bear the whole penalty.
Legislation should De had, alike from
the nation and from the states, not
| only to guard against the needless
multiplication Of these accidents, but
| to relieve the financial suffering due to
| them. Last winter Congress passed &
| safeIy-appliance law which marked Il
| long stride in the right direction. But
| there should be additional legislation
| to secure pecuniary compensation to
WOrkmen suffering from accidents, and
/ When they ;tre 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 tinan-
cial burden Of Industrial accidents TO
| be fOrnc by the injured Worimen and
| their families; ana Il workman who
/ suffers from an accident either has no
| case at I'll for redress or else must
undertake Il SUiJ for damages against
hi. employer Tie present practice is
based on the view announced nearly
severity years ago that ''principleS of
justice and good sense demand that 4
workman shall take upon himself all
the ordinary risks of his occupation"
In my view, principles Of justice and
good sense demand the very reverse of
this view, which experience has proved
to he unsound and productive of wide
spread suffering. 1t is neither just,
eXpe licnt, nor humane, il is revolving
80 judgment and sentiment alike, that
the financial burden IF accidents oc-
curing because of the necessary ext
gencics of their daily occupation
should be thrust upon those sufferers
who are least able to bear it. and that
such remedy as is theirs should only
he obtained by litigation which now
burdens our courts.
As a matter Of fact there is TO sound
economic reason fer distinction between
accidents caused by negligence and
those which are unavoidable, and the
Law should he such that the payment of
these accidents will become automatic
instead of being Il matter for lawsuit.
WO.llnIen should receive a certain def
mite and limited compensation for all
accidents in industry, Irrespective OF
negligence. When the employer, the
agent Of the public, on his own respon-
sibility and for his own profit, in the
business of serving the public, starts
III motion agencies which create risks
for others, he should take all the ordi-
nary and extraordinary risks involved;
ana though the burden will at the
moment b" his, it will ultimately be
assumed, as it ought to be, by the
general public. Only in this way can
the shock nf the accident he ditfuSed.
for il will he transferred from employer
to consumer, for whose benefit all IN
lustricS are carried on. From every
standpoint the change would be
benefit The community ut large
should share the harden as well rs the
benefits Of industry. Employers would
thereby gain u desirable certainty OF
obligation ana get rid Of litigation to
determine il. The workman and the
wurkmans family would be relieved
from Il crushing load.
The National Government should he
4 model employer. 1t should demand
the highest quality of service from its
employees ana should care for them
properly in return. Congress should
adopt legislation providing limited but
definite compensation for accidents to
;il Workmen within the scope Of the
Federal power. including employees IN
navy wards and arscnals. Similar icgs-
lation should follow throughout the
states The old and Inadequate remedy
nf suit for negligence would then grad
ually disappear.
such "A poltcy would mean that with
increased responsibility of the employ
or would come increased care ana
accidents would be reduced in number.
The temporary burden involved viii
Mt hamper our industries. Long expo
rirncc Of compensation laws in DINER
countries has demonstrated their bene-
fit What we advocate is only simple
measure Of justice. only one step
toward the goal Of securing, 50 far as
human wisdom can secure, fair ana
equitable treatment for each ana
everyone Of our people.
Az cornlary to tie above let me
point ont the extreme unWiHdom 81 the
railway companies in fighting the con-
StitutiCnGlitE Ot the nauOhtl cllploN
Crs' liability law. No law is more
cntDhltically needed, and it must be
Kept on the statute books in drastic
ana thnrouShGoing form. The rall-
roads are prompt to demand the inter
ference ana to claim the protection or
the Federal courts in times IF riot and |
disorder: and in turn the Federal |
Government should see to il that they |
are not permitted successfully to
plead Shat they are under The Federal |
law when therchy their own rights can |
he protected, but outside Of it when 1t |
is invoked against them in behalf Of /
thr rights Of others. II it is proper Tor
;hc Federal courts to issue injunctonS |
in hchal' of railroads. it is proper that
railroads. should he held to strict
liability fOr accidents occurring 70 their
cmplnvccs. There should be tho plain
est and most uncquivocable additional
statement. by enactment of Congress.
to the effect that railroad employees
are entitled to receive damages for any
that comes to them as an Incl
dent Of the performance of their duties,
AVA ~. lnU- GhouI1 be such that it Will