Deseret evening news. [volume] (Great Salt Lake City [Utah]) 1867-1920, 1907-04-10
The LIABILITY
OF EMPLOYEES
Argument Begins in u. S. Supreme
Court in Two Cases Involving
ConstitutlOnallty OF Law.
GOVERNMENT IS INIT ERESTED.
Not an Original Party But Interviewed
Atty. Gen Makes Strong Plea in
Favor of Validity of Act,

Washington. ApTit lO-~Arsu,nent was
begun today In the supreme court of the
United States in the two cases of Dam
sell Howard and ~ c. Brooks. involv-
ing the constitutionality of the en-
ployers' liability law. holding railroads
engaged in Interstate comm cree re-
sponsible Tor damages to employees
when caused by the neglect of fellow
employees or deficient appliances. The
cases have attracted wide attention and
lin both OF them the trial courts held
against the validits1of the statute.
In the Brooks case, Mrs. N. &, Brooks.
a citizen OF Kansas, brought suit
against the Southern Pacific In the
United States circuit court for the
Western district OF kentucky 10 ne cover
$4,000 damages owing 10 the death OF
her son. killed In an accident while
employed as a locomotive fireman on
Southern Pacific train in Nevada The
case was tried before Judge Evans, a
FORMER member OF Congress, who held
the law TO be unconstltutional both
because il does not fall Within the scope
of the authority given to Congress 10
regulate interstate commerce and at the
same time 1t undertakes to regulate
commerce within the state
In the Howard case the suit was for
$4,000 damages occasioned by the acci-
dental killing OF the plaintiffs husband
while serving as n fireman on the Tlli-
nols Central railroad near Memphis
The case was tried before Judge Nc
Call In the United States circuit court
Northern district of Tenn essee. who
also held the law to be invalid upon the
TWO grounds that liza ability for accident
cannot be regulated under the COM
rnerce clause of the Constitution. and
that even II IL could be- the authority
would not extend 70 the regulation of
Interstate commerce which he asserted
was undertaken by the law.
The government was not at first a
party 10 either OF the suits. but since
the law has been attacked, ii has in
tervened and the department of Justice
VIII be represented in the argument
The attorney-generaI has filed an ex-
haustive brief in the case in which
he strenuonsly uphOlds the law. Upon
Che poinr as to whether Congress has
the power to regulate the in strurn emit
ality of Interstate commerce, the at
torney-general contends that such reg
rlation IS in line with the regulation
OF Interstate commerce itself. and as
serts that the courts have frequently
recognized the power to regulate the
liability of common carriers, at is
fifIcult,N he proceeds, ''to see WHY ~
Congress may regulate the liability OF
common carriers and 9th erss engaged
in interstate commerce to strangers, it
may not regulate their liability 10 their
employees, the protection of interstate
commerce being as much involved in
the one case as in the other. l..
1t would be strange, indeed, if it
should be held that Congress can pro-
tect everything and everybody con-
nected with Interstate comm erce-th e
carrier the passenger, the stranger
the merchandising could not pro-
tect the person employed to carry 1t
on, those that bear the heat and bur
den OF the day. From the foundation
OF the government the power of Con-
gress to regulate interstate and for
egn comm cree has been construed TO
extend TO the regulation OF the instru-
mentalisies by which such comm cree
Is conducted and the regulation OF
such instrnmentalitie to include com
troll over the persons operating the
same"
With reference to the applicability
of the law to railroad EN- ployes whose
duties are confined to one state. he
says;
''It Is the carrier and not its en-
ployes that the act seeks TO regulate
and the carrier is subject to such reg
ulations because it is engaged in in.
teTstate commerce. 1t is submitted
that Congress can make a common
carrier engaged In Interstate com.
nnerce liable to any one for its negli-
sence who Is affected by 1t. ana II
they can do thai. necessarily Ii can
make such carrier liable to all OF Its
emplOVas"