The L'Anse sentinel., 1908-02-08
PRESIDENT URGES
new LEGISLATION
IN HOT MESSAGE
BIG CORPORATIONS SCORED BE-
CAUSE OF ATTITUDE TO-
WARD GOVERNMENT.
EMPLOYERS LIABILITY LAW

CHIEF Executive Declares ACT Neeos
Immediate Revision-Rishting
OF Injunction Abuses Is
Urged.
To the Senate and House OF Represen-
tatives: The recent decision of the SUI
preme court In regard to the employers
liability act, the experience of the Inter-
state Commerce Commission and of the
department OF justice In enforcing the In
terstate commerce and antitrust laws.
and the gravely significant attitude
toward the law and It's administration
great corporations, render 1t desirable
that there should be additional legisla-
tion as regards certain of the relations
between labor and capital, and between
the great corporations and the public.
The supreme court has decided the en-
ployers liability law to be unconstitu-
tional because its terms apply to en-
ployes engaged wholly in intrastate com
merce as well as to employees engaged In
Interstate commerce. BY substantial
majority the court holds that the con-
ton In so far as Interstate commerce
Is concerned.
AS regards the employers liability law.
j advocate It's Immediate reenactment,
limiting its scope so that II shall apply
only to the class of cases as to which the
court says II can constitutionally apply.
this scope. Interstate employment being
thus covered by an adequate national
law. the field OF intrastate employment
viii be left to the action OF the several
states. With this clear definition of
responsibility the states will undoubtedly
give to the performance Of their duty
within their field the consideration the
Importance OF the subject demands.
Compensation for Employees
Hurt In Government Service
I also very urgently advise that a COM
prehensive act be passed providing for
compensation by the government to all
employees injured In the government SER
vice: Under the present law an injured
workman In the employment of the gov
ernment has no remedy, and the entire
burden of the accident falls on the help
less man, his wife. and his young chill
dren, This is an outrage. 1t Is a matter
OF humiliation to the nation that there
should not be on our statute books n pro-
vision to meet and partially to atone for
cruel misfortune hso when when i comes upon upon
faithfully serving the public. In no 9TH
er prominent Industrial country In the
world could such gross injustice occur;
FOR almost all civilized nations have en-
acted legislation embodylng the complete
recognition of the principle which places
the entire trade risk for Industrial acci-
dents Excluding, of course. accidents
due to willful misconduct by the en-
ploye), on the industry as represented
by the employer, which in this case is
the government. In all these countries
the principle applies to the government
Just as much as to the private employer.
Under no circumstances should the In
tured employe or his surviving depend
ents be required to bring suit against the
government. nor should there be the re-
qu'rement that In order to insure re-
part of the government should be shown.
Our proposition Is not to confer right
OF action upon the government employe.
but TO secure him suitable provision
against injuries received in the course
OF his employment. The burden of the
trade risk should be placed upon the
is entitled to his wages, so he should be
entitled to indemnity. for the injuries sus-
tained In the natural course of his labor.
The rates OF compensation and the regu-
1ations for Its payment should be speci-
-ied In the law, and the machinery for
determining the amount TO be paid should
In each case be provided In such manner
that the employe Is properly represented
without expense to him.. In other words.
the compensation should be paid auto
law in the first instance should be vested
I'm the department OF commerce and labor.
The law should apply to all laborers. me-
the government of the United States,
including those In the service of the
Panama canal commission and Of the in
. The same broad principle which
sSS"id SiG Intimately be "' made ,sPpii.
enact laws to this effect. Where the
states alone have the power they should
shst AM .ne astS lsw Soes not
really mean mulcting employers In dam
ages. II merely throws upon the en-
against injuries which are sure to occur.
1t requires him either to bear or to dis
tribute through insurance the loss which
but but which. II undistributed. bears with
frightful hardship upon the unfortunate
victim Of accident In theory. II wages
thew thew Would Would always include an allowance
as against the risk OF injury. just as
certainly as the rate OF interest for mon
yanst nsuass sss a nsk o oss 1r theory
employees were all experienced business
men. thcy would employ that part OF
tse rss Of injury to secure accident
insurance. But as matter OF fact, 4
Is not practical to expect that this Will
ss dome by se nSS Sody law OF nEas
certain that II will be done, in effect,
by the employer. and 1t will ultimately
impose no real additional burden upon
There is n special bill to which call
your attention. Secretary Taft has ur-
gently recommended the Immediate pas
sage OF law providing for compensation
20 employees of the government injured
In the work OF the 1sthmian canal. and
that 100000 be appropriated Tor this pur-
pose each year. I earnestly hope this Will
be done; and that n special bill be passed
covering the case of Yardmaster Banton.
who was injured nearly two years ago
while doing his duty He is now help
less to support his wife and his three
little boys.
Action Urged to Right
Abuses Of the Injunction
I again call your attention to the need
of some action In connection with the
abuse OF injunctions in labor cases. As
regards the rights and wrongs OF labor
and capital, from blackIsting to boycott
ting, the whole subject IL covered in ad-
mirable fashion by the report OF the
Anthracite Coal Strike commission,
which report should serve as a chart for
the guidance of both legislative and exec
utivs officers. As regards injunctions
can dn little but repeat what have said
in my last message to the congress-. Even
though II were possible, ! should con-
slider II most .unwise TO abolish the use
OF the process OF injunction. II is neces-
sary In order that the courts may main
tain their own dignity and In order that
they may in effective manner check
disorder and violence. The Judge who
uses II cautiously and conservatively, but
who, whom the need arises. uses II fear
leesiy, confers the greatest service upon
our people, and his preeminent useful
ness a. 4 public servant should be hearth
" recognised. But there 10 no question