The Washington times., 1908-01-31


day TO Congress was:
To the Senate and House of Repre-
sentatives:
The recent decision of the Supreme
Court in regard TO the employers liza
bility act, the experience Of the Inter
state Commerce Commission and Of the
Department Of Justice il enforcing the
Interstate commerce and antitrust laws
and the gravelY significant attitude
toward the law and its administration
recently adopted by certain heads OF
great corporations, render it desirable
that there should be additional legisla-
ZION as regards certain Of the relations
between labor and capital, and between
the great corporations and the public.
The Supreme Court has decided the
employers liability law to be uncor-
stitUtlonaI because its terms apply 10
employees engaged wholly in intrastate
commerce as well as To employees en-
Eaged in interstate commerce. BY
substantial majority the court holds
that the Congress has power to deal
with the question in so far as inter
state commerce is concerned.
As regards the employers liability law
/ advocate its immediate reenactment'
limiting its scope so that 1t shall az
ply only 20 the class of cases as 10
which the court says fl can cOnsutu-
tionaIIy apply, but strengthening its pro-
visions within this scope. Interstate en-
ployrnent being thus covered by an ade-
quate national law, the field of inua-
state employment viii be left TO the
action of the several States With this
clear definition OF responsibility the
States will undoubtedly give TO tie
performance Of their duty within their
Held the consideration the Importance
Of the subject demands.
also very urgently advise that a
comprehensive act be passed pro-
vidlng for compensation by the
Government to all employees injured
I'm the Government service. Under
the present law al injured work
man in the emplO! ment OF the Gov
eminent has no remedy, and the
entire burden of the accident falls
on the helpless man, his vile, and
his young children. This is an out
rage.
1t is a matter of humiliation to
the nation that there should not be
on our statute books provision TO
meet and partially to atone for
cruel misfortune when it comes
upon q man through no fault OF
his own while faithfully serving the
public.
mo other prominent industrial coun-
try in The world could such gross IN
justice occur; for almost an clElIlZed
nations have enacted legislation en-
DOdying the complete recognition OF the
principle which places the entire trade
risk for Industrial accidents teXcluding
of course, accidents due to willtul mis-
conduct by the employee on the industry
as represented by the employer, which
in this case is the Government In All
these countries the principle applies 10
the Government just as much al 10 the
private employer. Under no Clrcuin-
stances should the injured empioye or
bis surviving dependents be required 10
bring suit against the Government, nor
should there be the requirement that III
order TO insure recovery negligence IN
some form on the part OF the Govern
menJ should be shown.
Our proposition is not 10 confer a
right of action upon the Government
cmploye, but TO secure him suitable
provision against injuries received In
the course of his employment The
burden Of the trade risk should be
as the nottingham Is emitted 10 MS
wages. 50 he should be entitled to IN
,lemuity fer the injuries sustained IN
the natural course OF his labor
The rates Of compensation and the reg
uIatsons for its payment should be spec
fled i'm 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 hlnl, In
other words the compensation slsOuld
be paid automatically, while the applca-
ton OF the law in the first instance
should be vested i'm the Department OF
Commerce and Labor. the law should
apply TO all labOTeTs. mechanics, and
other civilian employees of the Govern
ment OF the United States, including
those in the service Of the Panama Ca
nal Commission and Of the insulaT
governments
Apply to Private Employers, Too.
The same broad principle which should
apply to the Government should Ul-
timately be made applicable to all pri-
vate employers. Where the nation has
The power 1t should enact laws 10 this
effect. Where the States alone have the
power they should enact the laws. II
is TO be observed that an employers
liability law does not really mean mulct-
ing employers in damages. II merely
throws upon the employer the burden
of accident insurance against injuries
which are sure 10 occur. II requires
him either to bear OF to distribute
through insurance the loss which car
readily be borne when distributed, bu
which, if uudisTibuted. bears with
frightful hardship upon the unfortunate
victim Of accident.
In theory. II wages were always freely
and fairly adjusted. they would always
include an allowance as against the rlsH
Of injury just as certainly as the rate
Of interest for money includes an al
loWanCe for insurance against the risl
OF loss. IN theory, II employees were
all experienced business men, they
would employ that part of their wage:
which is received because OF tie risk oil
injury to secure accident insurance. Blu
as q matter Of fact. IL is not practical
TO expect that this viii be done by
the great body Of employees An EN-
ployer's liability law makes IL certain
that il viii be done. I'm effect. BY tn,
employer, and IL viii ultimately impose
no real additional burden upon him.
There is a special bill to which I cal
your attention. Secretary Taft ha.
urgently recommended the immediate
passage Of a law providing for com
Pensation to employees of the Gov
eminent injured IN the work of tn,
Isthmian Canal and that $4,000 be ap-