Middlebury register. (Middlebury, Vt.) 1886-1937, 1908-10-23
AGAINST CORPORATIONS.
Judge Taft's Decision In the Nara
more Personal Injury Case.

more Personal Injury Case.
| If men who labor come to know Mr..
| Taft and study what he has done for
their interests they will wonder how
there could he any sincerity in the at
tempt by the Democratic party to pref
udice labor against him.
Take the Narramore personal injury
case In Ohio which when considered
should forever set at rest all this man
ufactured talk for political effect
charging Mr. Taft with being the ia
ther of government by injunction. -
Judge Taft's decision in the Nara
more case when he was on the bench
has been of tremendous benefit to en-
ployee as against employer in Ohio in
personal injury cases.
The facts of the Narramore case are
these: Early in 1899 Narramore was a
brakeman on the Big Four road. one
| day while at work his foot caught in
an unlocked frog. \ train came along,
and he was manned for life. The rail
road refused TO do anything for him
and his wife and children dependent
upon him for support. Narramore
sought the aid of the courts.
Ohio law held that the frog Shoud
not have been left open and courts
generally held that an employee,
knowing that his employer was in the
habit of disobeying Il law intended for
the employees protection. by continu-
| ing at work assumed the risks of the
employment The judge before whom
the case was tried promptly dismissed
the complaint.
On appeal the case reached the Unit
ed States court of appeals and came
before Judge Taft. Judson Harmon
argued very masterfully for the rail
road, but the Republican candidate for
| president went squarely against Ohio
court precedents and of courts in many
other parts of the country in rendering
a decision in favor of Narramore In
his decision Judge Taft said:
THE intention of the Ohio legisla-
ture was to protect the employees of
railways from injury from frequent
source of danger by compelling the
railway company to adopt well
known safety device. And. although
an employee implicitly valves il com
pliance with The statute and agrees
to assume the risk from unlocked
frogs and switches by continuing in
the service without complaint. this
court will not recognize or enforce
such agreement The imposition of "A
penalty for the violation of statute
does not exclude other means of en-
fOrcement, and to permit he company
to avail itself of such an assumption
of risk by its employees is IN effect to
enable it to nullify penal statute
and is against public policy"
Judge Taft's decision still stands rs
the law in federal courts When the
common pleas court in Cleveland took
an opposite stand in 1903 the Ohio
Legislature in the spring Of 1904 pass
ed law which made Judge Taft's
decision one of the laws OF Ohio.
Who shall estimate the service that
Judge Taft performed for all who la
Dor IN dangerous employment by his
decision in the Narramore case. by
which he made the law on the side Of
those who work?
The decision In the Narramore case
was against gigantic corporate inter
estS and in the face of Ohio supreme
court decisions. but Judge Taft found
a way to Justice through the meshes
of the law skillfully drawn TO do in
calculable service for all time to those
| who labor His record on the bench
Is not one requiring explanation but
understanding, to see its convincing
business ana fairness. In all this
talk for the purpose of creating mis-
guided prejudice there is not a Demo
crat I'm the land who has said that
any OF his decisions were wrong
In all his career Judge Taft by deeds
mas shown the broadcast sympathy for
all who labor. No man will go fur
ther than he in efforts in their behalf,
but he is not INDUCING in cheap talk
OF the Democratic type of hoodwink-
ing by mere promises and misrepre-
10 a..