Tazewell Republican. [volume] (Tazewell, Va.) 1892-1919, 1908-02-06
PRESIDENT URGES
LAW ENFORCEMENT
Text Of Strong, Special Message to
Congress, in Which Mr.. Roosevelt
Condemns UllaVfulleSS and De-
mandS Rigid Obedience to Statutes.
Washington, Jan. 81.

washington, JAM 81.
The Presidents message to Congress
read as follows:-
To the Senate and House of Repre-
sentatives:-
The recent decision of the Supreme
Court in regard the employers liability
act, the experience of the Interstate
Commerce Commission and of the De-
partment of Justice in enforcing the in
terstate 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-
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
employers liability law to be unconsti-
tutional because its terms apply to
commerce as well as to employees en-
gagged in interstate commerce. By a
substantial majority the Court holds
that the Congress has power to deal
with the question in so far as interstate
commerce is concerned.
NEW EMPLOYERS LIABILITY BILL.
AS regards the employers liability
law, advocate its reenactment, limit
fng its scope so that it shall apply only
to the class of cases as to which the
court says it can constitutionally apply,
but strengthening its provisions within
this scope. Interstate employment be-
ing thus covered by an adequate nation
al law, the field of intrastate employ
ment will be left to the action of the
several States. With this clear defini-
ton of responsibility the States will un-
doubtedly give to the performance OF
their duty within their field the consid-
Grafton the Importance of the subject
demands.
also urgently advise that a compre.
hensive act be passed providing fol
compensation by the Government to al
employees injured in the government
service. Under the present law an in
5ured workman in the employment oi
the Government has no remedy, and the
entire burden of the accident falls OF
the helpless man, his wife, and his
young children. This is an outrage. Il
is a matter of humiliation to the Natior
that there should not be on our statute
books provision to meet and partially tC
atone for cruel misfortune when i
comes upon a man through no fault o.
his own while faithfully serving tn,
public.
In no other prominent industrial coun
try in the world could such gross injus
tice occur; for almost all civilized ma
tions have enacted legislation embody
ing the complete recognition of tn,
principle which places the entire trad
risk for industrial accidents Gncluding
of course, accidents due to wilful mis-
conduct by the employee) on the indus
try as represented by the employer
which in this case is the Government
In all these countries the principle ap
plies to the Government just as much a
to the private employer.
RESPONSIBILITY ON THE GOVERNMENT
Under no circumstances should tn
injured employee or his surviving de
pendents be required to bring sui
against the Government, nor shoul
there be the requirement that in orde
to insure recovery negligence in som
form on the part of the Government
should be shown. Our proposition is no
to confer right of action upon tn
Government employee, but to secur