The Barre daily times. (Barre, Vt.) 1897-1959, 1909-01-06
DEMAND CLOSE
OF SESSION
Continued from first page.

fered an amendment which cut out tho
part making employers liable for the
negligence of one employee to another
and Also made the bill applicable e
all employers, corporations Or indivld-
uals.
A yea and nay vote was called fol-
on the question Of the amendment and
after Speaker Cheney had ordered the
clerk to verify his vote and two OF
three asked leave 10 change their votes
it was found that the amendment had
passed 102 to t0i. The annomcemet
Of the result caused buzz ad then .
yea and nay vote was called for BY
Mfr. Williams on the question OF the
third reading The House then refus.
ed the third reading Of the bill IN y
doctored form applying to all compan-
les by a vote Of f24 10 So.
Discussion of Employers Liability.
The bin came up the first thing Of
ter dinner and the amendment of Mr.,
Balch of Irasburgh came shortly. Mr..
Balch believed Chat bill that was
fair to one company should apply to
all companies whether corporations or
not Mr. Williams Of Newport favor
ed the bill urging its passage on ac-
count OF the promises made in the con
vention of the dominant party AMI on
the merits OF the bill. He explained
that our present law on the sublecs 81
negligence was taken from the old Eng
ligh law which had been changed ma
terially in that country while it had
remained the same in Vermont. The
measure was drawn along lines in op.
Grafton in many other statas and coun-
tries.
Mr.. Boyce OF Proctor believed the
measure 10 be class legislation and said
that, according to statistics, IL benefit
ed but about II per cent OF the work.
iugmen Of tho state. simply those EN-.
ployed by corporations He related ex-
ample TO illustrate his belief in the in
Justice OF the measure and said that il
4 We n wide opening for the unscnpul-
ous employee TO take advantage of his
employer
Mr.. Barber of Brattleboro explained
the possibilities OF the law now in
force and what the new one would
mean. He said at the present time If
an employe OF corporation was hurt
and il could be shown that there was
the slightest Bit 81 negligence on his
part he could not hope to recover no
iaatter how great was the negligence on
the part Of the corporation, He didn't
think the present law was Just.
MIR. Martin of Brookline said he did
not believe d law should be passed for
the corporations that The members
would not stand under as individuals
MFR Jones Of Sudbury suggested that
the attitude Of small companies and In
dlyiduals toward their employees was
entirely different than that OF c0rpor
ations which could not keep track Of
employees and did not apparently show
the same interest In their welfare
1t was then that Mr., Hitchcock made
his suggestions formulated III an amend
nent. When ii came TO the last three
names on the roll the vote stood 100
10 100. The last three voted against
measure. TheH the clerk for the
purpose Of verifcation read the names
OF the members. Mr. Ballou Of Chester
and Mr.. TaIeot Of Williston asked that
they be recorded az voting eyes.' This
changed the result passing the amend
ment BY majority
With very little more discussion the
House proceeded to the vote on the