Albuquerque citizen. [volume] (Albuquerque, N.M.) 1907-1909, 1909-05-03
Files Brief in Support of the
Employers Liability
Act Recently
Passed.
RAILROAD ATTACKS
VALIDITY OF LAW
Attorney General Takes Interest
in Suit Brought by Rail
road Man and Which
VIII Test The New
Law.

Washington, May 3.-The govern
ment today filed in the supreme court
Of errors. New London county, second
judicial district OF Connecticut, its
brief in the case of Edgar G.. Monden,
plaintiff. against the New York. New
Haven and Hartford Railroad com
pany. The case was brought under
the employers liability act of April
%. 1905 and the government, by per-
mission of the court, is allowed to in
tervene and file orief in support of
the constitutiOnality of the act which
has been challenged by the defendant
company.
Attorney General Wickersham and
Wade H Ellis his assistant. who pre-
pared the brief. have taken a strong
personal interest in this case because
of it's great Importance and at the
outset state that the government has
no interest in another question in
volved than to defend the validity of
wholesale and important act of
Congress passed for the protection of
a vast number of citizens and for the
safety of interstate commerce. In the
case involving the constitutionality of
the former employers liability act
(207 u. ). 463.) The brief says the
department of justice was 81, en- per-
mission in the original and }ppelate
courts to file briefs and TO be heard
In oral argument
Congress, in adherence to the linn
itations established by the supreme
court in the former case il continues,
passed the act which is now the sub
ject of this controversy and the attor-
ney general is impelled by the same
sense of duty to the public at large
to defend the new law as that which
actuated him in seeking to uphold the
old. Counsel for the government are
able. earnestly to submit that the OBJ
iections urged successfully against
the employers liable law now before
this court is clearly within the con-
stitutional power of Congress.
Attention is directed to President
Roosevelts message to Congress May
%, 1908, recommending the imme-
diate enactment of an employers liza
bility act drawn to conform to the
then recent decision of the supreme
court and eliminating constitutional
defects found to exist in the former
act. This Congress, exercising its
best judgment, proceeded to do.
The Senate committee, il is pointed
out having the matter in charge af-
ter pointing out the defects in the for
mer law states that the proposed
measure avoids these criticisms by
confining the application of it's pro-
visions to the employees of common
carriers which are within the regula-
tive power of Congress over com
merce while employed by such car
rier in such commerce. In the brief,
ii is contended that the questions
raised in this case are settled by the
decision of the supreme court in the
former liability cases and that the
statute is constitutional though broad
enough to include an action for an
injury sustained by a servant of a
railroad engaged in Interstate COM
merce caused by the negligence of an
employe not engaged in interstate
commerce
I'm passing this statute" the brief
argues, Congress was legislating sole
ly with respect to the relation OF in
terstate railroads and their employees
while engaged in interstate COM
merce. 1t is the object of the act to
protect an employe engaged in inter-
Stdlt commerce from INJURY as the re-
suit OF any negligence of the inter-
state carrier or of any of it's instru-
Amentalities. While a servant of an in
terstate road is about his masters
business and engaged in interstate
commerce ne Is entitled and is within
the protection of the Congressional
power.
The interstate business of railroads
is so mingled with their state business
that no segregation can be recognized
in regulating the relation between in |
terstate carriers and their interstate
servants"
The brief concludes as follows:
This is wise, progressive and |
humane statute. 1t seeks, within ap-
proved and conservative lines to ac-
complish an object whose worth and !
Justice all men have long admitted |
that many other civilized nations have |
long ago attained. Legislation that is
10 protect the railroad employees does !
not benefit a class alone. The safety /
Of an Interstate carriers servants |
means the safety OF interstate com
merce itself.
with respect TO this act not only !
Its benefcient purposes but the care |
with which il was framed IN meet 1