The Topeka state journal. [volume] (Topeka, Kansas) 1892-1980, 1909-05-03
The Government Defends the
Employers Liability Law
In the Case of Mondon Against
the New Haven Road.
PREVIOUS OBJECTIONS
1t Is COntended, Have Been
Completely Eliminated.
The EecisiOn Means Much to the
Entire Country.

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.. Mondon,
plaintiff against the New York, New
Haven & Hartford Railroad company.
The case was brought under the me-
ployers liability act of April 22, 1908
and the government by permission of
the court is allowed to intervene and
file brief in support of the con-
stitutionality 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 its great Importance and at the
outset state that the government has
no interest in any other question in
volved than to defend the validity of
a wholesome and important act of con-
greSS passed for the protection of a
vast number of citizens and for the
safety of interstate commerce. In
the case involving the constitutional
ity of the former employers liability
act (207 L. S. 463) the brief says the
department of justice was given per-
mission in the original and appellate
courts to file briefs and to be heard in
oral argument.
Congress. in adherence to the
limitation established by the supreme
court in the former case it con-
tinues. passed the act which is now
the subject of this controversy and the
attorney 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 up
hold the old.
Objection Eliminated
Counsel for the government are able
earnestly to submit that the, objections
urged successfully against the validity
of the prior act have been eliminated
from the new statute and the en-
ployers' liability law now before this
court is clearly within the con
stitutional power of congress.
Attention is directed to President
Roosevelt's message to congress May
25. 1908, recommending the i'm
mediate enactment of an employers
liability act drawn to conform to the
then recent decision of the supreme
court and eliminating the constitu-
tionaI defects found to exist in the
former act. This, congress exercising g
its best judgme ent, proceeded to do.
The senate committee it is pointed out
having the matter in charge, after
pointing out the defects in the for
mer law stated that the proposed
measure avoids these criticisms by
combining the application OF its pro-
visions to the employees of common
carriers which are within the regula-
tive power of congress over commerce
while employed by such carrier in
such commerce.
In the brief. it is contended that the
questions raised in this case are set
tied by the decision of the supreme
court in the former liability cases and
that the statute is constitutional
though broad enough to include an ac-
ton for any injury sustained by a ser
want of a railroad engaged in inter-
state commerce, caused by the negli-
gence of an employe not engaged in
interstate commerce.
'In passing this statute" the brief