The labor argus. [volume] (Charleston, W. Va.) 1906-1915, 1909-10-21

VI ieiio" servant of the employer shall
not De defense where the in iury was
caused or contributed 10 by any of the
ioiio"lng causes, namely: any defects in
the works, plans, machinery or appliances
OF which the employer could have had
knowledge by the exercise of ordinary
care; the negligence of any person en-
gagged as superintendent, manager fore.
man or any person In charge of the works.
fiah'' machinery or appliances; the negli-
sence of any person in charge of or di.
recting the particular works in which the
employee was engaged at the time of
the injury or death; the negligence of
any person to whose orders the emplovee
was bound to conform and did conform
and by reason of his having conformed
thereto. the injury or death resulted:
the acts of any fellow servant done in
obedience to the rules, instruction or
orders given him by the employer or anv
other person who has authority to direct
the doing of said act.
'Sec. 2. The manager, supcrintend.
ent, foreman or other person in charge
or control of the works or any port of
the works, shall, under this act, be held
as an agent of the employer in all suits
for damages for death or injury suffered
by employee.
Sec. B. All acts or parts of acts
inconsistent herewith be and the same are
hereby repealed
This bill was passed by the House of
Delegates after hard and bitter fight.
the following members voting against it:
Ashbury and Ball (of Wayne), Avis
(of Logan), Coleord (of Kanawha)
Cornell (of Calhoun, Daniels and Sci
bert (of Berkeley, Dennis (of Green
brier), Devol and Kirk (of woody, Finley
COT Hampshire), Flesher (of Ritchie)
Gilkeson (of Hampshire), Keister (of
Pendelton,, Lilly (of Mercer), Matheny
(of Ralegh), Parsons (of Mason), Tea
garden (of WctzcD, Vossler (of Grant,
and Williams (of Pocahontas), making n
total of 26 as against 43 members voting
for the bill, there were II absentees when
the vote was taken. The same bill was
introduced in the Senate at the same
time as it was in the House and referred
to the Committee on Labor, which COM
mittce reported it back to the Senate
with the recommendation that it do pass
After many trials by Senator Littlepace
to call same up out of it's order he was
successful in having it made a special
order at which time it came up for first
reading and was about to be ordered to
second reading when Senator JOHNSON
(of Fayettc), moved that it be referred
to the Judiciary Committee which motion
prevailed by the following vote to xefer:
Bailey (of Grafton), Baker (of Bram-
welD, Blue (of Philipp), Coffman (of
Clarksburg), Craig (of st. Marys),
Fisher (of Sutton), Gartlan (of Parkcrs-
burg), Hatfield (of Eckman), JOHNSON
(of Hill Top), Kidd (of Glenvillc). Mer-
edith (of Fairmont), Smith (of Bccklcy)
Sutherland (Elkins). and White (of Mate
wan). Those voting against referring
were Foreman (of Petersburg), Carroll.
(of Hamlin), England (of Logan), Little
page (of Charleston), Miller (of Alder
sony, Shinn (of Fairplain), Smith (of
IIuntington), and Zilliken( of Wells
burg). The vote stood II to s in favor of
referring, there being s senators absent
and not voting The purpose of referring
this bill to the Judiciary Committee was
to kill it. Your President waited upon
the Chairman of the Committee Senator
Meredith (of Fairmont) and asked to be
heard on the bill. he assured your Prcsi-
dent that the bill would be reported back
to the Senate before adjournment. and if
the Senate wished to kill the bill they
would have to so in the Senate Chamber
and not put the odium upon his com
mittec of killing it, but your President
remained in attendance of the session
until it closed but the committee never
reported the bill to the Senate The
House bill after having passed that body
was sent to the Senate for concurrence
and placed on the calendar. realizing full
well that it would never be reached if left
to follow its course. we made an effort
through Senator Littlepage to have it
called up out of its order. but after try
ing for three days to gain recognition
from the President of the Senate we had
to bow in submission and accept the de-
feat of the bill from capitalistic Senate
The bill known as the Guard Bill
was introduced in the Senate
and was referred to the Committee on
Labor, which Committee after hearing
your representative reported it back with
the recommendation that it do pass. it
was placed the calendar. but never
reached first reading, the same applies to
the mis- representation bill