The Richmond palladium and sun-telegram. [volume] (Richmond, Ind.) 1907-1939, 1910-12-31
HELP FOR lUILERS
Minnesota Likely to Pass EN-.
pIoyers' Liability Law.
IN HANDS OF COMMISSION.
constitusional:ty Of Such Legislation
Practically Settled By Decisions Of
New York and Fedsra! Ceurts-View
Of Judge Brown.

New York and Federal ceurts-view
Of Judge Brown.
When the subject OF a workingmen's
,ompens alton act was before the last
legislature it was the prevailing oDiE
ion-any antagonistic view was SO
small as to be neglisibIe-that hhe FRO
posed enactment should provide for the
compensation of every injury sustain
ed by an employee. the question OF
blame or fault on either side 10 be
eliminated. 1t was simply q matter of
providing suitable compensation for
injury where there was no fault on the
wiIlful misconduct on the part OF the
employee in occupations where danger
is inherent from the use Of power and
machinery. The difficulty Of preparing
anything like n scale and ut the same
time Of securing uniformity that
would not discriminate against en-
ployers in Minnesota in competition
with other states led to the reference
Of the entire subject to commission
which is expected to report to the next
legislature.
The possible unconstitutionality Of
an act Of this character was limited at
rather than proclaimed. The common
law provides no available remedy for
injuries occasioned by Industrial acct
dents not attributable to the negligence
Of the employer. and it was questioned
hot ho l0t v,vo m tho nnW
under our system Of constitutional gov
eminent. to write this English provi-
sion into Il statute. This point has arts
en- in n case in New York state. where
such law is in force. and the supreme
court Of that state has sustained its
constitutionality. 1t was set up by the
railway defendant that not only had
the legislature exceeded its powers in
the act. but that its terms deprived
the railway company OF its liberty and
property without due process Of law
and denied it the equal protection OF
the law in contravention Of the four
teenth amendment to the constitution.
Upon all questions involved the court
ruled against the railway and sus-
tanned the law. 1t holds the legisla
ture may amend or repeal the COM
mou law and may provide remedies
where relief under the common law is
impossible. 1t says the cases relied
upon by the railway merely point out
the shifting character Of the border
line between the statutes which are
upheld by the court as being legiti-
mate exercise Of the legislative power
to pass all manner Of necessary aud
wholesome acts for the protection and
we'll being Of the public. although such
acts interfere with personal liberty
| and the right TO do as one will with
his own. and the statutes which are
held by the courts to be unwarranta-
BILE interference.
Emphasis is laid upon this finding OF
Justice Brown Of the federal supreme
court: While the cardinal principles
Of justice are immutabNe. the methods
by which justice is administered arc
subject to constant fuctuation. and
the constitution OF the United States.
which is necessarily and to L large ex-
tent infexible and exceedingly difficult
OF amendment. should not be So con-
strued Us to deprive the states OF the
power to so amend their laws as to
make them conform to the wishes of
the citizens as they may deem best fer
the public welfare without bringing
them into conflict with the supreme
law Of the land"
There will be no opportunity for TIE
final adjudication of this case before
the Minnesota legislature reaches con
sidera ton of the subject. The New
York statute has been used as n model
for parallel laws by other states. and
the decision Of the supreme court Of
New York will be taken as strength
ening the principle upon which IL is
based.-St Paul Dispatch.