The Birmingham age-herald., 1910-10-26
ROOSEVELT ISSUES
 AN OPEN LETTER
Answer Is Made to Candidate
 in Connecticut
LIBERTY OF LABORER
Question of Compensation to Labor ing Man for Injury Is Discussed and Roosevelt Takes Issue
 in the Matter

Syracuse, N. Y., October 25.--Theo- dore Roosevelt issued an open letter
 today to simon Baldwin, former chief
 justice of Connecticut and democratic
 candidate for governor of that state, in reply to MT. Baldwins demand for
 retraction of statements made regard ing him by Colonel Roosevelt in his | speech at Concord, N. H., on Satur- day.
 | Colonel Roosevelt in that speech said
 that Baldwin stood in retrogressive at titude toward working ngmen's compensa- ton laws. Justice Baldwin in his let | ter said he never had held the view | attributed to him.
 l Colonel Roosevelt in his letter re- peats what he said in the speech com plained of by Judge Baldwin to the eff feet that 1t was his opinion that it | was not competent for a working man who may be driven by dire need to accept any employment and bind him self not to be compensated if his health | Is damaged or if he loses life or limb in that occupation. The letter con | tinues:
 You say In your letter as print
 ed that the view of which speak would be opposed to the settled principles of law and no competent lawyer could or would take 1t and that to ascribe such a position 10 you Is calculated to affect your standing as lawyer. If you will turn to MT. Alger's | little volume called Moral Overstrain' and read the chapter in which he deals with the decisions of the courts up- ln11 1f,er hi InI re ha | labo oring man to make a contract to his disadvantage you will see that many | judges have taken the position to which I object. These judges have no doubt were honorable and conscientious | men of high standing as lawyers, but l emphatically hold that the position | they took was and Is retrogressive and not progressive.
 T have not with me the printed | transcript of one of your opinions which was handed to me prior to my mak- Ing the speech in question but If the | newspaper account of your letter is correct you hold therein that railroad employees who accept benefits from the
 accident insurance which you say the
 railroad often styles a erlief department, | cannot look to the company in case of accidents.
 If you are correctly reported by the press in this matter I hold that this position is retrogressive and not pro- gressive. I hold that the state has ab- solutely the right to enact laws re- fusing to permit and that existing laws should, in accordance with the opinion
 of very many progressive judges, be
 construed as not permitting any man.
 directly and indirectly, by any action
 of his own, to estop himself from his right to have a railroad or any other
 corporation forced to compensate him for any injuries done to him in the performance of his duties.
 If your letter is correctly quoted in the press in this matter you hold that the acceptance of a very small benefit from the accident insurance
 company by railroad employe would estop him from recognizing the sub stantlal amount which he otherwise
 would be entitled to recover for any injury received. I hold that such q
 view is most emphatically not progress ive'