Daily Kennebec journal. [microfilm reel] (Augusta, Me.) 1870-1975, 1910-10-29
Tells Republicans Of New York What,
In Fidelity to Their Party, They
Should D0--CoI. Roosevelt Gives
Another Dose to Baldwin.
ROOSEVELT TO BALDWIN.

|
Rochester. n. Y, Oct. 2S.-Theodore
Roosevelt this evening gave the copy
of another letter which he has written
to Judge Simon +. Baldwin. Demo-
cratic nominee for governor Of Con.
necticut, in which he discusses further
the attitude of Judge Baldwin regard
ing labor legislation, which Col. ROose-
welt criticized in his speech at Con-
| cord. n. Fl. last week as "Retrogres
Sive."
The first letter of Col. Roosevelt to
the judge was based on the press re-
ports of the letter from Judge Bald
win 70 nim. When the Baldwin let
ter reached Mr.. Roosevelt he found
that in some respect his (Col. ROOse
velt'sl information had not been en-
tirely accurate. Meanwhile he had
obtained fuller information from Other
sources. and on this he wrote the let
ter OF today. which follows:
Hon. Simon f. Baldwin. A Wall
ST., New Haven, Corn.
Dear Sir:
81 have lust now received your let
ter Of oct. oath. Ny former lette,
was based on statements in the pub
lie press as now appears not fully
correct rurporting to be your letter
published by you.
AT the sarle time I have received a
copy of You" opinion as chief justice
in the case of William H. HoXie. ver-
sus The New York. New Haven AMI
Hartford Railway Co.. this being one
of the documents | had in mind when
] spoke in New Hampshire as under
the conditions stated by me in the
letter which you have already re-
ceived.
This WAS 81 case.in which William
Fl. Hoxie, a train hand. an employee of
the New York, New Haven & Hart
ford Railway Co. was injured while
coupling cars, in train running from
Norwich. Conn. to Worcester. Mass.
The injured man sued the railroad
You presided in the appellate court and
wrote its opinion. declaring the work
mems federal compensation act, under
which Hoxie sued. to be unconstitu-
tional so that he was denied the right
to be compensated for his injuries.
section of the act provided:
Not any contract, rule, regulation
or device whatsoever the purpose or
intent of which shall be TO enable
any common carrier to exempt it.
self from any liability created by this
act. shall to that extent be void
The purpose of this provision was
as matter of public policy to protect
Workingmen from being coerced into
making improvident and unfair con-
tracts or STIMULATING to accept nominal
amounts for disahlement and multi
alton as the price of obtaining en-
plOTment. In urging such legislation
| IN a message TO the Goth Congress
in December, 1907, placed it upon
the ground Of justice to the workmen
If his country. | said in part: The
practice of putting the entire bur-
dent OF loss of life or limb upon the
:ictim Or the victims family is
| form of social injustice in which the
nited states stands in an unenviable
pra-eminence. In both our federal
ard our state legislation, we have
| with few exceptions. scarcely gone
further than the repeal Of the fellow
servant principle of the old law of
| liability. and in some of our states
even this slight modification of
| completely outgrown principle has not
the rest of the world stands out in
striking contrast to our backward
ness in this respect In your decision
| in question you squarely took ground
against the progressive view which
| | hold to he essential to the welfare
| of the workirgman of this nation and
therefore. to the welfare of the whole
| people. In treating or this opinion
| of yours. law notes on October 10th
wrote as follows: In the course of
| his opinion. he said: At common law
| a servant cannot recover from his
master for injuries received from the
negligence of fellow-servant act
| ing in the same line of employment.
| This apart of that general American
| law resting upon considerations of
right and justice that has been gen.
orally accepted by the people of the
| United States. This sentiment would
| be coldly received to say the least.
| by labor unions in working to secure
| a workman's compensation act such
as the New York Legislature passed
and Gov. Hughes signed about three
months agc. TIE fellow servant rule
| is not ri, inely inspired preeept
, any more than the contributory neg
| ligence or assumption of risk rules"
Personally l feel that 1t Is the high
| est degree retrogressive Tor II you
prefer the terms, Bourbon and re-
| actionary), to take the view that the
fellow servant rule is a part of the
| common law. and as here you con-
strue it. rests ps you say it does,
| Upon considerations of right and
justice" on the contrary. l believe
| that 1t is In It's essence of denial of
| right and justice and that progress
sive judges generally are now taking
| the position that this is Outworn and
Continued, on Page Two)