The Bridgeport evening farmer., 1910-10-25
BALDWIN ASKS
 A EXTRACTION
Writes Letter to Col. Roosevelt Denying Reference in Lat
 ter's Speech
HOPES HE MISINTERPRETED
Quotes Treatment of Subject Contained in His Book on
 Railroad Law


 Following out the points made by him in an interview yesterday re- garding Col. Theodore Roosevelt's at tack on him at Corncord, N. H., Judge Simeon B. Baldwin has sent a letter to Col. Roosevelt asking him to re- tract certain statements made in the speech concerning his attitude on Elm ployers' Liability Laws and Legis1a- tion. Judge Ba1dwin's letter follows: Hon. Theodore Roosevelt. LL.D,:
 Dear Sir:-In the newspaper re- ports of speech delivered by you at Concord, N. H., Oct 22, it is stat cratic party of Connecticut had nom mated for Governor a former judge, who was man who took the view that it was competent for the work man, when driven to accept any e1n- ployment, to grind him to bind him. self not to be compensated, if he lost his life Or limb in that occupation"
 I never took such a view.
 view.
 Such a view would be opposed to the settled principles of law, and no competent lawyer could or would take American Railroad Law in which I have treated of this subject fol- lows:
 '.The hazardous nature of it's busi- road company to constant risk of bod fly injury, and the company to fre- quent claims for compensation for such injuries. To provide a remedy for such claimants otherwise than by litigation, the company has implied power to organize a system of acci- departmentl for the mutual benefit of itself and it's employees, by means of a fund raised by their mutual con tributton. It may be made a condi- tion of the employment that they shall contribute to such fund, and also that, in case of accident, if they the company. It could not be made condition that they should look only to the fund. and waive any right of action against the company. Page 34).
 "Contracts with servants in bar of the statutory action in case of their death.
 when the person killed was rail- road servant it will be no defense that in consideration of taking him into the service of the company, he, or the benef1ciaries for whose benefit the action was brought, agreed with the company not to set up any claim against it for injuries which he might thereafter through negligence with which it might be chargeable, receive while in it's employment. Such a con tract is against public policy and void. But if the company should be one having relief department or ganized to grant benefits to such of it's servants, in case of injury, as may choose to become members of it, or to their appointees and the benef1ciar- ies, under the rules of the departn1e ent if they receive the benefits, can claim no damages against the company by req son of such injury, a payment and acceptance of benefits would found an equitable defense, provided such bene- fciaries were made parties to the statutory suit and were the same per sons for whose profit the action was given It would also, in case the benefciaries received the fruits of a judgment recovered for their use against the company in statutory action, bar any subsequent demand by them on the relief department" Page 531.
 I trust that your remarks at Con- cord were misin nterpreted. If not, you certainly were mfsfnformed-
 If you did, in fact, make the charge against me. or one substantially of that character, write to request that you would retraet it, as it is one call culated to affect my standing as lawyer Cat least among those who do not know me), well as to prejudice my position as a candidate for public office.
 Yours Truly,
 SIMEON E. BALDWIN.