New-York tribune. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1866-1924, 1911-01-26
Question Of Responsibility.

II there is to be a libel suit, ! must
| therefore, place upOn you the tull resp2,t
| sibility for its commencement ana must W
| cline 10 take any joint action "ItH , 30 30
/ such as you suggest for the suonisaIoiiI u
the matter 10 a referee. II is prefer a". ~ .
think, II you conceive II necessaiy bo o,,i
/ there should be such a suit, tnat II siIoul,'
| take It's course in a usual rather IMAM an
unusual way. / Of course prefer llat ~
suit should be brought; but. II one II
/ brought. | feel too deeply on the pIiHCipiTT
involved In this controversy. for which |
/ have COntended for many years 10 avn
/ the issue I'm such a suit The man ls sue
/ IN our controversy seems 10 me 10 ue onr
which can readily be passed upon py lHoSS
who have sufficient education 10 read anu
| understand English and who nave peJTpI r
/ them my letters and your OPINION. ~
speech at Concord 10 which you object Is
| as YOU state in your first letter, the SEN
/ tencs which read 49,.
! The Democratic party In Connecticut
! have nominated for Governor man wiz
while Judge occupied the most retrogresslve
/ position possible on this question OF WoIh'
| mems compensation, man VINO TOOK w !,
/ view that II was competent for WOrhIhdu
when driven 10 accept any employmeht
/ bind himself not 10 be COMPENSATE II ne
! lost life or limb in that occupation.
| You say that you do not object 10 tne
\ first part of the sentence, but that you 90
! object 10 so much Of IL as says that you
took the view that II was competent TOT
/ the workman when driven 10 accept any
! employment to bind himself not 10 ne com
| pensated II he lost life or limb IN that oc,
| cupation" You say that you never held
! such an opinion. and that sucn We"
| would be opposed TO the settled principles
Of law and that no competent laWysr c0 :, y.
! the time your first letter came out, quoted
/ you as saying. II have no recollection OF
/ ever taking on any trial or in any Judlcla
/ opinion the view attributed 70 me by eN-
! President Roosevelt. and | do not believe
! 7 ever did " The inference is mine tna'
YOU had forgotten when you MADE tnlS
sweeping denial that you had taken IN inc
/ Hoxie case the position which was SUB
stantallv that which I criticised. did not
use the phraseology as quoted. did eX-
| press substantially the same idea. AssuHl-
/ ing. therefore, the quotation 10 De accu-
| rate. I still insist that any distinction be-
/ tween this statement and your decision IS
! impossible 20 draw and that the statement
/ is i'm fact true.
Consider the thing for a moment: Sec
/ ton 3 OF the federal employers liability
act said that ANY contract rule. regulation
/ or device whatsoever. the purpose or intent
/ Of which shall be 70 enable any common
carrier 70 exempt itself from any Liability
! created BY this act, shall TO that extent be
void o." BY this section Congress declared
] that the railroads should not make agree
( ments with their employees by which the
/ employe should contract 70 lose any rights
which the statute conferred, Of compensa,
/ ton II he lost life or limb IN the railroad
/ occupation. In other words, Congress SAID
/ IT Vas NOT Competent ipL lllt WI hllAell
bind himself not 20 be compensated II he
/ lost life or limb while in the railroad en-
{ plov. You declared that 20 take away
/ from the railroad employe the right e
bind himself by such a contract 10 be killed
/ without redress under this act was in yio-
/ lation Of the Fifth Amendment of the Con
/ stitution OF the United states as tendins
TO deprive the parties 10 such contract OF
| Of law You saw specifically as 10 rail
road employees that this section OF the Law
/ denies them ono and all that liberty ~
contract which the Constitution Of the
/ United States secures 70 every one within
/ its jurisdiction" In all earnestness and
/ sincerity I ask what other conclusion Is
there for a man who gives language It's
ordinary meaning 70 draw from your opin-
| ion on this point. except A conclusion thai
! in your Judgment II was competent for the
/ emplove 10 bind himself not 70 be com
! persated II he lost life or limb In the rail-
road occupation? l again insist. as J have
repeatedly insisted In nv letters. that
! have construed YOUR decision fairly and
/ according 10 its obvious meaning.