The labor journal. [volume] (Everett, Wash.) 1909-1976, 1911-02-17

ing to run something over the laboring
man, and he initiates the members who
represent the employers by saying in
the next breath the employers are 90
ing to be skinned. There is maxim
have generally followed throughout life,
and that is ii you get everybody toll
agree with you, you are going to be
wrong, and ii you get nobody to agree
with YOU you are wrong also, but if
you get some to agree with YOU there
is chance you may be right. Cap
plausc.) So this gentleman's method of
argument is amusing from that view
point. He goes ON to appeal to labor
ing men by saying we do not want this
law and it would be better to have the
Oregon law. He says we would better
have the Oregon law. But who should
decide? For the present we are on the
eve of getting direct legislation; we are
ON the eve of getting the initiative and
referendum; we are Just on the eve of
getting complete control so far as lcgs-
lation is concerned. He SAYS to Kill
this thing now because it is only given
to us to ward off the grand idea of gov
eminent they have in the state of Ore
gon. Please turn your attention to the
Oregon law. 1t gives you not only the
initiative and referendum but it de
stroys the fellow servant doctrine. 1t
does not always destroy the provision
of contributory negligence. Now, for
the information of the men here, | want
to show you the motive, after | have
discussed this Oregon law, this man
must have in trying to present these ar
guments embraced here. In the first
place, the Oregon law itself has moth
ing of the kind. Let me read one para
graph of the Oregon law which he says
is what we want in Washington. (Sec-
ton ) was read from the Statute
Book. He says that is what we want
That is what they wanted in Oregon,
but that is what they did not get. Cap
plause.) In all actions brought to re
cover for injury to employees, through
negligence, the Oregon men did not get
anything. If an employer, in an acct
dent occurring in Oregon, can get into
the courts and prove the accident was
caused through a defect in the machin-
cry, plant or structure. then he has the
benefit Of the fellow servant rule. and
how easy it is for an employer to prove
to any kind of Il Judge or jury that n
spoke in wheel was missing. and that
caused the accident which took our hui
man life; and he gives evidence of the
fellow servant rule because he says
John Henry, who was at the handle of
that machine, knew that spoke was out.
knew that tooth was out of the pinion.
knew of the defect, and because he
J knew and worked that machine, and
killed Jack Thomas, the employer is
not liable. That is what those Oregon
men got and what we do not want to
get now. applause and laughter.)
t Then he goes on to say: You labor
ing men watch out i'll court, because you
t might get something run over You. The
I employers of labor have skinned You in
r the past, and they believe it is easy to
skin, You now" Yes. | am sorry to ad
r nit Labor has been skinned in the past
e but | am glad to say in this day and
age, when our orgaizcd labor movement
G is united, many of our members have
e come to the point of thinking for them
l selves. (Applause.) And they will not
be quite so much skinned in the future
as in the past. Applause and laugh
4 teri Logic such as this, coming from
] the source it comes from, is amusing in
5 one way and serious in another 1t is
e amusing because primarily it is offered
+ in the hope of defeating this law by
= an appeal to what it is considered Il lack
/ of intelligence on the part of the work
e ingman.
5 By sending agents here to Olympia
; at our session, opponents hope to dis
? tribute these arguments among our
= boys. changing their views on this pro-
position but I have a higher idea of
the representatives of labor now after
the training they have received. I have
, a higher idea of their intelligence than
to believe they can be worked off their
own feet by the representative of some
insurance company. CApplause)
Now, gentlemen of this Joint commit
tee and representatives of labor, | want
to state here a condition for you to
consider for one moment. There is no
man in the state of Washington who
has kick coming against this law eX-
cept those who are going to get hit
Who is going to get hit by the passage
OF this law? In the first place, the cas-
ualty companies, as | understand from
insurance reports, collected 100000 in
premiums during last year. In the
three years preceding last years report
tlpV salla.taI In +Io ,,,:..I.l...l.-