The Bridgeport evening farmer., 1911-02-25
CONFERENCE CALLED OF ADHERENTS OF WORKMEN'S
 COMPENSATION MEASURES ActionsTaken at Suggestion of Senator Jud- son at Yesterdays Hearing
 in Hartford
Conference Will Report Back to Committee of Judiciary and Labor-Morris Hillqu of New York Explains Measure Endorsed by Principal Trades Unions of the State.

workers of the State
 T am heartily in accord with MT. Fishers desire to abrogate the doc Urine of the assumption of risks and the fellow servant rule, and abrogate or modify the doctrine of contributory negligence. The present Liability law Is so iniQuitous, so fundamentally un- just, that it is not susceptible to amendment.
 But as to a Compensation act, we here I think the Fisher bill is in- sufficient. In the first place, it should cover practically all the work CTS of the state, in industries using modern machinery and implements. In the tremendous growth of modern crease and complication in machinery there is not today an employment in an established trade which is exempt from that awful toll annually levied upon the life and limb of the work CTS. Any exception, therefore, would be unfair.'
 MT. Hillquit then pointed out the difference between the Fisher bill and his own measure in regard to the number of men coming within the scope of the proposed Comp act. His own measure covers a far greater class of workers-indeed, the committee took MT. Hillquit up on
 
 measure could be enacted with such a wide scope. But Mr. Hillquit de- tended it's constitutionality upon the police powers of the state as applied to dangerous occupations. He attacked number of provisions of the Fisher measure as being open to doubtful constructions and possibly permitting the raising of the same old objectionable questions as to t'fel- low servant" or "contributory neg Hgence."
 Regarding some of these uualifica- | tions in the Fisher bill, Mir. Hillquit stamped them as unnecessary He ex- plained the fallacy of the "wilful neg l1gence" theory on the part of either employer and employe and quoted statistics to show that injuries must be regarded as a necessary part o1 the modern industrial system and | must be charged up as a part of the cost of production.
 But the most serious objection to the Fisher bill, aside from its re- to be it's scale of compensation, which is very small and is arbitrary and not l fixed upon a mans earning powers. The only fair way of computing the compensation to be paid is on q mans loss of earning capacity" said MT. Hillquit; "and then we do not compensate him for his pains and suffering. No law can restore a mans health. or heal his mutilated body And in addition to this sacrifice are we to deduct 40 per cent. or more of his wages at the very time when he most needs money,-when he re. | quires better food, better care, more attention? We are seeking enlight- | ened and just legislation, and I dc | not think that such a measure comes | within the description.
 When man contributes his I health, his body and possibly his life | a money compensation based upon his wages is not unfair.''
 MT. Hillquit then took up with great delight the statement of the ! Manufacturers association that il | would favor the German system. He l explained the working of the Germar system and said that it would be g great thing to install in Connecticut but he guessed that the Manufa ctur. CTS wouldn't stand for it if they real. llx understood it.