Arizona republican., 1911-04-09
JOHN HAYS HAMMOND
John Mitchell on This Sub ject Said That What Was More Especially Desired Was the Protection of Him Against Injury.

Philadelphia. April S.-An attack upon the existing employers Habil- ity laws was made by John Hays Hammond at the closing session to- night of the convention of the Am erican Academy of Political Social Science
 Mr. Hammond, who presided at the session, said in part: The present laws not only involve a cruel delay in the way of relief to the unfortun- ate sufferers from industrial acci- dents, but result in the diversion of the greater part of relief funds pro vided by employers into the pStkets of interruptions professional claim agents of the ambulance chasing type Our laws. to put it mildly. are a disgrace to the country"
 George W. Anderson, of Boston, paid his respects to courts for null Hfying acts of legislatures in con nection with workmen's cOmpensa- tion legislation.
 Tn America" he said, "our courts of last resort are occupying a func- tiOn closely analogous to the house of lords in England. They are sit ting as legislative bodies vetOing the enactments of supposedly legislative bodies"
 Others who spoke were Charles P Neil. United States commissioner of labor and John Mitchell, who said in part:
 What the wOrkingmen desire and demand is not so much compensa- ton for injury as prevention of in jury. and I believe that industry should bear the pecuniary loss sus- tained by wprkmen as a result of in dustrial accidents. just as it is now required to repair its machinery and offset the losses caused by depre- citation in the value of it's plants.
 From time immemorial the work ingmen of the United States have en- deavored to have enacted cOmprehen- sive employers liability laws. and while I am in full sympathy with their efforts in this direction. yet it is to be remembered that even the best system of employers liability means expense. delay. and litigation. whereas compensation laws such as prevail in foreign countries work au- tomatically, benefits are paid immed- lately. friction is eliminated, and a large measure of justice is done.
 Tt is. of course. impossible to say what the exact cost of automatic compensation would be, but it is not difficult to conclude that it would not require much more to compensate injured workmen in America on the basis of the British WOrkmens Com pensatiOn Act than is now paid hy American employers in premiums to liability companies.
 During the eleven years from 1894 to 1905. the employers liability com panies of the United States took in s99. .959.O76 in premiums from Ameri- can employers. These companies paid out in the settlement of claims of injured workmen S43.599 49S. or 4S per cent of the amount they took in Of the $43.599. 49s paid in the settle ment of such claims. it is safe to say that 8 per cent was expended by the injured wOrkmen in the pay ment of attorneys fees and court so that, in the final analy- sis. the injured wOrkmen received less than $30.OO0. 900 out of the S10O.- OOO.OOO paid by employers during this period in premiums to liability com panies Allowing sf5.00O.000 for the of the liability com panies and for reserve, it would mean that s55.O00.000 were wasted-were worse than wasted-because the money was used in burdening our courts with litigation and in delay ing or defeating the settlement of claims. many of them just claims. when it should have been used. and would be used under a wise cOmpen- satiOn system. for the immediate re- lief of the men and their families who are the victims of the hazard of pursuits.
 'I am not prepared to say that even though the entire s10O000.O0O had been paid directly to the in
 Continued on page ID