Norwich bulletin., 1911-02-16
Hearing on Employers Liability Law and
 Workingman's Compensation Act
ARGUMENTS BEFORE COMMITTEE
House Chamber Was Crowded for First Hearing Pres- dent of State Federation of Labor Stands for Abro- gation of Fellow Servant Manufacturers Op- posed to Both Measures as Introduced.

ing into an agreement for insurance against disability with the employur. Mir. Donahue said he knew of no req son why such a plan could not be in voked without legislative enactment.
 Assumed Risk is Class Legislation.
 Mir Chandler asked as to the post - tion of the federation on the doctrine of assumed risk He replied that this was a species of class legislation. It was determined in many court de- cisions as something unsound, unfa1F and unscientific. Personally he would the doctrine. If the rule were abolish ed parties could reach an agreement mutually. y
 Labor Don't Want 1909 Measure.
 Representative Hotchlfss asked IS labor was willing to accept the 1909 measure, and MT. Donaahue said it was not. To Mir. Chandler, MT. Dona1ue said he would gladly provide a draft of a bill covering his ideas if the commit tee desired him to do so
 Abolish Fellow Servant Rule.
 MT. Donahue was further asked to say in a few words just what the fad- eration stood for, and he said 1t was the abolition in toto of the fellow ser- want rule. 'If your committee will do this," he said. ''labor will rise up and call you blessed"
 Senator Spellacy asked if the feder- ation objected to a compensation law being passed. MT. Donahue said ha was not objecting.
 Representing Employers of fo0,0o0s
 MT. Emery next spoke. rspresent1ng the manufacturers of the state who employ about 100000 men. He went into the history of the movements both for compensating worhingmen for 1n3 Juries as 1t is carried out in coAtf- mental Europe and England. Ho also
 <l |n nHz1A 30I 0m"I the changes in the past fifty years. 4he burdens borne by manufacturers duo to competition, and argued that em-; ployers' liability would reach not tha captains of hundreds of employees. but those who employ only a few. ' Burden on Employer Felt by Empleye. He said that whatever burdens ara laid upon the employer must be feltf by the empioye, and If the burden iG heavy it means lower wages or lassened output. He said that arg7umeufB for abrosation of the fellow servant t42o as advanced were unsound and practi-
 cally impossible. Historically previous speakers, he said, had been in the wrong, for Great Britain had never abrogated this rule. What had been done was to modify the rule. He laid all the faults to present conditions to the system and not to individuals. He said that the effort to improve tho condition of labor had resulted in piling liability upon liability upon tho the manufacture and yet Aec1dents continue to increase He spoke of va- | ious state laws, of tho federal liability law, of cases under Engiish law, Of iit- igation, and liability 1nsuraneo, and at length discussed comparative neg1t- gence as well as contx1butory negii< gence, passing on to . recital o3 ex< periences of both England and 0srn.an manufacturers under the cosnpenaa9lox laws in effect ln their eoun&r1eA 4s replied to many questions and then eAd hearing went over until tofno5row