The Jeffersonian. [volume] (Atlanta, Ga.) 1907-1917, 1912-12-12

- graph. President Taft, as
Judge on the federal bench,
wrote an opinion some years
ago which was harshly criticised by
other courts and other judges. Yet
his opinion was SO plain, so just, and
so sensible that the average layman
could not understand why it should
be criticised, and concluded that
what was justice was not always
good law according to good lawyers.
Yet the highest court of New York
State, after years Of contrary reason
ing, has now concluded that Judge
Taft was right. 1t has rendered a
decision which will do much to put
public faith and confidence once
more in our courts. Here is the
story: The Legislature of Ohio
passed law making it criminal for
railroad to fail to put blocks in it's
railroad frogs. That law was passed
for the protection of railroad en-
ployes, to save their feet from being
caught in the empty frogs and them
selves placed in peril of being run
down by some oncoming train. This
particular railroad did not block it's
frogs, and railroad empIoye was
caught and injured by train
President Taft said that the fact
that the railroad company had itself
violated the law put the burden on
the corporation, and released the in
jured man from blame. Other courts
held that the injured man was just
as much to blame as the company,
inasmuch as it was his business to
know that the company was violat-
ing the law, and he should have
exercised just as much care to avoid
being caught as if no law had been
passed In the case Of Knfsley vs..
Pratt. decided in 1895, the New York
Court of Appeals decided that wo-
man who lost her arm in operating
an unguarded punching machine"
was not entitled to recover, although
the Legislature, for her protection,
required her employer to place a
proper guard around the machine.
The Court OF Appeals held the own
er of the machine blameless, and
added:
''It is impossible not to feel great
sympathy for this unfortunate plain
tiff, who has been manned for life,
but her recovery is barred by legal
principles that are salutary and
proper in the general administra-
ton of justice"
Again it was hard to understand
the legal principles" which stood
as barrier between this woman's
injury and the ordinary principles
of Justice The question is now
cleared up in the State of New York,
and, let us hope, the example will
be followed by others. In the case
of Fitzwater VS.. Warren, just de-
cided by the Court of Appeals, that
court follows President Taft'S Opin-
ion, and holds that risks occasioned
by the failure of the employer to
obey the law are not assumed by. the
employe, even though he has full
knowledge that the law is being vio-
lated.
''The statute which the defend
ants violated (says Chief Justice
Cullen, who wrote the opinion in
this case9, was enacted for the ex-
press purpose of safeguarding the
persons of employees. Where an en-
ployer deliberately fails to comply
with the statute, the courts should
be loath, except in very clear case,
to hold that the employe assumes
the risk of his masters violation of
the law; otherwise the beneticent re-
suits sought to be attained by the
statute will fail to be realized.
This decision is landmark. No
lawyer can fail to appreciate it's sig