The Bridgeport evening farmer., 1912-12-13

accident board. which administers the worknen's compensation act. is that have been settled in the brief existence of this commission. More rulings on disputed points have been sought in the past five months than will be submitted in corresponding per- iods hereafter, because the board has been obliged to establish precedents in so many calzes where the dispute was friendly and only for the purpose of securing advice.
 Employes Of elites and towns are not entitled to compensation for in in question is covered by a special statute. A driver of a scayenger wagon of municipal department was injured and the attention of the ac- cident board was called The conn mission ruled that recovery for i'm
 Employes of cities and towns are of a city who was. engaged in a. pulp lie duty imposed by law for the ben eft of the public from which no pro- fit or advantage is derived by the municipality.
 HOUSBOW1NER NOT LIABLE There has been @. difference of opin- ion to the liability of the owner of 8 house for injuries to worknen en- gagged in making repairs and the opin- ion Of the commission was asked. The question was, whether a houseowner who called in a carpenter, a paper hanger or a mason and instructed 4lIa OO kIcfA0 1eC6SSc4Ey T0p811S, SlOI1Q be responsible for the injury of any such workman. The accident board ruled that in such circumstances t1he houseowner was not an employer, within the definition of the workmen's compensation act, because he was not hiring a man while engaged in his usual trade, business, profession or occupation Housewares who em- ploy men to make repairs are free from liability for their injury.
 Some members of a church wished information from the accident board as to whether that institution should insure itself against injury to it's en- ployes, among them the pastor, the organist, and the choir leader. The board replied that if the minister or the organist were injured while in the performance of the obligations of his calling the church was not liable. ! Each. in the opinion of the board, is an independent contractor, perform l ing his work according to his own ideas, and the relation of master and servant does not exist between church and pastor or church and organist. | The commission has not satisfied it. 1 self whether the Massachusetts act has extra-territorial effect, whether | corporations are protected while at | work in another State. This question will soon be subrntdted to the supreme court in a friendly action. An em- ploye of a Massachusetts manufactur- ing company was sent to New York to set up machinery. While thus en-
 
 compensation was made. The conn mission has asserted that it is c1eal that employees of railroads eDga g,ed iI interstate commerce are entitled tc compensation for injuries received 1T this State. The railroad employe whS is @ resident of another State has the protection of the workmen's compen. ==tion act while he is at work in Mas ISachuSettS.
 RAILROADS TAKE RISK OF SUITS None of the railroad companies op- erating in Massachusetts has availed itself of the provisions of the work.
 mems compensation act and taken oU insurance policies against liability fol injuries to employees. The railroad com panies have taken the ground tha. their employees, if they seek compen sation for injuries, must do so at com mon law. The workmen'S compensa, ton act removed the defenses tha the employe was negligent, that tn, injury was caused by the negligence of a w-ernploye and that the ern pboye had assumed the risk of injury