The Chanute times., 1912-03-01
URGES JUSTICE
FOR EMPLOYEES
President Favors Passage Of Work
mems Compensation Act.
SUBJECT OF SPECIAL MESSAGE
Calls Attention to Great Injustice Of
Present System and Heavy Ex-
pense of Litigation Which
Bill Eliminates.

Washington.-Pr Taft sent
the following message to congress-:
To the Senate and aouse of Repre-
sentatives
have the honor to transmit here
with the report of the employers liza
bility and workmen's compensation
commission, authorized by Joint Reso-
luton No. Al, approved June 20, 1910,
ito make thorough investigation OF
the subject of employers liability and
workmen's compensation and to sub
nit a report through the president to
the congress Of the United States"
The commission recommends a care
fully drawn bill, entitled "a bill to
provide an exclusive remedy and COM
pensation for accidental injuries re-
eulting in disability or death, to EN-
ployos of common carriers by rail-
roads engaged in interstate or foreign
commerce or in the District of Column
bia and for other purposes"
This bill works out in detail a COM
pensation for accidental injuries to
employees Of common carriers in in
terstate railroad business, on the
theory of insuring each employe
against the resulst of injury received
In the course of the employment with
out reference to his contributory neg
ligence and without any of the rules
obtaining in the common law limiting
the liability of the employer in sucn
cases. The only case in which no
compensation is to be allowed by
the act is where the injury or death
of the employe is occasioned by
his wilful intention to bring about the
injury or death of himself or OF an
other, or when the injury results from
his intoxication while on duty.
It is unnecessary to go into the de-
tails of the bill They are, however,
most admirably worked out. They
provide for a medical and hospital
service for the injured man, for
notice of the injury to the employer,
where such notice is not obviously
given by the accident itself; for the
fixing of the recovery by agreement;
If not by agreement by an official ad-
juster, to be confirmed by the court,
and, if jury is demanded, to be
passed on by jury.
The amount of recovery is regu-
lated in proportion to the wages re-
oeived and the more or less serious
character of the injury where death
does not ensue, specific provision be-
ing made, for particular injuries, in
so far as they can be specified. The
compensation is to be made in the
form of annual payments for num-
ber of years or for life. The fees to
be paid to attorneys are specifically
limited by the act. The remedies
offered are exclusive of any other
remedies. The statistical investiga-
tion seems to- show that under this
act the cost to the. railroads would be
perhaps 25 per cent more than the
total cost which they now incur.
The report of the commission has
been very able and satisfactory, the
investigations have been most thor
ough, and the discussion of the con-
stitutional questions which have
arisen in respect to the validity of the
bill is of the highest merit.
Three objections to the validity OF
the bill of course occur: In the first
place, the question arises whether un-
der the provisions of the commerce
clause, the bill could be considered
to be a regulation of interstate and
foreign commerce. That seems to be
already settled by the decision of the
supreme court in the employers liza
bility case.
The second question is whether the
making of those remedies exclusive
and the compelling railroad compa-
nies to meet obligations arising from
injuries for which the railroad would
not be liable under the common law
is a denial of the process of law
which is enjoined upon congress by
the fifth amendment to the constitu
ton in dealing with the property
rights. This question the report takes
up and in an exhaustive review oil
I0G duluOllllCH LihhOo NiNSSA'
seems to me, the validity Of the act
This is the question which in the
court of appeals of the state of New
York was decided adversely to he
validity of the compensation act
adopted by the legislature OF that
state. How far that act and the one
here proposed differ, it is unnecessary
TO state. It is sufficient to say that
the argument of the commission is
most convincing to show that the po'
lice power of the government exer-
cised in the regulation of interstate
commerce is quite sufficient to justify
the imposition upon the interstate rail-
road companies of the liability for the
Injuries to its employees on an insur-
ance basis.
The third objection is that the right
of trial by jury guaranteed by the
seventh amendment is denied. AS a
matter OF fact the right is preserved
in this act by permitting a jury to
mass on the issue when duly de-
mauded in accordance with the limi-
H.. Of