The Julesburg grit-advocate., 1912-04-25
NEW LABOR BILL
I: 4 TAFT POLICY
Liability and Compensation
Measure Progressive.
JUSTICE IS ITS OBJECT
President Approves Proposed Lesisls.
tion Making Federal Labor Laws
Fit Modern conditions-Ls0aI
Machinery Simplihsd.


As the result of the personal inter
est Of President Taft in all matters al
fecting the workingmen Of the coun
Try, congress has before It today a
comprehensive bill on employers LA
bility and workmen's compensation
which is recognized as one Of the most
progressive Of the many achievements
of the Taft administration. The bill
vas reported by a commission ap.
pointed by President Taft pursuant to
. joint resolution Of congress passed
OIL June rs, 1910 and it WAS recently
sent to congress by the president &C
c0mpanied with n message recon.
mending its passage. As drafted the
measure provides an exclusive rem
edy and compensation for accidental
injuries resulting in disabilities or
death to employees Of common car
riers engaged in interstate or foreign
commerce or In the District Of Coium-
bia.
This comprehensive legislation is
the direct outcome Of the general un-
passed by congress In recent years
and is illustrative Of the Taft method
Of reaching an admitted evil by
painstaking investigation followed by
carefully considered laws. AS 10 we'll
known. the first employers liability
law passed in the last administration
Was declared unconstitutional by the
courts. A new law to take its place
was passed under this administration,
but 1t was generally understood at
the time that the comprehensive meas
ure now before congress was to fol
low. both as to liability and compensa-
ton, as soon as the necessary inves-
tigation into the subject could be
made. The result II that the work
ingmen Of the United States, 80 far as
they can be reached by federal law.
will soon be working under one of
the is.ost enlightened labor laws on
record.
J. Provision Is made in the bill, as
drafted tentatively. that every com.
mon carrier. engaged in interstate or
foreign commerce. shall pay compen-
satiOns in the amounts specified in
the bill to any OF its employees who
sustains personal injury by accident
arising out OF and in the course OF
his employment, and resulting in his
disability, or to his dependents in
case Of death.
1t Is provided in the bill that the
injured employee shall have medical
attendance, and surgical aid. when
necessary, the last mentioned being
limited to 5000 The monthly wages
Of an employee is deemed to be 26
times the established days pay, and
$50 Is the minimum monthly wage
payment. 1t Is also provided that ell
compensation under the act shall be
paid monthly. unless computed to a
lump sum.
Death benefits are provided for at a
SPECIFIC percentage OF the mans 5 wages
to be paid to the widow, with an in
crease In the amount when there are
dependent children and In case OF no
dependents the payment OF the burial
expenses is required. The matter OF
tSi oohoi Is dISO
covered In fair and equitable provi.
sion OF compensation for the injured
employee.
Another feature OF the proposed act
u clear definition OF the term de
pendent" as well as OF what consti.
tutes an injury and an employee. "
Legal complications are provided for.
reports OF accidents, payments and
operations under the law to the in.
terstate commerce commission, are re.
quired. and It il declared that the pro.
posed act shall take effect on July |,
1912. and cited as The Federal Com.
pensation Act OF 1872"
In Its Investigations of this subject
the commission determined at the out.
set that In substance the doctrines of
the common law originating under
comparatively simple conditions were
unjust AS applied to the complex re-
iat1ons OF master and servant. The
use OF complicated machinery, steam
and electricity h.s had the effect O,
increasing the deplorable entagonism
between employer and employee and
often giving few injured employees
large and frequehtly extravagant dam
ages. while the great majority have
been left to bear the entire burden
without any recompense whatever.
At the time of the adoption of the
common law rules OF liability indus
trial conditions were radically differ
ent from those Of today. The numbe,
Of employees was smaller because
there were few big industrial plants
The business carried on was small in
extent, the appliances used in the
work consisted largely of hand tools