Pullman herald. [volume] (Pullman, W.T. [Wash.]) 1888-1989, 1912-06-28

| QudTFleS ...,.. ..1
lS-Sm elters ...... .
19-Gas works .......2
2O-Steamboats .........3
24-Paper mills ........2
25-Garbage works ...2
3l-Cement manufacture .......3
37-Breweries ...., ........3
43-Packing houses ...........3
44-Ice manufacture ....1
Need of First Aid" Legislation
Employers, almost without excep-
ton, express themselves as satisfied
with the law The law provides the
following scale of compensation;
An unmarried workman gets $40
a month and IS is added in case of a
wife and So for each child, up to $35
month. This is increased so per
cent for the first six months, but
may never be over so per cent of the
claimants wages. In practice, the
60 per cent rule works only down
ward, The most that any claimant
may receive is $3.50, with the MAJ
jority of claims much below that
rate single men, for instance, receiv-
ing a monthly maximum of $50.
With the costs of necessary med
ical surgical and hospital service
added to the claimants wage-loss,
dissatisfaction is frequent and al
ready decided movement is under
way to increase the scale of compen-
sation or compel the maintenance of
so-called 'first-aid" funds, or both.
Employers Generally Pay Assessment
One of the predictions made by OPP
ponents of the law was that it would
be made ineffective by the refusal
of employers to pay their contribu-
tions, pending the decision of the
courts as to it's constitutionality
This prediction has not been con-
firmed.
Out of 5000 employers subject to
the law, only 80 have failed to pay
on demand and IA of these cases
have been settled by the attorney
general. OF the remaining 10, many
are in process of adjustment, several
are firms in financial difficulty, and
only a very small proportion of those
in default have shown their inten-
ton of actually doing into court.
Several defaulting firms are set
Ting direct with their employees,
many of such settlements being at
figures greatly in excess of those for
which the accident fund is liable. 1t
is believed by the commission that
such settlements are being financed
by the casualty companies.
AppeaIs From Awards of Commission
The following appeals have been
taken by claimants dissatisfied with
the awards of the commission;
Imperial Powder Co. of Chehalis.
Mrs Amanda Burke, Seattle.
Walter Thomson and wife, Seattle.
Isaac B. Knox, Port Angeles.
Hilma Lundvall, Seattle.
Satro Tanikawa, Seattle.
Jos w. Hamilton, Seattle
Alex. Cokoff, Seattle.
Sam Williamson, Seattle.
John Ungari, Spokane.
John Alexander Burch, Spokane.
Roy Musgrove, Tacoma
If is regarded as significant that
ont of $500 claims passed upon, only
10 appeals have been filed.
The DUPONT Case
The question has been asked by
firm of paid publicity promoters
frankly hostile to the law and alleged
to be in the employ of the casualty
com panies, why the attorney general
does not sue the E. l. DUPONT de Ne
mours Powder company and collect
its contributions into Glass 46. the
1
reasons are as follows:
The DUPONT company has eX-
pressed its intention of carrying the
case to the supreme court OF the
United States.
The same questions involved IN
the Dupont case are involved in the
Frye-Bruhn case of Seattle, the SUI
perior Portland Cement case OF Con
crete. the Western Cooperage case Oh
Seattle. the Wisconsin Lumber case
of Chehalis and the Mountain Timber
case of Kalama.
Before the DUPONT case was ready
for suit the state had already MADE
substantial progress in the forego-
ing cases. and the attorney general
deemed it unnecessary to institute
further legal proceedings involving
exactly the same questions that were
presented in cases then pending.