The Bridgeport evening farmer., 1913-05-07

the employer? After giving req
 sonable time in which to make such
 settlements, and providing that settle
 ments brought about by fraud or un-
 fairness shall be void, should not such
 legislation provide for a. competent ad-
 juster in each federal district, appoint
 ed by the judge, who shali take proof
 as to the facts fin case of dispute, and
 report to the court his opinion as to
 liability? If a lawyer or a claim agent
 is engaged, should not his compensa-
 ton be subject to the action of the
 Court, that the injustice of 50 per
 cent contingent fee for merely making a settlement, or conducting an easy
 case, shall no longer be possible? If either party is dissatisfied with the
 report of the adjuster, upon filing ex-
 captions to that report, should the party not have the right to come into
 the court and try the case out before court and jury in the usual manner?
 If we had such a statute applying
 to all corporations substantfa1ly sn- gagged in interstate commerce, and all such corporations were compelled to file within reasonable time their
 written assent to it's terms of liability, or be prohibited from engaging in in
 terstate@ commerce, it ts not difficult
 to believe that an imrnense amount of
 injustice ard litigation could be avoided
 ! Would 1t not be better to have such simple 1egfs. tIor, laying streas on sanitary conditions and safety, req sonable hours of work and reasonable compensation in case of injury or death, than 1t would be to have crude State insurance laws, that encourage malingering, enormously increase the expense of taxpayers for needless of- hcia1s, and fail to put a premium up- on the side of health and safetye2 Doubtless such statute cannot bs l drawn in a day. It, would require the I
 mature consideration of labor leaders | and employers Of labor, and the most 4 experienced and broad-ninded co1n- | sel that each can bring to their con- | There havs been objec- tions in the past, and there will bs | objections in the future, to any such l because of States rights.
 Right or wrong, however, the Con-A stitution' of the United States, the de- cisions to which we have called 4t- tention, and the business conditions of today, have made it impossible prop erly to settle this broad question byl appealing to first one State and then another For a long period of years, and able lawyers have la bored for uniform state legislation on matters so simple that 1t would sAern easy to obtain it, and yet as the re- suit of all these labors there are but g. very few laws that are uniform in1 different States, and usually these laws are to be found in but very few States.
 In the welfare of the workers in i'm terstate commerce, however, we have a master of national concern. and it can be adequately dealt with only by | rational law. Upon no other basis can the employers or the employees be put on equal terms with each other every where in interstate commerce. If the relation of employers and en1- ployes to each other in interstate com merce is thus regulated by national law, the States, in self defense, will be compelled to adopt substantially tue same regula tions. It is only just and right that a subject of national inn portance and scope should be settled oy national law; and 1t is doubtful if 1t will even be settled right by any l legislation short of that.