The Bridgeport evening farmer., 1913-04-09
WORK DISEASES AND
 PUBLIC DUTY
Sick Should Have Compensation As
 Well As Accident Victims.
John B. Andrews, Exclusive Service The Survey Press

Exclusive Service The Survey Press
 Bureau)
 If you were t1aid up,'' and your wages stopped. and you began to worry for your family as your saw ings dwindled away-how much diff ference would it make to you wheth- CT the trouble came through an acci- dent or an illness due to your work?
 There was the case of Schroeder, who went to work for Uncle Sam in the Brooklyn Navy Yard. One of our big war ships, the Ohio, came to the dock and Schroeder was sent down into the water-tight ''coffer- dams'' to burn off the old coat of paint in preparation for a new As a result of breathing the fumes of the lead paint, Schroeder was inca pacitated for work by acute lead poi Soning. He lost thirty-seven days on government for the payment of com pensation equal to the wages he had lost
 But Schroeder got not one penny. It was not an accident but a nee essary incident in his job The law only covered accidents. Said the at torney for the government.
 ''It cannot be said that these fumes were inhaled by accident. The fumes were necessarily produced by the work he was engaged upon. The in haIation of such fumes was to have
 
 have been avoided. Lead poisoning, under the circumstances, was the na- tura1, if not the inevitable, result
 A few months after the unfortunate Schroeder case a man named Hill was employed at placing floor plates in the engine room of the warship St. Louis in the Puget Sound Navy Yard. Meantime, lead and white lead paint was being applied in the bi1ges of the vessel As a result of this exposure to lead fumes Hill contracted a dis ease of the eyes which incapacitated him.
 But Hills claim for lost wages was approved because he was vic tim of an accident Said the attor- ney for the government: '"The injury to the claimants eyes was neither reasonably to be expected, nor the natural or inevitable consequence of the work he personally was engaged upon. The injury must therefore be ascribed to accident. The claimants particular work had nothing to do with the painting operations going on about him. His work as ship filter related to the laying of plates in the boiler room; the painting was being done by others.''
 Suppose, however, instead of Hill, one of the painters had been poison ed and incapacitated by the fumes of lead paint He would have had no valid claim. for it would have been a necessary incident of his job.
 The federal government since 1908, and fifteen states during the past two years, have recognized the wisdom and justice of the compensation prin- cip1e in dealing with the victims of industrial accidents. Now comes the demand that the American people, through Congress, adopt exac ctly the same principle in dealing with feder- al employees who are incapacitated for work by occupauona1 diseases.
 Aside from the fact that lead poi sonfng in the case of Schroeder was really preVentable, aside from the fact that there was no one to warn Schroeder of the dangerous nature of his occupation, there is one big final fact. The financial cost of this un- necessary case of acute lead poison ing, in addition to the personal suf- fering, fell upon poor Schroeder. Most men will agree that such financial losses should fall upon the employer In this case the employer was the na- ton, which means all of us, you and me.
 We owe Schroeder something more than an apology. While the federal government is publishing excellent re- ports on lead poisoning in the factor ies of private employers and is translat- ing and distributing in fat volumes the workmen's compensation laws of Flu
 
 States afford to do less than make provision for reasonably safe work places in the government service And can this country afford to ig- nore the good example of these Euro pean laws which provide compensa- ton for such victims of occupation al diseases?
 After more than four years of ex- perience under the present law the government recently published the first official report upon it's operation. l Sixty y-six-elosely printed pages of this report are devoted to nbarrassing l questions which have arisen because of claims arising out of occupations diseases. The administration of | awards has been as liberal as could l be expected under the unfortunate l legislative restrictions. The solicitor 1 for the department has taken a keen | interest in its operation. He has been faithful and alert. One of his most | urgent recomm endations for change l in the law is that it be extended to embrace occupationa1 diseases.
 The present federal Workmen's l Compensation Act of May 30, 1908, is 1 Americas pioneer compensation law. l It was a step forward, but only step. | It applies to only about one-third of | our 350,00O civilian employees and is 1 so deficient ths1 it's original sponsors 1 now waste no words in it's defense, | but frankly apologize for it's short l comings. +fNot a revision" says one | in a position to know, but a new law | is needed"
 The draft of a new law, prepared | after months of careful investigation