The Washington herald., 1913-02-16

sation laws IL that the injured minsr
Is entitled to at least a part Of his regu-
lar wages while he is lying In bed with
a broken leg and that his family should
be paid. something in case Of his death.
The cost Of his injury. therefore. Ia put
on the public where 1t belongs. It is
counted in with interest, mining, trans
portation and other expenses and prop
erly increases the price the consumer pays
for his coal. The miner. consequently,
under the modern scheme of compensa-
ton does not become the beneficiary Of
charity No violence Ii done his self
respect His wife and children need not
be ashamed to meet their neighbors and
playmates face to face. The miner. you
see. is a wounded soldier in the indus
trial army Of the nation. Necessarily
he has a furlosgh with pay during his
absence from the ranks.
when our mines and manufacturing
, establishments were small and few In
number. we followed the common law Of
England In dealing with the cases Of in
jured workmen. The workman was COM
PEELED to prove in a court Of law that
his injury was caused by the neglect or
his employer. Unless he could do %. he
recovered nothing. The employer ordin-
arily, denied his responsibility. He could
defend the suit brought against him by
charging an injured workman with con-
tributory negligence.
Thus a brakeman losing an arm or
leg might have been challenged in his
statements and shown to have been ne
glectful Of his own safety. The burden
Of proof was on him. II was the custom,
also. in defending suits for personal dam
ages to say that the injury was caused
by a fellow servant Of the man who was
hurt. Clearly, SO the logic Of such de-
fonse rap n railroad cppnnany was not
liable il an engineer in backing his loco
motive against a standing train at a
greater speed than usual crushed brake
man between the cars. The fellow sery-
ant. namely the engineer. under the COM
mon law as developed. was to blame.
Knew the Job Was Dangerous.
In short employers maintained that
they were not responsible for the per-
sonal negligence OF their workmen. nor
for the accidents they caused. rurther-
more. railroadinG or mining or iron
making was a dangerous occupation. The
worker knew the hazards he was taking
and. being free agent. should be compell-
ed to bear the consequences Of his choice.
He could be a farmer, a shoemaker or
clerk. When he picked out a dangerous
place. thus voluntarily assuming a risk.
he should not complain II he happened
TO get hurt. IL was even held that IN
some accidents-the breaking Of a ny-
wheel, for example-no one was at fault.
In such a case the injured workmen could
not recover anything. no matter II he
were made a cripple for life.
Happily, the world has outgrown such
ancient ideas Of what Is wrong and what
is right The conscience OF this age de-
mands that men engaged in hazardous
pursuits, in a service for the public, be
given a money protection against injury
and death. An iron molder in making
stoves may receive burns which will
keep him away from his work for months.
The cost of the stoves manufactured by
the foundry in which he is employed can
not be accurately ascertained until his
lost time is added to the other items Of
expense. Moreover. he should be paid
promptly and without a suit Under the
common law an injured man had to hire
a lawyer and get his proof. Perhaps he
nearly starved to death while waiting
for action by the court. A compensation
law keeps his name on the pay roll. And
the consumer. to use a familiar phrase.
pays the tax"
'The national law" I said. "only bene-
fits those persons who are employed by
the United States?"
TT includes artisans and laborers at
work In arsenals and navy yards; In riv-
er. harbor. and fortifiction projects; In
the hazardous places of the reclamation,
Bureau of Mines. forestry and lighthouse
services: in such manufacturing estab-
the national government. and In con-