The Bennington evening banner. (Bennington, Vt.) 19??-1961, 1913-01-24
workmen's Compensation.

One night last week in the SENATE
chamber at Montpelier the employers
of the great majority of Vermont la
borers. and representatives of the or
ganized workingmen of the State,
came forward of their own accord TO
advocate the passage of workmen' 5
compensation act. What was more
remarkable, they were able TO agree
upon the bill which they would like
this Legislature to enact. With a
few amendments upon which there
was no divergence of opinion the
Blanchard bill, known to the techni-
cal as S. 1871. was satisfactory TO all
concerned. But the significance OF
this meeting surpassed in Importance
the immediate prospects OF the blan-
chard measure or any other bill; 1t
bespoke a change of attitude and a
broadening of mind which give hope
for the future.
The bane of social and economic
life during the past quarter century
has been a soreness and suspicion be
tween the men who work for hire and
the men for whom they work. On
both sides there has been a deficient
adjustment to changed conditions,
and the resulting friction has been
exaggerated and misconstrued. On the
one side what was really the stirring
germ of a broader humanity was in
danger of being inflated and infomed
into narrow hatred and a tide of
fro vi n q
things On the other side the eau
tion and slow movement dictated by
business sagacity and a practical re-
gard for the welfare of the present
and future seemed in danger of de-
generating into mere sullen stubborn
ness and uuheedng BourbOnism. The
signs of the times which give us most
cause for rejoicing are those which
Indicate an adjustment and working
together of the two opposite, employ
er and employed.
The soreness came to a climax in
cases where an employe was injured
tended TO favor the injured workman
and to burden the employer with i'm
possible damages The common law
on the other hand, tended to give the
employer what was in certain in
stances an arbitrary and unreason-
able defense. If the employee was in
jured by reason Of the negligence Of
a fellow worker. he could not recov-
er though the fellow servant in ques-
tion belonged in another department
and had never been seen by him be-
fore II the employee could be said to
have assumed the risk as a result of
which he was injured, he was barred
from all possibility of recovery, and
this Notwithstanding the fact that he
may have been foryed by the circum-
stances of the case to assume the
risk or become a beggar The result
was that one injured workman would
recover so vast sum as to demon
alize him and injure the business he
had been serving, while another
equally in need would be cut of. by
technical rule, from receiving a
single cent
The first line of escape from these
unsatisfactory conditions seemed to
be by way of abolishing the employ
er's technical defenses. To accom-
plish this, so-called employers Ii
ability laws were framed. They
proved at best a patched-up remedy
In some instances these laws may
have helped conditions; they certain
~ did not entirely remedy them.
Manufacturers and other large en-
ployers of help began generally to in
sure against lawsuits. Under this
the casualty company
takes the responsibility and lights
the suits. The company has no per
sonal interest in the man. It's most
profitable policy is to discourage set
Element and fight everything. max
ing it as expensive as possible for
the sueing party. To preserve Its
case IL hedges the employer about
with restrictions so that often he is
forbidden on pain Of losing the com
pany's protection TO show even de-
cent humanity to the injured man.
This state OF affairs is distasteful to
Til concerned.
To avoid the inequalities and oppor
tunities of abuse which Turk In any
OF the old system OF
suit and recovery, the last few years