Daily Kennebec journal. [microfilm reel] (Augusta, Me.) 1870-1975, 1913-03-27

fNp'fN'
no right to keep them from receiving
this benefit. You do it to get the benefit
of the vote of farmers in this LcHsia-
ture l consider it right to include all or
none. | have as much right to ask that
the laborers in my factory be exempt as
the man that works ON the Iarm in the
woods or on the drive.
We do not know what it will cost to
insure against this obligation ana it will
drive out the operators in the small and
medium business, If we continue what
will become of the labOrcr. if YOU drive
the people out of business that are en-
ploying them? If the cases on the river
drive are very scarce why not include
them? My county depends largely upon
the canning of sardiHcs. You have no
more right to include my people than
YOU have the others.
| don't care what my party advocated,
/ do not approve it
The PRESIDING OFFICER: We
viii proceed with the consideration of
amendment b, That is Senate Docu-
ment 5S9 To Senate Document 575.
MIR. BUTTON OF KcnncbcG Mr..
Chairman, this amendment was Of
place on Page there is a Topographic
cal error, leaving out the word en-
ployers." Then the words following
that had not been changed after we
made the change in the bill. which we
dlG, to include individual insurers, ana
this amendment is offered to make the
hill uniform in that respect. | think
it is perfectly apparent to everybody,
~
ton of Senate Amendment Il.
The motion was agreed to. and Sem
ate Amendment Il was adopted
The PRESIDING OFFICER: The
next amendment for consideration is
Senate Document $40, Senate amend
ment c to Senate Document 30.
Mr.. BUTTON of Kcnncbec: Mr..
Chairman. this amendment was offered
for substantially the same reasons as
the preceding amendment. In mass
ing the materials for tins bill the com
nittee overlooked the fact that we
had not provided a certificate for all
classes of insurers and this amend
ment was made to cover ii. and !
think il is perfectly apparent what it
is for. move it's adoption.
The motion was agreed to and the
mondment was adopted.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The
next amendment for consideration is
Senate Amendment d to Senate Docu-
ment No. 575.
amend Senate Document No. 30
by striking out all of Paragraph .
on the fourth Page after the word
defined i'll the NJ and 81 lines and in
sorting i'll place thereof the following.
The Commission shall dcterminn
the average weekly wages from such
evidence as apears to them to be just
ard equitable.
Mr. WING of Franklin: Mr.. Chair
man, l introduced that amendment in
the interests of clcarncss ON the law.
The benefits to he paid seem to depend
upon the weekly wages, and in certain
cases where the labor had not been
working long it might be difficult to
determine what the weekly wages
would be, and the provision which is
now inserted in the bill provides that
regard may be had to the average
weekly amount which during - weeks
previous To the injury was being
earned by a person in the same grade
of employment. at the same work,
with the same employer
NoH in many cases where parties
j,fe employed on piece work that rule
could not apply, and it seemed to me
to be Il better provision to leave the
question entirely with the commission
20 determine the average weekly wages
by any evidence which they had at
their command to determine what was
tie reasonable, average weekly wage
to apply to the particular case which
thny We're considering.
Mr.. STEARNS: Mr.. Chairman, the
provision that is made in the bill was
thought by the committee to be il very
clear one, reading that where. by rea-
son of the shortness of time during
which the employee has been in the
employment of his employer, or the
nature or terms of the employment, il
is nnpracticable to compute the aver
age weekly wages as above defined,
regard may be had to the average
weekly amount which during the -
weeks previous To the injury was be
ing earned by person in the same
grade of employment, at the same
work, by the same employer, or if there
is no person so employed, by a person
in the same grade employed in the
same class of employment and in the
same county" The provision as made
by the amendment would give no rule
TO follow whatever, except leaving t
entirely in the judgment of the COM
mission, which would not be objection
able particularly to the committee, eX-
cept that ii would not seem to be as
clear as the provision III the bill.
The provision in the bill provides that
T. by reaSoH of shortness of time there
is not 30 weeks of employment, the
number OF weeks shall be deducted
from the ~ weeks, multiplied by the
amount of weekly wages and divided
by the number of weeks employed.
Now it seemed to the committee
that that rule would apply in the case
that the senator from Franklin has
prcsentcd. that even if it is piece
work, that there is a certain weekly
wage regardless of that, as the man
VI no works by the piece earns SO much
in a week. If he is not working 10y the
week, his wages amount TO so much IN
a week. The committee can hardly see
the necessity for the amendment, al
though they 90 not think it partcu-