The daily star-mirror. (Moscow, Idaho) 1911-1939, 1919-05-03


steamship lines, and so forth, we
knew accidents would occur just as
they occur for other employers of la
Dor, and that the employer-this time
the government would sometimes
be at fault. So we passed the en-
ployees' compensation act of May 30
1908. Under that act, almost auto
matically are adjusted claims against
the government. The law has work
ed admirably.
But this is not all we have done.
On September 7, 1916, we passed a
more general compensation act for
settlement of claims against the gov
eminent arising out of employment.
But we have gone further. In the
War Risk Insurance act of 1917 we
applied the same principle to those
in the service of the government who
might sustain injury by reason OF
such service.
Beyond that we have gone. A few
days ago we passed a bill through
the house providing that the Secre-
tary of war should have the right
to adjudicate contracts arising in the
present war, aggregating something
like So, 100000, that were in vari-
Gus stages of completion, but had not
been perfected. In other words, we
gave to the War Department the
power largely to adjudicate those
claims.
Now, | submit that we should apply
a similar principle in disposing of the
miscellaneous claims that arise agalst
the government.
In the case of the bill we passed a
few days ago authorizing the Secre-
tary of War to adjudicate contracts
we met a demand from every state IN
this Union. But, gentlemen, no mat
ter how just the claims may be that
will be adjudicated, not one of them
will be found more just, more deserv-
ing, than that of the poor old man in
Idaho who carried the mail 10 years
ago for the government and has not
been paid single penny for his ser
vices. Not one will be more just
than that of the homesteader who,
through a blunder of some land Of
flee official or official of the In
dian Bureau, was permitted to live |
for years and improve as a home
stead piece of land that had been
patented to an Indian, only to be told
by the government to "get out" after
he had received patent and supposed
he had builded a home for himself
and family.
What, then, do | propose? | pro-
pose as a solution of this question
that we authorize every executive de-
partment of the government to adju-
dictate and make settlement of every
claim arising in such department
Since the government Of the United
States can not be sued, we can say
what shall constitute final action.
would have the action of the secre-
tary of the particular department fl
nal in the case of any claim up to,
say, $4,000. Then | would provide in
claims larger than that that there
might be an appeal, an appeal either
The part of the claimant, to the Court
Of claims; or possibly you could pro-
vide that an appeal be taken, if you
want to call it that, to congress itself
in the larger cases; | would also
provide that claims be presented
Within reasonable time after in
Jury occurred.
Surely, this is a reasonable solu
ion. Gentlemen, if little question
rose in your community involving
40 or $3.50 you would be perfectly
Wiling to- trust the disposition of the
ase to the justice of the peace or to
he court that has the smallest juris-
lection. In my state justice of the
'eace has jurisdiction of cases up to .
800, or the district court in amounts
yer that. You would possibly waive
jury, and if you did not, jury, not
unanimously, but by three-fourths
ote, would bring in verdict that in )
inc cases out of ten would commend
self to the approval of both parties
Of
e an appeal. The case would be
ettled. !:
But what shall we say of cases Z
here both sides agree? What shall
e say of cases, for instance, that :
ould come before the probate court :
here a person comes in with a claim 3
nd the administrator of the estate Z
lys, Eyes; l recognize the justice of =
lie claim and l want to pay it?" 9
Tho would say that the probate :
'urt in any state of this country :.
ould refuse to order that the bill be :,
lid if that were the proper pro- :,
dure to follow in his particular jur q
1iction? Yet that is precisely what =
occurring in all these cases that | 3
I'VE brought to your attention, cases &
which not only the claimant asserts 3
e justice of the claim and furnishes q
oOf overwhei Inning, but where the q
through the department 3
here the claim arose, admits the &
stice of the claim but can not pay it
r lack of authority in law. &
What VIII be Gained. q
Now what would be gained by the
an that | propose?
First. There would be a speedy
justment of claims against the gov
lment. re'
Second. Fictitious claims would be ha
ned down and would not come in ha
~ with age as their chief measure tn,
merit. ha
Third. There would be orderly pro- de,
lure. c.,
Fourth The claims would be dis s.'
'ed of by the department having io'
facts before it. wv
fifth. Claims that should be dis jet