The Birmingham age-herald., 1922-12-24

eration of Labor, both active work' tials of service broad and efficient, as well as to devise new provisions for expansion. Compensation is not | infrequently as much menaced by fool friends as by actual foes. Phi losophers and reformers often aim body blows through want of working knowledge. or perhaps merely through idle supererogation. More | frequently 1t occurs, however, that assault is made on Jurisdiction or procedure by designing men who know exactly what they want and how best to manipulate Legislation. Because of general want of leSisla- tive understanding, and unfortunate legislative unconeern perhaps, the exercise of intelligent vigilance on the part of administration is fmpor- tant: since to be forewarned is to be forearmed. our arsenal may always be well equipped. By enlisting the interest of few stauneh legislative friends legislative misfortunes may usually be averted. By previous un- derstandins between organized labor and the more reasonable elements of | employment and insurance we have In Iowa profited very much in move ments constructive and defensive.
 
 sary to such cooperation than to risk too much in the game of cross lpurpose and general belliEerency. mmissioners may serve efficiently and unceasnigly and rule as men inspired. but if they do not stand un flinehingly and enduringly for the best that may be enacted in law they fall far short of the mark of their high calling.
 
 been thoroughly revised since enact- ment years ago are usually in need of vigorous overhauling. Iowa is in the throes of code revision. CT thought I lSnew just about how much deadwood our compensation law is carrying until cooperation with code commission disclosed how much l did not know in thls particular. You might smile were to give you q dia- gram of the duplication, redundancy, reiteration. and provisions void and unavoidable. but doubtless you should cast the beam out. of your own op- tic before making merry over the Il mote in the Hawkeye).
 This is by no means any measure of reflection upon legislative pater- nifty. Early in 1913, when our law was passed, there had been very 1it- tie experience under this system in l enacted compensation statutes. None of these had been fully operative as long as two years. There was little of American precedent or literature or experience available. British ref erence was by unfriendly influence held to be irrelevant and incompetent even impertinent The author of our compensation law had to make his fight for this innovation with { r.1n dafn inf nation. against the advice of friends, against the more or less open hostil- ity of employers, the doubts and fears of workmen, who reluctantly resisted the lure of the elusive and sometimes unique damage judgment, and the indifference of those who entertained no especial bias. For want of information, now abundant. our author was heavily handicapped in drafting and defending his meas ure and because of assault through want of knowledge or artful design he was forced to give up the fight or to put his bill through after it had been perforated by fool friends or crafty foes. The wonder is he was able to win at all and that his meas ure was not found to be much more unavoidable than 1t proved to be. This experience was doubtless dupli- cated in all states and provinces en- terin gupon this new field of juris- prudence.
 Much as most of our compensation laws need rewriting they are won- derfully improved over early enact ment In general efficiency and work able provisions. The workman has been liberally dealt with in increased percentage and maximum and mini mum payment, in larger coverage, and in general tendency toward statutory support for the sympa- thetic tendency of administration. Along these lines the limit of jus tice in industrial and social burden bearing may have been approached.
 The demands of equity, however, I would seem to require for the work
 man wider coverage in individual cases of industrial misfortune. In I most states and provinces, I believe, temporary disability does not run concurrent with permanent disabil- ity. It is mere matter of luck how much a man may realize from the loss of a finger, hand or foot. He may in some cases be able 10
 earn full wages again before the expiration of the waiting period, or he may be incapacitated for months and months. The argument that leg islation should or be interpreted l as saying that all +contlHSeHt IHiS- fortune in the loss of a member Is covered by schedule payment does 1 not appeal to me. It is only reason able to assume that payment in case of permanent loss of member is for the loss of use of such member during life, and not for wages lost during an excessive healing period. Circumstances should not be permit ted so disastrously to discriminate between individual cases I have known, wherein the grant for perma- nent disability was entirely exhaust ed in weekly payment during the healing period. In such eases it l requires all the nerve I can sum- mon to conceal the chagrin feel for the wrong my state visits upon tho unfortunate workman.
 In most jurisdictions accidental in- | jury Is recognized condition prece- dent to compensation payment. To deny relief in cases where incapac- l ity definitely arises from cumulative cause or from disease solely due to employment is absolutely indefensi- ble In moral sense. The theory l of compensation is that when able bodied workmen are taken into em- ployment, and due to such employ ment, they are deprived of or inn paired in earning capacity, support W ". fIf-. L.