Evening star. [volume] (Washington, D.C.) 1854-1972, 1924-12-28
BY WILLIAM ULLMAN.


With traffic accidents mounting at
a rate that is detrimental to human
progress and with all motordom
turning to ways and means of mini
MIXING the losses. the matter of in
demnity for personal injury or death
is rapidly finding a way to the CEN
ter of the stage.
Some urge compulsory insurance.
Others loudly condemn il as worse
than the trouble it might remedy.
Meanwhile the average motorist and
the average pedestrian demands, IF
not compulsory insurance, then
what"
Tho general opinion is that the
matter of indemnity has ceased to be-
come an individual matter and that.
being a public problem, 1t must be
handled in a big, decisive way. Yet
there is probably no motor problem
in which there is SO much contro-
versy regarding the method of at
tack
Compulsory Insurance Possible.
Compulsory automobile insurance
is under consideration in Is states
yet it was opposed at the convention
of the National Association OF In
surance Agents in Milwaukee.
Compulsory automobile insurance
is fact in Switzerland and Den
mark, yet the big Ohio State Auto
mobile Association is typical of many
automobile clubs in America that
condemn it as impractical for Amer
lea.
1t is argued on one hand that
though there is serious opposition to
compulsory automobile insurance
lust as there was a fight to defeat
the workmen's compensation act, II
will come about as matter OF sheer
necessity. The rebuttal is to the ef'
feet that compensation should give
way to an effective plan of proven
ton.
In the meantime thousands are be-
ing manned as a result of motor cal
operation and, whether the blame
rests with the drivers or with the
people who get into their way, the
fact remains that the injuries to
breadwinners are causing much
financial distress in addition to phys
ical suffering. Permanent injuries
frequently result in greater financia.
loss to the public than actual fatal
ties, and injuries by traffic careless
ness and mismanagement are in the
ma jority.
If compulsory insurance is at variance
with laws of human nature, as has been
charged; IL it presupposes the motoHs'
to be responsible for anything that
carelessness, what are we going to have
in its place? \ continuation of the pres
cnt situation, in which the personal in
jury suit is the only form Of redress for
the INJURED person, or for the survivors
Of a traffic victim. is generally viewed
as & crime in itself.
indemnity by City Improbable.
1t is not generally known by persons
who daily risk their lives that there Is
but a shadow of a possibility Of being
unidentified by any city il one is run
down and injured by a motor vehicle
owned and operated by the municipality
This has been demonstrated in several
Instances. and is coming to be regard
ed with alarm by compulsory insur-
pnce advocates by reason of the great
Increase in the use of motor vehicles
owned by municipalities.
The drivers of many automobiles that
are on the streets can be sued only with
great difficulty on the part of the in
Sured pedestrian, or the dependents Of a
victim, because in America the owners
of motor vehicles are held accountable
and because many owners nowadays are
the somewhat intangible municipalities
which are considered by some lawyers
as virtually execution proof"
Some conception of the inadequacy
and unfairness of the personal injury
suit is had from the records of Allie
gheny County, Pa. OF 355 married men
killed in accidents, SO families received
nothing, l13 received 500 or less. 81
received between 500 and $500 and Sc
per cent of 228 received nothing.
Situation in Ohio Cited.
Prior to the workmen's compensation
amendment of January I, 1924. in Ohio
it was possible to bring suit against an
employer where there was a violation
of the law. The average recovery for
5S people who took advantage of this
alternative was S3,008. Deducting the
attorneys fees the net recovery dropped
TO 1885. Under the compensation act
they would have received an average OF
$2S20.
Those who oppose the compensation
idea for motordom would like to know
what the matter of indemnity has to dc
with preventing loss OF life and personal
injury, and whether assurance of ade-
quate indemnity would not actually en-.
courage carelessness.
They fear that the professional &C
cident fakir would soon become {
menace. Asked why he has not up.