Evening star. [volume] (Washington, D.C.) 1854-1972, 1929-09-26
Motor Liability Likened
To Employers Risk
To the Editor Of The Star

To the Editor Of The Star:
Not long ago two women we're stand
ing at street corner in Atlantic City
There was nothing very unusual about
them, except that one was the mother
of six children and the other of four
No news value here! AS they stoot
talking two automobiles collided righ'
in front Of them. Seemingly that's wha'
motor cars are for. and there's no new:
| in that. either. But the collision forced
the cars up onto the pavement, pinned
the women against pole and killed
them both That is news-a stick al
the bottom of page 4! Most peopit
never saw the story, and only the i'm
mediate families gave 1t a SECOND
thought
Ten children were left motherless, ant
for this inestimable deprivation were
entitled to look for some recompense
however inadequate. from the harum-
scarum drivers who had so cruelty be-
reaved them. And here is a real story
one that should be told every day, un-
til 1t finally penetrates even the insen-
sitive skulls Of those legislators and
vendors who cherish property above
humanity and sales records above COM
mon decency.
Both of those cars were technically
owned by finance companies, and since
they were licensed by one of the great
majority of States which haven't th6
sense to institute compulsory liability
insurance, those 10 orphans have moth
ing but the memories OF their mothers
to get along on.
I'm not trying to pull sob story and
through your sentiments dim your
Judgment. I am only relating a dra-
matte example of that injustice which
is being perpetrated every day of the
year in less striking but equally revolt
ing form.
plovers' liability insurance was a
legitimate tax on manufacturers. we
freely conceded that the theory back OF
it wasn't wholly logical. Perhaps man
APPLYING for work at a machine accepts
the risks inherent in his job, just as a
man who sits in the sun has no right
to complain about sunburn. But we
discovered many moons ago that social
problems aren't most successfully han
died by cold reason. Practically, 1t
turned out that it was wisest to protect
the worker against the consequences OF
what was often his own folly, through
the medium of an inflnitesimal tax
upon the fruits of his labor. When first
the idea was preached, manufacturers
as a class lifted up their voices in holy
horror. One WOulO Lu'C IllousAO VIC
had collapsed into communistic saw
agery, with barn burning, poisoning
wells and the naturalization of womer
as minor side shows. Well, we tried 1t,
despite them, and it hasn't turned out
, BADLY at all. Here and there it is even
POSSIBLE to find a manufacturer who adj
mits privately he wouldn't go back to
the old plan If he could. At the very
least, his office is no longer invaded by
sudden pensioners who ruin his peace
of mind with their tears.
And now we dawdle and shake our
heads in a similar fashion over this
matter of automobile liability insurance,
though the need is plain and the de-
mand even more justifiable.
Employers used no mean argument
when they claimed that a worker should
assume the practicable risks of his &C.
cupation. But is this true of the poor
pedestrian? Has the day arrived when
walking the streets entails hazards like
working in a white lead factory? Must
we stay in bed to be entitled to the
protection of the law?
ought man be permitted to drive an
automobile at all when the presumption
Is that he will claim the benefits of the
bankruptcy act should he drive 1t reck-
lessly or illegally?q
ALPHONSE B. MILLER.