Evening star., 1945-01-18
Letters to The Star
Discusses Different Views
Of Statutory Mandate

Discusses Different Views
Of Statutory Mandate
To the Editor OF The Star:
In its editorial, Lessons In Language"
commenting on the recent decision of
the Court of Appeals in the workmen's
compensation case, The Star Is good
deal less than fair.
The case involved the liability of an
employer for mpensation-whether
for partial or for total disability-to an
employe who had sustained disabling
injury to his right leg, which, combined
with the fact that he previously had lost
his left leg and left arm, left him totally
disabled. AS stated in the editorial, the
statute provides that If an employe.
receives an injury which, of itself, would
cause only partial disability, but which.
combined with previous disability,
does in fact cause total disability, the
employer shall provide compensation
only for the disability caused by the
subsequent injury, and the decision is
criticized because, notwithstanding this
provision, the employer was held liable
for total disability.
But the issue was not as simple as it
thus is made to appear.
The statute provides that the word
disability" as therein used means loss
or reduction in earning power resulting
from injury, and the word injury"
means an injury which arose out of and
in the course Of the employment of the
injured employe. Thus the court left
that it was not at liberty to give the
expression previous disability" its
ordinary meaning, but was required to
give 1t the special meaning prescribed
by the statute, i.e., previous disability
resulting from injury arising out of and
in the course OF employment, and since
the previous amputation of the left arm
and left leg had not been necessitated
by injuries SO sustained the court held
that the previous disability" was not
such as to bring into operation the pro-
vision relieving the employer from liza
bility for compensation for total dis
ability.
The decision was not the only pos
sible one; the chief justice dissented
in a vigorous and well-reasoned opinion.
1t, however, should be pointed out that
the conclusion 6f the court was not
arrived at by ignoring a plain statutory
mandate, as the editorial seems to imply.
The fact that Justice Edgerton wrote
the opinion in the compensation case,
with the chief justice dissenting, while
the chief justice wrote the opinion in
the Mann Act case, referred to in the
editorial, with Justice Edgerton dissent
ing, should occasion no surprise or con-
fusion to the reader of both opinions
In each case Justice Edgerton favored
adherence to the wording of the statute,
while the chief justice favored greater
latitude in a judicial Interpretation of
the legislative language. Thus each of
these justices has been consistent in his
attitude. Approval of the conclusion
reached by one of them in one case,
and disapproval of his conclusion in the
other is beside the point.
LAWRENCE EKOENIGsBERGER.
Urges Honoring President Now
To the Editor Of The Star:
Presidents Washington and Lincoln
had enemies aplenty while they lived
We wonder why the people of those
times did not recognize their true value
as much as we do now While a man
lives his greatness is overlooked, but
after he is dead he is appreciated.
If only one of them could be brought
back to life again even for a single
day the entire population would honor
him. All parties would join in singing
his praise.
Now, would 1t not be to the lasting
credit Of this generation if for once in
all history we should recognize him
who must be destined to go down on the
pages Of our history as one of the
greats? refer to F. D. Roosevelt.
Should we not set a single day when
most convenient to do him honor while
he Is here with US? MOHLON.
Identifies Peace With Socialism
To the Editor of The Star:
There Is confusion of thought in
America about the political situation in
Europe, because economic conditions
are so different there.
Here, the poor, even unemployed and
on relief, are better off than most work.
ing people in Europe. Here, working
people vote capitalist parties into power.
There, the owning classes are kept in
power only by the armed force of Fas-
cists, Nazis, kings and dictators.
Democracy here means capitalism.
There it means socialism. Our repre-
sentatives are entertained in Europe by
those who can afford it-that is, the
collaborators and reactionaries who
have made money out of Axis occupa-
ton.
Democracy in Europe will not be
secure till great estates and industries
are owned and controlled by the elected
representatives of the people and own
ing for an income Is done away with.
If we let property interests control,
there will be no peace. A. CRAIG.
Mars, Pa.
Blames Churches for War
To the Editor of The Star:
The millions of dollars which the
churches are raising for war relief can
not restore the moral and spiritual
wreckage of World War II from which
humanity might have been saved If