Show HSI SIGNED SIGHED BY 81 THE PRESIDENT PRES ir first received assurance from attorney general that measure war wa not repugnant to conati constitution aution washington president roosevelt on wednesday signed tile the employers liability bill upon receiving an opinion from attorney general bonaparte that tile the measure was wag constitutional the bill makes railroads or other common carr leis icis while engaged in ln 1 forstate tor state commerce comme ice liable tor for the injury or death of an employer if the injury or death results in whole or in part frum the negligence of any ot of tho officers agents or employed emp loyes of carriers carrI ars or by reason of any defect or insufficiency in equipment this provision Is made applicable to carriers in the teril tories the district of columbia the panama canal zone and other possessions of the united states it is provided that in any action dundei the lons of the bill the injured employed shall not be held to ba have 0 assumed the ilak albl of his employment in any case tho the violation by the carrier of any fi statute taLato enacted for the safety of employees emp loyes loes contributed to the injury or death of the employed eni any contract tule lule leg illation or device denice to enable the carrier to exempt itself from liability under tinder the act is gendered len ien dered vold void ly by a specific declaration to th thit it end provision I 1 roade hoevel hoe lioNe vei ei that the binler shall credit for any made to the employed or ills his family in the form of insurance eclief benefit or indemnity an action toi the ie ic covely of damages must be commenced nathin to sears fichu the date of the cluse of the suit stilt in ills his opinion the general indicates that the bill is confined in its scope to common cavilers cari lers b rail load as distinguished bioni the act declared unconstitutional by the su premo preme court which embraced all common cair leis endig ged in interstate commerce comme ice and foreign commerce rho fhe attorney general then shows through court decisions and constitutional antei that this restriction does not make mahe the act int tv lr the constitution but is in line with state statutes which have hae been upheld in III the highest tribunals |