OCR Text |
Show EMPLOYERS' lllllfl Bill SIGNED THE PRESIDENT First Received Assurance From Attorney Attor-ney General That Measure Was Not Repugnant to Constitution. Washington. President Itoosevolt on Wednesday signed tho employers' liability bill upon receiving an opinion opin-ion from Attornoy General Bonaparto that tho measuro wns constitutional. Tho bill makes railroads or othor common carriers, whllo engaged In Interstate In-terstate commerce, liable for tho Injury In-jury or denth of an employe If tho Injury or death rcBults In wholo or In part from tho negllgenco of any of tho officers, ngents or employes of sucn carriers or by reason of any defect or insufficiency in equipment This provision Is mnde npplicnble to carriers car-riers in tho territories, tho District of Columbia, tho Panama cannl zono and othor possessions of tho United States. It is provided thnt In nny action brought under tho provisions of tho bill tho injured employe shall not bo held to havo assumed tho risk or his employment In nny caso whoro tho violation by tho cnrrlcr of nny statute onacted for tho safety of omployos contributed to tho Injury or death of tho omployo. Any contract, rule, regulation reg-ulation or dovlco to enable tho carrier to exompt Itself from liability under ho net Is rendered void by a speclno declaration to that end. Provision Is mnde, however, that tho carrier shall recelvo credit for any contribution mado to the omployo or his family In tho form of Insurance, relief, bonollt or Indemnity. An nctlon for tho re- iovcry of dnmnges must, bo commenced com-menced within two years Trdm tho dato ot tho cause of tho sulL In his opinion tho attorney general indicates thnt tho bill is conilned In Its Bcopo to "common carriers by railroad," rail-road," as distinguished from tho act declared unconstltutlonnl by tho supremo su-premo court, which embraced "nil common cnrrlors engaged In Interstato commorco nnd foreign commerce." Tho nttornoy general then .shows through court decisions and constitution constitu-tion interpretations thnt this restriction restric-tion does not make tho act repugnant tc tho constitution, hut Is In lino with state statutes which havo beon upheld in tho highest tribunals. |